Salon, Huffington Post and Daily Kos hotbeds of anti-Semitism!

Or so claims what Alternet’s Josh Holland calls a “ridiculous” new study by the Institute for Global Jewish Affairs. Holland writes:

Given how ubiquitous unsubstantiated charges of anti-Semitism have become in the debate over the Middle East conflict, I’m tempted to ignore the Institute for Global Jewish Affairs’ recent “report” supposedly exposing the liberal blogosphere as a teaming hotbed of raw Jew-hatred.

It’s easy to dismiss. It may dress itself as some sort of empirical research project, but the “study” is transparently devoid of any informational value, intellectually bankrupt and clearly the product of working backwards from a conclusion arrived at on ideological grounds.

But I won’t ignore it, because the strategic decision to pin one’s political opponents with charges of anti-Semitism only dilutes the power of that word. Then, like the boy who cried wolf, when real anti-Semitism rears its decidedly ugly head the word loses its all-important power to shame. I’m Jewish, and I don’t fear sharp-elbowed criticism of Israeli policy on websites, so it’s not in my interest to allow it to be conflated with true anti-Semitism, which is absolutely no joke.

Most of what passes for anti-Semitism in this new “report” is nothing new to readers of Muzzlewatch, and you should read Holland’s full piece where he does a fantastic job of dissecting the terrible methodology of this blatantly propagandistic report. But this is the part of Holland’s analysis I find most heart-breakingly sad and true:

It’s a slanderous report, and just to bring home the point of how dangerous it is to minimize real anti-Semitism by bitching about mean commenters on websites: I’m on various list-servs with progressives who write about Israel and Palestine — most of them Jewish — and when the report was issued our reaction was: ‘what do you have to do to get on this list — why weren’t we included?’

When you have progressive Jewish writers looking at charges of anti-Semitism as a badge of courage, it’s time to re-think your tactics.

And what other tactics do those geniuses over at the (Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs) Institute for Global Jewish Affairs have to offer us?

In “How to Fight the Campus Battle against Old and New Anti-Semites:
Motifs, Strategies, and Methods”, author Manfred Gerstenfeld seems to have absolutely no idea that Israel is consistently in violation of international law. He therefore consistently conflates authentic anti-Jewish hatred with virtually all criticism of Israel, making the following suggestion for embracing campus-based tactics that require a “low investment of human and financial resources and a potential high return in terms of damage to the enemy”:

• The methods to be used in the battle against anti-Semitism on campus should include counterattack, ridicule, exposure, “name and shame,” monitoring, documentation, mobilizing lawyers for arguing, as well as legal actions. Crucial battles against anti-Semitism are often fought with one hand behind the back. This facilitates free anti-Semitic lunches for the attackers.

Of course, those tactics are already in use everywhere on campuses, just ask Daniel Pipes. Are they likely to help those of us who sincerely want to fight anti-Semitism, seeing it as linked to all forms of bigotry? Guess.

Source: Jewish Voice for Peace's Muzzle Watch

“If everything is anti-Semitism, then there is no anti-Semitism at all.”

The (Israeli) Alternative Information Center’s Michael Warschawski has this to say on the use, and the empyting of all meaning, of the charge of anti-Semitism:

An Outrageous and Pathetic Weapon Against BDS: Stop Instrumentalizing Anti-Semitism!

Canadian Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, Jason Kenney .

Every time the State of Israel is confronted with substantial international criticism for its political behavior and its violations of basic international standards, it counter-attacks by using the infamous tool of accusations of anti-Semitism. One remembers the campaign on anti-Semitism launched by Ariel Sharon and his friends throughout the world, Jews and non-Jews, after the murder of Muhammad al-Dura in Gaza in September 2000, in order to create a diversion (in the very words of Roger Cukierman, then chairman of the French Jewish umbrella organization—CRIF) and to transform the victim into a victimizer and the victimizer into a victim: for more than two years, western media “exposed” the anti-Semitism of the critics of Israel instead of denouncing the massacres committed by the Israeli military in Gaza and the West Bank.Sixty five years after the end of WWII, the ashes of the victims of Nazi genocide have not yet disappeared from the sky of Poland, and the accusation of anti-Semitism remains connected to one of the bloodiest crimes of the twentieth century; as French journalist, Daniel Mermet, one of the targets of this campaign, pointed at, “no accusation can be worse, and even after you are proved not guilty of charge, the bad smell of such an accusation will be with you forever.”

The massacre in Gaza, a year ago, provoked a world-wide outrage, bigger even than in 2000-2002. The U.N. was forced to appoint an inquiry commission, and its report—the Goldstone report—is devastating for Israel. Moreover, for the first time since the establishment of the State of Israel, an international campaign calling for sanctions against Israel for its innumerous violations of international law, has been successful in drawing huge public attention and initiating a great number of mobilizations and initiatives around the world.

For the Israeli government and its friends, the time has come to take from the shelf the rusty old weapon of anti-Semitism accusations, a message that was heard loud and clear by the Canadian Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, Jason Kenney. At the Global Forum for Combating Anti-Semitism, held in Jerusalem on 16 December, the Minister stated: “We have articulated and implemented a zero tolerance approach to anti-Semitism.” So far so good, but he continued: “We have defunded organizations, most recently like Kairos, who are taking a leadership role in the boycott (against Israel).”

Accusing Kairos, an umbrella organization that includes most of the Christian churches in Canada, of anti-Semitism is ridiculous and pathetic. Ridiculous, because the record of Kairos is crystal clear on that issue of BDS and it its position is not the one that Minister Kenney accuses it of, and pathetic, because it is a re-heated dish that will not work a second time.

Already in 2004, there were signs indicating that the instrumentalization of anti-Semitism by Israeli propaganda machine was losing its efficiency and even becoming counter-productive; no doubt that, five years later, only a few people will accept to be blackmailed by such an outrageous false-accusation.

Worse, however, is that this old/new maneuver by “friends” of Israel like Kenney, is a symptom of the banalization of anti-Semitism. If everything is anti-Semitism, then there is no anti-Semitism at all. But, unfortunately, anti-Semitism has not disappeared from our world, and manipulating it for goals that have nothing to do with it, is playing right into the hands of the real anti-Semites.

To Jason Kenney, one must say very clearly “stay out of our struggle against anti-Semitism, and do not try to manipulate it for causes totally foreign to the anti-racist values which are motivating it. It is too important and too serious to be instrumentalized by your political agenda.”

We are proud of the success of the international BDS campaign. Minister Kenney may disagree with it, but hands off of any accusation of anti-Semitism concerning our campaign. Anti-Semitism is a dangerous threat to the public health of our societies and so are accusations that are manipulated for a political agenda that has nothing to do with it.

Source: Jewish Voice For Peace's Muzzle Watch

You Want to Understand Anti-Semitism? Just Look in the Mirror

Benjamin Weinthal, the Jerusalem Post’s correspondent in Berlin wondered earlier this week whether Germany has learned from its Nazi history? The question is in itself very intriguing. Considering its past, one may expect Germany to oppose any form of racist, discriminatory, expansionist and nationalist ideology. Bearing in mind Israelis are considered the ‘Nazis of our time’ by more than just a few commentators, one may expect the Germans to advise the Israelis what not to do. One may also expect Germany to stand by the Palestinians for the Palestinians are, de facto, the last victims of Hitler.

Do not hold your breath. When Jpost’s writer Weinthal refers to Germany learning from its history, he means the complete opposite. What he seeks is German subservience to the Zionist ideology and Jewish national interests. Weinthal, wants to see a clear diplomatic rift between Germany and Iran in the name of the Shoa and its memory. “With regard to its more future-oriented responsibility to prevent Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons and its threats to obliterate Israel, critics say Germany is stumbling.” Weinthal makes it transparent that as far as Zionists are concerned, guilt-tripping the Germans is the way forward.

Weinthal reports that the paths of Iran and Demjanjuk crossed at the International Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin conference ‘Time to Act’ last weekend. “The Berlin conference's policy experts raised questions about Germany's historic responsibility to Israel and the lessons from the genocidal Nazi anti-Semitism.” In case one is failing to understand, the Jewish lobby in Germany is mounting pressure on German politicians and academia to increasingly act against Iran in the name of Jewish suffering.

In the conference Dr. Charles Small , the head of the Yale ‘Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Anti-Semitism’ insisted that Germany had failed to extract the necessary lessons from the Nazi period. The Germans, according to this exceptionally lame ‘interdisciplinary’ academic Zionist do nothing to prevent an “Iran-organized Shoah”.

Zionist academics are indeed amusingly innovative. Interestingly enough, I myself never thought that Anti Semitism is a subject for an ‘interdisciplinary’ study. I always believed that if Zionists and Jewish tribal campaigners are interested in the origin of anti Jewish feeling all they really need to do is to look in the mirror. In fact Dr Small and the Jpost’s Weinthal who promote the prospects of a new world conflict in Germany should self-reflect so they understand where the resentment to Jewish nationalism and tribal activism are coming from. Once again, it is Jewish activists who openly promote conflict. Once again they do it in the name of Jewish suffering. This is enough to make Jewish national politics a repugnant concept.

“Holocaust denial is unlawful in Germany”, says Weinthal, yet Iranian Holocaust-deniers are welcome in German conferences. For a change Weinthal is almost correct. There is indeed an element of discrepancy here. But it can be resolved quite easily. Holocaust denial laws in Germany and anywhere else must be abolished immediately. It doesn’t make any sense that a certain historical chapter within our living memory should be legally restricted. Holocaust denial laws are an assault against humanism and free thought. Leave alone the fact that they make the Zionist Shoa narrative look highly suspicious.

Weinthal concludes by posing a criticism of German intellectual integrity. “Historical responsibility unites Demjanjuk and the Islamic Republic”, yet he continues, “the glacier-like pace at which the connection is being understood is rather surprising in a country that helped to develop philosophical thinking based on connections.”

There is a Glimpse of truth in Weinthal’s argument. On the face of it there is a discrepancy here between the German legal action and the state’s attitude towards Iran. Yet again, the solution is pretty simple: as I argued in a previous paper, Demjanjuk should have never been put on trial in Germany or anywhere else for ‘accessory’ charges. If the Germans are interested in Nazi ‘accessories’ they may start with the Jewish Kapos, continue with the Judenrat and eventually finish with the Zionist agencies that collaborated with Nazis all along the war.

According to Weinthal, the Germans fail to ‘make connections’. I would advise Weinthal that the Germans are indeed famous for their superior philosophers. It is also depressingly notable that Germany didn’t produce a single major philosophical work or a great symphony since the end of WWII. Due to its guilt and the constant Zio-centric pressure, Germany is wary of its own greatness or even greatness in general. Instead of hosting some major academic conferences that would elaborate on questions to do with Being, Ethics or Metaphysics (following the tradition of Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche and Heidegger), Berlin is welcoming some of the shallowest ‘interdisciplinary’ Zionist minds, the likes of Dr. Charles Small. Germany must immediately liberate itself of this pseudo academic trend.

Unlike Weinthal, I do believe that Germans have not lost their ability to think, to judge and to ‘make connections’. Germans do grasp what is really going on. In dismay they see the crimes that are committed in Palestine by the Jewish state. Germans may be confused by it all, but not for too long. Making the necessary ethical connections is inevitable.

To conclude, I do not think that anyone except Zionists doubt the fact that German people learned their lesson. However, it is evidently clear that Israelis, Zionists and Jewish Interdisciplinary tribal activists fail to draw the necessary lesson from the Shoa. Instead of making our planet a peace seeking habitable place the Zionists and Jewish tribal activists use Jewish suffering as an excuse for more wars and world conflicts. Zionists had a chance to open a new page in Jewish history. They obviously failed completely. The images of Israel starving Palestinians and dropping white phosphorus on populated neighborhoods depict a total Israeli ethical failure. Israel implements genocidal tactics. Israel is the only state to practice Nazi like racist discriminatory ideology and policies.

If Israel and its supporters want to tackle anti-Jewish resentments they should stop chasing their critics at once. They instead better look in the mirror and understand once and for all that the problem is inside.

Source: Gilad Atzmon

Jewish institutional chickens coming home to roost

Decades of determined silence, or aiding and abetting both illegal settlement expansion and vicious attacks on dissenting critics of Israeli state policy have created a kind of “blowback” in the institutional Jewish world.

The new targets of the settlers’ linguistic paramilitary forces, aka the rightwing pro-Israel punditocracy and their followers, aren’t just the usual suspects like Jimmy Carter or Archbishop Tutu. They’re now mainstream, moderate, demonstrably Israel-loving institutional Jews. This is a moment of truth for many of these targets. Faced with new pressure from their right-wing flank, some will fold and adapt to a more McCarthyite environment, especially if loss of funding is threatened. Others will stand strong and even be radicalized.

So, who are the new targets of occupation-supporters like Caroline Glick (Whither American Jewry?) and Isi Liebler (Candidly Speaking: Marginalize the renegades) of the Jerusalem Post and Walter Bingham (Expose the Renegades) in Arutz Sheva? For starters, there’s former Jewish Council for Public Affairs director Hannah Rosenthal, whose principled concern for the Jewish community and for Israel is undeniable. She is the newly appointed head of the US Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism:

Shortly after the announcement of Rosenthal’s nomination, conservative Jewish web sites began to attack her, some of them declaring that Obama appointed an anti-Israeli to fight anti-Semitism. Rumors brewed that she had accused Israel of systemically strengthening anti-Semitism. Bloggers argued that her appointment would cause Jews and Israelis to cast doubt on Obama and his relationship with Israel.

Then there’s the the popular San Francisco Jewish Film Festival, known for its diverse approach to programming, and the Jewish Federation in San Francisco, which (lightly) funds the Festival. Not used to getting hate mail from Jews, and being called anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli, the Federation has been under tremendous pressure to cave in to calls for excessively McCarthyite control over funding recipients; the Film Festival has already lost tens of thousands of dollars and half its board, with no sign of the campaign dying any time soon.

The Federation board wisely said no to an absurd proposal to bar partnerships with any individuals or groups who “defame Israel” (good luck defining that), but they did support a resolution passed by the General Assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America barring partnerships with groups that support Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions.

(Presumably, Time’s Joe Klein, who recently came out in support of a suspension of aid as a way to get the Israelis to actually freeze settlements, could still speak at a Federation-supported venue. Jewish Voice for Peace, however, which promotes selective divestment and sanctions as a way to end Israel’s occupation, would continue to get no funds or support from the Federation. In fact, the Federation would be duty-bound to oppose JVP, according to the resolution. As more mainstream Jewish groups openly advocate against support for 501c3s that support extremist settlers, it’s not clear how this resolution will play out.) Of course, there is the unprecedented smear campaign against Richard Goldstone, including coordinated condemnation of his report in Conservative synagogues across America, and yet he has continued to hold strong and defend his work with tremendous integrity. And then, there are the ongoing attacks on the new moderate AIPAC alternative, J Street, which puts forth an agenda not entirely different from what Netanyahu himself at least says he wants - two states that preserve as they call it, “a Jewish democracy”. Finally, there is the very surprising Glenn Beck (pictured above) attack on the Anti-Defamation League for their new report “Rage Grows in America: Anti-Government Conspiracies,” which calls out Beck in particular in a wide-ranging condemnation of hate-mongers. Surprising because the ADL can typically be counted on to overlook hate-mongering and Holocaust-abuse in the service of a rightwing “pro-Israel” agenda, but in this case has done the right thing in identifying this truly scary trend for which Beck has become the figurehead. As MJ Rosenberg writes in his new column at Media Matters

:

Glenn Beck is, not surprisingly, in a state of rage about the ADL report. He defends himself by asking the ADL to “name the person who has been more friendly to Israel” (the predictable defense). This, of course, is utterly irrelevant. The issue here is not Israel but the United States. It is here where Beck spreads his hate, not Israel. And then Beck turns on the ADL itself. Beck said that the Anti-Defamation League itself has “much to do with the plight of the Jewish people.” I don’t know what plight Beck is referring to, perhaps the Holocaust which so often pops into his head and out of his mouth. But, obviously, the ADL fought for the victims of the Holocaust, not its perpetrators. The Holocaust was the product of professional hate mongers, the mob who listened to them, and politicians who came to power on their backs. That is precisely the combination the ADL is worried about now.

It’s tempting to sit back and say, “I told you so.” As Israel is learning all too well regarding increasing numbers of intransigent settlers and religious fanatics who profess open contempt for their own country, you can’t help create a monster and then expect it not to try to devour you. But one hopes that all of the targets of these nasty charges will a) put into perspective the war of words versus the war of lives and homes being waged, for example, in Sheikh Jarakh in East Jerusalem right now and that b) they’ll resist efforts at intimidation precisely because Jews who love Israel should care about the rights of Palestinian Israelis getting evicted from Sheikh Jarakh, as well as the rights of their peace-loving Jewish neighbors. There is only one logical conclusion after reading Rabbi Arik Ascherman’s moving and terrifying account of what’s happening in East Jerusalem: justice for Palestinians is justice, and peace, for Jews. Supporting the ongoing evictions and terrorization of Palestinians is the last way in the world to show love of Israel.

-Cecilie Surasky

Source: Jewish Voice For Peace's Muzzle Watch