top
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: San Francisco | Racial Justice
Chron Zionist Smear Piece: SFSU Left - Hateful, Intolerant, Racist
by reader
Tuesday Dec 14th, 2004 7:24 PM
This would appear to be yet another Zionist smear piece against those at SFSU who stand up for the rights of Arab students. I've been a longtime student at SFSU and have witnessed and participated in rallies in which Arab students were smeared by Zionist professors and Hillell students, then spread by Chron writers who - for whatever reason - believe that only one side is ever to blame, and that police must protect only one side, because the other side is made up of . . . criminals? Apparently, for why else would the other side need a police escort? Most guys in Hillel could easily knock me to the ground, but because I stood with the Palestinian students, I was to be feared and defended against by a line of police, when no one had ever touched anyone else. And no one did. This is the 'threatening environment' that we at SFSU are smeared with because two sides cannot be treated equally, just as in the middle east, where children are murdered in broad daylight by military soldiers . . . because they are a threat. Just as we are. 100 lb glasses wearing white women - a threat. Scarf wearing dark eyed women holding a sign against occupation - a threat. Nader campaign organizing ISO white guy - a threat. Chemistry major Iranian guy who smokes - a threat. Older Jewish man from off campus holding a sign about 'camel jockeys' and screaming insults at us - no threat. Afterall, he needs police protection from us because he's Jewish, doesn't he? That's the sick aspect of all this - no one comes away normal in the end.
OPINION: SFSU's Legacy Of Intolerance
Cinnamon Stillwell
Tuesday, December 14, 2004

San Francisco State University has been in the spotlight lately, and the picture that has emerged is not a flattering one.

Following last month's nationwide elections, members of the SFSU chapter of the College Republicans were confronted by an angry mob simply for setting up a table and handing out political literature. Members of the International Socialist Organization, the General Union of Palestinian Students and others surrounded the Republican students, shouting at them to "get out" of SFSU.

After trying to provoke the Republican students, four Middle Eastern women claimed that they had been the victims of racism and physical aggression. Although the exact details are still being disputed by the various parties, police reports and eyewitness accounts appear to back up the College Republicans. It seems that free political expression is no longer welcome at SFSU, at least not if one is espousing unpopular views.

A question arises: How did such a threatening environment become associated with a campus located in one of the most liberal and tolerant cities in the nation? The truth is that SFSU has a reputation for intolerance that goes back at least 10 years. In this case, Republican students, clearly a minority at SFSU, were the targets. But in the past, such animosity was directed mostly at Jewish students or those seen as supporting Israel. Jews at SFSU have been spat on, called names and physically attacked, as well as censured by the administration for defending themselves, even as their attackers went unpunished.

The case of Tatiana Menaker, a Russian Jewish emigré and former SFSU student, is an example of the latter indignity. After committing the "crime" of responding verbally to another student's anti-Semitic epithets during a 2002 rally, she found herself persecuted by the administration.

Pulled into a kangaroo court, threatened with expulsion and ordered by the university to perform 40 hours of community service (but specifically not for a Jewish organization), Menaker was later exonerated after seeking legal assistance from the Students for Academic Freedom and the local Jewish Community Relations Council. But the damage was done.

During my time as a student at SFSU (Class of 1996), I was given a preview of things to come. In 1994, the Student Union Governing Board commissioned a mural to honor the late Black Muslim revolutionary Malcolm X. Designed by members of the Pan Afrikan Student Union and painted by artist Senay Dennis (known also as Refa-1), the finished product was problematic, to say the least. Along with an image of Malcolm X, the not-so-subtle symbols of Stars of David juxtaposed with dollar signs, skulls and crossbones, and the words "African blood," had been painted. Despite the obvious allusion to anti-Semitic blood libels of old, Pan Afrikan Student Union members claimed the symbols represented Malcolm X's alleged opposition to Israel, not to Jews, as if that was some comfort.

Predictably, Jewish students were outraged, as were others truly interested in promoting tolerance on campus. African-American English Professor Lois Lyles made her opposition known by trying to paint "Stop Fascism" on the wall next to the mural. After attempting to paint over the mural on several occasions, only to find the cover-up paint removed by protesters, the administration was forced to take more permanent action. And, on May 26, 1994, under the guard of police in riot gear, the mural was sandblasted, only to be replaced with the kinder, gentler version seen on campus today.

Being Jewish, I was shaken by the incident, but, not yet well versed in the growing anti-Semitism in America's universities, I chalked it up to fringe politics and moved on. Little did I know that this was only the beginning of what would become a familiar scenario at SFSU and beyond. As the Anti-Defamation League puts it, "On campuses across the country, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has led to demonstrations and activism by pro-Palestinian groups fueled by hatred of Israel and Jews."

Of course, some will automatically object to the characterization of anti-Zionist or anti-Israel sentiment as anti-Semitism. This is a popular refrain among those who are the principal offenders these days. Indeed, sometimes it's difficult to tell the difference between the sort of conspiracy-theory-driven rhetoric emanating from the Arab media and the language of many self-described "progressives" in the West. Both use terms such as apartheid, racism and, worst of all, Nazism to characterize Israel's policies toward Palestinians. Yet none of them accurately describe the tiny country that has been fighting for its existence since its inception, and to misuse such loaded terms devalues them of meaning.

But let's just say, for the sake of argument, that people who indulge in such hateful speech have legitimate criticisms of Zionism. At what point does political opposition to Zionism become an excuse for discrimination? According to the pro-Israel advocacy group Stand with Us, Jewish students at SFSU have been "denied positions in student government because they were 'Zionists,'" and "funding was denied to Hillel events because it was [a] 'Zionist' [group]." These injustices occurred in addition to charges of anti-Zionist sentiment on the part of some SFSU professors, despite the potential for intimidating Jewish students.

The flyers hung all over campus in April 2002 displaying a Palestinian baby on a soup-can label and the words "Palestinian Children Meat, slaughtered according to Jewish rites under American license" hardly constitute legitimate criticism. Then there was a "Peace in the Middle East" rally, organized by the SFSU Hillel chapter on May 7, 2002. This seemingly innocuous event was beset by pro-Palestinian protesters bellowing such enlightened statements as "Zionists off the campus now," "Go back to Germany, where they knew how to deal with you" and "Hitler should have finished the job." In fact, the counterprotesters became so frenzied that Jewish students had to be escorted off campus under guard by San Francisco Police Department personnel. Is such blatant bigotry considered acceptable behavior when its targets are the "dreaded" Zionists?

Even SFSU President Robert Corrigan seems unable to comprehend the true root of the problem. A statement by him about the issue, "It is not animus towards Jews, but there are strong anti-Zionist feelings on this campus," demonstrates a worrisome blind spot. And Sheldon Axler, dean of the SFSU College of Science, described slogans such as "Down with Zionism" and "Israel is a terrorist state" as "legitimate political expression." Anti-Zionism has indeed achieved a level of acceptance at SFSU and at universities throughout America and western Europe.

Never mind the fact that to be "anti-Zionist" is to oppose the existence of Israel. What else besides anti-Semitism explains the single-minded obsession with a country the size of New Jersey? Israel's alleged human rights offenses are given disproportionate attention, even as countless other nations commit crimes more heinous than anything seen in the Middle East's only democracy. Equality for women, gay rights, democratic institutions, tolerance of various religions and ethnicities are ignored in favor of the misguided view that Israel is the root of all evil in the world.

Increasingly, the myth that if the Middle East conflict were solved (i.e., if Israel were to cease to exist as a Jewish state), Islamic terrorism would come to a halt has made its way into many liberal and some conservative circles -- Pat Buchanan and other isolationists come to mind. But the fact is that Jews were hated before they had a state, and now they're hated for having a state. The very persecution that led Jews to flee Europe after World War II and help rebuild the nation of Israel is now directed at them for having survived the Holocaust. The insistence that Israel stop defending itself against Islamic terrorism also reeks of hypocrisy. Could it be that the very reason people despise Israel so much is because it's a Jewish state? No other explanation holds up under examination.

As for SFSU, it remains to be seen whether the administration will exorcise the cancer of extremism on campus or allow it to fester. While pontificating about "free speech," Corrigan and the SFSU administration continue to underestimate the growing radicalism in their own backyard. As a result, what began with attacks on Jewish students has now spread outward to any students who don't share the liberal politics of the majority.

As we have seen throughout history, Jews are the canary in the coal mine. Those who dismiss their persecution often become targets themselves down the line. Until this reality hits home, SFSU's legacy of intolerance is likely to continue.

Cinnamon Stillwell is a San Francisco writer. She can be reached cinnamons [at] earthlink.net.
Well Cinnamon must be right, because SFSU was the same campus -- back in the late '90's -- where one Laurie Zolith, then the head of Jewish Studies, said that THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA was imminently on the verge of another HOLOCAUST!!

THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE let Cinnamon Stillwell describe herself as just "a San Francisco writer". That would be like letting David Duke submit a guest opinion piece about how white people are oppressed on American campuses, and then letting him get away with describing himself as just "a citizen of Lousiana".

This is more pro-Israel/Zionist deception -- the same genocidal deception that the Zionist Jews have gotten away with for about the past 70 years or more, and who have perpetrated the longest humanitarian crisis in the 20th, going into the 21st, century. This crisis, perpetrated with the help of the Western imperialist powers and, of course, their news and even tv/film industry media. As UN General Secretary Kofi Anon once said, "Israel cannot continue to use the Holocaust as an excuse for the oppression of others."

AN AGAIN, THE SHEER *IRONY* -- THE SHEER *CHUZTPAH* -- OF A *ZIONIST* (AN INHERENT ANTI-*PALESTINIAN* ANTI-SEMITE) JEW COMPLAINING ABOUT ANTI-JEWISH RACISM!!

I put "cinnamon stillwell" into google and got something like 14 pages and 131 hits (including David Horowitz's and Daniel Pipes' rag): she's obviously is a pro-Israel or ARCH-ZIONIST semi-/professional PROPAGANDIST -- and for THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE to represent her as merely "a San Francisco writer" is outright, blatant DECEPTION tantamount to a LIE. But, since and before the Spanish-American War, and Hearst's famous line about covering that war, and the genocidal Philippino-Amerian War, the Chronicle has been quite easily and comfortably accustomed to publishing *LIES*.

THE CHRONICLE AIDED AND ABETTED NOT SO MUCH AN OPINION PIECE, BUT A DEFAMATION PIECE, MASQUERADING AS AN UNSUBSTANTIATED NEWS REPORT. HOW MANY PRO-PALESTINIAN OPINION PIECES COULD GET AWAY WITH THAT!?

Stillwell's is the kind of propaganda piece that has, indeed, been published in the blatantly racist and right-wing David Horowitz's Frontpage Magazine and at Daniel Pipes' CampusWatch website -- the Zionist equivalents of McCarthyist-like publications that seek to CENSOR any debate about Israel/Zionism, especially on American campuses.

*YOU* TRY TO MAKE A SERIES OF APOCRYPHAL, OR OTHERWISE QUESTIONABLE/UNSUBSTANTIATED, DEFAMATORY/NEGATIVE ACCUSATIONS ABOUT SOME JEWISH GROUP AND SEE IF THE CHRONICLE LETS YOU GET AWAY WITH IT. WHY, THE CHRONICLE PROBABLY WOULDN'T EVEN LET YOU GET AWAY WITH THE *TRUTHFUL* AND *SUBSTANTIATED* ONES!

But (once again), as the Jewish anti-racist, anti-Zionist, activist and public lecturer Tim Wise said, "But of course, the kinds of folks who push an ideology that required the expulsion of three-quarters-of-a-million Palestinians from their lands, and then lied about it, claiming there had been no such persons to begin with (as with Golda Meir’s infamous quip), can’t be expected to place a very high premium on truth." (See, "Fraud Fit For A King", and "Reflections on Zionism from a Dissident Jew".)

And note how Stillwell practices the well-worn pro-Israel/Zionist propaganda tactic of equating Zionism with Judaism or ALL Jews, and equating Israel with ALL Jews, and likewise equating anti-Zionism or any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. (This, while true anti-Semites would be happy to, indeed, send ALL Jews far away to Israel, just as some European anti-Semites were happy to see -- and let the European Jews be the Palesinian Arabs' problem.)

Stillwell refers to Zionism (support for Jewish colonialism/apartheid in Palestine) as "espousing unpopular views". So far, one can only hope that Zionism were an unpopular view in the West -- especially in the U.S. -- as South African apartheid, after many long murderous decades, at last became. So far, support for Zionism (inherently racism, as even both Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu, let alone, much earlier, Gandhi, have said) is still an all-to-popular view in the white-American/Eurpean West -- and especially in the U.S.. And so far, Israeli foreign policy in the Middle East (critically guided, in part, by Zionist neo-cons in American presidential administrations) has all-but become American foreign policy there -- as ARIEL SHARON himself has *proudly* boasted!

But, there are cracks slowly breaking out in the Zionist propaganda wall -- and, at last, of course, such cracks start to break out on college campuses first -- in spite of the stranglehold Zionists have in American society. (Just like opposition to Nazi anti-Semitism broke out among some extremely courageous German university students.) The Zionists, like Stillwell, know that these cracks could spell the beginning of the end for Israeli apartheid -- just like the cracks, developing on university campuses -- finally spelled the end of South African apartheid. AS MARTIN LUTHER KING ONCE SAID, "NO LIE CAN LIVE FOREVER" AND "TRUTH CRUSHED TO EARTH WILL RISE ONCE AGAIN."

Stillwell also writes, "Anti-Zionism has indeed achieved a level of acceptance at SFSU and at universities throughout America and western Europe." One can only hope that is true -- even as Zionist organizations try to politically *TERRORIZE* any critic of Israel on university campuses!


Stillwell asks, "A question arises: How did such a 'threatening' [well, threatening to any inherently racist ideology like Zionism] environment become associated with a campus located in one of the most liberal and tolerant cities in the nation?" THE ANSWER IS EASY: From the political anti-witch hunt movements, to the Civil Rights Movement, to the anti-war movement(s), to the anti-South African apartheid movement, to the Central American Sanctuary movement, to the anti-Zionist movement, university campuses have always been the first to develop political opposition to and actions against previously accepted racist/immoral ideologies. Yet Stillwell repeats the Zionist mantra that Israel's "*alleged* human rights offenses" are singled out. And, yes, any group that espouses a racist ideology (whether Aryan supremacy, neo-Nazism, or Zionism) *should* be DENIED "positions in student government" or funding, if they haven't been already.

THE FACT THAT THERE ARE MANY **JEWS** WHO ARE ANTI-ZIONIST AND PARTICIPATE IN THIS OPPOSTION TO YET ANOTHER IDEOLOGICALLY RACIST STATE -- ESPECIALLY IN THE BAY AREA -- ALWAYS GOES UNMENTIONED BY THE CINNAMON STILLWELLS OF THE WORLD.

AS NO LESS THAN ALBERT EINSTEIN ONCE SAID, "IT WOULD BE MY GREATEST SADNESS TO SEE JEWS DO TO PALESTINIAN ARABS MUCH OF WHAT NAZIS DID TO JEWS."

PROMINENT JEWS, LIKE ALBERT EINSTEIN, HANNAH ARENDT, AND OTHERS, ONCE REFERRED TO MENACHIM BEGIN -- WHO LATER BECAME A PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL -- A "FASCIST"!

NUMEROUS JEWISH COMMUNITY LEADERS AND FACULTY MEMBERS AT UC BERKELEY, IN A FORMAL LETTER PUBLISHED IN THE DAILY CALIFORNIAN, REFERRED TO DANIEL PIPES, HARDCORE ZIONIST JEW, AND A FOUNDER OF CAMPUSWATCH (AN ORGANIZATION THAT TERRORIZES/INTIMIDATES AMERICAN ACADEMICS), WHERE STILLWELL'S OPINIONS WERE ALSO PUBLISHED, AS ESPOUSING VILEY *RACIST* VIEWS AGAINST ARABS/MUSLIMS, SIMILAR TO THOSE ONCE ESPOUSED BY NAZIS AGAINST JEWS.

As I have often said, as a person -- an African American -- who also comes from a people who have also been persecuted, oppressed, or discriminated against for centuries at the hands of Europeans (including some Jews) *NO* AMOUNT OF SUFFERING ENTITLES ONE PEOPLE TO MASS DISPOSSESS, OTHERWISE TAKE, OR BE GIVEN THE LAND OF ANOTHER -- ESPECIALLY THIRD PARTY -- PEOPLE!

THE WORST TRAGEDY OF THE HOLOCAUST IS THAT MILLIONS OF ZIONIST JEWS WOULD EXPLOIT THE SUFFERING OF THEIR OWN PEOPLE IN ORDER TO PROJECT THAT SUFFERING ONTO ANOTHER PEOPLE (NOW, IRONICALLY, ABOUT SIX MILLION TOO!) -- THE MASS VICTIMS BECOMING THE MASS VICTIMIZERS.

[At the anti-AIPAC rally, Monday, at the Oakland Marriot -- where there were lots of ANTI-ZIONIST JEWS protesting, along with others, outside -- a Jewish woman came up to me and another Jew: she who was so wrapped up in the Jewish Holocaust (forget any other) -- even though Zionism (anti-Palestinian racism and systematic/mass displacement) started well before the Nazi Holocaust existed -- that she could rationalize any dispossession and oppression, in turn, of anyone else. She openly referred to the protesters, the Jewish ones as "self-hating", and the non-Jewish ones, especially the Palestinians, as "SCUM". I guess that's how Zionist Jews RACISTLY refer to anyone who won't just willingly be forced out of their homes by a bunch of foreign, blindly self-centered victims -- another bunch of Bible-&-gun toting Europeans (this time, Jewish, instead of Christian), who also happen to think that "swarthy"/non-European people are naturally inferior.]

Or, as anti-Zionist Jew Tim Wise ("Reflections on Zionism from a Dissident Jew") wrote:

"SURELY IT IS NOT FOR THIS IGNOBLE END THAT SIX MILLION DIED."
by Calidude
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 4:06 AM
Cinnamon Stillwell wrote a good editorial.

The editorial is correct, that there are far too many maniacs on the far left who claim to be "pro-peace" yet rant against Israel using exaggerated nonsense, and promoting lies so blatant that you have to wonder what the motivation behind the lies is.

The editorial is right, israel is roughly the size of new jersey, and on the other side of planet earth, yet a clump of maniacs have an insane obsession with everything about it.

If Abbas becomes the palestinian leader, and can convince the palestinian masses to support him, and hamas can be stomped out or eliminated in some way, and terrorism against israel stops, israel can hand land over, and peace can come. That's it.

There's a maniac anti-israel cult forming and it's really insane at this point.

Also, as everyone here knows, JA is a ranting loon who needs a mental therapist.

by gehrig
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 6:57 AM
Well, here's a simple way to find out how things stand at SFSU, and whether antisemitism is now a tolerated part of the scene.

Did any group issue an apology for the "slaughtered according to Jewish rites" blood libel? Did GUPS comment on it, or did they consider the antisemitic blood libel not worth repudiating? Same with the "Go back to Germany, they know how to deal with you there" comments -- did any organization apologize for that, or did they all turn the blind eye? Did SFSU itself do anything to address these blatant examples of racism?

JA: "Yammity YAMMITY yammity"

Whatever.

@%<
by Dave Sabatene
(davesbatene [at] yahoo.com) Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 8:17 AM
The entire world should know that Zionism is a despicable abomination against the Jewish religion, and ALL the Zionists are abominable lunatics. They do not represent Judaism, even though they have their bribed "rabbis" to do so for them. For more information, see http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com, http://www.nkusa.org and http://www.jewsnotzionists.org.
by gehrig
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 8:36 AM
sabatene: "ALL the Zionists are abominable lunatics"

Ah, the Neturai Karta sect again, once again trying to proclaim that _they_ are the only True Jews -- in one of the few forums where they have even the slightest chance of fooling anyone.

@%<
by SFSU alum
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 8:50 AM
close-up_of_sfsu_flyer.jpgjhtrsi.jpg
Thanks for such an insightful and on-point article. I was invloved w/ various activist issues at SFSU and never ran into the kind of anti-semitism referred to in this article until I came in contact with the General Union of Palestinian Students (GUPS) and the Muslim Student Association. They distributed an absolutely horrendous flyer with not so subtle references to the blood libel. For some reason, the black and Muslim student groups on campus feel it's ok to regurgitate old European anti-Semitism. If, on the other hand, a Jewish or "white" student group distributed such hateful material--calling Arabs "towel heads" or African Americans "jungle bunnies, for example--they would be shut down as a campus organization. Anyway, thanks a lot for articulating the opinions of many people.
by and of vermin like JA
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 10:55 AM
And their efforts to deny their Naziesque views and tactics will always backfire in the end.
by the censorship
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 11:02 AM
of only some points of view, while continuing to display such a highly controversial piece of propaganda.

if you're going to be provocative, you should really let people be provoked.
Calidude: "...promoting lies so blatant..."

BESIDES THE BLATANT LIES THAT ZIONISTS TELL, LIES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISCREDITED AND DEBUNKED MANY TIMES HERE ON INDYBAY, WHAT ARE THEY? MORE ALLEGATIONS WITHOUT DOCUMENTATION? TYPICAL ZIONIST.

WAIT UNTIL YOU SEE THE REBUTTALS TO STILLWELL THAT *JEWS* SEND IN -- LIKE DR. MARC SAPIR, OF BERKELEY, WHO WAS BORN DURING WWII.

AS FAR AS GUPS OR MSA: THEY SAID THAT THEY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FLYER ABOUT SHARON, AND NO EVIDENCE OR PROOF HAS EVER SHOWN OTHERWISE. WITH ALL THE DIGITAL/VIDEO CAMERAS AROUND, ONE WOULD THINK THAT AT LEAST *ONE* OF SFSU'S ZIONISTS WOULD HAVE PHTOGRAPHIC/VIDEOTAPED EVIDENCE OF THIS!

AS FAR AS THE *CONVENIENTLY* UNDOCUMENTED/UNRECORDED ALLEGED QUOTE ABOUT 'JEWS GOING BACK TO GERMANY' -- WHERE *IS* THAT EVIDENCE TOO? WHY DIDN'T ANY ANTI-ZIONIST JEWISH PROTESTERS THERE SEEM TO HEAR/REPORT SUCH SLURS? AGAIN, ALL THOSE ZIONISTS, BUT NOT ANY AUDIO/VIDEO TAPE OF ALL 'THOSE UGLY, ALLEGED, ANTI-SEMTIC SCREAMS'?

(I'D SUGGEST THAT ZIONISTS LOOK INTO THEIR OWN RANKS OF AGENT PROVACATEURS. IT CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BE THE FIRST TIME THAT ZIONISTS -- AS WITH THE INFAMOUS *DOCUMENTED* INCIDENT AT CLAREMONT COLLEGE IN CALIFORNIA AND ESLEWHERE -- FALSELY CLAIMED AN ANTI-SEMITIC ATTACK AGAINST THEM.)

AS FOR GASSY GERHIG (INDEED, THE STRAWMAN ARTIST):

DID THE MOSTLY MIDDLE-AGED AND ABOVE, NON-STUDENT JEWS AT (WHAT PROF. NORMAN FINKELSTEIN CALLED A LARGER VERSION IN D.C.) THEIR ZIONIST NUREMBURG RALLY, CELEBRATING *ARIEL SHARON* AT SFSU -- IN THEIR SEA OF BLUE & WHITE ISRAELI FLAGS (I ACTUALLY WAS PURPOSELY RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THEM TO TOTALLY EXPERIENCE THE FULL SORDID NAZIESQUE EFFECT) -- AND THE ORGANIZATIONS THEY REPRESENTED -- WHO WERE HURLING RACIST INSULTS AT THE PALESTINIAN STUDENTS -- APOLOGIZE?
by curious
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 11:10 AM
Did GUPS admit to having made the flyer? There is a difference between refusing to apologize and admitting to have made the flyer than refusing to apologize and claiming that they either didnt create the flyer or it was created by someone without permission. Claiming a group member made the flyer and didnt have permission would only really give one an excuse not to apologize if the person who made it is no longer a member fo the group.

There are several different forms of racism and antiSemitism one sees on both sides at Palestine related protests:
1. Open antiSemitism by some Palestinian activists (Ive seen a little and its rare but this flyer could fall in that category)
2. Use of code words (like ZOG) and code issues (like the USS Liberty or Israeli and 9/11) by mainly white activists who seem to have been influences by some neonazi rhetoric (although since some of the propaganda is distrubuted without a mention of its source many of those who espuse issues promoted by neonazis dont even know the source of the propaganda)
3. NOI style antiSemitism (also rare at protests but something that seems to have been part of the mural controversy at SF State)
4. The use of charges of antiSemitism to discredit groups that merely focus on Israel (a lot of the antiANSWER stuff falls in this category)
5. Calls for ethnic cleansing against Palestinians (one sees signs calling for an end to the occupation of Jewish land and signs about Jordan that seem to be calling for all Palestinians to be removed from the West Bank and Gaza)
6. proIsrael signs that associate all Palestinians with terrorism in a clearly racist fashion (people dressed up with kofias and fake suicide belts are roughly equivalent to proPalestine actists dressing up like Orthodox Jews and holding guns and I think that would be clearly seen if racist if it happened) I would also place the signs about social problems in Arab states in this category since while such signs would be positive in other contexts blaming Palestinains in Palesine for the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia or the treatment of minority religions in Iran is blaming an entire peopel for the actions of a few which is a common form of racism.
7. Openly racist slogans against Palestians (the is rare but there were peopel yelling things like sand n**r etc.. at a few demos)
by really know what happened?
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 11:14 AM
or is everybody here merely enjoying their own emotional reactions to whatever anyone else cares to assert, anywhere, anyhow, based on superficial appearances, and enjoying them in a public forum to boot?

i mean really, what does this serve?
by Critical Thinker
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 11:35 AM
>>>"4. The use of charges of antiSemitism to discredit groups that merely focus on Israel (a lot of the antiANSWER stuff falls in this category)"<<<

Lies and misconceptions aren't racism. Period.
by SFSU Alum
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 11:36 AM
The flyer was distributed by the MSA and GUPS but they refused to take responsibility for it. What a surprise! But, this sort of thing is not new to SFSU. Remember the blatantly anti-Semitic Malcolm X mural a few years back?
by curious
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 12:11 PM
SFSU Alum, what was GUPS reply to this accusation? (Id ont know Im actually asking) Did they claim it was a mistake, they didnt do it, it was done without their support or what?
As for the Malcolm X thing, who was responsible, was it GUPS?

Re: CT
#4 on my list of examples of racism was more underhanded to racist. ANSWER can be condemned but from what Ive seen of them they wouldnt even call themselves "antiZionist" because of the negative association of that term. Their conflict with Lerner was probably at root over taking a hard line on Palestine at an antiIraq war protest, which I cant see as antiSemitism even if you disgaree with their stand. Remember the IAC also was pretty proSaddam and proMolosovich so their stands over questionable third world nationalists; their stands are often bad but definitely not driven by antiSemitism.

I guess there is an element of antiSemitism to the use of antiSemitism as a word to use against those who strongly oppose Israel. There is both an element of "crying wolf" where real cases will be ignored and an element of backlash (when people pressure the LA times to take a more proIsrael stand and organize boycotts etc.. it actually feeds some of the paranoid conspiracy theories and increases antiSemitism. The charges that the BBC is antiSemitic for its coverage of Lebanon and thn the occupation is likewise very problematic since it comse across as a power play that is an attempt to silence real news, it also leads to invidual IDF troops believing the propaganda and targetting journalists.)
by Osto
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 12:17 PM
To Curious: You are certainly correct that racist comments come from both sides of this debate. Another common smear tactic directed at the Palestinians is the display of the photo of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem with Adolf Hitler, as if the opinions of one cleric in the 1930s are an indictment of the Palestinian people as a whole.

That picture of the can implying that Palestinian children are killed according to "jewish ritual" is certainly despicable, but once again, extremists are being promoted as typical of the pro-Palestine movement. There is hatred on both sides of this debate, and its unfair to those seeking peaaceful, just solutions to the conflict. While it's true that pro-Israel students are being harrassed on college campuses, Americans advocating justice for the Palestinians have been harrassed for decades. This is particulaerly true for journalists, who've often had their careers ruined by daring to criticize Israel.

Being anti-occupation does not make one anti-Israel. Israel's existence does not depend on it's possesion of the West Bank and Gaza. Indeed, Israel's existence may end necessitating the return of these lands. There are plenty of Israeli Jews who agree with me. Indeed, many of my Israeli friends are upset with diaspora Jews for giving support to the extremist settlers for whom the rest of the Israeli population suffers.
by Nazi Arabs
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 12:53 PM
" Another common smear tactic directed at the Palestinians is the display of the photo of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem with Adolf Hitler, as if the opinions of one cleric in the 1930s are an indictment of the Palestinian people as a whole."

LOL!!! As if one Austrian guy could incite the German people as a whole....(You know, the guy sitting next to Arafat's Uncle)
by heard it before
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 12:56 PM
Zionists are to Jews what Nazis are to Germans, an embarrassment to an otherwise admirable people.
by two different people just posted
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 12:58 PM
look closer
by SFSU Alum
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 1:06 PM
"Being anti-occupation does not make one anti-Israel. Israel's existence does not depend on it's possesion of the West Bank and Gaza. Indeed, Israel's existence may end necessitating the return of these lands. There are plenty of Israeli Jews who agree with me."

I could not agree more. I think there are plenty of Israeli Jews who agree with you and Jews who live outside of Israel as well. But, what matters is how one defines "occupation." For most--if not all--of the anti-Zionists the existence of the Jewish state of Israel is defacto occupation. The reason for this is the anti-Zionists view Israel as an "imperial" outpost, and view its citizens as "white settlers." Now, I must tell you most Jews in Israel and abroad do not share this notion of occupation, nor do they view of themselves as "white settlers," nor do they view the establishment of Israel as a "nakhba." Far from it, many of us view it as a modern miracle.

As far as the flyer, it depends on who you ask and when they were asked. When GUPS and MSA were first approached about the flyer, they were beligerent claiming it was not anti-Semitic (merely anti-Zionist) and that they had a right to free speech. Later, after getting sweated by the administration and campus Jewish groups, GUPS and the MSA attempted to backpedal and distance themselves from the flyer. They ultimately ended up apologizing for the flyer and releasing a luke-warm condemntation of anti-Semitism.

Regarding the Mural, the information you seek is available in the article above. The Pan Afrikan Student Union was responsible for the reprehensible mural, which was no surprise given their politics.
by SFSU Alumni
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 1:12 PM
"Another common smear tactic directed at the Palestinians is the display of the photo of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem with Adolf Hitler, as if the opinions of one cleric in the 1930s are an indictment of the Palestinian people as a whole..."

The Mufti (aka Amin al-Husseini) was far more influential than you imply. He acquired the reputation as a violent, fanatical anti-Zionist zealot and was jailed by the British for instigating a 1920 Arab attack against Jews who were praying at the Western Wall.

In 1929, major Arab riots were instigated against the Jews of Palestine. They began when al-Husseini falsely accused Jews of defiling and endangering local mosques, including al-Aqsa. The call went out to the Arab masses: "Izbah Al-Yahud!" — "Slaughter the Jews!" After the killing of Jews in Hebron, the Mufti disseminated photographs of slaughtered Jews with the claim that the dead were Arabs killed by Jews.

He later became the spiritual leader of the Muslim community in Jerusalem.

In April, 1936 six prominent Arab leaders formed the Arab Higher Committee, with the Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini as head of the organization, joining forces to protest British support of Zionist progress in Palestine. In the same month, riots broke out in Jaffa commencing a three-year period of violence and civil strife in Palestine that is known as the Arab Revolt. The Arab Higher Committee led the campaign of terrorism against Jewish and British targets.

Using the turmoil of the Arab Revolt as cover, al-Husseini consolidated his control over the Palestinian Arabs with a campaign of murder against Jews and non-compliant Arabs, the recruitment of armed militias, and the raising of funds from around the Muslim world using anti-Jewish propaganda. In 1937 the Grand Mufti expressed his solidarity with Germany, asking the Nazi Third Reich to oppose establishment of a Jewish state, stop Jewish immigration to Palestine, and provide arms to the Arab population. Following an assassination attempt on the British Inspector-General of the Palestine Police Force and the murder by Arab extremists of Jews and moderate Arabs, the Arab Higher Committee was declared illegal by the British. The Grand Mufti lost his office of President of the Supreme muslim Council, his membership on the Waqf committee, and was forced into exile in Syria in 1937. The British deported the Arab mayor of Jerusalem along with other members of the Arab Higher Committee.

According to documentation from the Nuremberg and Eichmann trials, the Nazi Germany SS helped finance al-Husseini's efforts in the 1936-39 revolt in Palestine. Adolf Eichmann actually visited Palestine and met with al-Husseini at that time and subsequently maintained regular contact with him later in Berlin.

In 1940, al-Husseini requested the Axis powers to acknowledge the Arab right:

... to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy.
While in Baghdad, Syria al-Husseini aided the pro-Nazi revolt of 1941. He then spent the rest of World War II as Hitler's special guest in Berlin, advocating the extermination of Jews in radio broadcasts back to the Middle East and recruiting Balkan Muslims for infamous SS "mountain divisions" that tried to wipe out Jewish communities throughout the region.
by well
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 1:48 PM
"The Mufti (aka Amin al-Husseini) was far more influential than you imply"

Assuming this is all true and the antiSemitism wasnt mainly anticolonialism (since at the time that was a more valid way of seeing Palestine since the MIddle Eastern jews didnt move en masse to Israel until after its creation), how would using a figure form the past like the Mufti to demonize present day Palestinians not be racist? If you are arguing about history, bringing up the Mufti makes sense but when the present day occupation is being brought up it seems strange. Horohito was the emporer of Japan when it was a Nazi ally yet after the war he remained a symbolic leader and US leaders honored him after his death in 1989. The ties between the present government of Italy and the fascists in Italy is even stronger ideology wise (and one cant forget the Croat idealization of past proNazi leaders, how antiSemite Henry Ford is portrayed as an American hero in US textbooks etc..). Yet somehow the Palestinians are singled out when it comes to collective guilt for the actions of a past religious leader? One doesnt have to go back 20 years to find the US supporting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Pinochet in S America etc.. yet all of these things are always dismissed as being "in the past". Yet the views of a Palestinian 60 years ago are used to justify Israel's actions against Palestinians today? Hell, one cant even get traction when one brings up Cheney's (or Israel's) ties and support for apartheid S Africa, but one can get traction when one demonized Palestinians for a religious leader several generations ago?

Aside from the selectiveness and collective guilt aspects of the use of the Grand Mufti to demonize the Palestiians one cant ignore the use of him to play into antiArab stereotypes (in the way conspiracy theorists play on antiJewish stereotypes). He is chosen because he is a religious leader (despite the main opposition among Palestinians being secular until quite recently). He is chosen because he fits into a yellow peril style view of a dangerous yet mysterious oriental leader conspiring towards bad things for reasons that usually come down him just being evil.... etc... It would be as if those arguing against Israel kept bringing up Rothschild and the WZO (to play on stereotypes of Jews and conspiracies about Zionists) Or one could even try to demonize Zionists by pointing to those who worked in Eichmann (Hanah Arendt's book on the banality of evil makes clear that Eichmann had no problem working with Jeiwsh leaders to get Jews out of Germany and that at some level he was a generic beurocrat doing his job and not caring about morality). One can dispute the history but at one level its irrelevent. One can always find someone who somewhat fits a stereotype to focus on and rally racist feeling (like Bush Sr's use of Willie Horton) but relying on real historical figures doesnt make the use of them less racist when the use is selective and designed to promote ideas of collective guilt.
by reader
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 1:50 PM
>>it almost looks like
by two different people just posted Wednesday, Dec. 15, 2004 at 12:58 PM

>>look closer

Who cares? Two posts, two valid points. It looks to me like the Zionists are losing ground and now need to change the subject.
by Remember Henry Ford?
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 2:00 PM
If one is going to demonize a people for promoting someone with Nazi ties, how about Henry Ford? He was one of the people who helped create the international atmosphere of antiSemitism and many of his writings served as an inspiration for Hitler. Its not just that he published and wrote antiSemitic conspiracy theories, he also disributed it around the world and had it translated etc...

Due to the fame of its publisher, Henry Ford Sr., The International Jew, a four-volume anti-Semitic work first published in the 1920s, has been a particularly powerful tool for haters trying to validate their hostile beliefs.
http://www.adl.org/special_reports/ij/intro.asp

The Protocols were published in 1920 in a Michigan newspaper started by Henry Ford mainly to attack Jews and Communists. Even after they were exposed as a forgery, Ford's paper continued to cite the document. Adolf Hitler later used the Protocols to help justify his attempt to exterminate Jews during World War II.
http://skepdic.com/protocols.html

Evil Americans honor Henry Ford as a hero:
http://www.hfmgv.org/exhibits/hf/default.asp
http://www.time.com/time/time100/builder/profile/ford.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/btford.html
http://www.thehenryford.org/museum/default.asp
http://www.hfha.org/mainav.htm
+
every textbook of American history gievn to US school kids

Isnt this far worse than the Grand Mufti connection with Palestinians? Demonizing a people for honoring someone tied to past attrocities is assiging collective guilt and is wrong, but if your going to do it doesnt demonizing all Americans who look up to Ford (or teach classes honoring hm) are far worse than any Palestinian honiring the Mufti in a textbook?
by henry XXX kissinger
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 2:03 PM
Well the jewish terrorist gangs tried to make a deal with the nazi's as well...seems like everyone wanted to get with hitler...the bushes, the kufti, the zionists!
by SFSU Alumni
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 2:13 PM
"Assuming this is all true and the antiSemitism wasnt mainly anticolonialism..."

I _might_ buy that, if the quotes attributed to the Mufti were directed at "Zionists/colonists" as opposed to "Jews". Problem is, all of his hatred is directed at the Jewish people, not "Zionists", not "colonists" but Jews.

And for the record, I'm not a fan of Ford either. He was a bigot. Problem with the comparison is its Palestinian and other Muslim extremists who are killing Jews today, not Fordist white folks.
by Rob
(ih8grep [at] yahoo.com) Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 2:49 PM
It is a poor service to the brave souls who were murdered during the holocaust to associate their sacrifice with defending the brutal actions of the state of Israel. I sincerely doubt that even at their most tortured hour, the victims of the holocaust would have wished for the brutal shooting by the IDF of Iman Darweesh Al Hams or the white wash investigation that followed.
by Critical Thinker
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 3:08 PM
under the guise of stating the obvious won't help you.

Your real intention is transparent. You're using the Holocaust victims for your own ends by accusing pro-Israel folks of exploiting the Jewish tragedy for their defense of Israel and by the way trying to paint the Israeli military as brutal, never mind that on average it has been acting with the most restraint any military would exercize under identical circumstances.
by well
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 5:25 PM
" I _might_ buy that, if the quotes attributed to the Mufti were directed at "Zionists/colonists" as opposed to "Jews""

Sure you quote does sound bad but it is in English not Arabic so one not only has to trust the quote but also trust that it was translated fairly (I have no reason not to trust you but when a quote is being used to demonize someone one does have to be careful).
by 50+
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 7:56 PM
IDF taught US military how to torture-Abu was Mossad operation-don't forget Sabra & Chatilla massacres by Sharon- remember Rabin-cut down by a "Zionist". They really appropriated that word 'Zion' . The Holy of holies, the Mount of Moses, transformed into a symbol of Intolerance and hatred. How Biblical in a perverse way. The Straussian Cult behind the throne is no fan of the ten commandments. Born again American mullahs like Falwell & Robertson bow to the Ancient Cosmic Connection of Jerusalem and twists it's true magic into an excuse for hatred. Such a convenient enemy, those Muslims. The Bay Area comes on like a lefty humanitarian, but Barbara "The Queen" Boxer gets half-a-million a year from AIPAC- Can you find a crashed 757 on the Pentagon lawn? Oh REALLY? Can you find the spirit of Lenny Bruce on Larry King? They wail "Holocaust!" every time you analyze their mindset with a degree of criticism. Dead babies DO NOT AFFECT THE IDF and it's getting that way with Marines too. We are becoming THEM- a NON_CHRISTIAN SHOW - N0 MERCY SHOOT THE WOUNDED- TORTURE THE CAPTURED- DESTROY THEIR HOMES KIND OF NATION- DON'T EVER GO FOR THIS-IT'S N-O-T AMERICAN (or Jewish either!)
by aaron
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 9:55 PM
<<...trying to paint the Israeli military as brutal, never mind that on average it has been acting with the most restraint any military would exercize under identical circumstances.>>

What a sleazy defense.

The "cirumstances" you allude to, but never want to honestly address, are the issue.

by Tim David
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 10:06 PM
Wow, what a shocker, Jews Against Zionism. Like this is something really extraordinary. What a movement, what a brave bunch of idiots! Like we never saw this coming... Gee, let's see, when was the first time I've heard about this??? Oh, yea, it only took a nanosecond to recall the rebellious masses that Moses led out of slavery from Egypt toward the "Promised Land"-Zion in Canaan who grumbled and complained about going back to slavery cause G_d just doesn't seem to care about our plight anymore. Wha Wha Wha. Just like in Moses' day these grumblers just can't take G_d at His word and just like in Moses' day they will die in their own desert of excuses while those who believe will claim the blessing. You never learn. No wonder G_d was about to wipe them out and start another nation through Moses. Your rebellion will only accelerate your judgment.
by Osto
Wednesday Dec 15th, 2004 10:33 PM
"LOL!!! As if one Austrian guy could incite the German people as a whole....(You know, the guy sitting next to Arafat's Uncle)"

I am not denying that charismatic extremists can negatively influence a whole population, just that the Mufti's support for Hitler has no relavence to the case of the Palestinians who are alive, and suffering, today. It's simply a shock tactic, designed to rouse people's emotions by finding a connection between a prominent Palestinian and the 20th century's most despicable figure.
by JA
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 12:54 AM
SFSU ZIONIST Alumni: "The flyer was distributed by the MSA and GUPS but they refused to take responsibility for it."

I guess that Zionist Jews don't need any evidence/proof, because they can usually racistly count on white-America's racism to accept any demagoguery said about Blacks, Browns, Arabs, Muslims -- anyone who's not European.


"curious": "ANSWER can be condemned..."

For what?

As for the Lerner -- a ZIONIST himself -- affair, please go back and inform yourself about it -- even from Indybay. The Jewish groups organizing the anti-war rally -- along with all the other organizers *BACKED* the decision not to have Lerner speak. The organizers -- Jewish and non-Jewish alike -- all agreed to not invite any speaker -- Jewish, Arab, Muslim, secular, etc. -- who had condemned any of the organizers. And there's nothing unusual about that. Do the Democrats or Republicans invite people to speak at their events who have condemned or spoken out against either party, respectively, or its major figures? Would AIPAC invite someone to come to their event to condemn or speak out against AIPAC or its major figures? Of course not. But, were their other Jewish speakers -- including other rabbis? Of course yes!!

Michael Lerner and his cultish supporters tried to *HORN* his way onto the stage of the huge public rally -- and he and his 'new age' Zionist cult *DIDN'T* get their way. ***GOOD***!!

The pro-IsraelZionist lobby is so *LOOSE* and *PROMISCUOUS* with their "CRYING WOLF" of "anti-Semitism", that they will one day make the word lose all its meaning -- people so accused will just start to just derisively chuckle/laugh (as, at last, one govt official did against a leading Zionist on the Charlie Rose show, before, which I am watching now) -- and embolden those who are real anti-Jewish anti-Semites. If the Zionists keep slinging their "anti-Semite" slurs and keep crying wolf, in time to come nobody will care if they are called "anti-Semitic": people will just sarcastically exhale and roll their eyes.


Otso: "While it's true that pro-Israel students are being harrassed on college campuses"

Please let's be specific Otso. On most American campuses Israel -- unfortunately -- is hardly even an issue -- yet. *WHERE* are these pro-Israel students who have to cower on their way to classes, ducking tomatoes or even paper wads thrown at them? Please, let's not be critically sloppy in an effort to appear even-handed.


"Nazi Arabs": "As if one Austrian guy could incite the German people as a whole..."

First of all, as Jewish scholar Lenni Brenner pointed out, the Irgun JEWISH TERRORIST GANG OFFERED TO FIGHT ON THE SIDE OF THE *NAZIS*, if Hitler supported the Zionist colonial project (which, of course, would entail cleansing Europe of all its Jews)!

Second, the Mufti controlled no nation, he controlled no parliament/congress/legislature, he controlled no territory (Palestine was under the political and military control of the British), he controlled no military, he controlled no treasury, he controlled no war industry, he didn't even control the Palestinians, nor was he their representative. SO WHAT'S THE BIG F*CKING DEAL!!? -- EXCEPT THAT THE ZIONISTS NEED SOME FIGURE TO RACISTLY DEMONIZE ALL THE PALESTINIANS. It would be like demonizing all the Irish because of what one Roman Catholic parish monsignor said.

The motivation of the Mufti who sought the Nazis' help (and perhaps even before the Holocaust began, or before the Allies themselves even claimed to know about the death camps) was to *stem* the Zionist Jewish influx into Palestine -- an influx that threatened to swamp the indigenous Palestinians in their own homeland -- just as some major Zionists sought to collaborate with (and even fight for) the Nazis to *increase* European Jewish influx into Palestine. The motivation of the Mufti was more or less an *immigration* issue.

SFSU ZIONIST Alum: "[the Mufti] joining forces to protest British support of Zionist progress..."

You see, even after this Zioinst trying to exagerate the control that this one Mufti had, this Zionist *ADMITS* that the Mufti's motivation was not the sheer hatred of Jews, but the desire to stop the Zionists from taking over Palestine -- the same motivation that *ANY* people in *ANY* country/land would have about an influx of foreigners invading to take over their homeland and sytematically dispossess them of land, homes, farms, businesses, and even employment/livelihood.

SO WHY DON'T THE ZIONISTS DEMONIZE ALL THE AMERICANS OR THE ALL THE BRITISH FOR WANTING TO STEM JEWISH (ESPECIALLY REFUGEE) IMMIGRATION TO THE U.S./UK!!? -- AND FOR EVEN TURNING JEWISH REFUGEES BACK TO THEIR DEATHS IN NAZI/FASCIST EUROPE!! I GUESS THAT IT'S EASIER AND MORE CONVENIENT TO DEMONIZE BROWN-SKIN PEOPLE.


SFSU ZIONIST Alum: "many of us [Zionist Jews] view it as a modern miracle."

As much a "miracle" as formerly French Indochina, apartheid South Africa, colonial Africa in general, or even the U.S. is concerned, or any other *RACIST* -- yes -- IMPERIAL, Bible-&-gun toting -- yes -- *EUROPEAN* colonial project. As much a "miracle" as the sea of American tax dollars that Isreal almost literally floats upon!!

The West (Britain and the U.S.) hoped to 'kill' two birds with one stone: hopefully limit Jewish immigration and send most Jewish refugees far away to Palesine, while having a dependent European imperialist outpost there at the same time.

[Although it is true that some British advisors and officials came to realize that the Zionist dispossession of the Palestinian Arabs -- let alone their absolutely ridiculous religious and ancient presence argument -- was morally wrong.]


"reader": "It looks to me like the Zionists are losing ground and now need to change the subject."

YES, THEIR **USUAL** POLEMICAL TACTIC.


"heard it before": "Zionists are to Jews what Nazis are to Germans, an embarrassment to an otherwise admirable people."

***YES!!!***

I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY AMONG THE PEOPLE *MOST* UPSET ABOUT ISRAEL AND ZIONISM ARE ANTI-ZIONIST **JEWS** (INCLUDING SOME HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS AND THEIR FAMILIES/RELATIVES/DESCENDENTS AND ANTI-NAZI RESISTANCE FIGHTERS). IF AFRICAN-AMERICANS EVER DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT (ZIONISM), I'D BE EMBARRASSED AND PISSED AS HELL!!
by JA, where you not banned some months ago?
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 1:05 AM
JA, where you not banned some months ago?

why are you back where you are not wanted?
are you equaly unpopular at the rest of the IMC's in the world???

-angie
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 2:23 AM
CT: You're by the way trying to paint the Israeli military as brutal, never mind that on average it has been acting with the most restraint any military would exercise under identical circumstances.

>>>"What a sleazy defense.

The "cirumstances" you allude to, but never want to honestly address, are the issue."<<<


You missed the phrase *on average* which I used on purpose because I wasn't focusing on any particular incident.
I've repeatedly referred to circumstances of different specific incidents, but perhaps you've been too loath to recognize that.
Unfortunately your cheesy attention and intellectual integrity has become the issue.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 2:31 AM
>>>"I am not denying that charismatic extremists can negatively influence a whole population, just that the Mufti's support for Hitler has no relavence to the case of the Palestinians who are alive, and suffering, today."<<<

Actually there is some relevance. It's found in certain themes, motifs and concepts of anti-Semitic brainwashing young Palestinians have been subjected to almost since infancy.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 3:49 AM
I haven't looked into the IAC's stances, so I can't pass judgement whether they're motivated by anti-Semitism.

I concur that an element of "crying wolf" exists when false accusations of anti-Semitism are leveled and that such accusations can backfire.
When justified charges of anti-Semitism are being made, I'm not too worried about how it's perceived by the offender.

This whole business of attributing an element of racism or anti-Semitism to false charges of anti-Semitism made against pro-Palestinian and/or anti-Zionist folks is a product of the frustration anti-Zionists feel at hearing such charges, be they justified or not; it's kind of a way to fight back, but nonetheless has no factual merit -- false accusations of anti-Semitism by pro-Israel people are made either out of some ignorance or a deliberate attempt to delegitimize non-anti-Semitic opposition to Israel/Zionism/pro-Israelis. The latter is a case of a lie, but not anti-Semitism.
by curious
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 8:58 AM
"The latter is a case of a lie, but not anti-Semitism."
Except its valuing defending Israel's reputation over the dangers to Jews from real antiSemitism. In a sense its saying thay real antiSemitism doesnt really matter that much because the charge of antiSemitism is so useful to use for other purposes.

How would you feel if instead of antiSemitism the false chrages were of promoting a Holocaust? Or the word Holocaust were used hyperbolically to describe every single conflict in the wold. I think many people would find that antiSemitic since its dimissive of the real horrors of the real Holocaust.

False charges of antiSemitism can be counterproductive and backfire but they also show a dimissiveness of real problems of antiSemitism.
by curious
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 9:11 AM
" Actually there is some relevance"

Is the teaching of the Mufti to Palestinian youth different from the teaching of Ford to American youth? You probably dont have references to the Palestinian textbooks but there is a big difference between misrepresenting or not representing a figure taught to be a hero (like Ford) and promoting the problematic views. Do the textbooks teach that the Mufti faught colonialism or that he hated Jews? The threat of massive immigration of mainly Jews from Europe to Palestinians who lived in what is now Israel turned out to be real, so one expects a Palestinian textbook to be supportive of someone who was fighting against immigration from Europe (and since the immigrants who were trying to take away Palestinian land were Jewish and were demanding a Jewish state even mentioning his opposition to Jewish immigration wouldnt have been antiSemitic) The Nazi connection obviously more problematic if hyped as positive (although the case of some Indian soliders turning against the British during WWII is easier for peopel to digest as antiBritish/antiColonial not proNazi or antiSemitic). Even if its mentioned it can be problematic, which is why when Ford is taught as a hero of Capitalism to US school kids his antiSemitism (and mass publication and distribution of antiSemitic books) is never mentioned since facts have to be left out once the textbooks decide to present him as a hero.
by FrS
(demon [at] helldimension.com) Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 9:47 AM
I have to say. Every day that passes, I get sicker and sicker. I have to point out something that NO ONE has, as far as my eyes have seen: Two incredibly (and historically) oppressed people. NEITHER of them a 'race' in and of themselves, bickering over madness. I truly am horrified. Seriously, does ANYONE OUT THERE see that the entirety of this amounts to some ancient holy war with no basis in modern reality? I have a newsflash for all my friends out there (and i will not lay claim to either side of the coin as so many here do, i.e 'I am a JEW or I am BLACK or I am GREEN): God? NOT with the existance. What DOES exist right now, in both the middle east and elswhere, is the potential for one of the most powerful economic, governmental and scientifically advanced civilizations ever to walk the face of the Earth to emerge. Imagine an entire continent unified under a geopolitcal reality rather than a religious one? The combined economic strength of a Unified 'Muslim' and 'Arab' (distincitions made, as the two do crossover) and 'Jewish' world under such a banner would mean an absolute, inevitable END to the monopoly that western states have over the everything and everyoness of ALL of our self realities. Europe has been trying to do it for a thousand years, and look at what a half-hearted, utter disaster has netted them on the world stage. The unique ability to pass judgement on one another from the safety of their nuclear shield!. Second newsflash: Jews, Muslims and the like NO LONGER have to struggle to emulate these powers in their own lands, when they can create something beautiful and whole by themselves, and perhaps even succeed. I keep hearing these ridiculous sentences like 'jew this' and 'muslim that' and 'holocaust this'... does ANYONE ELSE realize that the ONLY reason Nazi Germany had come about the way it did was because the time was ripe for it? Expressions of power often attatch themselves to groups both large and small at random based on factors and reasons neither the victims nor the victimizers are aware of, and disguised as racial/political/insert b.s reason here. EVERYTHING you know/feel/believe has been enginered for you since the begining of western reality by people in power who could care LESS about Gods one way or another, but USE these beliefs as structures to hold us in, and admittedly ingenius, cage.

WAKE UP guys. Everything is a structure. Tear it down now and make one that you can, for lack of a better word, seriously own shit with.

And for the record? If God does exist, we are ALL going to hell.

Cheers.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 9:52 AM
I should have said that those same themes, motifs and concepts are derived from al-Husseini's anti-Semitic heritage.

>>>"Is the teaching of the Mufti to Palestinian youth different from the teaching of Ford to American youth? "<<<
>>>:...when Ford is taught as a hero of Capitalism to US school kids his antiSemitism (and mass publication and distribution of antiSemitic books) is never mentioned since facts have to be left out once the textbooks decide to present him as a hero."<<<
>>>"there is a big difference between misrepresenting or not representing a figure taught to be a hero (like Ford) and promoting the problematic views."<<<

The third excerpt is right on. The difference stems first and foremost from the fact that the teaching of anti-Semitism in US public schools is forbidden -- the opposite of what occurs in PA schools. That makes Ford's anti-Semitic literature is off limits of the curricula in American public schools. This ban is a matter of policy in the US whereas the use of parts of al-Husseini's literature is zealously promoted by the PA.

>>>" The threat of massive immigration of mainly Jews from Europe to Palestinians who lived in what is now Israel turned out to be real, so one expects a Palestinian textbook to be supportive of someone who was fighting against immigration from Europe (and since the immigrants who were trying to take away Palestinian land were Jewish and were demanding a Jewish state even mentioning his opposition to Jewish immigration wouldnt have been antiSemitic) "<<<

This presumption and the conclusion coming on its heels that you and others like you make poses a real problem, because it inadvertently absolves the local Arabs from their culpability in instigating and perpetuating the utterly unnecessary process that turned a *non-exstent* threat -- a reality that posed a threat only to those local Arabs that had resolved to perceive it as a threat to all local Arabs -- into a disaster to so many local Arabs.
If the Palestinians in charge of those textbooks had set peaceful co-existence as a goal, they would at least drop the references to al-Husseini that portray the Jewish immigration in a mendacious manner. No matter how often you repeat the claim that the Jewish newcomers were trying to steal land owned by local Arabs, the facts will never square with it. It's that simple.

>>>"The Nazi connection obviously more problematic if hyped as positive (although the case of some Indian soliders turning against the British during WWII is easier for peopel to digest as antiBritish/antiColonial not proNazi or antiSemitic)."<<<

Just how anti-Semitic or avidly supportive of the Nazi views about Jews do you think were those Indian soldiers who fought the British during that period?
by reader
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 10:06 AM
My purpose in posting this is to show what reality looks like on campus, in opposition to the fantasy that Stillwell pushed in her article. While these professors were angry at members of GUPS, and describe them in such a way, their interest is in bringing members of the campus together, and in lauding those instances, not trying to scapegoat one side in a vicious attack and making false claims about a 'threatening' atmosphere on the campus.

http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/24399/format/html/displaystory.html
Thursday December 9, 2004
At last, respectful, spontaneous Mideast dialogue at SFSU
local voices
by fred astren & marc dollinger

Jewish and Palestinian students stood in the center of Malcolm X Plaza at San Francisco State University and debated one another on the Middle East conflict. In the middle of a rally sponsored by the General Union of Palestine Students, a small group of students from Hillel and the Israel Coalition began to engage Palestinian students. As Palestinian speakers stood on stage reading a laundry list of alleged Israeli atrocities, Jewish and Palestinian students attending the rally turned away from the stage and toward one another.

Last month, for the first time in memory (and certainly since the creation of the SFSU Jewish studies program), Palestinian students debated with Jewish students in civil and respectful dialogue. Students from both sides stood face to face, listening to one another’s point of view, challenging perspectives, and forcing all of us who witnessed this event to rethink our assumptions about how these two groups can interact at SFSU. Neither side retreated from its position, but each listened to the other while demonstrating discipline and restraint.

Within minutes of the first impromptu debate, dozens of students gathered around to listen to classmates present their positions. Soon, the focus of the rally turned away from the official program on stage as more and more students, Jewish and Palestinian, entered into conversation on the plaza. At any other time in the relationship between these two campus groups, such a situation could have degenerated into an emotional and threatening confrontation. To our amazement, today was different. The rally fizzled out as the demonstration performance on stage was transformed into dialogue in the plaza.

These spontaneous debates, which did not seem connected to Yasser Arafat’s death just a few days before, continued for close to an hour with students from both sides calling for creation of an ongoing dialogue. When the rally ended at 2 p.m., Jewish and Palestinian students shook hands. As a group of Palestinian students left the plaza, they called out to the Jewish students, “Peace in the Middle East!”

Such expressions are a far cry from the rejectionist political positions that have typified GUPS, which has been at the center of some of our campus’ most vitriolic political rallies, including an international headline-generating confrontation with Jewish students 2 1/2 years ago. Over the years, the group has mirrored Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, consistently and angrily repudiating Arafat for negotiating with Israel and the United States. As readers of j. are no doubt aware, GUPS has called for the destruction of the state of Israel, equated Zionism with racism and affixed its name to an anti-Semitic blood libel poster distributed on campus.

As members of the faculty and Jewish studies professors, we believe it is our responsibility to take a public stand in support of civil, reasoned discourse. As educators and mentors, we strive to lead our students by example. We attend political events regularly to observe how Israel and Jews are being represented and to maintain a Jewish faculty presence, with the security of students in mind.

The university should be a safe place where all can offer their perspectives, test their own intellectual assumptions, and engage in even the most challenging forms of critical inquiry. A rabbinic saying teaches that we learn the most from our students. In their conduct today, our students became our teachers.

We praise the Jewish students who chose to attend the rally and made a critical decision to challenge the political status quo on campus. A few articulate and focused student leaders can make a difference. That day, they did. We also offer our public support for GUPS and hope that those developments will be more than an aberration from past patterns, but will serve as a standard by which future campus behavior and debate will be judged.


Fred Astren is director of the Jewish studies program at SFSU. Marc Dollinger is the Goldman professor in Jewish studies and social responsibility at SFSU.
by Prof
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 10:26 AM
It's a shame that so many Jewish people are harrassed because of what Israel, a little country on the other side of planet earth, may be doing "wrong."

It's like a constant burden.

Nazi fuckheads have infiltrated the Far Left, which is why so-called "peace" acvitists spew the same rabid, exaggerated, dishonest, maniacal anti-israel crap that the ultra-right does.

It's ridiculous that SFSU jewish students, and jewish students around the world, have to devote so much time just to try to convince people that israel, which has been under nonstop terrorist attack since the day its existed yet has so far refused to actually wipe the fucking palestinians out, makes some mistakes and does some screwey stuff but is basically just out to preserve its own existence....

by theatrics
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 4:55 PM
It is a typical Zionist tactic to proclaim the victim's mantle even while the weaker side is being pummeled and discriminated against.

This is something I've come to expect. The real shame is in all the people who fall for this ploy -- a very effective device they've been employing for decades to pretend to be the victims and thus stifle debate, but in the end it is THEATRICS.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 5:16 PM
>>>"It is a typical Zionist tactic to proclaim the victim's mantle even while the weaker side is being pummeled and discriminated against. "<<<

Apparently this person expects the Israelis not to defend themselves. If they didn't, guess then he would be all jolly.

>>>" The real shame is in all the people who fall for this ploy -- a very effective device they've been employing for decades to pretend to be the victims and thus stifle debate, but in the end it is THEATRICS."<<<

In the upside-down world of Israel-bashers, real victim status is automatically transformed into a sinister ploy; the opposite side's staged victimhood skits, let alone the carefully crafted half-truths, lies, distortions and hyperbole routinely fed to the media, are often swallowed hook, line and sinker.
...BEFORE I MYSELF POSTED THE VERY SAME ARTICLE FROM THE JEWISH PUBLICATION "J" -- **CONTRADICTING STILLWELL** -- that reader posted (Dec. 16, 10:06am) above!!

SO, TWO **ZIONIST** JEWISH PROFRESSORS AT SFSU DIRECTLY **CONTRADICT** CINNAMON STILLWELL'S OPINION PIECE!

*NOW* WHAT YOU ZIONISTS GOT TA SAY!?

While I disagree with some of the negative characterizations in the Zionist Jewish profressors articles, NOTE how THE ZIONIST JEWISH SFSU PROFESSORS DIRECTLY **CONTRADICT** CINNAMON STILLWELL (who is virtually, if not literally, a full-time Zionist propagandist, *NOT* merely "a San Francisco writer") and her claim of an atmosphere of rampant threats and overt hostility -- or generally a threatening atmosphere -- against Jewish (but, of course she didn't mention the numerous Jews who support the Palestinians) students at SFSU.

Now, aside from the fact that the Zionist Jewish professors -- IN **CONTRADICTION** TO STILLWELL -- related an atmosphere of current civility and tolerance at SFSU, I was at the infamous Zionist 'Nuremburg' rally "2-1/2 years ago", and there were *numerous* civil discussions between Palestinians (and others) and Zionist Jews off to the side, during and, especially, after the big Zionist rally where heated exchanges -- typical of ANY controversial campus political rally -- even those having nothing to do with Zionism/Israel -- occurred on both sides. No fisticuffs were about to break out from Palestinian students -- or anyone else. The only point of highly confrontational interaction was when the Zionists refused to take down their one or two Israeli flags planted on the wall of the SFSU student union. No doubt the Zionists wanted to claim the student union as Zionist Occupied Territory -- or perhaps even, then, newly ANNEXED as a part of *ISRAEL* itself -- too! Naturally, the Zionists felt "threatened" when others wanted their Israeli flag(s) taken down.

But, the Zionist Jewish professors can't go so far as to admit that. They probably weren't even there at the time!

But, we all know that when the victimologically self-centered Zionists can't get their way (like they always do in Israel), they make up stories and go running to the generally racist (and especially anti-Palestinian) white media and put their stanglehold pressure on the administration or institution (univerisity, municipal, or whatever kind is within reach).

Now why Palestinian students are *expected* to hold a public virtual 'encounter group' session with their Zionist would-be apartheid oppressors makes as much sense to me as hypothetically imposing the expectation that, back then, black South African students should have held a public 'encounter group' session with pro-apartheid white Afrikaner students. It makes about as much sense to me as saying that rape victims must hold a public 'encounter group' session with a bunch of convicted rapists.

NO ONE *EXPECTED* OR IMPOSED UPON NAZI-ERA JEWS THE EXPECTATION THAT THOSE JEWS PUBLICLY "DIALOGUE" OR HOLD PUBLIC 'ENCOUNTER SESSIONS' WITH THE NAZIS -- BUT THEN THE NAZIS' VICTIMS WERE *WHITE*, SO ALL THE RULES ARE DIFFERENT, HUH?

Now, if Palestinian students, of their own volition, want to try to morally convince some more European, Bible-&-gun toting, racist colonialists to stop the more than 70-year oppression of yet another 3rd World indigenous people, then so be it. They will **NOT** have any more success than the anti-Zionists posting here in indymedia. They won't have any more success at moral/intellectual suassion than Ho Chi Minh did -- his quoting the U.S. Declaration of Independence, The Magna Carta, or any other document that the U.S. based its own anti-colonial revolution on. They will **NOT** have any more success than any other anti-colonial/anti-apartheid movement that wasn't based on either the struggle of armed resistance and/or large-scale international pressure against the colonial oppressor.

SFSU PALESTINIANS WILL *ABSOLUTELY* ***FAIL*** TO MORALLY PERSUADE ZIONIST JEWS THAT ISRAEL IS AN IDEOLOGICALLY AND BRUTALLY RACIST STATE BECAUSE RACISM -- ESPECIALLY COLONIALIST RACISM -- IS **NOT** AN INTELLECTUAL OR MORAL ENDEAVOR (IF IT WERE, IT COULD EASILY BE INTELLECTUALLY OR MORALLY DEFEATED): RACISM IS AN **IDEOLOGICAL** PERPETRATION.

RACISM IS A SYSTEM OF IMPOSED ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION WHEREBY THOSE WITH POWER OPPRESS THOSE THEY SUBJUGATE IN ORDER TO GAIN AND MAINTAIN POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE AND TO CREATE AN INSTITUTIONAL STUCTURE OF PRIVILEGES (like Israel's racist Jewish National Fund that owns the vast majority of the land in Israel and other anti-Palestinian mechanisms) THAT KEEP THAT SYSTEM IN THE CONTROLLING HANDS OF THE RACISTS THEMSELVES.

(Back during Constitutional American apartheid that system was known as "Jim Crow", which still informally exists in many parts of this country.)

ZIONIST JEWS ARE ***NOT*** GOING TO WILLINGLY GIVE UP THOSE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES AND PRIVILEGES -- NO MORE THAN ANY OTHER PREVIOUS IDEOLOGICALLY RACIST STATE EVER WILLINGLY GAVE UP THE PRIVILEGES OF ITS POLITICALLY DOMINANT CLASS.
by Who Cares
(demon [at] helldimension.com) Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 8:25 PM
I see the whole 'Unified Front' thing isn't what the 'in' crowds of academia today are going for.

Scary.
by JA
Thursday Dec 16th, 2004 11:10 PM
theatrics: "It is a typical Zionist tactic to proclaim the victim's mantle even while the weaker side is being pummeled and discriminated against. This is something I've come to expect. The real shame is in all the people who fall for this ploy -- a very effective device they've been employing for decades to pretend to be the victims and thus stifle debate, but in the end it is THEATRICS."

non-Critical Thinkifier: "Apparently this person expects the Israelis not to defend themselves. If they didn't, guess then he would be all jolly. In the upside-down world of Israel-bashers, real victim status is automatically transformed into a sinister ploy; the opposite side's staged victimhood skits, let alone the carefully crafted half-truths, lies, distortions and hyperbole routinely fed to the media, are often swallowed hook, line and sinker."


MALCOLM X: "COLONIALISM IS THE PERPETRATION -- THE LIE -- THAT TRIES TO MAKE THE WOLF [THE EUROPEAN INVADERS] LOOK LIKE THE LAMB AND THE LAMB [THE INVADED INDIGENOUS PEOPLE] LOOK LIKE THE WOLF."


AS IT WAS TRUE WITH EUROPEAN CHRISTIANS, SO IT WAS TRUE WITH EUROPEAN JEWS. THIS ONLY OFTEN SUCCEEDS AMONG WHITES BECAUSE OF WHITE RACISM -- WHETHER GENTILE OR JEWISH.


.
by Critical Thinker
Friday Dec 17th, 2004 1:53 AM
>>>"MALCOLM X: "COLONIALISM IS THE PERPETRATION -- THE LIE -- THAT TRIES TO MAKE THE WOLF [THE EUROPEAN INVADERS] LOOK LIKE THE LAMB AND THE LAMB [THE INVADED INDIGENOUS PEOPLE] LOOK LIKE THE WOLF."


AS IT WAS TRUE WITH EUROPEAN CHRISTIANS, SO IT WAS TRUE WITH EUROPEAN JEWS. THIS ONLY OFTEN SUCCEEDS AMONG WHITES BECAUSE OF WHITE RACISM -- WHETHER GENTILE OR JEWISH. "<<<


Since Juif Antagoniste, as we know, is zealously keen on manufacturing simplistic reductionist situation portrayals of Israeli Jews and their state's leadership, he's once again found applying a phrase uttered by one of his idols to a political setting it can never do justice to, throwing all nuances out the window.
by Unknown
(pcreenan [at] yahoo.com) Friday Dec 17th, 2004 10:20 AM
Zionism and anti-semitism
We implore and beseech our Jewish brethren to realize
that the Zionists are not the saviors of the Jewish
People and guarantors of their safety, but rather the
instigators and original cause of Jewish suffering in
the Holy Land and worldwide. The idea that Zionism and
the State of “Israel” is the protector of Jews is
probably the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the
Jewish People. Indeed, where else since 1945 have Jews
been in such physical danger as in the Zionist state?!




Jews are enjoined by their religious laws to be loyal
to the country of which they are citizens. ever
since the destruction of the holy Temple in Jerusalem
and the exile of the Jewish People some two thousand
years ago, we have been enjoined to be scrupulously
loyal to the countries we reside in, One of the great
biblical prophets, Jeremiah, in chapter 29 of his book
proclaimed G-d's message to all the exiled; verse
seven reads, "Seek out the welfare of the city to
which I have exiled you and pray for it to the
Almighty, for through its welfare will you have
welfare." This has been a cornerstone of Jewish
morality throughout our history to this very day.




Torah-true Jews wish to live in peace and harmony with
their neighbors in every country among the community
of nations, including in historic Palestine. They
deplore acts and policies of violence carried out by
those who, misusing the name of Israel our forefather,
have substituted the ideal of chauvinist nationalism
for the eternal values of the Torah, the eternal
divinely bestowed inheritance of the Jewish people.




It has been the age-old intention of Zionism to
intentionally stir up anti-Semitism anywhere possible,
and even more commonly, to take advantage of any
Jewish suffering anywhere in order to enhance its
cause Indeed, hatred of Jews and Jewish suffering is
the oxygen of the Zionist movement, and from the very
beginning has been to deliberately incite hatred of
the Jew and then, in feigned horror, use it to justify
the existence of the Zionist state – this is, of
course, Machiavellianism raised to the highest degree.
Thus, the Zionists thrive on hatred and suffering of
Jews, and seek to benefit thereby through keeping Jews
in perpetual fear, causing them to ignore the true
nature of Zionism, and instead to consider the Zionist
state is their salvation.


ANTI-SEMITISM BY POLITICAL ZIONISM
Although Zionists and others dispute it, the
undeniable fact is that revolutionary secular and
apostate elements in the Jewish community in Europe
contributed greatly to hostility towards Jews after
World War I. This aroused hatred of Jews in general
among many non-Jews. While a prisoner in 1924 in the
fortress of Lansberg on the River Lech, Hitler wrote
his Mein Kampf. We he became Chancellor of Germany in
1933, he was assisted by Goebbels, Roseberg and
Streicher. From them came the declarations, “The Jews
of Germany caused the defeat of Germany in the
1914-1918 war; the Jews of Germany were responsible
for the terrible conditions in Germany that followed
the war; the Jews of Germany are foreigners and they
wish to remain foreigners; they have no loyalty to the
country of their birth; they are not human; they are
filthy dogs; they have no right to intrude into
Germany’s affairs; there are too many Jews in Germany.



As far as Zionism is concerned, the founder of Zionism
and apostate, Theodor Herzl, sought to intensify
hatred of the Jew in order to enhance the cause of
political Zionism. Here are some of his “pearls”:

“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . .
become worse. . . this will assist in realization of
our plans. . .I have an excellent idea. . . I shall
induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . .
The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they
will strengthen the persecution and oppression of
Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends”.
(From his Diary, Part I, pp. 16)

Additional words from the vivid imagination of this
dreamer, from p. 68 of Part I of his Diary.

So anti-Semitism, which is a deeply imbedded force in
the subconscious mind of the masses, will not harm the
Jews. I actually find it to be advantageous to
building the Jewish character, education by the masses
that will lead to assimilation. This education can
only happen through suffering, and the Jews will
adapt.


Hateful views of Jews as being subhuman did not have
to be invented by Nazi theorists such as Hitler,
Goebbels, Rosenberg and Streicher. This ideology was
simply adapted from statements of political Zionists
such as those found in the writings of the Zionist
Yehezkel Kaufman in 1933.




In 1920 there were statements hostile to Jews
expressed at Heidelberg University. These statements,
arguing that Jews of Germany had caused the turmoil
that followed the war; that the Jews of Germany had
nothing in common with Germans, and that Germans had
the right to prevent the Jews of Germany from
intruding into the affairs of their volk were not made
by Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf, but by Nahum Goldmann,
who went in to become the President of the World
Zionist Organization and head of the World Jewish
Congress, and, indisputably, the most influential
political Zionist in the world, second only to the
Prime Minister of the State of Israel.




In 1921, Germans in Germany were told that:

“We Jews are aliens… a foreign people in your midst
and we… wish to stay that way. A Jew can never be a
loyal German; whoever calls the foreign land his
Fatherland is a traitor to the Jewish people“.





Who spoke these vile words? It was Jacob Klatzkin, the
second of two political Zionist ideologists in Germany
at the time, where the Jews of Germany were enjoying
full political and civil rights. It was he who had
advocated undermining Jewish communities as the one
certain way of acquiring a state. “They had no qualms
concerning tearing down the existing Jewish
communities.”




Who spoke in a public address at a political Zionist
meeting in Berlin and declared that “Germany… has too
many Jews”? Was it Hitler or Goebbels? No, it was
Chaim Weizman, later to become the first President of
the State of Israel. This address was published in
1920, and, thus, four years before Hitler had even
written Mein Kampf.




How many Zionist Jews know of this vicious treachery
uttered by these senior political Zionist leaders,
these apostates from the Jewish People? At the
Nuremberg Trials of Major War Criminals, Nazi
propagandist, Julius Streicher testified: “I did no
more than echo what the leading Zionists had been
saying”, it is clear that he had told the truth.




In addition to Hitler, Rosenberg, Goebbels and
Streicher, many other Nazi leaders used statements
from Zionists to validate their charges against the
Jews of Germany. Such are the efforts of Zionist
leaders to this very day to maintain a high degree of
anti-semitism in order to enable them, in feigned
horror, to then point to anti-semitism to support
their idolatrous and anti-Jewish cause. In 1963, Moshe
Sharett, then Chairman of the Jewish Agency, told the
38th Annual Congress of the Scandinavian Youth
Federation that the freedom enjoyed by the majority of
Jews imperiled Zionism, and at the 26th World Zionist
Congress, the delegates were told that the Jew is
endangered by the easing of anti-Semitism in the
United States “We are endangered by freedom” he
declared.




As we stated earlier, Zionism thrives on
anti-Semitism. Ben Gurion declared, “…not always and
not everywhere do I opposed anti-Semitism”. Zionists
regularly pull out their handy “anti-Semite” race card
against anyone, Jew or non-Jew, who dares to speak out
against the wickedness of Zionism.




During World War II, the Lehi organization, an
offshoot of Begin’s Irgun that was headed by Yitzchak
Shamir sought an alliance with Nazis! The following is
a quote from the writings of the Lehi in their contact
with the Nazis:




"The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a
national and totalitarian basis and bound by a treaty
with the German Reich would be in the interests of
strengthening the future German position of power in
the Near East ... The NMO in Palestine offers to take
an active part in the war on Germany's side ... The
cooperation of the Israeli freedom movement would also
be in line with one of the recent speeches of the
German Reich Chancellor, in which Herr Hitler stressed
that any combination and any alliance would be entered
into in order to isolate England and defeat it."





To those who assume that Zionists have been on the
side of freedom and equality, these words seem
strange. However, to those who understand the root of
Zionism, which is the transformation and eradication
of the concept of the traditional Jew and Judaism,
these statements are not strange at all. They are to
be expected.




The Zionists agreed with Nazism in general, even prior
to the advent of Nazism. They believed that Jews could
not, and should not, live in harmony in any other
society in the world, and that should be removed from
those societies for the benefit of those societies.
They believed that the new Jewish existence in its own
State would remake the image of Jews as “useless” and
“parasites.” These ideas existed long before Adolf
Hitler!




There is a huge amount of literature describing how
the Zionists made it very difficult to save Jews
during and after World War II. As various individuals
and organizations were trying to arrange departures of
Jews to western countries, the Zionists worked
overtime to prevent this from happening. They
expressed the opinion that building up the Jewish
population of Palestine was more important than
enabling Jews to go to third countries, and they
insisted to western powers that Jews should not be
accepted anywhere other than Palestine. Indeed,
Yitzchak Greenbaum, a famous Zionist, proclaimed that
“one cow in Palestine was worth more than all the Jews
in Poland.” The infamous David Ben-Gurion said in
1938:




"If I knew it was possible to save all the children in
Germany by taking them to England, and only half of
the children by taking them to Eretz Israel, I would
choose the second solution. For we must take into
account not only the lives of these children but also
the history of the people of Israel."




For more information about the brutal Zionist role
during World War II, Click Here.




After the war, a Zionist “religious” leader, Rabbi
Klaussner, who was in charge of displaced persons
presented a report before the Jewish American
Conference on May 2nd, 1948 :




"I am convinced people must be forced to go to
Palestine...For them, an American dollar appears as
the highest of goals. By the word "force", I am
suggesting a programme. It served for the evacuation
of the Jews in Poland, and in the history of the
'Exodus'... To apply this programme we must, instead
of providing 'displaced persons' with comfort, create
the greatest possible discomfort for them...At a
second stage, a procedure calling upon the Haganah to
harass the Jews."


It is ironic that the Zionists proclaim their State as
the safe haven for the Jewish People, when since World
War II no place on earth has been as dangerous for
Jews, both spiritually and physically, as the Zionist
state.




The Zionists worked relentlessly to create fear among
Jews in the Arab countries after the Zionist state was
established. Their tactic work most successfully in
Yemen, Morocco, Iraq, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia.




It is common knowledge among Iraqi Jews that during
1949-1950 the famous Zionist, Mordechai ben Porat, who
had the nickname of Morad Abu al-Knabel (Mordechai
Bomber), was instrumental in seeking to bribe Iraqi
officials after the creation of the Zionist state to
pass laws to encourage Jews to leave Iraq. This was
enhanced by the Zionists planting bombs in synagogues
in Baghdad in March 1950. Information about this is
readily available on the internet. For more
information Click Here.




The writings of Mr. Naim Giladi document in detail
what the Zionists did in Baghdad in 1950 to provoke
the departure of the Jews to the Zionist state. The
Zionists do not care what effect their policies have
on the Jewish communities of any country. When they
accuse European nations of every sin under the sun, do
the Zionists care that this will produce hostility
towards Jews? No! Not a bit. On the contrary, as we
have discussed, they thrive on such circumstances,
clinging to the vain hope that these Jewish
communities will rush for the “salvation” of the “safe
haven” of the Zionist Paradise where Jews are in
constant danger as the Zionist regime undertakes every
form of cruel provocation against non-Jews.




In more recent times the Zionists have sought every
opportunity to encourage Jews to leave their home
countries. Anytime there is even the smallest event of
hostility toward Jews on the heels of Zionist policy,
or if there are signs of economic distress and
dislocation, the Zionists magnify it a thousand times,
seek to ruthlessly humiliate the nations involved, and
agitate for Jews to go to the Zionist state, the
so-called “natural home” of the Jewish People. This
has been the case in countries such as France,
Argentina, Uruguay, the former Soviet Union and Egypt.




The promises of the Torah are always to be realized.
This verse from the Torah demonstrates that those who
are his enemies will pay a price when The kingdom of
G-D will prevail.

by For KALW readers
Friday Dec 24th, 2004 10:05 AM
Bumped to the top for "Your Call Radio" end-of-the-week journalism roundtable review program KALW readers and studio panel guests.
by Sefarad
Friday Dec 24th, 2004 11:34 PM

Do you mean that the Jews in France are not being attacked?

Don't the Israelis have the right to take in their country whoever they want?
by For KALW readers
Friday Dec 31st, 2004 10:16 AM
For KALW readers: Fri, Dec, 31, journalist wrap-up.
by JA
Friday Jan 7th, 2005 10:42 AM
Of electronicintifada.org
by Joshua
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 12:18 PM
So, the anti-colonialist stuff is very interesting, and I agree with quite a lot of it, but the main point has, as always been missed. Do ANY of you leftists here have a problem with students at SFSU chanting "Hitler didn't finish the job"? Do ANY of you hee have a problem with that absolutely disgusting and racist poster that the palestinian students put out? Am I stupid for thinking that those of you on the left who preach anti-racism might actually BE anti-racist? So many jews out there are starting to wake up to the reality of what is going on on campuses like SFSU, I only hope more of us do before it is too late.

Oh yes, bigots, I am JEWISH. I hope that makes my ability to see through your rhetoric that much easier to swallow!
by ya know what...?
Friday Jan 28th, 2005 7:01 PM
...Go F*CK yourself and your lies.