Posts
since Wed, 26 Dec 2007 20:04:17.
American Zionist Leaders Become Radioactive
by Joachim Martillo (ThorsProvoni@aol.com)
On July 29th the David Project announced the departure of founder Charles Jacobs from the organization. (See The David Project Announces Change in Leadership [Press Release] and Charles Jacobs to depart from The David Project [Boston Jewish Advocate].) Tactically, a change of leaders makes sense for the organization because Jacobs in the minds of many leading Jews and non-Jews had become radioactive as fanatic supreme at a Jewish hate group despite the continued support of a very wealthy segment of the Jewish community for his various campaigns.
New leadership at the David Project may be a sign of a new strategy under development by US Israel advocacy organizations and by the State of Israel itself.
The Israeli government has long attempted to maintain direct control of international perceptions of the nature of Zionist movement, of the ethnic cleansing of most of Palestine in 1947-8 and of the brutality of occupation after the 1967 War.
The State of Israel has tried to escape its obligations under international law by claiming that it is no longer an occupying power both in areas of Occupied Territories controlled in theory by the PA and also in Gaza from which Israeli settlements have been removed.
Israeli government spokesmen and professional American Israeli advocates try to foist responsibility onto the international community or onto Arab and Muslim nations. (See Bashir's Willing Accomplices.) Generally outside the USA no one takes such Zionist claims seriously, and even in the USA many Americans are beginning to realize the magnitude of Israeli government lies.
In the USA Israel advocates have generally resorted to direct confrontation tactics in attempts to prevent academics from obtaining tenure when they like Norman Finkelstein, Nadia Abu el Haj, Joseph Massad, Rashid Khalidi, Juan Cole and many others diverge from or disagree with Zionist orthodoxy..
Because Zionists are in panic that Arab and Muslim Americans are beginning to participate fully in the public discussion of American Middle East policy, organizations like the David Project, StandWithUS, StopTheMadrassa, etc. use scare-mongering to demonize and to marginalize Arab or Muslim American citizens or conspire criminally to deny them their constitutional rights as US citizens.
These tactics have lately brought diminishing return on effort invested because they tend to create internal conflict within the American Jewish community while many non-Jews have developed increasing scorn for Jewish-Zionist attempts at thought-control. In the case of the David Project's attack on the Islamic Society of Boston, the ISB found friends it never knew it had while the David Project stoked animosity that had been ignited by the Newton Jew effort to stop the Somerville Divestment Project.
The outing of Neoconservatives as a Jewish special interest group that has harmed the USA for the sake of the State of Israel has created tremendous skepticism of other obviously Jewish Zionist disinformation campaigns like Save Darfur or the ongoing incitement for an attack on Iran.
In this new political climate of impatience with Jewish Zionist manipulation, Israel Advocacy groups and individuals are using indirection as an evolved form of Fabian tactics.
Because the David Project provoked such anger among Christian interfaith organizations, it seems to have abandoned all direct confrontation with Palestinian-sympathetic churches.
Nowadays, Sister Ruth Lautt and her organization Christians for Fair Witness is almost certainly being funded directly or indirectly by The David Project or its main contributors. On Religion - Lawyer-Turned-Nun Rises to Israel's Defense .... indicates all sorts of interesting connections, and the placement of such an article in the NY Times may be an indication of the hand of David Project agent provocateur Rachel Fish.*
The Board of Directors and Executive Committee of Christians for Fair Witness contain two important David Project operatives, whose association with Charles Jacobs is omitted from their biographies on Christians for Fair Witness web site:*
Dr. Dennis Hale, Secretary /Treasurer
Prof. Hale is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Boston College. He is a Lay Eucharistic Minister at Grace Episcopal Church in Medford, Massachusetts where he previously served as Vestryman and Treasurer. He is also a founding member and director of the Episcopal Jewish Alliance for Israel.
Mr. Dexter Van Zile
Mr. Van Zile is a layman in the United Church of Christ. He is Christian Media Analyst for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA). He received his M.A. in Political Science/Environmental Studies from Western Washington University and his B.A. in Politics and Government from the University of Puget Sound. In the 1980s, he served as a Peace Corps volunteer in Zaire, now known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
The rising political cost of the Khalil Gibran International Academy conflict from the standpoint of the mayor and of the NY Board of Education led to the termination of Debbie Almontaser with subsequent civil court battle between Almontaser and the City of New York instead of the criminal prosecution of the leaders of the StopTheMadrassa for Conspiracy Against Rights.
By scaring the University of Michigan Press from continued distribution of Pluto Press books, the conflict over Joel Kovel's book Overcoming Zionism no longer appears as an attempt by StandWithUs and wealthy Zionist donors to the University of Michigan to squash free thought or expression. Instead Pluto Press must find a new American distributor while Pluto Press authors no longer have direct access to the American market.
The direct attack on Nadia Abu el Haj failed miserably while the David Project's foray into film making via Unbecoming Columbia has not only fallen short of derailing Joseph Massad's application for tenure at Columbia but also focused more attention on the David Project and a New York Jew conspiracy against free expression than it did on Arab and Muslim professors at that university.
The latest salvo against Massad and other non-Zionist professors is more subtle. Zionist organizations neither need to fight tenure battles nor stifle academic publications if professional journals begin to fear that every time an article from an Arab or Muslim American scholar appears in an issue the publisher will have to cough up $75,000 or more to settle a libel suit. (See Neutrals, Caught in the Crossfire.)
Scholars that can't publish won't receive tenure.
The drama of the Gaza Fulbright scholars shows the effectiveness of indirection as a means to achieve Zionist or Israeli government political goals.
As part of a strategy to strangle the Hamas government, the Israeli government imposed a siege that included denying Gaza students access to foreign academic institutions. Condeleeza Rice objected, and all but three Gaza Fulbright scholars were given leave to exit Gaza.
I pointed out to various senior American academic leaders that they would be hypocritical in continuing to oppose a boycott of Israeli academic institutions while Israel prevented Palestinian students from taking part in international scholarship. Shortly afterwards, the remaining three Fulbright scholars received permission to depart for the US, but then the Israeli government made new information available to the US State Department, which then canceled the visas of the three Fulbright scholars and also a high school student.
No longer was the Israeli government denying the students access to US academic institutions, for the US state department was doing Zionist dirty work.
Frequently, the US government officials act not as public servants but as agents of Israel advocacy, of the Organized Jewish Community (OJC) or of the Israeli government. The Office of Special Investigations represents the most egregious example, for it hunts down old men, who at 15 or 16 were janitors at German concentration camps during WW2 but ignores someone like Rahm Emanuel's father, who by law should be deported to the Hague, where he can be tried before the International Criminal Court for ethnic cleansing and genocide during the 1947-8 Zionist theft of western Palestine from the native population.
Developing reflexive Zionist behavior in US government officials has been a long term project of Judonia. The Harvard Wexner Israel Fellowship at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government is one element of the project. It brings middle level Israeli bureaucrats together with middle level US government officials so that US government employees can be enmeshed in the Zionist point of view.
The effects of Zionist enmeshment at this point are quite striking. US laws and regulations from the tax code, the SEC, and the FEC are almost never applied to Jewish or Zionist groups while the OSI never pursues Jews and the State of Israel rarely fulfils treaty obligations or requirements as a recipient of US aid.
Not only has subversion of the US government reached such a level under President Bush that a strategy of remote indirect manipulation of the political, economic and legal system may be successful at least temporarily in controlling political debate about the Middle East within the US government, but Jewish Zionist organizations no longer involved in direct confrontations over university professors, divestment, scholarly articles, books, or Palestinians students will probably focus on illegitimating Arab and Muslim American defense organizations as representing un-American special interests.
Note
* NY Times author Samuel G. Freedman is almost certainly a Zionist facilitator/gatekeeper and either lies or conveniently fails to fact-check when he writes:
In the rancorous and relentless debate on the Middle East conflict, Sister Ruth stands as a sui generis player. She has little contact with Jewish advocacy groups, none with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobby. She disassociates herself from Christian Zionists of the theological and political right. Even while defending Israel's defensive measures, including the separation barrier, she openly criticizes its occupation of the West Bank and laments Palestinian suffering.
Ruth Lautt's lament for Palestinian suffering wholly blames Palestinians for their situation according to the liberal Zionist "compelling necessity" script, i.e, "If only the barbarism of Palestinians did not force the noble Israelis to take punitive action."
Related Articles
[Iran/Ahmedinejad]
[Joseph Massad]
[Joel Kovel/Pluto Press]
[Debbie Almontaser/KGIA]
- Profiteering from humanitarianism
- Poisoning Human Rights Discourse
- Killing Muslims Under Humanitarian Cover
- Harvard Supports Incinerating Arab Countries
- Singing HaTikvah while inciting a disastrous US invasion
- The Neocon Program to Incinerate Arab and Muslim Countries
- USHMM: National Thought Control
Is Alan Dershowitz good for the Jews?
Philip Weiss, who has been discussing Jewish dual loyalty, recently started a discussion of Alan Dershowitz. (See http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2007/07/dershowitz-once.html) The report below provides background.
Dershowitz' Talk at Eitz Chayim in Cambridge, MA
by Joachim Martillo
thorsprovoni@aol.com
9-29-2005
On September 18, 2005, Alan Dershowitz gave a talk on his new book, The Case for Peace: How the Arab-Israeli Conflict Can be Resolved at Congregation Eitz Chayim (Tree of Life) in Cambridge, MA (see below).
This reform Temple located in a charming Cambrigeport neighborhood has a heymish atmosphere more usually associated with Eastern European Orthodox synagogues. It feels a lot like the Workmen's Circle/Arbeter Ring in Brookline, and the two memberships probably have a lot of cultural similarity and overlap. If the audience for Dershowitz' presentation is typical, the members are becoming older and grayer, have a left-wing or radical intellectual heritage, but are moving toward the right along with the entire American Jewish community even if they want to think of themselves as progressive activists. The membership of Eitz Chayim never had as many reservations about Zionism as one might find at the Arbeter Ring, which once upon a time belonged to the tradition of the Jewish Bund, but at one time the synagogue probably a fairly strong anti-Zionist (or at least Zionism-critical) contingent. It was not in evidence at Dershowitz' lecture.
Dershowitz gave his talk in the temple auditorium in front of the Aron Hakodesh, where the Scroll of the Torah is housed. The hall was practically full (probably more than 100 people). A reporter for The Boston Globe attended, but no article has appeared in that paper as of September 27.
Dershowitz did not present much material not contained in his book, and reading the book is probably more efficient than actually making the effort to see him in person. The Boston Public Library has at least eleven copies of it (but only six copies of Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpah, which provides careful analysis of Dershowitz' claims in The Case for Israel). Dershowitz told the audience that the profit from the sale of this new volume in Dershowitzian oeuvre will go to assist needy college students in the purchase of textbooks.
Of course, as far as can be determined, Dershowitz has never made the payment that he promised for finding factual errors in The Case for Israel.
Dershowitz did not present any new ideas in his talk. He merely made frequent assertion that the vast majority of reasonable Palestinians accept the self-evident rationality of his two-state plan. After reading the five basic elements of Dershowitz' framework for peace (pg. 2, The Case for Peace), no one should be surprised that Dershowitz is unable to provide the name of any Palestinian that agrees with him.
Here are elements 2 and 5 (the quote marks belong to Dershowitz):
2. Some symbolic recognition of the rights of Palestinian "refugees," including a compensation package and some family reunification, but no absolute "right of return" to Israel of the millions of descendants of those who claim refugee status -- a questionable "right" whose exercise would produce the great wrong of returning the Jewish state into yet another Muslim Arab state. All Palestinians should have the right to "return" to what will become the Palestinian state.
5. An end to the singling out of Israel for demonization and delegitimation -- and to the hatred directed against the Jewish state and its citizens and supporters -- by international organizations, many academics, religious leaders, and media pundits; and the normalization and acceptance of Israel as a full and equal member of the international community.
Dershowitz' bigoted refusal to acknowledge that ethnic Ashkenazi Eastern Europeans uprooted the native Palestinian population when they stole the territory of pre-1967 Israel makes it impossible for him to use the term refugees without quote marks.
Dershowitz' peace proposal reduces to forcing the ethnically cleansed Palestinian population to forfeit basic human rights of property and residence and to find homes elsewhere while murderous genocidal racist thieves and interlopers go unpunished, and the rest of us are not even allowed to discuss the villainy of Dershowitz, of his fellow racist Ashkenazi Americans and of murderous militaristic Zionist colonizers, who routinely use Palestinian children for target practice (according to the casualty statistics supplied by Israeli and non-Israeli human rights organizations).
For Dershowitz "peace" means that all the stolen property should remain in the hands of robbers, that the criminals should be granted amnesty, not only for past outrages but for what they are going to do. His "peace" puts native non-Jews in open-air prisons surrounded by tanks and checkpoints. His "peace" requires that all non-Jews in the US and in Palestine should accept second-class status to Jews while racist anti-Arab anti-Muslim Neocons dictate governmental policy, which includes using American youth to commit genocide and torture throughout Arab and Islamic countries, despite the wishes of the majority of the American population.
When Dershowitz elaborates his solution, he consistently places the onus of the conflict on the native population, whose right to democratic self-determination was thwarted by the British Mandate for Palestine with the connivance of the racist Zionist leadership. He insinuates that the native Palestinian population is guilty of some sort of original sin for rebelling against Zionist colonization, for ineffectively seeking aid from the Germans during the 40s -- something the Zionists did very effectively during the 30s, for very infrequently stating the facts of Zionist ethnic cleansing/re-folking (Umvolkung) in Palestinian Authority textbooks(*), and for reacting violently to Zionist depredations during the post-1967 occupation.
Occasionally, Dershowitz admits flaws in Zionist behavior (like the "relatively minor" prejudice and bigotry found in Zionist textbooks). Yet he is certain of the moral superiority of ethnic Ashkenazim and Zionist colonizers, and Dershowitz asserts that in response to every violent act that Palestinians commit (almost invariably in reaction to some Zionist outrage) Israel has the right (or maybe even the absolute obligation) to steal even more land in addition to the territory that Zionist colonizers stole in 1947-8. The Zionist occupation forces generally do much worse than steal more land when Palestinians reply to Zionist provocation. The IDF shoots up towns, bombs residences, kills civilians, destroys farmland, and walls up towns. The situation in the Occupied Territories approximates Nazi-Occupied Poland just before the mass murders began.
While discussing Finkelstein, Dershowitz made a very obscure claim that he really did not justify collective punishment against Palestinians of the sort that German Nazis applied to the Czech village of Lidice, and he also tried to prove that he really was not anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian because he intervened with the Harvard administration so that a student organization would be able to fly a Palestinian flag on Harvard campus last winter. Dershowitz expects his readership to overlook the vicious murderous Eastern European völkisch racism that underlies the Dershowitzian ideas, argument and proposal.
While American Poles, American Italians and Americans of other ethnic groups generally do not manipulate or exploit America for the sake of their racist tribalism, racist ethnic Ashkenazim like Dershowitz and his Harvard colleagues, President Lawrence Summers and Professor Ruth Wisse, have no problem with the sacrifice of American values and principles for the sake of militant Jewish exceptionalism and aggression.
Rarely does Dershowitz allude to the bigger picture like the anger of the whole world against the US for pandering racist ethnic Ashkenazi Americans in supporting Israel. Can anyone take the US government seriously when the US proclaims support for democracy, anti-racism, and human rights but supports a perverted criminal ideology like Zionism, which is inherently antidemocratic, racist and opposed to the very concept of human rights?
Dershowitz made a point of condemning the Somerville Divestment Project (SDP) for singling out Israel, and he parroted the ridiculous and vacuous logic of the subversive and racist Boston Israel Action Committee of the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC). Dershowitz is apparently unaware of the traditional activism and history of Somerville, which led in the anti-slavery movement and which has divested from other human rights abusers in the past. Dershowitz never explained how his support for undermining American democracy would lead to "peace" in the Middle East, nor did he explain why he thought that Americans should be forced against their will to pay the tab for Israel's existence.
Dershowitz' reply to a questioner during the discussion period betrays the true nature of Dershowitz' "solution" to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The attendee, who claimed to have worked in Israel for the last decade and to have witnessed many human rights violations, pointed out that the organized Jewish community and many individual American Jewish scholars have condemned American individuals and corporations for being invested in 1930s Germany, which was a human rights violator not much different from Israel today. He concluded by asking Dershowitz whether it was wrong to reject a standard for Israel that Jews want to apply to non-Jews. Dershowitz rather lamely replied that Israel was not like Nazi Germany and therefore should be exempted from the human rights yardstick. Dershowitz accords to Israel a privileged status that excludes it from the scrutiny of non-Jews. Dershowitz's answer is a good summary of the book, whose whole purpose is a justification for preserving the privileges of Jews shamelessly living on stolen Palestinian property.
Are the only parties to the conflict the native Palestinian population and the criminal Zionist colonizers or should we perhaps be asking whether an ethnic fundamentalist state whose ideology differs little from that of 1930s Germany (except for the obvious ethnic substitutions) should be permitted to exist in the twenty-first century? The US destroyed Baathist Iraq in a matter of weeks. The US could probably abolish the Zionist state of Israel in a similar timeframe with no comparable negative consequences and at much lower cost.
Dershowitz made it clear several times during his talk that he reserves special enmity for intellectuals like Tony Judt, Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky and Susan Blackwell who work to undermine the legitimacy of the racist ethnic Ashkenazi exceptionalist mind set. There is probably an element of self-preservation in Dershowitz' hatred of these people. If the anti-exceptionalist point of view becomes dominant in the USA, Dershowitz, Summers, Wisse and their intellectual bedfellows could find themselves the next generation of denizens of Guantanamo and similar concentration camps, where they could be interrogated or tortured according to Dershowitzian principles to determine the extent of their anti-American conspiracy to support Zionist terrorism.
(*) PA textbooks rarely deal with the issue at all. Dershowitz does not read Arabic and is simply repeating the standard Zionist disinformation and demonization that racist ethnic Ashkenazim disseminate in the USA. See http://www.ifamericansknew.org for a study of Palestinian textbooks.
ORIGINAL ANNOUNCEMENT
Congregation Eitz Chayim's Adult Education series continues Sunday, September 18, from 10:30-12 noon (come early for bagels and coffee) with Alan Dershowitz speaking on his latest book, The Case for Peace: How the Arab-Israeli Conflict Can be Resolved. President Bill Clinton has this to say about Prof. Dershowitz's new book: "The simple chord that resonates through the complex scenarios described in The Case for Peace is one of decency and respect -- for Palestinians, for Israelis, and, ultimately, for humanity itself. . . Hopeful and wise, the blueprint for stability presented in this book is among the best in recent years." Alan Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and a leading appellate lawyer in the defense of individual liberties. His many books include The Case for Israel (2003), the #1 New York Times bestseller Chutzpah, and The Vanishing American Jew. His talk is cosponsored by Porter Square Books as part of the new Cambridge Jewish Community Authors Series. After Prof. Dershowitz's presentation, all are invited to stay for coffee and good conversation with Eitz Chayim leaders and members, to learn about our long-time Cambridge non-denominational, egalitarian community, children's school, celebrations, membership, and more! Eitz Chayim is located at 136 Magazine Street, Cambridge (in Cambridgeport). For more information, call, email us, or visit our website. All are welcome!
136 Magazine Street Cambridge MA 617-497-7626 info @ eitz.org http://www.eitz.org/