Yad Vashem Chair: Nazi imagery at anti-Israel rallies incites violence

[Behind the Aegis]

The head of Israel's Holocaust memorial said Monday that the use of Nazi imagery at recent violent anti-Israel demonstrations across Europe have fanned the flames of anti-Semitism and incited violence against Jews.

Protests against Israel's Gaza offensive have included signs and slogans comparing Israeli soldiers to German troops, the Gaza Strip to the Auschwitz death camp and the Jewish Star of David to the Nazi swastika.

The protests have come amid a dramatic increase in anti-Semitic acts, including attacks on synagogues, beatings of pro-Israel demonstrators and proposed boycotts of Jewish businesses, according to the U.S.-based Anti-Defamation League. Avner Shalev, chairman of the Yad Vashem museum and memorial, said the comparisons were manipulative distortions of history and called for the Holocaust to be left out of contemporary political discourse.

"It is legitimate to constructively criticize the policies of any nation, including Israel. However, the baseless use of Holocaust imagery and terminology as a weapon against Israel has incited a tangible surge of anti-Semitism," he said. "That is the danger inherent when people cynically use the Holocaust to distort a present political conflict".

more...

[FarrenH]

1. A Jewish friend of mine who now lives in England

got PO'd with me about exactly this, during a fierce online debate about the conflict. I realised on the back of that debate that anti-Israeli sentiment does, actually spill over into anti-semitism. But I'm still of the opinion that its mainly existing anti-semitic tendencies that express themselves in times like these, not a real increase in antisemitism.

Just as there are neo-nazis who crawl out of the woodwork every time there is some opportunity to collectively bash black people, extremists and religious bigots piggyback on legitimate protest against Israeli excesses. They are despicable and leftists such as myself have no sympathy with them.

What caused disagreement between myself and my friend was whether the comparisons to Nazism have any legitimacy. As a child of Apartheid, I saw similar parallels being drawn between the Nationalist regime in South Africa's bantustans and Nazi ghettos. The comparison certainly struck me as appropriate then and no-one outside of Apartheids supporters objected to such comparisons. And I'm not sure its entirely inappropriate now.

The conflict is frequently framed exclusively in terms of Israeli security vs the Palestinian right to self-determination, but an oft ignored aspect of the conflict is the starkly visible Jewish ethnic nationalism that informs Israel's behaviour. It is not bigotry against Jews the world over to recognise this and call it what it is. Israel policy is heavily influenced by a violent ethnic nationalism no different from that of many earlier nationalist movements in Europe as well as the Afrikaner Nationalism of Apartheid's architects.

Several of Israel's so-called "new historians" cite Ben-Gurion and others baldly stating that war should be used as a cover for driving out Palestinians and occupying their land. Former Israeli ministers are on record as discussing over how to retard the growth of Israel's Arab population. And there is no framing of the conflict that disguises the stark reality that Israel has been expanding her borders continually since the 1960's, that Israel has been settling Palestinian land since the 1960's, that Israel has responded to every threat by causing disproportionate death of Palestinians, that even Israels laws are structured in such a manner that allow the summary and opportunistic seizing of property deserted by Palestinians, usually on the back of conflict, that Palestinians driven out by the conflict are denied the right of return.

So this child of Apartheid calls it like he sees it. It is ethnic cleansing, pure and simple. And the occupied territories are ghettos. The ghettoization of the occupied territories and terror tactics of Israel only differ from previous, similarly violent nationalist efforts in degree, duration and honesty. Godwin be damned.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

3. You do realize that site you quote is an anti-Semitic hate site, right?

And herein lies the problem!

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftishBrit]

6. If it's based on 'accurate' research why do you need to go to a site like 7thfire.com for it?

There should be valid historical sites for it.

[Behind the Aegis]

9. Now Rense?

Fuck, why not just post from StormFront!

EDIT: You are still missing a post from StormFront and the National Vanguard. Good to see you added TWO more anti-Semitic sites!

[FarrenH]

11. For once I agree with Aegis

Rense? Good God? Do you really think citing hysterical, dubiously-sourced websites that are well-known (Rense) for or otherwise obviously promote every conspiracy theory on the Internet, however outlandish, is going to convince anyone? On the contrary, it makes your posts look clownish.

[LeftishBrit]

12. With regard to your sources:

The first does appear to be a valid source. But it is not alleging Zionist collaboration with Nazis, but Nazi pre-war acceptance of aspects of Zionism and lack of enthusiasm for Arab nationalism. This would not surprise me: it was in the context of wishing to kick the Jews out of Germany - before all the mechanisms for the Final Solution were established- and the Arabs were also insufficiently Aryan.

Anthony Flood appears to be a right-libertarian and supporter of Ron Paul.

Counterpunch is known to be strongly anti-Israel, and not always reliable on related subjects.

The Utah archive is a genuine academic source, though I don't know how valid each particular document is.

Real-Debt-Elimination is a truly VILE site, which alleges Israeli involvement in 9-11, among other things.

JewsAgainstZionism is an ultra-fundie Orthodox Jewish site, which holds to the view that it was impious to set up a State of Israel before the arrival of the Messiah. They have a right to their beliefs, but are unlikely to convince anyone not of their fundie persuasion.

So you are really doing yourself and your argument a disservice by including so many links to sources that are at best unreliable and doctrinaire, and at worst vile.

As regards the facts of the case: I think it is doubtless an established fact that some Zionists did collaborate with Nazis - but it was hardly the general nature of Zionism to do so. It's an established fact that some black Africans collaborated with the slave trade and sold others into slavery. It's an established fact that many women have willingly co-operated with sexist oppression of their daughters and other women. One could go on, endlessly. No one except on the extreme right considers that slavery was justified, or that female subjugation should be accepted, because of collaboration by 'their own'. The same goes for Jewish liberation from antisemitic persecution. One COULD find genuine reasons for arguing that something other than Zionism would have been of greater benefit to the Jews - but the collaboration of a few Zionists with Nazis is not such a reason.

[LeftishBrit]

4. 7thfire.com is an insane site

Its opening page includes the following:

'Whole Body Vibration is a fascinating new technology, and is being used by celebrities and athletes the world over. health, nutrition, stem cell enhancers, shark liver oil, colloidal silver, serotonin optimizer, Maritime Pine Plus , cleansing pads from Japan, art, wisdom, new science, political and cultural insights, and laughter await you. '

and

'In addition, you will find out how you lost your freedom and sovereignty through a similar fraud. Your birth certificate established your subjection to the privatized Government of the District of Columbia by presumption. Discover the reality behind the illusion and take back your power, re-declare your independence and sovereign status above government and corporation. Get free of your credit card debt -- Cancel credit card debt legally!'

Like many crank sites, it is blatantly antisemitic: its articles - under the heading 'Zionism' - include 'Jewish Paedophilia' and 'Jewish Dominance in the Porn Industry'.

But in any case, anything with 'New World Order' in its heading should be assumed to be unreliable!

[LeftishBrit]

7. I actually disagree that the Nazi imagery is a main cause/trigger for antisemitism and violence.

It is mainly a symptom, not cause, of these things.

I think by far the bigger danger is accusations of Jewish or 'Zionist' responsibility for the world's or one's own country's evils. Such accusations as "Israel got us into Iraq", "No More War for Israel!", "The Jews control all the banks!" or, as on the above site, "Jewish Paedophilia!" are greater incitements to antisemitism.

[FarrenH]

8. The problem is

that there has always been an unhinged subculture that holds jews accountable for all the world's ills. And they crawl out from under their rocks in large numbers whenever international outrage over Israel's behaviour becomes acute. Furthermore, antisemitism is rife in the Middle East and many of the very people Israel is oppressing buy into the most unhinged conspiracy theories, from the Protocols to the Blood Libel. They do themselves no favours.

I think many more polemical, thoughtless leftists also do themselves no favours when they try to excuse or provide cover for such people. I certainly struggled with the issue for years because its difficult to form sympathies for a people with so many bigots in their midst who believe the most outrageous and unfounded slander.

But ultimately, it is the recognition that there is a greater injustice to be dealt with in the region that made me fall on the "anti-Israel" side of the equation. I do not believe one should hold the disenfranchised inhabitants of decades-old ghettos who (in Gazas case) are often on the verge of starvation, to the standards expected of middle class developed-world suburbinites. Freedom and dignity first, then moral approbrium at any unacceptable beliefs that may persist.

[cali]

10. self- delete

[juno jones]

13. Welcome to DU

You seem to posess some sanity, don't worry, we'll have it whipped out of you in no time. :P

One has to also understand that historically Zionism has made strange bedmates. Fundamentalist Christians, many as anti-semitic as the day is long, have long posed as friends and supporters of Israel. They don't give a crap about either Israelis or Palestinians, they are merely sponsoring Irsael in a bid to force along the fullfillment of their prophecies and their beloved armageddon. This is as true of the English christian aristos who originally put the mandate together as it is of Zion's American Christian supporters today.

Beware of gift horses and all that. Or perhaps I should say 'red cattle'.

[LeftishBrit]

14. I think there are Trojan horses on both sides

Israel is 'supported' by plenty of people who are not really concerned with Israelis, or Jews, at all, but include the Christian Zionists that you mention; some Islamophobes and Europeaean anti-immigrant bigots who would (and did in the past) just as quickly turn on Jewish immigrants as Muslim ones; and, most of all, right-wing Americans who regard Israel as a useful pawn, oops, I mean strategic ally, in its own battles.

Palestine is 'supported' by plenty of people who are not really concerned with Palestinians at all, but include traditional antisemites and anti-Israel conspiracy theorists; America-First xenophobic isolationists (who would quickly turn against a Palestinian state that needed American support); and most of all, certain Middle Eastern states that regard Palestinians as useful pawns, oops, I mean allies in their own battles, but wouldn't lift much of a finger to help them constructively.

This means IMO that the real interests and needs of both Israelis and Palestinians get obscured by many who claim to speak for them. It also means that there are too many people on both sides who have little real interest in peace breaking out in the region.

With friends like that, who needs enemies? and it can often be said on both sides.

[juno jones]

23. I agree with that

There are many trojan horses in this game that are being overlooked. The dominionists are particularly frightening ones, although Islam has it's share of types who also want the holy land for armageddon-like prophecy fulfillment.

It's just facinating to me that the Israelis would find allies in those who would ultimately kill or convert them if they got their way. The anti-Israeli anti-semite's motivations are far easier to spot and figure out.

[PerfectSage]

15. The signs point out the hypocrisy of one ideology by comparing it to another.

If Israel had a political leader with an effective grasp of grand strategy, the decision whether or not to go to war would have been very heavily influenced by it's probable effect on world public opinion.

Since an increase in anti semitism was a probablm outcome that any competent Israeli politician could have forseen. Why did Barak and Livni decide on war?
I knew it was a dumb decision all along. :eyes:

As far as I'm concerned, failure, is always a result of failure of leadership.
And failure of leadership is always the result of failure to grow a pair of moral balls.

Why do you think Bush/Cheney have been such clusterfucks for the last 8 years?

[Behind the Aegis]

16. EPIC and I do mean FUCKING "EPIC" ...

....FAIL!

[PerfectSage]

18. EPIC and I do mean FUCKING "EPIC" ...failure of the imagination and a failures of the intellect

10 simple questions that Israeli politicians failed to think through properly since 73:

What is the object?
What are the means to achieve it?
Are they available?
What are the costs and the benefits?
What are the hazards?
What are the limitations?
How will the public react?
Are the proposed actions morally justifiable?
What are the lessons of experience?
How does the present differ from the past?

The "Iron Wall" strategy became an impediment to successful grand strategy after 1973.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. His pretentiousness is so overwhelming its almost comic

[Vegasaurus]

17. There is anti-semtism no matter what Israel does

Read a little history.

2000 years of oppression, discrimination, bigotry, long before there was ever a "Zionist entity" to blame it on.

Jews are used to it, and Israelis will do what they need to do to keep themselves safe, even if it doesn't sit well in the court of public opinion.

[PerfectSage]

19. Up till 73 Israel=David vs Palestinians+arab neighours = Goliath

Afterwards Palestinians=David vs Israel=Goliath in the court of world public opinion.

If your zionist grand strategy keeps you safe in the short run and endangers you in the long run?

The zionism I'm refering to, that's problematic is right wing zionism(national zionism, Likud party of "iron wall strategy" and religious zionism "settlement builders")
Kinda reminds me of the Republican party. :rofl:

If Sun Tzu was the Prime Minister of Israel he'd implement the one state strategy with equal rights for Israeli's and Palestinians because it would throw a huge monkeywrench into the extremist position throughout the middle east.

But that would mean the end of right wing zionism :rof:

[LeftishBrit]

21. Sorry, but the very sentence 'If Sun Tsu was Prime Minister of Israel' points out..

how unrealistic some of the ideas are here.

[cali]

22. ack.

idiotic post. channeling Sun Tzu? How new agey of you, dear.

:rofl: :rofl: