[These ideas are spreading. Could a Jew have written the article below ? No (with extremely few exceptions). Jewish ideology places defense of their community above universal morality, even if that means silence in the face of horrific Jewish-created crimes. The problem is not just Zionism. The problem is the racist, self-delusional Jewish identity-ideology from which Zionism was born. Bear in mind, Benny Morris, a humanist "leftist," supposedly represents the more "tolerant" side of the world Jewish community. World Jewry, as an activist, chronically self-defensive pro-Israel group, is morally bankrupt.]
Offending Valerie. Dealing with Jewish Self-Absorption,
By KATHLEEN CHRISTISON, CounterPunch, February 7/8, 2004
"I was kidding a couple of Muslim Palestinian-American friends the other day about being barbarians, by the lights of Israeli historian Benny Morris. This was a day or two after this paragon of dispassionate Israeli scholarship had expostulated in an interview published in Ha’aretz on the benefits (if you’re Jewish) of ethnic cleansing, the critical miscalculation of David Ben-Gurion in not having completed the total ethnic cleansing of Palestine from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River in 1948 when he had a chance, and the barbarity of Arab and Muslim culture. “The Arab world as it is today is barbarian,” Morris declared. Islamic and Arab culture is “a world in which human life doesn’t have the same value as it does in the West,” in which freedom and democracy are alien, in which there are “no moral inhibitions.” He was speaking in sweeping terms, of entire cultures, of the mass of individuals in the Arab and the Muslim worlds, not merely of governments that are oppressive or undemocratic. Palestinians in particular, Morris believes, are barbaric, “a very sick society,” and should be treated “the way we treat individuals who are serial killers. . . . Something like a cage has to be built for them.” My friends have a good sense of humor, and so we laughed uproariously at the notion that they and every last Arab and Muslim throughout the world are barbarians. Hilarity is the way you often react when confronted with utter horror. What was so particularly horrifying about Morris’s pronouncements was their resonance, their representativeness, the banality of the evil they reflect. Meir Kahane, the assassinated Israeli-American rabbi and politician who made a career out of propounding racist views, always used to say that his anti-Arab pronouncements and policy positions were simply what other Jews thought in their hearts but did not quite dare to say out loud. Benny Morris -- who still considers himself a leftist, still favors establishment of a Palestinian state in part of Palestine, still exposes Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians in his examination of early Israeli history -- is one of those people Meir Kahane was describing, and he speaks for large numbers of his fellow Israelis and his fellow Jews throughout the world. Morris’s blunt soul-bearing has lifted the last barrier of propriety to the open expression of raw Arab hatred. One longs for some gigantic outcry of opposition or disgust over this confession of deep bigotry, but there has been none. Except for a few letters to the editor of Ha’aretz from American Jews, the interview has aroused little attention in the Jewish-American community: no denunciation, no shock, little or no discussion on any but the most progressive Jewish e-mail lists. You have to assume that, however awkward Morris’s blunt language may be, he is speaking for a large segment of American Jews who say they oppose the occupation, say they hate Sharon, say they hate Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians, but who do nothing about any of these things and who in the end would not grieve, either for the Palestinians or for the Jewish soul, if Israel wiped the Palestinians off the map. One of Morris’s fellow revisionist historians, Oxford University professor Avi Shlaim, observed when Morris first came out as an Arabaphobe in leftist clothing a couple of years ago that Morris was wallowing in self-pity. Self-pity over the supposed victimization of Israel and total absorption in a world in which only Jewish interests matter rang out loud and clear in Morris’s interview. Although he lectures about what he sees as Arab and Muslim moral failings, Morris thinks it impractical to demand morality of Jews. “I’m trying to be realistic,” he said. “Preserving my people is more important than universal moral concepts.” This self-absorbed focus on Jews, Jewish interests, Jewish self-preservation is characteristic of a substantial subset of American Jews who I have to assume secretly do not disagree with Morris’s world view. Take Valerie. Valerie is an actual person (although not her actual name); she is also the perfect representation of a large number of American Jews who seem to approach the Palestinian-Israeli conflict from an identical script: they are at pains to tell you they don’t like Ariel Sharon, have “always” opposed the occupation, and support two states in Palestine-Israel, but if anyone else ventures to describe what the occupation is really like on the ground in Palestine or what Palestinians endure at the hands of Israel’s occupation administrators, they react with bristling hostility and respond that they cannot “hear” such Israel-bashing. Jews are suffering in Israel, they tell you, and that is what takes precedence. It is obviously politically dangerous to talk about any group of Jews who seem to think or act alike. One is immediately attacked for labeling all Jews as identical, for stereotyping, and of course the notion that one is anti-Semitic always hangs over the discussion, either explicitly or implicitly. These days it is almost impossible even to discuss “Israel” and its actions and policies without being criticized for generalizing and failing to take account of those Israelis and American Jews who oppose the Israeli government’s policies. I want to make it clear that I am very well aware that Jews come in all varieties -- all political inclinations, all degrees of dedication to Israel, all degrees of religiosity and of ethnic self-identification. I am not by any means declaring that all Jews are like Valerie, or like Benny Morris, simply that Valerie represents a line of thinking about Israel that I have found quite common among many American Jews. Valerie and those who think like her on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict are somewhere in the middle along the Jewish political spectrum. They are well to the left of the conservatives who oppose any peace process and any Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, even somewhat to the left of the mainstream Jewish-American organizations that refuse to criticize any Israeli policy, but very much to the right of those Jews whose self-identity is not intimately linked to Israel. There are a great many Jews of this progressive stripe who are very proudly Jewish without feeling a particular need to protect Israel and its flaws, who can look at Israel with the same emotional distance and honest appraisal that they apply to any other country in the world. Valerie and all the figurative “Valeries” are incapable of distance where Israel is concerned. I find Valerie and those like her to be so very emotional about Israel and so inwardly focused on their own Jewishness that it is impossible to argue with them, impossible to persuade them of any viewpoint not their own, impossible to talk reasonably with them about Israeli actions that are obstructing a stable peace settlement."

[More Jewish Nazism, ad nauseum:]
Boim: Is Palestinian terror caused by a genetic defect?,
By Yair Ettinger, Haaretz (Israel), February 25, 2004
"Deputy Defense Minister Ze'ev Boim, addressing the issue of why much of local, regional and world terrorism is directed by extremist Muslims, asked Tuesday, "What is it about Islam as a whole and the Palestinians in particular? Is it some form of cultural deprivation? Is it some genetic defect? There is something that defies explanation in this continued murderousness." Boim was speaking at a memorial ceremony for the victims of a bus attack on the Coastal Highway 26 years ago. MK Jamal Zahalka (Balad) said in response that "whoever says that Palestinian behavior is caused by a genetic defect has a brain defect himself and the values of a racist fascist." "Boim is giving racism a bad name, and returning to the same kind of primitive, sickening and dangerous racism from which the Jews have suffered for many generations," Zahalka said, and demanded that the law against racism be enforced following Boim's statements. Meretz MK Avshalom Vilan also condemned Boim's statements and demanded he retract them, reminding the crowd that Boim used to be a high school principal. MK Ophir Pines-Paz (Labor) called for Boim's resignation if he does not apologize. MK Ahmed Tibi (Hadash) said he does not think Boim should resign because the deputy defense minister acts as valuable evidence for those who think the Israeli government embraces a group of fascists. Likud MK Yehiel Hazan supported Boim's statements. "What Ze'ev Boim said, it hasn't been researched, but according to my experience this is true. I think he is correct. It is well-known that Arabs have been slaughtering and murdering Jews for more than a generation," Hazan said. "I think this it is in their blood. It is something genetic. I have not researched this, but there is no other way to explain this," Hazan added. "Don't believe an Arab, even one who has been in the grave for 40 years."

We're Right, the Whole World's Wrong,
by Dov Fisher, [Jewish] Forward, April 19, 2002
"The whole world is demanding that Israel withdraw. I don't think the whole world, including the friends of the Israeli people and government, can be wrong." — Kofi Annan, United Nations Secretary General, speaking in Madrid, Spain
At this moment in time, many Jews who love and support Israel hear the soft voice within, asking the question to which Kofi Annan recently alluded in Madrid: Can we alone be right, while the whole world around is wrong? The evidence that we are standing on the other side of the "whole world" is manifest ...Today, once again, we alone are right and the whole world is wrong. The Arabs, the Russians, the Africans, the Vatican proffer their aggregated insights into and accumulated knowledge of the ethics of massacre. And the Europeans. Although we appreciate a half-century of West European democracy more than we appreciated the prior millennia of European brutality, we recognize who they are, what they have done — and what's what. We know, if they don't, that they need Arab oil more than they need Jewish philosophy and creativity. We remember that the food they eat is grown from soil fertilized by 2,000 years of Jewish blood they have sprinkled onto it. Atavistic Jew-hatred lingers in the air into which the ashes rose from the crematoria. Finally, the best of Europe truly are wracked by the burdened conscience of what they, their parents and their bubbes and zeides did, or failed to do, in the 1940s. So, instead of confronting a shameful past that belies their self-vaunted Romantic civilization, they seek now to assuage their consciences with the mendacity that Israel 2002 is no different from Europe 1942. Yes, once again, we are right and the whole world is wrong. It doesn't change a thing, but after 25 centuries it's nice to know."

[More Jewish racism and hypocrisy. It's kosher to trash, in abstract, "the Arabs," but never Jews.]
Its Always Been Them vs. Us,
By Arlene Peck, Gabrielle Goldwater Reports
"The Arabs are bombing, murdering, mutilating, raping and causing havoc all over the Judeo /Christian world. Israel has nothing to do with it -- nothing! The front page of my LA times today headlined, (besides the Israelis who were savagely bombed in Beersheba) that that these same sub-human savage militants who had killed twelve Nepalese workers want more! More concessions and more blood! They also captured two French journalists as hostages, so as to influence French domestic laws. This is especially interesting since Mr. Jacque Chirac and France has gone out of his way to alienate their western allies and welcome them with open arms into the country They want to pressure the French to change their laws on headscarfs. Otherwise, they were going to kill them. Folks, this is only the beginning. Within five years the required fashion in Paris will the burqas ... President Bush makes speeches regularly about how we've brought democracy to Afghanistan and Iraq. Do you honestly believe these people want or will accept anything that's brought to them in the way of freedom? I haven't even begun to get around to the holocaust which is happening by their rampaging, raping and killing hundreds of thousands in the Sudan by these same Arabs. Personally, in the case of Israel and especially at this point in time, I think this would be the best time to begin to put a plan into place. The first step is to complete, as soon as possible, the security barrier. No matter what the world court or any other hysterical, politically correct audience says for its own self interest. On a personal level , I believe a plan should be implemented where announcements are made that anyone who even tries to bomb anyone in the Jewish state will be shot by bullets soaked in pig blood. Then they will be returned to their families who raise these homicide bombers wrapped in pig skin for burial. Flyers should be dropped in the neighborhoods which harbors them, allows their arms to be smuggled under their houses in tunnels and then dance on the street celebrating the latest Israel disaster, stating it will be bombed with missiles dipped in pig oil. And, then do it! ... It all boils down to the fact that the Judeo /Christian free world is at war with an evil, vicious, seventh century barbaric Islamic culture. These people kill indiscriminately ... I have yet to see one out of the 1.3 billion marching in the street protesting with outrage actions such as these are! Yet, they are quick to dance in the streets and pass out candy at the joy of seeing the carnage in Israel's misfortune ... We have been so caught up in not hurting feelings and trying to show compassion that we have overlooked the master plan which is death and destruction from a culture that has absolutely no reverence for life. Hell, these people probably feel that they're doing a favor to everyone by killing them as the only thing they've been raised to revere is death. Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She travels extensively worldwide, reporting to her audience about political events, social happenings (Cannes Film Festival, London event for the Variety Club, etc.) and "must see" spots. If there is a place to see and be seen, she'll write about it for her international audience. Arlene's syndicated column is read weekly by millions and her television show ("Wow! It's Arlene Peck!") can be seen throughout Southern California every Monday night."

[More Jewish religious racism.]
What is wrong with a Jew marrying a non-Jew?,
Sarah Levi, Ask Moses ["Ask Moses is the only Jewish site that provides live, one-on-one access with Rabbis and scholars"]
"Many people resent Judaism’s view on this because it smacks of discrimination, but mainly because of profound emotional bias towards their non-Jewish partner. But let me ask you a simple question: imagine two people deep in love who decide to marry—but they discover that they are biological siblings on the very day of their wedding. Would they still marry? And would their aborted plans imply that their love was false? Would this smack of discrimination? Marriage is a spiritual act. It is the fusion of two souls. The Torah spells out which types of souls are compatible and which are not. Just like two siblings cannot marry, so too, a Jewish and non-Jewish soul cannot fuse. Not only is it prohibited, it is simply impossible. Judaism’s opposition to Jews marrying non-Jews is based on the explicit prohibition in the Torah (Deuteronomy 7:3): “Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughter to his son and do not take his daughter for your son.” The Torah continues with the reason (Verse 4): “[If you do], they will lead your son away from Me, causing him to worship other gods…” According to the Talmud (Yevamot 23a), this verse also teaches that a Jew is one who is born from a Jewish mother. The basis for this inference is the terminology “…they [i.e., the non-Jewish husband and his family] will lead your SON away from Me.” Why doesn’t it say, “…they will lead your DAUGHTER away from Me”? Because it’s referring to your grandson. In other words, the son of your daughter is considered to be “your son” [i.e. Jewish], whereas the son of your son is not considered to be “your son,” but “her son”: not Jewish. Our concern about mixed marriages is twofold: If a Jewish guy marries a non-Jewish woman, the children she bears will not be Jews, and if a Jewish woman marries a non-Jew man, the children she bears are likely to not have a Jewish upbringing, and end up abandoning Judaism altogether."

What's wrong with intermarriage?,
N. Silberberg, Ask Moses ["Ask Moses is the only Jewish site that provides live, one-on-one access with Rabbis and scholars"]
"Every person is put on this world with a mission to accomplish. The mission of a Jew is distinct and entirely different than the mission of a non-Jew. A Jew has 613 mitzvot (tools) to accomplish his/her goal, whereas a non-Jew has only seven. The goal of a non-Jew is to be a humane civil and spiritual person, whereas the Jew was entrusted with the awesome responsibility of connecting with the divine and transforming the entire world into a G-dly abode. Whether you are a Jew or not, this mission is not easy. I don't think I have to elaborate on the obvious. Every person is faced with temptations and struggles which try to lure him/her to take the easy way out and forget about his/her G-dly destiny. G-d therefore did us a favor. He created the idea of marriage. He made sure that every person has a partner with whom they can share the same goals and ambitions. It is so much easier to face life's struggles with someone on your side. So when you're feeling down you have someone to encourage you and keep you going, and vice versa. Marriage isn't (only) about passion and lust. A real marriage is about two people with similar goals and objectives who get together to form a team. Incidentally, this is why the divorce rate amongst Orthodox Jews is drastically lower than the rest of the population. For they (on the most part) understand the above explained concept. So even if with the passage of years the passion wears off a little, the goals didn't change. Marrying a non-Jew is an injustice to both the Jew and the non-Jew. Both of them are being deprived of a serious partner in life. So if you are a shallow person who lives only in the present, with no thought about your raison d'ettere, then go ahead. But from the fact that the issue is bothering you I suspect that you are a person who thinks about things well before making a decision. I therefore hope that you will have the necessary strength and fortitude to make the right decision. I think you should take out the time to find out more about your Jewish heritage. Only once you understand what it really means to be Jewish, then you can make an informed and educated decision in this important matter which will affect the rest of your life."

[Rabbis like this open the door to Hell. If there is no such thing as a difference between a "civilian" and "combatant," then anyone anywhere is subject to murder. If non-combatants are fair game, this brutal Jewish rationale not only would be aimed at Palestinians, but -- in an inevitable tit-for-tat response -- would be violently expanded to include innocent Americans and all Jews themselves.]
Rabbis call for IDF to hit civilians if needed,
By MATTHEW GUTMAN AND RONIT SELA, Jerusalem Post, September 7, 2004
"A group of prominent right wing rabbis on Tuesday issued a potentially inflammatory public call on the government to fight terrorism more tenaciously and to heed no difference between civilian and combatant in battle. The call by West Bank, Gaza, and right wing rabbis from Israel proper, arrived just a few hours after an IDF strike in Gaza killed 15 people – all of them Hamas members, according to a Hamas spokesman. The group of rabbis, headed by former MK and Chairman of the popular Bnei Akiva youth movement Haim Drukman (National Religious Party), said the army's policy in Palestinian areas should take into consideration that no army, when fighting amongst civilians, can protect the lives of its soldiers unless it is willing to take the risk of injuring, or even killing, civilians amongst whom terrorists hide "In a time of war as in today, we cannot differentiate between [civilian] population to an Army," the letter read ... Part of the letter hinges on the teachings of Rabbi Akiva a 2nd century AD scholar, who preached that while one should respect above all one's neighbor, there are choices to be made, specifically "our lives first." Other rabbis who signed the letter include the Chairman of the Judea, Samaria and Gaza Rabbi's council, Dov Lior, and rabbi's Amnon Shugerman and Yuval Sherlo who both head hesder yeshivas which combine Torah learning and shortened army service. The letter follows a slew of similar epistle by various Rabbinical councils who support the Greater Israel ideology, calling for the employment of harsher tactics against the Palestinians and for IDF soldiers to refuse their orders should they be summoned to dismantle an outpost or settlement. Yesha Rabbis' Council secretary Yishai Ba'abad said the rabbis' letter to the heads of state is based on a previous psak halacha (Jewish decree) that the lives of Israeli soldiers comes first and should be protected, even on the expense of "so-called civilians". "According to Christian law, one must turn the other cheek; but according to Jewish law, we must first and foremost protect ourselves. If 10 civilians are killed so that we can save the life of one IDF soldier - so be it."

[ American Jews continue to worry about growing evidence of Jewish dual loyalty and primary allegiance to Israel. No surprise here. The gay New Jersey governor's extramarital lover was an Israeli. Then there are the hoardes Jewish spies and traitors throughout the U.S. government for Israel and AIPAC (one and the same). Then there's the Jewish likes of Monica Lewinsky and Chandra Levin, dragging politicians down into the gutter. Where does it end? And so very, very clearly, there is increasingly no difference between the American Jewish community and its Israeli counterpart. Some American Jews are getting uncomfortable with their own dual loyalty chutzpah.]
We may be one, but which one? Blurring the line between American Jewish leadership and Israel isn't healthy for American Jews or for Israel. SIMPLY SABRA: Former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey had one too many Israeli connections ,
by Jonathan S. Tobin, Jewsweek, September 7, 2004
"It's been an odd week tracking the relationship between Israelis and Americans. Most of the attention here has focused on the fact that a young Israeli man named Golan Cipel was the governor of New Jersey's alleged extramarital lover or, depending on whose story you believe, the victim of sexual harassment by the state's chief executive. The fact that Gov. James McGreevey announced last month that he was "a gay American" who cheated on his wife wasn't the scandal in the eyes of most observers. It was the fact that McGreevey had appointed Cipel to a high-paying job as a state homeland security advisor, in spite of the fact that he wasn't remotely qualified and, as a foreign national, couldn't get a security clearance to receive classified information from Washington. The fact that an Israeli who hadn't even troubled to become an American citizen would even be considered for such a position marks an interesting turning point in the relationship between Israel and America. Israel began its history with citizens of other countries serving key roles in its armed forces. Most famous was U.S. Army Colonel David "Mickey" Marcus, who commanded the Israeli forces that lifted the siege of Jerusalem in 1948. Marcus was buried at his alma mater, West Point, the only American soldier who died fighting under a foreign flag to be so honored. But Cipel apparently was ready to return the favor. Like World War I American Gen. John J. Pershing, who landed in France in 1917 with the words, "Lafayette, we are here!" on his lips, Cipel might well have proclaimed, "Mickey Marcus, hinenei - 'I am here!' " when he entered the office that went along with his $110,000 salary. Yet the McGreevey mess isn't the only example of Israelis becoming players on U.S. shores. In a story that hasn't even been a blip on the radar screen of the secular news media, another Israeli has been appointed to an American job, raising different though troubling questions. It was the announcement that the American Jewish Congress was appointing Alon Pinkas as its new CEO. Who's Pinkas? Up until a few weeks ago, he was Israel's consul general in New York, serving in one of the Jewish state's most important diplomatic posts. But if the AJCongress gets its way, he will doff the mantle of diplomat, and take up the less-exalted title of chief macher for a Jewish organization best known for its unyielding stand on the separation of church and state in the United States. Perhaps I'm missing something, but the idea of a man who was an Israeli envoy just weeks ago taking the helm of a group that attempts to represent the interests of American Jews strikes me as more than a bit odd. Granted, maybe not as odd as the idea of the baby-faced Golan Cipel defending the people of New Jersey from Al Qaida, but still rather strange ... But AJCongress has still crossed a line. Pinkas, previously a foreign-policy advisor to Shimon Peres and Ehud Barak, has spent the last few years waltzing his way through the complicated labyrinth of New York Jewry. By all accounts, he has done a fine job, charming both the hoi polloi and the high-and-mighty. But while some Israelis have finished their terms in that office and fled back to Israel for a break from unending rounds of lox-and-bagel breakfasts and caviar receptions, Pinkas apparently can't get enough of it, and will get a salary from AJCongress far greater than the pittance New Jersey taxpayers shelled out to Cipel ... But don't the good people at AJCongress understand that blurring the line between American Jewish leadership and Israel isn't healthy for America Jews or Israel? The old slogan of the United Jewish Appeal was "We are one." But that was supposed to be a symbol of solidarity, not an avowal that no difference exists between being a U.S. citizen and one of the State of Israel ... But when some ask who do groups like AJCongress really represent - the State of Israel or the many loyal Americans who love both nations - do we really want that question answered by a foreign diplomat? By even contemplating the Pinkas appointment, AJCongress has stumbled badly. Their timing was also off in more ways than one. This was, it turns out, not a good week to be hiring an Israeli to fill a job better suited to an American."

"

[No, the above image and text is not a National Lampoon joke about communal Jewish narcissism and self-obsession. And it's not Halloween or Purim. Text and image are from "Judaism in the Amazon," Baltimore Jewish Times, September 10, 2004. "Mr. Block, an 18-year-old sophomore at the University of Maryland, College Park, recently worked on a research project with the Kayapo tribe in Pinkaiti, Brazil. His professor and two other students in the group were also Jewish. 'I had an interesting conversation discussing, among other things, Jews,' Mr. Block wrote in an e-mail to his parents, Michele and Steve Block. 'Janet [Chernela, his professor] and two other students are Jewish, and Graham [another student] is very interested in us all. So while in Amazonia, we have found ourselves frequently talking about the Jews and the Jewish people's successes and abilities to overcome.'" ]

“God Wills It!”,
by Uri Avnery, Information Clearinghouse, 09/15/04
"Two shocking manifestos were published this week. Both call for comment. One of them declares that dismantling the settlements in the Gaza Strip is a "crime against humanity." It does not mention that they were set up on the land reserves of a million Palestinians crowded in the tiny strip, and rob them of their scarce water. Their removal, it says, is an "expression of tyranny, evil and arbitrariness." Officers and soldiers are called upon not to take part in this "ethnic cleansing." This manifesto is signed by the father and brother of Binyamin Netanyahu, as well as Meir Har-Zion, the favorite pupil of Ariel Sharon, who became famous in the 1950s for slitting the throats of several innocent Bedouins with his own hands in revenge for the killing of his sister. Two former directors general of the prime minister's office also signed. Most of the signatories are not religious. The second manifesto declares that the Halakha (Jewish religious law) commands the killing of innocent Palestinian civilians if this helps to save Jews. It is signed by the heads of the "Arrangement Yeshivot," the West Bank settlement rabbis and other religious leaders. They were later joined by one of the two chief rabbis (the Sephardic one). I was not unduly upset by the first manifesto. People of this kind can be found all over the world. In other countries they are called fascists (but, because of the Holocaust, we do not like to use this term in our country). What unites them is a primitive, atavistic morality that says that "we" are a superior race, God's chosen people, a master race, etc., while "they" are inferior races, untermenschen ... The second manifesto is far more dangerous. A religious doctrine that calls for the killing of civilians in the name of God is very serious. Such a decree signed by the rabbis of the "Arrangement Yeshivot" is tenfold worse. In order to understand this, one has to know that these Yeshivot are in fact military units. They constitute a unique phenomenon in the Israeli army: whole units formed on an ideological-political basis, obeying their own leaders. When David Ben-Gurion created the Israeli army (officially called the Israel Defense Forces, or IDF) in the middle of the 1948 war, he was determined to eliminate all its political groupings. So he disbanded the Palmakh, the legendary elite force that was based on the kibbutzim and tended to the left. The present setup was created, officially, in order to enable students of Yeshivot (Jewish religious seminaries) to serve in the army without interrupting their studies. In practice, they constitute a militia of the extreme-right wing, especially the settlers. While serving in the army, the Yeshiva students are nominally under the army chain of command, but in practice they are also subject to their rabbis, whose position is reminiscent of the political commissars of the Red Army. If the orders of the officers and the directives of the rabbis ever conflict, the great majority of the soldier-students will undoubtedly obey the rabbis ... The Arrangement Yeshivot soldiers are daily engaged in situations where they have to decide whether to shoot civilians or not. It is quite clear that the "opinion" of their rabbis will determine their behavior. It is a sentence of death for many people. Even today, Palestinian civilians are killed every day. Only a small fraction of the incidents are reported in the media. An old handicapped man was recently buried under the ruins of his home by an army bulldozer that demolished it so quickly that his family had no chance of getting him to safety. Only yesterday a 9-year-old boy was killed while sleeping at his home by shrapnel from a missile fired by a helicopter at an adjacent building. Almost every day, boys of all ages are killed while throwing stones at tanks and soldiers (whose bulletproof vests and helmets mean they are in no danger). It is impossible to know how many, if any, of these civilians – men, women, old people and children – are killed by Arrangement Yeshivot soldiers, or soldiers commanded by kippa-wearing officers. Nobody can be accused without incriminating evidence. But it is clear that the interpretation of the Halakha by the rabbis has now put a kosher-stamp on such acts. It puts an end to any pretense of the "pure arms" myth. It negates not only the prohibition of murder, but also the shame for such acts. The only religious voice raised against this appalling document was that of a small and courageous group called Rabbis for Human Rights, which opposes the dirty messianic current that has submerged almost the whole religious camp in Israel."

[See for yourself. Is this man right? Does "Jewish morality" clash with other moralities? Is Jewish morality merely bigotry, ethnocentrism, racial supremacy, and a call to murder innocents?]
Jewish Morality ,
by Gary Cooperberg, Truth News, September 8, 2004
"The problem with so many of our Jewish leaders is both their lack of faith in G-d, and their incredible ignorance of basic Jewish morality. The founders of this country, from the very outset, created a very strange terminology for the battlefield. They called it "purity of arms." While those who formulated this odd concept may have thought it the highest morality, it most certainly was not conceived by Jewish sources, nor was it truly a moral concept. Weapons, like it or not, are implements for killing. There is no "purity" involved in such an effort. War is always a dirty business. Although Shimon Peres believes that war must be avoided at all costs, he is wrong. As terrible and undesirable as war may be, there are times when we have no choice but to go to war. King Solomon stated in Koheles, "There is a time for peace and a time for war." One of G-d's names is "Shalom," peace. But he is also called "Ish Milchama," Man of War. When Israel is attacked by her enemies, it is wrong for her not to go to war and to defeat her enemies. It is wrong for her to "negotiate" with those who seek her destruction. For to do so would be to imply that she is willing to, at least partially, self-destruct. Why else would she negotiate with murderers? We are not at war with terror. We are at war with Moslems who will never tolerate a non-Islamic entity in the Middle East (and maybe not anywhere else for that matter). The first step in winning any war is to recognize that you are at war and to know who your enemy is. Our leaders are afraid to be honest with themselves whenever they talk about "peace partners" in reference to our Arab enemies. Worse, they are aiding and abetting our sworn enemies every time that they refer to "Palestinians." The only reason that concept was established was to use it as an excuse to replace Jewish Israel with Arab "Palestine." It is treasonous for a Jew to lend credence to this plot by using deceptive terminology which gives credence to the rights of a fraudulent entity, especially since those rights threaten Jewish lives. The War of Independence of 1948 has not yet been won. It is still being fought on many fronts. The most dangerous front is right inside our own borders. And the worst reality is our unwillingness to root out the evil in our midst! ... Rather than be concerned about fences and where to construct them, it would make a lot more sense to simply remove our enemies from our midst. Instead we worry about the rights of our enemies! Enemies, in time of war, have no rights! Any Jewish leader who shackles our police and soldiers from protecting Jewish lives by expressing concern for the rights of our Arab enemies is a participant in the effort to destroy the Jewish state. At long last a rabbinical council, made up of true Torah sages, had the courage to openly declare Jewish morality which clashes with other moralities. They stated: "There is no need to avoid hitting or even killing 'Palestinians' who are not involved in terrorism when this will harm the efforts to defend Israeli lives," the statement reads. "Jewish Law provides that during war time, such as that which we are now experiencing, there is no difference between the populace and the army. If a danger arises to Israeli soldiers or to civilians, Jewish ethics teach that our lives take precedence over others." Already we have Knesset members calling upon the Attorney General to investigate whether there are grounds to prosecute these rabbis. It is extremely annoying to have Jewish morality conflict with the twisted morality of Jewish ignoramuses."

[Jewish neurosis gone berserk:]
Heil to the Chief. The Plot Against America, Philip Roth, Houghton Mifflin, 400 pages [Book review] By Bill Kauffman, The American Conservative, September 27, 2004
"Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America is the novel that a neoconservative would write, if a neoconservative could write a novel. In 1940, as in 2004, voters faced a choiceless presidential election between pro-war interventionists, with a noble antiwar socialist (Norman Thomas then, Ralph Nader now) the best man in the field. In Roth’s what-if world, we the people have an actual choice in 1940. Instead of a third term for President Franklin D. Roosevelt, America Firster Charles Lindbergh is elected president, whereupon all hell breaks loose—which is to say America is at peace, a condition never again to be permitted, apparently, in the United States of Armaments. The horrific consequences of electing an antiwar Midwesterner are seen through the eyes of young Philip Roth, son of an insurance agent, and his Jewish family in Newark, New Jersey ... Roth is ill at ease in the American past; his research seems to have consisted of a quick flip through the courtier histories of James MacGregor Burns and Arthur Schlesinger. He bristles with contempt for the benighted denizens of “the working-class heartland of isolationist America”—that is, mothers and fathers who would rather not send their boys to die in foreign wars. Their parochial and pacific instincts point the way to a Middle American fascism. Roth writes in sodden cliches: for instance, FDR “inspired millions of ordinary families like ours to remain hopeful in the midst of hardship.” This is Time-Life prose. There is not a felicitous sentence in this book; nor is there a spark of wit or a single subversive thought. The literary critics of the Department of Homeland Security will pronounce it fit for best-sellerdom. Charles A. Lindbergh was a classic product of Upper Midwest populism. His congressman father, a fierce foe of U.S. involvement in World War I, was dubbed the “Gopher Bolshevik” by the New York Times. Lindbergh is easily understood in a Minnesota tradition that stretches from the Gopher Bolshevik and Sen. Henrik Shipstead through Bob Dylan and Eugene McCarthy. He was no more a Nazi than FDR was. But not since the Spanish-American War have honorable Americans been permitted to criticize a war without being slandered as traitorous lackeys for the enemy. Just as Eugene V. Debs was calumnied as a Kaiser-lover and Martin Luther King Jr. as a communist, so must Charles Lindbergh be a crypto-Nazi. Given the current climate, Roth’s book is especially odious. Or perhaps The Plot Against America is meant to serve as the writing sample in Roth’s application for a speechwriter job in the Bush administration. The Plot Against America is the sort of novel a bootlicking author might write to curry favor with a totalitarian government ... Roth’s Lindbergh is laconic to the point of simplemindedness ... To young Philip’s parents, America is good only insofar as it sends its sons to die in foreign lands. The family’s favorite presidents are Wilson and FDR, who shipped more Americans to die overseas than any other chief execs. Unwashed Americans, who live in places like North Dakota or Minnesota or Montana, mean harm to the Roths; their reluctance to send their sons to transatlantic graves is presented as a particularly insidious symptom of anti-Semitism ... Lindbergh and Rabbi Bengelsdorf create an Office of American Absorption, whose centerpiece is the “Just Folks” program, under which Jewish youth are shipped out to the “Gentile heartland” to become real Amerrykuns. Philip’s brother spends the summer with a “Kentucky tobacco farmer.” He returns with an accent, respect for farm life, a taste for ham and bacon, and a dose of the fascist clap that Philip Roth imagines lurks everywhere in that darksome forest of fear west of the Hudson. To Roth, a small farm in Kentucky is the perfect training ground for a fascis ... [T]o Roth, the Gentile heartland is hell. If The Plot Against America sounds like Roth’s savage satire on Jewish paranoia, it is not. For the rural folk eventually run riot as a kind of cornfed, baccy-smokin’ Khmer Rouge ... A pity that Roth does not mind uprooting the hicks he so obviously hates—for war is the most pitiless uprooter of all ... It is here that Roth’s loathing of Catholicism, with its “witchy” nuns and “creepily morticianlike priests,” reaches a fever-swamp pitch. Winchell’s taunting of the antiwar wafer-eaters brings “the Lindbergh grotesquery to the surface.” He is assaulted in South Boston and greeted with chants of “Kike Go Home!” in upstate New York, Pennsylvania, the Midwest—all sewers “notorious for their bigotry.” Working-class Catholics erupt in anti-Semitic riots in Detroit: “shops were looted and windows broken, Jews trapped outdoors were set upon and beaten, and kerosene-soaked crosses were ignited” on the lawns of Jewish homeowners. Jewish schools are bombed and synagogues trashed in America’s first-ever pogrom. Anti-Jewish riots also break out in Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, St. Louis, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Scranton, Akron, Syracuse—all across the hate-filled heartland, for the “menace of anti-Semitism” stretches “from one end of America to the other.” Our heroes make a mad dash across “rural West Virginia,” where “Ku Klux Klansmen had to be lying in wait for any Jew foolhardy enough to be driving through.” Almost Heaven? Not in this book. Walter Winchell is killed in Kentucky by “an American Nazi Party assassin working in collaboration with the Ku Klux Klan.” Roth takes an especial scunner to poor Kentucky, his locus of American evil. A Jewish lady from Newark, exiled to Danville, is set upon by a mob of Klansmen, which is to say ordinary Kentuckians; she is beaten and burned to death in the state that provides “a nightmarish vision of America’s anti-Semitic fury” ... This is a repellent novel, bigoted and libelous of the dead, dripping with hatred of rural America, of Catholics, of any Middle American who has ever dared stand against the war machine. All that is left, I suppose, is for the author to collect his Presidential Medal of Freedom."

[No, Mr. Freedman. Jewish tribalism doesn't merely "thrive" upon universalism. It EXPLOITS it, rapes it, sucks the marrow from it, crawling within like a fat parasite. Jewish tribalism refuses to ever assimilate in the surrounding society and demands that it be understood as the eternal Other. And stating that two-faced, self-delusional, dual loyalty Jewish tribalism has anything to do with "honesty" is obscene. Let's state the problem clearly: Freedman's ideology is the one that fuels so hotly the boatloads of Zionist spies in the White House. And routinely calling this condemnation of Jewish bigotry and anti-Gentilism "anti-Semitic" isn't going to get off the ground any more.]
Samuel G. Freedman: I am Jewish,
by Samuel G. Freedman, Jerusalem Post, September 15, 2004 [Friedman, a professor of journalism at Columbia University]
"For me, universalism without tribalism is a kind of self-loathing. Whether fetishizing the blonde-haired "shiksa goddess" as a mate or championing all versions of nationalism and identity politics except for Zionism, too many Jews exude a desire to flee their own skin. They do not want to be enriched and altered by a dynamic encounter with Otherness but rather to escape into it, to avoid the social incrimination of being demonstrably Jewish. Tribalism, then, is fidelity to heritage and comfort with oneself. Yet tribalism alone refutes the prophetic injunctions to the social justice and the moral lessons of the Exodus narrative. Tribalism mistrusts the outer world because, deep down, it sees Jewish identity as something so fragile that it cannot survive immersion in a polyglot society. Jewishness confounds so many gentiles, and a good many Jews as well, because its definition is so inchoate, so ineffable, and at the same time so ineradicable. But if I were asked for a definition of Jewishness, I would say it relies upon, indeed thrives upon, the dialectic of universalism and tribalism, the self-correcting tension between seeming opposites. Each hemisphere of our soul keeps the other honest."

Columbus Citizens Foundation: DreamWorks Misleads New York Times and Reuters,
Yahoo! (Financial News;Press Release)September 21, 2004
"The following press release is being issued by the Columbus Citizens Foundation: DreamWorks SKG and DreamWorks Animation denials that Steven Spielberg was involved with the prejudicial animated kids' movie Shark Tale are false, according to Lawrence Auriana, President of the Columbus Citizens Foundation. In his statements to the New York Times and Reuters last week, DreamWorks spokesman Andrew Spahn noted that Mr. Spielberg had "nothing to do with the movie ... [he] runs our live-action business (Reuters, September 15, 2004)." A new book published by Miramax Books flatly contradicts this. It reports that last May in Cannes, DreamWorks screened a promotional reel for the movie that showed Mr. Spielberg inspecting Shark Tale storyboards and commenting, "No sharks were harmed during the making of the movie." The book, "Open Wide: How Hollywood Box Office Became a National Obsession" by Dade Hayes and Jonathan Bing, states further that the movie "had Steven Spielberg's imprimatur" (page 382). Mr. Spielberg is a co-founder and major shareholder of DreamWorks SKG and stands to profit generously from the success of Shark Tale. "Spielberg is looking to make a profit from the mafia genre at the expense of innocent children who are inculcated with prejudice from negative ethnic stereotyping," Mr. Auriana said. Mr. Spielberg has been eloquent and outspoken about negative stereotyping in the past. In a New York Times article published on March 9, 2004, Spielberg was quoted, "We are in a race against time for the conscious mind of young people" and need to teach them "the dangers of stereotyping, the dangers of discrimination, the dangers of racial and religious hatred and vengeful rage." "He should have stopped this project long before it reached this stage," Mr. Auriana said. "Now he is positioned to profit handsomely from a film that promotes exactly that which he claims to abhor. His actions are hypocritical and he is motivated by greed." The Columbus Citizens Foundation celebrates Italian-American heritage."

[This is a thinly disguised form of Jewish-inspired genocide: murdering children in the name not only of the Jewish state but of all Jews everywhere. It is Jewish moral corruption at rock bottom. And the brutal Jewish Lobby has forced brainwashed Americans to be silent accomplices to it.]
Killing children is no longer a big deal,
By Gideon Levy, Haaretz (Israel), October 17, 2004
"More than 30 Palestinian children were killed in the first two weeks of Operation Days of Penitence in the Gaza Strip. It's no wonder that many people term such wholesale killing of children "terror." Whereas in the overall count of all the victims of the intifada the ratio is three Palestinians killed for every Israeli killed, when it comes to children the ratio is 5:1. According to B'Tselem, the human rights organization, even before the current operation in Gaza, 557 Palestinian minors (below the age of 18) were killed, compared to 110 Israeli minors. Palestinian human rights groups speak of even higher numbers: 598 Palestinian children killed (up to age 17), according to the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, and 828 killed (up to age 18) according to the Red Crescent. Take note of the ages, too. According to B'Tselem, whose data are updated until about a month ago, 42 of the children who have been killed were 10; 20 were seven; and eight were two years old when they died. The youngest victims are 13 newborn infants who died at checkpoints during birth. With horrific statistics like this, the question of who is a terrorist should have long since become very burdensome for every Israeli. Yet it is not on the public agenda. Child killers are always the Palestinians, the soldiers always only defend us and themselves, and the hell with the statistics. The plain fact, which must be stated clearly, is that the blood of hundreds of Palestinian children is on our hands. No tortuous explanation by the IDF Spokesman's Office or by the military correspondents about the dangers posed to soldiers by the children, and no dubious excuse by the public relations people in the Foreign Ministry about how the Palestinians are making use of children will change that fact. An army that kills so many children is an army with no restraints, an army that has lost its moral code. As MK Ahmed Tibi (Hadash) said, in a particularly emotional speech in the Knesset, it is no longer possible to claim that all these children were killed by mistake. An army doesn't make more than 500 day-to-day mistakes of identity. No, this is not a mistake but the disastrous result of a policy driven mainly by an appallingly light trigger finger and by the dehumanization of the Palestinians. Shooting at everything that moves, including children, has become normative behavior. Even the momentary mini-furor that erupted over the "confirming of the killing" of a 13-year-old girl, Iman Alhamas, did not revolve around the true question. The scandal should have been generated by the very act of the killing itself, not only by what followed. Iman was not the only one. Mohammed Aaraj was eating a sandwich in front of his house, the last house before the cemetery of the Balata refugee camp, in Nablus, when a soldier shot him to death at fairly close range. He was six at the time of his death. Kristen Saada was in her parents' car, on the way home from a family visit, when soldiers sprayed the car with bullets. She was 12 at the time of her death. The brothers Jamil and Ahmed Abu Aziz were riding their bicycles in full daylight, on their way to buy sweets, when they sustained a direct hit from a shell fired by an Israeli tank crew. Jamil was 13, Ahmed six, at the time of their deaths. Muatez Amudi and Subah Subah were killed by a soldier who was standing in the village square in Burkin and fired every which way in the wake of stone-throwing. Radir Mohammed from Khan Yunis refugee camp was in a school classroom when soldiers shot her to death. She was 12 when she died. All of them were innocent of wrongdoing and were killed by soldiers acting in our name. At least in some of these cases it was clear to the soldiers that they were shooting at children, but that didn't stop them. Palestinian children have no refuge: mortal danger lurks for them in their homes, in their schools and on their streets. Not one of the hundreds of children who have been killed deserved to die, and the responsibility for their killing cannot remain anonymous. Thus the message is conveyed to the soldiers: it's no tragedy to kill children and none of you is guilty. Death is, of course, the most acute danger that confronts a Palestinian child, but it is not the only one. According to data of the Palestinian Ministry of Education, 3,409 schoolchildren have been wounded in the intifada, some of them crippled for life. The childhood of tens of thousands of Palestinian youngsters is being lived from one trauma to the next, from horror to horror. Their homes are demolished, their parents are humiliated in front of their eyes, soldiers storm into their homes brutally in the middle of the night, tanks open fire on their classrooms. And they don't have a psychological service. Have you ever heard of a Palestinian child who is a "victim of anxiety"? The public indifference that accompanies this pageant of unrelieved suffering makes all Israelis accomplices to a crime. Even parents, who understand what anxiety for a child's fate means, turn away and don't want to hear about the anxiety harbored by the parent on the other side of the fence. Who would have believed that Israeli soldiers would kill hundreds of children and that the majority of Israelis would remain silent? Even the Palestinian children have become part of the dehumanization campaign: killing hundreds of them is no longer a big deal.

[New Jewish Tribal Gilded Ghetto fortress going up for rich Jews in London? Electric gates, armed guards, Israeli patrols?]
Jewish sect set to buy up city grid square,
Serious About News (UK)
"MASSIVE new Jewish settlement is being planned for Milton Keynes, mk news can reveal. Secret talks are under way to sell a whole city grid square to build the development. Government landowner English Partnerships (EP) is in negotiation to sell-off a huge chunk of land on MK's western flank. The news has sparked fears that such a multi-million development would isolate the proposed new Jewish community. Council leader Cllr Isobel Wilson confirmed EP is currently in discussions with a large Jewish group from north London. She said: "There have been no discussions with the council directly as yet, but we would hold a full public consultation. "My personal view is that I prefer to see integrated communities in the interests of cohesion, unless someone can give me a very good reason otherwise. It is still very early days and I'm not sure what the exact plans are yet." Cllr Nigel Long, leader of the Labour group on Milton Keynes Council, added: "My concern would be that it goes against the whole ethos of MK and it being a traditional multi-faith, multicultural melting point. "I'm also concerned about the probity of giving a whole grid square to one organisation. "The proposed Hindu centre in Shenley Brook End is all about integration. This is all about segregation. "I've no problem with people of the Jewish faith and those already here. I'm sure a Jewish-only enclave just smacks of everything MK is not. "What we've got to try and do is to avoid ghetto-isation." An EP spokesman said: "We treat all enquiries seriously. "We have had a preliminary enquiry from a Jewish group based in north London. It is not at a detailed stage at this time. We have not entered into any agreements with the group. "If we did agree to sell land to any group it would involve a detailed agreement of terms, sale at open market value and would be subject to the local planning process." Zvi Friedman of Jewish group Reformed Synagogue said: "If this is a very orthodox group they tend to keep themselves very much to themselves."

[Similar story as above -- almost a mirror image of the segregationist Jew Klux Klan, this time in Israel.]
MK set to propose bill enabling communities for Jews only,
by Gideon Alon, Haaretz (Israel), October 11, 2004
" The Knesset presidium voted on Monday to allow National Union MK Zvi Hendel to propose a bill enabling the establishment of communities for Jews only, sparking charges of racism. If passed, the law would allow for the establishment of communities comprised of no more than 500 families "that seek to preserve the community character and will be designated for the residency of one specific people only." Hendel said the purpose of the bill was to allow for the creation of communities for Jews only."

[A hallowed memorial to Jewish racism.]
A degrading memorial,
by Alexander Yakobson, Haaretz (Israel), September 16, 2004
"In the ultra-Orthodox neighborhood of Beit Yisrael, the Jerusalem municipality has erected a memorial to the fatalities of the August 2003 terror attack on the No. 2 bus: a memorial plaque bearing the names of those who were killed. The name of one of the dead, Maria Antonia Reslas of the Philippines, was engraved separately from the others, and she was given the title "Mrs.," while the Jewish dead were awarded the title "sainted" (kadosh). "Shortly after the ceremony," the newspaper (Haaretz Hebrew edition, August 9) reports, "there was already evidence of the scratching that unknown persons had done over Reslas' name." The damage to the plaque is an ugly act of vandalism but the plaque itself, which officially declares that one of the dead is a second-class victim because she is not Jewish, is far more shameful and ugly. This is not a matter of an act by extremists. The hand hesitates to write this, but the truth must be told: The municipality of Jerusalem decided to degrade the woman who was killed out of consideration for the feelings of the public ... The mayor of the city of Jerusalem is an ultra-Orthodox politician, Uri Lupolianski, who was elected with the help of the votes of a considerable number of liberal voters ... Is it really the halakha (Jewish religious law) that necessitated the degrading inscription of the name of the woman who was killed? It is known that the halakha prohibits the burial of Jews and non-Jews together. Does this prohibition also apply to a memorial plaque? If the title "kadosh" is reserved, according to tradition, exclusively for Jews, would it not have been possible to relinquish it? And if indeed there is no possibility, according to the halakha and tradition as interpreted by the ultra-Orthodox, of mentioning Jews and non-Jews together in a dignified way, would it not have been preferable not to have posted the plaque? Are official memorial plaques a religious requirement? The truth is that this is not a matter, in this case at least, of halakhic requirements. However, this is also not merely a manifestation of insensitivity, but rather of a perception that is deeply rooted in broad circles of ultra-Orthodox society - even if it must not, of course, be attributed to every single ultra-Orthodox person. This perception refuses to accept a non-Jewish person as being of equal worth and to internalize the fact that here, in Israel, we are not a Jewish community that is concerned only for its members but rather a sovereign state that is responsible for everyone who lives in its territory. This attitude toward non-Jews has nothing to do with the Jewish-Arab conflict and the feelings of fear and hostility that it arouses; the dead woman who was treated with contempt in Jerusalem is a victim of Arab terror. Nevertheless, it is clear that this basic approach toward non-Jews has implications in the Jewish-Arab context. Public opinion surveys show that hostility toward the Arabs is stronger among the ultra-Orthodox than among other segments of the public."

[Jew$ love other Jew$. Jewish "religious day-schools" are codewords for Zionist indoctrination centers -- Judeocentric fortresses distinct and apart from public schools, multicultural universalism, and their non-Jewish neighbors.]
Jewish schools in Boston get $45m gift,
Big News Network, October 11, 2004
"Jewish day schools in the Boston area are receiving a $45 million gift from a group of local families, The Boston Globe reported Sunday. It's one of the largest amounts of money given the young religious day-school movement nationwide. The anonymous donors are giving $10 million to each of the three largest Jewish schools in the Boston area. The schools span American Judaism's theological spectrum -- Orthodox, the Reform movement and the Conservative movement. Together the three schools educate about 55 percent of the 2,800 youngsters who currently attend the 14 Jewish day schools in Greater Boston."

[Perhaps Alan Dershowitz can tell the teachers all about his published plans to torture Arabs (potential "terrorists") and the ADL can talk at length about how much they support "diversity" in their beloved apartheid Israel, for which they are a Zionist front. This shameless Zionist huckstering of the innocent is obscene. And is is INSTITUTIONALIZED in America.]
Partners Against Hate Annual Dinner in San Jose,
U.S. Newswire, October 11, 2004
"News Advisory: T he Anti-Defamation League (ADL) announces a special event: "Partners Against Hate Annual Dinner" with keynote speaker Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz. Professor Dershowitz is a world-famous civil rights activist and author of numerous books including, The Case for Israel. He will provide insight into the rising tide of anti-Semitism and ways to challenge it. Professor Dershowitz will be available for book signing at the event. The evening will recognize the winners of the IDEA (Innovative Diversity Education Achievement) Awards from 2003 and 2004. The IDEA program, made possible with the generous support of Applied Materials, recognizes and rewards teachers in the San Jose Unified School District who promote understanding and respect for diversity on campus."

[Here's the essence of Jewish identity as decreed by religious tradition: once born a Jew you can't escape it. It doesn't matter what you think or do. You're born chosen and you'll die chosen, veiled by the popular Jewish term "birthright." The omnipresent Jew Klux Klan performs Vulcan Mind Meld and doubletalk to chain down its own forever. Jewish ideology dictates that the "born Jew' is stuck in Jewish identity prison, and there's no way out.]
Can I stop being Jewish?,
by Rabbi Aron Moss, Israel National News, October 13, 2004
"Question: Although I was raised in a traditional home, was brissed and barmitzvad (sorry about these spellings), I have never had any faith or "religious" belief. I am now aged 34, and would describe myself as an atheist. I have no wish to be buried in a Jewish cemetery (and my Will will also make this clear) and have married a non-Jew in a civil ceremony. My question is, can I consider myself officially non-Jewish, by my effective opting-out, or do I need some sort of form or dispensation to be officially no longer Jewish? Many thanks for your help with what is perhaps an unusual question.
Answer: I would like to help you, but I feel there's nothing I can do.
According to your question, you have done everything possible to negate your Jewishness: in practice you do not keep Jewish tradition; in belief you are an atheist; in family life you have married a non-Jew and thus won't have Jewish children; and even in death you are determined not to be buried in a Jewish cemetery. One would think that all this would be enough to confirm your "un-Jewishness". But no! For some reason, you are still unsatisfied: you still feel Jewish! So much so, you feel you need official dispensation! And so, being an atheist, who do you turn to to solve this problem? A doctor? A psychiatrist? The civil celebrant that married you? No! You turn to a rabbi! I'm reminded of the child who ran away from home, but ended up just going around and around the block because his parents told him never to cross the road by himself. I'm sorry, Edward. There is nothing more you can do. You are as Jewish as Moses, Ariel Sharon and the Chief Rabbi of Wales. In fact, it seems that being Jewish is the most dominant (albeit in a negative way) factor of your personality. It is even influencing the place you want to be buried! (Why would an atheist care about where they are buried?) Edward, Jewishness is not a belief, a feeling, a conviction or a lifestyle. It is who we are. We can either celebrate it or fight against it. But it will always be there. So why not celebrate it?"

[Why do Jews feel so guilty? Because they know their neurotic tribal self-absorption and victim fetishism isn't -- honestly -- much to champion. Murdering Palestinians in the name of world Jewry isn't so swell either. Counting piles of dollars on the bed eventually leaves you spiritually wasted. And you can only hump a porno movie so long before even that becomes boring. Come on. Who in his right mind can believe there's been hostility towards Jewry everywhere since Day One FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON? No one can fool himself like that. At least not in private, when you're staring at yourself in the mirror, naked except for the gold chain around your neck. Jews are always banging their chests about how great they are because, deep in their heart, they know the truth lies elsewhere. "Being Jewish" today is an ideology; it's largely a tortured psychological condition of rage, shame, and, yes, guilt. You can get your jollies by conning all the brainwashed goyim to the end of time but it's a lot harder to con yourself at your marrow. Jewish neurosis, rage, shame, obsession, and vain materialism is leading the world to Hell. Jewish guilt is rooted in the denied realization that the racist community that claims them is ethically fraudulent. At root, the Jew senses he/she should break the communal chain that binds them to the self-absorbed nuthouse and become a Buddhist or Palestinian. Liberation. Finally. Let my people go. Really. OK then. Get off the couch, Mr. Freud. Put the ladies underwear back on your head if you like, but that'll be $900 for this two-minute session.]
Why Do We Feel So Guilty?
by Allen Salkin, Heeb magazine, (online excerpt from July 2004 issue)
"Go ahead and don’t read this article. That’s fine. You spent your money on Heeb’s “guilt issue,” but why would you want to read the cover story? Read the colorful sidebars and go watch some television instead. It’s not like I spent countless hours writing this piece or anything. Still reading?
The cudgel is called guilt, chosen ones. But you already know that. Jewish guilt. It’s a thing we’re famous for. Like an aversion to paying retail. As in: the reason you spent a recent Sunday traveling an hour and a half to spend time with someone who bores the hell out of you and starts every sentence with, “You know what you should really do is...” You’re sitting in that airless living room on a scratchy sofa because this person is related to you distantly or was very nice once, a long time ago, to your grandparents. You’re nodding, hoping that the movement of your head will keep you awake, and you’re thinking that what you should really be doing is what you want to be doing—hanging around your apartment in an old t-shirt, drinking ice wine, burning mix CDs and having slow, highly experimental sex with your significant other. Other than seasonal allergies, guilt is often considered the greatest plague to afflict the Hebrew nation. But it may not be that simple. While guilt is still routinely vilified as a demon that needs to be permanently exorcised from the Jewish heart, the news-you-can-use is that in the correct dosage, guilt can be a glorious gadfly, as invigorating to the Jewish spirit as the rush of being led to a well-situated restaurant table. Perfecting the dosage, however, can be a bitch."

[JTR contributor's comment: "More parallel government for Jews":]
JA Establishes Agency to Assist Jews in Case of Terrorist Attacks,
Maariv (Israsel), October 17, 2004
"Terrorist attacks against Jewish targets and the growing threat of terrorism worldwide have prompted the Jewish Agency to establish a special international coordination apparatus that would assist Jewish communities who would be a target of a terror attack. “Today’s threats against Jews are worldwide”, JA Chairman Salai Meridor told members of the Knesset’s Immigration Absorption Committee. “The level of threat on Jewish communities abroad has increased significantly in recent years, and that requires our preparation”, he added. The decision to set up the apparatus was reached after the bombings in Istanbul last November, in which six Jews were killed in attacks on the city’s synagogues. According to Meridor, the local Jewish community then turned to the JA and requested assistance, among other things in security. Meridor noted that a similar apparatus has already been established in the US. He says it is coordinated with the JA and other agencies in Israel. “The responsibility for the well-being of Jews in the Diaspora is placed, first and foremost on the local governments”, the JA chairman stressed. “But in light of the growing threat of terrorism and the surge in terror warnings, many Jewish communities turn to us and ask for assistance. A need has risen to provide solutions to these communities, and it will be answered by this apparatus”.

[The rise of Jewish religio-fascism.]
Return of the Zealots and Sicaari. With the help of rabbis, self-appointed spokesmen for the Holy One, the French Le Pen option is accelerating right under the nose of a nation that thinks it can't happen here,
by Gideon Samet, Haaretz (Israel), October 20, 2004
"The prime minister's one and only political plan is stuck - not because he doesn't want to carry it out, not because he doesn't have a public majority, not because it isn't vital. The disengagement plan is stuck because Israeli politics, in a drawn-out and destructive process, is deteriorating rightward. A quarter of the Knesset is extreme right. With the help of rabbis, self-appointed spokesmen for the Holy One, the French Le Pen option is accelerating right under the nose of a nation that thinks it can't happen here. Attempt to pass the plan is therefore in itself a critical test case to find out if the country has gone crazy. If the plan is defeated, or its implementation is shelved, nothing afterward will stop Israel collapsing into the very worst condition. This would be a resounding victory for extremism and nationalist demagoguery, for messianism and xenophobia, which would destroy any chance of dealing with the war with the Palestinians. That quarter of the Knesset that wants the conflict to last forever could swamp parliament, because outside the gates there are more political barbarians. More rebels from the ruling party will join the Likud rebels, the NRP, Yisrael B'Aliyah, and the National Union, as will the pliant reeds of Shas and United Torah Judaism. They will be more than a third of the parliament - and new elections might strengthen them. In the last elections many people refused to see the very same thing the Europeans recognize among themselves as the rise of a quasi-fascist, separatist process, one that hates everything it sees, from damage to nationalist holy sites all the way to homosexuality. That process is capturing positions even without elections. The meeting point between Israeli fundamentalism, dressed up as sacrosanct patriotism, and its Muslim twin is a great national threat that meets the strangest apathy here. The details of the ultimate disaster are well-known. More blood. Lots of blood. Becoming an international pariah, as predicted in the Foreign Ministry's own report. Don't let the false prophets of the nationalist and religious Le Penism spread tall tales - it is not disengagement that is threatening to destroy the Third Commonwealth. A horrifying national crisis has already taken root because of the rising influence of the Zealots and Siccari of our time."

[Tit for tat: If banning "everything" French is kosher, by damn so is banning everything Jewish. Oui, oui! As long as Jewish bigotry and tribalism is allowed free reign, it'll walk over everyone. Seriously folks, this little news article should be pasted in bright red neon on every billboard in France.]
American Board of Rabbis blasts France over Arafat,
Big News Network, November 1, 2004   
"In an unprecedented and extraordinary attack on France, the American Board of Rabbis has demanded a worldwide ban on French products. The New York-based association which promotes Jewish unity abroad voted unanimously to call on Jewish people around the world to boycott everything French: goods, services, and even the language. The board is outraged at France's providing hospital treatment for Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, who it describes as a 'master terrorist', responsible for 'the murder of thousands of infants, children, women, and men.' Association President, Rabbi Mordechai Yitzchok Friedman, said 'France’s harboring of Arafat, is consistent with its tradition of anti-Semitism and anti-American activities.” The Rabbi said the hosting of Yasser Arafat was an act of terrorism and was in breach of the U.S.'s Global Anti-Semitism Bill, under which the U.S. State Department is to monitor global anti-Semitism and annually rate countries on their treatment of Jews. Rabbi Friedman continued his extraordinary attack by referring to the Book of Genesis, Chapter 12, Verse 3, claiming, 'God will curse those who curse the Jewish People, and so shall the people and country of France be cursed.”

[U.S. mass media Judeocentrism laid bare:]
Rights Group Blasts U.S. Media,
Al-Jazeera, November 15, 2004
"A rights group has criticised some US media organisations for allowing racist and hate-filled speech during its coverage of Palestinian Yasir Arafat's death. The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) said it was deeply concerned with "the alarming hostility expressed by media commentators towards the Palestinian people in the wake of the death of Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat", a statement said. The ADC said US networks MSNBC and CNN both broadcast hostile commentary regarding Palestinians. Don Imus, of the Imus in the Morning programme aired on weekends on MSNBC, referred to Arafat as a "rat" and called him "stinky" with "beady-eyes". Imus also said that "all Palestinians look like him". The racist comments continued with one of his guests who described the Palestinians attending the funeral as "animals" and joked about their hygiene. "They're dropping soap from the helicopters," the guest laughed. Good riddance Arafat Also on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough, presenter of Scarborough Country, began his programme by declaring: "Some are calling Yasir Arafat's passing a tragedy. He's actually the father of modern terrorism. Good riddance." This was, after all, the man who invented modern terrorism in the Middle East and by extension was the godfather of September 11." Among the guests on the show was the Palestinian Authority representative to the United States, Hasan Abd al-Rahman, who while attempting to express his view, was interrupted by shouts of "where's the money?" by Scarborough in reference to international aid." .... The ADC also said that CNN was guilty of one-sided, hostile comments.Plans call currently for Yasir Arafat to be buried in his compound in Ram Allah, which will eventually be turned into some kind of shrine. Maybe they'll put a sign out front for the Palestinian people, that reads: 'Here lays the body of the thief who robbed you blind'," said Jack Cafferty on CNN's morning programme, American Morning. "Comments such as the ones listed can only be regarded as an overt incitement to ethnic hatred of the Palestinians," the ADC said in a statement. "Surely the denigration of an ethnic group, a people who have been living under an ongoing 37-year Israeli military occupation, constitutes a violation of any system of journalistic standards.

Introduction of professor Kevin MacDonald,
by Sam G. Dickson, (The 2004 Jack London Prize), Occidental Quarterly
"Unfortunately, setting aside the matter of the general unavailability of anti-semitica, most of such books are characterized by a tone so hateful and polemical as to impair their usefulness. There are exceptions now and then such as the book by the Roman Catholic writer Hilaire Belloc entitled simply The Jews and Anti-Semitism by Bernard Lazare, himself a Jew.  But such thoughtful and restained books are rare to the point of being almost non-existent.  In contrast to “anti-semitica” the literature on the issue from the Jewish perspective is overwhelming in size and in distribution.  Thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of books, a veritable unending river of articles in newspapers, magazines and journals as well as incessant Hollywood movies have been produced setting forth the Jewish or philo-semitic explanations of the relationship between Jews and Non-Jews. Furthermore, not only are such works generally available in our society, they are virtually forced upon us. One thinks of the books which appear at regular periods funded by groups like the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith which achieve massive distribution by being first offered for sale and widely promoted, then remaindered and finally inserted by gift into practically every library in America including every high school, college and municipal library.  Examples of such books spring readily to mind: Undercover and The Plotters by Roy Carlson, The Troublemakers, Danger on the Right, The Paranoid Style and so on. The thesis promoted by the literature of philo-semitica—and this thesis is the reigning orthodoxy of the establishment in our country and every other European country—is quite simple.  That thesis is that blame for the bitter history of the relationship of Jews and Europeans lies 100% on the side of the Non-Jews, that Jews are an utterly blameless people (“the most innocent people in history” according to Eli Wiesel), that Non-Jews hate and persecute Jews for absolutely no reason whatsoever except the intrinsic wickedness and evil of Gentiles, that no action or behavior on the part of the Jews has ever contributed in the slightest way to the unhappy relationship so often found between Jews and Gentiles.This is their explanation of why for a period of twenty five centuries or more Jews have often been the targets of hatred, anger, pogroms and expulsions at the hands of every people amongst whom Jews have lived from the Greeks and Romans of the pre-Christian era of antiquity through all subsequent time throughout all of Europe including virtually every nation of Christian Europe such as the England of Edward II, the Spain of 1492, Poland, the Germany of relatively modern times and Russia.  Everybody but the Jew is out of step. Such an “explanation” can only be characterized as a libel on humanity.  This silly, one-sided, biased and intrinsically impossible thesis is promoted by authority in our society, accepted by the vast majority of people and those who dissent from it are frequently the targets of official and semi-official harassment and persecution.  Indeed, as Joe Sobran once trenchantly observed, we don’t even have a vocabulary with which to deal with this subject...and other such subjects.  We have the word “anti-semitism” to describe the hatred of the Gentile for the Jew but no word exists in our language for the hatred of the Jew for the Christian. As I said before, there is virtually a void of sensible, restrained literature on the subject. And into that void has stridden our intrepid and clear-reasoned honoree, Dr. Kevin MacDonald. And at the most appropriate and suitable time of our post September 11 world. Indeed, one may wonder if it not were said correctly that “the hour and the man have met” or should we say “the hour and the scholar?” For three generations our country’s infatuation with the State of Israel and its role as the enabler of Zionist brutality against the Arab world provoked hatred and rage. Over and over again we have witnessed the spectacle of the votes in the United Nations condemning some latest Israeli outraged—votes in which the entire world even including Britain and the Western European countries has voted to condemn and only two—the United States and Israel have voted to condone such atrocities. Was it a surprise when after almost 60 years of such events the United States became the target of Arab terrorists, as we were warned by so many people including among them the late Alfred Lillienthal, himself a Jew?  But immediately the “leaders” of the American people assured us that despite the clear statements of the terrorists themselves, we were attacked because “they hate our freedom.” No, we all know better. The 3,000 or so Americans who died in the twin towers in New York died precisely because of our support of Israel no matter how atrocious its behavior. Despite the damage control efforts on this subject, the terrorist attack and the present situation will eventually force some degree of consideration of this issue from a vantage point other than the silly, preposterous “everyone is to blame but the Jews” theory. And that is why the appearance of Dr. MacDonald’s trilogy could not be more timely, allowing its readers to look at the history of our Two Thousand Five Hundred Years Together objectively. The core of those three volumes can be concisely stated by the observation that the key to Jewish survival throughout the long history of their diaspora is that they are—and must remain—adversarial to any society in which they live."

Can the Jewish Model Help the West Survive?,
by Kevin MacDonald (The 2004 Jack London Literary Prize),
Occidental Quarterly
"In mobilizing a sense of ethnic interest, Europeans are at a very serious disadvantage compared to Jews. A very striking feature of Jewish groups is their intense ethnocentrism—what I call hyper-ethnocentrism. I have provided a great many examples of this in my writing. Jewish ethnocentrism is a critical component of their success because it is of fundamental importance for their ability to construct highly focused ethnic networks in politics, the arts, the media, and the social sciences—all the critical centers of power in the modern world. Perhaps the main focus of my writing has been simply to describe how these networks operate and the extraordinary effects that they have achieved, from creating the culture of critique and, more recently, the culture of the Holocaust to the present effort of the United States to transform the politics of the Middle East in the interests of Israel. We should not forget that the great wellspring of modern Jewish populations was the religious fundamentalist Jewish populations of Eastern Europe in the 19^th century. These fundamentalists passionately rejected all the assimilatory pressures coming from surrounding governments. Well into the twentieth century the vast majority of Eastern European Jews could not speak the languages of the non-Jews living around them. Corresponding to this intense ingroup feeling were attitudes that non-Jews were less than human. “As one famous rabbi put it, ‘A Gentile does not have a heart, although he has an organ that resembles a heart.’ ” This hotbed of intense ethnocentrism was the origin of all the important modern Jewish movements, including political radicalism and Zionism. Many of the early Zionists had clearly articulated racialist views in which Jews were a unique and superior race. A good example is Vladimir Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky was an important early Zionist and he is the spiritual leader of the Likud party in Israel and its leaders—people like Sharon, Begin, and Shamir. He is also a hero to many American neoconservatives. I just recently found out that neocon patriarch Leo Strauss was a follower of Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky was deeply ethnocentric, believing that Jews were shaped by their long history as a desert people and that establishment of Israel as a Jewish state would allow the natural genius of the Jewish race to flourish, stating, for example: “These natural and fundamental distinctions embedded in the race are impossible to eradicate, and are continually being nurtured by the differences in soil and climate.”  What is striking is that virtually the entire organized Jewish community in the United States is allied to the Likud party and the settler movement in Israel whose leaders openly idolize Jabotinsky ... [Jewish/Israeli media mogul Chaim] Saban is far from unique. For example, in Canada, Israel Asper, executive chairman of CanWest Global Communications Corp. used his media empire to promote pro-Likud policies and has punished journalists for any deviation from its strong pro-Israel editorial policies. In my writing I have tried to show that Jewish involvement in the media has influenced content - that the media in the United States have reflected Jewish attitudes on multi-culturalism and all things Jewish, especially Israel, and negative attitudes on Christianity, European ethnocentrism, European culture and especially the culture of the American South and Midwest."

[Imagine a headline in a U.S. newspaper that said "White Wives are Black Husband's Prey." First, after your initial shock and realization that it wasn't a joke, you'd wonder if the Ku Klux Klan had taken over. And then you'd wonder if the newspaper's building had been burned down yet by mobs of anti-racist protesters. Would the newspaper also be driven out of business tomorrow and its leaders put on some kind of "hate crime" trial? In Israel, it is common parlance to print stuff below like this because the very principle of an expressly Jewish state is racist to the core and there's a large, hating, racist Jewish audience -- worldwide, including in America -- for this. "Arabs are savages, beasts, and they're polluting our Jewish maidens." Here below is exhibit 12 million of incessant Jewish hypocrisy. In America, Jews are in the vanguard of making sure a headline like this never sees the light of day. These same hypocritical American Jews turn a blind eye to endemic Jewish racism from the apartheid Israeli state.]
Jewish Wives Are Arab Husbands' Prey,
by Mayaan Jaffe, Israel National News, November 22, 2004
"The stories of pain and torture chill every bone in my body. Trembling, I sit before half-a-dozen women in the Lev L'Achim rehabilitation center for battered women, learning about how they lost their independence, lost their happiness, lost their lives. These women have been rescued from the misery of life in their husbands' Arab villages ... This is where Lev L'Achim comes in. Members of the anti-assimilation division of Lev L'Achim launch clandestine missions to rescue [Jewish] women who are trapped in their husbands' Arab villages. Once liberated, the girls are generally brought to the organization's unmarked hostel where a security camera monitors the electrically locked door. At the hostel, the women undergo psychological treatment and counseling. They are given the opportunity to begin new lives. But the transition from living in an Arab village to living in the hostel is not an easy one. Hostel director Chaya Stashevsky says the women are in constant conflict. Sometimes, the woman thinks she still harbors affection for her former Arab husband. After all, she has lived with him for who knows how many years; she has had children with him. "We don't have everything at the hostel. We give a lot of love, but their time with us is seen as temporary. The anxiety of what awaits a woman when she leaves this shelter sometimes psychologically paralyzes her," Mrs. Stashevsky explains.Still, says Shtigletz, the results are generally positive. Most of the women gain independence. Lev L'Achim helps them find and marry good Jewish men with whom they can start afresh. "In the end, we get these women to a place where they can live their lives according to Torah law…" he says. Thank God for Lev L'Achim."

[Hypocritical, totalitarian, self-serving, doublethink Jewish moralists are beyond disgusting. Jews like this bigot CREATED Arafat's Hell on this earth, and they're intent upon broadening it for all the rest of us in a world apocalypse for apartheid Israel. The thoughts below are shameful and pathetic -- those of a demented, vindictive child.]
Is it OK to hope anyone is in Hell?,
by Dennis Prager, Jewish World Review, November 30, 2004
"The death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat raises an interesting and significant question: Is it morally and theologically acceptable to hope anyone goes to hell? That was my first reaction to the death of the Godfather of modern terrorism. But I recognize that many people, including many who share my moral assessment of Arafat, might reject such a reaction, let alone publicly express it. But there is a good case to be made for hoping that Yasser Arafat now finds himself in hell. In order to do so, three issues need to be addressed: First, is there a hell? Can rational people believe in such a thing? Second, if there is a hell, does Arafat merit going there? And can any of us mortals judge a person worthy of hell? Third, if there is a hell, is it acceptable to hope someone who we believe merits it goes there?"

[Jewish self-reeling neurosis is colossal. Jewish anger, rage, shame, and guilt have become the very essences of Jewish identity, not the "Torah." ALL MORAL RESPONSIBLITY FALLS BY THE WAYSIDE IN THE MODERN JEWISH PSYCHE OBSESSED WITH PRESERVATION AGAINST ALLEGED FUTURE HOLOCAUSTS. Nothing else matters, but tribal self-defense. Nothing. Not ethics, or morals, or compassion, or anything. The perpetual Jewish War Machine must ward off the omnipresent "anti-Semitic" non-Jew, and do whatever it takes to do it. Period. Hence is born barbarous, immoral, corrupt Israel and today's world Jewry that will do anything to to hand another dirty bullet to it. In this article below, here we have the usual Jewish displacement of responsibility, and blame, for Jewish collective history. The usual iron-wrought DENIAL. Everyone else is always evil, never Jews. So a Jew yells out that "Palestinians are vermin," and our offended Jewish author below explains where that comes from in the Jewish soul, and why you've got to cut a little slack for her fellow Jews to vent their polluted, black spleens. This kind of article, like so many, is completely sickening for many reasons. The "Holocaust" was reinvented in 1967 because of enormous JEWISH effort (not an imperialistic American conspiracy to exploit POOR, POOR Jews again and again and again and again and ...), psycho-socially linked to expressly Judeocentric obsessions during the Israeli-Arab war at the time. Our extensive research on the obsessive creation of the "Holocaust Industry" in America (thanks to massive Jewish/Zionist efforts) is examined here.]
The Wrath of the Jews,
by Liat Weingart, Z-Net, November 29, 2004
"I’m in the living room of a family friend. The subject changes from yoga to Israel-Palestine, and I tell her that I think Americans need to change their foreign policy towards Israel. She says, “in what way, so that the Arabs will throw the Jews into the sea?” It takes four minutes of back and forth for the conversation to degenerate. She finally says, “Look, what I have to say isn’t pretty, but I’m not afraid. I’m going to say it anyways. The Palestinians are nothing but vermin. They make trouble in every country they live in. Even the other Arab countries don’t want them.” I take a deep breath. Then I realize, I’ve heard that sentence before, only with “Jews” instead of “Palestinians.” “Jews are vermin. They make trouble in every country they live in.” I’ve heard that before. And it’s breaking my heart that it’s coming out of her mouth. Earlier in the evening, we were sitting at dinner, and I asked her about why she left Poland. She said that anti-Semitism in Poland was extremely severe when she was growing up. She says that there was an outburst of anti-Semitism in the mid-sixties, and especially after the June 1967 War. Her husband, also a Polish Jew, looks up from his food and says abruptly, “Hey, why are you talking about this? Please change the subject.” At dinner, everyone is more than willing to oblige with their Israeli army stories, about how the Arabs want to throw the Jews in to the sea, but no one wants to go there when it comes to talking about how they were hurt by anti-Semitism. My mother has told me only a few stories of what it was like for her to grow up as a Jew in the Soviet Union. The most famous is how she took a broom to the head of a guy in school who persistently called her a “dirty Jew.” It’s the story with a happy ending. Justice was done ... Despite the enormity of the Holocaust Museum in Washington and various monuments to the Holocaust in the US, when you really get down to it, listening to Jews cry about how their families were annihilated, how they were beaten and targeted, is not a favorite American past-time ... The Holocaust Museum in Washington is the largest in the world and in the center of Washington, DC. Many of us think that Americans have heard more than enough about Jewish suffering. But the truth is that the Holocaust Museum and other forms of official recognition of Jewish suffering haven’t addressed anti-Jewish oppression at all ... The reason is simple – justice for Native Americans runs counter to the interests of the American ruling elite, whose wealth and power is built upon the legacy of that genocide. Before 1967, it didn’t fit into American strategic interests to talk about Jews or their history of oppression, particularly in the same sentence as the word “justice.” After 1967, when Israel defeated Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, and conquered the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, Sinai and the Golan Heights, the US government decided that Israel could serve as a surrogate for US interests in the Middle East. 1967 was the year when the US discovered Israel, and it was the year when the Holocaust was “remembered.” The discovery of Israel happened as selectively as the remembering of the Holocaust. The US discovered Israel as a military ally, not as a country with ordinary people, and so US aid to Israel reflected that. Most US aid to Israel, including economic aid, has been spent for expenses related to purchasing military equipment from the US. In order to justify that strategic relationship in moral terms, a new history of the Holocaust was “remembered.” One dominant narrative of the Holocaust is that Jews were led like sheep to the slaughter to the gas chambers, that they alone were murdered, and that the event of their annihilation had no precedent in history and no event in the present can compare to the Holocaust. The logical moral to the story for Jews is that we are alone in the world – no one understands our suffering because no one has experienced anything similar; we can only rely on ourselves for self-defense; we will be ever-vigilant, for danger lurks around every corner. And the logical moral to the story for Americans is that Jews need a strong Israel, and because the Jews were victims of the unspeakable, it’s our duty to arm Israel to the teeth. There are pieces of truth in the dominant narrative of the Holocaust ... The result of the endless repetition of that dominant Holocaust narrative is that many Jews feel abandoned and isolated, and very, very angry. We walk into these monuments and museums, and we cry and scream. We walk out and feel empty. Somewhere inside of us, we get a creepy feeling that justice was never done. I think that we feel that way because no one is listening to what we went through. You ask, “How can you say that no one is listening when the US government has a special department specifically set up to memorialize the Holocaust? When the Holocaust Museum in Washington is the largest in the world? When documentaries about the Holocaust and films about the Holocaust receive public acclaim and Academy Awards? Americans are listening to the story that they are being sold, one that serves the interests of a militant US foreign policy towards Israel."

[Imagine if a news host declared that Jews should "all" be killed because they're "all stinking animals." What would happen to that person? Reverse roles. In real life, a Jew, Sid Rosenberg, has said the same about Palestinians. What will happen to him? Probably a small reprimand because he's Jewish and his great uncle or someone survived the Holocaust. The climate of anti-Arab hate is festering everywhere. And Canada's stupid "hate crime" laws aren't designed to prosecute Jews; they're designed to protect them -- a politically active power elite -- from criticism. What crazed climate has been created by the Western Jewish Lobby and the Zionist seizure of American foreign policy?]
Probe here over aired Arab slurs. Arafat mourners derided on MSNBC,
by Antonia Zerbisias, Toronto Star, November 30, 2004
"The all-news MSNBC, which recently got the go-ahead for unrestricted access to Canada's digital dial, may have run afoul of our hate laws when its Imus In The Morning advocated dropping a bomb on Palestinians to "kill 'em all." Both the RCMP and the federal broadcast watchdog are on the case, investigating complaints from some two dozen Canadians. They include Paul Jay, best known as the independent producer behind CBC Newsworld's recently cancelled counterSpin. "I watched (Imus) and immediately I was outraged," he told me yesterda. Morning jock Don Imus, whose syndicated shock-talk radio show is simulcast on MSNBC, was probably just joking when he and his crew made racist, derogatory remarks during coverage of Yasser Arafat's funeral on Nov. 12. But many Americans, and obviously a few Canadians, weren't laughing when they caught this exchange between Imus, his sports anchor Sid Rosenberg and their producer Bernard McGuirk over images of the crowds mourning the death of the Palestinian leade.
IMUS: They're (Palestinians) eating dirt and that fat pig wife (Suha Arafat) of his is living in Paris.
ROSENBERG: They're all brainwashed, though. That's what it is. And they're stupid to begin with, but they're brainwashed now. Stinking animals. They ought to drop the bomb right there, kill 'em all right now.
McGUIRK: You can just imagine standing there.
ROSENBERG: Oh, the stench.
IMUS: Well, the problem is that we have Andrea (Mitchell, NBC foreign correspondent) there. We don't want anything to happen to her.
ROSENBERG: Oh, she's got to get out. Just warn Andrea, get out, and then drop the bomb, kill everybody.
McGUIRK: It's like the worst Woodstock.
ROSENBERG: Look at this. Look at these animals. Animals! ... (For transcripts and video, go to http://www.mediamatters.org ) If it turns out that the Imus show broke Canadian laws — and advocating the death of an ethnic group certainly qualifies — then somebody, either from the cable and satellite companies who carry the channel, or Rogers and Shaw Cable, who jointly hold the licence for MSNBC Canada, may face a prison sentence of up to five years. But Jan Innes, vice-president of Rogers Communications, told me yesterday that she wasn't even aware of the investigation: "We didn't get a single complaint." ...In fact, in the case of the Arabic-language Al-Jazeera, hate speech against Jews got it effectively banned in Canada even before it was launched here. After intense lobbying by community groups, the channel got the go-ahead for Canadian carriage last July, but with so many restrictions that no Canadian distributor will pick it up."