According to Zionist Logic, the Victims of the Holocaust Were Also Anti-Semitic
In an excellent article on how the Right is making the term ‘anti-Semitism’ synonymous with anything left-wing, Jonathan Cook makes extensive reference to my libel case. I reprint an extract from his essay below.
Jonathan is right.What he could of course have gone on to say is that according to the ‘logic’
of fools like Rachel Riley and politicians such as Lord Pickles and Tom Watson, most of the Jews
who died in the Holocaust were in fact ‘anti-Semites’!
This is in particular true of the 3 million Polish Jews, who
constituted half of all the Jews who were exterminated in the Holocaust. Poland's Jews voted overwhelmingly for the left-wing Bund, the General Jewish Workers Union, who were anti-Zionist.
In the last
free elections in Poland in 1938 for local authorities, in Warsaw the Bund
won 61.7% of the Jewish vote and gained 17 out of 20 Jewish Council seats.In the city with the second largest number of
Jews, Lodz, they won 57.4% and 11 out of 17 Jewish seats.
The problem was explained by Isaac Deutscher in his
essay 'The Non-Jewish Jew and Other
Essays':
‘to the Jewish workers
anti-Semitism seemed to triumph in Zionism, which recognised the legitimacy and
the validity of the old cry ‘Jews get out!' The Zionists were agreeing to get
out.’
So now we have it. In fact when Hitler murdered European
Jewry because, in his view they were the germ seeds of Bolshevism, he got it
right. Most of Hitler’s victims were anti-Semites! Netanyahu explained at the 2015 World Zionist Congress that Hitler only got the idea
of the Final Solution from the Palestinian Mufti! See Rewriting
the Holocaust and Netanyahu:
Hitler Didn't Want to Exterminate the Jews
It’s little
wonder that notorious racist and former Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel, Ovadia
Yosef, blamed the victims of the Holocaust for their own deaths.According
to this wretch
“The
six million Holocaust victims were reincarnations of the souls of sinners,
people who transgressed and did all sorts of things which should not be done.
They had been reincarnated in order to atone.”
The
time will come when Zionists will begin to ‘understand’ why the Holocaust was perpetrated.This is not so far fetched as it might seem.
When
Robert Bowers murdered 11 Jews in Pittsburgh recently, sections of the Israeli Right
and Likud blamed the victims and ‘understood’ the murderer.
Yoav Eliasi,
aka The Shadow, a prominent Israeli hate rapper and Likud Party member in good standing with hundreds of
thousands of followers social media followers, portrayed the massacre as
a legitimate response to the Jews of Pittsburgh’s support for refugees:
According to
Eliasi, Bowers “was a man fed up with
subversive progressive Jewish leftists injecting their sick agendas” into
his country. Explicitly echoing the neo-Nazi’s manifesto, Eliasi added that “HIAS brings in infiltrators that destroy
every country. The murderer was fed up with people like you. Jews like you
brought the holocaust and now you’re causing antisemitism. Stop bringing in
hate money from Soros.”Israel’s
Far Right Blame “Leftist” Victims of Pittsburgh Synagogue Massacre
‘Hours after the massacre in
Pittsburgh, a Likud Party email listserv pumped out talking points addressed to
“ambassadors of the Likud” that claimed the anti-Jewish shooter “drew
inspiration from a left-wing Jewish group that promoted immigration to the U.S.
& worked against Trump.”
Within
moments, Likud party activists like @guyshapira took to Twitter to repeat the
talking points word for word.
This is
where the Zionist libel that it is the Left not the Right is anti-Semitic ends
up.Zionism has always justified the anti-Semitism
of the Right as being the fault of the Jews for not having emigrated to Israel.
By continuing to live in ‘other peoples’ countries’ and opposing racism there, Jews
are held to have brought on themselves their own misfortunes. Zionism itself has
only ever existed with the support of the most reactionary and racist sections
of society.
What a
tangled web we weave.
Tony
Greenstein
Weaponising anti-semitism –
Jonathan Cook
In fact,
these anti-semitism “watchdogs” no longer even bother to conceal the fact that
their accusations of anti-semitism are intended as smears rather than as
serious assessments of a rising tide of bigotry.
Tony
Greenstein, an anti-Zionist Jew expelled by Labour party bureaucrats after a
concerted campaign to character-assassinate him as an anti-semite, took one of
his accusers to court, the grossly misnamed “charity” the Campaign Against
Anti-Semitism, in a libel action.
The CAA had claimed that Greenstein was a “notorious anti-semite”.
“Notorious”, let us remember, means “famous or well-known”. So it should have
proved a doddle for a well-funded charity that deals in little else but
tackling anti-semitism to support its claim.
Strangely,
however, when given a chance to produce the evidence before the UK High Court,
the CAA declined to do so. In fact, rather than use the standard
defence against libel, claiming their remarks were a “statement of fact” – or
what used to be termed “justification” – the CAA resorted to the much weaker
defence of “honest opinion”.
Traditionally
in libel cases against media outlets, reporters have had to show they had a
factual basis for their reporting, while opinion-writers could duck out under
claims of “fair comment”, which allowed for muckraking and provocative
viewpoints.
“Honest
opinion” allows you to state falsehoods, and puts responsibility on your victim
to prove the near-impossible: that you did so maliciously. In short, you
can defame as long as you can claim you did so in good faith.
What the CAA
has indicated is that when it describes someone as an anti-semite, it does not
need to base its accusation on evidence (such as a clear statement of prejudice
against Jews) but rather root it in hearsay or its own hunches. In other words,
the CAA is consciously playing fast and loose with the definition at the heart
of its mandate. It is hollowing out the meaning of anti-semitism to politicise
it.
The CAA’s
legal manoeuvres confirm that the charge of anti-semitism has indeed been
weaponised to silence political dissidents – just as critics, myself
included, have long been claiming.
Right kind of Jew
Of course,
the CAA is far from alone in pursuing this strategy. It is precisely the reason
all those anti-semitism claims are being thrown around recklessly to silence
anyone who wishes to disrupt the status quo – the constant warmongering, the
neoliberal rape of the planet, and the entrenchment of a carbon-based economy
that threatens imminent collapse of a climate conducive to most life.
Lots of
rightwingers would like to use the anti-semitism smear to win political
arguments in the more unruly, less predictable political environment we
currently inhabit. But sadly for them, it only sounds credible when
status-quo-loving centrist and rightwing Jews use it. Which is why we hear them
using it so much.
It was why
TV gameshow assistant Rachel Riley was taken seriously rather than ridiculed as
she suggested to her hundreds of thousands of Twitter followers that Owen Jones, a diehard soft Zionist and fairweather Corbyn supporter, and
Noam Chomsky (or Chomski, as Riley misspelt his name), a dissident
Jewish intellectual, were anti-semites.
Both were
characterised by her as “far left”, which is now treated as synonymous with
“anti-semitic” in the rightwingers’ playbook.
Astoundingly,
Riley was liberally spraying around the anti-semitism smear even as she made a
series of anti-semitic statements during a TV interview that unusually failed
to register on the radar of the usually vigilant anti-semitism “watchdogs”.
She observed that she didn’t look like a “typical Jew” (no
hooked nose, Rachel?) and argued that her previous use of the expression
“Bloody Jews again” wasn’t anti-semitic. She also implied that criticism of
Israel shouldn’t be allowed because it was offensive to Jews (thereby
conflating Jewish people with Israel, as well as denying anti-Zionist Jews a
voice).
But then
again, Rachel Riley can’t be anti-semitic because she, unlike Tony Greenstein,
is the “right kind of Jew”. She’s on the right.
Formed
in 1996 Jewish
Voice for Peace has become the largest single Jewish
group advocating for the Palestinians in the world. Indeed it is the largest
pro-Palestinian organisation in the United States. Where it has led others,
like Ifnnotnow have followed.
JVP
has over 70 chapters, hundreds of thousands of online supporters and over
100,000 Jewish signatories. One theme has run through all their actions – what Israel
does to the Palestinians is Not in my
Name. The Jewish state is not, despite its claims, a State of the Jews.
JVP
did not start off as an anti-Zionist organisation. To have done so would have cut
it off from an American Jewish community of some 5 million people. Unlike in
Britain, the vast majority of American Jews are Liberal, Masorti or
Conservative as opposed to Orthodox. Although historically the American Jewish community
was the most liberal section of the White community in the USA, supporting the
civil rights struggle of Black people, it also supported Israel and turned a
blind eye to things which, if they’d occurred in America and to them, they would have been
the first to condemn.
Unlike Britain there is a Growing
Divorce Between the American Jewish Community and Israel
JVP
was the first to raise the question of the American Jewish community’s loyalty
to Israel. As in Britain Jews have historically been silenced by memes such as ‘You don’t live in Israel you have no right
to criticise what it does’ and of course the classic argument of Zionism that if
anti-Semitism ever rears its ugly head then Israel will provide a refuge.
These
arguments carry less weight today. If Israel claims to be a state of the Jews,
all Jews wherever they live, then it can hardly claim immunity from criticism by Jews.
This argument, that people who don’t live in Israel can’t criticise it would
not be given the time of day if it had been applied to Apartheid South Africa or Nazi Germany.
Israel
has become a topic of both discussion and dissension within America Jewry.
Partly this is because of Israel’s own desire for Jewish racial purity. In a
state based on race then someone must be the guardian of who is and who is not
a member of the chosen race. There must be some ‘objective’ criteria for deciding
who does and does not fit in.
Liberal
and Conservative Jews are not recognised as fully Jewish and therefore most American
Jews live in a no man’s land. All personal matters – birth, marriage, divorce
and death – in Israel are controlled by the Orthodox rabbinate. American Jews are Jewish
for the purposes of the Law of Return but not for personal matters.
When
a neo-Nazi gunman Robert Bowers murdered 11 Jews at the Tree of Life synagogue
in Pittsburgh last October Israel’s Chief Rabbi David Lau refused to even
recognise that this was a synagogue. Lau called
it ‘a place with a
profound Jewish flavour’ as if it was a form of chewing gum.
Robert
Bowers had targeted this particular synagogue because
they worked together with HIAS, the Hebrew Immigrant
Aid Society which helped refugees in the United States. ‘You like to bring in hostile invaders to dwell among us’ This was at the same time as when Donald Trump’s racist invective was at its height attacking the refugee caravan during the Congressional elections. Trump created
the atmosphere in which Bowers did his murderous deeds.
It
was no therefore surprise that Pittsburgh Jews told Trump to stay away and not to visit them and when he came anyway they demonstrated against his
presence. Who accompanied
Trump? The Israeli Ambassador Ronald Dermer. Who flew to the USA to defend
Trump? The arch-racist Israeli Education
Minister Naftali Bennett.
Shalom
Lipner, a former adviser to several Israeli prime ministers, was reported
as saying that Bennett’s actions were
‘misguided + irresponsible this is: an Israeli
minister coming to Pittsburgh and hitting the campaign trail for Trump one week
before the midterms. Israel is already enough of a partisan football in
America; why would Bennett want to make the problem worse?’
Liberal
Zionist columnist Peter Beinart tweeted,
“Yes, antisemites don’t ask if you’re
Orthodox, Conservative or Reform. How about the Israeli government?”
This
is the atmosphere in which JVP organises. There is severe disagreement in the
American Jewish community over its relations with Israel. Netanyahu is reported
to have written
off the American Jewish community altogether.
Two years ago JVP set up a working party to
draw up a statement on Zionism. They have now reported and issued a statement. They declare that:
‘Jewish Voice for Peace is guided by a vision of
justice, equality and freedom for all people. We unequivocally oppose Zionism
because it is counter to those ideals.’
The
statement explainsthatwhen it was first formed
‘JVP made a conscious choice as an organization to abstain
from taking a position on Zionism, because we felt it closed off conversation
in the Jewish community.’
JVP’s
decision to now describe itself as anti-Zionist is an important one. It should serve as an example to British Jewish groups such as Jews for Justice for Palestinians which has
steadfastly refused to adopt any position on Zionism and has instead stuck to
an outdated and incoherent 2 State position that accepts a racist Israeli state.
Jewish Voice
for Labour, although most of its members are anti-Zionist has likewise adopted a
position that says it will take no position on Zionism. Palestine Solidarity Campaign although formally anti-Zionist in practice
says nothing at all about Zionism.
Why the Question of Zionism is
important
There is one
thing that Zionists hate above all and that is discussing Zionism. The Jewish Labour Movement campaigned
against what it saw as the use of the term Zionism as a word of abuse. A
position endorsed by the Labour Party’s Chakrabarti
Report.
Why then is
it important to understand and to oppose Zionism? First and foremost because
Zionism is the political movement that gave birth to the Israeli State. Zionism
is the ideology of the Israeli state.
If you don’t
understand Zionism then you won’t understand why Israel is a uniquely ethno nationalist state. You won't understand why it behaves as it does. Instead of dealing with the Israeli state
as a political problem Israel will be seen as amenable to a 'peace process' and diplomacy.
Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians will be seen as primarily one of human
rights and not a consequence of settler colonialism.
If you don’t
understand and oppose Zionism and see how it is antipathetic to Jewish people
and how it internalised everything anti-Semitism said about Jews then people will
see Israel as a normal bourgeois democratic state that has gone off the rails. Without
an understanding of Zionism people see Israel as a Jewish state no different
from Britain as a Christian state. From there it is but one step to seeing
Israel as the embodiment of Jewishness, which is the approach of anti-Semites
like Gilad Atzmon.
Anti-Zionism is the cure for Anti-Semitism
Anti-Zionism, contrary to what is alleged, is the cure for anti-Semitism. Instead of blaming Israel on the Jews, anti-Zionism enables people to understand the racist and imperial roots of Zionist colonisation
and settler colonialism. Israel is seen as a state that does the bidding of
western imperialism rather than a Jewish collectivity.
When people
don’t have an understanding of where Israel has come from and why, then they
look to conspiracy theories about Jewish power or the Rothschild bankers. It is
the demonization of anti-Zionism that leads to anti-Semitism. Today as
yesterday, virtually all anti-Semites are also supporters of Zionism. From
Christian Zionists to White Supremacists there is wall to wall agreement on
support for Zionism. As Orly Azoulay put
it in Israel’s YNet
‘The Jewish right in America and
in Israel is no longer afraid of the ‘old anti-Semitism,’ yet progressive Jews
are being defined as accomplices of Israel’s haters. As a result, Israel’s
relationship with America’s Jews is becoming increasingly explosive.’
For
example the Zionist Organisation of America invited Trump’s anti-Semitic
adviser Steve Bannon as a guest
speaker at its annual gala dinner in 2017 and 2018.
John Hagee, the President of the million strong Christian United for
Israel, who preached
that Hitler was god’s agent sent to drive the Jews to Israel, presided at the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem.
JVP
have recognised that if you are going to support the Palestinians then you have
to take a position, not merely on this or that aspect of Israeli policies but
on the nature of the state itself and the movement that gave birth to it.
I
have disagreements with aspects of the statement. For example I think they are
wrong to talk about different strands of Zionism and equate ‘Cultural Zionism’
(which was confined to about a dozen supporters) with Political Zionism and
also not to see that Religious Zionism was an offshoot of the latter. I note
that they don’t even mention Labour or Socialist Zionism, quite correctly in my
opinion.
Also I think JVP are wrong not to openly come out and say that Zionism is a form of racism. I
also think JVP are wrong to describe
Zionism as ‘a form of Jewish nationalism’.
This presupposes that the Jews are a nation, an anti-Semitic idea. Zionism was
a nationalist movement, amongst Jews and non-Jews. In much the same way as
Nazism and similar racist movements in Poland, Romania and Hungary were nationalist. However Zionism
wasn’t a movement of a Jewish nation. I
make a sharp difference between nationalism and a nationalist movement.
I
disagree with the formulation that
‘“Anti-Zionism”
is a loose term referring to criticism of the current policies of the Israeli
state, and/or moral, ethical, or religious criticism of the idea of a Jewish
nation-state.’
Anti-Zionism
is a critique, not of particular policies of the Israeli government but the State
itself. A Jewish State is inherently racist in a settler colonial context. But
these are mere quibbles. JVP accepts that Israel is a settler colonial state
and an Apartheid State. More importantly than both it describes itself as
anti-Zionist. All I can say to this is Mazel Tov. Let us hope that British
Jewish groups in support of the Palestinians have the courage of their
convictions and realise that temporising will not gain them either support or
friends. Below is the JVP statement:
Tony Greenstein
What is Zionism?
Where did it come from?
Zionism is a form of Jewish nationalism, and is the primary ideology that
drove the establishment of Israel. Zionism began in the late 19th century in
the context of a set of huge changes in political, cultural, social landscape
of Jewish life in Europe, along with the general rise of nationalist movements
and nation-state political forms. For Jews in Europe, this meant a sharp rise
in violent antisemitism. Jewish people – even though they had lived in Europe
for centuries – were fundamentally excluded from the ways European nations
defined themselves. This resulted in violent, targeted, anti-Jewish massacres
in Russia, known as pogroms; the development of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories
like Protocols of the Elders of Zion; and the re-emergence of older antisemitic
tropes, like blood libels, which claim that Jewish people use the blood of
Christian children in rituals.
Some Jewish people responded to this antisemitism by attempting to
assimilate into the European countries they lived in; this often proved impossible.
Many Jewish people – over 2.5 million – left as refugees, coming to the United
States or other parts of Europe. Others, most famously the Bund, rejected the
concept of nationalism altogether or turned to revolutionary socialism. And
some, notably Theodore Herzl, often seen as the founder of Zionism, thought
that Jews themselves constituted a separate people, and should therefore have a
state of their own. Herzl and other early Zionist thinkers were also very
influenced by European settler colonial thinking, often explicitly making the
case that a Jewish state in Palestine would be a European colony similar to the
British presence in India.
It is important to note that people who consider themselves Zionist have
different interpretations of what that label means in the present political
moment, to them personally, and historically. Moreover, over time, multiple
strains of Zionism have emerged, including political Zionism, religious
Zionism, and cultural Zionism.
Political: When people refer to “Zionism” today, this is often
what they mean. Founded by 19th Century thinker Theodore Herzl, it sees
the “Jewish problem” as having a solution in a “Jewish state.” As
nationalism rose in Europe, many, including Herzl, saw Jews as outsiders
to the nation, unable or unwilling to assimilate or be fully accepted as
members of the nation-state. According to Herzl, this “problem” should be
solved by a community of nations by establishing a Jewish state in
Palestine.
Religious: Many, but not all, forms of Zionism have their roots in
theological interpretations. It is important to note that this form of
Zionism is not exclusive to Jewish religious traditions. For example, some
evangelical Christian denominations believe that in order to facilitate
the second coming of Christ, Jews must “gather” in Israel as part of
Biblical prophecy.
Cultural: Most often attributed to Herzl’s contemporary, Ahad
Ha’am (Asher Ginsberg), this form of Zionism called for a spiritual and
cultural center for Jewish people in Palestine, but not for a “Jewish
state” in the same way Herzl did. Instead, this form of Zionism calls for
Jews to share a national language and culture.
The political ideology of Zionism, regardless of which strain, has
resulted in the establishment of a Jewish nation-state in the land of historic
Palestine. In 1948, 750,000 Palestinians were
expelled as part of that process, their homes and property confiscated. Despite recognition of their rights by the United Nations,
their rights to return and be compensated have long been denied by the US and
Israel. In 1967, Israel occupied what is now known as the Occupied Palestinian
Territories, putting millions of people under military rule. Longstanding systemic
inequalities privilege Jews over Palestinians inside Israel and in the Occupied
Territories.
“Anti-Zionism” is a loose term referring to criticism
of the current policies of the Israeli state, and/or moral, ethical, or
religious criticism of the idea of a Jewish nation-state. There has been
debate, criticism and opposition to Zionism within Jewish thought for as long
as it has existed. Jewish anti-Zionists span a political and religious
spectrum, from religious and secular progressives who view opposition to
Zionism as an anti-racist praxis, to ultra-Orthodox Jews who oppose Jewish
dominion until the time of the Messiah, to anarchist Jews who oppose the very
concept of nation-states, Jewish or otherwise. There are also many non-Jewish
anti-Zionists whose perspectives may be informed by moral criticism of the
policies of the Israeli government, problems with the impact of Zionist
thinking in Israel on non-Jewish residents, and/or a criticism of
ethno-nationalism more broadly. Many Palestinians take anti-Zionist positions
or identify as anti-Zionist because of the current and historical practices of
the Israeli state.
Criticism of Zionism is not to be conflated with antisemitism. States such as Israel
and the United States are openly criticized in public life, and their political
beliefs and policies are subject to critical debate, in accord with our basic
First Amendment rights.
For more on the history of Jewish alternatives to
Zionism, please see this blog post by former JVP staffer Ben
Lorber.
For more on the problems of conflating antisemitism
with anti-Zionism, please see this op-ed by NY Times columnist
Michelle Goldberg.
For more on criticisms of Zionism, please see these excerpts from “Zionism from the
Standpoint of its Victims” by Edward Said.
Why and how did we clarify our position on Zionism?
At its founding, JVP made a conscious choice as an organization to
abstain from taking a position on Zionism, because we felt it closed off
conversation in the Jewish community. Palestinian partners had long theorized
Zionism as the root cause of the Palestinian condition, and more and more of
our members not only agreed, but understood Zionism as damaging to Jewish
identity and spiritual life. In 2014, it became clear that we needed to clarify
our position in order to effectively continue doing our work.
We started by creating a committee through an application process that
was purposely designed to represent the breadth of JVP membership. This group
of staff, members and board met regularly over the course of two years to
design a curriculum on Zionism. Over 700 members attended the webinars
presenting the curriculum, and throughout the process, chapters met and
discussed the ways JVP’s approach to Zionism impacted their work locally and
nationally.
In addition, we held conversations about Zionism at the 2017 National
Member Meeting, surveyed individuals who attended the webinars, and had our
constituency groups – including Rabbis, artists, and students – hold
independent discussions on Zionism, notes of which were shared with the JVP
board.
We also gathered feedback from JVP staff, Palestinian members, activists
and thinkers, along with feedback from Jewish people of color and Sephardi
& Mizrahi Jews.
The board met over the summer and fall of 2018 to draft and finalize this
statement.
What do you see as the harms of
Zionism against Jewish people? Isn’t Zionism a movement for Jewish
self-determination?
While Zionism is often referred to as a movement of
“Jewish self-determination,” the Zionist movement defined this term in a narrow
political sense, rejecting the diaspora as inherently toxic and unhealthy for
Jews. The Classical Zionist concept known as shlilat hagalut
(“negation of the diaspora”), demeaned centuries of a rich Jewish spiritual and
cultural history – often to the point of using anti-Semitic imagery. For
instance, famed Zionist journalist/ writer Micah Josef Berdichevsky claimed diaspora Jews were “not a
nation, not a people and not human.” Hebrew literary icon Yosef Hayyim Brenner called them “gypsies, filthy
dogs and inhuman,” while Labor Zionist AD Gordon referred to diaspora Jews as “a
parasitic people.”
Zionism, as a political ideology and as a movement,
has always hierarchized Jews based on ethnicity and race, and has not equally
benefited or been liberatory for all Jewish people in Israel. Zionism is and
was an Ashkenazi-led movement that othered, marginalized and discriminated
against Jews from across the Middle East and North Africa that it termed
Mizrahim (the ‘Eastern Ones’).
In the early 1950s, starting two years after the Nakba,
the Israeli government facilitated a mass immigration of Mizrahim. Unlike their
Ashkenazi counterparts, the new Mizrahi immigrants were not permitted to settle
in the central cities or live in housing they could eventually come to own.
Instead, the Israeli police were deployed to compel Mizrahi immigrants to
remain in the transient camps and later development towns in Israel’s
periphery, as a means to expand the state territory and prevent Palestinian
return. During the 1950s Mizrahi immigrants were also subject to medical experimentation facilitated or performed
by the Israeli government, and several thousand babies and toddlers were forcibly taken from their parents by the Israeli
government. These children, two thirds Yemeni and a third from Tunisian,
Moroccan, Libyan, Iraqi and Balkan families, were taken by physicians and
social workers and given up for adoption by Ashkenazi families.
From the first waves of immigration in the 1980s,
Ethiopian Jews have experienced racism on the part of the
government and the Israeli public, exclusion from the public sphere,
discrimination in education and employment, and exposure to physical and verbal
violence. They also remain unrecognized as Jews by the Israeli religious
establishment and religious councils because of racial prejudice. Ethiopian
mobilization for racial justice consolidated since 2015 has called for an end
to institutional discrimination, police harassment, arrests without cause,
false accusations and indictments about assaulting police officers, and the
denial of due process, all of which have long been experienced by the Ethiopian
community.
Katie
Hopkins backs up the Pittsburgh murderer- Jews
are Responsible for using refugees to undermine the White nations
By their friends shall ye know them
Katie
Hopkins is a byword for racism and bigotry.What is in the throat of the tabloid leader writers is on the Twitter
feed of Katie Hopkins.There is no neo-Nazi
insult that is too vile or genocidal for Katie Hopkins.Hence why the Mailtook
her on from the Sun.
However Hopkins
has managed to excel herself with her latest tweet justifying Robert Bowers, the
murderer of 11 Jews at Pittsburgh. In his last message Bowers
tweeted ‘HIAS likes to bring invaders in
that kill our people. I can’t sit by and watch our people get slaughtered.
Screw your optics I’m going in.’ HIAS being the Hebrew Immigrant Aid
Society. Hopkins tweeted:
‘Watching the pin-the-blame on
the donkey after #PittsburghSynagogue. Gab. Trump. White Supremacists. The
Media. Muslims. Look to the Chief Rabbi and his support for mass migration
across the Med. There you will find your truths.” #Pittsburg
It’s not
clear which Chief Rabbi she is talking about. Britain’s Chief Rabbi, the
hapless Ephraim Mirvis, has never supported mass migration, but it is a useful
myth. The Chief Rabbi is a metonym for Jews. In other words the Jews are responsible
for the refugees which Trump railed against in the recent Congressional
election campaign.
Katie Hopkins anti-semitic comment on Ed Miliband's wife, Justine
It is a
favourite theme of the neo-Nazi Right that the ‘problem’ of refugees is the ‘fault’
of the Jews. It would seem that Katie Hopkins, who spends increasing time in
the company of the far-Right, has adopted this meme. '
Hopkin’s reaction to the suicide bomb at Ariande Grande’s
concert in Manchester, when 22 people were killed, was to call
for a ‘Final Solution’ of Muslims, which led to her departure
from LBC.
Katie thinks the world of Tommy Robinson aka Yaxley Lennon
Katie
Hopkins is however a consistent bigot.She may be the highest profile racist in Britain today, apart from her
good friend Tommy Robinson, but she is also a sincere and dedicated Zionist.
When it comes to BDS, as opposed to bombing, Katie is full of concern for Palestinian jobs - no matter that they deliberately stifle the Palestinian economy
Palestinians, the original inhabitants are 'rodents' i.e. vermin - neo-Nazi language from the Sun and Mail's former columnist
Katy Hopkins concern for Israeli families contrasts with her disinterest in the victims of the aerial bombing of Gaza's infrastructure
She visited Israel
and went out of her way to praise the Israeli military and the settlers and
demonise the Palestinians.However none
of this prevented her from being an anti-Semite. Quite the contrary to her diaspora
Jews must seem pitifully weak.
Let us
recall other comments that went virtually unnoticed by the Zionists until she
picked on the Jews. As thousands of refugees were drowning in the Mediterranean,
as they tried to flee civil war and famine in Africa, Katie Hopkins, took a
pride in demonstrating how ‘tough’ she was.One of her most infamous
quotes was
“Make no
mistake, these migrants are like cockroaches. They might look a bit “Bob
Geldof’s Ethiopia circa 1984”, but they are built to survive a nuclear bomb.
They are survivors”
Courtesay of the Daily Mail, Katie Hopkins went out to meet fellow fascists
“No, I don’t care. Show me pictures of coffins, show me bodies floating
in water, play violins and show me skinny people looking sad. I still don’t
care.’
Katie Hopkins with holocaust denier Peter Sweden
Hopkins joined
the C-Star in Sicily, which had been crowd funded by the fascists, whose
purpose it was to prevent the rescue of drowning refugees. Ironically the
fascist ship broke down and had
to be rescued by the German ship Sea Eye
which was there to rescue refugees! It was whilst meeting the group Defend Europe
in Sicily that she posed
for photographs with Peter Sweden, who is a holocaust denier. Sweden
tweeted that
the
globalists (mainly Jews) are the ones bringing in the Muslims to Europe, they
seem to work together” and “it is
the Vatican and the Jews who are behind the NOW [New World Order]
The collected sayings of Peter Sweden
Marie van
der Zyl, the President of the Board of Deputies wrote
that
“It is
distressing to see Katie Hopkins posing for a photograph with a Holocaust
denier, as part of her trip to support the ‘Defend Europe’ campaign,”
It must be distressing
for Zyl, who fully supports the equally
bigoted policy of Israeli Ministers when it comes to refugees.
After all it
wasn’t all that long ago when Katie Hopkins was an honoured guest at the annual
dinner and dance of the Zionist Federation.And who could possibly object to her presence when Israeli Minister
Gideon Saar was the guest speaker?Saar
even had the chutzpah to claim that Israel didn’t deport asylum seekers.Even as dedicated a Zionist as Rabbi Lea Mühlstein was
walked out. The Jewish Chronicle claimed that the dinner
was ‘marred by the heckling of Gideon Sa’ar'. Katie
tweeted
“Lovely to
spend time with friends & supporters @ZionistFed celebrating 70 years of
Israeli Independence. Go Bibi. Go Israel”
Katie Hopkins was a hit with those who attended the Zionist Federation dinner
Katie seems to have had a wonderful
time having her photo taken with fans and of course the chief ghoul himself,
Mark Regev.
This provoked Daniel
Sugarman, a hack journalist to complain that Katie Hopkin’s presence at the Zionist
Federation’s Gala Dinner was akin to a pork chop at a Friday Night Dinner. Most
unfair to pigs.Katie
Hopkins, Tommy Robinson, and why Israel needs to up its media game. Daniel ran through some of Katie’s
more unsavoury comments on “cockroaches”, the need for a “final solution” and her
letter “dear black people: if your lives
matter, why do you shoot and stab each other so much?”
Katie Hopkins enthusiasm for Poland's antisemitic government comes as no surprise
All of the above is true of course
but how is this different from referring
to African refugees as a ‘cancer’.?This is exactly what Miri Regev, Israel’s
Minister of ‘Culture’ (as in Goebbels) did.Admittedly Regev apologised for using the term – that is she apologised
to cancer patients for having compared them to refugees. An Opinion Poll conducted
by the Israeli Democracy Institute found 52% of Israelis supported
her comments, and 33% supported violence against refugees. The moral of the
story is that Katie should emigrate to Israel where she can convert to membership
of the Jewish race and can then join the Israeli government. Sugarman found it
‘infuriating
but, sadly, not surprising. There are unfortunately some within the wider
Zionist movement who appear to believe that any amount of loathsome behaviour
is bearable, as long as a perceived support of Israel is there.’
Katie had tweeted about how she had “pencilled him in” (Mark Regev) as her
fourth husband.Clearly it would be a
match made in hell. But Sugarman is being a hypocrite. There is nothing that
Katie said that has not been said every day by Israeli politicians.
For those
interested there is a fascinating interview
in the November 2018 edition of the Israel Today magazine with Katie Hopkins
which informs us that she is ‘one of the few willing to speak truth
to ills in our societies, irrespective of the consequences of doing so’.
