Times of London

Reminder to Times of London: Jews can certainly be antisemitic


An article in Times of London on April 2nd, titled ‘Labour welcomes back blogger who compares Israelis to Nazis‘, included the following about the “socialist, anti-Zionist, anti-racist” blogger in question, Tony Greenstein:

An activist who has referred to his critics as “Zionist scum” and claimed that the state of Israel has informally forbidden mixed-race couples has been re-admitted to the Labour Party.

Tony Greenstein, a campaigner from Brighton, was allowed back after Jeremy Corbyn’s victory in September despite having been barred during an attempt to join the party in the summer.

On his blog, Mr Greenstein refers to himself as a “socialist, anti-Zionist, anti-racist” and accuses the state of Israel of “wanton murder of Palestinian civilians”. He also compares Israelis to Nazis, saying of a proposed military award for an Israeli soldier: “It is the honour that used to attach to the SS.”

In a post in November entitled “When Nuremberg Came to Israel”, Mr Greenstein wrote: “Israel is a Jewish racial state and miscegenation, the mixing of the races, is strictly forbidden in Israel. Not legally of course, because Israel has to formally adhere to western values, but in the accepted and unwritten Zionist consensus.

Evidence about him compiled last year by Labour’s compliance unit and seen by The Daily Telegraph, included claims that Margaret Thatcher was “obviously legitimate” as a target for the IRA, and that “Zionists collaborated with the Nazis”.

Whilst most wouldn’t dare defend such extremist rhetoric about Israel, evidently Mr. Greenstein protested to the paper’s editors about the article’s implicit suggestion that he’s antisemitic, as this Times of London correction on April 14th (which appeared in both the print and online editions) indicated:

correction

Greenstein crowed about the Times of London clarification on his personal blog, here

However, the suggestion by Mr. Greenstein that his being Jewish should inoculate him from charges of antisemitism – which evidently seemed plausible to Times of London editors – is of course absurd. 

Indeed, as Professor Edward Alexander explained in an introductory op-ed about his new book (Jews Against Themselves), there have always been, throughout history, Jews who have “defamed, abandoned, and harmed their own people”.  (The title of Alexander’s book, however, is somewhat misleading, as such Jews typically don’t hate themselves at all. It’s most ‘other Jews’ they despise.)

Examples of Jews who either advance explicitly antisemitic tropes, or for whom the Jewish state’s “very existence is…a cancer that must be extirpated from the face of the earth” – i.e., hatred for Israel so intense that it crosses the line into antisemitism – include: Gilad Atzmon, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, Philip Weiss, Max BlumenthalGlenn GreenwaldMira Bar-HillelMarc Ellis, Richard Falk, Ronnie KasrilsJacqueline Rose, Gerald Kaufman, Richard Silverstein and Gideon Levy.

Perhaps most prominent on the list of Jewish anti-Semites is an Israeli Jew named Gilad Atzmon. 

As we’ve noted repeatedly, Atzmon engages in explicit antisemitism which is indistinguishable from what’s found on the white supremacist right. He refers to Judaism as “supremacist faith, has questioned whether the Holocaust occurred while simultaneously arguing that, if Hitler’s genocide did occur, it can partly be explained by Jews’ villainous behavior.  On this latter note, he claimed that Hitler’s views about Jews may one day be proven right.  Atzmon also explicitly charges that Jews are indeed trying to take over the world, and has endorsed of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, arguing about the document that “it is impossible to ignore its prophetic qualities and its capacity to describe” later Jewish behavior.

Whilst Greenstein’s comments don’t rise to Atzmon’s level, and we of course don’t know what’s inside his heart, his odious moral comparison between Israeli Jews and Nazis is certainly antisemitic according to the EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism – and merely the fact that he considers himself Jewish shouldn’t be a factor in this determination. 

 

166 replies »

  1. Tony Greenstein can be both Jewish and an antisemite, just as Kim Philby was both a British subject and a traitor. I fail to understand how this can even be a subject of legitimate debate.

    • “I fail to understand how this can even be a subject of legitimate debate”; you are assuming that you are debating with people with a positive IQ.

    • Adam, FYI, in the Main Page summary of this post, you incorrectly used “inculcate” for “insulate”? Here you used “inoculate”.

    • Yes he is. I know it’s hurtful to neoZionist Jews when other Jews counter their lies with the truth.

      • It’s Islamofauxbic when sane Muslims counter Islamofascist Taqqiya with the truth.

        – Ayan Hirsi Ali
        – Wafa Sultan
        – Bridgette Gabriel
        – Zudi Jasser

          • Migraine, Ayan Hirsi Ali and the other fine people are not made of straw. You on the other hand have a head of straw and sawdust.

        • @Margrain – it’s also quite painful to see a member of the clergy being charged with pedophilia, but yes, it does happen. Ordination as a priest does not preclude one from sinning. I’m sure your mum can relate to that.

      • Very little the trolls say here surprises (or bothers, or does much other than amuses) me, but…”neoZionist”? Seriously? Does that mean someone who was once an anti-Zionist or non-Zionist (with whatever brain-dead definition someone like you would come up with), and then became a Zionist again? Doesn’t that kind of interfere with the Left’s ideological flowchart where Zionists give up on Zionism, or the idea that Zionism is reserved for reformed anti-Zionists? Do you know ANYTHING about Zionism?

                  • The derisive term invented by and for use by crybaby fascists is back courtesy of one of their own, Daniel Margrain, who has stated for the record that there is an acceptable number for antisemites in the British Labour Party, as well as an acceptable number of Israelis that can be murdered with Hamas “rockettes.”

                    • Nazism is a far right ideology and far right right political parties court the neoZionist Jewish vote for a reason. Why do you think that is?

          • It helped a lot: first it helped by linking together the fringe you’re trying to turn into a broad movement with your hard-Left one-state friends (isn’t it interesting that far-Leftists have more in common with Nazis than any Zionists ever have, except you scream bloody murder when this accuracy pointed out?), and then by making your case via a subject so unimportant and goofy that it takes up about 10% of the regular Wiki page and has about 4 sources. But it makes sense you and Tony Groin-Street are friends: with every message you send out, you sound less and less intelligent.

            • ” (isn’t it interesting that far-Leftists have more in common with Nazis than any Zionists ever have, except you scream bloody murder when this accuracy pointed out?),”

              There is not a shred of accuracy in that statement at all. In fact is self-evidently nonsense since Hitler fascism is a far right political ideology.

              • Migraine, Your furher National SOCIALIST hitler was a …………. SOCIALIST.

                Let me guess, you too consider yourself a …………….. SOCIALIST.

                Are you Left or Right Wing? Does it even matter you little ole fascist SOCIALIST?

  2. The second comment is a good example of Zionist anti-Semitism. The reference to a grandmother being the Nuremburg definition of a Jew or Mischlinge to be exact.

    I have never said that a Jew can’t be an anti-Semite, it’s just that I’ve fought fascism and anti-Semitism all my life whilst Zionists have always justified it. What did Herzl say, he ‘pardoned’ anti-Semitism. This at the time of Dreyfuss and went on to tell us that the anti-Semitic countries will be our friends and allies! (Diaries, p.8, pp.83/4). There are too many Zionist to start quoting others on how anti-Semitism was justified, suffice to say that both anti-Semites and Zionists agree that a Jew’s home is in Israel/Palestine not where they live and they even indulge in the anti-Semitic trope that Israel is the home of all Jews and therefore Jews owe a dual loyalty to both where they live and Israel. Indeed when Netanyahu says, as he did in France after the Charlie Hebdo murders, that he came as a representative of world Jewry, we know we are talking anti-Semitism.

    Whilst Atzmon certainly is an anti-Semite, I spent years outing this Zionist whilst the rest of his Zionist compatriots flattered him or ignored h im, the suggestion that Chomsky, Finkelstein etc. are anti-Semitic just proves that you wish to equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism thus letting the real anti-Semites completely off the hook.

    The Times backed off, as did the Telegraph, because they would have had to prove and justify their allegations in a libel suit. The burden of proof is on the Defendant.

    And I know it’s only one lie among many but I don’t equate Israeli Jews with Naziism. I equate many of the practices of the Israeli state with the Nazis. Unlike fascists and Zionists I don’t put an equals sign between a state and the people who live in that state, although of course some people, like the Kahanist who murdered the severely injured Palestinian in Hebron are clearly Judeo-Nazis.

    • Tony. Go to Gaza. As an anti-Zionist, Hamass thugs should love to welcome a fellow anti-Zionist. When Hamass gets its ass handed to it, perhaps Hamass can assuage their discontent and rage out on Little Ol’ You.

      • In 1933 the Zionist Federation of Germany sent a memorandum of support to the Nazis which said:

        “On the foundation of the new [Nazi] state which has established the principle of race, we wish to fit our community into the total structure so that for us, too, in the sphere assigned to us, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible.”

        Later that year, the World Zionist Organization congress defeated a resolution for action against Hitler by a vote of 240 to 43.

        Leading Nazis like Joseph Goebbels wrote articles praising Zionism, and some Zionists received Nazi funds. A member of the Haganah, a Zionist militia in Palestine, delivered the following message to the German SS in 1937:

        “Jewish nationalist circles…were very pleased with the radical German policy, since the strength of the Jewish population in Palestine would be so far increased thereby that in the foreseeable future the Jews could reckon upon numerical superiority over the Arabs”.

        The Zionist movement went so far as to oppose changes in the immigration laws of the U.S. and Western Europe, which would have permitted more Jews to find refuge in these countries. In 1938, David Ben-Gurion, who was to become the first prime minister of Israel, wrote:

        “If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael [greater Israel], then I would opt for the second alternative.”

        This philosophy was put into practice. As the author Ralph Schoenman notes:

        “Throughout the late thirties and forties, Jewish spokespersons in Europe cried out for help, for public campaigns, for organized resistance, for demonstrations to force the hand of allied governments–only to be met not merely by Zionist silence but by active Zionist sabotage of the meager efforts which were proposed or prepared in Great Britain and the United States.

        The dirty secret of Zionist history is that Zionism was threatened by the Jews themselves. Defending the Jewish people from persecution meant organizing resistance to the regimes which menaced them. But these regimes embodied the imperial order which comprised the only social force willing or able to impose a settler colony on the Palestinian people. Hence, the Zionists needed the persecution of the Jews to persuade Jews to become colonizers afar, and they needed the persecutors to sponsor the enterprise.”

        https://cultureandpolitics.org/

        • Migraine, Ya got any newsreels of “zionists” meeting with Socialist SHlTler or goebbels like the one of your Grand Mufti and Socialist SHlTler meeting – exchanging salutes???

        • Edward, why did you publish my personal information? I think the police will need to be told about this.

          • Migraine, I think the police need to be told about your dripping, fascist, racist, bigoted HATE posts. The current environment has no room for fascists like you.

            • You’ve justified Genocide against the Palestinian’s. It doesn’t get more racist, bigoted and hateful than that. I hate the Israeli state not Jews. You hate Arabs and Muslims.

              • 9/11, London’s 7/7/05, Charlie Hebdo, Bataclan, San Bernardino, Brussels, Boston Marathon, Mumbai, Nairobi, Copenhagen, Sydney, Ottawa, Moscow, Beslan, Pam Am 103, Metrojet, …

                Islamofascist Iran, Islamofascist Hamass, Islamofascist Hezbullah, Islamofascist ISIS, Islamofascist Al Qada, Islamofascist Taliban, Islamofascist Boko Haram, Islamofascist Muslim Brotherhood, Islamofascist Al Nusra, …

              • Genocide – their population has increased EVERY single year. And they are the ones stating they are going to commit genocide.

                And you, you fucking Nazi Troll support them. So you are an advocate of genocide just like your great aunt Adolph

                • I never claimed that the Palestinian’s are subject to Genocide. However, they are subject to ethnic cleansing. Learn the difference, dummy.

                  • Nope, Plan D, Cast Lead, Protective Edge among others, prove it’s you who is the liar.

        • Classic anti-Semitic rhetoric.

          In 1933 few anticipated the full degree to which Nazi anti-Semitism would develop. It’s not like the Nazis were the first anti-Semitic party on the planet. The boycott of Nazi Germany didn’t fail because of Zionists, it failed because there wasn’t support for it from businesses, governments and religious groups. Here’s where anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism start to blend in. Both believe that the the target of their animosity has far reaching powers to influence and control, when they did not.

          It’s also a myth that Zionists closed doors to other escapes. They simply did not have that kind of power. What they opposed were deals that would cut off access to Palestine. That’s what your Ben-Gurion quote of 1937 was about. They weren’t successful at that either. They did attempt to set up a network of intelligence and resistance in Europe to the Nazis. Hannah Senesh was one such agent. The network was infiltrated by the Abwehr by threatening the families of 2-3 of these agents. Nor was the Yishuv as wealthy as anti-Semites like to imagine.

          The exact date that the Yishuv went public about the Holocaust was Nov 22, 1941. The Allies went public 4 weeks later on Dec 17. One wonders what took them so long, and why the Allied forces did so little once they new.

          To criticize statements made in 1933, 1937 or 1938 based on the events of 1941 is absurd. Not even the Nazis knew what they were going to do that early on.

          The not so peculiar blend of anti-Zionist anti-Semitism goes further than ascribing unwarranted prescience, power and influence to Zionist Jews, they also promote false equivalencies. Both the Nazis and the British were strongly nationalistic. Does that mean that the British were no different than Nazis. And if that were the case, does that not make Daniel Margrain a Nazi too, or at least a Nazi collaborator inasumch as he supports the British State? Both Islam and Nazism are based on the primacy and loyalty to a supreme leader, Hitler in one case, Mohammed in another. Zionism does not. Are we then to conclude that Islam and Nazism are the same in a way that both are different from Judaism and Zionism. Margrain’s argument would certainly lead to that conclusion.

          Professor Francis Nicosia has a couple of excellent books on the subject – “Zionism and Anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany”, and “Palestine and the 3rd Reich”. Up until 1938 the Nazis sought to disenfranchise the Jews of the Reich in order to force them to emigrate. The Haaverah agreement, which was initiated in 1932 under the prior Weimar Bruner government was seen as facilitating that goal. Nor did were the Zionists exempt from any of the Nazi laws discriminating against Jews with two exceptions. The first, they were allowed to speak in Hebrew at their meetings and they were allowed to run training camps in agriculture and the trades with the provision that these skills would not be used in Germany.

          Nicosia also pinpoints, as several other authors do, the difference between National Socialism and other Nationalist ideas – they believed that they were a master race in a struggle against all other races, and it was not only necessary for these races to be conquered and exterminated, it was glorious to do so, a unique combination of Nietzche and Social Darwinism. While British and American Nationalism both have an innate belief in their own superiority, neither is about the extermination of the other. Nazim also had another peculiar anti-Semitic belief that truly hope you don’t share, and that is that the Jews wanted to exterminate everyone else, in particular Germans. One wonders if the early pan-Arabs such as Rashid Rida and Sati al-Husri who leaned towards the volkish ethnic nationalism of Fichte and Herde picked up this same idea from proto-Nazis such as Heinrich Class or Wilhelm Marr.

          There were several emergent problems with forcing emigration in this manner. The first was that it impoverished the Jews of the Reich to the point where they were no longer acceptable to the now shrinking number of destinations that would accept them. This included the British in Palestine. The second was that the process was too slow. When Margrain’s Nazi friends invaded Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and the Ukraine, the population of Jews now under Nazi control suddenly was in the millions. And that’s when the decision towards extermination as the Final Solution (the other solutions having become infeasible) occurred.

          You want collaborators Mr. Margrain – I can give you several. The New York Times which buried the Holocaust on the back pages, but their sin, though grievous, was relatively minor in comparison to the others. The Catholic, Protestant and Confessing Churches who only opposed Hitler’s racism, not his goals of excluding and murdering Jews. The men at the top knew exactly what was going on and said nothing. The British and American government which colluded with the Nazis in closing the doors to the Jews along with the member states attending the Evian and Bermuda who sat in their comfortable chairs and sighed that it was a sunk cost. Roosevelt who threatened to punish the the Nazis for unspecified crimes (much like Obama’s reference to “random folks”) AFTER the war, a meaningless threat because in 1943 the Nazis were still sure they were going to win. A meaningless threat because after the war most Nazis went free and were deemed “rehabilitated” by their American, British, and Russians collaborators who thought they could use them to fight the cold war against each other and the Arab collaborators who used Nazi scientists and Nazi military advisors to continue their mutual war against the Jews.

          With all that over abundant guilt sloshing around you choose to blame Zionists?

          • Sir, to ignore that Zionists helped facilitate Hitler is to frankly engage in denialism. I’m not saying that they were the only ones.

            • You are mistaken, and employing the long and rather tortured illogic of other anti-Semites by seeking guilt by mere association. The Allies and the Church were entirely culpable of collaboration in the sense that you describe, yet you selectively misinterpret history to condemn those who not only attempted to rescue Jews, but actually succeeded! Were it not for British anti-Semitism and a policy of appeasement that success might have been far greater. What Zionists did was to flatter Nazis in order to facilitate the escape of Jews to the Palestinian Mandate. They were not in a position to do much else.

              I should point out that the Revisionists such as Jabotinsky, and Karesky, who led the revisionist leadership of in Germany split with the mainstream ZvfD (Zionist Federation for Deutschland) in that they continued their support for a boycott. They had no effect on Nazi policy either.

              To be against Zionist efforts to secure passage for Jews to the Mandate and to ignore Zionist efforts to secure victory for the Allies during the war is symptomatic of the kind of pathological attitude that permeates the anti-Semitic anti-Zionist mentality.

                  • The truth hurts, I understand that:

                    While supporters of the rogue Israeli state have not suggested Corbyn is an antisemite by name, the inference of guilt by association is clear. Politically, the purpose of the misuse of antisemitism by neo-Zionists is to quash all legitimate criticisms of Israel, its oppression of the Palestinian people and by extension, Muslim/Arab nationalist aspirations more generally.

                    In other words, unfortunately, antisemitism has been exploited politically and hence become a loaded term. As is the case with the inappropriate and liberal use of a word like ‘fascism’, the result of the demonization of all those who question neo-Zionist narratives, is to devalue antisemitism, thereby undermining any genuine attempts at dealing with it. Consequently, the visceral power antisemitism once had has diminished over time.

                    This narrative is given outward political expression by ideologically-aligned far right groups throughout Europe, many of whom court Jewish support and whose virulent racism is directed mainly against Arabs and Muslims. Both neo-Zionist Jews and their evangelical fundamentalist Christian counterparts long for the Second Coming and the way they envisage themselves getting there is by means of the political process. Both religious and non-religious neo-Zionists alike cynically exploit, for political purposes, the concept of the Biblical imperative predicated on the notion that God is a metaphorical real estate agent in the Heavens who has ascribed Palestinian land and property to Jews.

                    It’s this narrative that is the main ideological force that drives neo-Zionism on. In other words, religious and political extremists justify the theft of Palestinian land by recourse to ancient religious texts. I live in London. If somebody from Italy attempted to attack me and to steal my home based on the premise that at some point in ancient history the Romans populated Londinium, then I would do my best to resist (with violence if necessary) such attacks. Exactly the same principled logic applies to the Palestinian’s resistance to Israeli oppression today. The Labour Party is regarded as having a problem with antisemitism within its ranks in part because of the undue influence the neo-Zionist imbued Labour Friends of Israel, (whose primary motivation is determined by its political allegiance to Israel), has within the PLP.

                    Ultimately, any perceived difficulties the party has with antisemitism is outflanked by the far greater problems it has with neo-Zionism which are never addressed. Israel’s ‘friends’ within the PLP, for example, continue to remain silent about the illegal ongoing dispossession of Palestinians from their land, the historical Zionist programme of ethnic cleansing and the fascist aspiration for Eretz Yisrael (Greater Israel) of which, among others, the Koenig Plan, Operation Cast Lead and Operation Protective Edge are historical manifestations. The final irony of Zionism is that it turned the oppressed minority of Jews of Europe into an oppressor majority in Palestine.

                    https://cultureandpolitics.org/2016/04/17/criticism-of-israel-the-new-mccarthyism/

                    • “The truth hurts, I understand that.”
                      Then you, Margrain, should be enduring unbearable pain.

                  • Do you know what non-sequitur means? Look it up and then we can proceeed. For the benefit of others, I have not claimed many people within the Muslim world are not inspired by Hitler fascism. The issue that is being discussed is whether political (neo)Zionism is a far right racist and fascist ideology? The answer to that question is yes it is, which is why all the far right political parties throughout Europe of the kind fascist loving Eddy Baby supports, court the Jewish-neoZionist vote. Coincidence? Not on your nelly.

                    • “The issue that is being discussed is whether political (neo)Zionism is a far right racist and fascist ideology?”

                      You do like to decide what people can and cannot discuss on websites, don’t you Margrain.
                      If we don’t all play by your rules will you take your ball and go home?

                    • Migraine likes to ignore the little fact that although “the left” supposedly hates Ultra Conservative Right-Wing types,

                      “the left” LOVES Ultra Conservative Right-Wing” types – as long as they are Muslim.

                      Islamofascism gets kid gloves from Socialists, Regressive “progressives”.

            • “to ignore that Zionists helped facilitate Hitler” …

              unhinged nonsense. Just the kind of crap that a dreg like you would engage in – nil comprehension skills, nil understanding of context, nil analytical powers.

              And that’s before we start on your ignorance and on your bilious hatred.

                • Another example of an appeal to authority of the type that antisemitic anti-Zionists employ regularly.

              • You make the mistake of assuming that we are in a dialog. I’m under no delusion that you are capable of understanding your errors of judgement, nor is anyone else. My remarks were made with that in mind.

              • @Margrain

                A sad world you live in if you believe “truth” can be validated by the amount of pain a statement can cause. Lies and slander such as you promote are quite capable of inflicting pain. Perhaps you need to curl up with a like minded book – say “50 Shades of Grey”?

                Your posts demonstrate how anti-Zionists engage in anti-Semitism by seeking to deflect criticism of their criticism by first claiming that they are really not anti-Semites, then proving that they are.

                First let’s put aside your claim that “God is not a real estate agent.” which, while not anti-Semitic, is anti-religious. Most religious Christians, Jews and Muslims would disagree and point out that since the is God’s world and He can dispense with it as He likes. The Quran clearly supports the notion of Jewish national ownership of the land of Israel, but Muslims generally cite Israeli lack of piety as justification for ethnically cleansing Jews and placing them under submission. Yet your objection is not to Muslim religious motivations at all – it is selectively targeted against Jews and Christians, and not even against those Christians who retain supercessionist ideals, but against more modern and liberal Christians who have recognized the role of Christianity in persecuting and dhmimmifying Jews. Would that there were more such individuals recognizing a similar Arab history of anti-Semitism as well! One can recognize that religiously motivated Zionism is a positive force but note also that religiously motivated anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are, as you so quaintly put it, “bed fellows”. However, unlike the relationship between Zionists and the 3rd Reich, the association between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is embraced.

                Unlike you, I don’t dismiss religious sensibilities but instead take them into account. This legend about a flying horse that took Muhammad to Tahiti where he then danced the dance of the 7 veils and met the Jewish prophets is, to say the least intriguing, but how that segues into land claims I find most perplexing. 😉

                You live in London. If an Italian bought the flat next door and explained that his ancestors were Picts or Druids and that they had been exiled some 2000 years ago and that she had always desired in live in her historic homeland. If you then attacked her and her family, knifed some of her cousins and blew up the #35 bus, raving about “resistance” to “Mediterranean invaders” and shouting “Allahu Akhbar”, you’d deserve to be arrested or worse.

                That you subscribe to classic anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist tropes is evident in your buzzword laden diatribe. Themes such as ‘theft of “Palestinian” land’ (pre-1948 entirely purchased, most “settlements” on state land; land itself does not default to a ‘Palestinian’ or ‘Arab’ ethnicity), undue ‘influence’ of Jewish groups (anti-Semitism), aspirations for a ‘Greater Israel’ (Tigris to Euphrates anyone, classical anti-Semitic trope), ‘illegal dispossession’ (abuse of legal term for the purpose of slander), ‘Koenig Plan’ (more fakery – Koenig’s report did not say what anti-Zionists claim and was never implemented), 3 mini-wars prompted by missile fire from Gaza that did not spread into the west bank proving Israel’s agenda was entirely security related and lastly your purely anti-Semitic use of inverting Europe’s treatment of Jews as an accusation.

                Your own words condemn you for what you are.

                • And what am I, in your view, L.King? The question was rhetorical. You are going to have to substantiate your view that I’m somehow an anti-semite. No projections please. If I’m an anti-semite for stating that political Zionism is an ideology that’s racist to the core, then so too are numerous academics and scholars, many of whom are Jewish. The notion that I’m an anti-Semite is actually absurd given that I’ve fought against racism and fascism all my life. Actually, there is nothing “new” in these false claims of a anti-Semitism. Zionists have long used anti-Semitism and the Holocaust as emotional blackmail—their justification for Israel’s existence is that it is necessary to defend Jews from another Holocaust.

                  Therefore, it is argued, Israel’s actions today, no matter how brutal, are always justifiable because the Jewish state is located in the middle of Arab peoples who “want to drive Jews into the sea.” The end result of this propaganda is to stunt the growth of an international solidarity movement for justice for Palestine. At the same time, confusing anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism obscures the real root of the Israel-Palestine conflict. In truth, Zionism’s real history shows that it has never been about Judaism or saving Jews, and that its relationship with anti-Semitism is much more sinister.

                  The confusion has been fostered by Israel, which claims to speak for worldwide Jewry. But in reality, Judaism and Zionism are distinct and separate issues. Their only connection is that one is used as a cloak for the other. That is, all of Israel’s policies are defended on the basis that they are necessary in order to safeguard Jews the world over.

                  Unfortunately for Zionists the Biblical imperative does not trump international law. You are wrong to say that anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are embraced.The two are not synonymous. By contrast, political Zionism and far right fascism are ideologically aligned. This explains why far right political parties throughout Europe court Jewish-Zionist support. Up until the rise of fascism in Europe, Zionism was a fringe movement. Most Jews were just not that interested in moving to Palestine, let alone colonizing it or driving out the Arab population. In fact, between 1880 and 1929, almost four million Jews emigrated from Russia and Eastern European countries. But only 120,000 moved to Palestine, while more than three million moved to the U.S. and Canada.

                  In 1914 there were only 12,000 members of Zionist organizations across the entire U.S. Zionism is not an age-old Jewish idea. From its inception, it was a secular rather than a religious movement. It merely used Judaism as a means to bolster its nationalist claim. Zionists settled upon Palestine, instead of some other locations that they had originally flirted with, not for religious reasons but for purely propagandistic ones. Religious Jews, by and large, opposed the growth of Zionism at that time, and some Orthodox groups still do today on the basis of Jewish law.

                  Political Zionism—which sought to form an exclusive Jewish state—was a new phenomenon that arose in Eastern Europe in response to the growth of modern anti-Semitism. The leaders of the Zionist movement adopted and reflected many of the ideas of ultra-nationalism and colonial expansion that characterized the period. But Zionism was just one minority response among many to anti-Semitism. Jewish nationalism grew, and within that Zionism was a particularly conservative variant. Many more Jews flocked to socialist and communist movements, which actually fought against fascism.

                  Zionism’s response, on the other hand, was to collaborate with it. As a member of the (now-defunct) Israeli Socialist Organization put it, Zionism “accepts at least tacitly the basic assumptions of racism.” (Source:N. Israeli, “Zionism and Anti-Semitism,” in Arie Bober, ‘The Other Israel (Garden City: Anchor Books, 1972), 167—68).. That is, there is something inherent either in Jews or non-Jews that necessarily warrants a separation.

                  • “If I’m an anti-semite for stating that political Zionism is an ideology that’s racist to the core,…”
                    Earlier you had stated that it’s “neoZionism” that is racist, not Zionism. Which is it? Once again you’re slipping.

                    “…then so too are numerous academics and scholars, many of whom are Jewish.”
                    So, not all of them are Jewish. But so what if some are Jewish? Some of the worst antisemites in history have been Jewish, as some of the worst traitors to Britain have been British. It is a tactic of antisemitic anti-Zionists to hide behind such people. Never mind that most Jewish scholars, and most Jews throughly disagree, and can recognize irrational hate when they see it.

                    • It’s not anti-semitic to claim that (neo)Zionism is racist to the core which it is.

                    • It’s not “islamophobic” to claim that Islamofascism is racist to the core – which it is.

                      Who do Islamofascists hate?
                      – Bahais? Check.
                      – Buddhists? Check
                      – Christians? Check
                      – Hindus? Check.
                      – Jews – SORRY, Zionists? Check
                      – Educated women? Check.
                      – Women driving a car? Check.
                      – Improperly dressed women? Check.
                      – Free Speech? Check.

                      – Wrong kind of Muslim? Check. ( Whether you’re sunni, shiite, wahabb, salifi, sufi, you’re all in the crosshairs of some head chopper.)

                    • > More projection, Edward. Wrong, as usual, You just make stuff up….LOL.

                      Really? So where have you spent hours and hours and 100+ posts bashing Islamofascists, terrorism, passenger plane bombing, beheadings, stabbings, shootings, Child Slave Labor, Human Shield sacrifice, death worship?

                    • This is not an Islamist site. I reserve the right to criticise your brand of neoZionist racism. Note I never said Judaofascism which is equally as absurd as Islamofascism.

        • Another interesting tidbit from Migraines Vanity Website is that he is also a

          9/11 TROOFER.

          I LOVE 9/11 Troofers. They are so…… STUPID.

          IE. Why are there so many “theories” about the events on 9/11?

          No planes but CGI? Planes with No Windows? Remote Controlled planes? Thermite? Termites? (I keep the best ones for later).

          What is the One True “theory’?

          How many 9/11 Troofers are also 7/7/05 Troofers??? More CGI? Remote Controlled British Muslims?

          • On the contrary, I specifically condemned 9-11 truther’s. You are a liar Edward. Either that or you have serious comprehension problems.

            • Migraine, Did 19 Muslims, 15 of whom were Saudis, hijack 4 passenger planes, and after telling the passengers that if they do not resist, they will be safe,

              yet the 19 Muslim hijackers (ALL of them were Muslims, correct) flew 3 of the hijacked planes into prominent buildings (Two World Trade Center and the Pentagon) and the fourth Islamofascist hijacked passenger plane crashed in a field, never reaching its target?

              Was 9/11 committed by Muslims?
              Were the 19 Muslims attempting to commit GENOCIDE by toppling two 100+ story buildings????

                • Did Muslims also bomb the WTC in 1993, bomb London transport in July 2005, murder people in Brussels, Charlie Hebdo, Bataclan, Mumbai India, Nairobi Kenya mall, bomb the Boston Marathon, bomb Pan Am 103, bomb Metrojet, Beslan, Bali, Madrid, behead British soldier Lee Rigby, behead journalist Daniel Pearl, dead James Foley, shoot girls in the head for wanting an education, invade the 1972 Olympics and murder athletes, shoot Pope John Paul II, openly threaten the UK with 9/11 scale atrocities, shoot people at a Copenhagen cafe, murder people in Sydney, Ottawa, behead captives and post videos of the beheading on the Internet, …???

                  • Yes Muslims did all those things. But since, as the racist and fascist you are, you are intent on turning this into a sectarian-based issue, “Jews” engaged in Plan D, Cast Lead, Protective Edge, the Nakba, ethnic cleaning & Deir Yassin.

                    • Wow – changing the subject are you stupid Nazi.

                      Sorry that you are too stupid for mere words.

                      There is no ‘Plan D’ never existed.

                      Yes Jews did defend themselves from Islamofascists that attempted to murder 6 million Jews – too fucking bad asswipe.

                      The Nakba was first in 1920 when the Arab colonists were declared not to be Syrians – minor fact.

                      The only ethnic cleansing was by your pet fascists.

                      Even the Arabs that were there state that Deir Yassin was a myth.

                      In short you are a fucking moron without any facts. Typical EuroNazi shit

                    • @ Gee, “Plan Dalat didn’t exist?”

                      WTF are you on?

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Dalet:

                      And the notion, that I’m a Nazi is plain dumb since I’m of the centre-left and have fought against Nazism all my political life. You are obviously confusing me with your neoZionist pals in the IOF who kill kids and women for fun. Just to remind, you neoZionsm is a far-right ideology which is precisely why far-right political parties in Europe court the neoZionist Jewish vote. Is there anything else you need clarification with?

          • In response to your exchange I looked into Margrain’s blog. Based on his most recent article which is unequivocally opposed to 9/11 Trutherism I’d have to say you got it wrong. I’m a little disappointed as I’ve had lots of fun and experience in 9/11 debunking but it is what it is.

            Generally 9/11 Trutherism is not the gateway drug of choice into anti-Semitism as only a subset invoke memes of a neo-Conservative cabal in cahoots with the Mossad and World Zionism. David Ray Griffin may be a nutcase but I’ve never seen a whiff of anti-Semitism about him.

                • Edward, it’s not me who supports far right fascist groups like the BNP and EDL but you. So as usual you are wrong. You are a laughing stock, pal.

              • Margrain,
                re: your previous comment
                A Plan Dalet did exist, just not the one your propaganda heroes fantasize about, and, the real one was simply never implemented. Your article of faith is just another red herring. Another attempt at cramming Jewish independence into inapplicable Left/Right paradigm. This is a fallacy.

        • Edward as much as I disagree with the views of Margrain and not only find them wrong and repugnant. I believe it is wrong for you to post his address etc. I will continue to ridicule his posts and him.
          There are far too many ‘crazies’ in this World so I would err on the side of caution before posting his, or anyone’s, personal contact details.

          • Margrain is practicing Hate Speech. Let the authorities in his town deal with him according to the Letter of the Law.

              • I’m in the USA. Someone living in London has the right and responsibilty to fight Migraines Hate Speech.

              • Edward if you believe Margrain, or anyone else, is a terrorist and operating inside the UK then ring the Anti-Terrorist Hotline on 0800 789 321

                • Again, I DO NOT live in the UK. I live in the United States of America, G-d Bless America!

                  Your Anti-Terrorist Hotline number won’t work in the US but should work on your phone.

                  • Edward you really should not make assumptions or jump to conclusions.
                    Because I am British, Welsh to be exact, because I was bred there, worked most of my life there and was active in politics there you assume and jump to the conclusion that I still live in the UK.

                    Wrong Edward, I left the UK almost two years ago.

                  • Gerry, do you call home? Any relatives, friends, associates still living the UK? The same skill that you use to your old home can be used to notify the appropriate authorities on Migraine Hate Speech.

                • Gerald, When a crime is committed in the US, I don’t call the police in the UK.

                  When a crime is committed in the UK,…

            • No I have not engaged in hate speech. That’s pure nonsense, On the other hand, you’ve repeatedly called for the Genocide of Palestinian’s.

          • Thanks Gerald. As much as we disagree, it’s unacceptable to reveal personal details on the internet. I’m not a antisemite or racist and nothing I’ve said on here supports that hypothesis. My disagreement is with Islamophobes like Edward who openly call for the Genocide of Palestinian’s.

    • I’m impressed with your ability to say nothing even though you don’t seem able to stop talking.

    • Greenstein is a lightweight. What is all the fuss about ? This guy is in cahoots with Richard Silverstein, Anthony Loewenstein and the Zohorot clowns. I guess they love to parade him around because it generates clicks. Greenstein is clickbait.

    • Greenstein,
      It took about two sentences for me to find out how fucked up you are through your willfully(?) ignorant reading and distortion of history. You are disgusting. Adam Levick could not have done a better job than you have just done outing yourself.

    • So do explain to us what Zionism is, on your planet, and how one can be against the Jews having a free country and not be a Jew-hater. I am all agog.

      • You really do have comprehension problems don’t you? Nowhere have I mentioned Zionism.

        Erm, Jews have a country, it’s called Israel….LOL. Illegal settlement building beyond the Green Line is not.

        • You’ve illustrated another similarity between anti-Zionists and Nazis. The Nazis would declare all kinds of laws declaring things that Jews did as “illegal”, but when others did it, it was not. Saddam Hussein famously went even further. He declared that whatever he wrote on a scrap of paper was the law – and you don’t even have a scrap of paper!

          In order to declare the territory beyond the Green Line as “occupied” one would first have to recognize the legitimacy of either the Jordanian occupation of 1948-67 or the Partition Plan of 1947. But if the Jordanian occupation was legal, then so is the Israeli. If Jordanian construction from 1948-1967 was legal, then so is Israeli.

          But if one claims that the Jordanian occupation was illegal, then what replaces it? If one relies on Partition, a poor choice IMV, then Jerusalem and Bethlehem were part of the Corpus Separatum, in which case if Jewish construction is illegal, then so is non-Jewish construction. Either that, or they are both legal. However you mentioned the “Green LIne”, so you must be referencing the 1949 armistice lines.

          So where is the relevant legislation or agreement that Jews cannot create communities east of the Green Line? IMV the only prior article of international law is the 1922 Mandate for the League of Nations – unless you want to resurrect the Ottoman Caliphate from the dead!

          Article 6: The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

          Under Article 6 it becomes a duty of the League and thereby the UN which assumed all responsibilities of the league to encourage “close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

          If it is a duty under international law, it cannot also be against international law. This is not to preclude the possibility of Arab sovereignty, but that is a separate issue from residence.

          • This is all perfectly true.
            There is a further point, though: armistice lines cease to exist the moment one party fires across them. Israel would have been perfectly within her rights to declare the green line null and void on any number of occasions between 1949 and 1967 when the Jordanian military fired on (and several times, murdered) Israelis.

        • “You really do have comprehension problems don’t you?”
          That is not an answer.

          “Nowhere have I mentioned Zionism.”
          Yes, you have. I told you, you are slipping. Remember?

    • “The second comment is a good example of Zionist anti-Semitism. The reference to a grandmother being the Nuremburg definition of a Jew or Mischlinge to be exact.” –
      Hilarious. This has nothing to do with ‘Zionism’.
      Sue your teachers. Your reading comprehension and analytical skills are non-existent.

    • If you think Atzmon is a Zionist, Tony, you’re not necessarily an anti-Semite, but you are a lunatic. But you are also wrong on a number of points.

      Charges of “dual loyalty” are often exploited by anti-Semites. The reference point is Matthew 6:24 “No one can serve two masters for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. ” As such this is a very Christian concept. But read the next line, which should appeal to your socialist ethos : “You cannot serve God and money.” Read a bit forward to Matthew 12:30: “Whoever is not with me is against me.”

      I would turn that around. Most of us “serve” many masters, and we balance that loyalty. It is the fanatic, who can only serve one master, and it is the fanatic who seeks to create crisis situations where loyalty becomes a polarizing issue. The charge of “dual loyalty” is clearly a bullying tactic.

      Your other assertions are also disingenuous to say the least. It’s difficult to say whether or not Herzl was naive or optimistic in stating that anti-Semites would welcome the return of the Jews to Israel, but its also reasonable to point out that what he was attempting to do was turn the enemies of the Jews into friends by giving them what they wanted. He wasn’t justifying anti-Semitism at all.

      For Herzl the trial of Alfred Dreyfus was about France betraying what he believed to be the values of the Enlightenment. If France could succumb to anti-Semitism, then what hope could there be for humanity? Again the root cause was the bullying charge of dual loyalty. But Dreyfus was innocent, and the charge of dual loyalty was not because he had any loyalty to Germany but because he was a Jew. The anti-Semite reasoned that Jews in France might feel loyalty to Jews in Germany, and therefore Dreyfus, as a Jew, would be susceptible to betraying his country. French Catholics and Protestants were not subject to the same scrutiny. That’s the link to anti-Semitism.

      Jews have always felt a connection to other Jews and other Jewish communities. Jewish travelers could always find assistance and a Sabbath meal when traveling abroad. This is rather a beautiful tradition.

      Herzl’s strategy was not the only Jewish response to anti-Semitism. Some Jews tried to blend in, either by converting to Christianity or dedicating oneself to national or internationalist movements in order to defend oneself against charges of dual loyalty. Even better, you could prove your loyalty by denouncing your fellow Jews.

      I usually sigh when the accusation that someone like yourself makes false equivalences to Nazism. Godwin’s law comes to mind. It’s often sheer hyperbole and incitement, and shows little understanding of who the Nazis were and how they operated. It’s especially ironic coming from someone who is British as Israeli policy towards Arab terrorism mirrors British policy during the Mandate, albeit it’s not as harsh. Of course claiming that the policies of the Israeli government should be equated with that of the British in Palestine lacks the same dramatic impact, but it is the truth.

      • > The reference point is Matthew 6:24 “No one can serve two masters for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. ”

        If true then it’s bad news for the parents (loyal to mother or father? Impossible to love both?) or families with more than one children.

    • How have you fought? Ever put on a uniform and pick up a weapon? Bet not.

      You are an anti-semite period. Here is the definition “a person who discriminates against or is prejudiced or hostile toward Jews.” – that would be you, it says nothing about your religion.

      As for lying – well you are an expert at it.

      • Good definition. The problem is I don’t, and have never, discriminated against or is prejudiced or hostile towards Jews..You seem to have some kind of persecution complex.

          • Wrong. NeoZionism and Judaism/Jews are not synonymous. I reserve my hatred for AshkeNAZI neoZionist fascists like you and Edward. God you are dumb.

      • Migraine, What are you ranting about you vile fascist, racist, bigot, water carrying IslamoFascist fanboi???

            • Salafist’s of the kind that smashed planes into building on 9-11, ISIS, Al Qaida, Al Nusra, Boko Harem….Happy?

              • Are Salifists Muslims? How about Wahabbis? Sunnis? Shite? Muslim Brotherhood?

                Grand Mufti a Muslim?

                  • Just Islamofascists, those who support them, cheer them, and the suicidal Eurotrash who hate everyone not like them.

                    Happy Eternal Nakba!

                    • Do you hate “Judaeofascists” too….LOL Like I say, I hate Islamists, don’t support or cheer them. I know you are unable to comprehend information, you AshkeNAZI neoZionist piece of shit. So to avoid any further misunderstanding on your part, I’ll say it again and you can remind me what in the following you do not understand. For the umpteenth time:

                      I detest all Islamist fanatics and terrorists whether they be Wahabists/Salafists, neoconservative warmongers or neoZionists. Have I made myself clear?

                      Oh, and the term “Eurotrash” is also racist

                      Finally, Eddy Baby, if you love your racist “Jewish” Fatherland (sorry,Homeland) like you claim you do, why don’t you go and live there? Just a thought.

    • Bellend, Bellend on your pathetic website “BedWettersRuS” you used to have a section About Us, in which you stated that you “Despise Israel”. You might remember I raised it with you on a different thread. You also stated in the same section that “it is not the Palestinian people it is personal”

      Now, amazingly, this section has disappeared, why is that?
      Do your fellow members of the Axis of Arseholes also know that your nerve has failed you?
      What a spineless wimp you truly are.

    • All Muslims hate us, might as well give a little back. I hate all Nazis too, in fact I hate everybody that wants to kill me.

      Don’t like too fucking bad

      • Muslims hate EVERYBODY – even fellow Muslims. See sunni, shiite, wahabbi, saifi, ISIS, Al Qada, Taliban, Muslim Brotherhood, Boko Haram, Al Nusra, Fascist Iran.

      • Ah, Gee that’s the eternal sense of persecution and victim hood coming out in you predicated on your apparently incurable “antisemitosis”. People don’t hate you because you are Jewish, they hate you because you are a neoZionist fascist.

  3. Simple Gerald it is going to reappear as a page. So let me give you a preview of it, you being an A list kinda guy. I despise the State of Israel. It is a crappy little racist basket case of a country.

    • Bellend as you feel contempt or a deep repugnance for the State of Israel, what will you reappear as ?

      Obviously based on the contents of your posts and your pathetic website “BedWettersRuS” there is very little chance of you reappearing as a logical human being, the change necessary would be far too great.
      Or will you just reappear up your own arsehole, which is where you spend most of your time at present?