Google+ Followers

Wednesday, 27 April 2011

UPDATE - Atzmon Humiliated as He is Left With a Panel of One

Atzmon blowing his own trumpet

Atzmon Humiliated
Atzmon is beginning to realise where holocaust denial and his virulent brand of anti-Semitism leads. At present it is the status of a leper, with all 3 fellow panellists deserting him. His explanation for Palestinian Ghada Karmi not attending is that she sent him an e-mail:
"I'm delayed here (in Jordan) and will not be back in time for the event, and that is the reason for my not attending."
Contrast this with 2 of the e-mails Ghada sent me when I wrote to her about her being billed to speak alongside Atzmon, the first on 26th April:
Thanks,Tony. I have been trying to pull out and am urgently trying to find an email contact for them. I'm in Jordan currently, and not back till next week. Do you have a contact for the organisers?
Ghada
I wrote back to say that I had no contact details other than that publicised (I left a message but it was not returned). I also added that 'On the basis of what you have said here, I will say that you have confirmed that you will not be speaking and that way they can contact you.'

Ghad wrote back on 27th April to say that:
"Indeed I am not speaking, and I've sent an email to the only contact I saw which is on the advert for the event. I'm really concerned that no one has been in touch with me.from their side. I'll see what happens today.
I'll keep you posted.
Ghada"
There is of course an easy explanation, which is that Ghada tried not to hurt Gilad's feelings or more likely didn't want to experience the bile he has directed against other Palestinians who have displeased him. However Atzmon, despite his own beliefs, is not very bright and decided to publicise Ghada's kindness towards him.

UPDATE 30 April 2011
Unsurprisingly given the lack of knowledge about who was organising the event, Westminster University have pulled the plug on the event. However the Jewish Chronicle in one of its most extraordinarily dishonest reports (even by its standards) Westminster university cancels anti-Zionist event when of course it knows that Atzmon is an anti-Semite not an anti-Zionist. This is no accident of course because the JC has an agenda. It goes on to say that
'The event had been promoted by groups including the Stop the War Coalition, the white nationalist Stormfront movement, and the Real IRA.'

Of course this is nonsense. Stop the War Coalition have not promoted the meeting and the views of the neo-Nazi Stormfront or indeed the Zionist Federation's allies, the EDL, are irrelevant. As for the Real IRA I can only assume that this was made up. The JC report also omits Alan Hart's withdrawal.

Atzmon himself has gone haywire. His ego severely dented as he has been abandoned by everyone (except the JC and Stormfront!). On his ego-driven website, the affair is modestly entitled 'Gilad Atzmon: Drama in London'

However this is a severe embarassment to Atzmon. It's all the fault of the Zionists, especially the Jewish anti-Zionist ones! He writes that:

The venue as well as the panelists (except myself funnily enough) came under severe pressure that verged on abuse: one of the panelists admitted to the organisers that he had received twelve phone calls from different Jewish ‘anti-Zionist’ activists, who insisted that -- ‘for the sake of Palestine’-- no one should share a stage with Gilad Atzmon....

I guess that Jewish ‘anti Zionists’ know better than everyone what is good for Palestine, they are chosen after all.

John Rose and Ghada Karmi pulled out, and that is understandable: not many can endure such a level of abuse..'

Of coure this is a tad dishonest. Ghada wanted out, in fact she'd never asked to be in. John Rose was misled about the purpose of the meeting. As for Alan Hart, he will no doubt explain his own views on the matter since he hasn't responded to my e-mails.

But of course is Atzmon wishes to debate his politics then I'm more than up for it. But what Gilad wants is to be taken seriously by academics and those in the know. What he doesn't want is to have to put his ideas to the test, for reasons which are obvious.


Third Panellist Alan Hart Pulls Out – Atzmon is on a Panel of One!

I am reliably informed that Atzmon is infuriated at having been spurned by 2 of his fellow panellists - John Rose and Ghada Karmi - at the meeting which was supposed to take place at Westminster University on 3rd May. In fact he is spitting blood no less at the humiliation. Good. An ego like his needs taking down a peg or two.

I am therefore even more pleased that the third panellist – Alan Hart – the ex-BBC journalist and of Press TV now – has also withdrawn. Atzmon therefore has the Panel to himself and can explain at length how the Jews are behind all the world’s ills!

26 comments:

Rebecca said...

Why do you say that Atzmon is not an anti-Zionist? Everything I've read by him indicates that he believes the state of Israel should not exist, that it was founded on a basis of racism, etc. - standard anti-Zionist statements.

Tony Greenstein said...

Rebecca, first you shouldn't believe everything someone writes, or in Atzmon's case, anything he says.

But the definition of an anti-Zionist is not that you don't believe the Israeli State shouldn't exist. By that definition some quite shady characters including the thicker neo-Nazi would be included.

Anti-Zionism means opposing the idea that Zionism is any form of solution to the Jewish Question. Further it is opposition to Zionism as a form of settler-colonialism. If you read what I quoted in the Quick Guide to the man, then you will see he denies that this is the case. It's not colonialism.

Indeed Atzmon goes further. Zionism is a diaspora thing. It doesn't exist in Israel, as if the practice and ideology exist independently. if you don't accept Zionism is the problem, as he doesn't, then you can hardly be an anti-Zionist. Of course he uses words like anti-Zionism, colonialism, imperialism as if they were confetti. He never defines anything so it is hard to get a handle on him.

But he operates from the Zionist idea that all Jews form the same nation i.e. race. From there he proceeds not to see the machinations of colonialism and its Zionist settler project but he sees 'Jewishness' as the problem.

That makes him an anti-Semite not an anti-Zionist

Anonymous said...

Mr. Greenstein
Anti-Zionism means opposing the idea that Zionism is any form of solution to the Jewish Question. Further it is opposition to Zionism as a form of settler-colonialism.

You are wrong in both.
Who said it is the Solution to the Jewish Question..... it a solution for those jews who want a nation of their own, if one wants to sit in the UK, that's the solution for him, that means, that Zionism is a subjective concept one can choose to adopt it (My parents did not have a choice as your parents had and for them it was the only solution).
Regarding Colonialism, I guess you were raised up using terminology that has NO background, in Order to be Colonial, you have to be sent by your country as the UK sent its settlers to Australia or Africa.
What country sent the Jews ???
So how can they be Colonialist.
Now don't push the occupied territories, as you are against Israel in the 1948 UN borders too.

Final I wonder what you hate more Israel And Zionism or Gilad Atzmon Zionist -Jewish Approach.
As he puts you in bad condition.
As he says clear, you cannot be a JEWISH ANTI ZIONIST.
For me he is the scum of the earth
That's your problem.
You can't beat him and you never will.

Tony Greenstein said...

Anonymous asks 'Who said it [Zionism] is the Solution to the Jewish Question'?

Theodore Herzl, acknowledged as the founding father of political Zionism. His pamphlet Der Judenstaat (The State of the Jews or Jewish State) is subtitled 'A Modern Attempt at a Solution of the Jewish Question!.

You don't have to be sent by anyone to be a settler-colonial. Boers weren't sent by anyone, certainly not by the colonial power Britain. Colonisation is the forcible occupation and dispossession of the land of the indigenous population and the theft of their resources and country. Whether they do it off their own bat or at the behest of the country that sent them is irrelevant. Or did the American settlers cease to be settler-colonists because they had won their war of independence?

If so tell that to the Amerindians butchered in the expansion to the West.

Yes Atzmon is our problem but caused by you. You claimed that Israel and Zionism are equivalent to being Jewish and Atzmon has taken you at your word. He is indeed the bastard son of Israel.

Anonymous said...

Tony Greenstein you write Theodore Herzl, acknowledged as the founding father of political Zionism. His pamphlet Der Judenstaat (The State of the Jews or Jewish State) is subtitled 'A Modern Attempt at a Solution of the Jewish Question!.
You are no just wrong, but completely out of context, Herzl maybe gathered many ideas into one Utopia formula, the Issue of coming back to Israel, just needed to have an historical main event as every process, if the historical events were not occurring, it would happened in the need future, with no connection to his vision, I guess you would not even know about his existence.
Going back to the Colonial issue, the Jews who came to Israel cannot be compared to the Boers.....
Did the Boers had any Historical, religious you name it connection to South Africa... or your uk Brothers that went to America.
The Jews CAME BACK to their homeland.
Or you suggest as many that there is no connection between the Jews of our time (khazars) and the old time Jews.
If you can't distinguish between the Boers cause of going to S.A and the Jews.
You certainly have a problem with all the Jews (coming back to Jerusalem is a basic thing in the bible, if you are Jewish) Atzmon and as I said, you will never beat him, as he won at the first place.
All your ego fights, just makes a Joke out of the Jews and give this scum credibility he never got in Israel.

Sarah AB said...

I think you forgot to click 'copy' before you pasted the second email as it seems exactly the same as the first?

Anonymous said...

Sarah AB
Read both comments again.
Guess you forgot to click on your brain to undesrtand what you are reading.

Sarah AB said...

Anonymous - I should have made it clear that I was addressing TG not you - I was referring to two of the emails from GK.

Tony Greenstein said...

Sarah

thanks for pointing out the errors. I've made the necessary corrections. I assume that you are the same Sarah AB that did 2 posts on Harry's Place http://tinyurl.com/4x9df6b/
and
http://tinyurl.com/3jjes7x

I was pleasantly surprised when there was a post on Harry's Place which attempted, rather than the usual public school infantile yah booh abuse, to be fair and objective. A rare thing with a site which is usually a sewer when it comes to anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racism. [just swap 'Jews' for 'Muslim' on these posts and you get the flavour].

However Sarah came under pressure from the usual sources - those who referred to the nastly little anti-Communist Paul Bogdanor's site, an out and out Atzmon collaborators Mikey Ezra, who believes quoting himself is a good academic practice and foul mouthed fools such as the appropriately named Sackcloth & Ashes.

Sarah, who had all the courage of Nick Clegg when brought into order by Cameron, promptly demonstrates why Zionists were never trusted by the anti-fascist opposition in Europe.

She therefore added to one of her 2 HP po sts that 'although, when I wrote this post, I knew enough about Tony Greenstein to realize that my views are very different from his, I felt it was important to acknowledge as fully and accurately as possible the differences between anti-zionists such as TG and someone like Atzmon, and not to conflate them together when (as seems to have been the case with this event) anti-zionists, however much their views differ from those of most HP readers, do not want to be associated with Atzmon. Commenters have provided information about TG which reveals him to have articulated views which are still more objectionable than I had previously thought, and in some cases simply horrific – for example saying he wouldn’t care if any number of innocent people were vaporised – but I will keep the information from his blog as it is relevant to the post.'

Tony Greenstein said...

And then she went on to close all the comments!

Let us deal with the vaporisation comment. If Sarah was old enough to remember Bob Dylan's 'Masters of War' - 'I wish that you would die and your death would come soon' she would realise that I wished the death of the war mongers.

I specifically mentioned Bush, Cheney and Blair - all responsible for over one million deaths in Iraq itself and who would be worth successors to Streicher and Hoess on the gallows. And I also wished that both John Hagee and his fellow leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention (you know the one who described Hitler as god's messenger and who had provided the religious stamp of approval for wars) and Aipac whose sole purpose is to increase the misery and the death toll amongst Palestinians.

To all of them I wish as unpleasant end as possible. That is what they deserve. Innocent? I doubt it.

Tony Greenstein said...

More to the point, Sarah also misses out somewhere on the following:

i. Zionists do not oppose Atzmon. Never have. They have an interest solely in showing that he is representative of anti-Zionism, whereas in fact he is an anti-Semite and racist and that alone.

Hence why David Taube, who runs HP, could write about how, on March 19 2007 Mikey Ezra

‘invited me for a drink with Gilad Atzmon.’ Taube was quite bowled over. Atzmon was ‘utterly charming and a delightful drinking companion’ entertaining them with his new album in the taxi home.

‘Is Gilad Atzmon a racist?’ Taube asks. He answers his own question thus:
‘Not in the narrow sense of being preoccupied by genetic differences between people, certainly. He is rather, I think, a ‘cultural essentialist’.

it goes without saying that Gilad Atzmon has a somewhat eccentric way of viewing the world. It owes something, as we know, to the writings of “Israel Shamir” and Paul Eisen, although he holds Heidegger in high regard.’

ii. We also have Mikey Ezra who as I said was Atzmon's collaborator, and however much he wheezes with indignation now the fact is that he acted as Atzmon's little informer:

Mikey, can you provide us with the criminal record of this Bugger-Rance. Is he on spent conviction like greenie l or is he just an ordinary liar?
Gilad Atzmon | 03.12.07 - 8:00 pm | #

I have been very busy digging up stuff on Tony Greenstein - Roland Rance will have to wait for another day.
Mikey | 03.12.07 - 8:53 pm | #
‘Mikey, I hope you do not mind me saying that, but your contribution for the pls solidarity movement is priceless. It is crucial that we all know about the racist record of this Greenpiss, a man who was banned time after time for being a racist and an anti Semite!
I really want to believe that this revolting violent man will feel some shame and take some time off to think about it all. But I doubt it.’
Gilad Atzmon | 03.04.07 - 10:46 am | #
http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1706
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/thecutter/117192641046077827/ no longer accessible
Again, again, I believe that Zionists like you can cope with philosophical thinking because Zionism is a Jewish ideological stand. RK, Ben Gurion and later Begin and Shmuel Tamir were operating within different interpretation of the very the same ideology. The political and legal aspects are nothing but a cover up of the real meaning of this saga.
You can cope with it, Greenie and Brenner can't.
However, Good luck with Greenie and thanks for all the info you gave us about this low being.
Peace is the way forward
G
Gilad Atzmon | 03.08.07 - 4:02 pm |
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/thecutter/117192641046077827/

‘Mikey, I hope you do not mind me saying that, but your contribution for the pls solidarity movement is priceless. It is crucial that we all know about the racist record of this Greenpiss, a man who was banned time after time for being a racist and an anti Semite!
I really want to believe that this revolting violent man will feel some shame and take some time off to think about it all. But I doubt it.’
Gilad Atzmon | 03.04.07 - 10:46 am | #

iii. Zionists in this country no regularly demonstrate alongide the EDL, who parade with the Israeli flag when giving their Hitler salutes. Perhaps Sarah has an explanation?

iv. And perhaps she has an explanation for why every significant far-right and fascist party in Europe, with the exception of Hungary's Jobbik, are devoted supporters of Israel.

Fact is Sarah you took the coward's way out and succumbed to the anti-Zionist=anti-Semitism crap of your fellows. And it is precisely because of this equation that Atzmon has developed a space in which to spread his poison.

Sarah AB said...

I was put under no pressure to add what I did - I really do find some of what you say quite shocking. Although I began covering the Atzmon thing out of concern about antisemitism - I then, believe it or not, thought how awful it was that the Palestinians had to be 'represented' by someone like him. I don't feel that I should have to answer for the tastes of far right parties in Europe. I don't believe most Zionists are into the EDL.

Tony Greenstein said...

Sarah,

there is more than one way of pressurising someone. I judged by some of the comments that pressure was applied and I have no doubt you felt it to.

If you have as you say covered the Atzmon thing from the beginning then it is remarkable that you've come to the conclusion that I am anti-Semitic.

There is such a long history of accusations that anti-Zionists are anti-Semitic that it is what we call 'trite law'. Jonathan Hoffman openly says that aZ=aS as do many others. The examples are legion and e.g. included the late Tony Judt for example.

Clearly I can be accused of anti-Semitism as a term of abuse but anti-Semitism before being redefined via Zionism and the EUMC was quite specific - racism against Jews AS Jews - discrimination/hatred/violence etc. Opposition to Israel is no different to opposition to any other Apartheid state.

And if anti-Semitism is the metre then what would you say if Jews in Britain could not rent or lease 'national land' or if demonstrations marched to the chant of 'death to the Jews' as they used to if only places Jews lived were 'unrecognised' or Jews couldn't work in 'security related' industry etc. The examples of discrimination against even Israeli Arabs are too legion to mention and yet you avert your eyes. All the above would be rightly seen as anti-Semitic.

Palestinians are not represented by Atzmon - they have never elected him. Palestinians and Arabs are generally mystified by anti-Semitism because it wasn't a political condition that affected Arabia, for a no. of reasons to complicated to go into, but primarily that Arab countries were still in a state of pre-capitalist development. Hence why the Jews of Spain fled primarily to the Maghreb and Europe or why Arabs did not imitate the behaviour of sections of Europe, in particular the Ukraine and Baltic Republics, where there was considerable collaboration with the Nazis in the round up etc. of Jews. It just didn't happen which is why about 1% of Jews in the Arab countries occupied by Nazi Germany and its allies died.

The issue over holocaust denial in Arab countries and also Asia I might add is entirely different from what happens in Europe where the holocaust happened. Here it is to deny what the deniers would like to repeat. In Arab countries it is to deny the legitimacy of Israel, whose supporters use the holocaust. That is why I recommended you and others read Gilbert Achchar's book on Arabs and the Holocaust.

No I'm not expecting you to answer for European far-right parties and their support for Zionism and Israel. Merely to ask yourself WHY such parties should support Zionism and what it tells you about the movement you support.

And no I'm sure most Zionists don't support the EDL and yet the Zionist Federation is yet to put a statement on its web site explicitly condemning the EDL and stating that its presence is not wanted on further demonstrations. And again you could ask yourself what it is about Israel that is so attractive to this group of racists and fascists.

Anonymous said...

Ii see that you moderated my Comment.
What bothered you, that I linked between you and Atzmon ????

I guess you like to read only your comments.

Tony Greenstein said...

Nope I moderated you because that's what I do when Zionists become abusive. You have HP and many other places to swear and libel.

If you have anything to say, regardless of whether I agree and you're not a fascist or holocaust denier or an overt racist then you can post by all means.

But I have a lot of abusive comments from Zios sent here - you know things like I wished you perished in Auschwitz (which came in the same day as someone who said there was no holocaust!) so both were moderated.

But if you have something to say then that's fine.

Since there are no links between me and Jazzman I doubt if even you can invent them. Of course in your mind there's always links though it was Israel that literally gave birth to him.

And I also like people to give their names, especially if they are being abusive! It's called honesty.

Alon said...

There was nothing abusive in my comment.
It all had connections to your comment, but as you are the BOSS in your land, you give yourself the freedom to say what ever you want.
I just mentioned that your remark :
Zionists do not oppose Atzmon. Never have.
Is not just stupid but funny.....
and as you mentioned that for you Atzmon is the bastard of Israel.
for me you are the Bastard of the jews, as you compare the Boers with the Jews.
I guess in your logic they had a religious, historical, spiritual connection to South Africa before they arrived .

I found your comments much more abusive.
I guess its hard for you to accept, that you will never beat Atzmon and you will live with him till you are gone.
he is the mirror that just tell you how useless your ideas are.
we see him as a nut case, but he is playing your melody but in another tune, but he rips you apart.

Tony Greenstein said...

It's not a question of being boss, although Israel is quite good at being boss over the Palestinians and I don't hear you complaining.

Zionists don't oppose Atzmon on the contrary they feed him. He is the son of Israel, literally. He saw, to his credit, what Israel did and does to the Palestinians, drew the conclusion it had nothing to do with Zionism, and blamed it on the Jews.

You do the same. I said that Atzmon and Atzmonism is the bastard fruit of Israel. Clearly it is. And you in your post personalise it to myself, which is the reason last time I deleted your comment as I'm happy to debate Zionists but not to let things degenerate into another HP where ad hominems take the place of reasoned argument.

You think I am the bastard of the Jews. Well leaving aside the grammatical concepts involved, you again betray the anti-Semitism of Zionism of which Atzmon is a part. There is no such thing as 'the Jews' it was an anti-semitic invention that Zionism takes up. When Jews were a force in Europe and when there were large numbers of working class Jews, Zionism was a minority, the crazy schema of middle class Jewish youth.

Unsurprisingly if Israel claims to act on behalf of Jews worldwide some take them at their word and become anti-Semitic, i.e. anti-Jewish as a result. it is quite logical and in fact Zionism is not unhappy about anti-Semitism that drives Jews to Israel.

That is why Zionists have not been able to combat Atzmon when he has reared his head because they have too much in common - hence the drinks with Taube and Mikey Ezra and the latters role as an informer. A role some Zionists played very well in Nazi occupied Europe.

want.
I just mentioned that your remark :
Zionists do not oppose Atzmon. Never have.
Is not just stupid but funny.....
and as you mentioned that for you Atzmon is the bastard of Israel.
for me you are the Bastard of the jews, as you compare the Boers with the Jews.
I guess in your logic they had a religious, historical, spiritual connection to South Africa before they arrived .

I found your comments much more abusive.
I guess its hard for you to accept, that you will never beat Atzmon and you will live with him till you are gone.
he is the mirror that just tell you how useless your ideas are.
we see him as a nut case, but he is playing your melody but in another tune, but he rips you apart.

Alon said...

"for me you are the Bastard of the jews, as you compare the Boers with the Jews.
I guess in your logic they had a religious, historical, spiritual connection to South Africa before they arrived ".

You never answered this question,
As "Zionism as a form of settler-colonialism." is the base to all your correspondence, which is meaningless, as the jewish coming back to Israel has no term or equivalent in history and your pathetic attempts to use your clasical "Anti-Zionist" terms are rediculous and don't give you any credit .
Using slogans and all kind of irrelevant "pseudo-intellectual" terms, dose'nt make your point stronger, but wicker, as you use terms, without any connection to the main topic.
I belong to the "Jewish people" for me there are "the jews" as they always been for 2000 years, Atzmon among some other Israeli Nut's are not taken seriously (Combat what the hell are u talking about) Atzmon is known maybe in the Sewerage
circle of the extreme left (ex Matzpen that are still waiting for the Marxist revolution and are seen as those who are waiting for the prince from Disney stories), I do not debate as a Zionist, you see Zionism as some definition you mix with your problematic life as a Jew, while for me it is my life, I do not consider myself as a Zionist as it is part of me, part of my heritage, part of my destiny.

Guess you will have to be beaten over and over again by Atzmon, but this is your problem not mine.

Tony Greenstein said...

Well you are getting more het up Alon and saying even less that makes sense.

Yes I compare the Boers with the Israelis - not Jews or are you dumb. I refer to Zionist immigrants to Israel not Jews - so try and get that through what passes for a brain.

Yes the Boers did think they had a religious, historical and spiritual connection to South Africa. They referred to the Bible to justify their presence and designated Black Africans as the son of ham.

Yes you idiot. Zionism is not unique in using god to justify their adventures. Try reading the words of Bob Dylan's God on Their Side.

As Dr Verwoerd, the spiritual author of Apartheid and Prime Minister of South Africa noted: “The Jews took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs lived there for a 1000 years. In this I agree with them. Israel like South Africa is an apartheid- state.” Rand Daily Mail, 23.11.61

And after the state visit of John Vorster in April 1976 the Jerusalem Post commented on the conclusion of a pact between Israel and South Africa, that:

"The Afrikaners were especially enthusiastic... seeing a similarity of interest in two 'white' nations at the head and foot of the African continent waging lonely fights for survival against overwhelming black numbers.

Zionism was therefore not unique. There was no political significance to the 'next year in Jerusalem' mumbo jumbo - its meaning is very clear, next year we will be free. That is why for hundreds of years, when Jerusalem was part of the Ottoman Empire, very few Jews migrated to Palestine except the religious who wished to die there.

Hence why the Old Yishuv as Weizmann termed it was anti-Zionist. They didn't welcome the Zionist interlopers which is why the leader of Agudat Yisrael Jacob de Haan was murdered by the Zionists in the early 1920's.

You may think Zionism as a form of settler-colonialism is meaningless, but if you were Palestinian and white settlers came across your land and confiscated it because their religion tells them that 2,000 years ago their ancestors lived there, it wouldn't be so meaningless. But imagination is clearly not one of your strongest points.

There is no 'jewish coming back to Israel' because the tribespeople in animal skins who were Canannites who sometimes worshipped Jehovah millenia ago were one of many tribes who wandered around the area. They had no political significance. That came when people like you rewrote history.

The Jews of Palestine either left two thousand years ago, because the land couldn't support them or they were traders, or they assimilated or converted to Christianity and then Islam. So the people who are the victims of your colonial settlement have much greater claims to connections with the Hebrew tribes of old than you fucking Zionists.

Try reading Shlomo Sands Myth of the Jewish Nation, which really just brings together things which were always understood such as Arthur Koestler's 13th tribe referring to the Khazari tribes where many European Jews originated.

Your myth of the 'Jewish return' is no different from the Aryan myths of the 1,000 year German Reich. That's why Nazi theorists and Zionists got on so famously.

You say you belong to the Jewish people. You may as well belong to the Martians since there is no such people. If you are saying French and Indian Jews are one people then you are saying no more than most common and garden anti-Semites say, that Jews wherever they live owe loyalty only to their own and are forever aliens.

Yes that's right. Zionism, a product of late 19th century colonialism was a separatist movement which took anti-Semitism as its starting point.

Atzmon is the product of Zionism. You've said so long that 'the Jews' are responsible for the Palestinian plight that some like him have taken you at your word. Yet he belongs in the sewer alongside most Zionists.

Atzmon never beat us and never will. He is our problem and your asset. Like Caliban you should look in the mirror.

Avi said...

Tony, I have followed your blog for some time now, and it has been a real eye opener for me. Much of what you write here shocks me, but I can see that you are trying to get to the bottom of the central issues -- Some of what you say makes sense to me now, but it has been an uphill path for me, trying to process it.

However, I am very disappointed that you were unable to stop Atzmon. I am frankly too old to demonstrate and shout loudly, but I was in the area, and I was expecting a picket and a loud presence from your side and the Harry's Place lot, who I know you don't like, but I thought you were unified on the matter at least.

Please, somebody has to stop Atzmon from expressing his , frankly, outrageous and disgusting views. I used to be more in tune with Harry's Place than your side of the debate to be honest, but can't we join and agree on that? I know Aaronovitch, Cohen and Kamm have tried, and I admire them for that,even though it was a sad sight to see Atzmon debate them in a vile manner.However,on the plus side, it showed up Atzmon's nasty views to the max.

Jacobson too has admirably shown him up in the public sphere with his recent book's characterisation of Atzmon, but they have only been partially successful.

We need a team effort now to stop him.

Tony said...

Having attended Atzmon's talk last night I can confirm that Alan Hart was there and also two other speakers beside Atzmon himself.
"So not a panel of One"

Tony Greenstein said...

excellent. I'm glad Alan Hart attended as it means he's nailed his colours to the mast. Mind he lied about attending to one of our supporters

Raul Reeve said...

The problem with this blog is, it confirms Atzmon's analysis to the letter. Atzmon's supporters would do well not to read Greenstein - he makes us complacent.

Sarah AB said...

Avi - as an 'HP person' my view was that - once Westminster University was no longer (unwittingly, essentially) involved and once the panel had shifted - the main concern was the presence of Sabbagh, who seemed in a different league from the others. But I was sure Palestinian advocates would let him know what he was getting into, and if he wanted to appear on that panel, that's up to him. I felt it was such a marginalised event that it didn't need a protest. Maybe I'm wrong - but I felt that anyone who attended, and thought it was all perfectly fine, would be unlikely to have their views changed.

Anonymous said...

Gilad Atzmon did not ask to be in Israel (Read: Zionist occupied areas of Palestine). He is a proud British citizen now. Perhaps lay off your attacks on a very sincere man with a firm sense of justice.

Tony Greenstein said...

I have never said Atzmon did ask to be born in Israel. Like most people, he had no choice over where he was born.

He is held accountable for what he says now not where he is born. But the place and society of his birth is clearly relevant to how his ideas were formed.

I also don't know what it means to be a 'proud' British citizen. What is there to be proud of? Our record in Palestine, Iraq, Kenyaj, Ireland or maybe the entrenched system of class derived from feudalism with its titles and pomp.

So as with most Atzmon supporters you miss the point and bore us with complete irrelevancies. It's no wonder you don't give your name!

As for a profound sense of justice. Perhaps you should tell that to the Palestinian singer he played with Reem Kilani, whose songs he copywrighted or indeed how he came to rip off Mahmoud Darwish by again copywriting his works.

The man is a scoundrel who uses the Palestinian cause for his own purposes.