« "Loud Folly" By Richard Sale | Main | Marcus is puzzled over Turkey and Syria »

27 July 2015


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

William R. Cumming

As we all know history has not ended. But IMO once again those who believe they accurately reflect "Jewish" opinion DO NOT! NEVER AGAIN may be becoming EVER AGAIN!

Outrage Beyond

In observing this disconnect, one might wonder why it exists. A key reason is economic. Just as the USA has become an oligarchy, so has Israel. Cursory research will reveal the claim that 18 or 19 families control a significant share of major businesses and thus wealth, in Israel. It's a private club, and a small group runs it.

Likewise, these tentacles of influence reach their counterparts in the USA: extremely wealthy individuals who fund lobbies, propaganda shops (aka "think tanks") and advocates of more wars on behalf of Israel. This very small coterie of Zionist dead-enders will cheerfully continue to spend hundreds of millions to protect their favorite racist enclave.

*I have to take exception to the idea that Abe Foxman is somehow an outlier in this matter. Abe Foxman was a great enthusiast of the Iraq War for Israel; and it appears he's equally eager for one against Iran. He's an outspoken racist as well, although the media doesn't seem particularly eager to expose it. Of particular note is an hour-long video in which Abe can be seen conversing with NYT Zionist reporter Jodi Rudoren and her husband in Jerusalem. Abe makes several derogatory references to "the Arabs" in the video. One can't help but note that if someone else, in a similar video, made such reference to "the Jews" that Abe Foxman would immediately be sounding off about such heinous behavior. Abe Foxman sees himself as a speech policeman, someone whose goal is to restrict free speech. Although it's rather like shooting fish in a barrel, one wonders why Foxman hates the First Amendment so much.


Hmmm?? Foxman's position as reported by Steven Mufson is indeed interesting. Stay out of direct campaigns but ultimately support a "no" or more sanctions, force Iran into a complete surrender?

Here is the official take by ADL.



A watcged the last part of a documentary about Aby Nathan a couple of days ago. I wasn't aware of him. It's a real pity that the anti-settlement voices in Israel never really had a chance. ... the rest is what, ethnopolitics?


mysteries. lately I have a lot more understanding for people's spelling errors in English, but how can one mistake an A on the keyboard for an I?


"In observing this disconnect, one might wonder why it exists. "

The oligarchic bit seems to be a bit of a result, not the origin of it. Look into who won in the larger Zionist discourse and why, that may get you farther. ... It could at least become one little piece in the larger puzzle.


"It's a real pity that the anti-settlement voices in Israel never really had a chance. ... the rest is what, ethnopolitics?"

The current Israeli government even defines what is legitimate intra-ethnic discourse quite narrowly.

They are cracking down on what they variously describe as self-hating, disloyal Jews - or foreign agents - NGO activists of Groups like B'Tselem or Breaking the Silence.

Whoever reports that the IDF is beating up or killing Palestinians, or evicts them or wrecks their houses, is fouling the nest, and that only serves foreign interests.

Israel's justice chick is so intent on screwing Israel's anti-war and anti-occupation movements that she doesn't mind to destroy freedom of speech while at it. Her idea is to tax opposition to death and destroy their means to contuinue their work rather than prohibiting them form speaking outright:

"The bill, tabled by Yinon Magal, a member of the Knesset from the far-right Jewish Home coalition partner, would undermine the funding of the human rights organisations, which depend heavily on foreign support.

Under the bill, if an organisation receives more than $50,000 (£32,000) a year from foreign governments, it would have to pay a 37 per cent tax on those donations. The bill also specifies that government ministries and the army must refrain from co-operating with foreign-funded non-governmental organisations and that they must make clear their foreign funding sources in their correspondence.

Jewish Home has made it clear that the intent of the bill is to stifle what it sees as “foreign” criticism of Israel.

“Foreign governments come and donate tens of millions of dollars to organisations that act against the policy of the Israeli government and slander Israel and the army of Israel. This has to stop,” Mr Magal told The Independent.
“We are an embattled democracy and we have to preserve this democracy from those who would destroy it from outside.”


I guess in a country that has had military censorship for so long, such a stance must come quite natural, as must the logic: Israel is perpetually embattled, thus, perpetually, everything must serve the war effort! Dissent? Are you with us or with the enemy?

The example underlines the blind ethnocentric zeal and the siege mentality of the current Israeli government exemplarily.

ex-PFC Chuck

Our reptilian brain stems can do strange things.

William R. Cumming

And perhaps up to a dozen of those families involved in ORGANIZED CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. No rule of law in Israel IMO!


"The current Israeli government even defines what is legitimate intra-ethnic discourse quite narrowly"

I am aware of it. And I promise to read the rest, cp.

Are you aware of the "self-hating Jew" discourse over the centuries? Ever read Theodor Lessing's take?

I am pretty much aware of anything you try to tell me.

But just as with Varoufakis, I wonder about solutions. And without doubt ADL could be a big part of a larger solution, but apparently is unable to.


Can we talk about the Jewish disconnect on immigration?

All other nations must be open for everyone vs. the Jewish character of Israel must be forever preserved.


Outrage Beyond


I think we're largely in agreement. My commentary was on the current situation, not the origins.

As to those origins, I am well aware of how the "iron wall" doctrine of Jabotinsky prevailed over the early advocates of binationalism, to reduce it to a very brief explanation. That's obviously a much lengthier topic.

Also, as WRC notes below there is a significant gangster element in the Zionist oligarchy, which leads to the attitude that they can do whatever they want, however they want, and that "America is a thing that can be easily moved" to quote Milikovsky (aka Netanyahu).


ALS: I think Mr. Herzog should be asked, "Can you name one other country that sends its representatives to Congress to lobby against the policies of the elected US president?"

Simply. Stunning. Hubris.

David Habakkuk

Adam Silverman,

I know very well that the positions of the majority of American Jews cannot be equated with those of organisations and individuals that profess to speak for them.

However, a question has to arise as to why there has been so little organised opposition, among American – and British – Jews, to those very highly-organised groups, and very powerful individuals, who have simply recycled 'talking points' from successive Israeli governments and sought to bend the USG to the will of those governments.

As to individual opposition to these, most of us could name Jews of high intelligence and courage who have done precisely this, but they are rather few and, so far at least, appear to have had marginal influence.

As regards Britain, a consequence of this, to be blunt, is that we are seeing a mild revival of anti-Semitism. The reasons for this it seems that most American Jews simply cannot understand.

Not long ago, Jeffrey Goldberg produced an article of ineffable stupidity in the 'Atlantic', entitled 'Is Time for the Jews to Leave Europe?'

(See http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/03/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/ .)

At the end, there was an explanation which made a great deal clear. His grandfather, Goldberg explains 'grew up in a pogrom-afflicted village, not far from Kishinev' – which was, of course, the scene of very famous pogroms, in 1903 ands 1905.

From the remainder of the article, it was clear that for Goldberg it is Kishinev which tells the eternal truth about the 'goyim' in Europe – including Britain. This is a man who, psychologically, is still in Kishinev, and has no plans to leave anytime soon. Increasingly, it is clear that this is the essential condition of most Israelis, and, it appears, rather a large number of American Jews.

Unfortunately, the 'liberal Zionists' have, over the past half-century, done very little to combat rather less 'liberal' Zionists' like Goldberg. As far as Britain is concerned, the consequences of this were well spelt out in an open letter to the President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Vivian Wineman, by an interesting man called Robert Cohen, on his blog 'Micah's Paradigm Shift.'

(See http://micahsparadigmshift.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/boycotting-from-within-letter-to.html .)

Certainly Cohen is not typical of anything, in that on the one hand he is an orthodox Jew, rather than a secular one, while on the other he is married to an Anglican minister and lives in North Yorkshire – as he notes on the blog, one of the least Jewish counties in England. But by virtue of this situation he is probably in a better position than many to grasp the complexities of British feelings about these matters.

A critical matter that Cohen raises to Wineman – which is very much in the minds of many in Britain, including some of the most traditionally philo-Semitic – has to do with the continued professions by 'liberal Zionists' of their faith in the 'two-state solution'.

An obvious problem is that the same 'liberal Zionists' have had almost half a century in which they could have done something to attempt to prevent successive Israeli governments pursuing colonisation policies that have made a 'two-state solution' impossible. Instead, they have done practically nothing.

(At least in this country they have been more reluctant than in yours to acquiesce in the smearing of those who have tried to save Israel from itself as 'anti-Semites'.)

So Cohen writes to Wineman:

'Your faith in the two-state solution would carry more conviction if you had once in the last 25 years urged the State of Israel to recognise international law, halt settlement construction and accept that Jerusalem should and could be shared. But you did not.'

(See http://micahsparadigmshift.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/boycotting-from-within-letter-to.html .)

And Cohen then goes on to explain one set of reasons why anti-Zionism is actually producing anti-Semitism among some groups which, historically have not been anti-Semitic at all. Having stressed that there is nothing inherently anti-Semitic in the notion of bringing pressure to bear on Israel through economic protest, he goes on to write:

'But if BDS supporters find it difficult to make the distinction between Jews and the State of Israel it's hardly surprising. Every Israeli Prime Minister enjoys speaking as if they were our international leader. Our communal organisations, like the Board, refuse to offer an ounce of criticism towards Israel and our synagogues offer weekly prayers for the State of Israel and its defence forces. Why wouldn't BDS campaigners draw the conclusion that Judaism, Jews and Zionism are all one and the same?

'Over the last 70 years we have merged our ancient faith with a very modern political nationalist project to the point where most Jews accept the State of Israel as a seamless continuum of all our beliefs and traditions. You have contributed greatly to this situation but have left yourself no room and no words to unscramble it.'


WRC, I told you before, I don't like your screaming´capitalzation. Makes me wonder in fact if you are a democrat at heart or more a propagandist, to be quite honest.

Once you accept the idea of freedom, generally, you will realize that you will not ever be able to prevent that some take their chances, maybe even have a better financial basis then others, according to what circumstances allow. And yes, not all of them must necessarily be basically criminal.


Mr. Silverman

Sitting in my car listening to Pandora, and heard an ad from "Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran" urging folks to call Congress to reject the deal. One reason mentioned is that Iran is the largest sponsor of terrorism. The other being Iran will continue to do research and will be ready in "weeks" to make nuclear weapons.



Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran is funded by AIPAC. CFNI's commercials are ubiquitous during the evening news programs.


The part I love the must is they don't have to register as lobbyist.
I think America should stop sending them money and weapons. Spend here instead.


A better question for every American, Jewish or otherwise, is whether they think this is a good deal for the United States; there should be no other considerations for Americans, frankly. If those American Jews who are against the deal feel that way because it's bad for Israel, that should be reported, too.

The Beaver

Mr Silverman,

I still haven't find a good/real reason as to why the DOJ intervened in the case of Victor Restis versus UANI - Thomas Kaplan is married to the daughter of a rich israeli businessman and who does not know the Adelson's money into UANI.

Babak Makkinejad

The world then indeed owes a great debt of gratitude to the few tens of thousands of Iranian Jews who continue to live in Iran - as they have had been living for the past 2500 years - and God Willing, will continue to do so for the next 2500 years.

Those Iranian Jews are truly the Inconvenient Truth - to Israelis, to the Zionists Jews everywhere, and to Protestant Christians as well as to the Shoah Cultists in Europe and elsewhere.


we had the same worldview under Cheney/Bush only 7yrs ago, and may well come back to it. Great danger in RightSpeak and RightThink.

Adam L. Silverman


It is interesting, and in some cases shocking, to watch Israeli political and societal development. Some of this is the result of the neighborhood Israel is - the regional environment and context is somewhat unique and that's had an effect. The other, as I've mentioned here before, is basically the dynamic in an old political science axiom I learned as an undergraduate: if you treat a group of people despotically and they are freed or free themselves and set up their own state and society it tends towards the despotic and tyrannical. Or, to put it in biblical terms: the Israelites needed between 200 and 400 years in the wilderness and desert in order to forget what it was like to be enslaved before they could be trusted with establishing a new society. While I'm not a big fan of applying biblical principles to understand or resolve modern day problems, I think this dynamic from the Book of Exodus is most illuminating in this case.

Adam L. Silverman


The issue is less with the ADL per se and more with Rabbi Foxman. ADL's sole purpose is to serve as a watchdog and a resource on anti-Semitism and extremism. In this they are very good at what they do. Rabbi Foxman, however, became sort of a news media celebrity over the years, which has caused some heartburn for the ADL. If I'm recalling correctly one of the reasons that he pulled back on the news commentary appearances was that the ADL was catching a lot of bad publicity over his appearances, who's shows he was going on given the over all tone and positions of the hosts, and how he was basically out there as the titular head of the ADL, but opining and speaking on issues outside of the organizations mission that seemed to raise the question of just what the ADL is or is doing versus what it is supposed to be doing.

Adam L. Silverman


I think what you see here is the difference between Jews, who could be American or Canadian or English or French or Australian or etc, versus Israelis, the majority of whom are Jewish. I don't think you're specifically making a purposeful conflation, but this is one that is all to common. Jewish Americans, for instance, may be more or less in favor of immigration - I'm not going to go look for the survey data right now, but I'd be very surprised to find that a majority are not in favor of legal immigration. I'd also be willing to wager that there would be majority Jewish American support for humane treatment of illegal migrants based on how Jewish Americans tend to respond on social attitudes/views. This, as you know, is quite different than Israel's position, a position of a nation-state with a Jewish majority. So in the former case you have a religious minority within America and the latter a majority within a separate nation-state, where there is significant conflation between Jews as those who adhere to the religion of Judaism and Jews as a distinct ethnic or ethno-national group, which is also synonymous with being Israeli or, at least, the Israeli majority.

Adam L. Silverman

David Habakkuk,

I think this makes a lot of sense; especially as the Israelis - and very publicly Netanyahu, have conflated Israeli with Jewish. In the case of the US I think the driver behind the disconnect is that people have lives to live. And since Jewish Americans are now, basically, considered Americans who just have a different religion (with a few notable exceptions), the Jewishness of Jewish Americans isn't a major issue in mosts day to day lives. As a result stuff gets ignored because its not vital to what one is or isn't doing on any given day. This is, in many ways, similar to why turnout at mid-term elections in the US is so low. They're not exciting, we're not electing the president, who cares who is on the local school board or is one's state representative. As a result the only people that turn out are the hyper attuned. Those that are angry or upset or who have a long list of grievances. As a result a lot of our local and state elected officials are elected by less than 20% of those eligible to vote. I think this sort of apathy or everyday events and things is the driving dynamic in what you're describing. Getting involved and actually doing something is hard. It means being willing to get into a disagreement with one's friends and family, not to mention focusing on something other than what one is going to do this weekend. So its just easier to let these organizations do whatever it is they do and, maybe, write them a check or make a donation by paypal because that's an easy thing to do. Even if the organizations aren't really representing their views and wishes.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad