Henry Makow

This essay was written in September 2002.

Christians who believe Israel represents an outpost of Western Civilization might benefit from a book entitled "Jewish History, Jewish Religion" (1994) by Israel Shahak, a Professor Emeritus at Hebrew University.

Shahak escaped from a Nazi concentration camp and later served in the Israeli army. He is an organic chemist who combines a research scientist's objectivity with a humanist's commitment to universal ideals.

It appears that Judaism made a mistake when it rejected Christ's gospel of Love. As a consequence, Judaism may have become a primitive and possibly dangerous anachronism in the 21st Century. According to Shahak, Judaism is a xenophobic totalitarian belief system that has morphed into a fanatical Zionist ideology that now threatens the whole world.

I must admit that, even as an assimilated Jew, reading this book was like taking cod liver oil, not pleasant.

More »

Gilad Atzmon

Ilan Pappé is an important voice. One of those courageous historians, brave enough to open the Pandora box of 1948. Back in the 1990s Pappe, amongst a few other Israeli post-Zionists, reminded Israelis of their original sin - the orchestrated, racially-driven ethnic cleansing of the indigenous people of Palestine - the Nakba.

On Nov. 30, 1947, Jews in Tel Aviv celebrate after the UN's
decision to partition Palestine into an "Arab" and a Jewish state.

But like many historians, Pappé, though familiar with the facts of history, seems either unable to grasp or reluctant to address the ideological and cultural meaning of those facts.

In his recent article, "When Israeli Denial of Palestinian Existence Becomes Genocidal," Pappé attempts to explain the ongoing Israeli dismissal of the Palestinian plight. Like Shlomo Sand, Pappé points out that Israeli President Shimon Peres’ take on history is a “fabricated narrative.”

So far so good, but Pappé then misses the point. For some reason, he believes that Peres’ denial of the Palestinian’s suffering is a result of a ‘cognitive dissonance.’ i.e. a discomfort experienced when two or more conflicting ideas, values or beliefs are held at the same time.

But what are those conflicting ideas or values upheld by Israelis and their President which cause them so much ‘discomfort’? Pappé does not tell us. Nor does he explain how Peres has sustained such ‘discomfort’ for more than six decades. Now, I agree that Peres, Netanyahu and many Israelis often exhibit clear psychotic symptoms, but one thing I cannot detect in Peres’ utterances or behavior is any ‘discomfort’.

More »

Arthur Silber

A Palestinian woman and her child run for cover after an Israeli air-
strike hit the northern Gaza City on Friday. (M. Longari/AFP/Getty)

The most striking and significant quality of our national conversation "is one of overwhelming, oppressive and suffocating unreality. It is as if everyone knows, but will never acknowledge, that we may speak only in code, and that we may only utilize the safe, empty phrases that we have agreed are 'acceptable' -- phrases and language that are safe precisely because they have been drained of all correspondence to facts. It is as if everyone realizes, but will never state, that we are engaged in an elaborate charade, a pageant of gesture and indication, where substance and specific meaning have been banned. ... [T]he truth is not merely unpleasant, an uninvited guest who makes conversation difficult and awkward. Truth is the enemy; truth is to be destroyed."

Gaza is a concentration camp. It is not like a concentration camp. It is not a metaphorical or figurative concentration camp. It is a concentration camp. Our culture, our political leaders, and the cacophony of voices in the media have all agreed that this truth must never be spoken. If one wanted to be momentarily charitable about people's absolute refusal to recognize the obvious, one might argue that a land area of approximately 140 square miles, containing a population of roughly 1.7 million people, could not possibly be a concentration camp. But size and the number of prisoners are not the distinguishing characteristics of a concentration camp. The most essential characteristic of a concentration camp is what is permitted, and what is not. Only one question matters: Under what conditions are the people within its borders permitted to live?

Israel controls most of Gaza's land borders, just as Israel controls the air space above it and the waters that border Gaza on the west. The sole exception is the small border with Egypt, and Israel subjects that border to attacks whenever it chooses. In essence, nothing is permitted in or out of Gaza without Israel's permission.

More »

Alan Ireland

John Laffin

Murray Dixon and the specter of Christian Zionism

PART TWO -Semantics in the service of polemics

As New Zealand entered the 1980s, the country was more concerned about apartheid in South Africa than about Islam. Islam was sometimes in the news, but was not a big issue. All that changed in 1986, when local Christian Zionists declared war on their perceived enemy in the interminable struggle against "demonized flesh" and the "father of lies".

I realized that something was afoot on July 13, when a letter from a "Dr John Laffin", of Monomark House, London [4], appeared in the letters columns of the Tribune — a free, weekly, Palmerston North newspaper that doesn't normally find its way to Wellington, let alone London. The letter began: "As a recognized world authority on Islam I cannot allow to go unchallenged and uncorrected some comments made by Dr Ashraf Choudhary [5] in your issue of June 23." (This issue had carried an article by Jim Marr about the contributions that Muslims could make to New Zealand society.) The letter went on to make such sweeping statements as "Islam is a religion of pride while Christianity is a religion of humility". Laffin then took Choudhary to task for saying that "Islam" means "peace", and claimed that "No authority on Islam, whether Muslim or not, construes or translates 'Islam' to mean 'peace' ".

Puzzled by this alacritous outbust from an "authority" in London, I went to see the editor of the Tribune. But she only added to the mystery: The letter had been posted in Palmerston North, not London. "Yes," we thought it was a little strange," she said, "so we kept the envelope." She produced it for me. And there, in the top left-hand corner, were the words "International Christian Embassy (Jerusalem)". There was also a Palmerston North telephone number, which I called.

The telephone was answered by Murray Dixon, to whom I introduced myself as a person who was "interested in religion". Could he tell me what "International Christian Embassy" was all about? He certainly could. He spent about 10 minutes explaining the principles of Christian Zionism, although he did not, of course, use that term. I thanked him, and hung up.

More »

Stephen Lendman

War criminal B. Netanyahu appears to be celebrating the report.
Partner-in-crime S. Peres would appear to be pretty happy too...

International law is explicit, fundamental, inviolable, and sacrosanct.

In January 2012, Netanyahu appointed a three-member committee headed by former Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levy. Included were former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker and former Tel Aviv District Court president Tchia Shapira. They examined three issues:

(1) Legal aspects of Israel's occupation.
(2) The 2005 Sasson Report's conclusion that dozens of outposts built on privately owned Palestinian land were illegal.
(3) Whether Israel's presence in the West Bank is, or is not, an occupation.

Levy's report rewrote international law. It claimed that occupation

"as set out in the relevant international conventions cannot be considered applicable to the unique and sui generis historic and legal circumstances of Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria spanning over decades."

"Israelis have the legal right to settle in Judea and Samaria and the establishment of settlements cannot, in and of itself, be considered illegal."

It recommended legalizing illegal outposts. It said zoning officials should authorize them without further political approval. It urged no restraints on settlement construction. Netanyahu praised the report.

More »

Uri Avnery

The master magician has drawn another rabbit from his top hat. A real and very lively rabbit.

He has confounded everybody, including the leaders of all parties, the top political pundits and his own cabinet ministers.

He has also shown that in politics, everything can change – literally – overnight.

At 2 a.m. the Knesset was busy putting the finishing touches to a law to dissolve itself – condemning half of its members to political oblivion.

At 3 a.m. there was a huge new government coalition. No elections, thank you very much.

An operetta in 5 acts.

ACT ONE: Everything tranquil. Public opinion polls show Binyamin Netanyahu in absolute control. His popularity is approaching 50%; nobody else’s even approaches 20%.

The largest party in the Knesset, Kadima, sinks in the polls from 28 seats to 11, with all indications that it will continue to fall. Its new leader, former Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz, gets even less points as candidate for Prime Minister.

Netanyahu could sun himself on the roof of his luxury villa and contemplate the future with equanimity. All is well in the best of all Jewish states.

More »

Uri Avnery

Arch Terrorist Benjamin Netanyahu

Generals and secret police chiefs get together for an attack on the politicians.

In some countries, they arrest the president, occupy government offices and TV stations and annul the constitution. They then publish Communique No. 1, explaining the dire need to save the nation from perdition and promising democracy, elections etc.

In other countries, they do it more quietly. They just inform the elected leaders that, if they don’t desist from their disastrous policies, the officers will make their views public and precipitate their downfall.

Such officers are generally called a “junta”, the Spanish word for “committee” used by South American generals. Their method is usually called a “putsch”, a German-Swiss term for a sudden blow. (Yes, the Swiss actually had revolts some 170 years ago.)

What almost all such coups have in common is that their instigators thrive on the demagoguery of war. The politicians are invariably accused of cowardice in face of the enemy, failure to defend national honor, and such.

Not in Israel. In our country we are now seeing a kind of verbal uprising against the elected politicians by a group of current and former army generals, foreign intelligence and internal security chiefs. All of them condemn the government’s threat to start a war against Iran, and some of them condemn the government’s failure to negotiate with the Palestinians for peace. — Only in Israel.

More »

William A. Cook

Israeli Jews watching with glee as Gaza burns...

Gilad Atzmon’s insight into the organism created by the Zionist movement in his book, The Wandering Who?, is explosive; it tears the veil off of Israel’s apparent civility, its apparent friendship with the United States, and its expressed solicitude for western powers—Britain, Canada, Australia, France and Germany—exposing behind the veil, the assassin ready to slay any and all that interfere with its tribally focused ends.

In February of this year, Atzmon characterized Islam and Judaism as tribally oriented belief systems rooted not in “enlightened individualism,” but rather in “…the survival of the extended family.” These belief systems have nothing to do with personal liberties or personal rights; they have to do with securing the realm of their respective “ways of life.” But unlike tribalism in Islam, tribalism in Judaism “can never live in peace with humanism and universalism”. “Both religions stand as systems that provide thorough answers in terms of spiritual, civil, cultural and day to day matters.” In this regard, “…both Islam and Judaism are more than just religions: they convey an entire ‘way of life,’ and stand as a thorough attempt to answer crucial questions regarding being in the world…”

The Wandering Who? is a personal journey of a man born in Jerusalem, raised in the Jewish ‘way of life,’ infused with the myths of the founding of the Jewish state; “Supremacy was brewed into our soul, we gazed at the world through racist, chauvinistic binoculars. And we felt no shame about it either”. Inducted into the Israeli military during the 1980s he served in Lebanon, and, in his late teens, experienced an epiphany caused in good measure by careful listening to voices beyond the wall that encircled him in the ghetto that is the Israeli state. This epiphany forced a distinction in identity versus identifying, between self-reliance and obedient servant to an ideology, a distinction that recognized Jews as people, Judaism as a religion, and Jewishness, an ideology that determines identity politics and a resulting political discourse.

More »

Stephen Lendman

"According to the law, a person or an organization calling for the boycott of Israel, including the settlements, can be sued by the boycott’s targets without having to prove that they sustained damage. The court will then decide how much compensation is to be paid. The second part of the law says a person or a company that declare a boycott of Israel or the settlements will not be able to bid in government tenders." (Shalom Rav/Haaretz)

A previous article discussed it in detail, accessed through this link.

Before and after its July 11 passage, critics called it outrageous, shameful, lawless, and anti-democratic. More on that below.

In contrast, Netanyahu praised the measure, saying he authorized the bill:

"If I hadn't authorized it, it wouldn't have gotten here. I am opposed to boycotts against Israel and boycotts against groups within Israel."

The pro-Israeli NGO Monitor (NGOM) tried having it both ways, saying:

It doesn't "see this legislation as the appropriate means to combat the BDS movement. However, numerous NGOs have released misleading and false statements about the new law, (including saying it) criminalizes freedom of speech."

In fact, that's precisely what it does, infringing on the right of Israelis to speak freely on any issue without fear of recrimination.

NGOM, however, called public debate about it "indicative of the strength and vibrancy of Israeli democracy," when it exists solely for Jews, increasingly only well-off ones, benefitting at the expense of lower income Israelis like in America and other Western states.

More »

Uri Avnery

Rabbi Shapira, no grounds for remand (Photo: Noam Moskowitz)

The Archbishop of New York announces that any Catholic who rents out an apartment to a Jew commits a mortal sin and runs the risk of excommunication.

A protestant priest in Berlin decrees that a Christian who employs a Jew will be banished from his parish.

Impossible? Indeed. Except in Israel – in reverse, of course.

The rabbi of Safed, a government employee, has decreed that it is strictly forbidden to let apartments to Arabs – including the Arab students at the local medical school. Twenty other town rabbis – whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers, mostly secular, including Arab citizens - have publicly supported this edict. A group of Israeli intellectuals lodged a complaint with the Attorney General, arguing that this is a case of criminal incitement. The Attorney General promised to investigate the matter with all due haste. That was half a year ago. “Due haste” has not yet produced a decision.

The same goes for another group of rabbis, who prohibited employing Goyim.

(In ancient Hebrew, “Goy” just meant a people, any people. In the Bible, the Israelites were called a “holy Goy”. But in the last centuries, the term has come to mean non-Jews, with a decidedly derogatory undertone.)

This week, Israel was in uproar. The turmoil was caused by the arrest of Rabbi Dov Lior.

The affair goes back to a book released more than a year ago by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira. Shapira is, perhaps, the most extreme inhabitant of Yitzhar, which is perhaps the most extreme settlement in the West Bank. Its members are frequently accused of carrying out pogroms in the nearby Palestinian villages, generally in “retaliation” for army actions against structures that have been built without official consent.

The book, called Torat ha-Melekh (“the Teaching of the King”)[1] deals with the killing of Goyim. It says that in peacetime, Goyim should generally not be killed – not because of the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” which, according to the book, applies to Jews only, but because of God’s command after the Deluge (Genesis 9:6): “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man.” This applies to all Goyim who fulfill some basic commandments.

However, the situation is totally different in wartime. And according to the rabbis, Israel has been at war since its foundation, and probably will be for ever more.

More »