Headline:French anger at anti-Semitic abuse during ‘gilets jaunes’ protests
Sub-headline Writer Alain Finkielkraut verbally assaulted on fringes of Saturday march in Paris
The perfect marriage Macron and Neo-Conservative, i.e. Zionist Apologist, Alain Finkielkraut, a union made in the 9Th Circle! Look to the desperation, or better yet the political hysteria of these Defenders of Zionism, in sum, a European Settler State which practices Genocide-on-the-Installment-Plan against the indigenous Palestinians, while the world watches!
Even New Historian Benny Morris in his notorious Haaretz interview of 2004, and a more recent one defends Israel’s ‘ethnic cleansing’:
This is almost an identical repeat of what he said to Ari Shavit in a 2004 interview. There, he said:
If [David Ben-Gurion] was already engaged in expulsion, maybe he should have done a complete job. I know that this stuns the Arabs and the liberals and the politically correct types. But my feeling is that this place would be quieter and know less suffering if the matter had been resolved once and for all. If Ben-Gurion had carried out a large expulsion and cleansed the whole country – the whole Land of Israel, as far as the Jordan River. It may yet turn out that this was his fatal mistake. If he had carried out a full expulsion – rather than a partial one – he would have stabilized the State of Israel for generations.
But notice – Morris is changing his euphemisms. He used to call the ethnic cleansing of Palestine “transfer” (although he had a Freudian slip on “cleanse” with Shavit) but now, with Aderet, he’s calling it “separation of populations”. This is precious, really. It also points a dark and sinister finger at the notion of “separation” which has become a very central code-word for Zionist leftists and centrists. This “separation”, suggested also by other more colorful euphemisms such as “divorce”, has also been a central talking point for people like the late Amos Oz. So here, Morris, who also wants to somehow be known as a leftist, is making clear that “separation” is part of a genocidal scheme. He would not call it genocidal, and he denies that what he’s describing is ethnic cleansing, but that’s what it really is.
In a long interview with Ofer Aderet in Haaretz (published in English today), Morris says:
If the War of Independence had ended with an absolute separation of populations – the Palestinian Arabs on the east side of the Jordan River and the Jews on the west side – the Middle East would be less volatile and both peoples would have suffered less over the past 70 years. They would have been satisfied with a state of their own, not exactly what they wanted, and we would have received the whole Land of Israel.
It looks like the complainants are Macron, Finkielkraut, Zaki Laïdi and anonymous ‘Paris prosecutors’ with the help of the editors of The Financial Times. What shall the reader make of these News Stories?
Headline: Anti-Semitism doesn’t bother Benjamin Netanyahu if it comes from his political allies
Sub-headline:Why Israel is cozying up to Viktor Orban’s Hungary and overlooking Poland’s Holocaust law
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has now joined the likes of his sworn enemies, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and former Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, by engaging in Holocaust revisionism to promote his own political interests. The leader of the Jewish state signed an agreement with Poland late last month that absolves Poland of its role in the extermination of its Jewish population during World War II, despite ample evidence of passive and active collaboration — as was the case throughout Europe.
Netanyahu spun the accord as a sign that he had forced Poland to soften its law about the country’s role in the Holocaust, but it really shows that maintaining power matters more to Netanyahu than fighting anti-Semitism.
And it’s only the latest example.
Headline: An unlikely union: Israel and the European far right
Sub-headline: Israel has been engaging far-right groups and parties across Europe, ignoring their anti-Semitism.
In November 2017, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) hosted a gala dinner in New York City honouring Stephen Bannon, US President Donald Trump‘s then-chief strategist.
There were, however, some critical voices from within the Jewish community who denounced the ZOA for its decision to invite Bannon. One of them was former Jerusalem Post editor-in-chief Bret Stephens, who dedicated a column in the New York Times on the issue.
“Just as there are anti-Zionist Jews, there are also anti-Semitic Zionists,” Stephens wrote. He then went on to condemn Bannon’s indirect link to neo-Nazi Richard Spencer who, according to Stephens, advocates a “factitious theory that Israel is the sort of ethno-nationalist state he’d like to see America become.”
While Stephens was right to be outraged about the gala dinner, he is wrong to claim that Israel is not an ethnonationalist state.
Just recently, the Israeli government endorsed the Nation-State Bill, which among many racist provisions, calls for the establishment of Jewish-only towns. This bill alone should be enough to settle the silly debate on whether Israel can be both a Jewish nation-state and a democracy.
But relations between Israel and its lobby groups and racist, neo-Nazi and fascist organisations go way deeper than a one-off gala dinner with Steve Bannon. In fact, in Europe, Israel is actively pursuing alliances with far-right groups and parties as a state policy.
There is no ‘French Anger over Anti-Semitic Abuse’ but the manufactured propaganda supplied by the hysterical Neo-Con Finkielkraut, fellow traveler Macron and academic Zaki Laïdi, with help from anonymous ‘Paris prosecutors’ and the editors of The Financial Times: all inveigh against the Anti-Semitism of the gilets jaunes, while Netanyahu makes alliances with the most notorious of European Neo-Nazis!