The Colonialism of the Anti-Israel Left

judisThe first error in John Judis’ book “Genesis: Truman, American Jews, and the Origins of the Arab/Israeli Conflict” is in its title. The genesis of this conflict took place thousands of years before Truman when the Roman Empire imposed its colonial rule on the Jewish population using Arab mercenaries and when the Muslim Arab conquerors colonized Israel.

Judis describes the Roman ethnic cleansing of Israel’s Jewish population as the land going “through different religious incarnations after the pagan Romans ousted the Maccabee.” This is akin to another type of revisionist historian describing the Holocaust as Europe going through a new religious incarnation after the pagan National Socialists ousted Jewish communal leaders.

All the familiar myths of anti-Israel revisionist historians are present in Judis’ Genesis making it the least original book on Israel in some time. There are the European Jewish colonists seizing Arab land and powerful American Jewish lobbies intimidating politicians concerned about the “Palestinians” who would not spring into existence until after the failed invasions of Israel by the Arab colonial powers.

The Arabs are treated as a majority when it comes to their claim on the land and as a minority when it comes to soliciting liberal sympathy on their behalf. Judis justifies this political juggling act by rewriting history so that the Jews of Israel are reduced to European colonists rather than an indigenous minority.

Middle Eastern Jews are largely absent in his Eurocentric narrative because their existence upends his depiction of the Jewish resettlement as a Western colonial assault against a hapless native population. The Middle Eastern Jews, whose existence the left denies or minimizes, demonstrate that Zionism was no different than the national liberation movements of minorities like the Kurds or the Armenians.

Most Israeli Jews are Middle Eastern. Middle Eastern Jews were and are an oppressed minority under Arab Muslim rule. Their situation only improved under European colonialism. Instead of addressing that oppression; Judis pretends that Jews were better off as an oppressed minority under Muslim rule.

Like most champions of the Palestinian cause, Judis adopts the narrative of the Muslim conquerors, accepting its often imaginary and inconsistent history while disdaining the extensive history of the conquered and oppressed indigenous populations who suffered and suffer under their rule.

Judis denounces pro-Israel liberals who supported the rights of African-Americans for being “oblivious to the rights of Palestine’s Arabs”. Those American liberals however sided with national rights for a regional minority inclined toward democracy over a violently xenophobic regional majority already in possession of numerous ethnostates and theocracies that was enthusiastic about totalitarian fascism.

Their support for a Jewish State was based on the rights of a regional minority to self-determination.

Pro-Israel liberals supported minorities in America and the Middle East. John Judis supports minorities in America and opposes them in the Middle East; choosing Arab Nationalism and Islamic Supremacism over a majority-minority state that has protected the rights of Jews and other regional minorities.

The anti-Israel left champions Palestinian nationalism in the name of democracy and human rights for a “state” whose president is on the tenth year of his four year term and whose human rights don’t exist.

The “Palestinian” case that Judis retroactively constructs is a modern invention and he admits as much. Liberals of the day, like Bartley Crum of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on Palestine, heard from Dr. Hitti of the Institute for Arab-American Affairs that there was no such entity as Palestine.

Ahmad Shukeiri, before he became the first Chairman of the PLO, told the UN Security Council that, “Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria.” Abu Nidal, the ultimate Palestinian terrorist, proclaimed, “Palestine belongs to Syria.” Azmi Bishara, the Arab Israeli MK who fled the country after collaborating with Hezbollah, said in a television interview, “I think the Palestinian nation is a colonial invention.”

Judis dismisses Jewish nationalism as a 19th century invention, when it’s Palestinian nationalism that is a late 20th century invention.

He emphasizes European Jewish migration to Israel, but not Arab Muslim migration. He repeatedly states that Arabs had been living in Israel for 1,400 years as if the entire Arab population had arrived with the Muslim conquests. The history of modern Ramallah, the capital of the Palestinian Authority,  founded in the 16th century by a family of Christian refugees fleeing Muslim persecution, shows that the 1,400 year number that Judis keeps throwing around is as misleading as his suggestion that the Arab colonizers of Israel may be descended from the Philistines and the Canaanites.

Judis disavows the religious connection of Jews to Israel, writing that “Jews declared ‘Next year in Jerusalem’ annually during Passover dinners, but few took these words literally.”

Taking those words literally was the foundation of Judaism from before the Islamic conquest of Israel.

If, as Judis and other anti-Israel revisionist historians insist, Israel was a European colonialist invention, why have Middle Eastern Jews been the most dedicated to Israel and why did they immigrate in greater numbers to Israel than even the Jews of Germany and Poland?

Middle Eastern Jews were more traditional and religious than European Jews. The first returnees to Israel were Orthodox Jews. Today the American Jews most likely to move to Israel are Orthodox Jews. Zionism had a European political framework for a mandate based on religion and tradition. The vast majority of Jews living in Israel today are more influenced by the Bible than by Herzl or Ahad Ha’am.

John Judis begins his narrative in 1948 with Truman because he needs to justify a colonial solution. While the United States only had a limited impact on the rebirth of Israel, revisionist historians like Judis put the “blame” for Israel’s founding on the United States so that they can then demand that the United States undo the “wrong” that it did.

The rebirth of Israel had been long underway and the British withdrawal made it inevitable by simple absence. Truman acceded to recognizing Israel, but statehood was a matter for Israeli militias successfully defending their country despite the Democratic leader’s arms embargo on Israel.

Judis claims Truman opposed Israel because he “rejected the idea of a state religion”. That would be the same Truman who wrote to the Pope, “Your Holiness, this is a Christian Nation.” He claims that Truman “was not insensitive to the plight of European Jews” even though Truman had responded to Jewish pleas on behalf of DP’s by writing, “The Jews, I find, are very, very selfish.“ and had told the cabinet, “I have no use for them and I don’t care what happens to them.”

American Jews are depicted as a powerful lobby that intimidated Truman and every president since, yet this same lobby failed to save the Jews of Europe from the Holocaust by allowing them to escape to the United States. If this supposedly powerful Jewish lobby could not open the doors of Ellis Island, how did it pressure the United States into setting up an entire country?

Judis has Truman talking up the plan of British foreign secretary Bevin as “the best possible solution for Palestine” to replace the State of Israel with an unworkable Jewish-Arab federation that neither side wanted and that would have become a war zone the moment that the last British soldier left.

Ernest Bevin was the man of whom James G. McDonald, Truman’s own envoy to Israel, wrote, “Facing Bevin across the broad table, I had to tell myself that this was not Hitler seated before me.”

Truman did not create Israel and could not have prevented its rebirth by any means other than dispatching American soldiers to oversee an extension of British colonial rule under the guise of a federation and he recognized that there was no hope of maintaining Bevin and Judis’s solution without an American military occupation that would have made Iraq look like Grenada.

And yet it is telling that despite dedicating an entire book to attacking Jewish “colonialism”, the preferred alternatives of John Judis to Zionism are British colonialism or American intervention.

Judis wraps up a book of bad history written in bad faith by asserting that the only way to reach an agreement would be for Obama and the EU to make it clear to the Israelis “that they would not tolerate any other outcome.”

This is typical of the Western left which denounces colonialism while championing it at their own hands.

Judis pretends that his book is an anti-colonial work when it is really a lament for the colonial intervention that should have taken place under Truman and a plea to Obama to engage in a final colonial intervention to displace an oppressed indigenous minority from its land.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • Hank Rearden

    1. Jews as “European colonists.” This can only apply to post-1918 Palestine. Prior to that, what colonial power is behind those “European colonists” given that the Ottoman Empire is the authority? Herzl, for instance, died in 1904.

    2. European Jewish colonists seizing Arab land… What is the basis for that verb? The Jews did not have an army until the formation of the State. They had their own what would now be called a miltia in the Palmach, but that was only established in 1941. During Ottoman and then British rule, what force, exactly, did the Jews have to “seize” land in Palestine? They bought it. People now may regret that it was sold to them, but sold to them it was.

    3. The founding of Israel was not an immaculate event. But revisionist historians seem to be in the position of children shocked at finding out how they were made. In terms of the unimmaculate conception of Israel, we have to use Thomas Sowell’s tool…as compared to what?

    4. Finally, Judaism is one of the foundations of Western Civilization. It provided its moral basis. We have an interest in its perpetuation. Islam believes in war – Dar al-Harb; “a day spent in jihad is worth a month spent in prayer” (not the exact quote, but that is the sense of it). If Islam is embarrassed by acquisition through conquest, it has yet to say so.

    5. What does the world, particularly the Arab Islamic world, have to do about Israel? Adjust.

    • johnlac

      One question that few people ask (especially ant-Semitic types) is: what would that land be like now if there were no Israel…if all the Jews that resettled there before and after WWII had decided to go somewhere else? Most likely it would be like, as Mark Twain described it in his book “Innocents Abroad”, a barren wasteland. The Jews built that land into a democratic country that works and contributes to the world. Could the Muslim residents of the area done the same? Not hardly.

      • Raymond_in_DC

        Or carry the “What if” to consider the consequences of an Israeli defeat in 1948. The Jews would have been massacred and the world would have stood by. That goes without saying.

        But what of the land itself? It would have been fought over by Syria, Transjordan and Egypt – Syria likely taking the Galilee with its critical water resources and much of the coastal plain, Egypt the south including the Negev, Transjordan the Biblical heartland and the Judean hills, including Jerusalem itself. Lebanon might have grabbed a few border villages. In subsequent years Jordan and Syria would regularly battle over access to water.

        Over time, all the work done by the Jews would be undone – making the land once again an economic and cultural backwater. There would have been no independent State of Palestine and no talk of a Palestinian people.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        It would be Southern Syria with all that implies.

    • Judahlevi

      The “first error” in Judis’ book is him having written it.

      Jews for centuries have been persecuted for being Jews. Judis is one more anti-Semitic hater in a long line of them. There is nothing new here, only another irrational diatribe against the Jews.

      I recommend, “Why the Jews?” by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin as a primer of possible reasons for the existence of anti-Semitism.

  • StanleyT

    The man’s name is Judis? Apart from the spelling, what could be more appropriate?

  • The Facts

    I just bought the book on Amazon. It looks like not enough smarmy fifteen year olds have been paid by Aish HaTorah to trash the book yet. Run! Run! The good reviews are outnumbering the bad reviews! Not even this article does a good job of magnifying Jewish Nationalism into a struggle of global import. Mr. Greenfield has an uphill battle to minimize the import of the US as in influence in the Middle East. But the most important thing, by far, is that an author has a mind of his own and wrote something that the Kohanim have issued a fatwa against, and heavens-to-Betsy, people are reading it, liking it, and anticipating the hasbara response and its fake process of discrediting scholarly works.

    • Hank Rearden

      Not quite sure what you mean by a “….battle to minimize the import of the US as an influence in the Middle East.” I don’t know that anybody disputes the influence of the US in the Middle East since Standard Oil of California discovered the Saudi fields in the 1930’s. We aligned with the Saudis after WWII, signaled by FDR’s visit with King Saud after Yalta.

      We didn’t give any official support to Israel during the years after WWII. James Angleton, the OSS station chief in Italy at the end of the war, helped the Haganah smuggle Jews out of Europe, which is one reason he was always so tight with the Mossad. But at the time he did it, it was officially unofficial. We maintained an official arms embargo on Israel during the 1948 War in part because the State Department in general and George Marshall in particular didn’t want to back the Jews over the Arabs.

      We DID come in and replace France as Israel’s primary arms supplier AFTER the 1967 War, but one reason that war occurred is that we welshed on Ike’s guarantee of freedom of the seas for the Gulf of Aqaba, LBJ having his hands full in Vietnam (which is one reason why the Russians egged the Egyptians on).

      So “US influence in the Middle East” was not heavily on Israel’s side or, really, not at all on Israel’s side until after the 1967 War. Since then, yes. But that is after the present battle lines – the issue of Israel (a) being formed and (b) existing – were drawn. The US certainly did not draw them, although between 1967 and Obama we HAVE picked a side.

      The point being is that Israel’s FORMATION and EXISTENCE has not been a US policy, does not derive from US policy and occurred independent of US policy. Also, Israel is a very-long-standing member of the UN, meaning that it has been recognized as a legitimate state for decades. It was supported by the Communist world for at least a decade. Stalin was one of the first to recognize its formation because at that time Israel was socialist and because he wanted to put his thumb in the eye of the British. But, WHATEVER the reason, speaking both as the leader of the Soviet Union and as the leader of the communist world, he recognized Israel.

      So, the existence of Israel is not due to some nefarious US cabal or to “US influence in the Middle East.”

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Thanks Robert, if Judis needs the endorsement of anyone, it’s a white man who pretends to be a black Neo-Nazi on VNN

      • uptownsteve

        Why do you believe ‘The Facts’ to be a white pretending to be black? Please explain?

        • Daniel Greenfield
          • uptownsteve

            And this proves WHAT?

          • Daniel Greenfield

            That these are all the personalities of a guy named Robert Goodwin.

          • The Facts

            The mirror neurons are firing. The question is, is it echolalia or trying to get out of check using check? Imitation is the best form of flattery, but vanilla never congratulates vanillin. What happens when one imitates someone believed to be a white black fascist? Doesn’t the precession of the simulacrum start to artifact? How do you shadowbox against light? How does one negatively review a book which he could just as easily give a positive review if the money blew in a different direction? Is such a reviewer truly in possession of a singular personality, or merely a momentarily singular personality?

          • Daniel Greenfield

            Unlike you, my views are consistent. Though I suppose your anti-semitism is reasonably consistent across your varying personalities.

          • The Facts

            Your views are consistent for fixed temporal Aristotelian logical continua. You will find that mine exhibit Zermelo-Fraenkel consistency, and consistency across Cantorian cross sections of the same space that you enjoy. In that space, it really doesn’t matter if somebody is Jewish or not, because in time, everybody is either becomes Jewish or gives it up, or is counting a set which is in turn counted by the other.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            That is both logically valid and utterly irrelevant to real life.

          • The Facts

            You are right. There are no examples in real life of the axiom of choice where one chooses an element from a well-ordered set of potentially infinite tangibles and produces an uncomfortable, seemingly counterintuitive possibility. All choices produce clearly intuitive results, and nothing is indicative of a higher order topology. The earth is flat and only has room for either Muslims or Jews. I get what you are saying.

          • Daniel Greenfield

            I can’t deny that you are expanding your range.

          • iluvisrael

            you may change your name, but you are consistently BORING!

          • Drakken


        • J. Bargholz

          You and Robert have a lot in common — all of it bad.

          • uptownsteve

            Are you the same J. Bargholz from Beaker’s blog?


      From the River to the Sea,

      Pale-e-SWINE Will Never Be!


    • Ganesha_akbar

      Today, Jordanian-Arabs of The Palestinian Authority demand removal of “settlements” and that no Jewish communities be allowed in Judea (the so-called “West Bank”). Meanwhile, Egyptian-Arabs in Hamastan have ethnically cleansed Gaza of every ethnic Jew.

      It would appear that people demanding the ethnic cleansing of Jews from these disputed territories envision one country (Israel) where Jews, Muslims and others may live as equals; and another (Fakestine) where Jews are verboten. If that isn’t apartheid, colonial Islamo-supremacism, I don’t know what is.

      Victims of anti-Semetic propaganda have proven Joseph Goebbels right– if big lies (masquerading as “scholarly works”) are repeated often enough, then people will come to believe them.

      • The Facts

        I remember when I used to play with scare quotes and the words “so-called.” It’s fun isn’t it? Very Black Hebrews.

    • iluvisrael

      still sooooo obsessed with the Jews and Israel flip? you are one pathetic loser – go back to producing ghetto rap noise

  • Tradecraft46

    All the buzz-words, all the self-pity and the self-righteous all the lies. I have heard it all before.

    • StanleyT

      You’re referring to Judis’s distortions, of course. You failed to make that clear.


      Nakba! Wah!
      Occupation! Wah!
      Settlements! Wah!
      JOOOZ! Wah!


  • Clare Spark

    Greenfield’s criticisms of Truman and Bevin are entirely vindicated by my own research in the founding of the Jewish state. Others have glorified Truman as a special friend of the Jews through Christian Zionism. The Ralph Bunche UN papers tell a different story, emphasizing the power of the alliance between the US State Department and the UK Foreign Office under the just elected Labour Party. See “Oil politics and Obama’s view of Israeli history.” There is no doubt that Bunche acted under orders from the political class of the US and the UK, and it wasn’t good for the Jews.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      State has always been anti-Israel. They fancy themselves the miniature FO

    • Paul Marks

      Sadly the only good thing that can be said for President Truman is that he was not so hostile to Jews as Franklin Roosevelt was (see Paul Johnson’s “A History of the Jews” for President Roosevelt attitude to the Holocaust). Sadly the Jewish community in the United States did not know how their “friends” privately regarded them – and continued to vote for them. The Republican party endorsed the state of Israel as far back as the Convention of 1940 – yet gained no benefit from doing so.

  • uptownsteve

    How is Israel NOT a terrorist state? Displacing Arabs who lived there for generations. Imposing apartheid on the Palestinians. Shooting civilians in Gaza. Killing civilians on ships going to Gaza. Car bombs in Lebanon. Killing scientists in Iran. The list goes on and on.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      … nuclear scientists in Iran

      you left that part out

      • uptownsteve

        Do the Iranians have the right to kill nuclear scientists in Israel?

        • Ganesha_akbar

          Via sharia, Iranians presume both the right and obligation to mass murder Israelis. Moreover, the Iranian mullahocracy vows to launch nuclear genocide on Israel– not the other way around, dopey. Try harder to keep up.

        • Rob Hobart

          No, you cretin, because the Iranians are murderous theocrats, and the Isrealis are a free people defending themselves.

          • uptownsteve

            Oh, OUR terrorists are GOOD terrorists. LMAO!!!!!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            I guess you really don’t know what terrorism is. Terrorism is using force where the strategic and or tactical objective is to create terror. Military targets are a focus when there is some tangible material or strategic benefit to the attacker.

            In theory, one can use terror to attack military targets…but murdering a soldier or military contractor is reducing the enemies forces while murdering civilians is seen as simply trying to create terror.

            But if we do accept your gray definitions for terror (which would not bother me) it still doesn’t show Israel is doing anything illegitimately. You’ve got to make your case explicitly, not by following your stupid tendency to use Orwellian descriptions of events.


            What do you mean “OUR” comrade?

          • Drakken

            If you love those Islamic goat fuc**rs so much? Go join them, put your money where your big black mouth is. Come on buckwheat, time to put up or shut up.

          • yoelk

            So, Achmad, you admit to being a Muslim terror supporter.Finally, Now go back to writing for “Stormfront”. Regards to Heinrich, troll.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          If the Iranians did kill Israeli nuclear scientists, instead of random civilians as they are doing now, they would have a military justification.

          Instead they’re simply funding random murder.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          Iran would argue that they certainly do. They’re counting on that allah-given right.


          Fascist iran has already made its goals clear.

          Israel is not obligated to wait until islamofascist iran launches its missiles.

          Would you be willing to wait for people who have threatened on numerous occasions to lynch, murder you and your family and your extended family?

          What kind of FOOL are YOU?

        • gray_man

          They think they do.

        • yoelk

          No, but its not their goal. They want to kill all the Jews who belong there. Boom! And they don’t shirk from saying it loud and clear, troll

    • Paul Marks

      Actually it was Jewish communities that were wiped out (in terrorist attacks that go back to the First World War). Israel is not to blame for the declaration of the Grand Mufti (a friend and ally of the late Adolf Hitler – who had visited the extermination camps, which even Mr Hitler refused to do). Imposing “apartheid” is a direct lie (you are liar Steve). Killing civilians in Gaza is a Hamas speciality (it is how they rule the place), and fighting back after Turkish Islamists have attacked (check the video evidence for yourself) those sent to check to see whether the ships were carrying yet more weapons is justified self defence.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        Refusing to submit to sharia in the Middle East is de factor “apartheid” because sharia is considered the organic law of allah, especially for that peninsula. That’s where the rhetoric comes from. It is both hilarious and tragic when leftist lunatics repeat that BS.

    • Omar

      Are you kidding me?! First of all, the so-called “Palestinians” are an invented people. The so-called “Palestinian nationality” was invented by the Soviet Union during the 1960s in order to discredit Israel’s right to exist. Second, what car bombings? Most car bombings in the Middle East are caused by Islamist terrorist groups, like your beloved Hamas, which vows to destroy Israel and commit a second Holocaust. By the way, do you know who Hajj Amin Al-Husseini was? You might want to check this link out to see which regime he was friendly with: Name me one Islamist leader who is tolerant to Jews and who wants peace with Israel. Also, Israel is an inclusive democracy. Arabs living in Israel have more rights and liberties as Israeli citizens than people living in other countries in the Middle East, you a**hole. Check this link out to learn the truths that debunk your Islamist-friendly lies: Why don’t you condemn racial, religious and gender apartheid in the Middle East? Why don’t you condemn Islamist apartheid in Sudan, where the theocratic military dictatorship has committed genocide against black African Christians? You don’t condemn the Sudanese dictatorship because you support them. You support all atrocities as long as they are not committed by whites, Christians or Jews. You are a black supremacist and a Islamist who supports terrorism. Learn from fact, you f**k**g pile of vomit.

    • Ganesha_akbar

      What you’ve just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        Yeah, but if I had just arrived from Mars and that was the first and only thing I’d heard, I might wonder about these poor jihadi victims.

    • Rob Hobart

      Why am I not surprised that you’re an anti-Semite? It fits with the rest of your hateful nonsense.

    • Hank Rearden

      The definition of terrorism is making war on civilians. Israel does not do that.

      Car bombs in Lebanon?

      You are trying to whitewash Pali and Muslim terrorism by draining words of their meaning. As the great Thomas Sowell observed: “all things are the same except for their differences; and all things are different except for their similarities.”

      There is a difference between the fireman and the arsonist, although both are at the fire.

      There is a difference between the policeman and the criminal although both are at the scene of the crime.

      There is a difference between the soldier and the terrorist although both kill people.

      There is a difference between observing the Geneva Conventions and slaughtering civilians or putting them in a position to BE slaughtered.

      Israel is constrained by Jewish morality and the Palis/Muslims think morality is a weakness and revel in savagery.

      • uptownsteve

        Israel does not make war on civilians????? Oh really?

        • Hank Rearden


          You think different? When and where?

          • uptownsteve

            Read the link!

          • Hank Rearden

            New to me. Hard to have an immediate reaction. I would say a couple of things:

            1. The vocabulary of the piece shifts back and forth between “state terrorism” and “terrorism.”

            That raises a question. What does that author mean by “state terrorism?” My suspicion is that he is trying to find a pejorative term for “war” which is, after all, not a pretty thing.

            Another element would be unique episodes which while deplorable did not reflect policy or at least recurrent policy.

            No point in circumlocutions here. The argument really gets down to whether one thinks Israel is a legitimate state or not.

            If it is a legitimate state, then it has not only the right, but the DUTY to defend itself and to deal with its enemies in the harshest possible terms consistent with the rules of war.

            If the argument both here and in that article is that Israel is NOT a legitimate state, then really ANY violence that it perpetrates in the interest of its existence is illegitimate.

            Whenever there is the possibility that negotiations might actually resume between the Israels and the Palis, the Palis always make it a precondition that Israel release some large number of imprisoned terrorists. The Palis then celebrate these people as heroes. No doubt about what, for instance, they want their children to take away from the lives of these terrorists. These are people, mostly men, whose exploits are to be respected and by impliciation imitated.

            We see no such thing in Israel. We don’t see the killing of Pali families in their homes. Of course, there is criminal activity and even political criminal activity. But Israel law and society do not sanction it.,

            Lastly, there is such a large community of animosity toward Israel, including all of the Left in the Westem that has unlimited funds and unlimited access to the media, in most cases IS the media and in those cases where it is not has access as do we all to the Web, that IF there were a list of terrorist atrocities committed by Israel, and BEING committed on an ongoing basis and a POLICY of terrorism by Israel, I would expect to be able to get a bill o particulars of recent actions.

            I don’t see that bill of particulars. There are references in this article, but the use of vocabulary is not consistent.

            This is not rocket science. It is not a question of what Begin thought of his predecessors or how Eban parses what Begin said.

            How about a list since 2000, just to make it recent and specific.

            I believe that Israel is constrained by Jewish morality in its policies and their execution. Most of its armed forces, certainly the IDF, are citizen-reservist structures. These guys have to go back to their families. The IDF is not some abstracted bunch of superheroes living on another planet. So…the IDF as a terrorist organization, as is the necessary implication of this article? I don’t buy it.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            They use deceptive arguments and labels. “Killing” is a neutral term, so they punish Israel for defending itself as if fighting back is morally equivalent to starting wars in the first place.

            The original article is decades old and been debunked many times but it’s also been the inspiration for its spawn of mendacious propaganda videos and articles like the one stevie linked to.

          • reader

            Looks like a complete fabrication. Quotes aren’t even linked to the list of sources in any way. And the sources are predominantly of a Jew hater Said and a Commie Chomsky. What qualifies linguistics “professor” and a table rouser Chomsky to be an historian is beyond me.

          • reader

            actually, meant to write “rabble rouser” Chomsky, but I think I got a good one from a helpful spell checker here.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Quit rousing those tables! I’m trying to sleep here!

        • Omar

          Really? You’re using “If Americans Knew” as your primary source of documentation? IAK is a radical left-wing website that supports Islamist terror. Learn from real facts, you loon.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Is this guy goofing on us or what?

        • objectivefactsmatter

          This stuff is not funny, but you sir are a joke.


          Islam and Socialism makes war on civilians.

          – 9/11
          – 1993 truck bombing of the WTC
          – US Embassy bombings in Africa
          – Beltway sniper
          – 7/7/05 London transport bombings
          – Beheading of Lee Rigby
          – Beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl
          – Sneaker bomber
          – Underwear bomber
          – Mumbai India massacre
          – Beslan school massacre
          – Church bombings in NIgeria
          – Nairobi mall massacre
          – LIRR massacre

          uptownracist, Were you home schooled by the racist nation of islam?

        • yoelk

          Yes, really, Achmad!

    • reader

      What exactly Arabs lived exactly where for generations, steevo?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      “How is Israel NOT a terrorist state?”

      MacDonald’s is a terror organization. I become terrified when my fries are not hot enough.

      “Displacing Arabs who lived there for generations. Imposing apartheid on the Palestinians. Shooting civilians in Gaza. Killing civilians on ships going to Gaza. Car bombs in Lebanon. Killing scientists in Iran. The list goes on and on.”

      This random unjustified violence has to stop. Nobody every picked on Israel. They’re just bullies! So there!

    • Drakken

      To the victors go the spoils and pali loving jihadist white hating kaffirs like you whine about it. You don’t even know wtf apartheid is dumbazz.

    • gray_man

      How is muslim arabia not a terrorist state?
      Displacing Jews who have lived there for thousands of years. Imposing apartheid on Jews throughout the world. Shooting civilians the world over. Bombings throughout the world. Killing scientists just because they are scientists, who prove islam false. The list goes on and on.

    • yoelk

      You are a lying, nutter, uptown. Nothing more could be said for nor to someone who is incapable of discerning good from evil. and who defends the continuous genocidal rocket attacks from Gaza against poor ,generally dark skinned neighboring Israelis, who never initiated any harm to them.

    • Nekama

      You are just an ignorant POS who deserves the punishment of Sharia law. Your posts are garbage and my guess is so are you and your stupid family.

  • Ganesha_akbar

    Watershed Legislation: Maryland proposes boycott of ASA wacademic anti-Semites

    A state bill would prohibit state dollars from funding activities such as travel or membership dues tied to the American Studies Association, which passed a resolution in December to boycott Israeli academic institutions. The almost 5,000-member organization is devoted to American studies but also has taken a position on foreign policy regarding Israel that state officials said conflicts with the state’s stance.

    The bill’s sponsor, Del. Benjamin Kramer (D-Montgomery), said it would be inconsistent for the state to continue to support Israel in trade and agricultural and economic development while also funding organizations like the ASA. He called the ASA’s boycott a “discriminatory position.”

  • Jeff Ludwig

    Judis and others of his ilk, whether in J street or in the Knesset, have lost sight of the original David and Goliath story that I grew up with, namely that Israel was David against the Arab Goliath. Daniel Greenfield makes an incredibly good case for this view of the socio-political-moral dynamics of Israel’s coming into existence.
    As soon as the Palestinian Jews began making moves towards establishing a Jewish homeland via the activities of the Zionist movement, that itself represented a rebellion against their “dhimmi”(second class) status living within the Arab world. Non-Arabs, non-Muslims, had to pay a tax and had certain restrictions placed upon them, I understand, in order to “live in peace” (sic) in those territories. Any movement that would challenge that lower status or second class citizenship was and is itself considered an affront to Allah and Mohammed his prophet. The idea of Jewish statehood implies Jewish equality.
    That this state should arise in their midst is an almost unbearable affront to Arab Muslim pride and ideology. When we see the eruptions that can take place in the Muslim world at the appearance of even a cartoon that is critical of Islam, how much more is the “affront” when an inferior people (like Jews or Christians) should actually erect a state in the midst of their foul culture that is not beholden to them or their so-called God. I think that the word “fanatical” is too mild to express the nature of the Arab Muslim reaction to the Jewish presence from the earliest point when it seemed that the movement towards statehood was not merely a pipe dream, but a vibrant and pressing reality.
    I grew up in the 50’s and 60’s where the David and Goliath scenario was real in the minds of Jews as well as the mainstream media. However, over time, the paradigm of what really was happening shifted in the minds of some “liberal” intellectuals and in the mainstream media. Nevertheless, when the paradigm shifted, many, like myself, did not shift. To me, the original David and Goliath scenario is still in place. That is still the issue, and always will be the issue, and indeed, the David and Goliath scenario has faced the Jews in many lands as well as in Palestine after the Romans defeated Bar Kochba and other rebels units. When Israel was created, I believed that the days of Jewish second and third class citizenship were put behind us with the establishment of Israel. Yes, we didn’t have second class citizenship in the USA, but with a homeland, the supra-national identity of the Jewish people was finally reaffirmed for the first time since the Hasmonean warrior/priesthood leadership period. My dignity as a Jew was not only being upheld and affirmed by the USA, but stood as a shining light upholding itself in the family of nations!!! Is this biased? No. This is the reality. Any other vision about what has really happened is, in my opinion, biased and out of focus.

  • Ganesha_akbar

    Russians crush Chechens. Chinese trample Uighurs. Real genocides unfold regularly in Africa. Iran pursues a nuclear bomb. Hamas is openly dedicated to genocide. So is Iran. Nobody cares.

    And yet the only villain as far as Leftists are concerned is Israel… always Israel and America.

    But none of these facts matter. Indeed, it’s tiring even to recount them in an environment where big lies matter more than obvious truth, where self-defense is “bigotry,” where restraint is “intolerance,” and where the presumptive heirs of Gandhi fling molotovs in support of Saddam.

    Those interested in exploring the colonial history of apartheid Islamo-supremacism in a more scholarly manner may read, “The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims.”

  • Omar

    uptownsteve is probably a member of the Nation of Islam, based on his hate-filled rhetoric against light-skinned people and Westerners.

    • uptownsteve

      No buddy. Actually I am a middle aged Catholic, veteran, corporate salesman, husband, father, homeowner and taxpayer. You really need to stop demonizing people who disagree with you.


        “You really need to stop demonizing people who disagree with you.”

        You really need to take your words to heart.

        • Berceuse

          He needs to stop demonizing people who happen to be Jewish.

      • Webb Cook

        Wow, Steve, I apologize — I thought the white man was holdin’ you down. But you’re moving on up — to the top. You’ve finally got your piece of the pie. Boy, this calls for some kind of a celebration! Where would you like to eat — KFC or Chick-fil-A?

  • Ganesha_akbar

    Since the colonial Turkish occupation and ethnic cleansing of Greek Cyprus began in 1974:

    * at least 55 Greek churches have been converted into mosques
    * another 50 Greek churches and monasteries have been converted into stables, stores, hostels, museums, or have been demolished
    * the cemeteries of at least 25 Greek villages have been desecrated and destroyed
    * innumerable icons, religious artifacts and all kinds of archaeological treasures have been stolen and smuggled abroad
    * illegal excavations and smuggling of antiquities is openly taking place all the time with the involvement of the occupying colonial forces
    * all Greek place names contrary to all historical and cultural reason were converted into Turkish ones.

    Why doesn’t anyone howl about the colonial Turkish occupation of Cyprus? People have been driven from their homes, churches converted into mosques, and the thriving resort of Famagusta transformed into a ghost town. Nobody cares. Instead, Leftists obsess over the trumped-up plight of “Fakestinians”– an invented nationality, committed to eradicating a sovereign state in the name of colonial, apartheid Islamo-supremacism.

    VIDEO: Famagusta, The Hostage Ghost City of Europe

    • Drakken

      Get rid of every turk in northern Cyprus and the island could prosper once again.

  • semus

    Reading Mr. Daniel Greenfield is always an education.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      thank you

  • Berceuse

    We will never solve the Middle East problem by harking back into history to tease out which side has the greater divine right to existence. The only solution is an unwavering commitment to furthering the principles of democratic republicanism, economic and religious liberty, civil and human rights, rule of law and self-determination for which this nation remains the world leader — and an equally unwavering support for, and staunch defense of, whichever side best represents those principles. With that as the standard, how can there be the slightest doubt where our loyalties should lie?


      Islam is incompatible with Democracy.

      Proof? Egypt is an ancient civilization and it only recently began to experiment with Democracy.

      The Arab/Muslim culture is foreign and incompatible with the modern world. Look at how the Taliban treat girls who want an education.

      • Berceuse

        On one side you have a thriving free-market democratic republic with a strong military that has supported and defended our security interests without fail, a society that represents equality under the law, freedom of expression and peaceful co-existence with its neighbors. On the other you have an outlaw gang of vicious thugs and totalitarian bigots committed to a pogrom of religious, cultural and ethnic genocide. Anything less than unwavering support for Israel is as un-American as it is anti-Semitic.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    “This is typical of the Western left which denounces colonialism while championing it at their own hands.”

    That’s the beauty of Marxist collectivism.