Zionist elite

From Judeo-Nazi to Zionist-lite!

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 10:32:43 +0900 From: "Patrick McNally"
tkuh50@tku.ac.jp

From Judeo-Nazi to Zionist-lite!

The word "Judeo-Nazi" was coined and used by Israeli survivors of the
European Judeocide. Their idea was that Israel was doing to Palestinians
what the Nazis did to Jews. Not exactly the same, but the two ideologies
and practices were similar enough. Of course, Judeo-Nazi crimes
continue, so it is impossible to compare the complete records of the
two.

Meir Kahane's "They [Arabs] Must Go" is one of many invaluable books
that show the very close parallels between Germano- and Judeo-Naziism.
The good rabies does not complain about his enemies' behavior. He does
not argue that Palestinians are BEING dangerous, but rather that the
very BEING of the Palestinians is dangerous, i.e. nothing that the
Palestinians do is the problem, but they themselves are the problem and
"must go," be ethnically cleansed, or murdered if necessary. Kahane is a
genuine modern Joshua wannabe, a throwback to the reptile-brain stage of
biological development. The SHIT-list Jews show that Kahane's psychotic
pseudo-religious ideas are alive and well.

Obnoxious as Kahane is, his open rejection of all Western European
Enlightenment values is refreshing compared to the mealy-mouthed
hand-wringing of those Zionists who want to hide behind Western values
and even claim to be defending them. Kahane respected Palestinians for
resisting Israel aggression and criticized Israel for not smashing and
exterminating them faster.

If all Israel's apologists were as open and honest as the good rabbi,
there would not be such a serious problem. But surrounding -as it were-
the Judeo-Nazi core is a whole series of ideologically protective onion
rings. One obvious onion ring is the major American print and electronic
media which cover up the Kahanesque factor in Israeli life. Good insight
into this devious propaganda is found in Israel Shahak's "Jewish
Fundamentalism in Israel." In particular, he gives a detailed analysis
of the Jewish American coverup of Baruch Goldstein's massacre of 29
Muslims while at prayer. The USA media pooh-poohed the whole incident
with a lot of hand-wringing. Shahak shows how the incident involved an
integral part of the highest level of Israel's religious establishment
and its influence upon the secular parts of the Israeli establishment.

Unfortunately, there are even more subtle protective layers than the
brazen racism of the New York Times and the anti-Arab bigotry of
Hollywood films. For example, there is an anti-war group, A.N.S.W.E.R.
[Act Now Stop War End Racism]. They should have said, "End Racism except
in Israel." No speakers or signs at their demonstrations can make any
sustained criticism of Israel's Judeo-Nazi race laws. Of course, they
can criticize the person Sharon. They can criticize the occupation but
not the occupier and its racism which causes the occupation. In the
1940s Jews did not argue that it was sufficient for the Nazis to
withdraw to their 1937 borders. No! The whole Nazi racist social
structure had to be abolished. Some vicious Soviet Jews went further and
argued that the whole German people had to be abolished, but the more
humane and humanitarian Stalin reprimanded them and defended the
Germans' right to exist as a people.

The purpose of these more subtle forms of Zionist-lite is to limit
serious critical discussion of "der Judenstaat" [Herzl's term for "the
state of Jews, by Jews, and for Jews"]. This is found mostly in
universities. Of course, there is also a lot of grossly outrageous
racism among professors, e.g. Bernard Lewis, but I am referring to
professors widely respected for their anti-war, anti-establishment views
and not usually regarded as Zionists.

The following are suggested as features typical of a Zionist-lite
apology for the Judeo-Nazi state:

Feature #1. Zionist-liters often appeal to past Jewish suffering [both
real and imagined] as a factor mitigating or distracting attention away
from on-going Jewish crimes. The Holocaust is mostly frequently used.
Norman Finkelstein had good reason to refer to it as "Israel's prize
alibi." But discussions about European and Muslim anti-Semitism are
often raised. It is interesting how Christians and Muslims get lured
into these discussions and encouraged to confess their own historical
sins and to attack the other religion for its persecution of the Jews.

"Persecution of the Jews" is an interesting phrase. Using categories
from Latin grammar, the "of" can be either an objective genitive or a
subjective genitive. Objective genitive means that someone persecutes
Jews. Subjective genitive means that Jews persecute someone. In
politically correct discussions, it is forbidden to talk about the
subjective genitive in this matter. For example, In American
undergraduate classes one would never talk about how Jews persecuted
Christians. The victim-talk is always one way. It is almost as if Jews
always and only suffered. Notate bene: "almost as if." No Zionist
apologist is foolish enough to come right out and say "Jews have always
and only been persecuted." But the Jewish persecution and betrayal of
Christians never gets talked about. The racist Daniel Goldhagen,
Harvard's professor of Holocaust studies, is a good example of this
"Jews only and always victims" exaggeration.

Probably the most ridiculous ploy in this victim-playing is the harping
and bitching about Palestinian pizza-parlor terrorism. All serious
Palestinians, e.g. Edward Said, condemn the suicide bombers. Such
bombings serve the immediate purpose of strengthening Adolph Sharon's
hand. The Israeli elite needs the terror to keep its own electorate in a
state of psychotic hysteria and denial. Just like in 1938, the Nazis
needed the murder of a German diplomat by Herschel Grynszpan as an
excuse to start the Night of the Broken Glass.

However, in the intermediate and long term, the Samson-like bombers
right off the pages of the Old Testament do have major destructive
effects on Israel. Many Jews are running away from Israel and few want
to come. Israel even has to bring in whole villages of South American
Indians and transmogrify these unfortunate dupes into pseudo-Jews to
serve as cannon fodder for the redemption of the land in the chronically
invaded territories.

If the past suffering of Jews had been caused by Palestinians, this
Jews-as-victims argument might make sense. However, Arnold Toynbee
argued long ago that the European Judeocide cannot be used to justify
Jewish crimes against a totally different people. In particular, Zionist
crimes committed before the Holocaust could not by any stretch of the
imagination be justified by the Holocaust.

Let us just forget past Jewish suffering and focus on present Jewish
crimes! Jews do not need to be rescued from their past sufferings or any
hypothetical future sufferings but from the consequences of their own
misleaders' on-going crimes.

Feature #2. Zionist-liters often portray Israel as an instrument of USA
Middle East policy, as its cop-on-the-beat, and as its only reliable
ally in the area. This neatly serves to transfer blame for Israel's
crimes onto the USA. According to this view, Israel bombs Palestinian
villages with American-made F-16s to somehow carry out American policy.
Israel would really like to withdraw from Palestine, but the continued
invasion somehow serves the interests of America's elite. Israel would
really like to get rid of its hyper-apart-hate system, but that system
somehow serves USA strategic interests. For some mysterious reason, the
American elite wanted to get rid of apart-hate in Mississippi but keep
it in Israel. The new cage of walls being erected serves supposedly USA
elite interests by making it harder for terrorists to penetrate the
West's new Cement Curtain and possibly pollute our precious bodily
fluids, ala General Jack D. Ripper out of "Dr. Strangelove."

Poor little Israel! It would so much like to live in peace and harmony
with its neighbors, but it has to serve the USA elite by smashing the
crap out of a basically defenseless and helpless civilian population.
Does not all of this seem an excuse, a Freudian projection, a false
flag, a malarkey, a bullshit?

Before Israel we had lots of friends and few enemies in the Middle East,
but now only many enemies and one false friend. In fact, Izzie is a
catastrophic liability, the albatross sinking the American economy and
now dragging us down into the fascist nightmare of a domestic police
state. The two oil embargoes [1973 and 1979] were body blows to USA
industry and a direct result of our suicidal subservience to Israel.

Izzie is a huge financial vacuum cleaner that sucks billions of US$ out
of our economic system into a black hole. Izzie is the unruly elephant
that we have to clean up after. It is a gigantic blowback-cesspool and a
sort of continuous diplomatic embarrassment in the United Nations.
Israel Shamir writes, "Hesitating American Jews are in the position of
the elder sister in Raymond Chandler's "Big Sleep," who covers up the
crimes of her wild kid sister....As the cover-up continues, the younger
sister comes to believe she has immunity and keeps up her killing spree.
Eventually her crimes endanger the seemingly secure position of the
elder sister." ["Flowers of Galilee," pp. 115-116]

By no means does this mean that the USA has been a benign and innocent
state first dragged into evil by Israel. Howard Zinn's "A People's
History of the USA" shows the dark side of US history. Most US crimes
througholut history and the world have had absolutely nothing to do with
Israel, but Israeli influence mediated by its fifth column constitutes
an additional and highly destructive source of evil. The two together
constitute the contemporary world's real axis of evil. And it is bad for
Israel because it is destructive to the national interests of the host
which the parasite feeds off of.

Feature #3. Zionist-liters argue that Christian fundamentalists run the
USA's Middle East policy and push Israel into the unfortunate "clash of
civilizations" and the anti-Islamic religious war. Without these
Christian fundies, Israel's search for peace would be successful.

But perhaps Christian fundamentalism is only a useful public relations
distraction from Jewish fundamentalism. Even a troglodyte like Pat
Robotson seems like a Voltaire compared to Israel's head Sephardi rabbi,
Ovadia Joseph. The good rabbi is a crackpot but has some veeery
interesting ideas. Ideas? Perhap neural twitches would be a better word!
He argues that the Holocaust was a just punishment visited by God on
Ashenazi Jews. He also suggests that Israel should go slow with the
destruction of all the Christian and Muslim holy places because the
Judeo-Nazi state is not yet able to get away with the 100% destruction.
Of course, like all good Talmudists he believes all Christian-Islamic
holy places must be obliterated in order to fully redemn the land.

America's Bible Belt hick preachers do seem to have a lot of power, but
perhaps these pseudo-Christians indirectly owe all their media and
political power to Israel? Perhaps they are paradiegoyim for the
Judeo-Nazis. The fund raising cycle between a given preacher and Israel
works like this. Pastor Jim Bob Sheepshole goes to Israel and sucks up
to Rabbi Joshua Genocider, gets introduced to the Israeli minister for
racial purity, and invites these reptiles to come and speak to his
sheep. Norman Podoretz picks it up and explains to all sceptical,
secular Jews that it is a wonderful arrangement because it is good for
Israel. Somehow political money starts arriving in suitcases and Pastor
Sheepshole is in Fat City and becomes a major political player.

4. Zionist-lite defenses of Judeo-Naziism are also involved in the way
in which certain Jews are ostracized and considered outside the pale of
acceptable discourse. Noam Chomsky is not ostracized, because he is the
darling of the Zionist-liters. The good MIT professor nevers singles out
the Nazi-like race laws as something that has to be eliminated. He never
argues for the Palestinian right of return. Michael Neumann has pointed
out that none of the anti-Israeli measures proposed by Chomsky are at
all serious. But, you might argue, Chomsky is at the top of the SHIT
list. Well, so what? Chomsky is certainly no Judeo-Nazi and maybe not
even any kind of a Zionist. Zionist-liters are left-gatekeepers, i.e.
they keep criticism and action within well accepted bounds. They are
house-liberals who fulfill an indispensable function of social and
political control. What?? you may say! THE Noam Chomsky who wrote the
two-volume work [The Political Economy of Human Rights] which exposed
the prestigious "New York Times" as simply a higher level "Pravda?" Yes,
him! Chomsky is very close to Michael Moore in their basic ideas. They
are both great when it comes to anything other than Israel and
Judeo-Nazism. Neither will touch it with a barge pole. It is the third
rail of political correctness. Touch it! You're dead!

Norman Finkelstein is largely ostracized because he exposed Jewish
crimes against Jews. Not simply against Jews, but against the group most
vulnerable and worthy of sympathy, i.e. elderly, poorer Holocaust
survivors. And horror of horrors! The criminals ripping off the
Holocaust survivors were the Jewish leaders themselves. Interestingly
enough, it was Chomsky who saved Finkelstein from complete ostracism.

There are cases of full ostacism. Mordechai Vanumu was imprisoned and
ostracized because he converted to Christianity. No ethnic Jew, who had
not converted to Christianity, would have sat out 18 years largely in
solitary confinement. The official excuse for the 18 years is that he
revealed state secrets about Israel's nuclear weapons. But that was as
much of a secret as Israel's geographical location. Of course, if he had
been a Gentile, he would have been murdered.

Israel Shamir is ostracized because he became a Christian, advocated the
Palestinian's right of return, and wittily and scholarly exposes the
darkest side of Judeo-Nazi hypocrisy and deceit. The French translator
of "Flowers of Galilee" was even put on trial and ran the risk of
imprisonment. France must be even more zionized than the USA because the
book is available in the United States of Amnesia with no prison term as
yet threatened.

N. Finkelstein, Mordechai Vanumu, and Israel Shamir are good names to
mention in a conversation to check out just how anti-Zionist an
anti-Zionist really is. My experience has been that most Jews will say
that they are not Zionists but then state and defend a basically Zionist
position, e.g. deny the following three things:

1.) the Palestinian right of return, 2.) Israel's need to return to the
1948 borders, 3.) Israel's need to abolish its Nuremburg-style race
laws.

Interesting, but that is what Zionism is all about. Denial! Denial!
Denial! Ghetto! Ghetto! Ghetto! Wall! Wall! Wall!

Take a Jew and he will build a ghetto! You can take the Jew out of the
ghetto but not the ghetto out of the Jew.

Those are three good Jews and three good Palestinian human rights
issues. Try them out on Zionists, anti-Zionist, and non-Zionists! Better
yet frame the three issues in terms of any people other than the
Palestinians and then present them a Zionist! Other peoples are even
included as sideshows in Holocaust museums. But not the Palestinians.

Top of Page | Home Page