Being Ahead of Time

 BY GILAD ATZMON

By Gilad Atzmon

https://www.unz.com/

In my recent book, Being in Time, I analyse Jewish controlled opposition. I argue that some self-identified Jews end up being on both polar extremes of every debate that is even mildly relevant to Jewish existence: Those who have recently been disturbed about the Jews who are at the centre of the impeachment trial have also found that Jews hold key positions on Trump’s defense team. Those who accuse Jews of pushing immigration and multiculturalism can’t deny that Trump’s senior policy advisor on immigration is Stephen Miller and that breitbart.com was “conceived in Jerusalem.” The Palestinians’ solidarity movement is dominated by a few well organized Jewish solidarity groups that do little but divert the discourse from the Palestinian right of return and exhaust the movement in their relentless witch-hunting of truth speakers and seekers.

In Being in Time, I point out that as soon as an issue or event is identified as a potential Jewish problem, a Jewish satellite dissent emerges to ‘calm things down.’ As soon as Corbyn became the modern Amalek (‘existential threat’), Jews for Jeremywas formed to dismantle the idea that Jews hate Corbyn collectively. Those who view Capitalism as a Jewish construct are similarly reminded that Marx was also a Jew. In Being in Time I argue that none of this is necessarily conspiratorial. It is only natural for Jews to denounce the crimes that are committed on ‘their behalf’ by a state that defines itself as ‘The Jewish State.’ The same applies to Jews who are genuinely tormented by the vast over representation of Jews in some problematic spheres. Yet, the outcome of all this is potentially volatile: every crucial debate regarding the West and its future; Globalism, Neocons wars, capitalism, immigration, multiculturalism, Israel and so on, is too frequently reduced into an internal Jewish exchange.

It was therefore just a matter of time before some Jews would admit that the involvement of a few prominent Jewish celebrities in some spectacular sex crimes is becoming rather embarrassing and even dangerous for the Jews.

It seems as if Jonah Goldberg has launched the ‘Jews against pedophilia’ campaign. Today, The Jewish World Review published an article titled “French pedo flap a cautionary tale for OUR cultural aristocrats.” In the commentary, Goldberg digs into the activities of Jewish radical ideology, along with those of the notorious paedophile, Gabriel Matzneff.

Goldberg was triggered by a New York Times article that examined the rise and fall of the paedophilia devotee. Matzneff is 83, an old man now, but he has been the darling of the French literary world and media for decades: his work was supported by leading newspapers and literary publications. “He’d appear on highbrow TV shows,” Goldberg writes, where he’d “regale interviewers and audiences with the sublime pleasures of having sex with children in France and on sex tours of southeast Asia.”

In his book “Under 16 Years Old,” Matzneff wrote, “To sleep with a child, it’s a holy experience, a baptismal event, a sacred adventure.”

But the contrast Goldberg draws between Jeffrey Epstein and Matzneff is surprisingly clumsy: “The well-connected billionaire spent vast sums to keep his sexual abuses at least somewhat secret. Matzneff not only confessed to his crimes, his confessions were celebrated as literary contributions.” I feel the need to remind Goldberg that nicknaming one’s plane the “Lolita Express” is hardly an attempt to hide one’s sexual morbidity and crimes. If anything Matzneff is like Epstein in that both celebrated a peculiar sense of impunity. Needless to mention, no Jewish outlet denounced either of them or their not very secretive activities before they were caught and charged.

Jewish Radicals and the role of the Orgasm

Next comes the ‘rationalisation.’ “Matzneff was a Child of 68,” Goldberg writes, “a product of the left-wing ‘May 68’ movement that shook France in the 1960s. These radicals subscribed to the idea that anything smacking of traditionalism or bourgeois morality was backward. Conventional sexual morality was part of the same rotten edifice as imperialism and racism.”

Goldberg doesn’t approve of the ‘Jewish radicals and their ideology. He reminds us that “a few years ago, Daniel Cohn-Bendit (a.k.a. Dany le Rouge), the famous former radical and leader of the European Green movement, got in hot water for his earlier writings and statements about “erotic” encounters with 5-year-olds. He (Cohn-Bendit ) dodged major consequences by disavowing his own words, saying they were merely intended to provoke.”

Goldberg is a well-known and successful writer, he could have published his criticism of Matzneff and Jewish radicals in numerous national American news outlets but, presumably he made the decision to use a Jewish outlet. Whether intentionally or not, Goldberg provides an insight into Jewish survival strategy in general and Jewish controlled opposition in particular. Criticizing radical philosophy and the advocacy of pedophilia on ideological grounds by Jews in a Jewish media outlet conveys the image that Jews can deal with their problems. The goyim should let it go or, even better, move on.

But Goldberg’s account is either mistaken or misleading. The sex revolution that branched into advocating paedophilia wasn’t invented in 1968. Its radical Jewish roots take us back to the 1920-30s and, in particular, to the early work of Wilhelm Reich.

The Following is an excerpt from Being in Time in which I delve into Wilhelm Reich and his ‘genital utopia.’

In his 1933 work, The Mass Psychology of Fascism, Jewish Marxist and Freudian psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich attempted to explain the striking victory of ‘reactionary’ Fascism over ‘progressive’ Communism. Reich was desperate to rescue the relevance of revolutionary Marxism. In order to do so he formed a new ‘post Marxist’ theoretical outlook to explain why the Germans of his time favoured ‘authoritarianism’ over a ‘preferable’ communist revolution.

According to Reich, the attraction of reactionary and conservative politics and the inclination towards fascism is driven by a long history of rigid, authoritarian patriarchy which affects the family, parenting, primal education and eventually, society as a whole.
Of course, the remarkable popularity of fascism in Europe could have provided the scientifically-orientated Reich with a clear refutation of Marxist working class politics, theories and predictions. After all, dialectical Marxism had failed as a social theory as well as a methodical prophecy. But for some reason, he, like many other Jewish intellectuals of his time, decided to stick with Marx. Hoping to rescue what was left of dialectical materialism, and insisting that true communist political revolution would prevail once sexual repression was overthrown, Reich synthesized Marx and Freud into a ‘Sex Revolution.’

Wilhelm Reich posited that sexual liberation on a mass scale would save Marxist dogmatism and working people as well. In chapter five of The Mass Psychology of Fascism, he declared war on the patriarchal and conservative family which he saw as being at the core of mass conservatism: “From the standpoint of social development,” Reich wrote, “the family cannot be considered the basis of the authoritarian state, only as one of the most important institutions which support it.” The traditional family is a “central reactionary germ cell, the most important place of reproduction of the reactionary and conservative individual. Being itself caused by the authoritarian system, the family becomes the most important institution for its conservation.”

In the eyes of the neo-Marxist affection, both romanticism and traditional family values were obstacles to socialist reform and Reich’s vehicle towards the new world order was … orgasm! In his 1927 study, The Function of the Orgasm, he came to the conclusion that: “there is only one thing wrong with neurotic patients: the lack of full and repeated sexual satisfaction.” In the hands of Reich, the Marx-Freud hybrid was leading to what some critical cynics dubbed “genital utopia.”

Reich believed that for women within the patriarchal society, sex was within the realm of duty and/or restricted to procreation. “The maintenance of the authoritarian family institution requires more than economic dependence of wife and children on husband and father. This dependence can be tolerated only under the condition that the consciousness of being a sexual being is extinguished as far as possible in women and children. The woman is not supposed to be a sexual being, only the producer of children.”(The Mass Psychology of Fascism, Wilhelm Reich pg 56 37. Ibid pg 56)

Within the traditional society, the woman was robbed of any libidinal consciousness: “This idealization of motherhood is essentially a means of keeping women from developing a sexual consciousness and from breaking through the barriers of sexual repression, of keeping alive their sexual anxieties and guilt feelings. The very existence of woman as a sexual being would threaten authoritarian ideology; her recognition and social affirmation would mean its collapse.” Women were mere baby factories, who had only an instrumental role because: “Imperialistic wars require that there be no rebellion in the women against the function that is imposed on them, that of being nothing but child-bearing machines.” This description of the woman and the family fits the traditional Jewish orthodox family rather better than, say, the German, French, Italian or Spanish family cell.

But Wilhelm Reich wasn’t only a dialectic social revolutionary, he was also a pragmatist. He invented the Orgone Energy Accumulator, a wooden box about the size of a telephone booth, lined with metal and insulated with steel wool. The Orgone itself was a vague concept: an esoteric energy, a universal life force that was massless yet omnipresent and promised to charge up the body with the life force that circulated in the atmosphere and which he christened “orgone energy.” His Orgone box promised to improve “orgastic potency” and, by extension, physical and mental health Thus, the newly liberated Western subject was invited to experience the true meaning of Marx and Freud through sweating towards full emancipation by means of accumulating ‘Orgone energy’ in this wooden box.

Those who watched Woody Allen’s comedy film Sleeper (1973) probably remember the Orgasmatron – the orgasm inducing machine. In Allen’s satirical take on Reich’s Orgone box, it is actually the authoritarian regime that encourages its citizens to emancipate themselves by means of their genitalia. In Allen’s prophetic movie, the orgasm, like consumerism is a reward from the oppressive regime that diverts the masses’ attention from their existential misery.

The ‘authoritarian’ Germans, both fascist and communist, quickly expelled Reich from their ranks. By 1934, even Freud didn’t want anything to do with Reich. The progressive Americans however, tolerated his ideas, at least for a while. Reich was eventually arrested and died in an American prison leaving behind some radical minds, still convinced that the Orgone box was acting as a greenhouse for cosmic, libidinal energy. Within the free-ranging pornographic realm in which we live, the universe has become an extended Orgone container: pornography is free to all; genital sex is deemed almost Victorian; heterosexuality, at a certain stage, was on the verge of becoming a marginal adventure. And yet authoritarianism hasn’t disappeared. Quite the opposite; to borrow Marx’s metaphor – it is sex and pornography rather than religion that have become the opium of the masses. And yet, this ‘progressive’ universe in which we live didn’t defeat the inclination towards violence. We are killing millions by proxy in the name of moral interventionism and Coca Cola.

Donate

Gilad Atzmon on Truth, Faith and Palestine – Chester Interfaith Palestine Conference

 

 The following is a talk given at Chester Interfaith Palestine Conference 2019 on  (2.1.2019).

https://youtu.be/pfxhicFBHSI

 In the last few days Zionist and Israeli advocacy groups were desperate to cancel the  gathering of many local peace enthusiasts, intellectuals and religious leaders. Every Hasbara trick was put into play: Social media abuse, intimidating phone calls, smears and lies. But none of it worked. The pro- Israeli bigoted efforts backfired – – interest in the conference grew immediately, the local community stood for Palestine, peace, harmony and free speech!

Roderick Heather MBE, Chairman of Hoole Community Centre was subjected to vitriolic abuse.  I learned yesterday that Mr Heather decided to attend the conference meetings and to judge for himself whether it was a ‘hateful’ gathering. Apparently he was  impressed and announced to the group at the end of the first day  that they will always be welcome at the Hoole Centre.  Here is the message Mr Heather sent to North West Friends of Israel, the advocacy pressure group that led the campaign.

Hoole CEOIMG_8452.jpg

One may wonder why Zionist operators are so desperate to cancel Palestinian meetings and are so fearful of my work in particular. As things stand, the law seems to be on their side. With the IHRA definition of antisemitsm  and current legislation designed to supress all criticism,  the Zionist advocacy groups could theoretically  seek to punish  everyone who even comes close to any disputes of the operation of  their community or their beloved state. You would expect Zionists to ignore Palestinian gatherings. If those gatherings were indeed ‘hateful’ they could have  locked many of us up behind bars a long time ago. Clearly, the friends of Israel know that the  reality is  different. Palestine solidarity is a peaceseeking mission. Despite my huge body of work, I have never been accused of making a single hate statement. Needless to mention, I do not need to mention that I have never been charged or even questioned by a any legal authority anywhere in the world about anything I have said or written. The same applies to Stephen Sizer. The Zionist Lobby groups accuse Palestinian solidarity gatherings of  being ‘hateful’  while knowing that this type of behaviour is something that Palestinian activism is free of.

Here are final words from Chester Interfaith Palestine Conference:

 Chester Palestine Conference November 2nd 2019

 The Chester Palestine Conference was even more successful on its second day.  We actually ran out of chairs!

 The theme for the day was “Grassroots for Palestine: making local links”.

 The day started with a brief interfaith service.

 Burnley Women’s Peace Group shared the experience of their Jerusalem Peace Pilgrimage this year. The images of Palestinian suffering were very moving. They are a Jewish, Christian and Muslim interfaith group.

 A Jewish Roma activist addressed the similarities between the Roma and Palestinian experience.

 Andrew Herbert from Chester’s Methodist Church spoke of his Palestinian house rebuilding experience with the Amos Trust.

 Gilad Atzmon the international jazz artist and author of best-selling books on Jewish identity politics flew in from Greece to give a wide-reaching presentation entitled “Zionism from Herzl to Bibi”.

Atzmon was born into a Jewish family in Tel Aviv, and conscripted into the Israeli regime army where he had a life-changing experience when he was shocked by the barbaric conditions imposed by the Israeli regime on the Palestinians during the Israeli invasion into Lebanon in 1982.

In his intellectual, philosophical and polemical style he engaged us to think deeply about the causes of the worsening trauma of the Palestinian people.

 Damien Short’s presentation on the Genocide of the Palestinians was unable to be shown due to technical problems. We will endeavour to distribute it to the conference attendees. Damien is a Reader in Human Rights at the University of London. His book “Redefining Genocide: Settler Colonialism, Social Death and Ecocide”, which includes a chapter on Genocide and Palestine, is highly recommended.

 The Israeli artist Zohar’s exhibition of Palestinian paintings is on show at Chester University Kingsway Arts Campus, Kingsway, Chester CH2 2LB for the month of November.

These accomplished and thought-provoking pictures are “witnessing the chaos and brutality inflicted on the Palestinian civilian population by an ever more confident and belligerent military power.”

(For insurance and practical reasons we were unable to show these at the conference).

 We look forward to the 3rd Annual Chester Palestine Conference in 2020 !


My battle for truth and freedom involves some expensive legal and security services. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me and others.

Donate

Palestine Solidarity at the Crossroads

lord-polack-696x392.jpg

Last week we saw how Baroness Jenny Tonge was cruelly maligned in the House of Lords by Lords Pickles and Polak. Pickles invited the minister and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) to join him in condemning Jenny for “suggesting that the murders in Pittsburgh were caused by the actions of the Israeli Government”.

He accused her of causing “great pain in Pittsburgh” and (horror of horrors) falling foul of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism.

Jewish News reported that Pickles and Polak, both high-ranking figures in the Israel lobby, slammed her “callous inflammatory” remarks which, they claimed, were “in clear violation of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism adopted by the UK Government. For a Member of the House of Lords to publish such hateful thoughts brings Parliament into disrepute.”

Polak, according to this report in The Guardian, appears to work pretty much full-time for Israel and has abused the privilege of peerage. Many might think that brings the British Parliament into far greater disrepute.

So what did Baroness Jenny say on her Facebook page to warrant such a nasty personal attack? “Absolutely appalling and a criminal act, but does it ever occur to Bibi and the present Israeli government that its actions against Palestinians may be reigniting anti-Semitism? I suppose someone will say that it is anti-Semitic to say so?”

The PSC issued a statement complaining she “suggested Israel’s policies and its treatment of the Palestinians could be contributing to a rise in anti-Semitism generally” and the PSC regarded her post as “deeply troubling… and risked being read as implying that anti-Semitism can only be understood in the context of a response to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Such a view risks justifying or minimising anti-Semitism.”

As if their snottiness towards one of its founders and patrons wasn’t enough the PSC told Jewish News they were considering “further steps”. Baroness Jenny is a founder and long-time member of the PSC and a courageous fighter for Palestinian rights. At that point, given the PSC Management’s uncalled-for hostility, she thought it best to spare her many friends embarrassment and resign.

Now a petition is being put to the PSC by members expressing outrage that instead of defending her the PSC’s Executive joined in the Zio attacks. It insists that nothing she said was anti-Semitic, adding that “it is perfectly reasonable to link Israel’s murderous behaviour with attacks on Jews”. It calls for the Executive to apologise and ask Jenny to reconsider her decision to resign.

But would she? Jenny Tonge might do better hitching her wagon to a reinvigorated, turbocharged BDS movement, at least until the PSC is purged of its head office idiots.

‘The Inquisition rules’

Two weeks earlier the Jewish Chronicle and the British Medical Journal reported another craven act against the Baroness, this time by the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine which withdrew its invitation to Jenny to be a panellist at a meeting on maternal health. The reason? Because of “very recent media reports and allegations of anti-Semitic sentiment which are contradictory to our organisational ethos, and which we do not feel are complementary to this event.” What sort of organisational ethos confuses anti-Semitism with maternal health issues in developing countries?

Jenny said: “I was un-invited after complaints from an unknown source, claiming that my presence would disrupt the meeting. I was not allowed to know who the complainant was… How they thought I could bring criticism of the government of Israel into maternal health I do not know.

“Criticise the Israeli government and you are excluded from other things too. The inquisition rules.”

The Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine subsequently told the BMJ: “There was external concern that a successful debate… would be sidetracked by public questions related to the extensive anti-Semitic issues linked to the Labour Party that were dominating the UK media at the time of the event.”

Feeble excuse. It doesn’t say much for whoever chairs their meetings if they cannot stop the discussion from being sidetracked and going off-topic.

How many anti-Semitism claims have a legal basis?

Hugh Tomlinson QC recently warned that if a public authority did decide to adopt the IHRA definition (though it wasn’t obliged to) then it must interpret it in a way that’s consistent with its statutory obligations and doesn’t cut across the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Freedom of expression applies not only to information and ideas that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that “offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population”. Unless, of course, they amount to a call for violence, hatred or intolerance.

A further obligation put on public authorities is “to create a favourable environment for participation in public debates for all concerned, allowing them to express their opinions and ideas without fear, even if these opinions and ideas are contrary to those defended by the official authorities or by a large part of public opinion, or even if those opinions and ideas are irritating or offensive to the public”. A public authority seeking to apply the IHRA definition to prohibit or punish such expressions “would be acting unlawfully.”

Pickles and Polak should remember this next time they rise to speak in the House of Lords or anywhere else.

Retired Lord Justice of Appeal, Sir Stephen Sedley, pointed out that the 1986 Education Act established an individual right of free expression in all higher education institutions “which cannot be cut back by governmental policies”. He called for the Government to retreat from its “naively adopted” stance.

So according to top legal opinion the IHRA Definition does not make calling Israel an apartheid state or advocating boycott, divestment or sanctions (BDS) against Israel anti-Semitic. Also, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes “the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”.

As for the ghastly truth about Israel on top of all the other evidence, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) produced a report establishing that Israel, beyond a shadow of a doubt, is a thoroughly vile apartheid regime. Such was the fuss kicked up when it appeared that it has been withdrawn from UN websites.

But don’t worry, you can read about it here.  Among its conclusions:

  • The authors urge the United Nations to implement this finding by fulfilling its international responsibilities in relation to international law and the rights of the Palestinian people as a matter of urgency, for two reasons.
  • First, the situation addressed in the report is ongoing….. In the case of Israel-Palestine, any delay compounds the crime by prolonging the subjugation of Palestinians to the active practice of apartheid by Israel. Prompt action is accordingly imperative….
  • Secondly…. since the 1970s, when the international campaign to oppose apartheid in southern Africa gathered momentum, apartheid has been considered in the annals of the United Nations and world public opinion to be second only to genocide in the hierarchy of criminality.
  • This report accordingly recommends that the international community act immediately, without waiting for a more formal pronouncement regarding the culpability of the State of Israel, its Government and its officials for the commission of the crime of apartheid….
  • The prohibition of apartheid is considered ‘jus cogens’ in international customary law. States have a separate and collective duty (a) not to recognize an apartheid regime as lawful; (b) not to aid or assist a State in maintaining an apartheid regime; and (c) to cooperate with the United Nations and other States in bringing apartheid regimes to an end. A State that fails to fulfil those duties could itself be held legally responsible for engaging in wrongful acts involving complicity with maintaining an apartheid regime.

No wonder it was hushed up.

What next?

Miko Peled, in my recent interview with him, underlined the need for activists to shift up a gear and accelerate from solidarity to full-on resistance. This means wider involvement, better co-ordination, revised targeting and sharper strategy. In effect a BDS Mk2, turbocharged. And it involves treating Zionism and those who promote or support it with far less tolerance. As Miko said on another occasion, “If opposing Israel is anti-Semitism then what do you call supporting a state that has been engaged in brutal ethnic cleansing for seven decades?”

Indeed. And what do you call people in public life who adore and defend that state and intimidate anyone who voices disapproval?

Things are changing. The Stop the War Coalition last weekend brought together a number of experts in a conference about “re-framing the debate” on Palestine. That whole discussion is long overdue and I’m waiting to hear what came out of it. For example, robust measures must be put in place to counter bogus accusations of anti-Semitism stifling free speech

It might be no bad thing if someone came forward with a proposal for a centralised legal unit to reprimand the Zio-extremists who overstep the mark and use false accusations of anti-Semitism to pour hatred on the likes of Jenny Tonge.

Efforts must be made to ensure public institutions like Parliament don’t provide a platform for such odious behaviour. It would also be the unit’s task to launch into the public domain a working definition of anti-Palestinian racism similar to the one recently proposed by Jewish Voice for Labour.

By Stuart Littlewood
Source

Insightfulness and Palestine

October 14, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

insig pala_edited-1.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Insight refers to the sudden ability to see something in a way that profoundly clarifies our understanding. It allows us to revise our views from a totally new perspective. Insightfulness is an innovative mode. It offers an alternative, out of the box, vision of the world around us. Insightfulness is a key factor in any dynamic and vibrant discourse.

While the so-called revolution is occasionally fueled by ideological or social ‘insight,’ the ‘revolutionaries’ are more often anti insightful by nature.  They spend their energy reducing an ‘insight’ into a fixed regime: a doctrine, a dogma, a strategy, a pile of commandments, a kosher jargon or a list of ‘deplorables.’ While Marx, for instance, offered an insightful materialist vision of our past as well as our human future, Marxists are generally an anti-insightful bunch. Their doctrine reduces Marx’s insights into Torah and Mizvoth, restricting and suppressing creative thinking. So-called ‘revolutionaries’ are too often a collective of  ‘counter-revolutionaries;’ people who do little but kill insightfulness. They identify symbolically with the ‘revolution,’ while they sustain a reality of stagnation. This analysis may assist us in understanding the last 150 years of Left paralysis in the West. It may also explain why it is often fascists who take over precisely when conditions are ripe for a ‘text book’ Marxist revolution.

Observing the evolution of the Palestinian solidarity movement and the growing influence of Jewish bodies within this movement has provided me with the opportunity to monitor a spectacular anti-insightful operation.

For many years I have wondered why the Palestinian solidarity discourse is uniquely anti-intellectual. It basically jettisons critical thinking and acts instead from a rigid activism manual. Instead of advancing our understanding of the essence and the nature of what is responsible for the oppression of the Palestinian people, namely The Jewish State, the movement clings to models that drive us as far as possible from the conflict or a working understanding of its roots. Instead of asking how the Israelis interpret the meaning of their state as the ‘Jewish state’ or trying to understand how the Jewishness of that ‘Jewish state’ influences Israeli politics or its supportive lobby around the world, we cling to moldy 19th century theoretical models (e.g., colonialism) that apply to super power conduct in an industrial era. Instead of comparing the Jewish State to other political models that adhered to expansionism, nationalism, race and ethnic cleansing (Nazi Germany, for instance), we equate Israel with apartheid South Africa.

In truth, Israel is far more vile than apartheid South Africa. Apartheid is a racist system of exploitation, the Jewish state doesn’t want to ‘exploit’ the Palestinians, it wants them gone. Israel is a racially driven, expansionist ethnic cleanser but we are not allowed to study the true nature of its philosophy.

I should feel a bit sorry to point out that the Palestinian solidarity movement is not just ideologically and politically misleading, it is actually misleading by design.

In 2010 I asked Olivia Zemor,  an enthusiastic French Jewish pro Palestinian BDS activist, why she disseminates populist slogans that work to stifle her followers’ ability to understand the roots of the conflict and its possible resolution. Zemor’s answer was shockingly simple: “we have a lot of people who support Palestine, we better keep them busy with simple tasks.”  Perhaps the Palestinian solidarity movement is an intense engagement, but, as we know, it has yet to facilitate the return of a single Palestinian refugee to Jaffa, Lod, Haifa or anywhere else in that unpromising land.  In fact, it is doing the opposite. It keeps people busy with ‘simple tasks’ that divert their attention from the root cause of the conflict. Instead of looking at the exceptionalist and racist orientation that is intrinsic to pretty much every Jewish political discourse, we equate a post modernist  21st century entity  with the modernist politics of the 19th century British empire.  Instead of unconditionally supporting the Right of Return, the movement is basically an endless internal Jewish debate about Jews’ right to BDS.

In the 1990s the Palestinian solidarity movement  engaged in a vibrant innovative discourse that was the basis of an evolutionary mechanism where the most profound thoughts prevailed.  But this changed in the early 2000s when a crude and relentless effort emerged aimed at eradicating any attempt at deep, essentialist, innovative thinking. Insightfulness was replaced by a rigid regime of correctness. The solidarity movement rapidly became an intellectual desert.

Instead of caring for the refugees in Lebanon or Syria, the Palestinian solidarity movement primarily engaged in the  ‘fight against antisemitsm.’  Bizarrely, it was the Palestinian solidarity movement that acted, well in advance of Hasbara pressure groups, to purge those ‘problematic voices’ who were brave enough to call a spade a spade.  This was predictable since it was in the early 2000s that  the Palestinian solidarity movement morphed into a Jewish identitarian discourse. From that point on, the solidarity agenda was defined by Jewish sensitivities.  The solidarity movement didn’t liberate Palestine because it wasn’t meant to. Its real goal was to vindicate the Jews as a collective from the crimes committed  on ‘their behalf’ by the Jewish State.

Throughout this time the so-called ‘Jews in the movement’ (JIM) viciously and ferociously attacked the greatest  minds and most enthusiastic activists who expressed support for Palestine (People like Israel Shamir, Greta Berlin, Richard Falk, Norman Finkelstein, Paul Eisen and Alison Weir).  None of these attacks led to discussion or debate within solidarity institutions, for these institutions have been reduced into authoritarian kangaroo courts.  The attacks were often followed by Talmudic Herem procedures – calls for disavowals and excommunication.

Back in the day, Paul Eisen taught me the iron rule of Jewish politics. “Self identified political Jews,” he said, “always kick to the left.” As long as they do so, they sustain their membership in the fold. Often we learn that a West Bank messianic settler has kicked to Netanyahu’s left. Netanyahu, on his part, kicks the Israeli political centre. The Israel’s Labour Party does the same to the Israeli Left that itself often harshly criticizes Jewish diaspora ‘anti’ Zionist groups. Unfortunately, this dynamic doesn’t stop at the Israeli border. Diaspora self-identified progressive ‘anti’ Zionist Jews follow the same procedure. They smear, denounce and purge those whom they are desperate to silence.

The pattern is clear, to be a (political) Jew is to define the boundaries of kosher conduct. Jews do not agree amongst themselves on what constitutes kosher political conduct, but they do agree on the necessity of boundaries. To be a Jew is to insist that someone else is ‘beyond the pale.’

This  dynamic  manifests itself daily within the Jewish pro  Palestinian movement. The British Jewish group that calls itself “Free Speech on Israel” doesn’t actually support true freedom of speech. It just insists upon redefining the boundaries of such ‘freedom.’ JVP and Mondoweiss often tell us what and who we shouldn’t listen to. When my book The Wandering Who was published in 2012 it rapidly gained popularity amongst Palestinian supporters. Mondoweiss were very quick to react. They changed their comment policy . “From here on out, the Mondoweiss comment section will no longer serve as a forum to pillory Jewish culture and religion as the driving factors in Israeli and US policy.” The Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist site practically banned its followers from talking about the Jewishness of a state that calls itself ‘The Jewish State.’

The same applies to Richard Silverstein and others who are often denounced by Zionists and even anti Zionists  yet still insist upon defining what is right and who is wrong for Palestine.

In light of this Jewish kick boxing apparatus, Goyim are easy to describe. Goyim do not kick to the left nor do they kick to the right.  The most dedicated American journalist on Palestine,  Alison Weir, has never told us what the boundaries of the political discussion are. The Washington Report on  Middle East Affairs has not told us whom we should ignore or disavow. Stephen Mearsheimer also failed to tell us who to delete. And these Goyim are not alone. I have never seen Richard Falk’s repudiation list. Norman Finkelstein is not a fan of my work, but he does not interfere with my or anyone else’s work. The same applies to Chomsky.  Paul Eisen and Israel Shamir who suffered more than most the vile and brutal smear campaigns, have never participated in the Jewish left kicking.

Shamir, Eisen, Finkelstein, Chomsky and Falk may disagree on many things but they share a crucial quality.  Like Uri Avnery R.I.P. and Gideon Levy they do not present a template of kosher boundaries. It is not surprising that these people are amongst the most insightful. They operate as intellectuals. They do not operate politically as Jews. They offer their take on reality and refrain from defining what issues we shouldn’t tackle. They let others be.

In my latest book, Being in Time, I reinstate the discussion about ‘Athens and Jerusalem.’ Athens, as I define it, is the birth place of philosophy, science and beauty. Athens is where ‘we think things through.’ Jerusalem, on the other hand, is the city of revelation, the realm of obedience governed by a strict regime  of correctness. Unfortunately, the Palestinian solidarity movement has been reduced into a ghettoized Jerusalemite sect. But despite this, solidarity with the Palestinians hasn’t died out. It has grown into a universal global awareness. By now, we are all Palestinians, Like the Palestinians we can’t even utter the name of our oppressor.

It was not the so called ‘solidarity movement’ that made us Palestinians. It is the IHRA definition of antisemitsm that makes us Palestinians. It is the global campaign against Corbyn and the Labour party that has made us feel like refugees in our own country. It is Trump making Israel great again that made us Gazans. It is the realization that Zionist abuse is a multi layered  global  disaster. It is the understanding that if we won’t wake up and soon, we may be next to bear the consequences.

cover bit small.jpg

To learn how we have become our own worst enemy read Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto…

Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk).

‘Jews In The Movement’

September 26, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

tikun my arse.jpg

By Devon Nola

Thanks to Laura MacDonald for bringing to our attention the revealing thread that begins with Richard Silverstein lamenting over being suspended from Twitter and infringing on his freedom of speech.  This phenomenon of thought police is unfortunate, and we see this happening all over social media.  However, it doesn’t take long before we see Silverstein engages in this very same reprehensible practice, blocking anyone who challenges his opinion or who expresses a view point he doesn’t agree with.

Silverstein is hardly the only one who engages in this behavior. In fact, it’s rampant across social media and most prevalent in the Palestinian Solidarity Movement: it appears to be largely controlled by the so called ‘Jews in the movement,’ a bunch of self-proclaimed anti-Zionist Jews. This contingent seems to be involved, primarily, in keeping the discourse of the oppressed Palestinians free from ‘antisemitism.’ In practice it sets the boundaries of the Palestinian solidarity discussion, so it is compliant with Jewish sensitivities.

What is most ironic is while blocking pro-Palestinian activists or anyone who crosses his redline, Silverstein simultaneously has started another Twitter page, “Why Is Twitter Censoring Free Speech”.  His Twitter name on this page is ‘Tikun Olam Speaks’.  Tikun Olam in Hebrew translates to ‘fixing the world,’ an aspiration of mending the human landscape in an ethical and universal manner.  This may sound like a noble aspiration, yet, the intolerance performed by Silverstein and his acolytes isn’t necessarily the universe the rest of us like to dwell in.

Here are a few pearls from Mr. Silverstein: “…tonight, of all nights, Atzmon himself and a few acolytes decided they would take a dump here in the midst of my efforts to fight back against zio-suppression of free speech.”

“So, these assholes, happy to divert attention from what’s important to their petty ideological squabble, mess things up for all the rest of us.”

Based on these comments one may assume that Silverstein, despite his age, is still well within his anal phase. However, Silverstein continues, “I’ve almost never blocked anyone on the left….” I presume that Silverstein doesn’t see the irony in his supposed fight for free speech.

Maybe, Tikun Olam means fixing the world so it is constructive and beneficial to Jews only or Israelis, more specifically. Whatever the case, I would suggest that Silverstein and his company of ‘world fixers,’ may consider repairing themselves first.

For me, a female goy, self-reflection is the cornerstone of constructive universal ethical correction. Yet, my experience, with many of those who identify as the ‘Jews within the movement’ (including Liberal/Progressive, anti-Zionist, anti-racist, tolerant, peace-seeking, etc.) shows all evidence their agenda is somehow different. Rather than looking in the mirror, they engage in hideous smear campaigns, intense attempts to cancel talks and boycotts against anyone who doesn’t stay within the ‘safe boundaries’ of Palestinian discourse. Sadly, they operate much like the so-called hardcore, right-wing Zionists. This shouldn’t take us by complete surprise, the Zionists and the ‘Jews in the Movement’ self-identify as one people. They seem to disagree on some issues but they happen to adhere to one particular authoritarian political culture.  Truthfully, by now, I have less issue with the Zionists as there is no pretense about who they are.

Two such innocent people who’ve been subject to these attacks are Gilad Atzmon and Alison Weir. The campaigns against them are astounding, merely for not following orders put in place by the so-called ‘Jews in the movement.’  But here is the good news. Both Weir and Atzmon survived the vile onslaught. I believe this is due to people experiencing a change of heart.  It’s become clear to many of us that Atzmon and Weir are somewhat of a litmus test. If you hate them, you are most likely a ‘Jew in the movement.’

It may come as a surprise to some, but many television programs begin with a precursor stating the views in the program are not necessarily shared by the station.  This is how we American Goyim, the so called 98% understand freedom of speech. This is how we unchosen Americans comprehend the 1st Amendment and the American experience in general. We want to see platforms open to all viewpoints.  The notion of silencing dissent is what we Americans with just a single citizenship view as tyranny. If this is what the ‘Jews in the movement’ have to offer, they may be better off operating in isolation as they apparently do.

Watching Silverstein’s Thread is a lesson in Jewish self-ghettoization. You can see how Goyim and dissenters are pushed out one after the other. Within just a few hours a vivid discussion had been reduced into an isolated corner in a remote synagogue. Is it a coincidence that all of that happened just a few days before Yom Kippur when Jews, so we hear, are commanded to ‘self-reflect and amend their ways’?

The ‘Jews in the Movement’ seem to operate as a dedicated thought police force. For them speech is only free if you stick to their ‘script.’  Otherwise, be prepared to face their wrath.  It seems fitting to close with two very profound Atzmon quotes.

1) “Jewish power is the capacity to suppress discussion of Jewish power”.

2) “The discourse of the oppressed is dictated by the sensitivities of the oppressor.”  With friends like this, who needs enemies?

The End of Zion

September 12, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

9046120d901d4e4a98a20fb3161282e6_18.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Before the Jewish new year, Rosh Hashana, the Hebrews are commanded to make an audit – an overview of their standing in the world. Haaretz, the paper of the so called ‘thinking Israelis,’ followed that Mitzvah, polling Israeli Jews on their attitudes toward Jewishness, Judaism, God and ‘the Jew.’

The Jewish God

The Jewish God is, without doubt, a spectacular invention. He (she or it) was invented by the Jews to love them especially. The Jewish God comes across as a jealous and vengeful character. He engages in genocidal projects, using WMDs of chemical and biological warfare as the early Egyptians could testify. Clearly the Jewish God would stand no chance at The Hague, but Jews seem to love their God, or more likely, are fearful of their own invention.

One may wonder why the Jews invented such an unpleasant deity. Couldn’t they contemplate a merciful and kind father instead? Initially, Zionism was a secular nationalist Jewish movement that tried to separate Jews from their evil God, to make them enlightened people. With that in mind, it is fascinating to examine what was missing from the Zionist secular ‘promise.’

Not a lot apparently.

According to Haaretz’ poll, “54 percent of Jewish Israelis believe in God, and another 21 percent accept the existence of an undefined superior power other than God.” These results resemble the American attitude toward God. A poll published by Pew Research a few months ago found that 56 percent of Americans believe in the original God of the Bible and another 23 percent in a superior force. It is worth noting, however, that unlike the Jewish god, the American God is largely Christian – kind and merciful.

believe in God?.png

Haaretz’ poll reveals the intimate relationship between right wing politics and Judaism. 78% of the Israeli right believe in God. Only 15% of the left are believers. This means that as Israel becomes more religious, the fate of the Israeli left is sealed. This is hardly surprising. Left is a universal attitude. Judaism is a tribal precept. Left Judaism is a contradiction in terms, the tribal and the universal are like oil and water, they do not mix. The Israeli left is destined to die out (assuming that it isn’t dead already).

For the Jew not the Many

The poll reveals that “Slightly more than half of Jewish Israelis believe that their rights to the Land of Israel derive from God’s divine covenant in the Bible.” I guess this doesn’t leave much hope for peace. “56 percent believe that the Jewish people are chosen people.” This leaves even less hope for peace. And to remove any possible doubt of a peaceful resolution anytime soon, Haaretz reveals that “Seventy-nine percent of right-wingers believe that God singled out the Jews… Seventy-four percent of right-wingers believe that Israel holds a divine deed for its land.”

jewish people?.png

The vast majority of Israelis appear to adhere to a rigid Judaic notion of choseness that is translated into an entitlement to someone else’s land.

I wonder what the 13% of Israeli ‘leftists’ who see themselves as ‘chosen’ understand left ideology to be. Is ‘for the Jew not the Many’ how they interpret social justice?

The Jewish Deity

In my latest book, ‘Being in Time,’ I argue that a cultural study of the Jews and their many religious precepts (Juda-ism, Athe-ism, Zion-ism,  Holocaust-ism, Moral Intervention-ism, everything-ism etc.)  reveals that Jewish religions can be characterised as a set of ideas that facilitate entitlements. The holocaust, thought by some Jewish scholars to be the most popular Jewish religion, is attached to a list of entitlements that are cultural, political and, of course, financial.  Zionism, another popular Jewish religion, holds that it was the ‘God of Israel’ that promised Palestine to the chosen people. But Jewish entitlement is not just an Israeli or Zionist attitude. When Jewish anti Zionists offer their political positions, they first declare their unique ‘Jewish entitlement’ to their beliefs. ‘As Jews we are there to kosher the Palestinian Solidarity movement.’ Many of the same Jews who ‘legitimised’ the Palestine plight, are busy these days giving a kosher stamp to Jeremy Corbyn. In general, the Jewish left’s entitlement has been exercised by disseminating ‘kosher stamps’ that paint ‘the Jews’ in a positive, humane light.

stems from.png

Israel seems to be divided on religious issues but the trend is clear. With 51 percent believing that the Jews’ right to Israel stems from God’s promise, regional reconciliation probably isn’t the next project in the ‘pipe line.’

Darwin didn’t make Aliya

The poll suggests that Israel is separating geographically and culturally: “eighty-five percent of Jerusalemites believe in God, compared with only 44 percent in Tel Aviv and the central region. Only a quarter of Israeli Jews fully keep Shabbat, but 66 percent keep it in Jerusalem as compared with just 15 percent in Tel Aviv or Haifa. Thirty-seven percent don’t believe that humans and apes share a common ancestor – a disturbing finding – but in Jerusalem the anti-Darwinians enjoy an absolute majority of 81 percent while in Tel Aviv they’re in a distinct minority ‘of only’ 27 percent.”

Israel is getting “Jewier”

Haaretz notes that “the most startling gaps are generational. In Israel in 2018, the younger the Jew, the more likely he or she is to be more religious, observant, conservative and willing to impose his or her beliefs on others. Sixty-five percent of the population would let supermarkets and groceries operate on Shabbat, but that position is supported by only 51 percent of people between 18 and 24, compared with 84 percent of those 65 and older.”

Haaretz points out that that the religious shift of young Israelis “stands in stark contrast to current trends in the United States and Western Europe, where millennials are ditching religion in droves.” In Israel, “younger Jews go to shul at twice the rate of their parents and grandparents, while in the United States and Western Europe the opposite is true.” In other words, “Israel is getting Jewier, at least for the time being.”

These results indicate that Israel is drifting away from enlightenment. Zionism promised to modernise and civilise the Jews by means of ‘homecoming,’ but the Jewish state has achieved the opposite result. While Israel has transformed itself into an oppressive dark ghetto surrounded by humongous concrete walls, it is actually the young diaspora Jews who are ditching the ghetto.

 

REMINDER: AS PFLP MARTYR AYMAN NAJJAR (R.A.) SHOWS, THE PALESTINIAN RESISTANCE STANDS WITH HIZBULLAH

by Jonathan Azaziah

Ayman Nafez Rabih an-Najjar (R.A.), a 26-year old Palestinian fighter of the PFLP’s Abou Ali Moustafa Brigades, was martyred alongside his comrade, 24-year old Mouhannad Majed Jamal Hamouda (R.A.), on July 29th, 2018 in Jabaliya when the usurping Zionist entity was launching a vicious assault upon the illegally besieged Gaza Strip. The legendary Resistance group founded by George Habash said that the young men gave their lives in the line of duty, i.e. resisting the ‘Israeli’ terrorists who seek to ethnically cleanse the indigenous Palestinian people from the lands that have been in Palestinian hands for 30-40 generations. Ayman and Mouhannad both died with honor, dignity and a pristine glow of Mouqawamah.

Shahid an-Najjar loved Hizbullah with all of his pure heart and had tremendous admiration for its leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Pictured here with a frame of Lebanon’s Liberator emblazoned with the PFLP’s insignia just above him, the message that the Abou Ali Moustafa Brigades martyr was sending couldn’t have been more plainspoken: We, the tigers of ferocity and steadfastness, who defend the Palestinian cause and fight to implement the Right of Return, decolonization and full liberation, stand with the Lebanese Islamic Resistance which ushered in the Era of Victories unequivocally.

Let this be a reminder to all those naysayers, slanderers, liars and outright ZOG agents: From the War of the Camps to the Second Intifada to right this second as we live and breathe, it is Hizbullah that has stood with the Palestinian cause, fought for the Palestinian people and given Shouhada — the very best of its Commanders and it is not only prepared but prouder than proud to given even more — for the total restoration of Palestine. Hizbullah, got it? Not the fork-tongued, neo-Ottoman pig Erdogan. Not Al-Saud and the UAE, both of whom slaughter Yemeni children for sport like IOF does in Gaza. Not Qatar, which finances the Zionist Organization of America and censors its media outlets to please World Zionism. Not the “Muslim” Brotherhood. None of them. Just Hizbullah–with Iranian and Syrian support. Ayman knew it. The PFLP itself is aware of it. And if the “Palestine Solidarity Movement” and the rest of the Gentile “Anti-Zionist” Zionists out there would pull their heads out of the nether-regions of Jewish Voice for “Peace” and the plethora of additional like-similar Dajjalic fronts… They’d know it too. Rest in power, o’ dazzling and dauntless Fedayeen. May you enjoy the bliss of Jannah in the company of Abou Ali Moustafa (R.A.), Sayyed Abbas Moussawi (R.A.) and all our other fallen-yet-ascended heroes for infinity.

Truth, Truthfulness and Palestine

June 11, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

truth Palestine .jpg

Talk delivered at Deep Truth-Countering Deep State Lies (online conference)   

Sun 10 June

By Gilad Atzmon

A healthy society doesn’t need a ‘truth movement.’  But we Americans, Brits, French and Germans are far from healthy and our so-called ‘truth movements’ haven’t led us towards any sources of light. The question is: Why?

One possible answer is that ‘truth movements’ are ideal environments for the operators of controlled opposition — those who insist upon vetting any discussion about the truth by claiming to know what ‘the truth’ is, what it comprises and who its enemies are.

Karl Popper posited that since no number of scientific experiments could definitively prove a scientific theory we should utilise a methodology based on falsifiability. While we posses the means to refute a scientific theory or scientific ‘truth,’ we lack the ability to verify a single scientific theory by means of experiments. For instance, if you state that ‘the sun rises in the East’ is a valid scientific truth, a single occasion of the sun popping up early in the morning in the West will refute your theory. “Building Number Seven” may not point at the culprit behind 9/11 but it is thought to refute the official 9/11 narrative. Furthermore, history laws such as Holocaust denial laws in Europe or the Nakba law in Israel exist to defy alteration, refutation or scholarly debate about the past. Instead of helping us to grasp our past, the existence of such laws reveals to us that some parties are desperate to stop anyone from exploring  what really happened.

The French philosopher Jean-François Lyotard observed in his book, ‘Heidegger and The Jews’ that history may claim to tell us what happened, but most of the time ‘history’ is institutionally engaged in concealing our shame. The Americans, for instance, conceal the brutality of slavery, the Brits conceal the crimes of the empire, the Jews suppress any inquiry into Jewish accountability for Jewish history’s chain of disasters and so on. The message here is that instead of simply learning history from historians, we may well benefit from adopting a psychoanalytical approach to try to understand what historians work to conceal. We should ask why does America build a holocaust museum in every city? Why did the Brits make the Imperial Wars Museum into a Holocaust shrine? We may even want to understand how it is possible that on the same day Israel celebrated “the biggest Gay Pride Parade in the region” hundreds of Israeli snipers were deployed on the Gaza border with orders to shoot every Palestinian who might try to break out of the Gaza concentration camp. Israel’s liberal LGBT attitude is basically a pink-wash, an attempt to conceal Israel’s abusive racist policies towards the indigenous people of its land.

But there is reason to be optimistic. Against the odds, and despite the open assault on truthfulness, truth has a unique ability to unveil itself.

In this presentation today we will look at Palestine and Israel in the light of truth and truthfulness and we will find out that by now we are all Palestinians. Like the Palestinians we are not allowed to utter the name of our oppressors.

Trump and Truthfulness

If truth reveals itself however involuntarily, President Trump is a leading vehicle or, perhaps, an arch facilitator, for such process to take place.  Let us, for instance, examine Trump’s decision to move the American embassy to Jerusalem. This cataclysmic political decision was criticised by every reasonable figure globally but it actually provided the opportunity for the truth to unveil itself.

Just a few hours after Trump’s televised announcement, Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas informed Vice President Pence who was at a state visit in the region that he was persona non grata in Ramallah. President Abbas’ reaction to Trump’s Jerusalem move was to declare that America can no longer act as a negotiator, it is a side in the conflict. It was Trump’s Jerusalem move that finally allowed the penny to drop. America hasn’t just taken a side in the conflict, it may as well be an Israeli colony.

Truth Shines on the Jewish Solidarity Spin

Over the last two decades the Palestinian solidarity movement has become a toy for Jewish solidarity. The results of this have been devastating. The core Palestinian plight, namely The Right of Return was practically wiped out and replaced by Israel-friendly terminology such as ‘End of Occupation’ – a set of peaceful sounding bites that in practice legitimise the existence of the pre-1967 Jewish State. New sound bites were attached to the Israeli Palestinian conflict such as: apartheid, colonialism, settler colonialism and even BDS. These misleading terminologies were designed to convey the image that the Israeli Palestinian conflict was not unique, that it had precedents in history. Of course, this is simply wrong and consciously misleading. Zionism is based upon the ludicrous idea that Jews have the right to return to their ‘homeland’ after 2000 years. Who else should enjoy such a ‘universal’ right? Can my Italian drummer claim my house in London as a ‘Roman offspring’?

But Trump’s Jerusalem move reminded the Palestinians that the denial of the Right of Return is at the core of their plight. It is the Right of Return that they should fight for, the Right of Return and nothing but that Right.  Since March we have seen huge protests by Palestinians on the Gaza border. These protests have cost a lot of Palestinian lives. Hundreds were murdered by Israeli snipers, thousands have been injured, but the truth has prevailed. The current resistance by the Palestinians has achieved more of an impact than 20 years of wasted diluted kosher solidarity: Israel is now on the defensive: boycotted culturally and spiritually. PM Netanyahu visited every significant European capitol in the last few days begging for support on Iran. He found closed doors. The Argentinian football team cancelled its visit to Israel. Today I read in the Israeli press that more and more Spanish municipalities ban Israeli cultural events. These measures are a direct reaction to Israeli barbarism in Gaza and beyond.

 Killing From Afar

The Austrian Philosopher Otto Weininger dedicated his valuable text ‘Sex & Character’ to a harsh deconstruction of the ‘female character,’ and then concluded his work by suggesting that the Jewish male is a woman. Weininger killed himself shortly after, he probably couldn’t stand the fact that he himself was an effeminate character as well as a Jew.

Zionism, either consciously or subconsciously took Weininger very seriously. In its early stages Zionism saw itself as an alpha male factory. It brought to life the new Israeli — the Sabra named for the prickly pear.  The  diaspora assimilated Jew, was, in Zionist eyes,  indistinguishable from the outside but calculating and mean on the inside. In contrast, the new Israeli Sabra was to be rough and tough on the outside, yet sweet and humane on the inside.

The Zionists promise was to construct the new Jew, to make him and her into warriors — Combatants that could fight for their cause unlike their Diaspora relatives who were thought to have surrendered like ‘lambs to the slaughter.’

Israeli history suggests that this project seemed successful for a while. In Israel’s early days young Hebrews were willing to fight and die. Indeed, they won a few successive battles (1948, ‘56 and ‘67). I was brought up within this Spartan environment. My peers and I looked forward to sacrificing ourselves on the Jewish nationalist altar. This has clearly changed. The Israeli army is no longer a winning army. Not only does it lack decisive victories, more often it finds itself defeated, withdrawn from the battlefield with its tail between its legs.

What we have seen on the Gaza border in the last two months reveals that Otto Weininger’s observation was indeed prescient. Again the truth has unveiled itself however involuntarily. The Israeli army is an army that kills from afar. It is basically a barbarian criminal outfit dominated by the cowardly nature of its members.

The Israeli military elite has dreaded a March to Jerusalem for decades.  Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians marching back to their lands, homes, cities and villages is something that can’t be easily addressed militarily. Generals are naturally fearful of such incidents because they entail unpredictability. It is impossible to predict how a lone rifleman will react when confronted by thousands of angry Palestinians closing in on him — will he stay to defend his position or will he run for safety?  And what about the air force, can we count on an F-16 pilot to drop a napalm bomb on unarmed Palestinians marching towards Tel Aviv? Seemingly the Israeli generals have found an answer to the above dilemma – they kill from afar.

Israel has deployed thousands of snipers in Gaza. They are ordered to kill from afar. Not exactly the early Zionist heroic image of a face to face warrior who sees the eyeballs of his foe as he fights for his survival. But the snipers are not alone. Israeli pilots also rocket Gaza from a distance while cruising over the Negev or the Sea.  Both the snipers and the pilots are supported by dozens of drones that are controlled by boys and girls who operate in safety and comfort in air-conditioned units.

Otto Weininger’s diagnosis had some merit. Apparently the alpha male transition didn’t work as the early Zionists wished.

We Are All Palestinians

Truth, as we know, is under attack in the West. It doesn’t take a genius to identify the elements that see truth as a threat and seek to suppress truth seeking. The political means that have been designed to suppress truth and truthfulness operate openly. At one stage this online conference was  named  ‘The Left Out Forum.’ It is the platform for scholars and humanists who unveil the shame that  the Left in its current permutation can’t handle. How did it happen to the Left? This is easy to explain – at a certain stage the good old Left was hijacked by the so –called ‘New Left’ — a corrosive set of ‘ideologies’ that are designed to suppress truth and truthfulness.

The New Left assault on truth is facilitated by two means. The first is ID politics – a divisive crude attempt to teach us to speak ‘as a’ (as a woman, as a Jew, as a Lesbian, as a Black, etc.). ID politics has either consciously or not removed us from authenticity and authentic thinking. Instead of pondering for ourselves, we learned to think ‘as a’ in a collective manner (as a Jew, as a Trans, as a Gay, etc.)

The second New Left tactic is so-called ‘Political Correctness.’  PC culture is basically politics that doesn’t allow political opposition. Interestingly enough, this is exactly how we define authoritarian and tyrannical discourse. The truth of the matter is that tyrannical conditions are light in comparison with PC culture because PC is driven by self-suppression. It represses our ability to express ourselves authentically, and even more dangerously PC stops us from thinking independently.

All of this has led me to the conclusion that in the world in which we live, we are all Palestinians. Palestine is not just some far away conflict. It is here all around us: like the Palestinians we are unable to explicitly utter the name of our oppressors. Like the Palestinians, our dissent has been compromised. In Britain, the police will knock on your door as soon as you tweet your thoughts about Israel and its Lobby. America is catching up.   Like the Palestinians, our truth has been hijacked but it has not been murdered.

Truth, as we have seen, is a lasting enduring concept.  Truth is that which unveils itself against all odds. Whether we like it or not, truth will shine upon us as it has shined upon Gaza and Palestine in the last two months. However, the truth may not be where we expect to find it.

Otto Weininger taught us that “in art self- realisation is realisation of the world.” The artist, according to Weininger, hits the truth by means of self-reflection. Trying to universalise Weininger’s insight may suggest that truth happens to unveil itself to us because the truth is in us. Truth is not what you find out while examining the world, it is not in the press or in the media, on CNN, the BBC or the Guardian of the Judea. Truth is not what you find in academia or even in a truth movement’s pamphlets. Truth unveils itself because truth is that which we find within ourselves. Truth is found when we close our eyes in disbelief. It reveals itself when we look inward, when we  learn to attend to our inner voice of reason and ethics.

Truth is not a personal esoteric experience. Quite the opposite, it is that kernel of humanity we all share. It is that which makes us into one, a one that transcends  political affiliation, identity, gender, race, ethnicity  or biology. As in Palestine, sooner rather than later,  we will realise that truth, so to say our truth, that which we share, is the only thing worth fighting for!

To Support Gilad’s Legal Defence Fund

DONATE
 

If they want to burn it, you want to read it!

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, 

Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk). 

Al Mayadeen’s Nakba Special featuring Gilad Atzmon

May 15, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reOKhDG6X78&t=3m28s

The English part starts around 3;29 min/sec.

In this interview with Al Mayadeen’s Zeinab Al Saffar  I elaborated on The Right of Return, the racism that is inherent to the Jewish State, the Jewish solidarity spin and the inevitable future – One Palestine from the river to the sea.

Six years ago 20 Palestinians called for my disavowal as I was touring America raising funds for The March to Jerusalem.  At the time some Palestinians were happy to serve their ‘solidarity meisters.’  But recent events  reveal how wrong they were. Their people are actually more determined than ever.

The Right of Return is the core of the Palestinian plight. It puts Gaza in context, it brings Israeli crude racism to light. It unites the Palestinians, it unites the rest of us behind them.

This interview was filmed in Maroun al Ras, Southern Lebanon

If they want to burn it, you want to read it!

cover bit small.jpg

Dissecting Jewish Solidarity (Palestine, Blacks and Beyond)

May 11, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

Gilad on KGNU Independent Community Radio, Denver, CO at Shareef Aleem’s `Show

https://youtu.be/McLMG4Oj2Oo

May 08, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

In a healthy society truth doesn’t need a ‘movement’.  In a society with a prospect of a future, truth is explored and celebrated in the open.

In the coming USA visit I will delve into the strategies that are set to deviate us from truth and truthfulness. We will learn how false dichotomies are manufactured and the means by which detachment and alienation are sustained. We will look primarily at Palestine and Neocon Wars.

Like the Palestinians we are not allowed to utter the name of our oppressor nor can we discuss the means that facilitate this oppression. Truth is our first step towards emancipation.  By now, we are all Palestinians.

Please share these dates with your friends and come to meet me.  

Monday 7 May, 2018 @ 7 pm,  Africa and Zionism – Dissecting anti-black racism in Israel and beyond, led by El-Hajj Mauri’ Saalakhan and Gilad Atzmon,  39 Eldridge St  4th Fl, Chinatown, NYC

Tuesday  8 May, 2018 @ 7 pm,  Truth, Truthfulness & Palestine – a talk and Q&A with Gilad Atzmon,  353 West 48th Street (2nd Floor), room 1, NYC

Thursday 10 May, 6.30 – 8 pm ,Truth, Truthfulness & Palestine – a talk and Q&A with Gilad Atzmon followed by a music party. Meeting @ Wil Mar Center, Mendota Rook, 953 Jenifer St. Madison, WI
Friday 11 May, 8 pm Truth, Truthfulness and Palestine, a talk and Q&A with Gilad Atzmon –  AL Nahda 10555 Southwest Highway, Worth, IL (Chicago)

Saturday 12 May, Rich Forer and Gilad Atzmon with WE ARE CHANGE Denver 6.30 pm.  7401 W. 59th St, Arvada, CO.

Sunday 13 May, 12.00 Rich Forer and Gilad Atzmon, Truth and Truthfulness in America a private meeting in Denver, Co. Please contact me if you want to attend.

 Sunday 13 May, 3.00 pm  Jazz & Beyond  at The Mercury Café, 2199 California St, Denver. CO

Monday 14 May, Jazz night, Dan Schulte -bass, Fred Ingram – drums, Steve Cleveland – kb. 7:30 pm till 9 pm,  Sanctuary at the Southminster Presbyterian Church, 12250 SW Denney Road, Beaverton, Oregon

Tuesday 15 May, Today is the Day, Truth, Truthfulness and Palestine,   The Clackamas Truth and Inquiry Group at 15815 SE 82nd Dr., Clackamas,  OR in the Denny’s Banquet Room at 7 pm.

Wednesday 16 May 7 – 9 pm Gilad with Jason Hanna and the Bullfighters at the Riviera Supper Club, 7777 University Ave. LA Mesa CA 91941 (San Diego)

Thursday 17 May, Morning talk in SD. This event is private – if you want to attend please contact Gilad.
Saturday 19 May,  2:00 PM,  Gilad Atzmon in Los Angeles – Music by Fritz Heede and Gilad Atzmon  followed by a talk  on the current dystopia  by Gilad   1827 S Hope St, Los Angeles, CA 90015

Tuesday 21 May,  Truth, Truthfulness and Palestine. 7-9pm, Community Room Richmond Library, 325 Civic Center Plaza Richmond, California

Ahed Tamimi Interrogation Video Discussed in New Report

Source

I do not make a habit of visiting the Daily Beast. I simply don’t care much for their editorial policies. But an article published today on an alleged video of a police interrogation of Palestinian teen Ahed Tamimi is worth taking a look at.

Before I get into the details of the report, let me just comment, as an aside, that for a while now it has seemed to me that we are witnessing a growing rift among Jews over the policies of the state of Israel. The rift is primarily between Jews who live in the West and Israeli Jews who by and large support the policies of apartheid.

For instance you might want to go here to read an article, published a bit over a week ago at the ultra-Zionist Aurtz Sheva/Israel National News website–an article which assails Ronald Lauder over a mildly-worded comment in which the president of the World Jewish Congress criticized “Israel’s capitulation to religious extremists” while at the same time referencing a “growing disaffection of the Jewish diaspora.”

Israel’s policies and all the boycotts they are generating, in addition to making it increasingly hard to cast Jews as victims, are bound to be causing headaches for Jews who oversee vast business empires in the West–empires which depend upon public goodwill for continued profitability. And this is probably a major source of the “growing disaffection” Lauder refers to.

Now comes the Daily Beast article.

Written by a Jewish writer, Jesse Rosenfeld, the article offers a rather realistic view of the occupation, describing Ahed Tamimi’s village of Nabi Saleh as a place where “unpleasant daily encounters with Israeli settlers and soldiers are a fact of life.” Rosenfeld also makes reference to “vitriolic condemnations” heaped upon the Tamimi family by “hardline Israeli politicians” and by “national activists,” and he additionally cites figures showing that the conviction rate of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli military courts is “near one hundred percent.”

It’s almost sounds as if the Daily Beast is championing the cause of Ahed Tamimi!

But let’s get into the nuts and bolts of the article, which you can read in full here. Rosenfeld apparently was given access to a video of an interrogation of Ahed that took place on December 26. The video, he says, is nearly two hours long, and in it the two Israeli interrogators show no regard for her rights as a minor.

The AZZ Freak Show starring Tom Pessah

March 05, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

 By now, the discourse of the oppressed is defined by the sensitivities of the oppressor. 

By now, the discourse of the oppressed is defined by the sensitivities of the oppressor.

By Gilad Atzmon

If you want to understand how Jewish domination of the Palestinian solidarity movement has derailed the Palestinian struggle and caused complete paralysis of the movement, the explanation can be found in 972.com and Tom Pessah .

“Anti-Semitism is unlike most other forms of hatred” writes Pessah at 972.com today.  And why? Because  “it is both a form of bigotry and a false accusation.”  An Israeli Jew ‘pro’ Palestinian is telling us that while hatred of Jews is based on lies, other forms of hatred (misogyny, anti black, Islamophobia) must be factually supported. Can you think of a more telling example of morbid Judeo centrism?

“Bigotry is always bad,”  Pessah writes. And it seems that the tribal merchant has uttered what seems like a universal sentiment, until it becomes clear that again he is only referring  to his tribe. “It is bad for Jews inside the pro-Palestine movement .. it is bad for attracting Jews from outside the movement… and it provides plenty of ammunition for those seeking to silence Palestine solidarity activism by equating it with anti-Semitism.” Pessah’s  attack on ‘bigotry’ is only as it applies to Jews.

If self-love were a Jewish sport, Pessah would be an Olympic gold medalist . His Jews-only organisation, Jews For Racial and Economic Justice’s (JFREJ) new booklet, “does a good job of defining anti-Semitism as an ideology that uses lies and stereotypes about Jews in order to blame them for society’s problems.” Can  Pessah tell us how many goyim are members of the board of this exclusionary Jews-only oranisation? I looked at the booklet. I saw a lot of the usual ‘Zionism is not Judaism’ but I didn’t see  any attempt to explain what was meant by Jewishness. There were no references to the Jewishness of the Jewish State. The demography of the Ziocon club wasn’t mentioned in the booklet either.  What the JFREJ offers instead is the usual  lame  solidarity Hasbara — a desperate attempt to conceal the embarrassing fact that Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and is supported by a vast majority of Jewish institutions.

In his article, Pessah, an Israeli Jew who dwells on Palestinian land, attempts to impose boundaries on the Palestinian solidarity movement. It is no secret that Jewish activists feel threatened by the Palestinian Right of Return. In fact, the entire Jewish solidarity project can be seen as an attempt to weaken the Right of Return by diluting its content with as many misleading slogans as possible; For example: ‘End of Occupation, ‘Colonialism,’ ‘settler colonialism,’ ‘Apartheid’ etc. These terms are designed to divert the solidarity movement from the essential Palestinian cause and, in practice, to provide Israel with the right to exist.

To read more about The Jewish Solidarity Spin.

Pessah admits that he was initially concerned by the Palestinian Right of Return. But his anxiety was allayed when some “non-Arab pro Palestinians” explained to him that “Palestinians returning to their homeland didn’t have to mean expelling the current Jewish inhabitants. From then on, I started to make the right of return a central part of my advocacy work.”

And so, once again, we see that Pessah’s ‘solidarity’ is primarily concerned with Jews. It was only when he understood that Israelis would not be affected by the Right of Return that Pessah decided to integrate the slogan into his pro Palestinian phrase-book.

An Israeli Jew is now an authority on the true meaning of the Right of Return? It makes me wonder if Pessah has confirmed that the Palestinians have now given up on their villages, cities, orchards and fields? If this is the case, then please, set up a meeting immediately with Pessah, 972’s editorial staff and Bibi Netanyahu, seal a peace deal and once and for all put this Israeli/Palestinian conflict behind us.

But then, what is the meaning of the powerful Palestinian chant, “From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free?”  Pessah offers an interpretation. “We meant freedom for everyone.” Apparently the Zionists didn’t buy his nonsense. So Pessah and his ‘solidarity’ group have “promised to stop using this chant.”

Pessah writes,

“We had gone out of our way to be sensitive, taking the claim of Jewish safety seriously, while ignoring the politics these (Jewish)  lobby groups were trained to promote.”

Precious, isn’t it?

The followers of my work know that I contend that the result of Jewish domination within some segments of the Palestinian solidarity movement can be described in very clear terms:

The discourse of the oppressed is defined by the sensitivities of the oppressor.

Pessah has been stupid enough to bring this devlopment to light.

“When one of our allies confused the terms ‘Jews’ and ’Zionists,’ I wrote a long letter to my colleagues about the differences between the two.” We do not need Pessah  or Ali Abunimah to tell us that Zionism and Judaism aren’t identical. Leibnitz has provided us with the relevant theory.

The problem is that we cannot determine where Zionism ends and Jewishness starts. Similarly, it is impossible to determine where Pessah and the AZZs end and Netanyahu begins. All of them care primarily about Jews and their interests, they may disagree on the details.

Pessah proudly informs his 972 Jewish followers how he helped to silence a Muslim preacher, Abdul Malik Ali,  because he had claimed that

(a) “Zionist Jews” were behind a series of violent incidents that were blamed on Muslims, including 9/11, and that

(b) these same Jews owned the media. “Since then,” Pessah writes,

 

“Abdul Malik Ali has never been invited back to speak, and we were taken seriously after demonstrating that we did not conflate anti-Semitism with opposition to Israel’s policies.”

The generally admired Alison Weir is also an “enemy” as far as Pessah is concerned.  Pessah apparently  takes pride in her expulsion from the Leading BDS coalition.

As usual, yours truly is the ultimate enemy. This time I am accused of being

“a Holocaust denier and an active proponent of Nazism.”

I guess it really gets under these tribals’ skin that I insist that we stop treating the holocaust as a religion and instead elevate it to an historical chapter subject to the usual open scrutiny. Pessah boasts about the call made in 2012 for my disavowal. As Pessah and others surely know, this call had zero impact on my work or my career. If anything, it confirmed to many much that I have to say about Jewishness, choseness and the duplicity inherent in the AZZ camp. I have never worked closely with any Jewish groups or solidarity bodies dominated by tribal interests. I am a writer. I wrote The Wandering Who, which is, without a doubt the best selling book on Jewish ID politics. The book digs into the corrosive work of Jewish solidarity groups. It explains the tribal ideology that drives Pessah, Mondoweiss JVP, 972 and future Judeo-centric bodies to come.

If Pessah weren’t offended by my work and did not try to discredit me, I  would take it as an insult and consider early retirement.

If they want to burn it , you want to read it..

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto

Amazon.co.uk  ,  Amazon.com  and   here  (gilad.co.uk)

 

The Crumbling Holocaust: an Israeli Perspective

February 24, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

palestine-holocaust-children-1.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

The following are segments taken from an outstanding Haaretz  commentary  titled ‘The Crumbling Consensus that Jews Were the Ultimate Holocaust Victims’ by Ofri Ilani.

The article explores the fundamentals of the global religion of the Holocaust, identifies the international institutions that sustain the doctrine and the political events that indicate that the Goyin are weary of the notion of the primacy of Jewish suffering. I tend to agree with most of Ilani’s observations as well as his predictions regarding the fate of the holocaust religion. One crucial difference between us is that while Ilani seems distressed by the possible collapse of the Holocaust consensus, I believe that emancipation from that tyrannical Judeo-centric precept is a necessary humanist development.

On the central role of the Holocaust and its memory Ilani writes;

“An encounter with someone for whom the Holocaust is nonexistent was incomprehensible to me – at the least it was like talking to someone who’s never heard of the sun, or who doesn’t know what water is.”

Ilani’s view seems to integrate the Holocaust into the  Greek’s ‘Classical  Elements’ along side water, air and fire.  Ilani elaborates on his position.

“In Israel, the Holocaust is the first thing you have to know. If someone here knows anything at all about the past, it’s about the Holocaust. Not the discovery of America, not the moon landing, certainly not the French Revolution, not even the Revelation at Mount Sinai – first of all, the Holocaust. For a certain period, it was possible to think that it was the same outside Israel.”

Ilani is clearly younger than I. For my parents’ generation,  my peers and myself, the Holocaust was a distant story: a Jewish diaspora tale, a tragic event that happened to other people: people whom we saw as categorically foreign. People who were led like lambs to the slaughter as we, ‘the Israelis’ were not. Clearly at a certain stage the Israeli attitude toward the Holocaust changed and this shift has yet to be completely understood.

Holocaust indoctrination has spread widely beyond Israel’s border, Ilani posits. “In America, as in many other parts of the world, children in recent decades have learned about the Holocaust from an early age. It’s basically perceived as the formative event of the modern era, against which the central political values of our age were shaped.” Sarcastically he adds, “suffice it to try to imagine how people reviled their political adversaries a century ago, when the words ‘Nazi’ or ‘fascist’ still had no meaning.”

Ilani then affirms that the Holocaust religion dictates a strict and rigid world order.

“The U.S. Holocaust Memorial and Museum in Washington, the Holocaust monument in Berlin and International Holocaust Remembrance Day represented the enshrinement of this memory. Everyone was called upon to remember, according to a rigid protocol. Every public statement about the Holocaust is monitored by experts, journalists and international organizations. Every deviation from the official line draws condemnation.”

Ilani is simply stating what many of us know. The primacy of Jewish suffering has become a tyrannical apparatus in the West. Within the holocaust ideology, Israel is shielded from criticism and its extensive record of human rights abuse is largely ignored. The Palestinian solidarity movement is practically paralysed by Jewish thought police squads, because within the context of the primacy of Jewish suffering, Palestinians can only be secondary victims.  

Ilany describes how the Holocaust story, as we now know it, is starting to crumble.

“Many people were stunned in recent weeks by Poland’s legislative efforts in regard to the remembrance of the Holocaust, and by the statements of the Polish prime minister to the effect that in the Holocaust there were Jewish criminals to the same degree that there were Polish criminals.”

The Poles were not alone,

“we are now seeing the collapse of this world order. Events such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the rise of Trump and the Brexit crisis are three of the biggest cracks that have emerged in it. The consensus concerning the Holocaust of the Jews was fundamentally linked to that political order.”

The Israeli academic acknowledges that the Holocaust and the new global capitalist world order are two sides of the same coin.

“It is the European Union and other global institutions created since the 1990s that disseminate the official version of the Holocaust of European Jewry and enforce its preservation. So it comes as no surprise that the disintegration of the world order and its institutions has also given rise to the unravelling of the consensus on the Holocaust.”

I guess that those who are upset by the global capitalist order might be cheered by Ilani’s vision of the crumbling Holocaust creed and the authoritarian institutions attached to it.

To read Gilad Atzmon’s take on truth, history, integrity, holocaust and revisionism read this: http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/truth-history-and-integrity-by-gilad-atzmon.html

If they want to burn my books , you want to read them..

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto

Amazon.co.uk  ,  Amazon.com  and   here  (gilad.co.uk). 

Guardians of Judea

February 16, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

That which appears as harsh political polarity within the Jewish world is more than often a mere camouflage.

That which appears as harsh political polarity within the Jewish world is more than often a mere camouflage.

by Gilad Atzmon

In The Wandering Who I argue that Jews appear to disagree on many things but rather often they agree on the most ‘important things’. I contend that that which appears as harsh political polarity within the Jewish world is more than often a mere camouflage.

To learn more read this.

Though it is clear that Jewish hawks and Zionists are collaborating enthusiastically with the so-called ‘progressives’ only rarely do we manage to find evidence of such teamwork. Ahead of the American election we, for instance, were shocked to learn that the so-called solidarity activist Max Blumenthal fabricated a story on the 2012 Benghazi attack on the pages of the Guardian in order to divert attention away from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s blunders in Libya at the time that his papa Sidney Blumenthal was financially invested in reconstruction and regime change in Libya. Hillary Clinton was delighted by Max’s spin. She wrote to Sidney ‘your son is a Mitzvah.’

This Morning the Guardian of Judea is exposed once again.  Ahead of his Labour kangaroo court trial coming Saturday, notorious AZZ* Tony Greenstein is desperate to list his kosher credentials and actions on behalf of the Hasbara league. Greenstein did it numerous times before. When he was suspended from the Labour Party he bragged about being praised by the ultra Zionist Board of Deputies of British Jews (BOD). This morning Greenstein once again quotes Jamie Slavin of the same BOD. “Whilst his views (Greenstein’s) on the situation in the Middle East are a complete anathema to me, to his credit, he has led the opposition within the PSC to the rising levels of anti-Semitism.” The Ultra Zionists Slavin confirms that which we all know. Greenstein has been working hard to sabotage the Palestinian solidarity movement in the name of his core tribal interests.

Today, thanks to Greenstein, we were delighted to learn that the Guardian Executive Editor Jonathan Freedland was stupid enough to trust Greenstein not to post his personal exchange where they discussed some tribal concerns such as: Paul Eisen, Jeremy Corbyn and yours truly.

All in the family...In the email, Guardian’s Freedland repeats, almost word  for word the BOD’s line of thought.

All in the family…In the email, Guardian’s Freedland repeats, almost word  for word the BOD’s line of thought.

In the email, Guardian’s Freedland repeats, almost word for word the BOD’s line of thought: “despite our obvious disagreements, I have always had respect for the integrity of your position.  I remember your admirable stance on Gilad Atzmon for example.”

Some may wonder what made Freedland trust Greenstein’s integrity considering the latter’s embarrassing unlawful past. Maybe Freedland learned his lesson. I, on my part, am pretty delighted to see that self-identified Jews can fight on pretty much every topic, but so many of them are united around my disastrous impact on their exceptionalist tribal project. I guess that my capacity to unite the Jews is remarkable, I may as well be their king.

I will also use this opportunity to wish Tony Greenstein luck on his hearing this Saturday. I do believe that the Labour party should readmit him immediately. Tony Greenstein is not an anti-Semite. He is a proper kosher merchant as the BOD and Freedland confirm above. The suggestion that Greenstein is an anti-Semite only gives a bad name to anti-semitism.

If  Elias Davidsson wants to burn it, you want to read it …

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto

Amazon.co.uk  ,  Amazon.com  and   here  (gilad.co.uk). 

 *AZZ-Anti Zionist Zionist

No Fly Zone over Israel

February 13, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

Syria possesses the ability to impose a no fly zone over northern Israel.

Syria possesses the ability to impose a no fly zone over northern Israel.

Interview with Gilad Atzmon on recent news by Alimuddin Usmani

http://lapravda.ch/

Alimuddin Usmani: On the 10th of February, Syrian anti-aircraft units managed to use an old Soviet anti-aircraft missile built in the sixties to shoot down an Israeli F-16.

 What is the significance of this military incident?

Gilad Atzmon:  I do not know much about the type of anti air missiles the Syrians used.  It seems that the Israelis were also perplexed by Syrian anti air capacity. But what we do know is that the Israeli F-16 wasn’t in Syria’s air space. It was well within Israel, in fact not too far from Haifa’s sky. This means that Syria possesses the ability to impose a no fly zone over northern Israel. This is undoubtedly  a positive development. It may even restrain Israeli aggression.

AA: According to Israeli minister Bennett, “Israel must act systematically against the Iranian octopus“.

GA: The reference to Iran as an octopus is new to me. I have seen the octopus imagery used to portray the idea of Jews having  domineering powers.  The image I am referring to is one of octopuses  decorated with a Star of David and holding the planet in their hands.  I do wonder what led Minister Bennett to use such a metaphor. Is it the fear of being encircled and eventually squashed by mighty Iran or maybe Bennett was simply projecting, attributing his own characteristics to the Iranians. This question can remain open. I can say with certainty that since Bennett is a religious Jew, he won’t eat calamari any time soon and he probably doesn’t even know what he misses.

bennet and clamari .png

What is fascinating  about the incident is that for years we have seen Israeli politicians vow to attack Iran. We have seen Jewish leaders worldwide push for military actions and sanctions against Iran. The facts are undeniable: Israel feels surrounded and Bennett seems to admit it by employing the octopus metaphor.

AA: Recently a French-Syrian woman was forced to quit a song show due to some comments she made a while ago on Twitter criticizing the French government’s stance on terrorist attacks.

 What is you take on the above?

GA: This farce highlights the duplicity at the core of so-called multi culturalism and ‘diversity.’ We love and care for the ‘other’ but only so as long as the other conceals his or her otherness. We love Muslims as long as they pretend to be Jews. I see this form of  progressive  ‘diversity’ as an anti humanist oppressive force.

AA: Ahed Tamimi, a young Palestinian activist was arrested on the 19th of December for slapping an Israeli soldier who was standing outside her home. She is still in prison, awaiting a trial. What is your opinion about this girl?

GA: I am afraid that my linguistic abilities fall short in describing my admiration for this Palestinian teenager. I am not impressed by the Palestinian solidarity movement. And now many see the solidarity movement as a controlled opposition apparatus, largely dominated by Jewish organisations and outlets  (JVP, IJAN, Mondoweiss etc.). This has led to a discourse of the oppressed  shaped by the sensitivities of the oppressors. Instead of talking about the Right of Return we have been subject to a barrage of notions, ideas, tactics and political tools that are set to limit the resistance and in practice, facilitate recognition of the Jewish State and its right to exist (to read more  http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2015/5/16/the-jewish-solidarity-spin).

Ahed Tamimi represents uncompromising resistance. She wants her land to be free, and I don’t doubt  that her wishes will come through

AA: Tell us something about your next gigs.

GA: I am on my way to Barcelona. I am writing to you while seated in a plane. Tonight I will be talking about my new book Being in Time. I will probably be asked about Catalan independence in light of my  post political theory although I have nothing to say about it. I do not really understand the Catalan situation nor do I know how or where to locate it within my criticism of the current global dystopia, I hope that by the end of the night I will have learned  more about Catalonia. A lot of my ideas were born out of intense exchanges with the many people I have encountered while being on the road. It is the differences that  spark thinking and originality, concepts that are seriously lacking in the monolithic tyranny of correctness that is imposed on us.

Watzal und Dershowitz

December 20, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

watzal dersh.png

By Gilad Atzmon

Two days ago, I revealed that Ludwig Watzal, a  supposedly  pro Palestinian German  writer, attempted to defame me and my work by doctoring my words and fabricating quotes.

Some of my supporters who follow Watzal’s work approached Watzal and asked him for clarification.

Watzal’s initial response was to dismiss their questions.

“This is all trash written by a Zionist agent,” Watzal answered.

Screen Shot 2017-12-18 at 16.54.40.png

 So again, I have been labeled a ‘Zionist agent,’ just for pointing at the depth of duplicity in the midst of the Palestinian Solidarity Movement.

But then Watzal was shown screen shots from my book The Wandering Who? that proved that he had completely invented my words. The German disinformation merchant changed his tune.

Watzal had to admit that he had lifted the quotes from no other than ethnic cleanser advocate, Prof.  Alan Dershowitz’. You may ask why a Palestinian ‘solidarity’ activist would turn to Dershowitz as an ‘authority.’ You would expect Watzal to know that Prof. Noam Chomsky described Dershowitz as ‘a remarkable liar and slanderer.’

But our story doesn’t end there. Watzal, the hapless imbecile managed  to dig an even deeper hole. Watzal wrote to a respected solidarity activist who had questioned his fraudulent accusations that:

“In Social Science, It’s legitimate to quote another author like I did.”

Watzal is correct. In social science as in all scholarly work, one may certainly quote others. But one is also required to reference the origin of any quote.  Failing to do so is generally called plagiarism.

Watzal managed to fail three times in a row.

1.    Watzal plagiarised  Dershowitz by  failing to credit  Dershowitz as the source of his quote. Instead, he presented the ‘quotes’  as if they were the product of his own research.

2.    Watzal published doctored and fabricated quotes without checking them.

3.    The cover up. Watzal obviously knew that his quotes weren’t  the product of his own study. He could easily have asked for time to check his work  and eventually retract it but Watzal decided, instead, to spin and slander in the most disgusting and fraudulent manner.

In an Athenian universe, any of the above would be enough to strip Watzal of  his academic titles.

This is not the first time I have come across a lack of integrity  within the Palestinian solidarity movement. And the question I ask myself is what is it about the Palestinians and their plight that attracts these fraudulent characters? Whether we find an answer to this or not, we can certainly see why the solidarity movement has led nowhere. It was set to lead us astray.

Palestinian Expo 2017: The UK Government and The Lobby

June 27, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

PalExpo.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Over the last decade, Palestinian solidarity has been hijacked by many Jewish organisations – JVP, IJAN, J-BIG – and also by other insipid left-leaning groups that in practice, have reduced Palestinian solidarity into a paradigm that is lame, meaningless and leads absolutely nowhere. This loose collective of tribal and Identitarian merchants has managed to reduce the magisterial Palestinian call for Right of Return into a squalid and self-serving Jewish internal debate about the ‘Right to BDS.’ The discourse of the oppressed is now defined by the sensitivities of the oppressor.

Palestine Expo 2017 , scheduled to take place on the weekend of July 8-9 at the QE2 centre, could have been an attempt to re-instate the meaning of Palestine: its culture, its politics and its call for liberation. It could have reinvigorated resistance and, most importantly, put the Right of Return at its heart. It could even have attempted to redefine and solidify the Palestinian conditions for peace in the region.

But it didn’t aspire to do any of those things. Featuring Jewish anti-Zionist voices, and endorsed by various Jewish organisations, it instead attempts to give voice to the most politically-correct and Jewish-friendly vision of solidarity available. And guess what, it didn’t work. Instead of welcoming this Zio-friendly approach, British Jews, utilising all their lobbies and employing every trick in the Hasbara playbook, have act institutionally and aggressively to cancel the event

Yesterday, we learned from the Jewish Chronicle that the British Government in the person Sajid Javid, the Communities Secretary, has threatened to cancel the Palestinian cultural festival in central London next month over the organisers Friends of Al-Aqsa’s (FOA) ‘support of Hamas’. In a letter sent to FOA on June 14, Mr Javid said he was considering calling it off, citing: “concerns that your organisation and those connected with it have expressed public support for a proscribed organisation, namely Hamas, and that you have supported events at which Hamas and Hezbollah – also proscribed – have been praised”.

I guess that the recent election results haven’t taught the Tories the necessary lesson, that people are sick and tired of these manufactured ‘terror’ concerns, especially when they know that it is actually the British government that has been launching, one after the other, immoral and criminal Zio-con wars.

According to the notoriously Zionist Jewish Chronicle, Ismail Patel, founder of Friends of Al-Aqsa, “is closely linked to several Islamic organisations and has openly expressed support for Hamas in the past, calling the group “no terrorist organisation.” Needless to say, Patel is spot on. Hamas is a democratically-elected body which, against all odds, manages with some success and without being their fault, the biggest open-air prison known to humankind, and whose militancy should be understood only in the context of its resistance to Israeli blockade, oppression and occupation. Anyway, as far as I can see, the conference is not voicing any particular support for Hamas.

Image result for Gilad Atzmon and Holocaust denier Paul Eisen

The JC then goes on to list further crimes of the FOA. It has “actively promoted boycotts of Israel and has hosted antisemitic musician Gilad Atzmon and Holocaust denier Paul Eisen on its website.” Well, as far as supporting boycotts is concerned, surely boycotting Israel is an entirely peaceful act, so if the British Government is really so fearful of terror, boycotting Israel may well be the way forward.

Screen Shot 2017-06-27 at 20.42.40.png

As for yours truly, I have nothing to do with this event and naming me as an ‘antisemite’ means very little unless one of these Jewish institutions that does this on a daily basis stands up and defines exactly what it is that I am not allowed to say. What exactly is the ‘crime’ of which I am accused? As things stand, I have never been questioned about any of my views or statements by a single law enforcement authority around the world. If the JC really believes I am guilty of any ‘hate crime’, then it really ought, once and for all, say what it is. The JC also doesn’t much like Paul Eisen, one of the very few authentic humanists around and who is repeatedly labelled a ‘Holocaust denier’ just because he insists that the Holocaust be treated as an historical narrative rather than as a religion. Is this really a crime in the UK?

By now, British Jewish institutions should surely have grasped that these old, recycled anti-Semitic/Holocaust denier labels have lost their power. After all, they tried it with Corbyn and as we know, if anything, it only contributed to his popularity and near victory in the last election.

In a letter replying to the Secretary of State, Mr Patel correctly states that the government is interfering unlawfully in this event and added that ministers had “failed to provide any satisfactory reason as to why they have chosen to cancel an event which seeks only to celebrate Palestinian culture and heritage.”

I would have liked to think that the Tories, now accused of BBQ-ing hundreds of working Brits and Muslims in Grenfell Tower, would have learned their lesson and behaved sensibly for a change.  And here is the good news, they certainly did! As I was about to post this article I learned from the Jewish press that despite the Jewish lobby relentless pressure  Palestine Expo 2017 is going ahead. A spokesman for Mr Javid said:

“We have worked with the QEII Centre to carry out checks following concerns raised about the Palestine Expo 2017. Following these checks, we have agreed the event can take place as planned.”

Seemingly calls to Boycott Israel and posting Gilad Atzmon and Paul Eisen articles is still a kosher adventure in the eyes of British law.

I guess that the British government may have learned its lesson after all. With a bit of luck,  it may even subscribe to Athens against all odds and turn its back to Jerusalem…

If you want to grasp this crucial dichotomy between Athens and Jerusalem, Being in Time is the book for you: Amazon.co.uk ,  Amazon.com  and   here.

Israel/Palestine – Has Peace Prevailed?

June 06, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Image result for Alan Dershowitz, giladWhat is it about me that attracts these Jewish diaspora lowlifes? My arch AZZ* detractor, Tony Greenstein, has a well-earned criminal record forever attached to his name, Alan Dershowitz, so desperate to smear the professors who endorsed my work, was with notorious paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, implicated in underage sex and Anthony Dennison, of the North West Friends of Israel, the Zionist extremist group that terrorized the Northern College music school last year, is a convicted hooligan.

Now, it may be, that being something of a felon actually adds to one’s Jewish reputation – this might explain why both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump married their daughters to sons of Jewish convicted criminals.

Still, with all those villains around, life never gets boring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P32NSpuvKz4

Harvey Garfield, Jewish, ethnic activist of the Zionist extremist Sussex Friends of Israel, and another lowlife, also hopes to sabotage my music career. Garfield, apparently, likes to send letters to harass those who promote my music and my writing – and believe it or not, this Zionist merchant uses none other than Ali Abunimah to support his argument (see letter below) .

But this may be a positive development. While the news from Palestine seem to be evermore grim and depressing and reconciliation seems further away than ever, behind the scenes peace has prevailed. Because for staunch Zionist Garfield, it is Palestinian solidarity activist Ali Abunimah who is the highest authority – at least, that is, when it comes to Gilad Atzmon.

Garfield asks promoters to “not forward or otherwise distribute” his communication outside the immediate management of their venues.  Why is this? I can think of three reasons:

1. Garfield is an anti BDS campaigner. He claims to promote freedom of thought. The fact that he himself is caught trying to stifle this freedom, though entirely consistent with his non-ethical Zionist mind-set, could still be pretty embarrassing.

2. Garfield is just plain lazy and it’s easier simply to copy and paste the same email over and over again.

3.  Garfield, a rabid Zionist activist actually pretends to operate as a ‘pro Palestinian’ humanist supportercirculating Ali Abunimah’s ‘text.’ Why does Garfield feel comfortable with Abunimah’s text? Because it wasn’t written by a Palestinian. It was actually written by a Jewish anti Zionist Zionist. Abunimah actually admitted to professor  Norton Mezvinsky, at the time, that he has never read a single text by me and was completely unfamiliar with my ideas!

I see it as my duty to distribute Garfield’s ‘communication’ and let everyone enjoy the emerging harmonious bond between Britain’s most extreme Zionists and the man whose great achievement to date was reducing the Intifada into a Zionist-friendly electronic noticeboard.

 

Email;

Private and Confidential

I understand you are due to host a gig featuring Gilad Atzmon.No doubt you are unaware that Atzmon is a self identified antisemite and Holocaust denier.I attach several links to that effect as follows

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/palestinian-writers-activists-disavow-racism-anti-semitism-gilad-atzmon

Extract

Palestinian writers, activists disavow racism, anti-Semitism of Gilad Atzmon

Ali Abunimah13 March 2012

Granting No Quarter: A Call for the Disavowal of the Racism and Antisemitism of Gilad Atzmon

Note: This statement was first published by the US Palestinian Community Network (USPCN) and is authored by all of the undersigned.

For many years now, Gilad Atzmon, a musician born in Israel and currently living in the United Kingdom, has taken on the self-appointed task of defining for the Palestinian movement the nature of our struggle, and the philosophy underpinning it. He has done so through his various blogs and Internet outlets, in speeches, and in articles. He is currently on tour in the United States promoting his most recent book, entitled, The Wandering Who.

With this letter, we call for the disavowal of Atzmon by fellow Palestinian organizers, as well as Palestine solidarity activists, and allies of the Palestinian people, and note the dangers of supporting Atzmon’s political work and writings and providing any platforms for their dissemination. We do so as Palestinian organizers and activists, working across continents, campaigns, and ideological positions.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/25/gilad-atzmon-antisemitism-the-left

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/ukmediawatch.org/2015/03/10/a-brief-intro-to-gilad-atzmons-holocaust-denial-aka-george-galloways-pillow-talk/amp/

I appreciate you were likely unaware of the racist views of Mr Atzmon when taking the booking, but in light of these revelations would ask that you cancel his appearance with immediate effect.

Please do not forward or otherwise distribute this communication outside the immediate management of your venue. 

I look forward to receiving your response. 

Yours sincerely

Harvey Garfield

 

*AZZ-anti Zionist Zionist

Related 

Radical? Zionist Book Burner More Likely

May 30, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

If Edinburgh is the Athens of the North, it deserves an Athenian bookshop rather than a Jerusalemite crematorium. 

By Gilad Atzmon

For some days now I’ve been feeling a little bored because my new book Being in Time didn’t seem to be attracting any real opposition. My arch-enemy Alan Dershowitz declined calls to disrupt my USA tour which, in fact, was a great success and all-in-all, the launch of the book seemed to be going smoothly, on the verge of going snooze-ly.

But seemingly everything changed. 

Yesterday, on my way to the event in Cluny, Newcastle I learned that the music venue had capitulated to the Zionist lobby’s pressure. Cluny’s manager, Joel Thomson, told me over the phone that they had received two emails and had decided to withdraw. It took a local friend around five minutes to trace a new location. However, when I arrived at The Cluny around 6.30 PM (to divert the traffic to the new location), I ran into some appalling behaviour by staff members and the owner.

But the Cluny wasn’t a big surprise. Two days ahead of our Edinburgh literary event, David Scott and myself received a cancelation email from Mairi, the owner of the Lighthouse ~ Edinburgh’s Radical Bookshop.

Now, before I go on, let me assure you, we are still, as planned, meeting this evening at 7.30PM near the Lighthouse ~ Edinburgh’s Radical Bookshop. From there, we will then walk to a new venue that tolerates intellectual exchange – something contemporary ‘radicals’ seem to struggle with.Mairi

In her email, and later in her official statement, ‘radical’ Mairi tells us all we need to know about the level of her argumentation. It is an insult to the notion of intelligence.

“It was only brought to my attention today that the event would coincide with the beginning of Shavuot,” Mairi writes,  “and as a result many Jewish individuals who might have wanted to attend to challenge Gilad, would not be able to do so. To exclude members of the Jewish community from a controversial discussion on Jewish identity and politics instinctively felt wrong.”

Impressive, don’t you think?

Leaving aside that my new book doesn’t focus on Jewish ID politics or Judaism per-se, I found myself wondering whether ‘radical’ Mairi would be as insistent on ‘Nazis’ attending a literary event that was critical of Adolf Hitler and his ideas. Would ‘radical’ Mairi similarly insist on inviting Isis enthusiasts to events that were critical of the Islamic State? Or is it only Jewish sensitivities that concern ‘radical’ Mairi?

My guess is that this most ‘radical’ owner of this most ‘radical’ bookshop must adhere to the most extreme form of Zionist privilege – something of a happy coincidence since my new book, Being in Time actually identifies the roots of this exact same Zionist bent at the very core of New Left ‘radical’ thought.

 “Gilad”, she writes in her email,  “although I do not believe that you are a hate speaker, I have no doubt that in affiliating yourself with some far right speakers who are openly holocaust deniers, you have undermined your ability to engage in a productive debate about current politics.”

You know, you’d think that the owner of a radical political bookstore would know that in the real world there are no Holocaust deniers: no one with half a brain has ever denied  that Hitler opposed the Jews and wanted them out of Germany and Europe. No one has ever denied that Jews suffered hugely under Nazi occupation and no one denies that Jews, because of the Holocaust, succeeded in stealing Palestine. 

Some people, however, do indeed question the technicality, practicality, factuality and the meaning of Hitler’s anti-Jewish measures. Zionists often refer to these people as Holocaust deniers’ but in practice, the intellectual field in which those ‘deniers’ are submerged is  historical revisionism.

I am proud that I have argued forcefully in support of revisionism. I argue that if history is the attempt to narrate the past as we move along, then making history into a meaningful adventure must entail re-visiting, re-writing and, in practice, revising the past. True history, therefore, is always a revisionist adventure. This applies not just to the Holocaust but to every single event in the past including slavery, the Nakba, the Holodomor and so on.  Unlike ‘radical’ Mairi I oppose the Holocaust being reduced to a religion. If the Holocaust is our new Western religion then I for one insist upon being an atheist! 

Marie adds

“I believe that your views lend credibility to far-right anti-semitic groups even if you do not consider yourself an antisemite.”

But my writing and my thoughts are published and endorsed by many of the most respected intellectuals and humanists  along the entire political spectrum. Being in Time’ is, as it says on the cover, a post-political manifesto. It suggests that the political dichotomy between Left and Right is dated, meaningless and irrelevant and in my universe, thinkers are divided by the merits of their arguments and not by their left/right political affiliations. I don’t ‘denounce’ people as some leftists insist I should. I engage in scholarly dialogue with  people of all political persuasions and if I don’t agree with someone, I do not denounce, I criticise. For me, humanity is that which crosses the divide rather than hiding behind ghetto walls.

But it gets worse. Mairi also claims to have been harassed by people who support my work. But the cancelation of the event was posted on the bookshop’s site on Saturday night when the shop was closed. There was no reason for anyone to assume that our event was cancelled, or about to be cancelled. Moreover, in my entire career, neither myself nor any of my followers have ever been associated with a single violent or unsavoury incident to do with my work. So Mairi is lying and this shouldn’t take us by surprise. Within Left circles, lying for the ‘cause’ is an entirely kosher procedure. Again, this tendency is studied closely in ‘Being in Time.’

But to be fair to Mairi, she was indeed subjected to some intense pressure – but the pressure came, not from any supporter of mine, but from the notoriously tyrannical Mick Napier.  Napier opposes anyone who points out the obvious fact that if Israel defines itself as the ‘Jewish state,’ then we’d better ask ourselves what the ‘J word’ stands for. It is so for years, the ever-marginal Napier and his miniature SPSC, have been desperate to disrupt my events in Scotland (music as well as intellectual) – and, of course, always in the name of ‘Palestinian solidarity’.

It is almost funny the way Napier campaigns for free speech on Israel whilst working 24/7 suppressing free speech here – especially if it should focus on Jewish power. Who really is he working for? Again, ‘Being in Time’ offers a theoretical foundation to help us to grasp this type of activity and all other forms of controlled opposition.

So what do ‘radicals’ like Mairi and Mick Napier mean by ‘free discourse’? Our ‘radical’ bookshop owner offers an answer:

“We are a platform for open discourse, but I intend to give a platform to speakers I support who might not otherwise have a venue, that is my choice and my right.”  So, ‘radicals’ allow free speech – but only to those with whom they agree.

This is not exactly a plan for popular resistance, more a guide to ghetto building. But at least we now know why the revolution never happened.

And finally, if you’re wondering what is it that has, within Left and radical circles, led to such intellectual regression and how come a radical bookshop so easily transforms itself into a book-burning pyre?  Again, my new book provides the answer. It is the suppression of Athens and the invasive power of Jerusalem that has murdered Left tolerance and all revolutionary thinking.

 If Edinburgh is the Athens of the North, it deserves an Athenian bookshop rather than a Jerusalemite crematorium. 

The book can be ordered on Amazon.co.uk  & Amazon.com The book is now available here. 

The book can be ordered on Amazon.co.uk  & Amazon.com

The book is now available here.

Jewish Survival Strategies: An Interview with Gilad Atzmon

May 26, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

Introduction by GA:  In this interview, Aedon Cassiel (Counter-Currents) focuses on the most problematic and controversial aspects in my work. We spoke about Jewish power in the context of race, biology, genes and eugenics. We delved into Jewish survival strategies, controlled opposition, the identitarian dystopia and nationalist nostalgia. We also looked at The Bell Curve and cognitive partitioning. Cassiel didn’t cut me slack. He criticised my work form right wing vintage. I must admit that I had a lot of fun with his questions. 

By Aedon Cassiel

https://www.counter-currents.com

In your work, who do you consider yourself to be speaking to? If you don’t have a specific audience in mind, then my question is: if only one group of people could hear your message, who would you choose, and what would you have them do about it?

This is important to me. I do not intend to speak to people of any specific persuasion. I am not an activist and have zero interest in political involvement. I am engaged in an intellectual search. Jews fascinate me – their troubled history, their survival strategies, their overrepresentation in media, politics, banking, the Manhattan Project, the list of the one hundred worst landlords in New York City, academia, and their dominance in political lobbying. I am trying to identify the cultural roots at the core of all that. In short, I am interested in the metaphysics that forms the Jew rather than the Jew himself. I am after culture and ideology.

The final third of Being in Time focuses on the idea of “controlled opposition” – specifically, on the idea that Jews tend to both lead and manage criticism of Jews, even of criticism promulgated by other Jews, which has the effect of pushing non-Jews out of the sphere of the debate. Are your efforts another form of attempting to create a controlled opposition? Why or why not?

Thanks for raising this crucial point. If Jewish survival strategy is as sophisticated as I try to suggest, then you and others must take extra caution with Jewish ideologists and ideologies. And yes, I suppose this applies to me, too. My work must be subject to criticism, including the criticism the book itself applies, and hopefully it will stand the test of reflexivity.

Being in Time is now available on Amazon.co.uk  & Amazon.com  &  here. 

Being in Time is now available on Amazon.co.uk  & Amazon.com  &  here

What do you mean when you say that Jews “are certainly not a race, nor even an ethnicity”? What do you understand these two terms to mean? Is it that Jews consist of too many different unrelated groups to be fairly considered as a single collective, or do you mean to suggest that race and ethnicity are meaningless categories in general?

Despite the fact that many Jews insist that they belong to one race and share one father, it is more likely that Jews have not formed a single continuum as far as ancestry, genetics, or biology are concerned. However, it is clear to me that despite the fact that Jews do not form a racial continuum, their politics are always, and I really mean always, racially oriented.

You ask whether I believe that race and ethnicity are meaningless categories in general? Not at all. However, I am not an evolutionary scientist or an anthropologist, and the study of race or ethnicity isn’t my domain. I dig into some philosophical questions having to do with Jewish identification.

You discuss at length the sociological implications of extensive cognitive partitioning in Jewish society over time, and as a historical cause of this phenomena you talk about the practice of selective breeding in Jewish rabbinical culture. In fact, this is one of the key points to which your work repeatedly comes back. Yet, you seem to want to shy away from claiming that genetic influences are part of the explanation behind why these patterns persist. How could the cognitive partitioning in Jewish society involve genealogy without involving genes? It seems odd to specifically identify breeding patterns as being responsible for this development, and yet – as you seem to – deny that heredity is the method of transmission. What, then, do you think is the mechanism behind this phenomena’s historical persistence?

I have no doubt, as I state in Being in Time, that the European Jewish rabbinical meritocratic system can be understood as a eugenic project. I would be delighted to find out that an evolutionary scientist has decided to look into my theoretical model and produce a scientific study that would verify or refute my theoretical assumptions. Kevin MacDonald has produced the most important work on this topic to date, and the gross animosity he is subject to suggests that he is an Athenian truth-teller – a critical philosophical mind.

You prefer to talk about “ability” as a general term rather than using IQ as a specific instance or measurement of ability. What theories do you have about what is at the core of the superior average “ability” of Jews?

In my work I do not provide facts or statistics. I am raising issues and you, the reader, my listener, are the facts. I produce an interpretation or analysis of a given situation, a set of problems in our current reality, and it is down to you to examine it, play with the ideas, and eventually make a judgment.

I am troubled by IQ measurement without regard to scientific debate over how to measure IQ. “Ability” can be judged by a person’s achievements or merits. John Coltrane achieved more than any other saxophonist. I do not need to see his IQ results. Would Donald Trump score a higher result than Hillary Clinton on an IQ test? I doubt it somehow. Yet he was certainly more “able” to win the election. The reason I refer to ability is because for me, the crucial insight made by Richard Herrnstein and The Bell Curve was that they discerned that America was heading towards a cognitive partitioning. Herrnstein was an academic genius with significant ability. The Bell Curve could have saved the American people, but the book was effectually burned by the favorite “Left” icons: people like Noam Chomsky, academic fraudster Stephen J. Gould, and others. I allow myself to argue that Gould, Chomsky, and those others who trashed The Bell Curve bear direct responsibility for the dystopia in which we live. For me, the issues of the validity of IQ measurement and comparisons between races were side matters. The Bell Curve’s prophetic warnings about cognitive partitioning addressed a topic that has become the core of the oppressive reality in which we live.

Would you say that it’s rational for Jews of higher “ability” to want to keep their society focused towards increased cognitive partitioning?

I find it hard to verify whether it is the result of any conscious decision. What I argue in Being in Time is slightly different. I contend that since America and the West have evolved into cognitively divided environments, and since (Ashkenazi) Jews are accustomed to these conditions, it is hardly surprising that the Jewish Ashkenazi elite is prominent.

In the book, you frequently express a wish to see a return to manufacturing. I agree that this has to be a part of the picture, but presumably you wouldn’t advocate sending academics out to work in factories and fields, for example. So in your view, what precisely would the full dissolution of cognitive partitioning entail, in practical terms? What would we have to do, and how long would it take, and what would the main difficulties be?

I believe that the structure of society will change radically. I do not think that society needs millions of unemployed Gender Studies graduates. For society to be functional, production and agriculture must be reinstated. Higher education must be free for those who are qualified. A functional society must decide what are its primary needs, e.g., how many new doctors are needed, how many engineers, philosophers, feminist scholars, or saxophonists? Academia should be set to provide this education for free and at the highest possible level. This would mean planning. This also suggests that academia wouldn’t continue to operate as a self-serving industry. And yes, if industry, manufacturing, and production are starting to roll, we may find some very intelligent people involved. I do not see this as a negative development. Quite the opposite; society will once again be diverse for real. Isn’t that what the progressives have been promising us for decades?

How extensive do you think the historical influence of identity politics would have been in an American society that never invited Jews in?

Good question, but unfortunately I have no answer. However, I would mention that identity politics operates as a cosmopolitan, revolutionary ideology. In other words, you do not need to be present in a place to spread the ideology.

Would American society have freed the slaves, or given women the vote as quickly, without the influence of Jews? Would feminism have become as radical and divisive?

We have to be careful here. We have to differentiate between political acts that unite us as humans and those which break us up into tribes. The abolition of slavery was an American political project that was partially motivated by ethical reasoning. The same applies to women’s rights. However, radical feminism and lesbian separatism are as separatist as Jewish identity politics (Zionism as well as “anti”). They are biologically-oriented identitarian thoughts that are set to maintain a fragmented, sectarian social environment.

Without identity politics, would black-white relations hold as much tension as they do today? And if Jews both helped press the legitimate form of early identity politics to achieve their aims faster, and held on by the skin of their teeth as identity politics outlived its purpose and became toxic, how can we even begin to analyze the net impact of these two diverging phenomena?

I guess that this is exactly what I attempt to do in Being in Time: I try to dissect the corrosive factors that broke us into sectors.

Your analysis seems to be that Jews have been a leading force in promoting identity politics as a conscious or subconscious means to divide and fracture society in order to normalize the sense of homelessness throughout society that they feel, to ensure that no one else is allowed to have any stronger sense of “belonging” than they do. If the root behind the effort to promote this kind of division is the Jewish sense of homelessness, then why isn’t giving Jews a home – to take away that underlying feeling of homelessness – not a viable answer to the situation?

I actually believe that allocating a national homeland for the Jews was a great idea. I argue that early Zionism was a consistent and coherent movement that was highly effective in its ability to diagnose the Jewish problem and cultural symptoms. Yet, the failure of Zionism suggests that planet Earth may not be a suitable place for such a homeland. Zionism has proven that, despite its initial promise to turn the Jews into “people like all other people,” the Israelis didn’t manage to develop an empathic notion of otherness. Their treatment of the Palestinians proves this point beyond doubt. Israel also fails to love its neighbors. In fact, along with its dedicated Jewish lobbies (AIPAC, CRIFF, CFI, etc.), it relentlessly pushes for global conflicts (Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, etc.). Let me make it as clear as I can, though I am accused by some Zionists of reopening the “Jewish question”: I fully acknowledge that I do not have a solution for the problems above, nor am I going to try to solve these problems.

Let’s talk about how intentional you think these Jewish tendencies towards fomenting division are. For instance, Tim Wise is an anti-racist activist who travels around lecturing about giving up white privilege, and challenging everyone else to give up their privileges as he has given up his own. Wise never openly identifies as a Jew, and he speaks about himself as if he were of white European origins. Is it meaningful to talk about someone like Tim Wise, who is of Jewish descent but identifies himself neither religiously nor politically as a Jew or as Jewish?

In The Wandering Who?, I restricted my analysis to those who identify themselves primarily as Jews. This was a relatively easy task, and it helped to clarify that the Zionist and the so-called “anti” are one. In Being in Time, I extended my scope. I am, once again, talking about the Athens/Jerusalem dichotomy. Jerusalemites always know what is kosher and who is treif (basket of deplorables). Progressives behave as a bunch of Jerusalemites who subscribe to secular chosenism. They attribute to themselves a special sense of superiority and at the same time look down on the so-called “reactionary.” Tim Wise and other prog-preachers should self-reflect. He should ask himself why he thinks in racial categories. He should wonder why he subscribes to binary thinking that resembles the Jew/Goy, Kosher/Treif. Can he love his “white” neighbor? While Jerusalem is a form of obedience, Athens is a task, it is a hard job. It involves constant dynamic conceptual shifting intellectually, mentally, spiritually, and ethically.

Do you think someone like Tim Wise is either consciously aware of, or consciously intending, to create the divisive outcomes caused by his style of identity politics? To what extent is any of this conscious?

I really do not know. My role as a philosopher is to refine the questions rather than dictating answers. I certainly believe that these are the kind of questions that Wise should ask himself and that others are entitled to ask of him. In fact, these are the kind of questions each of us ought to ponder.

This question isn’t as focused inside your main line of argument as my others are, but it crossed my mind as I was reading. Is there any reason why Jewish influence over divisive forms of feminism, for example, would be as significant as it was, and yet Jews have not – or to my knowledge, they haven’t yet – co-opted the so-called men’s rights movement, or men’s rights activism? Why would involvement in feminism serve Jewish interests, but not involvement in MRA ideologies?

Great question. Otto Weininger insisted that the Jewish man was actually a woman. Maybe this is the answer to your question. Maybe the reason I decided to stop being a Jew was because I didn’t want to be a woman. I probably have to look into that for a while.

 

%d bloggers like this: