Criticism of the state of Israel does not automatically align the critic with the ‘wipe the Zionist entity off the map/until victory! until Jerusalem!’ tendency...Pointing this out does not transform a writer into a vicarious Arab nationalist...the reactionary fundamentalists of Hamas...Hamas will be gifted the opportunity to establish an Islamist theocracy governed by sharia, contiguous to Israel itself.

Sounds like Mr Osler is aiming for a job with the Guardian. This sort of anti-Hamas (and therefore pro-Israel) propaganda, wrapped in a package of bland caring/sharing sentiments is just the sort of thing that goes down there.

A vicious racist gangster state with a bigger and better airforce than all Europe combined, and enough nukes to destroy every European city, is something anyone remotely sane would like to see wiped off the map.

a bigger and better airforce than all Europe combined

Is that a fact Jock or hyperbolic nonsense?

Hyperbolic nonsense? Actually, I think the quote I remember was roughly '...twice the number of TOP OF THE RANGE FIGHTERS' as the UK and France combined.' I can't find or remember any sources for that, but I remember it froms several sources that are usually dependable. I have to admit that the only estimates I could find quickly on the web put Israel's air force about half the size of France and UK combined (no comment on the make-up of these numbers), but, since no-one else has in Europe has an air force worth mentioning, and it's no secret that the new Eurofighter is 10 years out of date and not highly thought of, and Israel is known to have the most up to date fighters, it would be at least safe to estimate that the combined air forces of Europe would be seriously challenged by Israel's air force. I read lately that Israeli planes had been flying training runs to Spain in preparation for the long haul to Iran, so they've got the range to reach much of Europe.
Not to mention the 2 new submarines Germany recently supplied them with - these can be adapted to launch missile with nuclear warheads.
If they succeed in reducing the entire Islamic world to a pre-industrial condition, who's to say they might set their sights on Europe next. Does the USA need us any more? Or even have any use for us?
I'm sure if you've got a subscrion to Jane's review you could search their site and find that the above is not too far out.
As to wiping Israel off the map: I hope it's superfluous to recap that Mohammedinajad was deliberately misquoted, and that when I talk if wiping Israel off the map I mean ending the racist state in the most humane way possible - but the more powerful it gets, the fewer the options. I mean - what is Israel now? The private army of the Rothschild's and the international bankers? Or of a rogue lobby group that's become a very lucrative business? Does it really have much to do with Judaism now, if it ever did? It's some sort of rapidly growing mutant, and very dangerous!

Scroll down to current inventory, they sure do have
a lot of F15s and F-16 combat aircraft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Air_Force
These aircraft have in service in various guises since the 1970s.
IAF website, doesnt seem to work though:
http://www.iaf.org.il/Templates/HomePage/HomePage.aspx?lang=EN

It's a bit quiet round here. Four comments in 10 hours on an Israel/Palestine thread. Where are all the AWL flamers? Where is the SWP contingent? Is everyone still arguing over at Socialist Unity Blog?

Excellent post. Entering into talks without making it clear what the desired outcome is will end in yet another set of broken peace talks. The whole notion of a two-state solution needs to be challenged as it is apparently the only possible option - which I find very hard to believe.

Dave

How do you see your democratic secular state being created?

What do you mean, 'succeed in reducing the whole of the Islamic world to a pre-industrial condition'?. I thought they'd managed that pretty well for themselves. So, Mr McTrousers, do you think we should argue for squidillions to be spent on the British Army so that the nasty Jews don't get us?

Once a MIG always a MIG.

Pathetic.

Plus -- perhaps if I could be so bold -- "Two States: Lenin on the National Question for Slow readers - or retards"

What's a MIG?

Either Sue R is incredibly stupid and has no knowledge of the history of Arabia in the 20th century or a troll who endlessly recycles a Eurocentric chauvinist line.
Given previous posts about Al Qaeda training manuals being in the hands of people who work in WH Smith I tend towards the latter.

A proper "two-state" solution (ie *not* a Palestian "bantustan", but a viable state based upon pre-1967 borders) is so obviously the *only* realistic solution that I fail to take even a thoughtful commentator like Dave, seriously, when he rejects it. What's your alternative? A "secular democratic state"? Well, yes: we want a "secular democratic" Middle East , and a "secular democratic" world. The question is: how do we get there. The "one-state" solution simply has no grip on reality, and offers no way forward to the Palestinians. It's either an idealistic pipe-dream with no grip on reality (the benign version advocated by people like Dave)...or it's code for "drive the Jews into the sea" (what most "anti-Zionist" and pro-Arab fanatics actually mean by it).

I'm actually incredibly stupid and ignorant. What's your excuse, Eddie? Free Gillian Gibbon!!!!!

Starting from here, the only remotely possible peaceful route to s single-state solution is _via_ a two-state solution. After 20 or so years of peaceful coexistance, two sovereign democratic states might plausibly decide to merge into one federal one, or perhaps join a wider regional confederation.

If you are going to be massively optimistic, arguing from principle for the best solution ignoring all obstacles, argue for that.

If not, then advocacy of a single-state solution really means you have to express a prefence as to which side you would like to see ethnically cleanse the other.

Osler has lost it. Dear me -- this post is the worst you have ever done here Dave (and I say that as a friend).

Too many pseudo-leftist fuckwits in your ear - I think that may be one of the problems you have -- mixing in amongst the London circle of dilettantes,'radicals' and headcases that exist down there.

Get a grip man.

The extreme state of counter-revolution in the middle east demands that, while maintaining a critical position vis-a-vis nation states everywhere, communists must stand in solidarity with Israel, the founding of which is inextricably linked to the climax of European counter-revolution and the defense of which is made necessary by the continuing 'reactionary modernism' of Middle East regimes.

Get yourself sorted -- or I'm coming doon there to drink you under the fucking table or drink you out of your fucking hoose and home.

Jim,

The fact is, there is only one state now, Israel, and a Palestinean county council.

A viable Palestinean state is hardly likely to be viable without some form of co-operation with Israel, whether it's European Union style, or Belgian style, neither party can walk away in splendid isolation.

It's pretty obvious to anyone who's not completely delusional that not only the US administration, but the ruling party in Israel are committed to a "Two State" solution, as long as a Palestinian leadership that continues to exclude Hamas retains power.

see this interview with Olmert:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/929233.html

Only the victory of a rejectionist government in Israel could resist the international pressure and even then, it's economy is completely dependent on foreign energy supplies and military aid.

So the notion that it is an autonomous imperialist power that can challenge the EU is patently absurd.

However, actual moves towards an independent Palestinian state could certainly entail an attempt to crush Hamas in Gaza and be a prelude to another war.

Even if a Palestinian state were created under the conditions required by the US and EC, the geographical and economic realities of the region mean that rigid seperation of the two populations is unviable.

The dynamics of the situation mean that the borders erected would not hold.
Only a bi-national socialist state offers any possibility of a permanent solution without further ethnic cleansing.

To argue for a secular democratic state is to step outside history and advocate the ending of the Jewish national movement. It is an anti-Israel stance. Forget it.

The use of the term "ethnic cleansing" is also a use of historical anachronism and is an example of how to strip something of its historical context.

It is quite clear that Zionists favoured population transfers prior to 1948, but they saw them on the model of the Treaty of Lausanne, where populations were exchanged between Greece and Turkey. They would be agreed between states, if involuntary on the part of the people (the removal of Gaza and Sinai settlements being an example).

However, it ended up as an involuntary transfer, and Palestinians fled or were forced out of their homes. The situation became unmanageable because of the failure of the powers to enforce the UN partition (notably the mandatory power, Britain).

This meant that a Palestinian state was not created and refugees from what became Israel found themselves under Jordanian and Egyptian occupation. Without a Palestinian state the refugees could not, and would refuse to be, absorbed in the way that the Greek and Turkish refugees were, or the smaller number of Jewish refugees who moved in the opposite direction.

Thus the absence of the state means that the historical preconditions for a peaceful social evolution in the region were not in place with the resultant rise of ultra nationalism, rightist religious messianic movements, and fascistic fringes.

A two state settlement is the necessary precondition for social and national evolution that will lead to peace, it is not the peace settlement itself. It is long overdue.

threads on Israel and the Middle East are always interesting, not least because they bring out deep-seated hatreds or chronic insensitivity

I was wondering when someone was going to pick up Jock MacTrouser's blatant antisemitic reference:

"I mean - what is Israel now? The private army of the Rothschild's and the international bankers? "

I had always hoped that socialists here or readers of this blog would be more sensitive than most to racist imagery and pick it up, but that is proven not to be the case

And nowadays across the Web you can see a whole range of quasi-fascists, their fellow travellers and bosom buddies, such as Jock MacTrousers, who articulate this racist filth wrapped up in academic speak, slogans or agitprop and yet it rarely ever gets picked up.

Had Jock MacTrousers attacked any other ethnic or social group then dozens of people would have been down on him like a ton of bricks.

But as it is Israelis are seen as a fair game, and so the Far Right can piggyback their filth into forum's without hardly anyone batting an eyelid.

Modernity
I dare say you are right about Jock Mac. His comments are insensitive and could well be anti-semitic. However, you are a great fan of Harry's Place which regularly posts vile comments about Muslims without any comeback from the site organisers or commentators like yourself. Aren't you therefore being extraordinarily one-sided?

I realise doing this kind of thing makes you feel all superior, Modernity, but the reason nobody has taken up Jock Mac's comments are because he is plainly saying that Israel isn't the state of the Rothschilds etc, or indeed anything particularly to do with Judaism.
And I can only reiterate what Matthew said, I have never seen you demur from the contumely heaped upon Muslims at HP (the teddybear case is, needless to say, currently generating an extraordinary feed frenzy with some utterly vile comments, none of which seem to particularly irk our Modernity).

Hypocrite: I did take up the point you allude to when I said: "the notion that (Israel) is an autonomous imperialist power that can challenge the EU is patently absurd."

Personally, I've never read this "Harry's Place" site that people seem to obsess about so much, nor have I any particular wish to do so.

I must say, I think McT's points were more based on deranged fantasy than historical or political reality and actually made "Tim" seem quite reasonable!

Bit like an argument between two factions in "Spooks". Cue "humane" lethal injections.

RACISM! It's a sad comment on the state of the British 'left' that it can still be possible to express support for Israel in polite (or any other) society, never mind on a left-wing blog. Whether Israel has anything to do with Judaism or not, it is still a vicious ' white men and natives' racist state (e.g. are the racist landownership laws enforced against non-Arabs?), and anyone who countenances its continued existence as such (i.e. as Israel)is a racist, and should not be allowed to post here.

As to fantasies about Israel attacking Europe: is that so unlikely? If they can get away with what they did to the USS Liberty, they can get away with anything. Look at some of the right-wing nuts in the Knesset - they're barking mad and capable of anything, even if their paymasters disapprove.

And who are their paymasters? Thanks for sticking up for me hypocrite lecteur, but I'm afraid I wasn't plainly saying that Israel is not the private army of the Rothschilds, but I was certainly not saying that it is. I am convinced by James Petras arguments (e.g. in 'the power of Israel in the United States' and ' Rulers and Ruled in the US Empire) that he is right and Finkelstein and Chomsky (for instance) are wrong, on the question of whether the tail is wagging the dog or vice versa. But I'm not sure that Israel is the tail, rather I feel that both the US and Israel are the dog, and the Israel lobby is the tail that's wagging it. I'm not going to make a long case for that here. Who finances the lobby? Well, the US taxpayer, but that's like a circular i.e. the lobby sees that the taxpayer pays for the lobby to see that the taxpayer pays for the lobby to...(Israel is. like the military, also a way of transferring money from the poor to the rich in the US). But where was the prime mover?
All writings I've seen on the Israel lobby, talk of right-wing think tanks heavily funded by Jewish billionaires, though I've not seen any specific details - so maybe the writers are wrong, or jumping the gun without real evidence - I assume that these donations come with guarantees of anonymity, but there is enough documented support for Israel from Jewish billionaires for it to be a reasonable supposition that they are (or were originally) the main donors, and therefore could call the tune. I say 'could' because really I'm not sure that anyone calls the tune anymore, which is why I speculated that Israel was some sort of rapidly growing mutant, out of control and very dangerous - maybe, like capitalism itself, a self-perpetuating predatory system.

No, I don't subscribe to the deranged Illumanati conspiracy theories that abound on the net; I don't consider that stuff right wing - it's just fantasy that's too incoherent to adhere to any political position.

But is it unacceptable to note that while very few Jews are international bankers, an awful lot of international bankers seem to be Jews, and ask whether they can sometimes show a solidarity based on self interest, have routes of communication and advancement through long-established connections that are less accessible to outsiders. Why, for instance, did Jews comprise 6 out of 7 of the oligarchs who made off with the accumulated wealth of the Soviet Union? These were young men, albeit educated in the best US business schools, so they must have had access to huge support networks - they were chosen for their contacts, and six out of seven is too much for coincidence. Is it antisemitic to notice this? Is it antisemitic to ask who owns the federal reserve bank?

Whether these forces have the interest of Jews generally at heart is anyone's guess.

And, as for whether Europe should spend 'squidillions' on a military to defend itself agaimst the Jews - No! not Europe! - I advocate pulling out of the EU - but some sort of mutual defence arrangement with France and Germany, that recognises that the US ( and therefore Israel) is the only likely threat to us, and will certainly oppose any attempts to assert independence.

Jock McJewhater:
It's a sad commentary on the state of the British "left" that people like you feel able to spew your anti-semitic bile without being denounced for what you are: a vicious, anti-semitic, racist.

Re: jockey mac racist -- pleased with yourself Osler?

Look around you. Whose side would you prefer?

I'll leave it at that.

On second thoughts -- no -- I won't.

Why don't you have anything to say Osler?

At least delete the garbage from the antisemite.

Takes but a moment of your precious time so it does.

Or are you one of those complete fucking idiots who can't see what's in front of your snout?

Israelis who have known me as an anti-Zionist of long standing are curious to hear what I think about Zionism. I have, of course, long since abandoned my anti-Zionism, which was based on a confidence in the European labour movement, or, more broadly, in European society and civilization, which that society and civilization have not justified. If, instead of arguing against Zionism in the 1920s and 1930s I had urged European Jews to go to Palestine, I might have helped to save some of the lives that were later extinguished in Hitler’s gas chambers.

For the remnants of European Jewry – is it only for them? – the Jewish State has become an historic necessity. It is also a living reality. Whatever their cleavages, grievances, and frustrations, the Jews of Israel are animated by a fresh and strong sense of nationhood and by a dogged determination to consolidate and strengthen their State by every means at their disposal. They also have the feeling – how well justified – that the ‘civilized world’, which in one way or another has the fate of European Jewry on its conscience, has no moral ground to stand on when it tries to sermonize or threaten Israel for any real or imaginary breaches of international commitments.

Even now, however, I am not a Zionist; and I have repeatedly said so in public and in private. The Israelis accept this with unexpected tolerance but seem bewildered:

‘How is it possible not to embrace Zionism?’ they ask, ‘if one recognises the State of Israel as an historic necessity?’

What a difficult and painful question to answer!

From a burning or sinking ship people jump no matter where – on to a lifeboat, a raft, or a float. The jumping is for them an ‘historic necessity’; and the raft is in a sense the basis of their whole existence. But does it follow that the jumping should be made into a programme, or that one should take a raft-State as the basis of a political orientation? (I hope that Israelis or Zionists who happen to read this will not misunderstand the expression ‘raft-State’. It describes the precariousness of Israel, but is not meant to belittle Israel’s constructive achievement.)

To my mind it is just another Jewish tragedy that the world has driven the Jew to seek safety in a nation-state in the middle of this century when the nation-state is falling into decay.

Through several centuries every progressive development in the life of Western nations was bound up with the formation and growth of the nation-state or with the movement for the nation-state. The Jew was not connected with that movement and did not benefit from it. He remained shut up in his synagogue and in his religious loyalties while Western man subordinated religious to national loyalties and found his stature within his nation rather than within his Church. Only now, when man no longer grows in stature within the nation and when he can find himself anew only within some supranational community, has the Jew found his nation and his State. What a melancholy anachronism!

‘Ah, but show us the nation that has abandoned its statehood for the sake of a cosmopolitan or internationalist dream,’ say my Israeli friends.

No-one has done so, of course; and it has not occurred to me to urge Israelis to do so. The point is that the nation-state decays and disintegrates whether people are aware of it or not, no matter what their efforts to preserve it. The process is world-wide, however varied its local manifestations.

Written in 1954. Isaac Deutscher (1968) The Non-Jewish Jew and other essays, London: Oxford University Press, pp 111-113

From an interview given by Isaac Deutscher to New Left Review on 23 June 1967:
A man once jumped from the top floor of a burning house in which many members of his family had already perished. He managed to save his life; but as he was falling he hit a person standing down below and broke that person’s legs and arms. The jumping man had no choice; yet to the man with the broken limbs he was the cause of his misfortune. If both behaved rationally, they would not become enemies. The man who escaped from the blazing house, having recovered, would have tried to help and consol the other sufferer; and the latter might have realized that he was the victim of circumstances over which neither of them had control. But look what happens when these people behave irrationally. The injured man blames the other for his misery and swears to make him pay for it. The other, afraid of the crippled man’s revenge, insults him, kicks him, and beats him up whenever they meet. The kicked man again swears revenge and is again punched and punished. The bitter enmity, so fortuitous at first, hardens and comes to overshadow the whole existence of both men and to poison their minds.

You will, I am sure, recognize yourselves (I said to my Israeli audience), the remnants of European Jewry in Israel, in the man who jumped from the blazing house. The other character represents, of course, the Palestine Arabs, more than a million of them, who have lost their lands and their homes. They are resentful; they gaze from across the frontiers on their old native places; they raid you stealthily and swear revenge. You punch and kick them mercilessly; you have shown that you know how to do it. But what is the sense of it? And what is the prospect?

The responsibility for the tragedy of European Jews, for Auschwitz, Majdanek, and the slaughters in the ghetto, rests entirely on our own western bourgeois ‘civilization’, of which Nazism was the legitimate, even though degenerate, offspring. Yet it was the Arabs who were made to pay the price for the crimes the West committed towards the Jews. They are still made to pay it, for the ‘guilty conscience’ of the West is, of course, pro-Israeli and anti-Arab. And how easily Israel had allowed itself to be bribed and fooled by the false ‘conscience money’.

Isaac Deutscher (1968) The Non-Jewish Jew and other essays, London: Oxford University Press, pp 136-137

Good essay here:

From Victim to Shylock and Oppressor:
The New Image of the Jew in the Trotskyist Movement

The left for the most part, acts like Israel doesn't exist. Being established 60 years, certifies its existence.

I think class struggle should be supported inside Zionist organizations. If you are Israeli, chances are you belong to a Zionist group. Radicals should join groups as Histadrut and the Labor Party.

In Palestine work with socialist elements of Fatah and trade unions.

Go back to basics, Unite Israeli and Palestinian workers.

McT: "I don't subscribe to the deranged Illumanati conspiracy theories that abound on the net; I don't consider that stuff right wing"

No, you just subscribe to a slightly sanitised "left-wing" version of them. The vocabulary is exactly the same, as well as the specific examples.

If you don't consider it right wing, you wouldn't have considered Mein Kampf right wing in the 1930's.

Ambiguity is thin layer of space between truth and lies. But it's big enough for genocidal intentions to grow in.

Contra McTrousers;

I think it's a funny kind of left winger that can argue against the right of self determination for any nation. Including the Jewish one.

Jews are not a nation, any more than Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Hindus, homosexuals, trainspotters etc.

Jim Denham - Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've noticed your name before, and got the impression that you're a member of the racist, far-right Alliance for Workers Liberty. It's another sad comment on the so-called 'left' that you lot were admitted into the Socialist Alliance, and then Respect. That's one of many reasons I will never take the SWP seriously again, and has raised a big question mark over the Socialist party which I had previously considered a more serious outfit, apart from its Trotskyist - I consider Trotskyism to be basically a CIA funded and directed anti-communist, anti-socialist propaganda program.
I never expected much of Respect, but I thought it was worthwhile getting George Galloway re-elected to snub New Labour, and to get a higher profile for socialist ideas. I don't expect much of Respect's successors, and the posts here confirm that.

As to Isaac Deutscher: he thought it worthwhile to write 3 volumes on Trotsky, who he described as a prophet - my case rests.

"

McT: "I don't subscribe to the deranged Illumanati conspiracy theories that abound on the net; I don't consider that stuff right wing"

No, you just subscribe to a slightly sanitised "left-wing" version of them. The vocabulary is exactly the same, as well as the specific examples.

If you don't consider it right wing, you wouldn't have considered Mein Kampf right wing in the 1930's.

Ambiguity is thin layer of space between truth and lies. But it's big enough for genocidal intentions to grow in.

" - Alec Nichols

I expected something like that - just the usual hiding behind the Holocaust of the racial supremacist (not that they're even a race, of course) Zionistas and their opportunist camp-followers.

The true succesors to Hitler are the Zionists, and you are one.

Do you have any specific answers e.g. do you know what percentage of influential bankers are Jews? Do you believe the assorted 'rich-lists'' assessment of the Rothschilds' wealth? Do you know who funds the Israel lobby? Have you read the James Petras books I mentioned above? Do you have any answers to the case he makes for the Israel lobby being the controlling force in American politics?

Of course you don't. Why would you bother, when you can just cry anti-semitism, and the argument is over?

As a last thought - if there was a group of people who were totally exempt from all accusations or investigations of conspiracies, do you think that it would accord with long experience of human nature to believe that they would not conspire?

"... cry anti-semitism, and the argument is over"

I haven't accused you of 'anti-semitism', but in the light of your subsequent arguments I'd say you are a rabid arse-licker of Hitlerism.

You substitute your exaggerated conspiracy theories for political and economic analysis, while disowning the more embarassing crackpot variations on the theme.

Which ties in with the class interests of a faction of bourgeois opinion which would like to change the direction of Western foreign policy, but is simultaneously on the right.

Just as Hitler's movement diverted the left in Germany with its exaggerated claims of the influence of Jewish bankers and capitalists, but protected the interests of the Krupps, Thyssens and Bosches of the time. Thereby providing a fake left alternative to the KPD and SPD and allowing for the destruction of the German workers movement.

The fact that there is a pro-Israel lobby and a "Jewish bourgeoisie" and part of it seeks to influence political opinion in the west, is hardly that suprising. Nor is the fact that elements within it may sometimes act illegally.

But it doesn't control the USA or Britain, nor could it. The criminality traditional establishment is far more "teflon-coated" and unlikely to be leaked by elements within the police MI5 or the Tory party, but that never concerns neo-nazis like you.

Nor could Israel, with a land area the size of Wales, a population of 5 million Jews, no oil or coal reserves and near total dependence on US military supplies in the event of war, threaten the EU.

So to support your fantasy, you have to use the argument that the "lobby" control the US and you cite Petras as your left-wing authority.
A slippery character on the academic left, who changes his arguments as the wind blows.

Of course to vipers like you precise definitions don't matter, because your words can just just blow in the wind without any repercussions.

As I said before, a bi-national socialist state is the only guarantee of no further ethnic cleansing.

Alec Nichols - I was going to respond to your last post, but I looked back over the previous posts and found this from you:

" It's pretty obvious to anyone who's not completely delusional that not only the US administration, but the ruling party in Israel are committed to a "Two State" solution, as long as a Palestinian leadership that continues to exclude Hamas retains power."

You're either stupid or evil; either way you're not worth the candle.

"You're either stupid or evil; either way you're not worth the candle."

No, just a realist.

Speaking of candles, Shabbat Shalom and Happy Hanukkah.

http://www.dkimages.com/discover/previews/935/65228470.JPG

"could well be anti-semitic. "

the English art of understatement is not lost on the Left.

as so amply pointed out by Jim Denham, Will and Alex Nichols it is blindingly obvious that Jock McTrousers's outpourings are racist filth

what is more surprising is the inability, insensitivity, complacency and downright laziness which meant so few people picked up on it (Dave did) and couldn't be bothered to take a stand against anti-Jewish racism

and people often wonder why the Left is so small?

PS: I am happy to discuss HP on my own blog, not Dave's, as Matthew Stiles' point didn't address the issue and is a mere deflection

Modernity
For what it's worth I do think that the comments from Jock are disgusting nonsense but there is similar stuff on HP only there it is directed at Muslims. It's a total cop-out from you to say that you won't discuss that because it is Dave's blog. You come on to this blog, wagging your finger, slagging off the left because there is a lack of condemnations of comments but on HP if anything you give succour to the anti-Muslim stuff. Talk about splinters and beams.

Matthew,

I have pointed out direct anti-Jewish racism under people's noses, and all I get for my trouble is attacked.

message and messenger?

of course if certain people are not terribly sensitive to anti-Jewish racism or have difficulty spotting it, then you might imagine that they would be grateful for someone pointing it out?

if you wish to discuss HP with me, please do so on my blog as I don't like to derail Dave's blog

Modernityblog:

Ever considered whether some of the activities of Labour Friends of Israel supporters might have contributed to views like McT's?
Not to mention the more right-wing elements like Stanley Kalms, former treasurer of the Conservatives, who was recently threatening to join UKIP?

alex,

contributed?

hardly, the pathological antisemitism which is found in the likes of Jock McTrousers is probably more inspired by his own neurotic mentality, Soviet antisemitism and him reading too much David Duke

I am just a bit disappointed that today's Left has forgotten many of the lessons from the 1970s/1980s antifascism, and how to spot and deal with intellectual skinheads such as Jock McTrousers

it's a shame that more people don't read Steve Cohen's That's Funny You Don't Look Anti-Semitic, http://www.engageonline.org.uk/ressources/funny/

Alex "Modernityblog:

"Ever considered whether some of the activities of Labour Friends of Israel supporters might have contributed to views like McT's?
Not to mention the more right-wing elements like Stanley Kalms, former treasurer of the Conservatives, who was recently threatening to join UKIP?"

Alex you have a basic misunderstanding of antisemitism. It's not the actions of Israelis , it's not the action of any Jews that contribute to antisemitic views - It's antisemites who are responsible for antisemitism.

At first thought I found it a bit depressing that only one poster took my side against these slimy fake-left, Nick Cohen fan, fascist, neo-liberal zionist racists. But, on second thoughts, I find it heartening that no-one can be bothered - there's no point in arguing with them. Under the definition of antisemitism given above, it would be hard to be a decent human being without being antisemitic.

But, though I grudge responding to these slime, one last thought: Hitler ascribed guilt to all Jews for the crimes of SOME Jews; the posters above hold me guilty of condemning ALL Jews for RAISING QUESTIONS about the activities of SOME Jews !

I spotted Jock McTrouser's anti-semititism which is why I reproved him mildly with the remark about 'the nasty Jew' and ironically suggested that he should argue for squidillions to be spent on the British Army to defend us. Having read the rest of his comments I can only assume he is an out and out Nazi, but also mentally ill. Surely,Dave, it is not too much to ask you to ban him from posting on this site. After all, I thought the left had a policy of no platform for racists and fascists.

"After all, I thought the left had a policy of no platform for racists and fascists."

some do, some don't

but this episode illustrates the point, if someone had said originally that Jock McTrousers was a nasty racist and in all probability a Hitler lover, then the response probably would have been:

"oh no, Jock McTrousers is just an anti-Zionist making legitimate criticisms of Israel, and you're just trying to silence him"

whereas now even the staunchest critic would be hard put not to see the explicit racism which oozes from Jock McTrousers' posts

but that's the problem, a lot of people nowadays can't see the difference between dressed up racism and legitimate political criticism of Israel, for far too long people have become desensitised to anti-Jewish racism.

so when such racism is staring them in the face, they often blink, shrugged their shoulders and walk on

that's why the issue of anti-Jewish racism is important, not only so that people will know the obvious signs but that they will react to it, and oppose it wholeheartedly, whether or not it comes from Stalinists, their fellow travellers, the extreme right or whatever source

Because clearly you can't oppose racists and fascists if you can't recognise them, and that's the lesson that the Left should remember from the 1970s/1980s.

Why does the Israeli government steadfastly insist on being one of the only member states of the United Nations to refuse to subscribe not only to the international convention on nuclear arms proliferation but also to the conventions relating to both chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction? Why does the EU insist on continuing its Association Agreement with Israel which affords that state huge trading advantages within Europe when it is so clearly in breach of the human rights provisions of that agreement?

Any state that so clearly treats international conventions, agreements and institutions with such contempt, should surely be kept at arms’ length by an international community that appears instead to want to appease its every claim and to facilitate its every demand. For God’s sake, of what is the world so frightened – Ehud Olmert, the Labour Friends of Israel or the comatose Ariel Sharon?

Still not deleted the fash comments then Osler?

Fucking hell -- Oxford Union Masturbating Society watch out! osler is stealing your thunder!

Richard wrote: 'Alex you have a basic misunderstanding of antisemitism. It's not the actions of Israelis , it's not the action of any Jews that contribute to antisemitic views - It's antisemites who are responsible for antisemitism.'

Old-fashioned European anti-Semitism was based upon fairy tales: Jews as Christ-killers, child blood-sacrifice, world Jewish conspiracy, that sort of thing. All nonsense, but murderous nonsense, leading to pogroms and culminating in Hitler's Holocaust.

Although the old myths still exist in a vestigial form these days in Western Europe and the USA (and have taken root in the Arab and Islamic world, where they didn't exist a century ago), anti-Semitism today is largely a response to material conditions; that is, it is a corrupted and ignorant response to the actions of the Israeli state vis-à-vis the Palestinians.

Such a response to Israeli actions is wrong, and must be condemned by socialists. It is not on the left where such sentiments are found; rather (in my experience), it is amongst politically naive people who are disgusted by such Israeli actions, but who do not understand the relationship between Zionism, the state of Israel and the Jewish people.

However, things are not helped by the way in which Zionists and the pro-Israel lobby associate Jews as a whole with Zionism and the state of Israel. This plays into the hands of the professional anti-Semites: the far right and extreme Islamicists, who make exactly the same association between the Jews and Zionism and Israel. Hence, one can see how politically naive people fall into this trap.

Yes, anti-Semites are responsible for anti-Semitism; but the state of Israel and Zionists and Israel lobbyists are making things easier for them to spread their poison.

It falls upon people who understand the relationship between the Jewish people, Zionism and the state of Israel -- and upon socialists in particular, as the foremost opponents of racism -- to ensure that people's criticism of the actions of the state of Israel against the Palestinians does not become corrupted into hostility towards Jews as a whole, and that it remains free of the stench of anti-Semitism.

Dr. Paul wrote:

anti-Semitism today is largely a response to material conditions;

you could say that about many things that it's hardly a satisfactory explanation for the complex phenomena we know as antisemitism

that would hardly explain away Soviet antisemitism, would it?

that would hardly explain away the Eastern European states purges of "cosmopolitans"**, would it??

reducing everything down to the material conditions is an oversimplification, and would not provide a satisfactory explanation when looking at the rise of racial attacks on Jews in the last 3-4 years

Antisemitism is a multifaceted phenomena, which evolves over time bringing in new elements, on one end of the scale it is merely a foul racial hatred and yet at the other it is a full-fledged ideology, which seeks to explain away the world's complex interactions by means of Jewish conspiracies and suchlike.

So we shouldn't try to reduce everything down to the material or the economic, it may play part in explaining some manifestations, but by no means can it explain all instances, nor can it answer the question: why does antisemitism persists in so many different societies in different forms?

you wrote:

and upon socialists in particular, as the foremost opponents of racism

some are, some ain't

as Mike Rosen puts it:

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=10384

"That’s to say, it’s said by some that racism towards peoples from countries oppressed and exploited by the West is the main racism we’re fighting, but a racism directed towards peoples seen as heavily implicated in the West’s oppression matters less."

Translation: racism directed towards Jews is often seen as a lesser concern

by and large, the problem is that parts of the British Left are in a degree of denial and ambivalence about the variations of (non right wing wing) antisemitism and so when it pops up (as with Jock McTrouser's filth) they don't know how to spot it

[** cosmopolitans, another nasty euphemism for Jew]

Dr Paul correctly writes that 'things are not helped by the way in which Zionists and the pro-Israel lobby associate Jews as a whole with Zionism and the state of Israel'.

The real issue is that the British electorate is increasingly concerned about undue Israeli influence on our parliamentary democracy – not Jewish influence – of which there is none. It is not the Chief Rabbi who has the ear of the Prime Minister, (both current and previous), but the Israeli ambassador.

Very true, as this article shows:
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/yasmin_alibhai_brown/article3218062.ece
Maybe mod and sue will accuse her of being an anti semite too.

I was just wondering when Jock McTrousers, Vaird or Paddy Garcia are going start quoting from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, as "fact"

So you claiming that Yasmin Alaibhai Brown is an anti semite and put her writings in the same category as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

kill garcia.

Stamp the dirt down.

Filth.

Do away with. Put in a skip with rats.

Why not stick to the point rather than issuing death threats? Twat.

Joke: Paddy Garcia talks about not issuing death threats, I thought that's what his friends in the Palestinian independence moverment and the Islamic world did all the time. (Sharp intake of breath from assembled masses reading this!!!!'My God, it's an Islamophobic Harry Placer!!!' they scream.). Why is it so difficult for people, supposedly conscious socialists to recognise reactionary filth when it presents itself? r mental illness. How more explicit does the pond scum have to be for you lot to wake up that Jock McTrousers is either a wind-up merchant or a very naughty boy? I'm very disappointed in you, Dave. By their friends, ye shall know them.

Specific criticism of, or answers, to ANYTHING I ACTUALLY SAID, very welcome.

Well said, Jock.