A few hours after I posted a video revealing Max Blumenthal’s toilet incident, Doug Johnson wrote to me the following insightful message:
“The thing that strikes me about this scene is the tacit acceptance of the idea that people accused of being anti-Semitic should naturally be physically assaulted or even killed.
Blumenthal and the bald Israeli (David Sheen) didn't object to the idea that Israeli or Diaspora Jews would attack or murder anyone, much less a fellow Jew, accused of anti-Semitism. They didn't balk at the concept of engaging in physical violence against people who have opposing political views.
Instead, their only objection was to which individuals are classified as anti-Semitic and therefore which individuals should be subjected to politically motivated violence, i.e., terrorism.
Doug Johnson”
Johnson’s astute observation is damning. Max Blumenthal defames activists, scholars and intellectuals as ‘anti Semites,’ clearly aware of the possible consequences. He appears to expect other Jews to exercise lethal terrorism against the subjects of his defamation. Blumenthal states that “smearing one as an anti Semite definitely” leads to an Israeli or Jewish “attack” (2:39): by framing me as an ‘anti Semite’, for instance, Blumenthal intended to incite a Jewish terrorist act against me.
But Blumenthal is hardly original. He follows a familiar Israeli Hasbara drill.
In a radio interview in 1990(1), hard core Zionist Joseph Lapid, at the time a senior Israeli columnist, explained what he thought of Victor Ostrovsky, the Mossad whistle blower. “Ostrovsky is the most treacherous Jew in modern Jewish history. And he has no right to live, except if he's prepared to return to Israel and stand trial.”
Valerie Pringle, the journalist interviewing Lapid asked: “Do you feel it's a responsible statement to say what you've said?”
Lapid: “Oh yes, I fully believe in that. And unfortunately the Mossad cannot do it because we cannot endanger our relations with Canada. But I hope there will be a decent Jew in Canada who does it for us.”
Pringle: “You hope this. You could live with his blood on your hands?”
Can anyone distinguish between hard core Zionist Lapid and alleged ‘anti’ Zionist Blumenthal? As far as I can see, both agitators are inciting murder by proxy. Maybe, after all, this bar mitzvah boy Blumenthal is just a Goliath wannabe rather than a peace activist.
(1) http://www.wrmea.org/1995-january-february/the-contrasting-media-treatment-of-israeli-and-islamic-death-threats.html
In a radio interview in 1990(1), hard core Zionist Joseph Lapid, at the time a senior Israeli columnist, explained what he thought of Victor Ostrovsky, the Mossad whistle blower. “Ostrovsky is the most treacherous Jew in modern Jewish history. And he has no right to live, except if he's prepared to return to Israel and stand trial.”
Valerie Pringle, the journalist interviewing Lapid asked: “Do you feel it's a responsible statement to say what you've said?”
Lapid: “Oh yes, I fully believe in that. And unfortunately the Mossad cannot do it because we cannot endanger our relations with Canada. But I hope there will be a decent Jew in Canada who does it for us.”
Pringle: “You hope this. You could live with his blood on your hands?”
Can anyone distinguish between hard core Zionist Lapid and alleged ‘anti’ Zionist Blumenthal? As far as I can see, both agitators are inciting murder by proxy. Maybe, after all, this bar mitzvah boy Blumenthal is just a Goliath wannabe rather than a peace activist.
(1) http://www.wrmea.org/1995-january-february/the-contrasting-media-treatment-of-israeli-and-islamic-death-threats.html
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian 
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment