From: eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf)
Subject: Re: Antisemitism
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 04:22:09 GMT

wmcguire@world.std.com (Wayne McGuire) writes:

>To: Ron Evans

>>Ah yes, the old anti-Semitism smear. Doesn't it embarrass you to
>>use it?

> RE> A fair question.  Should one be embarrassed to point
> RE> out antisemitism altogether?  Not in my opinion.
> RE> I have unabashedly done this in the case of David
> RE> Irving, Robert Faurisson, and the bcpu-group on this
> RE> network.  It was easy to see through the standard defense,
> RE> I'm not antisemitic, I'm antizionist."

>Well, good for you. You would be remiss if you didn't battle real
>anti-Semitism wherever it exists. The problem is that too many
>emotional pro-Israelists have sloppily thrown around
>anti-Semitism smears to compensate for their inability to engage
>in rational and fair debate about particular controversial
>policies and ideologies within Judaism, Zionism, Israel and the
>Jewish tradition in general. The term, in fact, has become so
>unlinked from any real meaning, due to its frequent misuse, that
>I don't think many people give a damn one way or another whether
>they are target of the charge. Hell, it's practically a badge of
>election these days. No one is doing any real thinking who
>doesn't get on the wrong side of Israeli zealots and labelled as
>the spawn of Adolph Hitler.

You are therefore implying that any kind of intelligent thought goes against
the ideals of the "Israeli Zealots."  Those Israeli Zealots go against every
kind of thinking, huh?  They just get involved in everything.  A kind of world
conspiracy, won't you say?

> RE> Now, as for the case at hand, a suggestion that Israel has a
> RE> policy to drive out citizens based on their non-Jewishness
> RE> alone strikes me as antisemitic innuendo. I am not at all
> RE> embarrassed to say so.

>You know, I think it's really sad that so many Israeli apologists
>like yourself are so unfamiliar with the range of excellent
>information sources that are available to any intelligent person
>who wants to acquaint him- or herself with what is going in
>Israel. There is a deep strain of thought and feeling in
>contemporary Israel, hardly confined to the fringes and spreading
>deep into the highest levels of the establishment, that would
>most assuredly like to drive Palestinians out of the occupied
>territories, and even Arabs out of all of Israel. If you want to
>label Ehud Sprinzak, Moshe Leshem and other respected Israeli
>writers as "anti-Semites" for daring to reveal these facts, then
>by my guest. It just adds to the general hilarity that surrounds
>most behavior on the Israeli political right these days.
 
 First of all, even if we believe that Israelis want to "drive the Arabs
 out" (and we assume that is bad), there is no policy to do so.  That is
 what the comment was refering to.  

>  RE> Damn, I was caught in the act of trying to divert world
>  RE> attention from the double standards in judging Israel and
>  RE> judging other nations in the area such as Iran, Iraq,
>  RE> Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, ...

>I have little respect for the political values of the states you
>mention, but none of them, with the possible exception of Iran,
>have claimed to be "a light unto the nations" lately, nor does
>the American taxpayer generously provide aid to each and every
>one of the citizens of any of these nations at the rate of nearly
>$1000 per annum.

I don't remember the Prime Minister of Israel of any other Israeli official
of late calling Israel a "light onto the nations."  Also, the American taxpayer
doesn't generously provide Israel with aid - the U.S. gives and Israel gives.
I certainly don't think that the U.S. gives Israel money because it is "nice."
We give Israel money out of self interest.  Don't pretend it is some kind of
gift.

>It's the gap between posturing and reality which makes Israel
>look so ridiculous of late. If it would drop all the prophetic,
>badgering rhetoric, particularly in regard to "the nations," the
>world would be less likely to "Swaggartize" it. The fact is,
>Israel has Swaggartized itself. It is being hoist on its own
>petard.

Israel, and the Jews, have only wanted to be left alone. It was the "nations"
who graciously provided pogroms, inquisitions, crusades, and holocausts for
the Jews.  The Jews, and Israel, never tried to stick their noses into other
people's affairs, it was the other way around.


> RE> Is Israel increasingly becoming a Jewish theocratic state,
> RE> or is this more innuendo?

>If in the U.S. the Roman Catholic Church received special
>political perks, financing, and offices from the government, at
>the expense of all other religions, Christian, Jewish, and
>otherwise, would you consider the U.S. to be a theocratic state?
>Or would you be engaging in nasty innuendo--evil anti-Catholic
>hatred, no doubt--if you expressed any objections to such a
>political system?

Israel is not America.  Israel is a Jewish State.  It is meant to be a Jewish
State.  It was brought into existence to be a Jewish State.  The concept of
Israel only matters if it is a Jewish state controlled by Jews.  If the world
doesn't like this or finds this somehow "racist" then it should have thought
about the consequences of persecuting the Jews for 2000 years.  We don't want
your hospitality anymore.  You wouldn't let us live in peace in your countries,
now how about letting us live in peace in ours.

>Try to be serious, Ron.

Ed.