Thecutter: please email me at vineyardsaker@gmail.com. I want to help Gilad. Thanks, VS
Rachel Corrie, murdered five years ago today.http://homo-sapien-underground.blogspot.com/
2008/03/rachel-corriemurdered-five-years-ago.html
Tony Greenstein (Tony Gatekeeperstein?) responds on Alef (the Israeli list of Haifa University) mailing list.
Here are his contributions! Be patient, he really went into overdrive!
The first one:
The pretentiousness of pseudo academics (was article by Oren Ben-Dor on Free Speech and Atzmon (CP) (mary))
To: alef@list.haifa.ac.il
I am surprised that Mary Rizzo has the gall to even mention the pathetic petition, signed by 250 nonentities, anti-Semites and conspiracy theorists, in support of ‘2 outstanding personalities’ i.e. Rizzo and Atzmon! As an afterthought it mentions the siege of Gaza.
On 11th February 2008 a petition for people to "express... solidarity with Gilad Atzmon and Mary Rizzo" and to "declare that he [Tony Greenstein] does not speak for us or in our names" was posted to indymedia two days after it appeared on Mary Rizzo's blog. I doubt that most of the fools who signed the petition even know who I am. No matter. The Indymedia version of the petition contained The Radical Press of Canada as a signatory and earlier versions of the petition on Rizzo's site included a hyperlink to this site.
When I and others queried the fact that The Radical Press, and other anti-Semites like Paul Eisen, had signed her petition, this is what Rizzo wrote:
Post 242
Jan 17, 2008
Dear Editor,
…
At any rate, The Radical Press presents thought-provoking and intelligent information and analysis. It is absolutely NOT anti-Semitic, but many who might not agree with its harsh critique on Israel might try to label it as such, so that people will create confusion between the two, and things never change.
I hope you realise that it is a valuable resource, and any campaigning made to insinuate that it is a racist site is not at all accurate.
Mary Rizzo
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p...7#comment-
43890
I and others posted to the Socialist Unity site (Atzmon has named it ‘socialist Jewnity’ witty what?) pointing out that this site which is 'absolutely NOT anti-semitic' included articles on the:
Jewish Banking Cartel (82) Jewish Holocaust Industry (77) Jewish Lobby (112) Jewish Media Monopoly (105) Jewish Porn Industry (50) Jews (14
Jews Behind Bolshevik Revolution etc. etc.
http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=6...?p=681#more-
681
And not forgetting of course an incisive little piece entitled (what else?) AMERICA IS RUN BY JEWS By Brother Nathanael Kapner bronathanael@yahoo.com AMERICA IS NOW A JEW-RUN NATION. Here is a list of the prominent Jews who run America:
I’ll spare people the names but I think you get the message. Elsewhere on the site we learn that ‘Judaism is a "chameleon" culture/religion. It "becomes" whatever is necessary in order to deceive and trick non-Jews’ http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=6...?p=681#more-
681
And then there’s Oren Ben-Dor’s article that Mary has directed our attention to. Ben-Dor is a prime example of the pretentiousness of academics and their
their use of jargon to cloak the vacuity of their argument. What, for example does the following mean?
‘Zionism can be conceived as a symptom the non-empathetic manifestations of which are historically and existentially continuing certain facets of Jewish being and thinking. It is very important to ask whether the originary aggression of victim mentality as well as the choseness-begotten separateness existentially links the Zionist and the Jewish question. This link may well pervade the mentality of Israelis whether orthodox or not.’
Total garbage. When Ben-Dor signed the first petition that Mary and Atzmon drew up in support of themselves 2 years ago, I arranged to meet him in London. He told me then that he accepted Atzmon’s thesis that Zionism springs from this metaphysical ‘Jewishness’. He couldn’t though explain why. But maybe people can tell me what they think the paragraph below means?
‘The anti-Zionist struggle must not encage itself in too simplistic a link between the Jewish Question with the Zionist Question--a simplistic link that in fact craves to sever the deeper ontological connection that might persist between the two questions. Such a dominant, and far too quick, paradigm that by and large dominates the anti-Zionist struggle has been that Zionism's misuse of the Holocaust is somehow an aberration of Jewish thinking. Thus portrayed, Zionism can be successfully isolated and fought against by Jews as Jews.’
What is the Zionist Question? There certainly was a Jewish Question in Eastern Europe of the 19th and early 20th centuries. I'm not aware of any Zionist question. Unfortunately the Jewish Question was ‘solved’ by the extermination of 5-6 million Jews and the emigration of millions more, primarily to the United States.
And why should the fact that many Jews are anti-Zionist ‘need(s) to be questioned and destabilised’? Surely the fact that more and more Jews today are non or anti-Zionist should be welcomed? Does Ben-Dor have a problem with Jews being anti-Zionist, does he think it is impossible? If so then he and his mentors clearly hold to the Zionist argument that to be Jewish is to be automatically Zionist. Hence why this fool of an academic believes that ‘Jews Against Zionism’ is an oxymoron. The only moron is Oren Ben-Dor and his anti-Semitic associates.
‘It is this very denial of the existential link between the Jewish Question and the Zionist Question--a link that is suppressed by formulations such as "Jews Against Zionism" or, more broadly, by many attempts of "Jews" to become anti-Zionist - that needs to be questioned and destabilised. To be an anti-Zionist without due regard to that being and thinking that Zionism may so tragically continues, may well be to confuse symptom and cause, thus perpetuating that history that leaves the symptom--Zionism--intact. There is need to fathom the extent to which the slogan "Jews against Zionism" may be an oxymoron. Such an oxymoron
Such an oxymoron may be at the heart of the denial, and protection bestowed upon the denial, of the oxymoronic nature of another notion, namely that of a "Jewish and democratic state".’
In one of his more significant insights, Ben-Dor informs us that ‘The essence of an intellectual is free speech’. To which I reply, not necessarily. Otherwise every gutter racist and bigot could be held to be an intellectual. When not boring Dor is merely mundane and hackneyed. But maybe someone can tell me what the following sentence means:
‘The significance of the Holocaust is both nebulous and ubiquitous to humanity.’
Or indeed this:
‘The horrors and murderous violence against Jews may have been a response to events that had corrupted the relationship between humans and Being long ago.’
I think what the fool is trying to say is that the Holocaust lay in the past relationships of Jews with non-Jews. By dressing it up in pseudo-intellectual jargon Dor hopes to sound insightful. It is a good example of all that is worst in ‘intellectuals’ and academics.
But for all the nonsense about free speech I know that if I were to reply to this rubbish, in defense of a petition aimed specifically at me, then Counterpunch will not print it. That is the reality of the ‘free speech’ that these people really believe in.
Tony Greenstein
He goes on doesn't he...?
this was my reply
I thought that ad hominem attacks were not going to be tolerated on this list any longer? I need not mention that were I to defend myself against these vile and inflammatory accusations, "I" would be accused of violating the rules. Yet, these kinds of posts should not
be permitted on this list, as I thought there was a warning that if there was to be "discussion" a link should be left so that people could investigate on their own and not have to deal with it in their inboxes. Should people be interested in the discussion, there was an article by Ben-Dor on it that was linked and no part of it was even reprinted on the Alef list. Breaking this rule (of insulting and smearing other members of this group on posts sent to this list)
would cause the exclusion from the list. Does this rule not get enforced when I am at the brunt of it? mary rizzo
TONY again
My response to the article which Mary kindly linked to may have been rude, but it was not an ad hominem attack on any member of this list. Nor am I guilty of 'insulting and smearing other members of this group' and would be interested to know what specific comment(s) are being referred to.
What Mary did was deliberately link to an article which was an ad hominem attack on me. Maybe she thinks that is acceptable. Mary is thus being hypocritical. She doesn't do ad hominem, she just helpfully points people in the direction of such attacks! Reminds me of the sabbath goy. You can't light a fire on shabbas but you can get a non-Jew to do so, as long as you don't instruct him/her! So you say 'the room is cold' rather than 'could you turn the fire on'. God is thus deceived!! Mary assumes the Alef List is likewise fooled.
I have termed Oren Dor a fool because he is someone who is obviously intelligent and yet he has fallen for the gutter racism of Atzmon and his cohorts and ends up parotting their nonsense.
Shraga admits to not understanding the article in question and suggests that 'the article is just too high for me.' I suggest not. That is why I titled my response 'the pretentiousness of pseudo academics'. There is really nothing more detestable than the way some academics and academia traditions believe that if you make your language inpenetrable and as difficult as possible to understand then you have succeeded. I disagree. If you have something to say then you should be able to say it in a way that is comprehensible to someone of normal intelligence.
The reason Shraga doesn't understand this mess of an article by Oren Dor is that there is little or nothing to understand. It brings no insights to the subject, adds nothing to the sum of human knowledge but merely shrouds what is being said in a thicket of poorly drafted English and incompatible clauses. It is a demonstration of the art of a non-sequitur.
The fact that Counterpunch has printed it, given their proclivity for 9/11 style conspiracy theories, proves nothing. Shraga is of course right. Protests against the Zionist abuse of the Nazi holocaust have nothing to do with Holocaust Denial. However those that Oren Dor defends cloak their holocaust denial views in protests that all they are doing is opposing the abuse of the Holocaust.
Tony G
and here's Tony's latest, with my replies interespersed:
tony writes:
My sincere apologies Avraham if I go over my quota,
Mary: rules? who needs 'em? You went over quota and know you do so, but that does not stop you from doing it.
TG: but a link was deliberately put on the list by Mary Rizzo,
Mary: yes, I put a link up because I was asked to link to anything about you rather than spam the list with my views on you. I obviously respected the rule, you did not. There are dozens of smear pieces you have since written that you could have left a link to, but you do not seem to care about rules. I thought OBD's colleagues would be interested in reading his article. You don't have to tell them whether the content is acceptable or not, Tony! People still have freedom of thought and can decide for themselves!!
TG: which pointed people to an article in Counterpunch which defends a 'petition' which is solely devoted to a personal/political attack on me. There is nothing in this link/article or the 'petition' which is of the slightest benefit to the Palestinians or an explanation of anything to do with the situation in Israel/Palestine.
Mary: this is your personal opinion. By no means held by those who wrote it, signed it, published it or defend it. If you have a problem that people disagree with you, you have to learn to deal with this. Not everyone is going to agree with you, but that does not mean that they are:
"Nonentities, apologists for if not actual Holocaust Denial, fools", that their sites are conspiracist (you smear CP every time it criticises you, but you still are quite anxious for them to publish you, which doesn't seem too likely. This and all the other insults you deem appropriate is not what a thinking person should surrender too by way of defense. A bit of humility and acceptance in the diversity of opinion of others might do you good.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, those on alef may not be aware that in the past month articles have been in internet and the printed mass media for my personal role in getting a Nazi war criminal extradited to Italy. Tony knows all about this, and he still insists on tarnishing me with this Holocaust Denial brush. It is unacceptable! And it is simply repeating a lie knowing I am not given space to defend myself, which is disgraceful.
TG: I'm not aware of insulting Mary, unless pointing out that she can't recognise the most obvious and blatant examples of racism and anti-Semitism when they are staring her in the face. Her defence of The Radical Press, which she assured us was anti-Zionist and not anti-Semitic is a case in point.
Mary: and what is this if not a harangue against me and an attack on me? Articles I did not even read you are quoting, as if I have something to do with them! This is simply a smear and not acceptable, and this is a rule that you also are held to adhere to. Will it be enforced? I doubt it. But you still have disregarded the rule and created
But you still have disregarded the rule and created a "case" against me that is from the top of your weird little obsession. The RP "case" was also explained in full on SU, and that was more than enough waste of time. Why do you need to spam the rest of us with it? It is simply defamation! If you can't have all eyes pointed at you, you seem to be upset, and I dedicate to much time to you as it is, for your contribution to the "cause" it is actually a sin.
TG: The 'petition' signed by 250 nonentities and apologists for if not actual holocaust deniers is just another attack on myself. I have broad shoulders but it is dishonest as is Oren Dor's article, which purports to defend Atzmon's freedom of speech, which has never been under attack by anyone, least of all me.
Mary: OH??! And you tried and failed to get my blog pulled! Google would not have any of it, but still, you tried to censor one of the top three blogs on Palestine and have it eliminated! If this is not censoring Freedom of Speech, you don't know what the concept means. I know you have been harassing some of these 250 non-entities. This also is something that should not be allowed. Just because we have inboxes does not mean we have to receive anything at all. People didn't know to filter you before? They do now!
TG: I have enough experience of academic life - including degress in Chemistry/Mathematics, Imperial History and Law - to know when an article has something to say and when it is pretentious. It must have been 15 years ago when, just for a laugh, someone wrote an article, with all the difficult, long words and pretentious clauses in for an academic journal and it was published. The author then confessed that the article was meaningless! I suggest Oren Dor's article is much the same and where one can garner a clue it is that Zionism comes from 'Jewishness'. In this he returns to his Zionist roots.
Mary: How can you be the arbitor of the value of all articles? Who assigned this to you of all people? This is so pretentious, much more than any judgment you can pass on the article you hate so much. And, as far as I am aware, you were continually asking to meet up with Oren, very interested in communicating with him and getting him "on your side". Apparently, since he doesn't agree with you and most likely never did, he is now a "fool" who writes pretentious stuff that you feel you can scoff at?
TG: So no Mary, the article wasn't an ad hominem attack on me, it was merely devoted to defending a 'petition' that was! You're like the little boy accused of eating the last piece of chocolate cake. Not me he proclaims, it was the cat. But who let the cat in the kitchen?
Mary: the point is, you can't resist attacking me here and feeling justified in doing so. Of course, I am not going to waste my time "reporting" you, but your repeat offenses and continued presence here are indicative of who these rules are here to serve and how
how they are perhaps not enforced with any kind of objective criterion.
And, to ENrique's claim "On the
other hand it is utterly untrue, as it excludes all those Jews who oppose this form of colonialism, as if they weren't Jews. And as a matter of fact
they are the best allies of the Palestinians."
I don't know how we can determine "who" the best allies of the Palestinians are, (as a group). As a matter of fact, most of my life I have worked in activism with Jews and to be blunt, it never leads to any positive change for Palestinians. It always gets directed into a watering down of the issues, as if Anti-Semitism was the problem and not ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and cultural genocide of them. And it always gets lost in some kind of character assassination because "we aren't Marxist enough" or we "criticise what should not be criticised". In the past 4 years, I have changed dramatically my arenas of activists. While never abandoning the Right of Return as the principle idea that can have no modifications made to it, I have willingly avoided any group that does not have the ROR as the core concept (there are few Jews willing to go that far, the number is so marginal that those who campaign for that we actually know by name! and this is where the first problem came from, in working in primarily Jewish groups, they do not often recognise that this right is not a whim, but it is the most serious issue of them all), and this means I have worked mainly with Palestinian, Arab (both religious and secular) and groups not recognising themselves as any specific denomination, and they are far more focused on the main issues, they use a language that is less accommodating and they are not always concentrated on being seen as moderate or on gatekeeping. They certainly, (and I am speaking about groups and individuals who run some of the main Internet sites such as Palestine Remembered, The Palestine Chronicle, AMIN, Middle East Online, Al-Awda, as well as some of the main activists in Europe and the middle east such as the director of IslamExpo, Gaza Vivrà, Anti-Imperialist Camp, Free Gaza, International Action Centre, BRussels Tribunal, and so on) do NOT consider that Jews (as Jews or even as anti-colonial Jews) are their best allies. Their best allies are anyone, Jew or not a Jew, who supports the ROR and the Palestinian people. It is really that simple.
mary
T: And then there’s Oren Ben-Dor’s article that Mary has directed our attention to. Ben-Dor is a prime example of the pretentiousness of academics and their use of jargon to cloak the vacuity of their argument. What, for example does the following mean?
G: Unlike you, a man who was kicked out of Brighton Polytechnic for being a vandal. OBD is a real academic, top Philosophy reader and Low scholar. As far as we are aware till recently you were craving to recruit him to you J commissariat.
‘Zionism can be conceived as a symptom the non-empathetic manifestations of which are historically and existentially continuing certain facets of Jewish being and thinking. It is very important to ask whether the originary aggression of victim mentality as well as the choseness-begotten separateness existentially links the Zionist and the Jewish question. This link may well pervade the mentality of Israelis whether orthodox or not.’
G: Tony if you had just a minimal thinking capacity you would know that OBD here describes you and your ilk, the chosen, non empathic Zio armada.
T: Total garbage. When Ben-Dor signed the first petition that Mary and Atzmon drew up in support of themselves 2 years ago, I arranged to meet him in London. He told me then that he accepted Atzmon’s thesis that Zionism springs from this metaphysical ‘Jewishness’. He couldn’t though explain why. But maybe people can tell me what they think the paragraph below means?
G: Tony goes for Oren, one of the last intellects who still operates closely with the PSC.
‘The anti-Zionist struggle must not encage itself in too simplistic a link between the Jewish Question with the Zionist Question--a simplistic link that in fact craves to sever the deeper ontological connection that might persist between the two questions. Such a dominant, and far too quick, paradigm that by and large dominates the anti-Zionist struggle has been that Zionism's misuse of the Holocaust is somehow an aberration of Jewish thinking. Thus portrayed, Zionism can be successfully isolated and fought against by Jews as Jews.’
G: Again Tony uses the Holocaust whenever he can, like a Zionist cos he is a Zionist. Were he intelligent enough, he would be able to understand the above but he isn't.
T: What is the Zionist Question? There certainly was a Jewish Question in Eastern Europe of the 19th and early 20th centuries. I'm not aware of any Zionist question.
G: You are not aware of the Zionist question. Here I give you one. why is it that rabid Zionists like Tony Greenstein think that they can get away pretending to be Palestinian supporters even when 280 prime activist tell them to fuck off?
T: Unfortunately the Jewish Question was ‘solved’ by the extermination of 5-6 million Jews and the emigration of millions more, primarily to the United States.
And why should the fact that many Jews are anti-Zionist ‘need(s) to be questioned and destabilised’?
G: Many? How many? Do you in
G: Many? How many? Do you include yourself? Cos actually everyone else including Hirsh is convinced that u r a proper zio.
T: Surely the fact that more and more Jews today are non or anti-Zionist should be welcomed?
G: Welcomed by who, by the pls in Gaza?… Tony u ve just been rejected by the Pls solidarity movement and not a single activist stood up for you…just lick your open wounds and shut up
T: Does Ben-Dor have a problem with Jews being anti-Zionist, does he think it is impossible?
G: and if he does? Surely U tony, aren’t a good example
T: If so then he and his mentors clearly hold to the Zionist argument that to be Jewish is to be automatically Zionist.
G: Indeed and we both take you as a prime proof for that matter.
T: Hence why this fool of an academic believes that ‘Jews Against Zionism’ is an oxymoron. The only moron is Oren Ben-Dor and his anti-Semitic associates.
G: Wow, it took you almost 5 paragraphs to associate Ben Dor with AS.. How long is going to take before you call him a Holocaust denier, you boring repetative joker.
‘It is this very denial of the existential link between the Jewish Question and the Zionist Question--a link that is suppressed by formulations such as "Jews Against Zionism" or, more broadly, by many attempts of "Jews" to become anti-Zionist - that needs to be questioned and destabilised. To be an anti-Zionist without due regard to that being and thinking that Zionism may so tragically continues, may well be to confuse symptom and cause, thus perpetuating that history that leaves the symptom--Zionism--intact. There is need to fathom the extent to which the slogan "Jews against Zionism" may be an oxymoron. Such an oxymoron may be at the heart of the denial, and protection bestowed upon the denial, of the oxymoronic nature of another notion, namely that of a "Jewish and democratic state".’
G: Indeed denial, is the exact word.
T: In one of his more significant insights, Ben-Dor informs us that ‘The essence of an intellectual is free speech’. To which I reply, not necessarily.
G: Who the fuck are you to reply, did we ask for the opinion of a petty criminal and a shoplifter?
T: Otherwise every gutter racist and bigot could be held to be an intellectual.
When not boring Dor is merely mundane and hackneyed. But maybe someone can tell me what the following sentence means:
‘The significance of the Holocaust is both nebulous and ubiquitous to humanity.’
G: It means that the Holocaust is not necessarily what you won’t it to be, thus you cannot hide behind it anymore!
Or indeed this:
‘The horrors and murderous violence against Jews may have been a response to events that had corrupted the relationship between humans and Being long ago.’
G: This may be too complicated for you greenie, there is too little human in you to understand issues to do with beingness and humanity.
T: I think what the fool is trying to say is that the Holocaust lay i
T: I think what the fool is trying to say is that the Holocaust lay in the past relationships of Jews with non-Jews.
G: Just to make sure I read it correctly, you just called a top philosopher a fool without even understanding what he has to say. Greenie you are indeed the ultimate answer to the question. You are the ugliness, a walking dirt.
T: By dressing it up in pseudo-intellectual jargon Dor hopes to sound insightful. It is a good example of all that is worst in ‘intellectuals’ and academics.
G: Baby Greenie, unlike you who were qualified as a petty criminal bu the court of England. Mr Ben Dor is a lecturer in demand and an Heiddeger reader. so just shut up.
T: But for all the nonsense about free speech I know that if I were to reply to this rubbish, in defense of a petition aimed specifically at me, then Counterpunch will not print it.
G: In fact no one prints you except yourself and Socialist Jewnity cos no one wants your dirt baby.
T: That is the reality of the ‘free speech’ that these people really believe in.
G: it isn’t matter of free speech, it is actually matter of quality. As well as being a piece of despised joker, you are also a shitty writer.
However, inshallah we meet in court, I will try to Bring Oren with me so he can tell the Judge about you and your tireless campaign.
ON an ON and ON and ON and.... You know, I hate to agree with Greenstuff about anything - I was reluctant to say it, because Oren seems to be on the right side (as far as I can discern), but that article is semi-literate drivel. I know that students of some disciplines get used to writing in that tortured and 'nebulous' (i.e. hard to locate the meaning) style but, still, his flowery academese is mixed in with so many grammatical errors that the effect is often meaninglessness. Unless he's hedging his bets against the possibility that the going gets tough, so he can claim he meant something else entirely. I don't really mean that - not very generous - I think he's so sincere. But I'm mystified why Counterpunch chose this particular essay to publish, and I don't think it helps much.
So, sorry Oren, I'm sure you mean well, but Greenstuff is right about this much - if you've got something worth saying, then it's worth saying to the max people, which means in the simplest language.
I would read Prof. Ben Dor's article any day over anything Greenstein has written, which is TRULY unreadable.
Thinking about Gatekeeperstein (marrrry!) all day and ya know what strikes me each time? That this is a man with an entirely arbitrary version of what fact and truth is. His own personal narrative is based upon the secure belief that since he can take advantage of a legislative permission given to him to cover over things he doesn't like or that society as a whole condemns, that it makes them "untrue". I earn my keep listening to confessions all day long. People really go to great ends to accept themselves for how they are, and the defence mechanisms that they use become pathological only when they are unable to distinguish from reality and phantasy, fact and fiction, truth and lies.
And it is the vehemence that Greenstein has in stating things that he KNOWS to be patently, utterly false, such as the above claim "Gilad's freedom of speech has never been under attack, least of all by me", is just the most blatant lie possible, and he of course can't believe it unless he is willing to disown the sum total of his recent political activity and the vast bulk of his written output.
I remind myself, on the platform of ALEF, he is trying to win the hearts and minds of a group he considers to be a sort of elite, the Hebrew speaking Israeli activists who are also generally tendentially Leftists and secularly oriented. He is trying to impress them. Obviously, they haven't seen him in action anywhere but there, if he says, X is a Racist site, it *is* because they don't actually investigate it. And, he gives the back patting that the old boys club needs in order to still feel relevant in some way.
They are about as relevant as the wind I would make go over the Sahara by whistling, but they don't feel that way, much the same as Tony.
They have lost all metre of perception of what they TRULY are, because the truth in the narrative is hidden behind the metal of the knight in shining armour. They do this for one another, then claim they do it for the sake of the Palestinians.
I would like some truthfulness out of Tony, since he can't quitte reach humility, but just an awareness that he is less perfect than he claims to be, and that his truth has many flaws. Until the Pied Piper goes this far, all the rats will continue on their merry way.
The petty criminal from Hove is now after Oren Ben Dor.
So now his task is that of silencing an academic intellectual who is also active and dedicated to solidarity to Palestinians.
http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2008/
...university.html
Why not? He already tried writers, Jazz musicians, publishing network, a prominentPalestinian blog. The shoplifter inquisitor must get on with the job...
Since no one in the PSC stood up for Greenstein, not even his Jewish friends, not even his red twin princess from Birmingham, Greenstein is now left with no other option but launching a one man anti Zionist movement.
A one man movement just because Tony Greenstein (the Jew, and this is how he entitles himself so that no one ever is able to refer to him in any other way and if they do it with a negative connotation, they are "attacking THE JEW as a group", according to his logic) is the only person on this planet who is still willing to be associated with Tony Greenstein (the shoplifter, the credit card fraudster and the vandal).
Tony is the man behind
Rehabilitated Jews for Palestine
"shoplift today, Join tomorrow."
"shoplift today, Join tomorrow."
what a joker this man is
Jewish Crime Watch -
" no-one in PSC stood up for him (Greenstein)" What about Michael Rosen? I noticed that he was pitching in with Andy Newman, Greenstein and the boys, in the comments following Greenstein's posts on the Socialist Unity site. Funnily enough, I've just been barred from posting on Lenin's Tomb for pointing that out and calling him a covert zionist, and noting that Rosen seems very pally with the SU lot, who hate the SWP (and Lenin's Tomb), of which Rosen seems to be a member. I've been suspicious of him for a while ( before I read Gilad's essay where he calls him one of the gatekeepeers), because any time I've mentioned the enormous, disproportionate jewish power in the USA, Rosen tries to deny it, Lenin too. The statistics crop up everywhere - you couldn't miss it. But you're not allowed to notice that in Trotworld. Anyway, it's no great loss to me - it'll stop me wasting time arguing with them. But I'm beginning to notice a pattern in Trotskysim; they have 2 great anathemas: one is nazism, which effectively means the white protestant working class; the other is Stalinism, which means any communism not run by jews. They oppose US/Uk imperialism, of course, but somehow they always manage to promote the propaganda that justifies it. They're not the worst, but they're pretty bad.
Anyway, in the light of that, I feel I was a bit harsh on Oren above. All credit due for being on the right side.
Lafayette,
Those people are very heavily into banning, and as Mary can vouch, I will say what I used to say to her when she would get worked up about something ... "I'm surprised that you're surprised". (She loved it when I was her cynic!)
The only way, if one really (really) is still interested in some kind of concept as Socialism, is to avoid looking for wisdom in any of these UK Socialist sites because they have an arcane idea which is still related to what I call Divism (as in Div -ism). The cult of personality is still very big for them, and the problem is, if your cult man is loaded with formaldehyde, the clock still runs on its merry way. What would Lenin have said of the cell phone, of the sneaker, of the T-shirt, Jeans... consumer goods that are the ultimate in establishing a range of "democracy and equality", by providing the various classes with the same "trappings"?
It's the commenters on the blogs that really get sickening though... they still think they have some key to wisdom and they are SNOBS.
Ok, let me put it this way... they hate truly clever people. They look for ways to put them down. When they can't do it, they ban them or like HP and SU does, they close the comments down when there is no way they can match the wit or arguments of their contenders.
I'm a lurker, but even that gets boring. Can't tell you last time I lurked on HP LT SU or JSF. Maybe when I went public here?
But, yes, agreeing with Gatekeeperstein on anything does give one horrible feelings of disgust. It hasn't happened to me yet, and for certain, it won't!
How amusing that unemployable sociopath Greenstein deviates his abuse trail onto Dr of Philosophy & Law, Oren Ben-Dor & in the process asks his (imaginary) readers: Who Is Gilad Atzmon?
http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2008/ ...university.html
Well, bloody hell Tony, you should know & despite the crushing limits of your remarkably small brain, I think it’s possible you do know.
The man you stalk & harass 24 hours a day & write about incessantly in your narcissistic little blog is an immensely talented, internationally successful & dearly beloved polymath. He is the antithesis that forces you to acknowledge your pretty impressive lack of achievement outside the world of vandalism.
It is clear to anyone with a GCSE in psychology why you hate Gilad with such pathological bile. I almost feel sorry for you. It must be very painful to look in the mirror & see a violent thief with about as much charm as a dead dung beetle. It’s hard. But Tony, what can we do?! It’s obvious as well why you cling to your identification with ‘Jewishness’. It’s the only thing that distinguishes you, in your own mind, from a small town, ASBO-proud ‘hoody’. But Tony, aside from the generation gap, that's all you are.
I wish for you own sake & for the sake of all of our boredom thresholds that you had something to contribute to the world other than ‘crimes against poultry’ but there is simply nothing of note about you. It really is sad. You imagine you’re Ben Gurion on an Eichmann hunt. But Tony, you’re just a man who a nicked a chicken & got caught.
Simone, It's like I was telling Mary yesterday when Tony was saying how poorly written it was (why he left off his favourite word "turgid" has me worried) and that if someone didn't understand it, that means there was nothing to understand, because if Tony didn't get it, it would natrually make no sense...
Well...
After all of that....
I told Mary from now on I refer to him as They Mayor of Simpleton!
But yes, of course, elements of envy, rivalry, jealousy do certainly weigh in there as cause. But a man living in denial is what I really think is the saddest part of it all, and he does expect others to carry out his phantasy for him. A few actually will do so because they too are looking for a charasmatic figure to follow so that they can play the role of the disciple. I really want to do a case study on the Mayor of Simpleton!!
Greenstein thinks that those who signed the petition do not know who he is ( am I alone in thinking he has delusions of grandeur? ) but of course he announces who he is through his voluminous postings. I for one did not know anything about him until I started reading his defamatory attacks and I note that merely by signing a petition I am now cast in the role of anti-semite and holocaust denier. Truth is TG knows nothing about me and judging him on his own words, he knows precious little about anything else. He has the gall to criitcise us for defending Gilad and Mary, because they are diverting attention from what is going on in Gaza. What has he been doing month after month, if not ignoring the defence of Palestinians to pursue his petty and vindictive vendetta. He could come up with something positive to build the movement ( if he had one brain cell left! ) but he chooses instead to attack it. There is a price to be paid for this and he is going to pay it.
Lafayette, please report to us, what Rosen had to say? I missed it...i am very interested in these 3.5 'wondering (socialist) Jews'... the way they schlep between the 4 cyber shtetls..(JSF, Jpuke, Socilaist Jewnity, HP etc')
and always end up with Engage...
Oh no has the children's laureate stuck his head above the parapet again?
Sorry, but this will have to run through a few posts.
I'm aware that this isn't exactly a momentous matter, but I DID mention it, and you DID ask for what Rosen said ... To be fair to myself this will have to be a bit lengthy, to contextualise ( 'he said, she said...', I'm afraid) what I'm saying. I include, at the end, some quotes from Rosen re Gilad Atzmon, from the Socialist Unity site. To be fair to Rosen he didn't really join in when Greenstein was assaulting Gilad daily on the SU, and I don't regard his arguments as beyond the pale - it's where he's making them, the company he keeps, and his methods which belie his affected demeanour of civilised urbanity. I had previously noted ( I can't be bothered looking up any more old blogs) Rosen and Lenin trying to pretend that jews are powerless, and marginal in the US, and, to be fair, I had previously called Lenin a covert zionist. There is a coherent thread running through Rosen's criticisms of Gilad, and my arguments with him.
The key quote from Rosen (amongst those below) is: " ....I’D BE REALLY INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT SOME OF THE NON-JEWS AROUND ON THE LEFT THINK OF THE JEWISH POWER ARGUMENT..." Not so, in my experience! What he is interested in is labelling as ' on the right' anyone who supports the notion of 'jewish power', and bullying them out of the argument. Note that he not merely disputes the overarching reach of US jewish power (a reasonable position), but wants to pretend it doesn't exist. As I said above, there are so many statistics that this is indisputable, and it is indisputable that jewish elites collude at least in some areas. So why does he (and Lenin)attempt to dispute it? Why does he ask for statistics - in the hope that I'll link to some non-kosher site?
First is a selection from the argument that got me barred from the tomb, followed by a selection from my comments on a previous blog which Rosen misquotes - whether you agree with me or not (and I would admit my arguments could be improved), the point is how Rosen misrepresents them. My last quote, before Rosen's SU remarks on Gilad, is the one Rosen misquoted.
' MOD's WAR WITH THE BRITISH MIND ' MARCH 16/ 08,
the subject of the recent unrest in Tibet came up. I expressed some reservations regarding the media's sudden enthusiasm for Tibet, ending with:
" ... If I see Richard Gere wearing a 'Free Palestine' badge, or campaigning to stop the genocide in the Congo, I'll take him seriously on Tibet. "
Apart from this mention of Palestine, there was no mention of Israel or jews, or anything that could be construed as relating to either. Some agreed (almost word for word - see the very last comment), some nitpicked, and some virulently disagreed.
Then ROSEN chipped in:
" If anyone's curious as to what Lafayette Senacherib is on about, he or she expressed it on Lenin's thread the other day: [Jews in the UK] are 'hugely over-represented in all fields'. "
ME:
" Covert zionist [ this relates to an earlier exchange which I'll explain shortly] Michael Rosen has to do his gatekeeping bit. What's that got to do with Tibet? Is doubting US propaganda anti-semitic? Oh, I forgot - of course it is. I notice that he put part of his quote from me in brackets; I can't remember if I said anything about the UK [ I didn't] - I was talking about the zionist powerbase in the US..."
Someone suggested I should be barred for calling Rosen a covert zionist (although he had obviously just called me an antisemite), Lenin agreed, then ROSEN offered the following:
" In case anyone thinks I have misrepresented LS's comments this is what he/she said:
"Suppose the BNP ( a tiny percentage of the population), held such a disproportionate position in the UK, hugely over-represented in every field, with a lobby that had such a grip on the political system that no-one could be elected without kow-towing to it, with its own ruthless intelligence service, and a foreign fascist, racist colony practicing genocide and armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons."
"such a" - meant "such as the Jews". [ it meant ' such a disproportionate position as the jews do in the USA, I'll give the context in a minute]
I raised the matter because people on the thread seemed to be wondering [ they weren't] where LS's politics are coming from or what they're about . I'm suggesting that one component of it is a view of the UK [ Tibet?] where 'every field' is 'over-represented' with Jews . ...I think it's really informative that LS posts here. It's all part of the debate and of course it's fascinating to know that someone who renounced his so called 'right of return' and has appeared on plenty of platforms supporting eg the PSC, the Campaign For Palestine, the boycott, signed an international petition for one-state etc etc is a 'covert zionist'. I've a feeling that this says more about LS than it does about me.
"
My reply was deleted, with the following message: " Lafayette's comment has been removed and all future contributions from him are unwelcome. "
Rosen follo
The quotes attributed to me above come from the below.
PREVIOUS POST March 8/08 " THE ROOTS OF ISRAELI BARBARISM"
" Explanations of US support often, in my opinion, overestimate the co-incidence of Israel's interests and general US ruling class interests, and overlook that jews are now a huge percentage of the ruling class, and a coherent group acting in a solidarity based on jewishness. When the illegitimate (I would argue, even in capitalist terms) power of the jewish elites is challenged, then we will see a change in the attitudes of Israeli elites. So to that extent, only the jews can sort it out; but they won't unless they're forced to. "
ROSEN
LS, you seem to have the facts at your fingertips: "jews are now a huge percentage of the ruling class". What percentage is that, apart from being 'huge'.
And why precisely is it 'illegitimate' in 'capitalist terms'? How are elites within a ruling class 'illegitimate'?
ME
" An exact percentage? That's just a distraction. Do you deny that jews are hugely over-represented in US elites? If so, why do you deny it? I can't be bothered looking too hard for sources or links at the moment, but I've read that a recent Forbes rich list showed 50% of the top 100 billionaires as being jewish, and I regularly see figures of 30-40% for jewish membership of the very rich, 60% ownership of Hollywood, near total control of the US national press, and the biggest percentage of investment bankers. But here are some figures from a suitably kosher source, that falls to hand: Yuri Slezkine's 'the Jewish Century', winner of the 2005 National Jewish book award... [ I'll skip the statistics, I know you've seen plenty]...
...I'm sure you guess what I'm leading up to; there may be no ' single jewish interest', but there is undoubtedly a coherent jewish interest, as evidenced by all the Israel PACs (I think it is ludicrous to pretend that jews are not central to these PACs). My point is obviously that the only explanation for the scale of the jewish ascendancy is that the 'jewish interest' is acting in solidarity in an illegal and racist manner; giving preference in lines of credit, and even insider trading, on a 'racial' basis, and using every trick in the book, from bribery to murder, to keep attention away from it. "
continued from above:
This is what I mean by 'illegitimate, even in capitalist terms'. By 'capitalist terms' I mean the 'really existing' set up in the US currently. For example, there is a specific case for impeaching Bush and Cheney, as opposed to indicting the entire capitalist class. Comparison with Hispanics in Latin America is just a distraction. At present, in the US, there are laws against racial discrimination (nominally sometimes, admittedly) and insider trading. There is nominally a commitment to positive discrimination to redress the historic-based disadvantages of African-Americans. We would call white people to account, if they opposed this, and white racism is generally recognised as an evil, if specific examples are exposed. There is no excuse for turning a blind eye to jewish racism, especially since the power it has created is the bedrock of support for the zionist racist state.
ROSEN
" [ some reasonable arguments followed by]...You're looking for some kind of exceptionalism for Jews within capitalism that isn't exceptional...unless you're trying to say something else "
ME
" You've totally ignored that I said that there is at least a nominal commitment in the US at present to redressing the historic disadvantage of African-Americans relative to the Anglo-Saxons, to ending racism. It is YOU who is proposing a 'jewish exceptionalism' by attempting to exclude them from this. How do YOU account for their success? I know you don't believe in genetic differences between races, or believe that jews are a race anyway? Neither do I. ...we have to try and use whatever rules centuries of struggle have managed to achieve. "
ROSEN
" ...Does he mean that the laws that exist (won through 'struggle', he says) be used against 'the Jews'? So that 'the Jews' should have less power? Is that the LS programme? If so, he should say, so that we can talk about it. " [ as a broad trajectory, yes]
There was another Rosen comment which said nothing new, then
- ME: ( this is the bit he misquotes on the March 16 blog)
" You're not interested in reforming capitalism. Yawn. Well, I know you claim to be interested in fighting racism, fascism and freeing Palestine. Suppose the BNP ( a tiny percentage of the population), held such a disproportionate position in the UK, hugely over-represented in every field, with a lobby that had such a grip on the political system that no-one could be elected without kow-towing to it, with its own ruthless intelligence service, and a foreign fascist, racist colony practicing genocide and armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons. Would you be interested in reforming that part of capitalism? I imagine your response would be that the BNP are just thickos (so why give them so much attention?) and it could never happen. So, is it ok because jews are clever? Or because they're jews?
Anyway, I've noticed Michael Ro
SOME REMARKS BY ROSEN ON GILAD ATZMON FROM THE SU SITE
9/1/08 GILAD ATZMON MEETING CANCELLED
29 ...Much more significant is GA’s more serious points about ‘Jewish power’. This is a political analysis of the Middle East and indeed of how the world is run. The issue in question is whether the politics of both the Middle East and indeed of world finance, US policy in Iraq and towards Iran are all carried out at the behest of a group variously identified by GA and others as ‘the Jews’, ‘American Jews’, ‘the Israel lobby’, ‘Jewish money’ and so on. As far as it is possible to tell, GA seems to think that this is the case... he seems to be saying that ‘they’ sent America into Iraq to kill millions of Iraqis.
... GA would like to remove the category of antisemitism from the argument. . So, if this line of thinking isn’t antisemitic, what is it? ...is it time now that that analysis needs updating by saying that capitalism and imperialism are now so controlled by one group acting as a group that we should really talk about ‘the Jews’ as running it all for the benefit of ‘the Jews’? And if this is the case, what’s to be done? ... to remove ‘the Jews’ from any position in which they dominate, control, regulate, manipulate etc. And when that’s done, the argument continues (I think), the world will be a freer happier plac...
So, there are two parts to the Jewish power argument: one that it exists .(and to say so isn’t antisemitic, it’s just factual) and two, that removing Jewish power will liberate humankind, beginning with the Palestinians...
...I’D BE REALLY INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT SOME OF THE NON-JEWS AROUND ON THE LEFT THINK OF THE JEWISH POWER ARGUMENT...
49 ...The review dismisses the M and W thesis of the all-powerful Israel lobby running US policy in the interests of Israel and/or the Jews etc etc. This is interesting because this completely separates the SWP from the Atzmon position without mentioning him by name. We shall see if Atzmon puts this down to crypto-zionist infiltration of the SWP...
52 ... I think Atzmon has turned his irritation with European Jewish nostalgia (he, being an ex-Israeli) into a hate of it, as it appears to him to be irrelevant, an obstacle to the liberation of the Middle East and in the end too connected to Zionism. IN so doing, he dismisses the anti-zionist traditions that almost got wiped out by the Nazis but have (in tiny numbers) survived... However, as I’ve said, I don’t think that this is the most significant or serious of his attacks. The key to it all is the ‘Jewish Power’ thesis and I think his sometime bookers at the SWP have dealt with this quite nicely in this month’s Socialist Review. Presumably, peacepalestine and/or Atzmon’s webpage will expose them as crypto-zionists in a day or so…
Some of these posts were too long, but nothing very important was lost - in fact, nothing very important was included, probably. I have to admit that the above is very boring - but Gilad asked, so there you go.
Commenting by HaloScan
