Jonathan A. Greenblatt, directeur van de Anti-Defamation League
Naar aanleiding van de terroristische aanslag op een synagoge in Pittsburg, waarbij elf congregatieleden vermoord werden, schreef Jonathan A. Greenblatt, directeur van de Anti-Defamation League, in The New York Times onder andere het volgende:
People of all faiths and ideologies must speak out clearly and forcefully against anti-Semitism, scapegoating and bigotry in our society.
If your candidate is attacking George Soros or the 'globalists,' or a member of Congress from your party is embracing Holocaust deniers, you must stand up and tell them to stop.
If your allies in a range of social justice causes either explain away the anti-Semitism of the Nation of Islam by citing the good work they may do or justify demonizing the Jewish state of Israel and its existence, then they need to know that they can no longer be your ally.
Hier doet zich weer iets griezeligs voor, de zionistische Greenblatt, die geen kritiek duldt op de zelfbenoemde 'Joodse staat,' misbruikt de dood van 11 joodse Amerikanen om terechte kritiek op de terreur van het zionistisch regime te criminaliseren door die kritiek te karakteriseren als 'demonisering.' Zo mogelijk nog absurder is de formulering dat kritiek op de beursspeculant George Soros of op 'de globalisten,' een eufemisme voor allereerst de ongecontroleerde financiële elite, een vorm van anti-semitisme is. Greenblatt gaat hierbij impliciet ervan uit dat de banken in handen zijn van 'Joden.' Wanneer een goyim dit zou verklaren dan staat Greenblatt en zijn ADL vooraan om hem of haar van 'virulent antisemitisme' te beschuldigen. Even maf is de kritiek op Soros af te schilderen als 'antisemitisme,' al was het maar omdat het volgende bekend is:
Het CBS-programma 60 Minutes zond eens een onthullend interview uit met George Soros. De Amerikaanse onderzoeksjournalist Steve Kroft leidde het als volgt in:
When the Nazis occupied Budapest in 1944, George Soros’ father was a successful lawyer. He lived on an island in the Danube and liked to commute to work in a rowboat. But knowing there were problems ahead for the Jews, he decided to split his family up. He bought them forged papers and he bribed a government official to take 14-year-old George Soros in and swear that he was his Christian godson. But survival carried a heavy price tag. While hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were being shipped off to the death camps, George Soros accompanied his phony godfather on his appointed rounds, confiscating property from the Jews.
KROFT: You’re a Hungarian Jew… who escaped the Holocaust… by posing as a Christian.
Mr. SOROS: Right.
KROFT: And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps.
Mr. SOROS: Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that’s when my character was made.
KROFT: In what way?
Mr. SOROS: That one should think ahead. One should understand and anticipate events and when one is threatened. It was a tremendous threat of evil. I mean, it was a very personal experience of evil.
KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.
Mr. SOROS: Yes. Yes.
KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.
Mr. SOROS: Yes. That’s right. Yes.
KROFT: I mean, that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?
Mr. SOROS: Not – not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t see the connection. But it was – it created no – no problem at all.
KROFT: No feeling of guilt?
Mr. SOROS: No… Well, of course I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was – well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in markets – that if I weren’t there – of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would be taking it away anyhow. And – whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.
En hoewel Soros een joodse achtergrond heeft, verklaarde hij in hetzelfde interview niet in de Joodse God te geloven, met andere woorden: geen jood meer te zijn, tenzij men zoals de nazi's en de zionisten van oordeel zijn dat het joodszijn bepaald wordt door het bloed, dat het als het ware genetisch wordt bepaald, hetgeen antisemitische nonsens is.
Het meest kwalijke aan de politiek van Greenblatt en de ADL is dat kritiek op de immorele praktijken van Soros, die ook nog eens vanwege handel met voorkennis is veroordeeld, en op de handel in niet bestaand geld die in 2008 ontplofte en een economische crisis inluidde, in één adem noemt met het ontkennen van de 'Holocaust.' Zo tracht de zionistische lobby in de VS kritiek op de misdadige praktijken van de banken en van het zionistisch regime in Israel monddood te maken.
Al in 1981 verklaarde Nahum Goldman, mede-oprichter van de World Jewish Congress, waarvan hij 28 jaar lang voorzitter was,
We zullen moeten begrijpen dat het joodse lijden tijdens de Holocaust niet langer meer als verdediging zal dienen, en we zullen zeker moeten nalaten de Holocaust als argument te gebruiken om gelijk wat we ook mogen doen te rechtvaardigen. De Holocaust gebruiken als een excuus voor het bombarderen… is een soort 'ontheiliging,' een banalisering van de onschendbare tragedie van de Holocaust, die niet misbruikt moet worden om een politiek twijfelachtig en moreel onverdedigbaar beleid te rechtvaardigen.
Vanwege zijn gematigde houding en zijn streven naar coexistentie met Israel's Palestijnse en Arabische buren werd Nahum Goldman tenslotte diep gehaat door zijn mede-zionisten. Vrede had voor hen geen zin, aangezien ze onder aanvoering van Ben Goerion uit waren op de hegemonie in het Midden-Oosten.
In his later life Goldmann had extensive conversations with David Ben-Gurion. In his bookThe Jewish Paradox, Goldmann recalls a late night conversation he had with Ben-Gurion in 1956 about ‘the Arab problem.’ Ben-Gurion told Nahum Goldmann:
'Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it’s true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their [the Arab’s] fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations’ time, but for the moment there is no chance.'
(Nahum Goldmann, The Jewish Paradox: A Personal Memoir of Historic Encounters that Shaped the drama of Modern Jewry, Grosset & Dunlap, 1978, p. 99)
De vooraanstaande Joods-Israelische historicus en auteur Tom Segev schrijft over hem:
Goldman believed in the limits of power and in the power of self-restraint. Thus he was in favor of postponing the Declaration of Independence, in the hope of preventing the war, and he thought that the Sinai Campaign and the Six-Day War broke out basically as a result of mistakes made by the government of Israel. After the Six-Day War and until his death, he believed that it was to Israel's benefit to withdraw from the territories. As opposed to the thesis that Israel's deterrent power would ensure its existence, he believed that only the Arabs' agreement to accept it in their midst would ensure this.
The president of the World Jewish Congress and the president of World Zionist Organization walked a tightrope between the Jewish interest and the Zionist interest, and between both of these and the interest of the State of Israel. In contrast to the founding fathers of the state, and first and foremost Ben-Gurion, Goldman tended to see Israel as one among many possible alternatives for organizing Jewish life, including Jewish life in the Diaspora.
It turns out that he was right and perhaps this was his major sin: Jews can live outside of Israel, they can live well and many of them can live better there than in Israel... He not only aroused the envy of the Israelis, but also subverted some of the basic truths of their existence.
In de ogen van de zionistische maximalisten was Nahum Goldman's 'grootste zonde' zijn overtuiging dat 'Jews can live outside of Israel, they can live well and many of them can live better there than in Israel.' Dat was tegen het zere been. Het was een aantasting van de belangrijkste leerstelling van het zionisme, namelijk dat het antisemitisme alle joden op aarde dwingt naar het 'beloofde land' te emigreren. De werkelijkheid is, zoals bekend, volstrekt anders. Nog steeds leeft een aanzienlijk deel van degenen die zich joods voelen of daadwerkelijk zijn buiten Israel.
The ADL’s ‘top ten’ list is consistent with its history of muzzling dissent on Israel at all costs
Israel/Palestine Alaa Milbes on October 27, 2010
Recently, the Anti-Defamation League came out with a statement placing Students for Justice in Palestine on its top 10 anti-Israel organizations in the United States. As ADL has a history of spying and attempting to crush pro-Palestine, anti-apartheid activists working on issues of justice and civil rights, we are honored to be on a list with prominent civil rights organizations such as the Muslim American Society and Jewish Voice for Peace among others.
The ADL was established in 1913 as a response to anti-Jewish bigotry in the United States. In 1993, the San Francisco police raided an ADL office after discovering a police officer had provided the organization with information on American citizens supporting the Palestinian cause and those opposing South African apartheid. The ADL’s Roy Bullock, an undercover investigator, held records consisting of information on 77 Arab organizations and nearly 647 leftist and anti-apartheid organizations.
Rather than being a civil rights organization that defends the rights of Jews and other minorities, the ADL has a reputation for stifling debate regarding Israel’s “Jewish” democracy. The top 10 list simply reinforces this concern. The ADL blindly supports the Israeli government in its endeavors, including many that flagrantly discriminate against Palestinians.
Domineering moves, including blacklists, are increasingly viewed by peace advocates as badges of honor. Rebecca Vilkomerson, executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace, expressed her pleasure at being targeted: “We’re growing, we’re very organized and we’re effective…There was something perversely pleasing about being included on the ADL list.”
“The status quo crowd knows that its power is waning as American Jews have come to the understanding that defending the occupation is no act of friendship to Israel. It is precisely the opposite and that those who are first to call others “anti-Israel” have helped perpetuate policies that would be Israel’s undoing. The lobby is terrified. And so it resorts to McCarthyism, which historically is the last resort of those who are losing. It didn’t work for Joe McCarthy. It won’t work for them.”
In fact, the ADL has created a reputation for itself, as a criticizer of highly respected human rights workers, scholars and political figures. The ADL even went after Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the esteemed South African anti-apartheid campaigner, when he was appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council to head a fact-finding mission to Gaza. Astonishingly, the organization even criticized Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress in the 1980s because of Israel’s close friendship with apartheid South Africa.
In its blind and staunch support of Israel, the ADL has found itself increasingly defending the indefensible. Organizational support for some discriminated-against minority groups does not exonerate the ADL for its heavy-handed defense of the Israeli state as a “Jewish and democratic state.” The hypocrisy of such a position is obvious. The ADL would never, thankfully, support the United States as a white and Christian state nor have the temerity to then call such a construction a democracy. Yet this is precisely what it asks for Israel.
Just days ago, Rupert Murdoch was honored by the ADL for his supposed support of Israel and commitment to fighting anti-Semitism. Yet by honoring the CEO of News Corp, parent company of Fox News, the ADL is fairly openly supporting demagogues such as Glenn Beck who is given plenty of space to promote hate against various peoples, including immigrants and Palestinians.
Having emerged from the Western colonial era, save in Palestine, university students look to the example of predecessors who fought South African apartheid and Jim Crow discrimination in the American South. In both instances, student movements were a main driving force in ending racist governing structures.
The ADL knows SJP’s potential to end a racist and colonial system enforced on the Palestinian people. Placement on the “top 10 list” is only a sign that student movements have the potential to change government policies. Our opposition to Israeli policy continues to resonate with people around the world who are shocked and dismayed at Israel’s ongoing flouting of international law and the right of Palestinians to freedom and fundamental human rights. The ADL’s discriminatory take on Israel/Palestine is entirely antiquated; the outlook of students with SJP who promote equal rights for Palestinians and Jews in the region surely represents the future.
Alaa Milbes is a graduate student at Columbia University in the department of Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African studies, and she is a member of Students for Justice in Palestine.
Nahum Goldmann: 'De Holocaust gebruiken als een excuus voor het bombarderen… is een soort "ontheiliging," een banalisering van de onschendbare tragedie van de Holocaust, die niet misbruikt moet worden om een politiek twijfelachtig en moreel onverdedigbaar beleid te rechtvaardigen.'
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten