Irish MV Saoirse becomes 2nd victim of sabotage, cannot sail with Gaza Flotilla

So how do nonviolent, unarmed humanitarian activists protect themselves from weapons-wielding attackers? Not very well.
 
But they don’t have to. Afterward, they don’t even point a finger. And it’s working.

Via too many flat screens to stop, the world audience sees that Israel will stop at nothing to starve off its remaining Palestinians, neither violence, lawsuits, attempted murder, or slander, is too much to keep humanitarians from hindering Israel’s designs on Judea and Samaria.

Now I admit I favor just a little finger pointing, particularly when it’s too early to say, concrete evidence-wise, because that brings out something even less attractive. Accuse Israel immediately and guess what, they’ll indignantly try to put the blame on others. That’s ugly.

And they accuse you of antisemitism, even if you love Jews, but don’t favor the Zionist, mass-murdering variety.

Getting aid to the beleaguered Gazans may prove more difficult than a beeline Mediterranean cruise, but this mountain of a greater Palestinian cause is coming to Mohammed.

Delegitimizing Apartheid Israel is becoming as easy as taking candy from a baby-candy-taker. While the internet hasbarapocalypse foams at the mouth applauding what may or may not have been IDF divers who rigged the MV Saoirse to sink in mid voyage, or what may or may not have been Mossad undercover agents who relieved flotilla participants of their cellphones, the eagerness of Stand-With-Israel fans to stand with such tactics is compounding with self-antisemitism.

It’s becoming more and more clear, with obstacles like the corporate media stacked against critics of Israel, that a nonviolent strategy is tantamount to success against a lawless foe. Remember our TSA considers nail-clippers to be a weapon. your average ocean-going cabin cruiser arms itself with at least a speargun or two if there becomes a need to fend off would-be petty pirates. God forbid the Gaza Flotilla be caught with tools like that.

So how do flotilla activists keep a 24-hour watch against underwater demolition teams? How do elderly activists protect themselves from paid-hoodlums holding them up? The next flotilla will need an entourage of protectors I suppose, if this what happens to this flotilla doesn’t break the blockade of Gaza for good.

In the struggle for Middle East land, Palestinian violence will always win

Israel can build all the new settlements it wants, take heart, it only takes one horrific Tate-Labianca-like crime scene to curb the Zionist homecoming charade. Israel can terrorize Gaza to smithereens, the Palestinians have nowhere to flee. American Jews on the other hand, are not going to leave comfortable digs, to relocate to Jerusalem where their 11-month-old might be slashed to death in her crib. Such dastardly strategy comes at a price of course, against a military willing to defy international law and exact collective punishment for the deed of one zealot, but Israel knows that even its US billions in weapons cannot compete with one Palestinian knife that finds its mark.

Odd, isn’t it? On the battlefield, Goliath can slay an entire West Bank of Davids, but when the contest is holding ground, you can take it, but if you can’t convince your people to settle it, the land will revert to its rightful inhabitants.

I’ll leave you to decide if the murder of an Israeli settler family is off-limits. They’re moved unto properties appropriated from Palestinians, illegal settlement of occupied land, they’re ferried by armored SUVs in military convoys, their rooftops, front gates, walls and streets are guarded by soldiers, their neighborhoods buffered by “sterile zones” purged of all inhabitants, the persistence of their habitation is used to advertise for more settlers and demoralize the non-Jewish native population in waiting of cleansing. Are settlers “innocent civilians,” irrespective old or young age? Who is to blame for putting settler children into homes whose previous inhabitants have been put out on the street, who can only assail their walls with stones?

Remember too, it’s the Israeli settlers, more than the IDF soldiers, who routinely raid Palestinian homes, orchards and farms, killing their neighbors with impunity. Where does any settler get to pretend they should be considered an innocent civilian?

Arab Palestine is confronted with a slow death by attrition. Israel has never disguised its plan to ethnically purge the entire of what it calls Judea and Sumaria. What does it matter then, if resistance violence begets occupier retaliation, if this brazen home-invasion-family-murder provokes an avenging of deaths ten fold? The Russian Partisans paid fifty to one. The Gaza massacre was 300 to one. The Gilad Shalit prisoner ratio is tens of thousands to one, still well shy of US military disproportional force.

Peace activists want to curb armed resistance in favor of nonviolence, calculating that peace will come when Palestinian martyrdom awakens the Israeli conscience, or whichever comes first, Palestinian blood runs dry. This suits Israel of course, its Apartheid State needs the Palestinians gone, for Jews cannot forever pretend they have a Democray while subjugating an inferior untouchable class. So long as one Palestinian remains who fights back, Israel will never conquer Palestine.

Israel can plan all the settlement construction sites it wants, the more beautiful the better, in the end the people of Palestine can claim them in partial compensation.

The sinking of Judea, aka the Palestine

The sinking of the JudeaIn his novel Youth, Joseph Conrad wrote about a doomed coal steamer named “Judea.”
 
A propos of nothing much (Conrad’s theme was not solely about hubris), the story was based on events in Conrad’s own life and his early maritime experiences on a ship which was actually called “Palestine.”

The Gazan People’s Front or People’s Front of Gaza less funny than Nazirene

A Gaza Flotilla PR mishap, as minor as a participant speaking out of place, was seized upon by one reporter to suggest rivalry between co-sponsors of the relief convoy due to convene Saturday at Gaza’s door. When an interviewee said “Free Palestine Movement” instead of “Free Gaza,” the reporter recalled scenes from Monty Python’s Life of Brian and the mortal rivalry between the “People’s Judean Front” and the “People’s Front of Judea,” often understood to lampoon the PLO and it splinter groups. Haha. But why didn’t the reporter mention Python’s other irreverent terrorist gang also fighting the Roman occupation: the uber-Zionist Nazirene? Because Otto and the Nazirene, that’s right, not Nazarene, were cut from the video when control was wrestled from Monty Python for the rights.

Why the offense? Because they wore swastika-like Stars-of-David and they goose-stepped? Because they followed a small-mustached leader named Otto who dreamed of a racially pure state for Jews only?

I’m surprised that more Monty Python fans aren’t livid at the suggestion the classic has been censored for all posterity. But only those who saw Life of Brian in the theater, or can pick up an out-of-print paperback of the screenplay, would know what lines successive viewers don’t hear to memorize.

Lines like these between Eric Idle and Graham Chapman:

OTTO: It’s time, you know … Time that we Jews racially purified ourselves … We need more living room. We must move into the traditionally Jewish areas of Samaria.

BRIAN: What about the Samaritans?

OTTO: Well, we can put them in little camps. And after Samaria we must move into Jordan and create a great Jewish state that will last a thousand years.

Imagine a Zionist depicted using Hitler’s expression “living space!” Lebensraum meant a homeland where the German people could live unmolested, with room for their population to grow.

Associating Zionists with Nazis has always meant courting trouble. Does it sound incredible that defenders of Israel would take a knife to Monty Python’s work? Know any other blockbuster movies of the late 70s which mysteriously shed memorable scenes when they reemerged on video?

Criterion recently released a DVD with extras that purport to include the deleted scenes, you can see them on Youtube, but they are actually outtakes with bits missing still, in particular the lines above.

I wrote about this at length in an earlier post, when I came upon the missing dialog just by chance. In that post I also transcribed the full text of the censored scenes.

Back to the joke made at the Free Gaza Movement‘s expense. Hopefully the organizers can laugh it off. Really Jerusalem-based reporter Jackie Rowland was making hay of an email shown to her by a participant being compelled to switch the word “Palestine” for “Gaza” because they were not authorized to speak officially for the “Free Gaza Movement.” With any improvised collection of activists, only those tasked should speak for the whole. Especially someone who may have been admonished beforehand not to present themselves as a spokesman.

I cannot presume to know what were the motives in this instance, but it’s been my experience that characters bent on disrupting the work of activists often put themselves before the cameras to sabotage the message. Leaders have to guard against that tactic.

The reporter should have know as much. Imagine interviewing Rush Limbaugh and taking him at his word that he represented the White House.

The activist should have made that fact more clear. It certainly was disingenuous of the reporter however, because it would be easy to confirm that there was no such group, instead of concluding that rival non-profits were vying for taking credit for the convoy. In that way Jackie Rowland’s article seemed like a mean-spirited laugh.

The groups which have brought the multi-million dollar enterprise together that is the Gaza Freedom Flotilla appear to me to be far from adversaries, otherwise how could this be the ninth unified attempt?

The same cannot be said for Fatah and Hamas of course, nor of the extremists in Israel.

monty-python-life-brian-ottoThe latest reports have the relief convoy meeting in the international waters off of Gaza on Saturday. The story has been playing well in the international press, and is beginning to see daylight in the US. Apart from those with a Zionist slant, two decent reports emerged today in the WSJ and Time.

Original Anti-Zionist jokes in Monty Python’s LIFE OF BRIAN remain cut out of Criterion special edition

monty-python-life-brian-ottoThink you know the saga of the deleted scenes from Monty Python’s LIFE OF BRIAN? Not if you trust Wikipedia. The 1979 comedy didn’t just take the mickey out of Jesus and the feuding Palestinian Liberation fronts, it poked fun at Zionists, as goose-stepping racists led by Eric Idle’s OTTO the NAZIRENE determined to promote Jewish racial purity, carve a Lebensraum from the “traditional Jewish areas of Samaria,” displace the Samaritans into internment camps, and plan an Anschluss of Jordan to “create a great Jewish state that will last a thousand years.” My, my, my. But the defamed parties had the last laugh. They acquired the studio with the rights to the film, obliterated the offending celluloid, reedited the video release, and have rewritten cinematic history.

Maybe you don’t care what Israel has been doing to the Palestinians. Did you know someone is messing with the oeuvre of Monty Python? We had the comedy sketches memorized in college. Who could have imagined the originals would be vulnerable to tampering?

I’m not sure this is an overreaction. Monty Python is not Shakespeare, what is? But it’s not Nicholas Sparks either. For a populist phenom I say Python rivals Swift. This is book burning, is what it is — a sinister effacing of creative work. In a recent British poll, Life of Brian was in contention for England’s greatest film comedy. But for your consideration, instead of a director’s cut, we’ve got a censor’s cut.

Here’s the lowdown in brief: three integral scenes of the theatrical release were removed from the video version. The third scene was recut to make up for the absence of the first two. And a key character was stricken from the credits.

When Criterion later released a collector’s edition, the missing sequences were included in the extras as “deleted scenes.” But these scenes were represented by mangled outtakes of the originals, from which key lines remain excised. Then an official narrative was fabricated to recount how the sequences had been removed from the original version to improve the flow, the crude outtakes testifying to why they didn’t make the cut.

But that’s all bullocks –and the niggling weak spot to this digital book burning is, ironically enough, that BOOKS were published in 1979 to accompany the film’s release: a mass-market paperback of the screenplay, and an oversized Monty Python Scrapbook.

The rewrite runs afoul too of anyone who remembers seeing the film in its first release.

Not My Tribe has suffered its own internal dissension over comparing Israel to the Nazis. Apparently it’s SO not done, not even Monty Python can get away with it.

You may have revisited the video many times, now the DVD, maybe you read about the scandals about the film’s release, maybe you memorized some of the Biggus Dickus dialog; are you curious that you missed the bits about Samaria, Jordan and purified Jewish blood?

When the Catholic church objects to a movie, it declares a boycott. Zionists take a more effective strategy. When pulling funding from the project doesn’t work, they buy the rights and delete the scenes. You’d think a film as celebrated as Life of Brian would be inviolate to culture vandals. And so far the desecration has escaped the legions of Monty Python fans. Wikipedia recounts how Otto’s scenes were deleted from the film, and thankfully resurfaced to be included as outtakes on the 2007 Criterion edition. But the account is untrue.

From restored out-takes we might surmise that Jewish objection were limited to the Star of David embellished as a swastika, but from the un-restored material it seems that the modern censors objected to Zionists depicted as determined to carve their own Lebensraum in Samariaby by means of Anschluss and concentration camps, for the sake of a third Jewish reich. And what have we now happening in the Occupied Territories which Israeli settlers insist on calling their Sumaria and Judea of biblical history, and what of the open air internment of the Palestinians in Gaza. Oh My Goodness.

The Criterion edition of Monty Python’s Life of Brian has some famously restored scenes, alleged to have been cut from the original version. They’re available again, and you can see them on Youtube. But it’s Poppycock. The scenes in question were actually removed from the video release, and “lost” by the studio which took over handmade films. The deleted scenes were actually out-takes of the originals. Fortunately, the screenplay published to accompany the 1979 release has the original lines, which vary quite curiously from what’s being peddled as the restored original. Yes, the deleted scenes have deleted scenes.

If you saw the 1979 film in the theater, you might remember Otto, the Hitleresque Zionist with the curiously non-German accent. Here is the original script made from the final take. The out-take restored as “deleted scenes” stray considerably from these lines. The lines in bold have simply been simply clipped.

BRIAN slips out through the back door and descends some steps into MANDY’S garden where he sits, head in hands.

Suddenly a voice assails him.

life of brian deleted sceneOTTO: Hail, Leader!

BRIAN: What?

OTTO: Oh, I– I’m so sorry. Have you seen the new Leader?

BRIAN: The what?

OTTO: The new Leader. Where is the new leader? I wish to hail him. Hail, Leader. See.

BRIAN: Oh. Who are you?

OTTO: My name. Is. Otto.

BRIAN: Oh.

OTTO: Yes. Otto. It’s time, you know. . .

BRIAN: What?

OTTO: . . . Time that we Jews racially purified ourselves.

BRIAN: Oh.

OTTO: He’s right you know. The new leader. We need more living room. We must move into the traditionally Jewish areas of Samaria.

BRIAN: What about the Samaritans?

OTTO: Well, we can put them in little camps. And after Samaria we must move into Jordan and create a great Jewish state that will last a thousand years.

BRIAN: Yes, I’m not sure, but I . . .

OTTO: Oh, I grow so impatient, you know. To see the Leader that has been promised our people for centuries. The Leader who will save Israel by ridding it of the scum of non-Jewish people, making it pure, no foreigners, no gypsies, no riff-raff.

BRIAN: Shh! Otto!

OTTO: What? The Leader? Hail Leader!

BRIAN: No, no. It’s dangerous.

OTTO: Oh, danger: There’s no danger. (flicks his fingers) Men!

A phalanx of armed, rather sinister, men appear from the shadows and fall in.

OTTO: Impressive, eh?

BRIAN: Yes.

OTTO: Yes, we are a thoroughly trained suicide squad.

BRIAN: Ah-hah.

OTTO: Oh yes, we can commit suicide within twenty seconds.

BRIAN: Twenty seconds?

OTTO: You don’t believe me?

BRIAN: Well . . .Yes . . .

OTTO: I think you question me.

BRIAN: No. No.

OTTO: I can see you do not believe me.

BRIAN: No, no. I do.

OTTO: Enough. I prove it to you. Squad.

SQUAD: Hail Leader.

OTTO: Co-mmit Suicide.

They all pull out their swords with military precision and plunge them into themselves in time, falling in a big heap on the ground. Dead.

OTTO: (with pride) See.

BRIAN: Yes.

OTTO: I think now you believe me. Yes?

BRIAN: Yes.

OTTO: I think now I prove it to you, huh?

BRIAN: Yes, you certainly did.

OTTO: All dead.

BRIAN: Yes.

OTTO: Not one living.

BRIAN: No.

OTTO: You see, they are all of them quite dead. See I kick this one. He’s dead. And this one’s dead, I tread on his head. And he’s dead. And he’s dead. All good Jewish boys, no foreigners. But they died a hero’s death and their names will live forever. Helmut . . . Johnny . . . the little guy . . . er . . . the other fat one . . . their names will be remembered . . . eventually . . . forever. So now I go. Hail Leader.

BRIAN: Wait Otto. You can’t just leave them all here.

OTTO: Why not–they’re all dead.

One oh the ‘corpses’ farts. There is a giggle.

OTTO: Wait a minute. There is somebody here who is not dead. There’s somebody here who is only pretending to be dead. Stand up, you.

One of the bodies stands up sheepishly. As he does so, he stands on someone else who quite clearly says ‘Ow.’

OTTO: Who said ‘ow’? You’re not dead either. Neither are you. Stand up, stand up, all of you. Oh, my heck, is there not even one dead?!

They have all stood up averting their eyes in shame.

HELMUT: No, sir. Not one.

ADOLF: We thought it was a practice, sir.

OTTO: Oh my cock! Tomorrow, as a punishment, you will all eat–pork sausages!

There is a horrified muttering at this suggestion. OTTO turns sharply to BRIAN.

OTTO: OK. Tell the Leader that we are ready to die for him the moment he gives the sign.

BRIAN: What sign?

OTTO: The sign that is the sign, that shall be the sign. Men, forward!

OTTO’S MEN march away singing their exciting song.

OTTO’S MEN’S SONG:
There’s a man we call our Leader.
He’s fine and strong and brave,
And we’ll follow him unquestioning
Towards an early grave. He-e gives us hope of sacrifice
And a chance to die in vain,
And if we’re one of the lucky ones,
We’ll live to die again.

BRIAN: Silly bugger.

A second scene involves Otto and his Nazirenes receiving the sign, as the crucifixion party departs the city gates.

JUDITH now is running through the crowded streets. She reaches some steps and climbs up onto a roof. Quickly, she opens a basket and releases a flock of pigeons.

A very STRANGE MAN is lying on a lonely hilltop. Suddenly he rouses himself, sits up and peers into the distance towards Jerusalem.

A flock of pigeons flies up against the sun.

Seeing this, the STRANGE MAN rouses himself and does an extremely odd but elaborate dance.

Further away, on an even lonelier hilltop, a pile of straw moves to reveal that it is in fact a MAN dressed in straw. He watches the STRANGE MAN’S dance closely.

STRAW LOOK-OUT: It is the sign!

Instantly OTTO appears, with all his men.

OTTO: The sign that is the sign?

LOOK-OUT: Yes!

life of brian deleted scene the signOTTO: Men! Our time has come! Our leader calls! Men forward!

The MEN march into the wall and each other.

OTTO: Oh my cock.

Of course the omission of Otto’s gang created a problem for the film’s final scene, where his men repeat their self-sacrifice beneath the crosses. Here was the original sequence:

Suddenly PARVUS looks up. He has heard something.

OTTO and his MEN appear over the skyline.

BRIAN: Otto! (a new flicker of hope in his eyes)

OTTO: Men, charge!

They charge.

The ROMANS, seeing this formidable army bearing down on them, finger their swords rather nervously and then break and run away back towards the city gate.

BRIAN’S face lights up with renewed hope as he sees OTTO’S army advancing at the double. The army arrives under the cross, swords held aloft. The ROMANS have all run away.

OTTO: (to Brian) Leader! We salute you. Men! Die for your cause!

With immaculate precision they all run themselves through, including OTTO.

OTTO: You see. Every man a hero. They died for their country.

BRIAN: You silly sods.

For the re-edited video and subsequent DVD versions, audio voice-overs were added to explain Otto’s final charge. None of this was in the original.

–[A group of faux oriental-looking warriors come over a hill, led by their leader, King Otto. Care to venture a guess as to who they are? Yes, it’s…]

WORKER
The Judean People’s Front!

PARVUS
The Judean People’s Front!

OTTO
Forward all!

WORKERS
Look out! The Judean People’s Front!

–[The JPF stop in front of Brian’s cross.]

OTTO
Ve are the Judean People’s Front! Crack suicide squad. Suicide Squad! Attack!!!
–[drumroll]
–[They all ceremonially whip out their weapons, open a hatch in their armor, and proceed to kill themselves.]

OTTO
Ungggghhh… that showed ’em, huh?

BRIAN
You silly sods.

11/16
ADDENDUM:

Scan from Monty Python Scrapbook of Brian of Nazareth, (NY: Grosset & Dunlap, 1979) page 5: “Dramatis Personae, in order of appearance” lower ninth tenth of list.

LIFE OF BRIAN cast credits
Note Eric Idle as Otto, the Nazirene, evidently scrubbed from the revised credits too.

This Israel public relations jig is up

Colorado College lecture in Gaylord HallCOLORADO COLLEGE- The news from the ISRAEL TODAY lecture is all good. If you’d been there, you might wonder how my takeaway from such a bilious gathering could be upbeat. I’ll tell you. The Palestinian voice was well represented, Israel’s presentation was Old Testament, and the writing on the wall grows ever more clear. And I got a few nice pics.

The Audience
To begin, I would certainly have preferred everyone had acted with more decorum. That is, if there had been impressionable attendees there. As it was, the seats were only half occupied. Except for the young men with “JEW CREW” on their backs, or girls with Hebrew script across their pullovers, there were almost no CC students. The audience was one third voices for Palestine, and two thirds vitriolic Jew, amazingly indignant to disruption of their world view. No one was there to listen, except to cheer for what they already believed. But I’m certain it was an eye opener for all.

My friends and I were sure to supplement the speaker’s pauses with color to augment his heavily loaded statements. For example, when Gil Artzyeli described the objective and feat of Israel’s 2006 incursion into Lebanon “to silence them,” and did that not prove effective? Who could refrain from adding “you killed them.” The 2/3 supporters grew more and more angry. But the speaker had an inopportune manner of posing rhetorical questions, which we couldn’t resist answering.

It almost got us kicked out. I spent the duration with security guards poised right behind me, ready to escort me out of the room. I learned it would be more prudent to avoid the back row at opportunities like this, because you can be pulled out of your chair, or distracted into involuntary conversation with security personnel more readily than if you were well ensconced among the other attendees.

Those voicing support for Palestinians were made to wait until question and answer portion to voice their objections. Even then, the pro-Israel audience would cut them off. It became impossible to ask a complex question without interruptions of “What is your question? State your question!” They hounded everyone who wasn’t setting the speaker up for a softy. It was a ruthless crowd with the civility of Tea Partiers. When the pro-Israel attendees took their turn posing questions, no one interrupted. When it was a detractor, their time suddenly became too valuable to entrust to us. Even a CC student from Gaza, who hasn’t been permitted to visit his family in two years, was not given a hearing.

I’m positive that as these rude people think on how the event transpired, they will not be able to help feeling ashamed. Our interactions were spirited and engaging, addressed to a speaker with the hubris to take us on. We interrupted the speaker, but never tried to drown him out. Our adversaries on the other hand tried to flat out shut their fellow audience members up.

That crowd is immovable. I’ve no optimism for influencing their resolve. On the other hand, their rigidity was laughable. Their logic will not sway anyone new. They were positively shrill about their speaker being permitted to deliver his message as abridged. “Let him speak!” they shouted, as if their attention was rapt by information they’d never heard before, a preposterous notion. I’m neither Palestinian nor American Jew, but this was Israel Foundation Myth for Dummies. I can only think that this crowd sat tightly clenched, thrilled that the others among the audience were forced to listen to their dogma.

The Presentation
Old school. Palestinians offered their own statehood, but rejected it. Israel is pretext for Arab countries to oppress their peoples. No such thing as a Palestinian, Jewish presence in Judea has been continuous, Palestinians teach their children to hate, Israelis teach love, etc, etc. The old greenhouses of Gaza story was the example given to show that Palestinians don’t want to help themselves. Arab neighbor states are blamed for not resettling the Palestinians. Gaza is free, it is not occupied.

Would you believe Israel justifies the force it used in Lebanon and Gaza based on what NATO was permitted to do in Bosnia? Those were war crimes too! Israel accuses its critics of anti-Semitism because they don’t take other militaries to task for their crimes. But really Israel gives itself the latitude to commit crimes commensurate with the worst.

And here’s a wild gem! Israel owes its enormously successful economy (no mention of US foreign aid or direct sponsorship by Jewish American interests) to, among progressive business practices, the fact that all Israelis, both men and women, have to serve compulsory military service. It gives them the skills and discipline to excel in business and strengthen Israel. Mr. Artzyeli showed a video clip taken from CNBC, recommending that such a policy in American would certainly greatly improve its prospects for an economic recovery!

A word about the delivery of the presentation. Though impeccably dressed Gil Artzyeli affected the presence of someone wearing a Tony Soprano tracksuit. He sat back on his heels, his eyes directed to the ceiling as he dismissed his questioners. When a Palestinian girl raised a specific instance of an IDF strategy deployed in Lebanon, wondering how it was not a war crime. Artzyeli ignored it completely, making an aside to someone up front that the he wasn’t about to dignify that accusation with a response.

It’s kinda the problem Israel is having, isn’t it?

The Jig is Up
Over the last weeks I’ve had a chance to participate in three presentation by Israeli officials. The sum experience has fortified me with hope. With world opinion against them, and now the Goldstone Report, Israel is on the run.

The first lecture by Uzi Landau was on the offensive, directed toward Iran. It went over poorly. The Q&A revealed that Landau hadn’t connected the dots at all. The audience he had hoped to rally became only more concerned about Israeli nukes than Iran’s.

The second presentation delivered by Nir Barkat was an encouragement to the Denver Jewish community to support Jerusalem, with donations, travel, and by encouraging emigration. There the audience was equally smug and oblivious to the notion that increased settlements constituted violations of international law. But Israel’s continuous push for Jewish immigrants provides the clue to what Barkat inadvertently confirmed. Jews are leaving Jerusalem. The balance of the population is shifting toward the non-Jew.

This third event with the Deputy Consul General took the rhetoric down to basics, a demonstration of how far Israel is slipping. The dogma behind Zionism’s right to its own state, and their right to defend themselves, used to go without saying. Today Gil Artzyeli was forced to defend the most basic assumptions. The Jewish diaspora, their right to return, the expanding borders, the wall, the military retaliation. I was thrilled to see arguments slip back past the basics.

The Jewish American communities may still be a resolute, but their numbers are not large. It appears to me that the compatriots they’ve recruited, from the Christian right and the neoliberal conservatives are receding quickly.

The image of the much-oppressed Jew is becoming eclipsed by the militant arrogant Zionist, earning no one’s sympathy.

A few pictures from the event:
Deputy Consul General Gil Artzyeli lecture November 12, 2009
Castigated for raising his voice, Ed Nace insisted on standing for the duration of the lecture, to lend omniscience to his objection.

Deputy Consul General Gil Artzyeli lecture November 12, 2009
Colorado College Poli-Sci professor, and Middle East specialist Bob Lee rose several times to forbid the impromptu participation by the audience. Here he calls for security to remove Ed.

Deputy Consul General Gil Artzyeli lecture November 12, 2009
Security reconsidered asking Ed Nace to leave as he informed them in his booming voice that he was a Colorado College alum.

Deputy Consul General Gil Artzyeli lecture November 12, 2009
Would you believe Mr. Artzyeli trotted out the old Farfur the Mouse clip, depicting Muslim children being taught to admire suicide bombers. It’s a favorite example whose relevant context was long ago dismissed.

Footnote
One lamentable observation I had regarded a member of the chaplain’s office at CC, who is also a peace community activist. She was not at liberty to take sides on the Palestinian – Israel discussions for fear of alienating the Jewish students. I do not personally doubt her motives, nor her sympathies for the victims of injustice in Palestine.

However, when our 85 year-old Ed Nace raised his voice, or stood angrily, the chaplain’s assistant moved to calm him down. She may have thought he needed assistance, but in reality his stubborn act was working. His offense at the slanders against Palestinians, his incredulity that such a one-sided presentation was being allowed, and his indignation at the ferocity with which he was being silenced, expressed itself as a hard-of-hearing old man who was not about to be bullied. His performance, even inadvertent, worked to disrupt the lecture and temper the smug untruths being passed as academic fact. But Ed’s act was not made any easier by a colleague trying to calm him down. To his credit, Ed persevered and was able to put a human emotional context to Mr. Artzyeli’s slick propaganda.

The chaplain is no doubt schooled in nonviolent communication. She needs to bone up on effective nonviolent theater. Non-confrontational communication isn’t going to bring racist bullies like Artzyeli to heel. Zionist Apartheid is going to fall when it is condemned and pilloried.

Militant Fratricide, Say Shiboleth?

So I got onto this because of a comment posted supposedly proving that All Palestinians are evil because of one Arab-on-Jew act of violence which sounds a lot like it was instigated by the Jewish kids.

And I’ve pondered for the past day or so, Why doesn’t the commentator get upset about Jew-on-Jew violence?

I would say, you know, that the closer one is in kinship to ones attacker or victim, the more upsetting it is.
And I thought about “Say Shiboleth” which is from the Book of Judges. Fairly near the end. Chapter 12.

The Israelites in the Gilead were at war with the Israelites of Ephraim. When they had slaughtered so many in Ephraim, they were picking off the stragglers at a ford of the River Jordan.

The guards would challenge anybody to say “Shiboleth” which the Ephraimite accent would render as “sibolet”
Once identified as Ephraimites, the fugitives would be taken out and slaughtered.

There was a similar Kin-slaying between the tribe of Benjamin and the Rest of Israel. again in the book of Judges and in which the Benjaminites were almost exterminated.

This sort of thing happened all the Damn Time.

As Solomon lay dying, two of his sons divided the kingdom..

The Tribes of Judah and Levi formed the Kingdom of Judah and the other tribes formed the Kingdom of Israel.

At the time of the Assyrian Conquest, the time of the prophets Jonah and Isaiah, and several of the other prophets, All Of Whom are quoted extensively in the “Right of Return” rhetoric, when they said “Israel” these are the people who were meant.

That Israel would be restored. Neither Israel nor Judah had yet been subjugated.

Also, the Assyrians and their successors on the Imperial Scene Babylon and Persia…

DID NOT take the entire people out of the land. They took the aristocracy, the priests and the artisan class.

And the military.

They didn’t need MORE peasants in Babylon, they already had plenty of Poor Folk.

Sad thing about the Economic Crimes of Conquest and Slavery is people are sorted according to how much money they can bring to their new masters.

Dehumanization on the grandest of scales.

In between the division of the Kingdom and the Assyrian Conquest, there were fratricidal wars between Israelites and Judeans.

All… The… Damn… Time…

When the Persians allowed the Priesthood to go back to Judah and Israel, two of the most violent Hate Freaks in Jewish history were the leaders of the “return”.

Their names were Ezra and Nehemiah.

They basically re-conquered the people who had been left behind. The poor who had tended the land all the time the rich were in Babylon.

It was like, “Yeah, you guys took care of OUR land for US, thanks for your service, now get your stinkin’ arses off OUR land.. and by the way, we no longer considere you to be Pure Israelites because while the priesthood was away you intermarried with Other Tribes of Israel and with Gentiles”

True Racism at its finest. Hating your Own Cousins for not being “pure”.

But back to the axe-wielding “militant”. An axe isn’t a weapon of choice. You would have to be well trained in the Martial Arts to use it effectively as a weapon. A real “militant” out to do some terrorism would have some kind of weapon that’s EFFECTIVE.

But he was Palestinian, therefore he must be a Terrorist.

If a Jewish Israeli shoots or stabs or gets into a fistfight with another Jewish Israeli, why isn’t one or both of them called “Militant” or “Terrorist”?

Because it’s fratricidal, brother against brother?

The Palestinians are the closest relatives the Jews have in the entire world, more so than any other Arab group.
And proven through DNA.

More than that, so is everybody else, sprung from one source…

Anybody rising up and smiting his neighbor, friend, enemy, foreigner from the farthest reaches of the world, is smiting his Brother.
Those who don’t believe the Bible on that can believe the DNA.

Either we speak out against fratricide, matricide, parricide, whatever the feminine-specific term is for killing your sister, infanticide…

Or we join hands in common guilt with those who actually do the killing.

We take the Mark of Cain upon ourselves.

It’s one or the other, and can’t be both, and can’t be “neither”.

We can’t sit on that fence.
That fence won’t even support ONE person, far less the whole world.

America the Beautiful is NOT a Hymn.

Bite me.

What got me onto this, of course the very Anglo-American persecution of their fellow Americans, including and especially American Indians, like the Ward Churchill (metaphoric) Lynching…

But after I published the bit about Malaysian students being forced to learn English by their Corporate Masters, a show came on and just ended about a half hour ago, comparing America to the Bible.

Claiming, and rightly in some cases, although as you can well imagine they didn’t use quite the same phrases or even the same concept, that some of the worst criminals in History and especially American History, men like Captain John Smith and Cotten Mather, Kings Henry VIII, Queen Elizabeth 1st, King James etc etc… were inspired by the ENGLISH versions of the Bible, and that the Bible is the Sole Inspiration for Imperialism, American Style, that we’re (again with Cotten Mather, gotta love that jerk, he makes it EASY to hold my fellow Christian’s feet to the fire) “the Shining City on the Hill” with our Manifest Destiny to bring the Poor, Benighted Dark Skinned world to Americanism. oh, that’s right, they said “Christianity”.

America is NOT God and is not even a lower case “g” god.

It’s two continents.

Just because certain highly placed United States government officials believe that the term “America” applies exclusively to us, they also by coincidental occurrence believe that Christianity belongs Exclusively to the English as a RACE.

I’ve been in MAINSTREAM churches where this is often preached.

They preach that America is actually the “New Jerusalem” and the English RACE has taken over the position (through the silliest use of Transmogrification Magic that I personally have ever heard of) The New Chosen People of God.

Sarah Palin’s church, for instance, preaches that. Not the entire Assemblies Of God denomination but her church in particular.

Evangelic churches have one doctrine, the Priesthood of the Believer.

Like there’s no Baptist Pope.

In their mindset, criticizing American Foreign Policy or American Corporate Imperialism or American Racism, interchangeable concepts actually,

Is tantamount to Blaspheming against God Himself.

Feh.

I can turn that on it’s very illogical head and say that people who think that resistance to Imperialistic Racist Corporate Tyranny is Anti-American and Anti-Christian are defiling the Name of Christ with their dogmatic insistence on equating their Murderous Evil with His Name.

Taking God’s Name in Vain, in other words, the first instrument of any act of Blasphemy.

It figures prominently in what’s referred to as “God’s Top Ten No-No List”.

But the T.V. show, it was playing “America the Beautiful” in the background.

And preaching that the English language is the Savior of the World.

Funny thing about that is, Jesus didn’t speak any English and the English Language wouldn’t evolve into anything recognizable to anybody who doesn’t have at least a High School grasp of English for well over a thousand years.

The English people of His time had this really nasty practice of capturing Roman soldiers, putting them in wicker cages and lighting them on fire.

Legion X spent time in Anglia and Judea…

A LOT.

Tenth Legion. A Punishment Brigade.

Pontius Pilate himself was made governor of Judea because he pissed off the Emperor.

He was on Punishment Detail, too.

For those readers who’ve never been in the service, those would be the guys who you see picking up cigarette butts and raking the rocks on base.

Worse than that even, Legion X was usually your last chance as a soldier before being sold as a slave or simply crucified.

They’re THE only legitimate connection that can be claimed between Jesus and England in His time.

The Joshua Paradigm…

If “We” are morally and legally required, as many have suggested, to judge “They” as in any other nation, by the most radical remarks of “Their” citizens, would “They” not also be justified in judging “We” by the most radical remarks of “our” citizens?

Let’s take as a specific case “reverend” Patrick Robertson. who said that a certain leader of a Nation in South America should be assassinated.

Further, let’s take into account that his Masters in the Bush/Cheney administration were and their minions still ARE fighting a Terroristic Covert War in that same Nation.

Let’s further go with comments by Mr Robertson and many of his fellow “ministers of the gospel” that Israel should have Killed every Palestinian, even the Babies, when they took the land.

They claim this by references to the book of Joshua. They claim that Israel, and by association the United States, is being punished now because they didn’t “Cleanse the Land”.

Never minding the fact that the Palestinians are ethnically just as much Israel as the Jews.

The “ten lost tribes”? Never went anywhere, they’ve been there ever since BEFORE Judah was carried off to Babylon.

Also the Jews who weren’t Wealthy were left behind in Judah, mostly the Babylonians carried off the priesthood, royalty and the Richest of the Judeans, NOT Israelites, Israel was a separate Kingdom.

When Jesus and laer Paul, nee Saul of Tarsus, (a tentmaker by trade and a Lawyer by profession) said “Judge not, lest ye also be judged, for with what measure ye mete judgment shall Judgment be meted unto ye”

They were re-stating what Moses and later Joshua said.

It’s one of the first principles of the Talmud.

What reason would a Palestinian, an Iraqi or an Iranian have to trust Netanyahu or any of the other Puppets of the Bush/Cheney Corporate Empire? Bush and Netanyahu shake hands, smile, joke, are very cordial to the same freaks who claim that the Iranians and the Palestinians

should be Utterly Destroyed, from the Greatest unto the least, and every beast, and every servant, man, woman and CHILD, none shall ye leave alive…

Well, Why should they?

From their point of view, punctuated by Assassins bullets, air strikes and invasions like the ones into Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza, The Empire has declared through its Spokes Freaks that Iran and Palestine should be destroyed.

Especially punctuated by more than a million deaths of the Citizens of Iraq.

The vast majority of them, like the vast majority of the Palestinians killed, Were CIVILIANS and a really disproportionate number of them Children.

Israel, Judah, Moab, Edom, Samaria, Palestine…

And why it all counts.

Since the whole Israel Right-Of-Return is a huge part of any Any ANY issue involving the modern state of Israel.

It’s not just Religious Talk, so if you’re offended by Biblical references then toughie-poo.
The Bible just happens to be one of the premier sources for Israeli history.

AND.. Arab History

AND Palestinian history.

This is really oversimplifying things, but to most Americans Judah and Israel are equivalent and Palestinian and Arab are interchangeable terms.

To those no-doubt Highly Paid Lobbyists For the Israeli “DEFENSE” Force who insist on calling us liars or ignorant or hate-mongers or whatever, this will be Kindergarten stuff, …

ASSUMING OF COURSE THAT THEY ACTUALLY ARE JEWISH and/or BIBLICAL SCHOLARS or SERIOUSLY AS EXPERT ON THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF THE REGION THEY CLAIM THEMSELVES TO BE (and of course, as they claim we cannot possibly be…)

After the reign of Solomon, just to start, in the middle where a beginning properly belongs, Just Ask Steven Spielberg…

After the Reign of Solomon Israel and Judah were two separate Kingdoms.

Israel, and Judah.

Remember that because it is important and there will be a quiz later, which will count for 57.3% of your total grade.

After the kingdom of Israel got their collective head knuckled by Assyria (Remember Jonah?) but not Judah, and then a short while (historically speaking) later Nebuchadnezzar conquered BOTH and carried away into captivity… NOT EVEN MOST of Israel or Judah, Because They Left The Poor People Behind… (Remember Jeremiah? Of course you do…)

At this point the remnants of the Philistines aka Phoenicia aka Lebanon… a Greek culture…
And the remnants of Moab, descendants of one of the sons/slash/Grandsons of Lot (by his two daughters,)

( you know, Moses wasn’t very Kind or Gentle when he described the doings of his relatives, but he cut Lot a “lot” of slack, claiming he was too drunk to recognize his own daughters)

And the remnants of Edom, descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob aka Israel…

and various tribes of actual Arabs, descendants of Abraham’s first son Ishmael

And even the descendants of the recently (relatively) Dismantled Hittite and Assyrian Empires…

And throw in Ethiopians, Egyptians and Nubians who were stranded in the back and forth conquests over several centuries.

THESE were the people who lived in Israel and Judah at the time.

When people babble much about the Lost Tribes of Israel they’re refering to the Kingdom of Israel which consisted of the vast majority of the tribes of Israel save for Judah and Levi.

And They’re Not “lost” in the sense that they up and disappeared either, it’s “lost” like in the RELIGIOUS context.

More on that…

Remember how I said that Moses was NOT overly kind to the memory of his ancestors and relatives?

Of course you do.

Some of the highest ranking members of the Knesset and Mossad were quoted/slash/interviewed by a Religious Scholar from Colorado Springs and it gets routinely broadcast on TBS.

Who popped off with the Really Racist viewpoint, seconded and aided by the Israelis, that since many (but not all) of the Palestinians are descended from Esau, aka Edom, and their country called Idumea by the Romans, and they considered Esau to be a vagabond and lazy, shiftless and ignorant….

They consider ALL Palestinians to be Lazy Shiftless and Ignorant Vagabonds.

The term “morally dissolute” was thrown in as well, and the notion that ALL the descendants were morally dissolute Because Of Their Ancestry.

Not Racist? I can easily see that it IS… Extremely Racist.

Moses said that Jacob, ISRAEL, cheated Esau out of his birthright, his possessions and even the blessings of their father Isaac.

Stole, and Lied to do it.

That’s two of G_d’s Top Ten on His personal Hit Parade.

When Joseph, 11th son of Israel and first son of his favorite wife Rachel, was sold into slavery by his 10 elder brothers, according to Moses and generally recognized by both Muslim and Jew (the religious groupings) as being accurate, JUDAH wanted to have Joseph killed.

Here Moses plea bargains for his own ancestor Levi, (he wasn’t Ethnically a Jew, although he was Israelite, and Hebrew, but… the Edomites are ALSO Hebrew…

According to Moses, Levi prevented his brothers and especially JUDAH from Killing Their Brother, and was allegedly somehow not aware that a Passing Band of Arabs (Ishmaelites) was so close to their camp, as in “right in the middle of their encampment” that they managed to buy Joseph without Levi knowing about it until much later.

Moses was a Prophet but he was first a Man, and people don’t go out of their way to disrespect Grampa.

Judah also married his own daughter-in-law, OK so she was actually the widow of two of her sons, but here Moses tries not to be nasty about his kinfolk… Judah thought she was a prostitute, “went in unto her” and knocked her up, before marrying her… and without of course consulting his wife.

But, hey, it’s the EDOMITES who are “morally dissolute” right?

Racist? Hell yeah that’s racist.

Let’s flash forward again, this time to Right After The Babylonian Captivity.

The King of Persia (Iran) allowed the priesthood and as many of the Judean (Jews) Captives to return to Israel and Judah.

There they found that the poor who were left to tend the lands in Israel and Judah and Edom and Moab and Lebanon had intermarried.

Oh, NO!

Say it ain’t so, Jonah!

Jewish people intermingling with the Goyim? Gasp! Oh the Horrors!

Ezra and Nehemiah, the two Levite Priests who led the Return to the Land… Thanked the Israelite and Moabite and JEWISH peasants for keeping the land as well as could be expected, then condemned them for Not Maintaining Racial Purity.

And kicked them off the Rich Folks’ lands which they had been tending for more than 70 years.

“Thank you for all your time and labor, now Get Off My Property You Smelly Racially Impure Peasants YOU!”

These then are the “Lost Tribes” of Israel.

Where did they go? They didn’t. They’re still there.

In the New Testament they’re called “Samaritans”.

The parable of the “Good Samaritan” must have raised quite a few Elitist Pharisaic Eyebrows because the Pharisees and Sadducees considered anybody not Wealthy and Elite like themselves to be Ignorant Peasant Scum…

Plus they weren’t Racially Pure.

The Romans didn’t carry off ALL of the people in the region as slaves, not even all of the Jews.

Same way the Assyrians, Babylonians, Hittites and Alexander the Great didn’t.

Evidence, you say?

I mean, evidence aside from that already accepted by “Israel” and their FAMILY who are also Children of Israel the Palestinians?

Boy, you sure drive a hard bargain, but OK, here’s Evidence.

Olive Groves and Vineyards.

Sure Olive trees and grape vines grow wild in the region, but we’re talking Massive Cultivation of them.

Olive Groves and Vineyards that are older than the Roman Empire.

On land where if they were to survive at all they had to be Irrigated.

Anybody who has ever done Farming (And here I’ll excuse the Intellectual Elites like Don and Grace and Mary and David Haddad, who might all be the Same Person with different names)

I’ll excuse you because I don’t believe you’ve ever put hand to shovel or hoe or axe.

BUT I HAVE.

Maintaining an agricultural enterprise of any sort requires Hard Work.

In modern times there are machines which take up most of the Hard Work but they’ve only existed about a century and a half.

For 20 times as long these Groves and Vineyards have been tended by hand.

Irrigation ditches mean Water… and Dirt… Combined.

You have to clear the weeds out of the irrigation ditches at least 5 times a year just to keep the water running.

And if you’re using shovel, axe and hoe to do it it’s one hell of a lot of hard work.

If you’re doing it in Palestine Israel it’s one Hell of a lot of Hard Work under a Relentless Merciless Blazing Sun.

Olive Trees that were planted 60 years ago wouldn’t be producing yet.

They DO take that long.

You plant an Olive Grove not in the hopes that YOU, yourself, will ever eat the fruit thereof, because you most likely WON’T, but instead for your grandchildren.

A Vineyard will start producing within a decade, but it takes centuries to get one going full blast.

“Israeli” Wine and Olives? And in only 60 years?

Sir No Sir!

Those vineyards and groves were tended, by hand, for centuries and even millenia by those “Lazy Shiftless Morally Dissolute” Arabs, Edomites, Moabites and ISRAELITES who make up the Palestinian Nation.

Right to Return? What about the Right To Remain?

Those ARE Israel and have been for thousands of years.

Acknowledged as such by the scriptures that you as Jews and I as a Christian and the Muslims to be the Truth.

If you want to pop off with the “Right Of Return” and quote Scripture to justify your actions you have to Be Judged By Scripture as well.

That’s the Essence of the Law of Moses.

“Behold, I set a stumbling block in Zion”.

Oh, and speaking of Moses, that bit about “Thou Shalt Not Kill”?

#6 on G-d’s Top Ten List… yeah, THAT one…

You know, G_D meant what He said.

That’s why they’re called the Ten Commandments and not “a bunch of Meaningless Suggestions”.

In order to judge someone to Death you have to be Pure yourself.

That means, (and of course, as David Haddad said in his many personalities, I’m “ignorant” and don’t know a Damned thing)

That means You Must Have NEVER committed any of the sins punished by Death according to the Law of Moses.

Even if you were redeemed of the penalty of your sins, “Redeemed” simply means that the debt was paid, not that it never existed.

Holy Land claimants want DNA pedigree

OMG-d. In their continuing effort to rationalize Israel’s right to exist as a European Jewish colonial authority over the lesser Palestinian Semites, Zionists are reconstituting a DNA claim check to redeem their lost Judea. Researchers are hoping to link today’s Israelis via DNA to the forefathers to whom their G-d, so the scripture says, promised the land. Though the scientific sampling is still small, the “proof” thus far is already showing an incredible racist temerity.

Anti-Negroid, anti-Semite, and anti-Goyim.

The following excerpts are from a 1999 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA revealing the intent to differentiate Jewish DNA.

Several lines of evidence support the hypothesis that Diaspora Jews from Europe, Northwest Africa, and the Near East resemble each other more closely than they resemble their non-Jewish neighbors. … The only exception was the Ethiopian Jews, who were affiliated more closely with non-Jewish Ethiopians and other North Africans.

dna-ashkenazi-jewAnti-Negroid
Does this suggest to you that Zionists may be more interested in granting a right-of-return El-Al ticket to white Jews over black? Forget Affirmative Action. They didn’t report the detail that only a handful of Ethiopian “Beta Israel” had yet been surveyed.

Emphasizing that the Beta Israel of Ethiopia were largely only converts to Judaism, fends off another contentious population, the Khazars of Ukraine/Turkey/Kasakhstan who converted during the Middle Ages. Why? It’s disputed that the European, less-Semitic looking Ashkenazi Jews may have originated from Khazaria.

–The graph above positions DNA types in relation to each other. Jewish groups (ASHkenazi, ROMan, North AFrican, KURdish, Near EAstern, YEMenite, and Ethiopian EtJ) are marked with triangles. Note the proximity of the non-Jewish PALestinian and SYRian. Likewise the Turk. (Algebra students will note the locations are plotted according to two coordinates, out of 18 possible lines.)

Let’s revisit the aim of the 1999 study. To bolster the claim of modern Jews to the ancient lands of Judea, required this hypothesis:

…a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.

This places the Jewish Peoples at the scene of the original land grant. But hark, the 1999 study came to an additional conclusion, less welcome, but significant enough to become the study’s vexing title:

Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes

The possibility has been oft suggested by “Anti-Semites” of course, that the pre-1948 inhabitants of Palestine could be more closely related to the original Chosen People, than the prodigal European Jews. In lieu of a “Diaspora,” many of the original Israelites might more pragmatically have abandoned Judaism in order to assimilate with their conquerors. In other words, the Palestinians and Syrians of today might have a genetic claim to match their hereditary claim to ownership of the farms and orchards inhabited over a continuum of millennia.

Anti-Semitic
Semantics, like DNA, accord the inhabitants of the Middle East a common heritage. “Semites” refer to the Semitic people, not just the Hebrew.

The 1999 study was quick to put qualifiers on the direction in which the findings appeared to be leading:

The extremely close affinity of Jewish and non-Jewish Middle Eastern populations observed here supports the hypothesis of a common Middle Eastern origin. Of the Middle Eastern populations included in this study, only the Syrian and Palestinian samples mapped within the central cluster of Jewish populations. Continued studies of variation in larger samples, additional populations, and at other loci are needed to confirm our inferences as well as to clarify the affinities of Jewish and Middle Eastern Arab populations.

Imagine a South African Boer using such evidence to lay claim to the Transvaal, without of course wanting to suggest a common heritage with native Africans. Note too, here the researchers will point out that additional data is needed, whereas no such footnote accompanied their dismissal of the Ethiopian Jews.

Regardless, finding affinities between the Semitic peoples does not serve a Jewish state, created from land seized from Palestinians, and growing by the acquisition of more. What to do about this troublesome suggestion? Discredit the work of the past:

A number of earlier studies found evidence for Middle Eastern affinities of Jewish genes; however, results have depended to a great extent on which loci were being compared, possibly because of the confounding effects of selection. Although the NRY tends to behave as a single genetic locus, the DNA results presented here are less likely to be biased by selective effects.

Obfuscate with genetic drift, gene flow, admixture and ancestry.

At the most basic level, the genetic distances observed among Jewish and non-Jewish populations can be interpreted as reflecting common ancestry, genetic drift, and gene flow. The latter two processes will tend to increase genetic distances among Jewish populations, whereas admixture will also have the effect of decreasing genetic distances between Jewish and non-Jewish populations. Our results suggest that common ancestry is the major determinant of the genetic distances observed among Jewish communities, with admixture playing a secondary role.

And emphasize the insufficient breadth of this survey:

Although some mtDNA studies suggest close affinities of Jewish and Middle Eastern populations, comprehensive comparisons of mtDNA variation in Jewish and neighboring non-Jewish populations are not yet available.

But don’t let that hinder your overreaching premise:

The results support the hypothesis that the paternal gene pools of Jewish communities from Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East descended from a common Middle Eastern ancestral population,

And try a dose of straight-speak about your assumptions, lest scientists notice you pretend to have proven your assertion. In particular that you are overriding the DNA processes of drift, flow and admixture with assumptions of “ancestry.”

A Middle Eastern origin of the Jewish gene pool is generally assumed because of the detailed documentation of Jewish history and religion. There are not many genetic studies that have attempted to infer the genetic relationships among Diaspora Jews and non-Jewish Middle Eastern populations.

Anti-Goyim
Finally, note the problem of tracing DNA through paternal lines. Although in Judaism the priesthood is traced through men, membership is matrilineal. Drawing some conclusions requires the need for approximation, in particular for the Ashkenazi Jews of Europe.

To address the degree to which paternal gene flow may have affected the Jewish gene pool, we estimated approximate admixture levels in our Jewish samples from Europe. This question remains unresolved in particular for the Ashkenazi community. Our results indicated a relatively minor contribution of European Y chromosomes to the Ashkenazim.

Ashkenazi Jews are the progenitors of the Jewish populations who came to America, coming from Europe and before that Central Europe. In contrast to the Sephardic Jews of Southern Europe and the Mizrahi Jews of the Middle East, the Ashkenazi were the primary community behind Zionism, who lobbied the United Nations to legitimize the creation of a Jewish nation of Israel. DNA researchers are as motivated to link the Ashkenazi to Middle Eastern origin as they are to break their connections to Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.

Some genetic studies suggest that Jewish populations show substantial non-Jewish admixture and the occurrence of mass conversion of non-Jews to Judaism. In contrast, other research points to considerably greater genetic similarity among Jewish communities with only slight gene flow from their respective host populations. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that the degree of genetic similarity among Jewish communities and between Jewish and non-Jewish populations depends on the particular locus that is being investigated. This observation raises the possibility that variation associated with a given locus has been influenced by natural selection.

Subsequent genetic studies are chipping away at the original construct. Here’s a 2003 study: Multiple origins of Ashkenazi Levites: Y chromosome evidence for both Near Eastern and European ancestries.

Comparisons with other Jewish and non-Jewish groups suggest that a founding event, probably involving one or very few European men occurring at a time close to the initial formation and settlement of the Ashkenazi community, is the most likely explanation for the presence of this distinctive haplogroup found today in >50% of Ashkenazi Levites.

A 2004 study published in the European Journal of Human Genetics further explores the founder effect, opening the door to the influence of the Khazars: Y chromosome evidence for a founder effect in Ashkenazi Jews.

Recent genetic studies, based on Y chromosome polymorphic markers, showed that Ashkenazi Jews are more closely related to other Jewish and Middle Eastern groups than to their host populations in Europe. However, Ashkenazim have an elevated frequency of R-M17, the dominant Y chromosome haplogroup in Eastern Europeans, suggesting possible gene flow. In the present study of 495 Y chromosomes of Ashkenazim, 57 (11.5%) were found to belong to R-M17. Detailed analyses of haplotype structure, diversity and geographic distribution suggest a founder effect for this haplogroup, introduced at an early stage into the evolving Ashkenazi community in Europe. R-M17 chromosomes in Ashkenazim may represent vestiges of the mysterious Khazars.

And a 2006 study: The matrilineal ancestry of Ashkenazi Jewry: portrait of a recent founder event.

Both the extent and location of the maternal ancestral deme from which the Ashkenazi Jewry arose remain obscure. Here, using complete sequences of the maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), we show that close to one-half of Ashkenazi Jews, estimated at 8,000,000 people, can be traced back to only 4 women carrying distinct mtDNAs that are virtually absent in other populations, with the important exception of low frequencies among non-Ashkenazi Jews. We conclude that four founding mtDNAs, likely of Near Eastern ancestry, underwent major expansion(s) in Europe within the past millennium.

A 2008 study: Counting the founders: the matrilineal genetic ancestry of the Jewish Diaspora.

Unlike the previously reported pattern observed among Ashkenazi Jews, the numerically major portion of the non-Ashkenazi Jews, currently estimated at 5 million people and comprised of the Moroccan, Iraqi, Iranian and Iberian Exile Jewish communities showed no evidence for a narrow founder effect,

Shlomo Sand and shattering a national mythology

Shlomo SandShattering a ‘national mythology’ Shlomo Sand’s book is titled “When and How the Jewish People Was Invented?” and you probably will not find it stacked up on tables for sale in Barnes and Noble or Borders. I don’t expect it to be readily available for Colorado Springs librarian patrons either. Ask for it though.

The Haaretz interview:

Actually, most of your book does not deal with the invention of the Jewish people by modern Jewish nationalism, but rather with the question of where the Jews come from.

Sand: “My initial intention was to take certain kinds of modern historiographic materials and examine how they invented the ‘figment’ of the Jewish people. But when I began to confront the historiographic sources, I suddenly found contradictions. And then that urged me on: I started to work, without knowing where I would end up. I took primary sources and I tried to examine authors’ references in the ancient period – what they wrote about conversion.”

Experts on the history of the Jewish people say you are dealing with subjects about which you have no understanding and are basing yourself on works that you can’t read in the original.

“It is true that I am an historian of France and Europe, and not of the ancient period. I knew that the moment I would start dealing with early periods like these, I would be exposed to scathing criticism by historians who specialize in those areas. But I said to myself that I can’t stay just with modern historiographic material without examining the facts it describes. Had I not done this myself, it would have been necessary to have waited for an entire generation. Had I continued to deal with France, perhaps I would have been given chairs at the university and provincial glory. But I decided to relinquish the glory.”

Inventing the Diaspora

“After being forcibly exiled from their land, the people remained faithful to it throughout their Dispersion and never ceased to pray and hope for their return to it and for the restoration in it of their political freedom” – thus states the preamble to the Israeli Declaration of Independence. This is also the quotation that opens the third chapter of Sand’s book, entitled “The Invention of the Diaspora.” Sand argues that the Jewish people’s exile from its land never happened.

“The supreme paradigm of exile was needed in order to construct a long-range memory in which an imagined and exiled nation-race was posited as the direct continuation of ‘the people of the Bible’ that preceded it,” Sand explains. Under the influence of other historians who have dealt with the same issue in recent years, he argues that the exile of the Jewish people is originally a Christian myth that depicted that event as divine punishment imposed on the Jews for having rejected the Christian gospel.

“I started looking in research studies about the exile from the land – a constitutive event in Jewish history, almost like the Holocaust. But to my astonishment I discovered that it has no literature. The reason is that no one exiled the people of the country. The Romans did not exile peoples and they could not have done so even if they had wanted to. They did not have trains and trucks to deport entire populations. That kind of logistics did not exist until the 20th century. From this, in effect, the whole book was born: in the realization that Judaic society was not dispersed and was not exiled.”

If the people was not exiled, are you saying that in fact the real descendants of the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah are the Palestinians?

“No population remains pure over a period of thousands of years. But the chances that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient Judaic people are much greater than the chances that you or I are its descendents. The first Zionists, up until the Arab Revolt [1936-9], knew that there had been no exiling, and that the Palestinians were descended from the inhabitants of the land. They knew that farmers don’t leave until they are expelled. Even Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, the second president of the State of Israel, wrote in 1929 that, ‘the vast majority of the peasant farmers do not have their origins in the Arab conquerors, but rather, before then, in the Jewish farmers who were numerous and a majority in the building of the land.'”

And how did millions of Jews appear around the Mediterranean Sea?

“The people did not spread, but the Jewish religion spread. Judaism was a converting religion. Contrary to popular opinion, in early Judaism there was a great thirst to convert others. The Hasmoneans were the first to begin to produce large numbers of Jews through mass conversion, under the influence of Hellenism. The conversions between the Hasmonean Revolt and Bar Kochba’s rebellion are what prepared the ground for the subsequent, wide-spread dissemination of Christianity. After the victory of Christianity in the fourth century, the momentum of conversion was stopped in the Christian world, and there was a steep drop in the number of Jews. Presumably many of the Jews who appeared around the Mediterranean became Christians. But then Judaism started to permeate other regions – pagan regions, for example, such as Yemen and North Africa. Had Judaism not continued to advance at that stage and had it not continued to convert people in the pagan world, we would have remained a completely marginal religion, if we survived at all.”

How did you come to the conclusion that the Jews of North Africa were originally Berbers who converted?

“I asked myself how such large Jewish communities appeared in Spain. And then I saw that Tariq ibn Ziyad, the supreme commander of the Muslims who conquered Spain, was a Berber, and most of his soldiers were Berbers. Dahia al-Kahina’s Jewish Berber kingdom had been defeated only 15 years earlier. And the truth is there are a number of Christian sources that say many of the conquerors of Spain were Jewish converts. The deep-rooted source of the large Jewish community in Spain was those Berber soldiers who converted to Judaism.”

Sand argues that the most crucial demographic addition to the Jewish population of the world came in the wake of the conversion of the kingdom of Khazaria – a huge empire that arose in the Middle Ages on the steppes along the Volga River, which at its height ruled over an area that stretched from the Georgia of today to Kiev. In the eighth century, the kings of the Khazars adopted the Jewish religion and made Hebrew the written language of the kingdom. From the 10th century the kingdom weakened; in the 13th century is was utterly defeated by Mongol invaders, and the fate of its Jewish inhabitants remains unclear.

Sand revives the hypothesis, which was already suggested by historians in the 19th and 20th centuries, according to which the Judaized Khazars constituted the main origins of the Jewish communities in Eastern Europe.

“At the beginning of the 20th century there is a tremendous concentration of Jews in Eastern Europe – three million Jews in Poland alone,” he says. “The Zionist historiography claims that their origins are in the earlier Jewish community in Germany, but they do not succeed in explaining how a small number of Jews who came from Mainz and Worms could have founded the Yiddish people of Eastern Europe. The Jews of Eastern Europe are a mixture of Khazars and Slavs who were pushed eastward.”

If the Jews of Eastern Europe did not come from Germany, why did they speak Yiddish, which is a Germanic language?

“The Jews were a class of people dependent on the German bourgeoisie in the East, and thus they adopted German words. Here I base myself on the research of linguist Paul Wechsler of Tel Aviv University, who has demonstrated that there is no etymological connection between the German Jewish language of the Middle Ages and Yiddish. As far back as 1828, the Ribal (Rabbi Isaac Ber Levinson) said that the ancient language of the Jews was not Yiddish. Even Ben Zion Dinur, the father of Israeli historiography, was not hesitant about describing the Khazars as the origin of the Jews in Eastern Europe, and describes Khazaria as ‘the mother of the diasporas’ in Eastern Europe. But more or less since 1967, anyone who talks about the Khazars as the ancestors of the Jews of Eastern Europe is considered naive and moonstruck.”

Why do you think the idea of the Khazar origins is so threatening?

“It is clear that the fear is of an undermining of the historic right to the land. The revelation that the Jews are not from Judea would ostensibly knock the legitimacy for our being here out from under us. Since the beginning of the period of decolonization, settlers have no longer been able to say simply: ‘We came, we won and now we are here’ the way the Americans, the whites in South Africa and the Australians said. There is a very deep fear that doubt will be cast on our right to exist.”

Is there no justification for this fear?

“No. I don’t think that the historical myth of the exile and the wanderings is the source of the legitimization for me being here, and therefore I don’t mind believing that I am Khazar in my origins. I am not afraid of the undermining of our existence, because I think that the character of the State of Israel undermines it in a much more serious way. What would constitute the basis for our existence here is not mythological historical right, but rather would be for us to start to establish an open society here of all Israeli citizens.”

In effect you are saying that there is no such thing as a Jewish people.

“I don’t recognize an international people. I recognize ‘the Yiddish people’ that existed in Eastern Europe, which though it is not a nation can be seen as a Yiddishist civilization with a modern popular culture. I think that Jewish nationalism grew up in the context of this ‘Yiddish people.’ I also recognize the existence of an Israeli people, and do not deny its right to sovereignty. But Zionism and also Arab nationalism over the years are not prepared to recognize it.

“From the perspective of Zionism, this country does not belong to its citizens, but rather to the Jewish people. I recognize one definition of a nation: a group of people that wants to live in sovereignty over itself. But most of the Jews in the world have no desire to live in the State of Israel, even though nothing is preventing them from doing so. Therefore, they cannot be seen as a nation.”

What is so dangerous about Jews imagining that they belong to one people? Why is this bad?

“In the Israeli discourse about roots there is a degree of perversion. This is an ethnocentric, biological, genetic discourse. But Israel has no existence as a Jewish state: If Israel does not develop and become an open, multicultural society we will have a Kosovo in the Galilee. The consciousness concerning the right to this place must be more flexible and varied, and if I have contributed with my book to the likelihood that I and my children will be able to live with the others here in this country in a more egalitarian situation – I will have done my bit.

“We must begin to work hard to transform our place into an Israeli republic where ethnic origin, as well as faith, will not be relevant in the eyes of the law. Anyone who is acquainted with the young elites of the Israeli Arab community can see that they will not agree to live in a country that declares it is not theirs. If I were a Palestinian I would rebel against a state like that, but even as an Israeli I am rebelling against it.”

The question is whether for those conclusions you had to go as far as the Kingdom of the Khazars.

“I am not hiding the fact that it is very distressing for me to live in a society in which the nationalist principles that guide it are dangerous, and that this distress has served as a motive in my work. I am a citizen of this country, but I am also a historian and as a historian it is my duty to write history and examine texts. This is what I have done.”

If the myth of Zionism is one of the Jewish people that returned to its land from exile, what will be the myth of the country you envision?

“To my mind, a myth about the future is better than introverted mythologies of the past. For the Americans, and today for the Europeans as well, what justifies the existence of the nation is a future promise of an open, progressive and prosperous society. The Israeli materials do exist, but it is necessary to add, for example, pan-Israeli holidays. To decrease the number of memorial days a bit and to add days that are dedicated to the future. But also, for example, to add an hour in memory of the Nakba [literally, the “catastrophe” – the Palestinian term for what happened when Israel was established], between Memorial Day and Independence Day.”

The Germans have their shepherds

I was watching the Westminster Dog Show and learned about the most improbable breed of dog. It’s Jewish.

Anti-anti-semitic hundWould you believe it? It’s called the Canaan Dog. It’s named after the biblical lands, and it shares the mystical stewardship connection the Jews have with the Holy Land. Only they are fit to look after it.

Who knows why, or who knows if it’s really true. The Bedouin keep these dogs, as have the Druze, but because the Kelef K’naani is the official dog of Israel, the exclusive lineage, which we are informed is deserving of preservation, excludes the Arab connections like they were pariah.

(Exclusive- Do you think you might have a Canaan dog? Well you don’t. They’re that exclusive. And the Canaan Dog Rescue is only interested in saving real ones.)

In spite of the Westminster Kennel Club’s waspish ambiance, the voice-over description of the Canaan was similarly Kosher, which is what caught my attention.

Bred in Ancient Judea to be shepherds and watch dogs for the Israelites, the breed suffered a setback when the lands were overrun by the Egyptians. When the Hebrews were scattered in the Great Diaspora their dogs were left to go feral in the Negev desert. There they lived in the wild for, are you ready for this, 2000 years! When Zionism brought the Jews back to Palestine, master and faithful hound were reunited. The Canaan was re-domesticated again in the 1930s [to protect their unpopular owners from their historic rivals]. Bracketed notation mine.

Actually, an animal behavior specialist was recruited from Austria in 1934 by the Haganah, the Jewish paramilitary organization protecting the Zionist settlements in Palestine since 1907. They needed a working dog for what would become the Unit Oketz, the Israeli K-9 special forces. Bred from the pariah dogs which attended the Bedouins, the Canaan dog, actually a Spitz, is noted for its alertness, its bark and its distrust of strangers. I’m reminded of the attack dog trained to be racist in Sam Fuller’s 1982 film White Dog, banned in the US.

Canaan, by the way, encompassed an area which covered present day Israel, the occupied Palestinian territories, and parts of Lebanon and Syria. Who is dragging politics into the dog show?

Who smelt it, dealt it.

Israelis accuse their Muslim foes of wanting to wipe Israel off the map. They extrapolate that Israel’s “right to exist” is threatened by exterminationTM, even nuclear holocaust (no trademark needed). In reality opponents of Zionism are only suggesting that European Jewry return from whence it came. Wipe away the aparthied borders, they say, which designate Judea as for Jews Only.

Many Israelis hold dual citizenship, attesting perhaps to their own personal reservations about Israel’s tenure in the Middle East. Israelis know they are but visitors on a Zionist pilgrimage to Jerusalem, imposed at the expense of Palestinian lives. Israeli immigrants preserve their dual citizenship escape clause, their right of return to their lands of origin, should the Palestinians ever reconstitute themselves successfully.

Meanwhile the Jewish Anti Defamation League defames all critics who would question Israel’s underlining claim to statehood, the Zionist usurping of Palestine’s statehood to be more precise. (I’m reminded of how the US beef industry has enacted laws in some states which make it illegal to criticize bad meat. Both stink.)

Israel is most certainly wiping Palestine off the map.Town by town, Palestinian beach-goer by Palestinian. Israel is undeniably in contravention of every Palestinian’s right to exist. And Israel has the temerity to point its finger at its victims and accuse them of wanting to “wipe Israel off the map.” The rapist crying “foul!”

Irreligious troubles

Remember the troubles in Ireland? They were religious wars is what we were told. The Catholics against the Protestants. Been going on for centuries. Indeed.

England has occupied Ireland for centuries, that much is true. And the English lackeys who settled the land for the British king and played landlord to the Irish were Protestant indeed. And the native Irish who have been fighting to regain their sovereignty are the religion of St Stephen who drove the pagan snakes from Ireland and converted everyone to Christianity before there was such a thing as Protestantism. The English were Catholic until Henry VIII was refused an annulment from the pope and so created his own Church of England. British subjects had to follow their king into Protestantism, and the enemy freedom fighters in Ireland would, of course, not.

And so the battle between the Irish and their English occupiers waged on, cleverly repackaged by the empire, the British Empire and ours, as religious troubles. Who sympathizes with an opponent’s foreign religion? The plight the dispossessed is another matter.

Likewise in Palestine. Are we to believe that Muslims are fighting Jews over the fate of their religious differences in Palestine? Oh, it’s been going on for thousands of years. Really?

Israel’s pretext for entitlement to the Holy Land dates back two thousand years, that’s true enough, when Jews last ruled Judea. There probably can be no end to land disputes when you argue claims that far back. Courts decided long ago to simplify disputes with statutes of limitation. In war however, every conqueror likes to assert they are reclaiming what lands were theirs by predestiny.

Palestinians are fighting the Israelis for their homeland. Israel occupies Palestine and keeps building settlements unto more of it, displacing and killing the original occupants. Israel’s motives might be religious, but the conflict is not. The fighting is occupation versus resistance, er, insurrection. The internecine strife amongst Palestinians and amongst Lebanese are no more sectarian than it is about who is collaborating with the occupiers.

Sectarian differences in Iraq, as throughout the Middle East, have similarly less to do with religion than the struggle against colonial occupiers. Right now we are demonizing the Shia, the fundamentalist hard ballers out of Iran, who threaten the Sunnis. They do, but hardly for religious reasons. The Sunni are and have been our agents, the administrative class for the West’s domination of the Middle East. When you hear Egypt opine, that’s us. Saudi Ariabia, that’s us. All the feudal sheiks, sultans and monarchs? Ours. In our pocket and we in theirs. They don’t like the Shias because they’re as irreligious as alpha males in a harem. Once more the occupiers have their religious or counter-religious pretext. The oppressed are fighting for their land and their freedom.

Israelites go home

Baja JudeaAdmittedly this is a picture of Tel Aviv residents protesting their nation’s militant actions against Lebanon and gathering to offer a prayer for peace.
 
On another level, is it also a picture of fair-skinned westerners on a Middle Eastern beach who’ve overstayed their welcome?
 
Maybe it’s time to close Club Med Judea.

Americans descend upon Baja Mexico all the time, we don’t try to annex it. Or Costa Rica, or Belize. There’s nothing wrong with vacationing in the tropics, but is it fair to emigrate there, declare it your own, and ask the world to protect you from the anger of the people who you sent packing?

Let American and European Jews have their promised land, as promised vacation land. Visit and sunbathe all you want, then go home. This idea that white man should colonize Arabia is so 19th century. Colonization doesn’t work, and we have no right.

Nowhere was this more obvious than South Africa, where white colonizers held themselves as superior to the natives, imposing apartheid to force the indigenous populations to keep to their own neighborhoods.

Can there ever be peace in the Holy Land? Of course there can. Return Israel to its rightful owners. Let Jew, Muslim and Christian live together in a secular state. Will there always be sectarian violence? Perhaps, we’re seeing it elsewhere between Muslims. Sectarian problems will have to be worked out between neighbors. It’s clear the answer was not to give the whole ball of wax to one religion. Especially not the white one.

Ahmadinejad and Hamas not denying Holocaust

Iranian president
No one is suggesting that the Holocaust didn’t happen, or that six million Jews weren’t killed by the Nazis. The mythology surrounding the Holocaust has to do with its aftermath: how the murder of six million Jews became justification for the creation of a Jewish state on land which belonged altogether to someone else.
 
That is the mythology about the Holocaust which natives of the Middle East would like the rest of us to contemplate.

Western media seems intent on perpetuating a distortion of the Muslim position. So intent are they to avoid questioning the legitimacy of Zionism that anyone who does is painted as a “Holocaust denier.”

No one is denying the Holocaust! And no one is calling for killing any more Jews! “Wiping Israel off the map” is a truncated translation of what the Muslim voices have expressed. It does not mean “off the face of the earth” or “eradicate” or “exterminate.”

Right to exist
Hamas is often described as not believing in Israel’s right to exist. It sounds so unreasonable. Everyone has a right to exist. But Israel is not a person, it’s an entity. Try this on for size. Does Jewish occupied Palestine have a right to exist? Did French occupied Algeria have a “right to exist?”

Algeria had a right to exist, and the French there had every right to exist, as a minority. And as we’ve seen with all former colonies, the majority population has an inclination to rise against its upper class oppressors. The west has of course the inclination to try to prop up those embattled regimes.

Israel was a nation created in 1949, carved out of the land of the Palestinians to make a home for European Jews. Israel is regarded by many as a last example of colonialism. White settlers laying claim to the lands of another people.

Now the Israelis are erecting a wall to separate themselves from the darker skinned Arabs. It’s an apartheid wall, and we’ve seen apartheid before. The Boers of Dutch ancestry no longer rule South Africa because the world wouldn’t stand for it.

Israelis have as much right to exist as anyone, as the Boers for example, but they don’t have a divine right to exist on the backs of their native brothers.

Apartheir wall   Israelis call it a “fence.” To construct it required demolishing entire Palestinian neighborhoods, often separating Palestinian farmers from their fields and orchards.
 
 

Off the map
When the Iranian president says he would like to wipe Israel off the map, he’s not saying he wishes to kill anyone. He didn’t say he wants to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth, he’s saying he’d like to see Israel off the map OF THE MIDDLE EAST!

Ahmadinejad even suggested that Israel relocate itself to Europe. If Europeans feel so bad about the Holocaust which they inflicted upon the Jews, why shouldn’t it fall to Europe to offer up some of its real estate for a Jewish homeland?

Ahmadinejad, like many Muslims, doesn’t see that it was Europe or America’s place to bequeath Ancient Judea to the present day Jews, a land which for the last two thousand years has belonged to non-Jews and went by the name of Palestine.

We all came from Africa. Does that give us a right to resettle it without regard to who’s already living there? Should someone resurrect Babylon, Alexander’s Greater Macedonia, or the Holy Roman Empire?

Hamas, and the PLO before it, speak of driving this foreign intruder from Palestinian land. The Muslims scattered the Israelites into Europe two thousand years ago. Now interlopers have brought them back and Hamas has pledged to drive them out again.

Imagine if America chose to return its Puritans whence they came, to England, where they weren’t terribly popular the first time. Perhaps the English would vow to expel the kill-joys once again to the New World.

As unreasonable as it was to redraw international borders to recreate a Promised Land, so too might it be unreasonable to undo the land grab of 1949. Perhaps the most pragmatic course of action would be to insist the Israelis and the Palestinians cohabit the promised land. They can govern themselves democratically and the chips will fall where they may. This age of enlightened democracy should have little patience for dogmatic racism and religious prejudice, from either side.

The world should be able to look upon these religious squabbles with impartiality. Although it seems Israelis are plenty worried that the secular west may not always grant Jewish fundamentalism more deference than its Islamic rivals. Therein lies the importance in not denying the Holocaust.

Holocaust myth
What peoples, among victims of genocide, have ever been granted their own ancient Promised Land as a redress for the genocide? None. Is this because the Holocaust was such a unique genocide? Indeed, to be labeled a Holocaust denier you merely have to be denying the uniqueness of the Holocaust.

When Iran president Ahmadinejad says that he wants to examine the myth of the Holocaust, he is threatening to challenge the prevailing Zionist interpretation.

Ward Churchill got in trouble with the Zionists because he wanted to compare the genocide of Native Americans to the Holocaust. He makes the case mainly because the policy of extermination conducted against the original inhabitants of the Americas is still denied, and as a result extensions of the policies persist.

I think the argument to prove Churchill’s point leads in an altogether different direction. This is because the Jewish extermination was not an act of imperialism against an weaker people.

The genocide against the Native Americans was like the systematic extermination of indigenous peoples everywhere: Australia’s aborigines, Indonesia’s Ache and Timorese. It is also the age-old mechanics of one people conquering another, like the genocide by the Turkish of the Armenians, and the recent actions of the Sudanese Arabs against their blacks.

The genocide against the Jews was class warfare upward. It belonged in a category like the Soviet and Chinese against their bourgeois and intellectuals, like the Khmer Rouge genocide of the urban Cambodians most of whom were ethnic Chinese, like the Hutu slaughtering of the Tutsies, like the traditional and recurring pogroms against Jews. It’s hard to say that even the Spanish Inquisition wasn’t after the usury profits of the Jews.

Thus antisemitism is less unique than its name implies, and resembles very much Marx’s class warfare where the proletariat is trying to come out from under its oppressors, or perceived oppressors.

The Holocaust is touted as religious genocide, hence the rationale for redress which honors their biggest religious wish: return to their Promised Land.

The Zionist count on the west’s continued support of that religious goal. They need an independent Israel with a homogeneous Jewish religion. They know that if they were to be integrated with the region’s present-day peoples, as a Jewish minority among Palestinians, they stand a good chance of being voted off the island.

So here are America and modern Europe, standing in support of a dogmatic religious group. It does not play well with others, and it insists in fact that it be segregated from everyone else, even as it usurps the land of others, and occupies adjacent lands under the pretext of its national security.

I have no doubt that victims of the Holocaust would themselves be shocked and shamed at the crimes that Israel is committing in their name against the peoples of Palestine.

Why America and Europe should side in religious solidarity with Jewish fundamentalists without sympathy for the Islamic fundamentalists is the consequence of believing a myth.