|
[Hillel]
was
accustomed
to
say: |
|
|
|
1:14
פרקי
אבות |
The
American
Jewish
Committee ignores
the
second
question.
Joachim
Martillo
ThorsProvoni@aol.com
February
13,
2007
Numerous
Zionist
or
Jewish
organizations
and
individuals
are
slandering
former
President
Jimmy
Carter
as
a
Jew-hater
in
order
to
invalidate
his
new
book
Palestine
Peace
not
Apartheid.
In
response
Carter
has
correctly
pointed
out
that
all
prominent
critics
of
his
book
are
Jews
that
refuse
to
engage
any
of
the
issues
that
his
book
addresses.
Because
the
public
might
as
a
consequence
infer
that
opposition
to
Carter's
analysis
results
purely
from
ideological
bias
or
Jewish
tribalism,
Haaretz
correspondent
Shmuel
Rosner
writes
in
"The
Carter
Trap"
(http://tinyurl.com/2fqd88)
that
[this
observation]
is
the
only
card
left
in [Carter's]
hand,
but
it
is
a
strong
one,
which
embodies
a
trap
from
which
there
is
no
escape.
On
one
hand,
this
problem,
too,
could
be
solved:
All
it
needs
is
one
well-known,
well-respected,
non-Jewish
critic
to
come
out
publicly
against
Carter.
If
such
a
person
does
emerge,
it
will
be
possible
to
completely
undermine
the
legitimacy
of
this
miserable
book.
But
on
the
other
hand,
what
lies
behind
the
assumption
that
such
a
critic
is
needed?
Is
this
not
a
disturbing
admission
that
even
in
America,
when
it
comes
to
Israel,
the
word
of
Jews
is
still
not,
and
may
never
be,
completely
sufficient?
Rosner
does
not
even
address
the
issue
that
many
Carter
supporters
are
Jewish
and
that
many
prominent
American
and
Israeli
Jews
have
criticized
the
former
president
for
whitewashing
the
history
of
Israel
and
for
an
overly
generous
appraisal
both
of
Zionism
and
also
of
the
conditions
under
which
Israeli
Palestinian
citizens
live,
but
David
Harris,
who
is
the
executive
director
of
the
American
Jewish
Committee
(AJC)
specifically
confronts
such
Jewish
critics
of
Zionism
in
his
preface
to
Alvin
Rosenfeld's
essay,
"'Progressive'
Jewish
Thought
and
the
New
Anti-Semitism"
(http://tinyurl.com/ygnw2q).
The
American
Jewish
Committee,
from
its
founding
a
hundred
years
ago,
has
seen
its
mission
as
the
protection
of
Jewish
rights
worldwide
and
the
strengthening
of
Jewish
security.
Today
that
mission
centrally
includes
assuring
the
right
of
Jews
to
a
national
collective
self-expression
through
the
existence
of
the
State
of
Israel.
Those
who
oppose
this
basic
right—whether
Jew
or
gentile—must
be
confronted.
Prof.
Rosenfeld
is
to
be
thanked
both
for
exposing
the
vacuousness
of
their
arguments
and
for
alerting
us
to
the
threat
that
arises
when
a
Jewish
imprimatur
is
given
to
the
questioning
of
Israel’s
legitimacy.
Note
that
those
he
calls
“proud
to
be
ashamed
to
be
Jews”
are
ideologists
who
deny
the
legitimacy
of
Israel’s
existence,
not
critics
of
specific
Israeli
actions
or
policies.
There
can
be
healthy
disagreement
and
debate
within
a
family
or
a
country
as
to
what
the
right
course
of
action
is—but
never
of
the
fundamental
rightness
of
its
being.
The
participants
have
some
serious
misconceptions
about
the
Eastern
European
Jewish/ethnic
Ashkenazi
intellectual
culture
(see http://tinyurl.com/3bpcr6 for
a
brief
discussion
of
Jewish
ethnography).
Freedom
of
thought
is
not
a
characteristic
of
traditional
Eastern
European
ethnic
Ashkenazi
culture
but
of
the
breakdown
of
that
culture,
and
to
this
day
American
Jewish
communal
organizations
put
a
lot
of
effort
into
keeping
American
Jews
all
on
the
same
page
with
regard
to
the
State
of
Israel
and
Zionism.
The
AJC
publication
of
Rosenfeld's
paper
looks
like
just
another
attempt
in
the
long
history
of
sometimes
successful
sometimes
unsuccessful
efforts
by
the
ethnic
Ashkenazi
communal
leadership
to
crush
intellectual
deviance
within
the
American
Jewish
community,
which
today
is
almost
entirely
ethnic
Ashkenazi.
As
the
American
Jewish
community
has
incorporated
more
Russian
Ashkenazim,
whose
anti-individualism
has
both
Soviet
and
Eastern
European
Jewish
roots,
the
narrow
range
of
allowed
opinion
within
the
organized
Jewish
community
has
become
even
smaller
as
Boston
AJC
Director
Larry
Lowenthal
recently
experienced
during
his
conflict
with
Alex
Koifman
(http://tinyurl.com/296emj),
who
is
the
Russian
Jewish
head
of
Boston
for
Israel
as
well
as
one
of
two
Russian
Jews
on
the
board
of
the
Boston
chapter
of
the
AJC.
Nowadays
successful
communal
suppression
of
divergent
American
Jewish
opinion
often
includes
the
purging
of
the
historical
record.
Even
relatively
recent
(not
very)
dissenting
Jewish
organizations
like
Breira
(See
Torn
at
the
Roots,
The
Crisis
of
Jewish
Liberalism
in
Postwar
America,
by
Michael
E.
Staub,
http://tinyurl.com/3x7k73,
http://tinyurl.com/2ctgwd)
and
New
Jewish
Agenda
(http://tinyurl.com/2n2238)
as
well
as
their
leaders
have
vanished
from
award-winning
histories
of
the
American
Jewish
community
like
American
Judaism
by
Brandeis
Professor
Jonathan
D.
Sarna.
In
his
article
Rosenfeld
attempts
a
similar
rewriting
or
erasing
of
Zionist
history.
He
states
on
page
14:
"By
no
reasonable
standard
of
historical
comparison
or
legal
judgment
can
one
show
that
Israel
is
intent
on
genocide;
nor
are
the
Israelis
engaged
in
a
“race
war”
against
the
Palestinians."
One
can
only
be
completely
amazed
that
director
of
the
Institute
for
Jewish
Culture
at
Indiana
University
either
is
completely
mendacious
or
is
totally
ignorant
that
primary
Zionist
literature
is
almost
uniformly
racist,
extremist
organic
nationalist,
colonialist,
biological-determinist,
or
social
Darwinist.
The
eminent
Zionist
leader
Max
Nordau,
who
is
probably
second
in
importance
only
to
Theodor
Herzl,
did
not
introduce
eugenics
to
the
German-speaking
world,
but
he
was
probably
the
most
important
popularizer
of
eugenic
ideas
in
the
German
language
(http://tinyurl.com/39r54o).
Zionist
leaders
and
writers
since
Moses
Hess's
publication
of
Rome
and
Jerusalem:
The
Last
National
Question
in
1862
have
supported
the
ideal
of
racial
revitalization
through
racial
purity
and
purification.
No
major
Zionist
thinker
from
the
1880s
through
the
1940s
would
have
disagreed
with
the
proposition
that
Zionism
is
a
Blut
und
Boden
or
la
terre
et
les
morts
form
of
Romantic
nationalism.
It
certainly
belongs
to
the
same
class
of
ethnic
fundamentalist
parties
and
ideologies,
of
which
the
Polish
Endeks,
Greater
Serbianism
and
German
Nazism
are
examples.
Ideologically
Zionist
scholars
are
at
least
as
relentlessly
primordialist
and
essentialist
as
German
Nazi
and
proto-Nazi
scholars.
(Some
of
the
latter
were,
in
fact,
German
Jews,
who
later
became
Zionists.)
If
Rosenfeld
is
not
consciously
lying
about
the
"race
war"
inherent
in
Zionist
ideology,
one
must
wonder
what
he
thinks
the
preeminent
Zionist
leader
Chaim
Weizmann
meant
on
September
19,
1919
by
declaring
the
following
to
the
English
Zionist
Federation
(Expulsion
Of
The
Palestinians,
http://tinyurl.com/2zl5n3,
p.
41).
"By
a
Jewish
National
Home
I
mean
the
creation
of
such
conditions
that
as
the
country
is
developed
we
can
pour
in
a
considerable
number
of
immigrants,
and
finally
establish
such
a
society
in
Palestine
that
Palestine
shall
be
as
Jewish
as
England
is
English
or
America
American."
(Expulsion
Of
The
Palestinians,
http://tinyurl.com/2zl5n3,
p.
41.)
The Zionists achieved most of that goal in 1947-48 by committing genocide as defined by The International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (http://tinyurl.com/ypb4xv), which states the following in Article 2.
In
the
present
Convention,
genocide
means
any
of
the
following
acts
committed
with
intent
to
destroy,
in
whole
or
in
part,
a
national,
ethnical,
racial
or
religious
group,
as
such:
...
(c)
Deliberately
inflicting
on
the
group
conditions
of
life
calculated
to
bring
about
its
physical
destruction
in
whole
or
in
part;
The
ongoing
immurement
of
Palestinian
population
centers
in
the
Occupied
Territories
is
an
obvious
continuation
of
the
genocidal
Zionist
program
and
a
clear
violation
of
the
above
article
of
the
International
Genocide
Convention.
This
form
of
Zionist
genocidalism
has
strong
similarities
to
Soviet
genocidalism,
in
which
Soviet
ethnic
Ashkenazim
played
a
leading
role
(http://tinyurl.com/3y7mmh).
In
his
article
as
well
as
in
the
radio
discussion,
Rosenfeld
followed
the
Zionist
party
line
when
he
asserted
that
rejection
of
the
legitimacy
of
the
Zionist
or
Jewish
state
results
from
bigotry
or
anti-Semitism
simply
because
there
is
only
one
Zionist
or
Jewish
state.
Apartheid
South
Africa
was
the
only
Afrikaner
state
in
the
world,
and
the
world
is
much
better
off
for
its
absence.
Likewise
after
March
12,
1938
there
was
only
one
German
state
on
the
planet,
and
vast
numbers
of
people
supported
its
destruction
for
perfectly
valid
and
legitimate
reasons
after
the
start
of
WW2.
Reinharz
also
parroted
Zionist
propaganda
and
completely
ignored
all
modern
scholarship
on
ancient
Judaism
(or
Judaisms
as
Jacob
Neusner
would
write)
to
project
modern
Zionism
back
to
the
Judaism
of
the
Greco-Roman?
period
or
before.
This
sort
of
nonsense
is
particularly
important
in
conning
Christian
Americans
into
supporting
Zionism
but
has
no
connection
whatsoever
to
the
facts.
Rabbi
Lerner
and
Professor
Wolfe
generally
opposed
the
extremism,
fanaticism
and
racism
of
Professors
Rosenfeld
and
Reinharz,
but
they
were
also
guilty
of
some
serious
misrepresentations.
Despite
Wolfe's
belief,
German
Jews
and
ethnic
Ashkenazim
have
never
been
particularly
strong
defenders
of
free
speech
outside
of
the
Jewish
community
and
have
historically
tried
to
control
the
discourse
of
the
larger
non-Jewish
society
whenever
the
means
have
been
available.
The
Downfall
of
the
Anti-Semitic?
Political
Parties
in
Imperial
Germany
by
R.
S.
Levy
describes
in
detail
how
German
Jewish
advocacy
organizations
like
the
Zentralverein
deutscher
Staatsbürger
jüdischen
Glaubens
(Central
Association
of
German
Citizens
of
Jewish
Faith)
used
the
legal
system
Like
Rosenfeld
and
Reinharz,
Levy
often
tends
to
conflate
possibly
legitimate
criticism
with
anti-Semitism.
While
Rabbi
Lerner
basically
agreed
with
this
article
and
with
careful
scholars
like
Norman
G.
Finkelstein
(see
Beyond
Chutzpah:
On
the
Misuse
of
Anti-Semitism?
and
the
Abuse
of
History)
that
Zionists
and
Zionist
organizations
generally
refuse
to
answer
the
content
of
critiques
of
Israel
but
strive
to
switch
the
discussion
to
the
legitimacy
of
the
critic,
he
himself
acts
as
a
sort
of
gatekeeper
by
limiting
the
discussion
to
a
superficial
aspect
of
the
AJC
attack
on
progressive
Jews.
Commentary
Magazine,
which
the
AJC
only
just
spun
off
as
an
independent
entity
in
January
2007
(http://tinyurl.com/3xbxj7),
presented
the
larger
picture
in
its
January
issue,
which
contains
the
article
"Jews,
Muslims
and
Democrats"
(http://tinyurl.com/2g3ye4)
by
Gabriel
Schoenfeld,
who
writes:
...in
the
judgment
of
the
political
scientist
Peter
Skerry,
we
may
now
be
witnessing
the
emergence
of
a
new
force
in
American
politics.
Writing
in
Time,
and
citing
a
whole
range
of
such
convergent
interests,
Skerry
calls
this
a
“Muslim-liberal
coalition”
(more
accurately
it
might
be
called
a
Muslim/Arab-liberal
coalition).
If
he
is
right,
and
if
this
coalition
can
be
organized
to
act
with
any
degree
of
coherence,
it
could
indeed
end
up,
through
sheer
numbers
alone,
wielding
a
disproportionate
influence
on
American
politics
[my
emphasis],
to
the
clear
detriment
of
the
interests
of
American
Jews.
In
theory
the
USA
is
supposed
to
be
a
democracy.
Normally,
a
political
group,
whose
power
comes
from
sheer
numbers
alone,
is
described
as
wielding
a
proportionate
influence
on
American
politics.
Schoenfeld
and
those
American
Zionists
that
agree
with
him
have
a
clear
anti-democratic
un-American
agenda.
Of
the
Jews
attacked
in
Rosenfeld's
article,
only
Noam
Chomsky
has
much
name
recognition
among
American
Muslims
collectively,
but
Rosenfeld
and
the
dominant
group
at
the
AJC
seem
to
fear
that
the
situation
might
change.
Only
this
concern
explains
the
inclusion
of
Rabbi
David
Weiss,
who
is
not
progressive,
and
Adam
Shapiro,
who
does
not
identify
with
the
American
Jewish
community
(http://tinyurl.com/22lpf7),
in
an
article
entitled
"Progressive
Jewish
Thought
and
the
New
Anti-Semitism,"
for
unlike
the
other
targets
of
the
article,
they
have
both
made
extensive
outreach
efforts
to
American
and
non-American
Muslims.
Marginalizing
progressive
Jews
with
accusations
of
anti-Semitism
is
simply
not
enough
from
the
standpoint
of
the
AJC,
the
Anti-Defamation
League
(ADL),
the
David
Project,
the
Center
for
the
Study
of
Popular
Culture,
Stand
with
US,
and
other
Zionist
groups.
In
order
to
be
truly
certain
to
block
this
"Muslim-liberal
coalition,"
of
which
there
is
yet
actually
little
evidence
in
the
USA
(it
is
more
developed
in
the
UK),
these
Jewish
communal
and
Zionist
organizations
are
trying
to
incite
a
form
of
Islamophobia
on
the
model
of
Central
and
Eastern
European
Judeophobia
or
anti-Semitism
of
the
late
18th
through
the
middle
20th
century.
Here
are
some
of
the
activities
associated
with
this
ongoing
and
expanding
program.
[Note how much the above billboard advertisement depends on reflexive racism. Maybe the guy on the left is some price-gouging Texas oil billionaire while the guy on the right is an Arab American humanitarian that is farming in Missouri.]
i. to the abolition of the Ottoman Caliphate and
as
the
basis
for
crafting
an
Islamophobic
fantasy
comparable
to
The
Protocols
of
the
Elders
of
Zion
or
to
the
German
Nazi
propaganda
about
the
jüdisch-bolschewistische
Weltverschwörung
(Judeo-Bolshevik
world
conspiracy).
In
reality,
polling
data
consistently
shows
the
vast
majority
of
Muslims
(from
the
least
to
the
most
religious)
have
about
as
much
interest
in
a
restored
Caliphate
(or
Imamate
from
the
Shiite
standpoint)
as
Jews
have
in
being
ruled
by
the
Davidic
House,
for
whose
restoration
Orthodox
Jews
beseech
God
daily
according
to
the
traditional
Jewish
prayer
book.
In
general,
whereas
Schoenfeld
and
the
AJC
as
well
as
Abraham
Foxman
and
the
ADL
(http://tinyurl.com/2753nw,
http://tinyurl.com/2csatr)
advocate
restrictions
on
democracy
and
freedom
of
expression
in
the
USA,
American
Muslims
oppose
the
antidemocratic
aspects
of
the
Patriot
Act,
and
Muslims
outside
the
USA
desire
democratic
reforms
for
their
countries
along
with
greater
scope
for
freedom
of
expression.
The
pattern
outlined
above
is
not
only
despicable,
but
it
is
also
shamelessly
clear.
The
purveyors
of
this
sort
of
Islamophobia
on
steroids
have
a
very
clear
goal
to
marginalize
Western
Muslims
so
drastically
so
that
no
respectable
political
group
and
especially
that
no
progressives
would
ever
have
any
association
with
American
Muslims
whatsoever
—
except,
of
course,
for
those
vile
and
contemptible
Jewish
anti-Semites
so
graciously
identified
by
the
AJC.
Because
professional
Islamophobes
in
the
organized
American
Jewish
community
or
among
US
Zionist
groups
would
certainly
not
mind
and
would
probably
be
overjoyed
if
their
incitement
against
Islam
led
to
the
expulsion
or
even
to
the
genocide
of
American
Muslim
communities
(see
Note
below),
these
fanatic
Muslim
haters
are
probably
guilty
of
the
crime
of
fomenting
genocide
and
should
be
indicted
at
the
Hague
for
crimes
against
humanity.
Concerned
Americans
must
begin
seriously
to
consider
whether
fanatic
and
extremist
Jewish
Americans,
more
committed
to
Zionism
than
either
to
their
fellow
Americans
or
to
basic
human
decency,
should
continue
to
play
important
roles
in
US
media,
academia
and
politics.
Certainly,
the
AJC
and
its
spin-off
Commentary
are
crossing
the
line
into
the
sort
of
un-American
and
subversive
activities
not
seen
to
such
a
degree
since
the
pro-Soviet
subversion
of
the
20s,
30s,
and
40s.
Note
Mark
Steyn,
who
is
a
Canadian
political
commentator
of
mixed
Jewish
ethnic
Ashkenazi
and
Catholic
Belgian
ancestry
and
who
is
often
associated
with
Neoconservatism,
has
already
somewhat
obliquely
opened
up
the
discussion
of
genociding
Western
Muslims
in
his
recently
published
book
America
Alone:
The
End
of
the
World
as
We
Know
It,
in
which
he
states
the
following.
Why did Bosnia collapse into the worst slaughter in Europe since World War Two? In the thirty years before the meltdown, Bosnian Serbs had declined from 43 percent to 31 percent of the population, while Bosnian Muslims had increased from 26 percent to 44 percent. In a democratic age, you can't buck demography - except through civil war. The Serbs figured that out - as other Continentals will in the years ahead: if you can't outbreed the enemy, cull ’em [my emphasis]. The problem that Europe faces is that Bosnia’s demographic profile is now the model for the entire continent.