tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post6009154198657478809..comments2024-03-28T04:26:49.354+00:00Comments on Tony Greenstein's Blog: Norman Finkelstein –A Wasted Opportunity & Self-IndulgenceTony Greensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14300640929161205370noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-72858673767710299532012-04-10T03:29:24.295+01:002012-04-10T03:29:24.295+01:00The political character of Finkelstein is stereoty...The political character of Finkelstein is stereotyped in the manner of Chomsky, as making reference to the TSS as pragmatic diplomacy, corresponding to the international consensus. Well, it appears to me that Finkelstein is tied to a further rationale which is related to the national-identity of the Israeli-Jewish nation, which implies a political identity. Unfortunately Finkelstein only conceives of this identity in the Zionist political sense of a 'Jewish' State, whatever that is supposed to be. As such he carries a Zionist grain of thought because he cannot conceive of any other political identity. Nonetheless Finkelstein refers to a inescapable presence that cannot be included in the definition proposed by the term 'Arab Palestine', for example. Even a OSS of equal citizens does not provide for the collective identity of the Israeli-Jewish Nation. The manner by which such a minority nationality may be included in a common Society of Palestine in the State that is presently Israel, must be the federated model with National-Cultural Autonomy for each nation concerned. That is why the OSS is not a solution in and of itself. It does not go far enough.dr. abraham Weizfeldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08127854255666175869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-2930612218878786242012-03-04T15:36:04.045+00:002012-03-04T15:36:04.045+00:00This article leaves a lot to be desired. It quote...This article leaves a lot to be desired. It quotes, for example, the International Criminal Court in Europe as the highest legal authority and dismisses it as being only used against anti-Western criminals, which I agree with the latter, but it is not the court to which Finkelstein refers constantly and consistently which is the ICJ, the International Court of Justice which deals with STATES not people!<br /><br />Indeed, the ICJ is so well respected that the 'dreadful dictator' Gaddafi of Libya instantly recognized their judgement over a land issue between Libya and Chad and withdrew the Libyan troops immediately on hearing the voice.<br /><br />Also, to name the UN as is here is ridiculous. The UN is a flawed institution but it does have a wide membership of all countries. The main problem with the UN is the UNSC where certain nations who have nuclear weapons get to exercise the veto and so undermine the validity of the argument.<br /><br />Finkelstein appears to have become arrogant perhaps, but then he is from Blooklyn and I think such a disposition may be inherent from this background. He's direct and he's getting weary I believe. I understand it. <br /><br />IF we choose to disregard the idea of a state of Palestine then we accept that Israel takes all the territory of Palestine.<br /><br />IF we can accept that Israel takes all the territory of Palestine then what's the decades of struggle all been for? Who wins? No one!<br /><br />TO me, it's like swimming across the Atlantic Ocean and seeing the shore on the far side, having a strong tide pushing back against you, which you have known will be the case from the day you set out, only to decide (or have someone else decide) you should abandon this swim and instead start swimming the Pacific instead!<br /><br />Madness!<br /><br />I believe the idea of a one state solution is exactly and precisely what Israel wants! I believe the half dozen ideas of what the solution should look like are splitting the issue and dividing the movement which wants, quite genuinely, to see a real just solution.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-88066938880357499322011-11-21T21:21:36.347+00:002011-11-21T21:21:36.347+00:00norm self describes his position as "pretty t...norm self describes his position as "pretty tame" in a 2008 state of nature interview NF: Academia is a pretty open place. I was not driven from my post because of my opinions, but because I was politically active. By the standards of the ivory tower, my views on the Israel-Palestine conflict are pretty tame: I don�t oppose the two-state settlement, I don�t extenuate Palestinian terrorism, and I do not define myself as anti-Zionist.ricorochanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-68001704287007588112011-11-15T16:46:53.137+00:002011-11-15T16:46:53.137+00:00Elam
thanks for the links and yes, I'd be gra...Elam<br /><br />thanks for the links and yes, I'd be grateful for Daniel's e-mail address.<br /><br />Agree about primary research but, as you say, it can be time consuming and expensive, having only done a little of it myself, although it has is own rewards.<br /><br />Ruth Linn's book, although very short and she herself was an Education Prof. was very interesting, not least because she approached the whole subject afresh.<br /><br />I did have an exchange of e-mails with her a few years ago because I found, and still find, the whole topic fascinating, how they the Zionist historians tried to erase him from memory.<br /><br />ALso, unlike both the Zionist historians (and ironically Lenni Brenner) he has no time for Weissmandel's and Gizi Fleischmann's Europa scheme to bribe the Nazis (having falsely believed they had stopped the Slovakian deportations with bribery in September/October 1924).<br /><br />Although not a historian, Linn put her finger on the way that the Zionist historians, led by Bauer, have deliberately tried to absolve the Judenrat as an institution, by reference to the dilemmas and consciences of their members, despite them having been an essential cog in the machinery of extermination.<br /><br />My own view of holocaust research, which I'd never have time for, is that we know the basics now, although individual nuggests will still turn up. The real question is how do we interpret the holocaust in terms of the Zionist 'strategic memory' (Dawidowicz) e.g. the idea that if Israel had existed 10 years before it gained independence then there would have been no holocaust and likewise that the Zionists were the only ones with answers.<br /><br />This is one of the main reasons why Vrba and Marek Edelman were eliminated from history by Yad Vashem.<br /><br />It will be interesting to know what you think that Kasztner was threatening to reveal. I've no doubt the Israeli government was up to its neck in it. I assume you've read Shoshan Barri's article in the Journal of Israeli History 18:1 'The question of Kastner's Testimonies on behalf of Nazi war Criminals'.<br /><br />In essence she accepts that Kasztner's actions weren't that of a lone individual but the Jewish Agency. The question is what else they knew and sanctionedTony Greensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14300640929161205370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-66178575842644193502011-11-15T16:39:09.155+00:002011-11-15T16:39:09.155+00:00My report on Norman's lecture at LSE Students&...My report on Norman's lecture at LSE Students' Union on 20 Feb 2004 can still be read here<br /><br /><br />http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JustPeaceUK/message/10816<br /><br />shorter link:-<br /><br />http://yhoo.it/tVM3GlBrian Robinsonhttp://musicweaver.users.btopenworld.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-16210319246108266652011-11-15T16:34:34.892+00:002011-11-15T16:34:34.892+00:00I thought long and hard before allowing this inane...I thought long and hard before allowing this inane comment about Shraga and the '2 kinds of' holocaust denier.<br /><br />I have never even read one word in which Shraga Elam, with whom I've had many disagreements, is a holocaust denier. Not one.<br /><br />This kind of Zionist blackguarding demonstrates conclusively that not only do you not give a toss about holocaust denial but YOU ACTUALLY WELCOME IT. Why? Because in your twisted little minds, the existence of holocaust denial enables you to 'prove' that Jews are still under threat.<br /><br />Just as Zionist activists welcome anti-Semitism as 'proving' how necessary Zionism is. And when there is no anti-Semitism they go and create or simulate it.Tony Greensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14300640929161205370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-77824885122668635702011-11-15T14:50:28.701+00:002011-11-15T14:50:28.701+00:00I don't deny that Finkelstein's book did h...I don't deny that Finkelstein's book did have an impact. That doesn't make the book any better and is no indication of its quality. <br />You don't have to be an expert on the Judeocide in order to make a good research into the Holocaust industry. There are many archives open and there are still some witnesses alive. So this is no excuse for using mainly secondary literature. Of course it needs more time and might be expensive, but this is very important. It is a fact that there are not enough good researches made on the Holocaust industry and similar subject and those that are made don't get enough attention and I'm not talking only about my own researches.<br />Netty e.g. talked with several people and I also interviewed some involved persons, as did other Israeli journalists. <br />Here is a link to Wikipedia on Wilkomirski:<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binjamin_Wilkomirski. <br />There is a list of publications at the end. If you want Daniel's mail I can send it privately (he was BTW a Trozkyite).<br />I know Ruthie Linn personally. She is no expert on the subject and she deals only with the Verba's story. Still because she is mainstream prof. she found some holes in the system and used them to publish a Hebrew translation of Verba's book. It wasn't easy even for her.<br />I hope to be able soon to publish some new interesting things about how Kasztner was killed by the Shin Beth in order to prevent him disclosing uncomfortable things for the Israeli government...Shraga Elamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10823782332267359038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-44298459917127107572011-11-15T09:47:43.047+00:002011-11-15T09:47:43.047+00:00Oh I see that there are 2 kinds of Antisemite Holo...Oh I see that there are 2 kinds of Antisemite Holocaust deniers .<br />Those you have conversation with (Shraga) and those you try to block their ideas with all kind of stupid stories (Atzmon)<br />What a hyp·o·crite.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-46154905174508756232011-11-15T01:46:47.701+00:002011-11-15T01:46:47.701+00:00Yes I've heard of Isi Leibler but not Netty. ...Yes I've heard of Isi Leibler but not Netty. Yes I would like to see her writings and that of Wilkomirsky. I agree with your point about the culpability of the Swiss banks.<br /><br />Part of the problem with the Holocaust is precisely that it has been sanctified and turned, literally, into another Jewish festival rather than a means of understanding the past. Fascism itself is almost missing in Zionist accounts, most notably Goldhagen's execrable book.<br /><br />Despite your criticism of Finkelstein's work and Holocaust Industry, it certainly achieved a political impact and I found it very interesting. Likewise his critique of Goldhagen's Germans: Hitler's Willing Executioners was something I agreed with in particular.<br /><br />Given he's not a holocaust historian, of which there are very few on the anti-Zionist side (have you read Ruth Linn's book on the Culture of Silence - re Vrba?) then it's not surprising that he will go to the secondary literature.<br /><br />I doubt that anyone will surpass Hilberg anyway when it comes to raw research and the ability to construct an overall explanation of the killing machine. The failure to publish his magnus opus, because of their twin addictions to resistance and also the Judenrat and collaboration, was their own loss.Tony Greensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14300640929161205370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-13502559816785508822011-11-15T00:10:40.561+00:002011-11-15T00:10:40.561+00:00Tony, I would say that NF brought to the attentio...Tony, I would say that NF brought to the attention of certain circles the problems around the JCC. Actually in the mainstream Jewish world Netty's revelations were like a bomb. I believe that in 1999 I drew Norm's attention to her work and the whole issue. He was at that time only concerned with the issue of his parents and the Claims Conference.<br />He relies, like he does in other publications, mainly on what is called secondary literature and hardly on primary source. He mentioned Netty's very important research but mentioned her name only in a footnote. This is in my eyes immoral.<br />His work isn't very systematic. He doesn't differentiate between the Holocaust Industry and Religion and doesn't tell the whole story of the industry which didn't start with the JCC but with the Transfer Agreement of 1953 and it isn't just the JCC.<br />You can find references to Netty's work here: http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=897 <br /> The author, Isi Leibler like Netty are both Zionists. I'll ask her to send me her articles on the issue and will forward them to you privately, if she agrees.<br />There are some articles in English mentioning Ganzfried's work on Wilkomirsky and you'll find them for sure. Otherwise I'll ask him to send them to you (he wrote also a book about it).<br />Concerning the Swiss banks; although it is true that the Jewish restitutions organizations, the Holocaust Industry (the JCC wasn't a player in this game) were not pursuing justice, but their own interests. It is also true that the assets of Jewish Nazi victims deposited in Switzerland were much lower than what the Swiss banks agreed to pay, but that doesn't mean that these banks were innocent.<br /><br />This is what I wrote few years ago: <br />"In 1998 the Swiss banks agreed to pay a $1.25 billion global settlement, much more than the actual size of the heirless Jewish assets. The banks, nevertheless, brokered a favorable deal as the agreement excluded the Nazi loot that the Swiss had refused to return after WWII. Assets of IG Farben, a large company deeply involved in the Auschwitz project, for example, were appropriated by the Swiss Bank UBS with the support of the Swiss government. These assets alone are estimated to be around $3 billion.<br />Jewish organizations claimed they had pressed for a quick deal with the Swiss banks because Shoa survivors were passing away. Seven years later, however, only about half of the sum, around half a billion dollars, has been distributed and this is only due to very generous eligibility criteria. The fate of the rest of the money is still an object of dispute. It is quite clear that these Jewish organizations and Israel calculated (and still do) that they could profit from the arrangement, since it was unlikely that heirs would be found for the majority of the unclaimed assets in Switzerland." <br />http://www.badil.org/en/al-majdal/item/937-the-holocaust-industry-doesn%5C%27t-act-against-israel-as-it-did-against-switzerland <br />Another older article on the issue:<br />http://arendt-art.de/deutsch/Stimmen_Israel_juedische/shraga_elam_zionism_judeocide_nazi_assets_switzerland.htmShraga Elamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10823782332267359038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-78846921637232617512011-11-14T19:24:42.118+00:002011-11-14T19:24:42.118+00:00Brian,
thanks for the links to the audio files. ...Brian,<br /><br />thanks for the links to the audio files. As far as your question goes, I don't have a crystal ball (otherwise I'd be very rich and lazy, not maybe just very rich, maybe not even that!).<br /><br />But when you say we've got to carry people with you then that is up to campaigners for a particular idea. If those on our side argue for a reactionary solution, which is what NF is doing, then that is simply a cover.<br /><br />But I actually don't agree. We already have a one state, the question is what type of state. A democratic or a Jewish state? Now I do indeed believe that the demand for equal rights, i.e. that everyone living in Greater Israel i.e. Palestine should have a vote, an equal say in their own future etc. is very attractive. I fear NF hasn't done much street canvassing recently.<br /><br />And because in reality Israel's leaders are adamantly opposed to an independent sovereign state of Palestine, for the reasons I & Moshe Dayan argue (!), then I don't think 1 state is any further off. Indeed significant voices like Avraham Burg, former speaker of the Knesset, now support such a solution.<br /><br />I just don't accept this is some pie in the sky idea that relates to nothing practical. And even if you say, well the Palestinians (50% I think NF cited) support 2 states as opposed to 1 state, if you pursue it a little further and ask the 50% which would they prefer - 1 or 2 states, I think you will find the overwhelming majority will answer 1 state.<br /><br />Thanks Naomi. It is important that in our opposition to Zionist exceptionalism we don't fall into the trap of Palestinian exceptionalism. Partition has been tried in a number of ex-colonies - India, Cyprus, Ireland - and it has always been an unmitigated disaster. That was why the ANC was correct to oppose those who wanted it in South Africa.<br /><br />Shraga. <br /><br />I knew that Finkelstein supports 2 States for some time now. I heard him argue this at Sussex 2-3 and 5-6 years ago and I tackled him about it then. But at those times he was speaking about the Palestinian cause, the rightfulness of their case and actually, when I first heard him I was very impressed. <br /><br />He argued that it is wrong for people to say the Palestine issue is 'complicated' when in fact it is very simple. Settlers came and they dispossed the indigenous and of course if you want a Jewish ethnic state then inevitably you will have to expel the non-Jewish part of the population.<br /><br />I didn't know any of this background to Holocaust Industry and assumed it was all original. What can be said though is that NF popularised this information and certainly that about the Jewish Claims conference. As to whether <br /><br />I would be interested in particular to read Netty C. Gross in the Jerusalem Report in 1997 and will try and google it.<br /><br />Nor did I know about the true origins of the story of the alleged Auschwitz survivor "Wilkomirsky". <br /><br />I'm not sure why you say that 'Norman also wrote a factual and moral false defense of the Swiss banks' role during the Nazi era.' It is true that he minimises their role, from memory, citing the Report that was commissioned into the affair. But if you are saying that that Report was wrong, although again from memory its Chairman was a Zionist and involved in the claims themselves or had been, then again I'd be interested in the details.Tony Greensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14300640929161205370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-45009443250158729382011-11-14T15:33:52.600+00:002011-11-14T15:33:52.600+00:00Thanks very much for this Tony - in particular put...Thanks very much for this Tony - in particular putting partition in the Indian context, and your entirely realistic prediction of the disaster that 2 state would be. Even if Finkelstein is right that the BDS apartheid demand is untenable (which I obviously don't believe, and dropping it would create a faster 'solution', such a solution would only lead to an even worse situation for the Palestinians. Human rights are indivisible.<br /><br />On the point of solidarity, I solidly agree with the first anonymous - that anti-colonialist movements must be anti-colonial in nature. However, I also agree with Tony that one doesn't have to follow all the Palestinians' demands - for the simple reasons, that such would be impossible, given the diversity of Palestinian views and political groupings. My point is that once, as an international, one decides to support a particular Pal campaign, one supports it; one doesn't attempt to steer it. Hope that clarifies the argument I make in the blog.<br /><br />best,<br />NaomiNaomi Foylehttp://www.bwisp.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-42925359742732961872011-11-14T15:17:06.607+00:002011-11-14T15:17:06.607+00:00Tony,
I don't understand your disappointment ...Tony,<br /><br />I don't understand your disappointment of Finkelstein. It isn't new that he supports the so called TSS. His understanding of the ME conflict is very limited and highly overestimated. Even what you consider to be his great achievement "The Holocaust Industry" is a very weak book on the research side. There are much better and more founded publications on the issue as e.g. of Netty C. Gross in the Jerusalem Report in 1997.<br />Somebody wrote that the good passages of the book are not original and the original passages are mostly not good.<br />Even the term Holocaust Industry wasn't invented by Norman. Prof. Benny Beit-Halahmi used it an article in 1992 and doesn't consider himself to be the inventor.<br />In his highly polemic book Norman doesn't give also a due credit to my friend Daniel Ganzfried, who had discovered the faked identity of the alleged Auschwitz survivor "Wilkomirsky". Norman also wrote a factual and moral false defense of the Swiss banks' role during the Nazi era.Shraga Elamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10823782332267359038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-16112391988551948232011-11-14T13:07:51.920+00:002011-11-14T13:07:51.920+00:00My own copies of the audiofiles, as an alternative...My own copies of the audiofiles, as an alternative to those on the BRICUP site:-<br /><br />The Finkelstein-Rosenhead discussion (afternoon 11-11-11) is at http://bit.ly/sR9nbp<br /><br />Finkelstein's evening Lecture is at http://bit.ly/tzn2t4<br /><br />The short Q&A session is here http://bit.ly/sP9bNt<br /><br />(The Q&A might not yet be up on the BRICUP site)<br /><br />-- BrianBrianhttp://musicweaver.users.btopenworld.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-17989955570922094732011-11-14T12:59:53.042+00:002011-11-14T12:59:53.042+00:00Tony, could you deal with what I think is one of h...Tony, could you deal with what I think is one of his main arguments for the 2-state solution? He's been saying this consistently for years now (eg at his LSE lecture, Feb 2004). Namely that a 1-state solution would take 100 years (he now seems to think 120) and that it's wrong to condemn (or somesuch word) Palestinians to another 3 or 4 generations to living under the awful occupation.<br /><br />In 2004 he said that anyone who doesn't think it would take so long 'doesn't understand the way these things happen'.<br /><br />I'm asking now why you, and of course the many others who agree with you, think it wont take 100 - 120 years?<br /><br />There's another issue, but I don't want to take away from my main question (I really want to know the answer to that, ie I'm not being rhetorical). The other point was to do with what I took to be his 'realpolitik' -- we may be morally correct in some line we're advocating, but if we don't carry 'the public' with us, we're a cult talking to ourselves. We can't (he said) go further or faster than those whose minds we want to change can follow. (I take the point of the commenter above, ie what's meant by 'the public' or 'people'?)<br /><br />Finally, I made audiorecordings which are now on the BRICUP website, although I'm not sure if they've yet put up the third one, the 12-min Q&A session at the end of his evening lecture. He deals with the 1-state issue in his first response. (There's also a barnstorming performance by Glyn Secker, sans microphone, smiting the waves ...!)Brian Robinsonhttp://musicweaver.users.btopenworld.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-74207711604122380842011-11-14T12:43:14.920+00:002011-11-14T12:43:14.920+00:00If anon (2) believes that we are all Zionist then ...If anon (2) believes that we are all Zionist then he might care to tell us why? And possibly what s/he means by Zionism too.Tony Greensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14300640929161205370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-2828045309307676562011-11-14T12:39:44.517+00:002011-11-14T12:39:44.517+00:00You are all Zionist that's the basic problem, ...You are all Zionist that's the basic problem, that's why you are all so confused and will never understand that you are all wasting you time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-640441812647446166.post-46100424754174763682011-11-14T09:29:22.946+00:002011-11-14T09:29:22.946+00:00There are a number of worrying points about the pr...There are a number of worrying points about the presentation that Finkelstein gave in the afternoon.<br />He made it clear that only a concentration on the law would sufficiently influence people to respond to BDS.<br />There is a problem with this formulation. We now know that Europeans in the latest poll believe that Israel is a greater danger to world peace than Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan. So clearly there is a constituency open to the ideas that BDS formulates.<br />I wonder which people Finkelstein believes the BDS movement should try to convince. I also wonder whether the North American situation influences him excessively and so it is the North Americans who are in his sights. <br />I noted too that Finkelstein identified three areas where influence had traction, the Goldstone report on Cast Lead, the Flotilla and finally BDS. He then went into a detailed argument as to why the Palestinians should not be the only arbiters of their struggle. Those who support anti colonialism recognise that in the struggle for self determination, it is the voice of the colonised that should be heeded and indeed followed. Anything else is patronage. I noted that Finkelstein actually gave more credit to outside forces (Goldstone, Flotilla) than to internal Palestinian agreed demands and wonder what that says about his mindset. Suicide Bombing was never a demand from Palestinian civil society and it is a red herring to include it in the debate.<br />Finally there is the issue of apartheid. Finkelstein became in my view confused about this, saying that the use of this definition would mean that people would be demanding that Israel cease to exist. <br />Now it is quite clear that this is not nearly so much a sticking point for Israeli objectors, as the right of return is, so I wondered how Finkelstein could make such a strange response. The only answer that I came up with is that the fundamental issue with respect to the apartheid analogy is the conflict between the right to return and the law of return and maybe Finkelstein believes that by allowing the idea of apartheid to surface, the law of return could be challenged. And this is perhaps why he cannot bear to mention Zionism, because when the chips are down, this is his ideology as well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com