How Zionists manage to get away with their myths and lies?

 

By Gilad Atzmon

 

 

Sat Apr 13, 2013 6:36PM GMT

 

In his new book, “The Invention Of The Land of Israel”, Israeli academic Shlomo Sand, manages to present conclusive evidence of the far fetched nature of the Zionist historical narrative – that the Jewish Exile is a myth as is the Jewish people and even the Land of Israel.
Yet, Sand and many others fail to address the most important question: If Zionism is based on myth, how do the Zionists manage to get away with their lies, and for so long?”

Related Interviews:

 

Jewish power is the unique capacity to stop us from discussing or even contemplating Jewish power. It is the capacity to determine the boundaries of the political discourse and criticism in particular.

In his new book, “The Invention Of The Land of Israel”, Israeli academic Shlomo Sand, manages to present conclusive evidence of the far fetched nature of the Zionist historical narrative – that the Jewish Exile is a myth as is the Jewish people and even the Land of Israel.

Yet, Sand and many others fail to address the most important question:

 

• If Zionism is based on myth, how do the Zionists manage to get away with their lies, and for so long?
• If the Jewish ‘homecoming’ and the demand for a Jewish national homeland cannot be historically substantiated, why has it been supported by both Jews and the West for so long?
• How does the Jewish state manage for so long to celebrate its racist expansionist ideology and at the expense of the Palestinian and Arab peoples?

 

Jewish power is obviously one answer, but, what is Jewish power? Can we ask this question without being accused of being Anti Semitic? Can we ever discuss its meaning and scrutinize its politics? Is Jewish Power a dark force, managed and maneuvered by some conspiratorial power? Is it something of which Jews themselves are shy? Quite the opposite – Jewish power, in most cases, is celebrated right in front of our eyes. As we know, AIPAC is far from being quiet about its agenda, its practices or its achievements. AIPAC, CFI in the UK and CRIF in France are operating in the most open manner and often openly brag about their success.

 

Furthermore, we are by now accustomed to watch our democratically elected leaders shamelessly queuing to kneel before their pay-masters. Neocons certainly didn’t seem to feel the need to hide their close Zionist affiliations. Abe Foxman’s Anti Defamation League (ADL) works openly towards the Judification of the Western discourse, chasing and harassing anyone who dares voice any kind of criticism of Israel or even of Jewish choseness. And of course, the same applies to the media, banking and Hollywood. We know about the many powerful Jews who are not in the slightest bit shy about their bond with Israel and their commitment to Israeli security, the Zionist ideology, the primacy of Jewish suffering, Israeli expansionism and even outright Jewish exceptionalism.

 

But, as ubiquitous as they are, AIPAC, CFI, ADL, Bernie Madoff, ‘liberator’ Bernard Henri Levy, war-advocate David Aaronovitch, free market prophet Milton Friedman, Steven Spielberg, Haim Saban, Lord Levy and many other Zionist enthusiasts and Hasbara advocates are not necessarily the core or the driving force behind Jewish Power, but are merely symptoms. Jewish power is actually far more sophisticated than simply a list of Jewish lobbies or individuals performing highly developed manipulative skills. Jewish power is the unique capacity to stop us from discussing or even contemplating Jewish power. It is the capacity to determine the boundaries of the political discourse and criticism in particular.

 

Contrary to popular belief, it is not ‘right wing’ Zionists who facilitate Jewish power, It is actually the ‘good’, the ‘enlightened’ and the ‘progressive’ who make Jewish power the most effective and forceful power in the land. It is the ‘progressives’ who confound our ability to identify the Judeocentric tribal politics at the heart of Neoconservatism, American contemporary imperialism and foreign policy. It is the so-called ‘anti’ Zionist who goes out of his or her way to divert our attention from the fact that Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and blinds us to the fact that its tanks are decorated with Jewish symbols.

It was the Jewish Left intellectuals who rushed to denounce Professors Mearsheimer and Walt, Jeff Blankfort and James Petras’ work on the Jewish Lobby. And it is no secret that Occupy AIPAC, the campaign against the most dangerous political Lobby in America, is dominated by a few righteous members of the chosen tribe. We need to face up to the fact that our dissident voice is far from being free. Quite the opposite, we are dealing here with an institutional case of controlled opposition.

 

In George Orwell’s 1984, it is perhaps Emmanuel Goldstein who is the pivotal character. Orwell’s Goldstein is a Jewish revolutionary, a fictional Leon Trotsky. He is depicted as the head of a mysterious anti-party organization called “The Brotherhood” and is also the author of the most subversive revolutionary text (The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism). Goldstein is the ‘dissenting voice’, the one who actually tells the truth. Yet, as we delve into Orwell’s text, we find out from Party’s ‘Inner Circle’ O’Brien that Goldstein was actually invented by Big Brother in a clear attempt to control the opposition and the possible boundaries of dissidence.

 

Orwell’s personal account of the Spanish Civil War “Homage To Catalonia” clearly presaged the creation of Emmanuel Goldstein. It was what Orwell witnessed in Spain that, a decade later, matured into a profound understanding of dissent as a form of controlled opposition. My guess is that, by the late 1940’s, Orwell had understood the depth of intolerance, and tyrannical and conspiratorial tendencies that lay at the heart of ‘Big Brother-ish’ Left politics and praxis.

 

Surprisingly enough, an attempt to examine our contemporaneous controlled opposition within the Left and the Progressive reveal that it is far from being a conspiratorial. Like in the case of the Jewish Lobby, the so-called ‘opposition’ hardly attempts to disguise its ethno-centric tribal interests, spiritual and ideological orientation and affiliation.
 

 A brief examination of the list of organisations founded by George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) presents a grim picture – pretty much the entire American progressive network is funded, partially or largely by a liberal Zionist, philanthropic billionaire who supports very many good and important causes that are also very good for the Jews. And yet, like staunch Zionist Haim Saban, Soros does not operate clandestinely. His Open Society Institute proudly provides all the necessary information regarding the vast amount of shekels it spreads on its good and important causes.

 

So one can’t accuse Soros or the Open Society Institute of any sinister vetting the political discourse, stifling of free speech or even to ‘controlling the opposition’. All Soros does is to support a wide variety of ‘humanitarian causes’: Human Rights, Women’s Rights. Gay Rights, equality, democracy, Arab ‘Spring’, Arab Winter, the oppressed, the oppressor, tolerance, intolerance, Palestine, Israel, anti war, pro-war (only when really needed), and so on.

 

As with Orwell’s Big Brother that frames the boundaries of dissent by means of control opposition, Soros’ Open Society also determines, either consciously or unconsciously, the limits of critical thought. Yet, unlike in 1984, where it is the Party that invents its own opposition and write its texts, within our ‘progressive’ discourse, it is our own voices of dissent, willingly and consciously, that are compromising their principles.

 

Soros may have read Orwell – he clearly believes his message – because from time to time he even supports opposing forces. For instance, he funds the Zionist-lite J Street as well as Palestinian NGO organisations. And guess what? It never takes long for the Palestinian beneficiaries to, compromise their own, most precious principles so they fit nicely into their paymaster’s worldview.

 

The Visible Hand

 

The invisible hand of the market is a metaphor coined by Adam Smith to describe the self-regulating behaviour of the marketplace. In contemporary politics. The visible hand is a similar metaphor which describes the self-regulating tendency of the political-fund beneficiary, to fully integrate the world view of its benefactor into its political agenda.

 

Democracy Now, the most important American dissident outlet has never discussed the Jewish Lobby with Mearsheimer, Walt, Petras or Blankfort – the four leading experts who could have informed the American people about the USA’s foreign policy domination by the Jewish Lobby. For the same reasons, Democracy Now wouldn’t explore the Neocon’s Judeo-centric agenda nor would it ever discuss Jewish Identity politics with yours truly. Democracy Now will host Noam Chomsky or Norman Finkelstein, it may even let Finkelstein chew up Zionist caricature Alan Dershowitz – all very good, but not good enough.

 

Is the fact that Democracy Now is heavily funded by Soros relevant? I’ll let you judge.

 

If I’m correct (and I think I am) we have a serious problem here. As things stand, it is actually the progressive discourse, or at least large part of it. that sustains Jewish Power. If this is indeed the case, and I am convinced it is, then the occupied progressive discourse, rather than Zionism, is the primary obstacle that must be confronted.

 

It is no coincidence that the ‘progressive’ take on ‘antisemitism’ is suspiciously similar to the Zionist one. Like Zionists, many progressive institutes and activists adhere to the bizarre suggestion that opposition to Jewish power is ‘racially motivated’ and embedded in some ‘reactionary’ Goyish tendency. Consequently, Zionists are often supported by some ‘progressives’ in their crusade against critics of Israel and Jewish power. Is this peculiar alliance between these allegedly opposing schools of thoughts, the outcome of a possible ideological continuum between these two seemingly opposed political ideologies? Maybe, after all, progressiveness like Zionism is driven by a peculiar inclination towards ‘choseness’. After all, being progressive somehow implies that someone else must be ‘reactionary’. It is those self-centric elements of exceptionalism and choseness that have made progressiveness so attractive to secular and emancipated Jews. But the main reason the ‘progressive’ adopted the Zionist take on antisemitism, may well be because of the work of that visible hand that miraculously shapes the progressive take on race, racism and the primacy of Jewish suffering.

 

We may have to face up to the fact that the progressive discourse effectively operates as Israel’s longest arm – it certainly acts as a gatekeeper and as protection for Zionism and Jewish tribal interests. If Israel and its supporters would ever be confronted with real opposition it might lead to some long-overdue self-reflection. But at the moment, Israel and Zionist lobbies meet only insipid, watered-down, progressively-vetted resistance that, in practice, sustains Israeli occupation, oppression and an endless list of human rights abuses.

 

Instead of mass opposition to the Jewish State and its aggressive lobby, our ‘resistance’ is reduced into a chain of badge-wearing, keffiyeh-clad, placard-waving mini-gatherings with the occasional tantrum from some neurotic Jewess while being videoed by another good Jew. If anyone believes that a few badges, a load of amateur Youtube clips celebrating Jewish righteousness are going to evolve into a mass anti-Israel global movement, they are either naïve or stupid.

 

In fact, a recent Gallup poll revealed that current Americans’ sympathy for Israel has reached an All-Time High. 64% of Americans sympathise with the Jewish State, while only 12% feel for the Palestinians. This is no surprise and our conclusion should be clear. As far as Palestine is concerned, ‘progressive’ ideology and praxis have led us precisely nowhere. Rather than advance the Palestinian cause, it only locates the ‘good’ Jew at the centre of the solidarity discourse.

 

When was the last time a Palestinian freedom fighter appeared on your TV screen? Twenty years ago the Palestinian were set to become the new Che Guevaras. Okay, so the Palestinian freedom fighter didn’t necessarily speak perfect English and wasn’t a graduate of an English public school, but he was free, authentic and determined. He or she spoke about their land being taken and of their willingness to give what it takes to get it back. But now, the Palestinian has been ‘saved’, he or she doesn’t have to fight for his or her their land, the ‘progressive’ is taking care of it all.

 

This ‘progressive’ voice speaks on behalf of the Palestinian and, at the same time, takes the opportunity to also push marginal politics, fight ‘Islamism’ and ‘religious radicalisation’ and occasionally even supports the odd interventionst war and, of course, always, always, always fights antisemitism. The controlled opposition has turned the Palestinian plight into just one more ‘progressive’ commodity, lying on the back shelf of its ever-growing ‘good-cause’ campaign store.

 

For the Jewish progressive discourse, the purpose behind pro-Palestinian support is clear. It is to present an impression of pluralism within the Jewish community. It is there to suggest that not all Jews are bad Zionists. Philip Weiss, the founder of the most popular progressive pro-Palestinian blog was even brave enough to admit to me that it is Jewish self -interests that stood at the core of his pro Palestinian activity.

 

Jewish self-love is a fascinating topic. But even more fascinating is Jewish progressives loving themselves at the expense of the Palestinians. With billionaires such as Soros maintaining the discourse, solidarity is now an industry, concerned with profit and power rather than ethics or values and it is a spectacle both amusing and tragic as the Palestinians become a side issue within their own solidarity discourse.

 

So, perhaps before we discuss the ‘liberation of Palestine’, we first may have to liberate ourselves.

 

GA/JR

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Israel Channel 2 program on Anti-Semitism (must watch)

Wednesday, April 10, 2013 at 6:52PM Gilad Atzmon

 

Israel defines itself as the Jewish State, its tanks are decorated with Jewish symbols, it commits crimes against humanity in the name of the Jewish people, and yet, Israeli TV can’t understand why people out there express some anger towards Israel. Zionism or Jews. I can’t make up my mind whether this is tragic or just sad -time is overdue for Israel and Jews to self-reflect.
The TV program fails to define what ‘anti Semitism’ is. It also fails to suggest since when Jews are Semites.

In spite of being an Israeli (Hebrew) TV program, many of the segments are in English.

Interestingly enough, just a year ago, Ethnic Cleanser enthusiast Alan Dershowitz crowned me as the ‘biggest danger to the Jewish people.’ This time I am not mentioned at all. I guess that our Zionist, AZZ and their Palestinian Sabbath Goyim grasped by now that the Anti Semite/Racist label is not going to work with me. I easily survived the smear. They will soon try something new. I can see them working hard.

  

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Playing the Venezuelan Anti-Semitism Card

by Stephen Lendman

Throughout his tenure, Washington officials vilified Chavez unjustifiably. So did media scoundrels.

He was America top hemispheric enemy. Donald Rumsfeld once likened him to Hitler. Pat Robertson called for his assassination. Anti-semitism accusations surfaced often.

His December 2005 Christmas Eve address was held against him. He said nothing offensive. His comments were maliciously taken the wrong way. He said:

“The world is for all of us, then, but it so happens that a minority, the descendants of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendants of the same ones that kicked Bolivar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia.”

“A minority has taken possession of all the wealth of the world. A minority has taken ownership of all of the gold of the planet, of the silver, of the minerals, the waters, the good lands, oil, of the wealth, and have concentrated the wealth in a few hands.”

“Less than 10 percent of the population of the world owns more than half of the wealth of the world, more than the population of the planet is poor, and each day there are more poor people in the whole world.”

Days later, the Simon Wisenthal Center played the anti-Semitism card. It demanded an apology. Media scoundrels piled on.

Weekly Standard contributor Aaron Mannes said “Hugo Chavez veers into anti-Semitism while explaining how to create a workers’ paradise.”

The Wall Street Journal‘s Mary O’Grady called Chavez’s address an “ugly anti-Semitic swipe.” It followed “an insidious assault over the past several years on the country’s Jewish community.”

She spuriously claimed “heavily armed Chavez commandos raided a Caracas Jewish school, terrifying children and parents.”

It was “part of (his) political strategy of fomenting class hatred – an agenda that finds a vulnerable target in the country’s Jewish minority.” Saying so turned truth on its head.

The Confederation of Jewish Associations of Venezuela (CAIV) responded to baseless Simon Wiesenthal accusations. Former president Fred Pressner said:

“You have acted on your own, without consulting us, on issues that you don’t know or understand.”

“We believe the president was not talking about Jews, and that the Jewish world must learn to work together.”

Separately he said no anti-Semitic violence was committed against Venezuela’s Jewish community. Claims otherwise are canards. Chavista anti-imperialism is misportrayed as government-sponsored anti-Semitism.

Anti-Defamation League demagoguery is longstanding. It’s notorious. It played the Venezuelan anti-Semitism card numerous times. It’s on the rise, it claimed. Chavez scapegoats Jews for political advantage.

It alleged “classical anti-Semitism” ahead of 2006 Venezuelan presidential elections.” It repeated false charges after the 2010 Mavi Marmara massacre. It did so many other times.

Ahead of October 2012 elections, it claimed Chavez tried to portray opposition candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski “as being tainted by his Jewish lineage.” He did no such thing.

Capriles is a self-professed Catholic. He’s the son of Jewish holocaust survivors. Chavez mocked no one’s religion. He justifiably condemned Israeli crimes. He did so many times.

He maintained cordial relations with Caracas Jewish community leaders. In 2008, Latin American Jewish Congress president Jack Terpins said:

“The Jewish community is more at ease now with President Hugo Chavez, who demonstrated that he is a great friend of the Jewish community and who wants to fight anti-Semitism in Latin America.”

At the same time, Argentina’s US ambassador Hector Timerman said Chavez works “with (Brazil’s Lula and Argentina’s Kirchner) to achieve total eradication of anti-Semitism in Latin America.”

“This is a gesture that speaks about the leadership and opinions of President Chavez regarding the need to end all types of discrimination in our region.”

Venezuela’s constitution prohibits discrimination. Indigenous rights are guaranteed. So are human rights, peaceful cooperation, participatory democracy, and social justice.

In September 2010, Chavez met with Jewish community representatives. He dispelled alleged hostility, saying:

Opposition forces “tried to wage a little campaign that I’m anti-Jew, an enemy of the Jews.”

“The reality is we respect and care about the Jewish community.”

Then Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro said Jewish community relations were in “optimum shape,” adding:

“We respect the customs of all our communities and the religious customs of all the groups who, in Venezuela, have freedom of equality.”

Venezuelan Jews are largely in Caracas. Some live in Maracaibo. They number around 16,000.

In late January 2009, vandals desecrated a Caracas Sephardic synagogue. They threw sacred scrolls on the floor. They wrote “Death to the Jews” and other anti-Semitic epithets on walls.

They stole artifacts and computer equipment. Media scoundrels linked what happened to strained Venezuelan/Israeli relations post-Cast Lead.

Commentaries suggested official anti-Semitic policy. Chavez was wrongfully criticized. He condemned what happened. He did so publicly.

A Caracas police investigation determined that synagogue fencing was cut from the inside. The attack was robbery. It was disguised as anti-Semitic vandalism.

Private synagogue security team members were arrested. Eleven were charged. They confessed. Desecration and graffiti were meant to deceive.

Anti-Semitism charges surface often. In his book, “Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History,” Norman Finkelstein said:

“Whenever Israel comes under international pressure to resolve its conflicts with the Palestinians diplomatically or faces a public relations debacle, its apologists mount a campaign alleging that the world is awash in a new anti-Semitism.”

On March 5, Chavez died. Maligning him continues. On March 6, JTA (The Global News Service of the Jewish People) headlined, “Long the bane of Venezuelan Jews, Chavez is gone. Now What?”

“For more than a decade, Venezuelan Jews (held) their breath,” it claimed. He “used his bully pulpit to intimidate, rail against Israel and embrace Iran.”

“While (he) never explicitly threatened the Jews of Venezuela, his frequent harassment and staunchly anti-Israel positions kept them continually on edge.”

How JTA didn’t explain. It unjustifiably conflated legitimate Israeli criticism with anti-Jewishness. Doing so turns truth on its head.

Ben Cohen did the same thing. He’s a New York-based writer. He comments on Jewish and international affairs.

On March 6, his Haaretz article headlined “Will Venezuelan anti-Semitism die with Hugo Chavez,” saying:

“Under Chavez, Venezuela became a source of incendiary anti-Israel rhetoric that spilled over into open hostility towards the dwindling Venezuelan Jewish community, and his successors seem likely to continue to stoke anti-Semitism as a useful political tool.”

Will “Jew-baiting” persist or subside, he asked? “(T)here is little reason for optimism on this front,” he claimed.

Anti-Chavismo US Zionist organizations say so. They wrongfully maligned Chavez throughout his tenure.

According to Cohen, “anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism (were) critical element(s) of the Chavez regime’s bid to become the ideological center of the world’s radical states.”

“Chavistas….may decide that lowering the volume on anti-Jewish rhetoric is, for the time being, a compromise too far.”

Haaretz knows better. Yet it published what demands condemnation. A follow-up report was no better.

On March 29, it headlined “Leaked Documents: Venezuelan intelligence spying on local Jewish community.”

“Venezuelan agents follow, photograph and keep track of the movements of various leaders and rabbis of the local Jewish community, as well as collect information on them, their activaties and their meetings.”

They’re “working on the assumption that the country’s Jews are the bridgehead for attempts by the United States, Israel, to destabilize the country.”

Alleged leaked documents were published. Unnamed Buenos Aires “experts” claim they’re credible.

“(M)any fear an outbreak of violent anti-Semitic acts directed by the government to use Jews as scapegoats.”

It bears repeating. Former Confederation of Jewish Associations of Venezuela (CAIV) president Fred Pressner says no anti-Semitic violence was committed against Venezuela’s Jewish community. It wasn’t earlier. There’s none now.

Venezuela has justifiable national security concerns. Washington destabilization efforts continue. They persisted throughout Chavez’s tenure.

They’re allied with hostile internal right-wing elements. Evidence suggests Mossad’s involved. CIA operatives infest Venezuela. America’s Caracas embassy is a hotbed of anti-Chavista subversion.

Failure to take protective measures would be irresponsible. Credible evidence warrants police searches. National intelligence operatives try to prevent trouble before it erupts.

Groups aren’t targeted for being Jewish. Anti-Semitic accusations don’t wash. Repeating them is irresponsible. Why Haaretz did so, it must explain.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/playing-the-venezuelan-anti-semitism-card/

posted by Steve Lendman @ 12:42 AM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Is Palestinian Solidarity an Occupied Zone?

By GILAD ATZMON

http://www.counterpunch.org/

Once involved with Palestinian Solidarity you have to accept that Jews are special and so is their suffering; Jews are like no other people, their Holocaust is like no other genocide and anti Semitism, is the most vile form of racism the world has ever known and so on and so forth.

But when it comes to the Palestinians, the exact opposite is the case. For some reason we are expected to believe that the Palestinians are not special at all –  they are just like everyone else. Palestinians have not been subject to a unique, racist, nationalist and expansionist Jewish nationalist movement, instead, we must all agree that, just like the Indians and the Africans, the Palestinian ordeal results from run-of-the-mill 19^th century colonialism – just more of the same old boring Apartheid.

So, Jews, Zionists and Israelis are exceptional, like no one else, while Palestinians are always somehow, ordinary, always part of some greater political narrative, always just like everyone else. Their suffering is never due to the particularity of Jewish nationalism, or Jewish racism, or even AIPAC dominating USA foreign policy no, the Palestinian is always a victim of a dull, banal dynamic – general, abstract and totally lacking in particularity.

This raises some serious questions.

Can you think of any other liberation or solidarity movement that prides itself in being boring, ordinary and dull? Can you think of any other solidarity movement that downgrades its subject into just one more meaningless exhibit in a museum of materialist historical happenings? I don’t think so! Did the black South Africans see themselves as being like everyone else? Did Martin Luther King believe his brothers and sisters to be inherently undistinguishable?

I don’t think so. So how come Palestinian solidarity has managed to sink so low that their spokespersons and supporters compete against each other to see who can best eliminate the uniqueness of the Palestinian struggle into just part of a general historical trend such as colonialism or Apartheid?

The answer is simple. Palestinian Solidarity is an occupied zone and, like all such occupied zones must dedicate itself to the fight against ‘anti Semitism’. Dutifully united against racism, fully engaged with LGBT issues in Palestine and in the movement itself, but for one reason or another, the movement is almost indifferent towards the fate of millions of Palestinians living in refugee camps and their Right of Return to their homeland.

But all this can change. Palestinians and their supporters could begin to see their cause for what it is, unique and distinctive. Nor need this be all that difficult.  After all, if Jewish nationalism is inherently exceptional as Zionists proclaim, is it not only natural that the victims of such a distinctive racist endeavor are at least, themselves, just as distinctive.

So far, Palestine solidarity has failed to liberate Palestine, but it has succeeded beyond its wildest dreams in creating a Palestine Solidarity Industry, and one largely funded by liberal Zionists. We have been very productive in schlepping activists around the world promoting ‘boycotts’ and ‘sanctions’ meanwhile Israel trade with Britain is booming  and Hummus Tzabar is clearly apparent in every British grocery store.

All those attempts to reduce Palestinian ordeal into a dated, dull, generalised materialist narrative should be exposed for what they are – an attempt to appease liberal Zionists. Palestinian suffering is actually unique in history at least as unique as the Zionist project.

Yesterday I came across this from South African minister Ronnie Kasrils. In a comment on Israeli Apartheid he said : “This is much worse than Apartheid..Israeli measures, the brutality, make apartheid look like a picnic. We never had Jets attacking our townships; we never had sieges that lasted months after months. We never had tanks destroying houses.”

Kasrils is dead right. It is much worse than Apartheid and far more sophisticated than colonialism. And why? Because what the Zionists did and are doing is neither Apartheid nor is it colonialism. Apartheid wanted to exploit the African, Israel wants the Palestinian gone. Colonialism is an exchange between a mother and a settler state. Israel never had a mother State, though it may well have had a few ‘surrogate mothers’.

Now is the time to look at the unique ordeal of the Palestinian people. Similarly, now is the time to look at the Zionist crime in the light of Jewish culture and identity politics.
Can the solidarity movement meet this challenge? Probably, but like Palestine, it must first, itself, be liberated.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Lobby: Canada Postal Union is antisemitic!

Posted on March 7, 2013 |

Stephen Harper’s government has asked country’s Postal Workers Union (CUPW) to apologize for insulting Canada’s closest ally and the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel.

The union is once again chased by the powerful Jewish lobby groups for using its news letter to spread hatred towards Israel. “Canada is allowing Israel to terrorize occupied people, breach international law, normalize home demolition, build prison-style walls, checkpoints and steal resources,” says March newsletter.

Steven Fletcher, Harper’s minister of transporation, who also oversees Canada Post, has slammed the CUPW for crossing the “red-line”. “The CUPW should apologize for this misuse of public funds,” he said.

Jewish MP Mark Adler, member of Harper’s Conservative Party, has claimed that the newsletter outraged the Jewish community and many members of the parliament and union members.

Israel lobby groups, in past, had claimed that CUPW used fund on political activitism against state of Israel. They have accused CUPW for funded activists to attend the World Social Forum’s “Free Palestine” conference in Porto Alegre, Brazil, and a confab in Holguin, Cuba to demand the US release five Cuban agents arrested for espionage. CUPW has refused the allegations.

In January 2013, when Canada Post issued a new stamp in honor of Swedish-born Jew, Raoul Wallenberg, for saving 100,000 Jews in Hungary during WW II – all these whinos congratulated head of Canada Post, Indian-born Hindu Deepak Chopra.

In the past, Canada Post have issued stamps commemoratig Jewish events which were never blamed for being politically motivated. For example, it issued a stamp wishing 23 million Canadians “Happy Chanukah” in October 2011. In 2010 Canada Post issued a stamp marking the 60th anniversary of Canada’s bilateral relations with Israel (see top left). In 1995, it issed a stamp to publicize the Jewish Holocaust.
The CUPW leadership is known for its criticism of the Zionist regime. It was the first Canadian union to call for the boycott of the Zionist entity in 2008. the union has 54,000 members. Canada Post is a ‘Crown Corporation’.

I would like to end this post by quoting the most dumb propaganda piece I have the misfortune to read against CUPW. On March 6, 2013, some so-called the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies (FSWC) posted the following statement:

“There is an absolute neglect by CUPW of the ongoing anti-Jewish violence and terror faced by Israel on a daily basis. This demonstrates a profound bias against a people who, despite being repeatedly dispossessed throughout history, have managed to create the only democratic nation in the Middle East with equal rights for all its citizens on the land which is their historical birthright,” says Avi Benlolo, President and CEO of FSWC.

How some person could be so idiot? American Jewish author Marianne Williamson told Kevin Barrett PhD last year that Israel is not a democracy. On the other hand, Israeli columnist, Gideon Levy, in daily Ha’aretz called Israel a half democracy. I wonder if Benlolo ever bothered to study some objective source to find out why his Khazarian ancestors were expelled from almost every European country – 108 times?

The Simon Wiesenthal Center, which is named after the ‘Farther of Holocaust’ Simon Wiesenthal – less said the better. Israeli historian and author, Tom Segev PhD, has called Wiesenthal, ”a fame-seeking myth-maker and an Israeli Mossad agent”. Former Austrian Jewish Chancellor Bruno Kreisky called Weisenthal a “Gestapo collaborator”. Dr. Norman Finkelstein in his controversial book ‘The Holocaust Industry’ called Wiesenthal “a liar”.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Holocaust: ‘Only Jews can make fun of it’!

 

Posted on March 2, 2013 |

 

The old-dam of US show-business, Joan River (Russian Jewish Joan Alexandra Molinsky), has refused to apologize for making joke about the Holocaust on her TV show “Fashion Police”, insisting that was just part of her Jewish humor to remind the public about Holocaust. I think, River was making fun of president Barack Obama who in his speech at the UN General Assembly, last year, called Holocaust as sacred as the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Jesus (as).

River’s “antisemitic” joke involved a dress worn by German supermodel Heidi Klum during Monday’s Oscars episode of her show, saying: “The last time a German looked this hot was when they were pushing Jews into the ovens“. The joke made Israel lobbyist Abraham Foxman jump on his seat. He slammed Joan River with a statement, saying: “Of all people, Joan Rivers should know better. This remark is so vulgar and offensive to Jews and Holocaust survivors, and indeed to all Americans, that we cannot believe it made it to the airwaves“. So the Guru is telling us that all 300 million Americans are Jewish!

After learning that Joan River is no Hillary Clinton, Abe Foxman, wrote a letter to Suzanne Kolb, President of E! Entertainment Television, urging the network to prevail upon Ms. Rivers to issue a formal apology, and to remove the segment from future broadcast. A similar request made by Abe Foxman in the past, have resulted in River’s telling Foxman’s organization ADL to, “shut the f-ck up”.

In 2011, French Jewish historian, Dr. Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasce, issued an open letter to Hollywood’s top Jewish producer, Steven Spielberg, saying: “No Sir, you will not find ONE witness who saw 6 millions Jews slaughtered. You will not find ONE witness of Zyclon- B- gas chambers to exterminate 1000 or 2000 people at a time, close to the crematoria. See my ‘Shoa Sherlockholmised’ herewith: it is the summary of 20 years study on the subject. The ‘6-million-gas-chambers myth ‘is an arithmetic and technical nonsense“.

German comedian Oliver Polak is not ashamed to tell his audience on stage that he doesn’t believe in Zionist narrative of the Holocaust; ‘Six Million Died’. Polaks, known as ”the only German Jew comedian“ has been criticized by Israel lobby groups for making fun of the new Jewish religion. Polak response has always been: “I’m allowed to do that. I’m a Jew“. Sometime, Polak even has made fun of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, whose leaders have slammed Polak’s Gentile audience more than the comedian for laughing at his anti-Holocaust jokes instead of showing their guilt for what their Nazi ancestors had done to the European Jews.

Recently, Israeli TV program “Eretz Nehederet” aka “A Wonderful Country” portrayed a group of Israeli high-school students on a visit to a Nazi ‘death camp’ in Poland. They made funny remarks about the Holocaust narrative. The skit amused many but also offended some who asked: “How dare a humor and satire program poke fun at the Holocaust and its symbols?

Dr. Hajo Meyer, an Auschwitz camp survivor, in 2010, claimed that Israeli Jews are carrying out Palestinian Holocaust. Dr. Norman Finkelstein quoted his mother making a similar statement in his book, ‘The Holocaust Industry’.

American Jewish writer and blogger, Roger Tucker, refuses to accept the “six million” numbers and the existence of gas chambers. He says the myth was created by Zionists for the survival of Israel. “The subject is important because there would be no Israel if it weren’t for the general acceptance of the official holocaust narrative. If historians are able to cast sufficient doubt on these elements of this story then whatever justification there has been for the existence of this bizarre “state” will disappear – and good riddance,” wrote Tucker.

Let us not forget British Jewish writer and blogger, Paul Eisen, who is not ashamed to claim that he doesn’t believe in Holocaust.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

In Eyes of the World, Palestinians are “subhuman”

Palestinians aid a wounded proterstor following clashes with Israeli settlers in the West Bank village of Qusra near Nablus on 23 February 2013. (Photo: AFP – Jaafar Ashtiyeh)

 

By: Haidar Eid

Published Sunday, February 24, 2013

 

Article one of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly states: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” It does not, however, say “with the exception of Palestinians.”

 

But we, 11 million Palestinians, know very well that we are the exception to that rule. Whether we are “Israeli Arabs,” “Arabs of the occupied territories,” or diasporic Arabs, we cannot have the same rights as “all human beings.” Others have the right to life, work, security, health, movement, democracy, education, electricity, water, medicine, food, love, marriage. We don’t.

 

Any attempt to understand the rationale behind these blatant human rights violations – what Jimmy Carter, Desmond Tutu, John Dugard, and many others call apartheid – is faced with accusations of anti-Semitism, a weapon used to silence voices calling for justice in the Middle East. Take, for example, the accusations hurled at the organizers of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) event at the Brooklyn College. Of course, no American president wants to be at the receiving end of such accusations.

 

As Ben White wrote: “The abuse of the charge of anti-Semitism to shield systematic human rights abuses and to smear activists, while tired and transparent to many, is still a favorite tactic.”

The possibility of peace with justice at this moment is far from realization. The impossibility of the realization of the national dream of one third of the Palestinian people has brought forward the embarrassing question of the rights of the remaining two thirds, namely the dispossessed refugees living in miserable camps.

What is the Palestinian cause if not the right of return of the refugees both inside and outside Palestine? Is there a slight possibility of having ‘peace’ in the Middle East without resolving this question? If, as some Israeli leaders claim, there is a way of finding a ‘just solution’ that does not include their return, does that guarantee a just comprehensive peace?

 

The whites of apartheid South Africa defined the institutions of the country as democratic – albeit white democracy, i.e. by and for whites only. Native Africans never recognized the ‘white nature’ of that country. The idea of defining the country as exclusively white and democratic at the same time was never accepted by the international community. It was considered blatant racism. Unlike Palestinians, black Africans are considered human beings, and therefore, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to them.

That is precisely what the call for the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state means. Forget about 6 million refugees scattered all over the world as a result of the process of ethnic cleansing that accompanied the establishment of Israel.

According to this formula, the Palestinians are only those who live in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. ‘The Middle East conflict,’ in case you didn’t know, will be resolved if the latter are given a flag and three to four truncated bantustans with a chief that we can call a president.

US President Barack Obama’s expected talks in Ramallah and Tel Aviv next month are not going to allude to the refugees’ issues. Obama also won’t utter a word about the civil rights of 1.2 million Palestinian citizens inside the state of Israel. One thing he will not forget to say again and again: The US is committed to the security of the state of Israel! Hendrik Verwoerd and P. W Botha, the architects of Apartheid, would have been vindicated.

Haidar Eid is an assistant professor at al-Aqsa University in Gaza.

The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect Al-Akhbar’s editorial policy.

Want to publish a (thoughtful) response to one of our opinion pieces? Send your contribution to our Submissions editor.

 

• Detach from Zionists / Attach To The Cause
• BDS Against George Galloway 
• BDS , EI AND OTHERS / ELIMINATING THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE VICTORY OF THE RESISTANCE IN LEBANON
• BDS : BOYCOTT VERSUS KNOWLEDGE  

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Galloway Versus Falsification Of The Cause

By Daniel Mabsout,

 

 The BDS strikes again and as usual it sides with Israelis and Zionists against pro Arabs and pro Palestinians . Now this is not something new for BDS since previously they had accused Gilad Atzmon of being anti semitic . Imagine a bunch of Arab intellectuals, on the payroll of dubious organizations- like Soros institutes – and coordinating with Israelis, boycotting West bank dates while enrolling in Tel Aviv Universities, accusing Gilad Atzmon of being anti semite instead of defending him and promoting his ideas and his experience of an Israeli soldier who rejects the usurping state of Israel and calls for the restitution of Palestinian rights .

  BDS stood against Atzmon pretending that his ideas about Jewish culture endanger the Arab cause, as if they knew what Jewish culture is, not to speak of the Arab cause of course . A bunch of rascals that is what they are ! No doubt that the BDS has lost direction totally and are embracing the Jewish cause – that is not their cause by the way – and joining the anti semitic chorus that has been singing the same tune since post WWII..

Lately, in the encounter that opposed PM George Galloway to some dubious Israeli student boasting about the right of Israel to occupy the West Bank, whereby Brother Galloway left the debate , BDS took another shameful position of defending the Israeli student versus the long time friend of all Arab Causes, the committed friend of Arabs- including those of BDS – ie PM George Galloway .

Of course someone like George Galloway who spent half his life defending Arabs – whether Iraqis , Palestinians or- lately- Syrians and Bahrainis – does not need to be endorsed by BDS people . But it makes one get out of his senses hearing them- with their uptight Zionist attitude saying – in defense of the dubious Zionist Student – that they do not boycott Israeli individuals which is a big lie in itself since they have been exposing Gilad Atzmon for his views on Jewish culture to which they have no clue of course .

No doubt that the BDS works for the western establishment and not for Palestine, and the Western Establishment has got nothing to do with Palestinian rights; and no doubt that they need to show their masters of EU and Soros and company , that they are well behaved and not transgressing the limits prescribed by their Zionist masters while pretending to have become universal !

You should hear BDS joining anti Semitism to Islamophobia ! You should hear one of their brains called Abunima defend the Wahabi Sheikh al Oraifi and his fatwa related to raping Syrian girls !!How wonderful and impartial on behalf of the New Zionists who have hijacked the Palestinian cause to turn it into a commodity that serves Israel and gives Israel the legality it always lacked .

Thank you BDS for turning the Palestinians cause into a fruitful business and a promotion for the barren intellectuals that you are , thank you for giving legality and legitimacy to the usurping state of Israel, thank you for never mentioning the armed struggle and never paying tribute to the armed Resistance of Hizbullah who liberated Lebanon. Thank you for being sectarian and anti Syrian.

Thank you BDS for projecting on the Palestinians – who are rotting in camps for 6 decades now- the satus of disadvantaged Israeli citizens that are segregated against. . Thank you also for boycotting dates while never trying to stop normalization and recognition. Thank you for talking about return and never working for it , and thank you BDS for turning the Palestinian plight into a masquerade of fruitless functions and door to door activities undertaken by NGOs in occupied land in coordination with Israelis.

Thank you BDS finally for siding with Israel and showing us your true self and thank you for not supporting George Galloway for George Galloway has everything to gain from this!!

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Jews against Cardinal Rodriguez for Pope

Posted on February 18, 2013 |

 

Jewish groups have started their smearing campaign against one of the leading contenders, Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga (born 1942) of Honduras as successor to the retiring Pope Benedict XVI. The first shot was fired by no other than the Jewish academic, Dr. Alan Dershowitz, the welknown hate-mongering and truth-twisting anti-Arab, pro-Israel crusader.

Dershowitz has called Cardinal Rodriguez, “an out and out antisemite”.

“The Cardinal has blamed the Jews for the scandal surrounding the sexual misconduct of priests toward young parishioners! He has argued that Jews got even with the Catholic Church for its anti-Israel position by arranging for the media – which they, of course, control, he said – to give disproportionate attention to the Vatican sex scandal. He then compared the Jewish controlled media with Hitler, because they are, protagonists of what I don’t hesitate to define as a persecution against the Church,” wrote Dershowitz.

Dershowitz’s above rant is based on Rodriguez’s 2002 interview with the Italian-Catholic publication “30 Giorni,” – in which he said that Jewish-controlled media was exploiting church sex scandals to divert public attention away from Israeli brutality against Palestinians.

On May 6, 2009, Dershowitz, at the Jewish FrontPage Magazine, blasted Father Angelo Idi, Bishop Richard Williamson, Cardinal Joseph Glemp and Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Meridiaga.

“Anti-Semitism in the Catholic clergy transcends ideological lines. Bishop Williamson and Father Idi are fascists of the hard right. Cardinal Rodriguez is a leftist “liberation” theologist. Cardinal Glemp is just an old fashioned Polish anti-Semite who follows in the footsteps of his predecessors who were also Primates of the Polish Catholic Church,” wrote Dershowitz.

Interestingly, ADL website has claimed that Cardinal Rodriguez apologized for his 2002 comments during a conversation with its director Abraham Foxman.

Dershowitz has claimed that if Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga succeed Pope Benedict XVI, “all of Pope John Paul II’s (born to a Polish Jewish mother) good work in building bridges between the Catholic Church and the Jews would be destroyed. This should not be allowed to happen. The campaign against this bigot must begin now“.

Dershowitz’s beef with Cardinal Rodriguez is that he is against Capitalism and abortion – both establishments being controlled by the Jewish elites. However, Cardinal Rodriguez do has something common with Dershowitz. Both hate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. In 2007, the former president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, demanded an apology from Chavez for calling Cardinal Rodriguez “a parrot and an imperialist clown”. However, later Zelaya joined Chavez’s Latin American economic cartel – a move which brought his downfall via a US-sponsored military coup.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

J-BIG Vs. P-small

By Gilad Atzmon

A poorly-written but still revealing briefing was published a few days ago by J-BIG. J-BIG may sound like an Israeli penis enlargement clinic but is in fact an acronym for Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods  –  a Jews Only political organisation set up to promote Jewish interests amongst Palestinian solidarity in general and the BDS movement in particular. The briefing was apparently published in order to “help BDS campaigners to defy the accusation of antisemitsm” and to explain “how the charge of antisemitism applies (actually) to Zionism itself.”

It doesn’t take long for an intelligent person to grasp that Zionism is fuelled by anti-Semitsm. In fact, early Zionists were candid enough on occasions to admit that the enemies of the Jews may actually have a point.

Here are some comments made by Early Zionists about their fellow Jews.

‘The Jew is a caricature of a normal, natural human being, both physically and spiritually.’ (Our Shomer ‘Weltanschauung’, Hashomer Hatzair, December 1936, p.26. As cited by Lenni Brenner

‘The fact is undeniable that the Jews, collectively, are unhealthy and neurotic..’ Ben Frommer, The Significance of a Jewish State, Jewish Call, Shanghai, May 1935, p.10. As cited by Lenni Brenner

‘The enterprising spirit of the Jew is irrepressible. He refuses to remain a proletarian. He will grab at the first opportunity to advance to a higher rung in the social ladder.’ (The Economic Development of the Jewish People, Ber Borochov, 1916

So in this regard, early Zionism, could actually be seen as a unique moment of Jewish self-reflection. It’s certainly true, and J-BIG are correct in suggesting that Zionism, and later on Israel, both invested heavily in anti Semitism, transforming it into the very raison d’être of the Jewish national project.

But what about these so-called ‘anti’ Zionist Jews and J-BIG? Do they not also invest in ‘anti Semitism’ and in most cases even invent its existence simply to justify their own existence? In fact, our J-BIG ‘anti’ Zionist Jews are even more sinister than their Zionist twins because J-BIG  are clearly making a huge effort to transform the entire Palestinian solidarity discourse into a new front in their eternal battle against anti Semitism. It’s as if anti-Semitism is a Palestinian issue. And why do they do it? Probably  because primarily they are concerned, not with Palestine, but with their own tribal interests. So, as much as they love to keep the  ‘J’ big, they also happen to keep the ‘P’ somehow smaller or at least secondary.

It takes our J-BIG agitators about 1000 words of mangled logic and convoluted reasoning before they get to the point and reveal their true motivation. “Some misguided supporters of the Palestinians have attributed their oppression to an international Jewish conspiracy, to ‘Jewish power’, to ‘a Jewish spirit’, etc.”

Here we go again. In spite of the fact that Israel defines itself as the ‘Jewish State’, despite the fact that its airplanes are decorated with Jewish symbols and its murderous actions are supported by powerful Jewish lobbies around the world, our Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists  still insist that we do not address the core of the problem. They want us to oppose Israel while avoiding the crucial fact that Israel defines itself as the ‘Jewish State’. In effect, they want us to fight Israel but with both hands tied behind our back. And why? Is it because they are concerned with some universal ethical issues? I don’t think so. No, the real reason is that, knowingly or unknowingly, they are actually committed to a tribal cause and I think we all know which tribe we’re talking about.

Whether we like it or not, Israel is openly driven by a dynamic force which it interprets (rightly or wrongly) as the true “Jewish spirit” and whether we like it or not, Israel’s supporters around the world utilise every possible aspect of Jewish power. And this is no conspiracy. Everything is done right out in the open for all to see. Even the Jewish lobbying within the Palestinian solidarity movement is pretty much in the open, as proved by the J-BIG pamphlet. Philip Weiss, the man behind the Jewish progressive blog Mondoweiss was even honest enough to admit to me a year ago that his support of Palestine is “motivated by Jewish self interests.”

So, I guess that the most crucial question here is what exactly are those ‘Jewish self-interests’ and how do they relate to ethics in general and to the Palestinian plight in particular?

Unfortunately, our ‘progressive’ J-BIG agitators have managed to drag some Palestinian academics and activists to fight their battles for them and, once again, they openly brag about the fact that “leading Palestinian commentators and activists reject such ‘support’ as damaging the Palestinian cause. Ali Abunimah, Joseph Massad, Omar Barghouti and Rafeef Ziadeh were among dozens who denounced any who point to the ‘Jewish’ character of the oppression of Palestinians.
Clearly, without mentioning my name, our ‘progressive J-BIG refer here specifically to the call by Palestinian blogger Ali Abunimah and others to disavow yours truly.

Since I am found to be at the centre of this campaign I should mention that by now enough prominent Palestinians activists, humanists and academics have stood up for me and my writings – something J-BIG  fails to mention. Furthermore, I actually welcome the debate on those crucial matters and I am more than happy to be at its very centre. This week, Counterpunch published Blake Alcott’s detailed analytical study of the call for my disavowal. Alcott established beyond doubt that what some of our leading Palestinians were led to sign was a very problematic text. What led a bunch of devoted Palestinian academics and activists to join a Jewish campaign without even engaging in some elementary research? What led Abunmiah & Co to disavowal a fellow intellectual turning their back to the notion of intellectual integrity and freedom of expression? I think we should be told.

Interestingly enough, my latest book The Wandering Who attempts to provide an answer. It elaborates on the Jewish political nature of Israel and its lobbies but it also points at the destructive role of those lobbies within the left, the Anti War Campaign and the Palestinian solidarity movement. Again, I don’t speak about any conspiracy. As far as I am aware, this is all taking place before our very eyes. Abunimah & co kept silent about this affair for almost a year and they probably know why.  I guess that they are still searching for something that may look remotely like an argument or even an excuse. After all, It is slightly unusual for Palestinians and Arabs to adopt the most vile Talmudic Herem culture. As Palestinian poet Nahida Izzat suggests, it demands an explanation. 

Here is my message to J-BIG, Abunimah and anyone who is willing to listen. It would be impossible to grasp the success of Israel and Zionism without scrutinizing the role of Jewish culture, ideology and the significant impact of the Sabbath Goy within the American Administration but also in Palestine. After all, many of us do realise by now that, at least,  from a Jewish political perspective,  the Palestinians are merely Goyim du jour. Nothing really new, yet very painful if you happen to be a Palestinian. 

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics  and Jewish Left’s  spin in particular  Amazon.com  or Amazon.co.uk

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!