A religious conflict is one in which the actions and rhetoric of the conflict is dominated by religious ideologies, argumentation and symbolism. This doesn’t mean that all or even most of the people involved in the conflict are religious or religiously motivated. It is likely that the majority of Israelis oppose the relentless assaults by messianic settlers on Al Aqsa mosque that led to the recent escalation. Yet these assaults by hard-core religiously motivated Jewish activists have now shaped the conflict. And this does not apply only to the Israelis. It seems that Al Aqsa mosque has become the symbolic unifier for the Palestinians. And this unification has been a positive development for the Palestinians. While it appeared for a while that Israel had managed to break the Palestinians and their ability to struggle as one people, the current Jewish assault on Al Aqsa has united the Palestinians and Arabs and not just the Muslims.Read More
Those who were naive enough to buy into the idea that the Israeli Palestinian battle is a ‘political conflict’ must revise their perception of this matter. The images of religiously motivated Israelis and Palestinians stabbing each other with knives and screwdrivers reveal a simple and undeniable truth -- we are witnessing a colossal religious and ethnic conflict. Unlike ‘political disputes,’ religious and ethnic disputes are rarely resolved, at best; such disputes can be temporarily suppressed. The current conflict in Israel is violence at the most personal level. Tragically, this phenomenon is a persistent theme throughout Jewish history.Read More
Occasionally Israeli political and military leadership fail to survive Israeli wars. PM Golda Meir and her Chief Of Staff (David "Dado" Elazar) were sent home after the 1973 blunder (Yom Kippur war). PM Menachem Begin lost his sanity after the first Lebanon war (1982). Defense Minister Amir Peretz and his Chief Of Staff’ Dan Halutz’ were treated harshly by the Israeli media following the 2006 defeat in Lebanon. PM Benjamin Netanyahu is now paying a price for the recent Israeli disaster in Gaza and the Palestinian uprising that followed.Read More
In this Al Etejah's Panorama program Gilad Atzmon elaborates on the dominance of Jewish lobby in the UK and America and the weak resistance it meets in both Britain and the USA. The activity of the Lobby clearly undermines the notion of Western democracy. We also spoke about the collapse of Left politics and future of Western thinking.
The Labour is facing a new challenge, as pro-Israel supporters are increasingly stopping donations to the party.
The Labour’s financial backers say they do not want party leader Ed Miliband in Downing Street. They have described Miliband’s position on Gaza and Palestine as ‘toxic’.
The tension began a few months ago, when Miliband slammed Israel's latest ground incursion into the Gaza Strip which led to the deaths of hundreds of civilians, many for them women and children. Miliband had described the Israeli offensive as ‘wrong and unjustifiable’. He also warned Tel Aviv that it was ‘losing friends in the international community day by day’.
Later, Miliband further enraged Israelis by supporting a vote on the recognition of Palestine in the House of Parliament. The MPs voted by a huge margin of 274-12 in favor of the motion on October 13.
The Labour has been receiving hundreds of thousands of pounds a year in donations from the pro-Israeli lobbies community.
“It is very clear that Ed Miliband and all other Labour party leaders have been heavily supported by the Jewish lobby, Jewish donors in the UK for around 2 decades,” said author and political activist Gilad Atzmon in an interview with Press TV.
Atzmon believes that Miliband’s pro-Palestinian attitude is ‘hardly possible to be taken seriously’.
Some Labour officials argue that the Jewish anger poses a huge challenge complicating the party’s fundraising efforts, making the leaders pass the begging bowl.
Reported by Gilad Atzmon
Natali Cohen Vaxberg, Israel’s leading kaka artist, Faces Charges After Pooping on the Israeli Flag
NBC reports today that “A left-wing artist who posted a video of herself defecating on an Israeli flag to protest the country’s treatment of Palestinians appeared in court on Monday facing charges of desecrating a national symbol.” In fact this uniquely revolting young woman spread her crap on the flags of every possible country. As we know, cosmopolitan Jews do not approve of national belonging. The video entitled “S*** instead of blood” was posted on Natali Cohen Vaxberg’s Facebook page on July 18 - and provoked outrage in Israel.
I wish one day, a Zionist with a brain finds the guts to debate me, for smashing the repetitive Kaplan is no fun at all...
From Press TV website:
"A declaration of war" that's how Mahmoud Abbas' spokesman reacted to Israel's closure of the al-Aqsa mosque to worshippers in reaction to the shooting of an Israeli rabbi.
While the UN Security Council proves its inability to hold Israel accountable for illegal settlement building, anger is rising in the capitals of Israel’s allies about its actions and more pressure that Tel Aviv is putting on Palestinian officials.
This edition of ‘The Debate’ interviews Gilad Atzmon, writer & political commentator from London, and Lee Kaplan, investigative journalist from San Francisco, to ask has the world reached a crossroads in how it deals with Israel, and which way will it go?
"The Palestinians are devastated, but the Israelis are the big losers following the bombardment of Gaza".
We spoke about 'solidarity', controlled opposition, political paralysis and activists' impotence. I also spoke about the structures and the building of cognitive elite. I attempted to explain the difference between Palestinian subservient elite (Ramallah) and combatant one (Gaza).
GA: The following is my book review of Shlomo Sand's latest book. It was published a year ago. Following the publication of the English edition of How I Stopped Being A Jew last week, I decided to post it again.
By Gilad Atzmon
Sand’s latest book, How I Stopped Being A Jew, is a tragic testimony made by a morally awakened Israeli Jew who comes to realise that his spiritual, cultural and political existence is contaminated with Judeo-centric exclusivism and is fuelled by ethno-centric racism. Shlomo Sand decides to stop being a Jew – but has he succeeded?
Sand, as we all know, is a wonderful writer; witty, innovative, poetic and fluent, his voice is personal, at times funny, occasionally sarcastic and always genuinely pessimistic.
Sand’s writing is scholarly, deep, reflective and imaginative; however, his scholarship is pretty much limited to French liberal thinking and early post-modernist theory. The outcome is disappointing at times. How I Stopped To Be A Jew is a ‘politically correct’ text, saturated with endless caveats inserted to disassociate the author from any possible affiliation with anyone who may be viewed as an opponent of Jewish power, critical of Jewish identity politics or a challenger of the mainstream historicity of the Holocaust.
“I don’t write for anti-Semites, I regard them as totally ignorant or people who suffer from an incurable disease,” (p. 21/Hebrew edition) writes the author who claims to be humanist, universalist and far removed from Jewish exclusivism.* It all sounds very Jewish to me. When it comes to the Holocaust, Sand uses the same tactic and somehow manages to lose all wit and scholarly fashion. The Nazis are “beasts”, their rise to power metaphorically described as a “beast awakening from its lair.” I would expect a leading historian and ex-Jew to have moved on beyond these kinds of banal clichés.
Sand writes about identity politics and is certainly sensitive to the complexities of this subject. He argues forcefully that nationalism is an ‘invention’, yet, for some reason he attributes some forensic qualities to identity and the politics involved. Perhaps Sand fails to realise that identity politics is actually a form of identification – it is there to replace authenticity. For example, Zionism was born as an attempt to replace Judaic authentic orientation with an imaginary sense of national belonging – Israeli identity is a collection of signifiers set to make the Jew believe that he or she has a past, present and future. Identity is basically a set of symbolic identifiers that evoke a sense of collectivism. If you pierce your right ear, you become a club member, if you sport a kaffiyeh you become a solidarity activist, if you manage to utter a few Israeli sound-bites you may become a Zionist. All these identities lack any authentic depth.
Little Britain, a BBC comedy show, provides us with an invaluable insight into this. Daffyd Thomas (The Only Gay in the Village) exhibits a wide range of gay symbolic identifiers without ever once being engaged in a single homosexual intercourse. So Daffyd, while identifying as gay – politically, socially and culturally – saves himself of the elementary authentic experience as a homosexual.
Sand understands that Jewish identity politics is hollow, but he may fail to grasp that all identity politics are hollow. On the contrary, nationalism, which he clearly despises — the bond with one’s soil, heritage, culture, language, landscape, poetry is actually a cathartic experience. Though nationalism may well be an invention as Sand and others insist, it is still an intrinsically authentic fulfilling experience. As we all know, patriotic national feelings are often suicidal – and there’s a reason for this – because just sometimes it manages to integrate man, soil and sacrifice into a state of spiritual unification.
GA: the following is a comprehensive review of The Wandering Who and the controversy around it. It also includes an extended appendix of commentaries re the book both positive and negative.
Gilad Atzmon's book "The Wandering Who" about Jewish identity politics has, since its publication three years ago, sparked most different reactions as well as particularly lively debates, as a glance on the controversial author's Wikipedia page shows. Some view him as an inspired fighter for justice, as an undaunted source of ideas and impulses, even a prophet, while others despise him as an "anti-Semite" and demonize him as a soul catcher in the quagmire of extreme right-wing ideas. What's in this prophetic devil's book? What do people say about it? What is to make of it? What happens on the 202 pages between the two covers resembles an elaborate jazz piece in its composition: Themes are employed and varied, circles closed, biographical details interpolated. At the heart of the study are - in a nutshell - two major theses: that there is a political ideological "Jewish-ness" which by far exceeds the boundaries of Zionism, and that, in this context, there is a deep gap between tribal interest politics and universal standards within the range of Jewish opinions: Jerusalem versus Athens, known from the problem of the Jewish vs. the democratic state. In 22 chapters, organized in four parts and supplemented by diverse fore- and afterwords, the author analyzes the heterogeneous Jewish collective from which he originates, often in a context with the Israeli crimes against the Palestinians. The self-critical impulse at the root of his criticism can be understood while reading the epilogue, where Gilad Atzmon recounts an episode from his school days in Israel: On a visit to Yad Vashem the fourteen-year-old asks the teacher why so many Europeans loathed the Jews so much and in so many places at once. The subsequent punishment did not silence the querist; apparently, similar scenes were to follow. Thus the author self-assesses not to look at Jews or Israelis, but in the mirror (p 94). This is essential for understanding his motivation.
PART 1: WHAT'S IN IT?
Atzmon is a dissident, someone who, during his time in the Israeli army, discovered lies and inconsistencies he started to consequently pursue, as he describes in the introductory part of "The Wandering Who". What did the first Israeli president mean when he spoke about a Jewish "primary quality" (p 16f) that ranks higher than civic commitments of Jews toward a diaspora country? Atzmon analyzes Victor Ostrovsky, a deserter ex-Mossad agent (p 18ff), and his description of "sayanim", diaspora Jewish helpers for the Jewish cause. What enabled Wolfowitz, Greenspan and others to mobilize the USA for Zionist interests? It was in any case no conspiracy, writes Atzmon, for everything was in the open and public (p 30).
Gilad Atzmon's book "The Wandering Who" about Jewish identity politics has, since its publication three years ago, sparked most different reactions as well as particularly lively debates, as a glance on the controversial author's Wikipedia page shows. Some view him as an inspired fighter for justice, as an undaunted source of ideas and impulses, even a prophet, while others despise him as an "anti-Semite" and demonize him as a soul catcher in the quagmire of extreme right-wing ideas. What's in this prophetic devil's book? What do people say about it? What is to make of it?
What happens on the 202 pages between the two covers resembles an elaborate jazz piece in its composition: Themes are employed and varied, circles closed, biographical details interpolated. At the heart of the study are - in a nutshell - two major theses: that there is a political ideological "Jewish-ness" which by far exceeds the boundaries of Zionism, and that, in this context, there is a deep gap between tribal interest politics and universal standards within the range of Jewish opinions: Jerusalem versus Athens, known from the problem of the Jewish vs. the democratic state. In 22 chapters, organized in four parts and supplemented by diverse fore- and afterwords, the author analyzes the heterogeneous Jewish collective from which he originates, often in a context with the Israeli crimes against the Palestinians. The self-critical impulse at the root of his criticism can be understood while reading the epilogue, where Gilad Atzmon recounts an episode from his school days in Israel: On a visit to Yad Vashem the fourteen-year-old asks the teacher why so many Europeans loathed the Jews so much and in so many places at once. The subsequent punishment did not silence the querist; apparently, similar scenes were to follow. Thus the author self-assesses not to look at Jews or Israelis, but in the mirror (p 94). This is essential for understanding his motivation.
Reported by Gilad Atzmon
The BBC reported yesterday that London based newspaper The Jewish Chronicle has apologised to readers who complained after it ran an advert for the Disasters Emergency Committee's Gaza crisis appeal (DEC).
The weekly newspaper said running the advert was "meant as a purely humanitarian gesture".
When it launched the appeal, the DEC said the latest conflict had made half a million people in Gaza homeless and warned of a "humanitarian emergency".
After the advert featured in this week's Jewish Chronicle (JC), a Facebook page was set up calling on Jewish readers to boycott the title until it issued a "full apology".
It accused the newspaper of "ignoring the sensitivity of this conflict which is having a day to day impact and effect on the Jewish community here".
A message posted on the papers own Facebook page pointed out that the advert was "not an expression of the JC's view".
It added: "We have received complaints from readers angry at the decision. We apologise for the upset caused."
The Dictator-A Film Review by Gilad Atzmon
On the face of it, Baron Cohen’s The Dictator is a horrid film. It is vulgar, it isn’t funny and if it has five good jokes in it, they appear in the two minute official trailer. In short, save your time and money – unless of course, you are interested in Jewish identity politics and neurosis.
Similar to Cohen’s previous work, The Dictator is, once again, a glimpse into Cohen’s own tribal morbidity. After all, the person and the spirit behind this embarrassing comedy is a proud self-loving character who never misses an opportunity to express his intimate affinity to his people, their unique comic talent and their beloved Jewish state. But let’s face it, Cohen isn’t alone, after all, he has created The Dictator together with a Hollywood studio. So, it’s reasonable to say that what we see here is just one more Hollywood-orchestrated effort to vilify the Arab, the Muslim and the Orient.
I guess that Arab rulers, regimes and politics are an ideal subject for a satirical take, still, one may wonder what exactly does Sacha Baron Cohen know about the Arab World? As far as the film can tell, not much. Instead, Cohen projects his own Zionist and tribal symptoms onto the people of Arabia and their leaders.
In the film, Cohen plays General Hafez Aladeen, the Arab ruler of the oil-rich North African rogue state Wadiya. On the face of it, he is the satirical version of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, but in reality, Aladeen’s actions are no less than a vast amplification of the crimes committed by Israel and its war criminals such as Shimon Peres, Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni.
Apparently, dogs in California have a new source of entertainment: a TV channel run by a former Israeli Army propagandist. The Arab Digest reported today that an Israeli company launched a new TV Channel for Dogs in San Diego; the Executive chairman, Yossi Uzrad, was executive producer of the Channel 2 news company and the head of the news desk at the IDF radio station in Israel. In a nutshell, an Israeli army propagandist is running a Dog's TV channel. The Arab Digest rightly wonders whether it is safe to let America’s dogs to be subject to an Israeli propaganda channel. The show may lead some dogs to invade their respective homes and expel their human family members from their doggy promised land.
By Gilad Atzmon
“Dershowitz is not only a remarkable liar and slanderer, but also an extreme opponent of elementary civil rights” Noam Chomsky
The following is an analytical yet amusing glimpse into the deceitful and psychological nature of Zionist propaganda as manifested by arch Zionist Alan Dershowitz.
Dershowitz wrote last week, “in a recent post, Atzmon said that he would be willing to play alongside David Duke. What a duet!”
This little insignificant anecdote brought a smile to my face because in my text I was actually positively considering joining a new healing musical adventure along together with Alan Dershowitz on tuba and David Duke on trumpet.
Here are my words, “I really do not understand why Alan Dershowitz believes himself to be morally superior to Duke. Dershowitz is a Zionist Jewish supremacist, he is a world leading advocate of a racist and expansionist ideology, namely Zionism. And yet, I wouldn’t say NO to an invitation for a musical gathering along together with Dershowitz on tuba and Duke playing the trumpet, just because I believe that music brings people together.”
The text is plainly clear. There is no room for misinterpretation. It was not a ‘duet’ which I was willing to join but actually a ‘trio’ that would include Alan Dershowitz alongside David Duke. Dershowitz lied again. Instead of just politely declining and admitting that he is ‘no good’ on tuba, he followed once again his falsehearted tactics-first he put words in my mouth and then interpreted the words he himself invented. “But that's exactly where Atzmon belongs,” wrote Dershowitz - “in the company of neo-Nazis, Holocaust deniers, homophobes, misogynists, sexists and other bigots.”
If Dershowitz was an intellectual, which he isn’t or an artist which he certainly isn’t, one could have argued that this kind of behaviour suggests that the elder Zionist may live in a cute phantasmic solipsistic universe. If Dershowitz wasn’t aware of his deceitful actions, he could have been classified as a psychopath. But I actually, tend to believe that there is a certain level of awareness behind Dershowitz actions. And the conclusion is, indeed, very concerning, we are dealing with an inherently dishonest person, a ‘remarkable liar’, as Noam Chomsky describes him along together many other intellectual and humanists who have reached the same conclusion.
But why is he lying? Why is he doing it so often? Can he get away with it? Clearly not anymore, yet he wouldn’t stop. At this stage he cannot stop.
Last week, as Jewish Lobbies continue to invest enormous efforts in dictating and imposing a rigid and unquestionable Holocaust narrative, Israeli Haaretz published a short, succinct and courageous report challenging the validity of the Wannsee Conference as proof of the Nazi ‘final solution’.
Just ahead of Holocaust Memorial Day, the Israeli paper reported that Dr. Norbert Kampe (63), director of the "Wannsee Conference" Memorial Centre in Berlin, has challenged some of the most widely-accepted historical ‘facts’ associated with the conference and its meaning.
Jewish Holocaust scholars have always insisted that the master plan for the Nazi Judeocide was conceived at the Wannsee Conference but Dr. Kampe is quoted as saying that the conference dealt only with “operational matters” instead of being a platform of any form of “decision making”. To prove his point, Kampe pointed to the fact that Hitler and his ministers were not present at the conference. Furthermore, he says, "At the time, January 1942, there was no organized plan for extermination camps."
And yet, Haaretz admits, “Make no mistake. Kampe is not anti-Semitic. Certainly not a Holocaust denier. On the contrary. As expected of a professional historian, he studied countless relevant texts, documents and testimonies on the particular event…His conclusion is the direct outcome of an educated analysis of written material in his possession.”
So courageously, a Hebrew paper praises Kampe and his “fascinating historical lesson” and also acknowledges that the Israeli Ministry of Education lacks the capacity to engage in any form of informed Holocaust debate. Haaretz clearly admits that
“to this day no one knows with complete certainty and confidence what exactly happened on 20 January 1942, in this pretty villa in the wealthy suburb of Berlin.”
In May 2010, all 189 signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – including Iran – tacitly agreed to a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East and called for a conference in 2012 in Finland. But Israel has refused to support a nuclear weapons-free zone for the region, reluctant to give up its own. Israel also is not a signatory to the NPT. These facts have arguably destabilized the region, leaving open the possibility of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East
Antiwar.com reported today that former Saudi intelligence chief has called for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Prince Turki Al Faisal urged the five permanent U.N. Security Council members to guarantee a nuclear security umbrella for Mideast countries that agree to a nuclear weapons-free zone and impose sanctions on countries that develop or maintain nuclear weapons.
Though it is clear that an Iranian nuclear weapons program would certainly be a concern to Saudi Arabia, it also must be mentioned that the opinion of the U.S. intelligence community, the Obama administration, and the latest IAEA report is that Iran’s enrichment is so far civilian in nature.
It seems as if Israel and its relentless lobbies are the biggest threat to world peace.
By Gilad Atzmon
This last weekend brought with it some vile manifestations of Jewish politics in its most horrific forms.
United Against the Goyim
In the USA, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, Andrew Adler, suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu should consider ordering a Mossad hit team to assassinate U.S. President Barack Obama so that his successor will defend Israel against Iran.
Actually, it wasn’t just Obama whom Adler suggested to eliminate, the Atlanta Jewish Times listed three lethal options to help Israel counter Iran’s nuclear capability. The first, to launch a pre-emptive strike against Hamas and Hezbollah, the second to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities and the third is to assassinate the current American president.
Devastatingly, Adler’s murderous attitude towards politics is wholly consistent with some Biblical and Talmudic anti-gentile teaching. It recalls clearly certain Old Testament genocidal verses such as Leviticus 26:7-8:
‘You will chase your enemies, and they shall fall by the sword before you. Five of you shall chase a hundred, and a hundred of you shall put ten thousand to flight; your enemies shall fall by the sword before you.’
It is also consistent with the appalling way in which Palestinians are abused by the Jewish State. But it is also consistent with the Jewish cultural wrath towards the dissenting Jesus and towards dissent in general. May I remind readers that the word Yeshu – Jesus in Hebrew – is the abbreviation of the Hebrew phrase
“may his name and memory be blotted out”.
Without comparing president Obama to Jesus, Adler’s homicidal inclination is somewhat similar. Seemingly, some Jews have yet to forgive Jesus – nor President Obama. .
This week, Jesse Lieberfeld an11th-grade American Jewish teenager won the Dietrich College’s 2012 Martin Luther King, Jr. Writing Awards for composing a beautiful piece about his own moral awakening and journey away from Judaism.
“I once belonged to a wonderful religion. I belonged to a religion that allows those of us who believe in it to feel that we are the greatest people in the world—and feel sorry for ourselves at the same time,” says young Jesse. However, it seems that it didn’t take too long before Jesse found out for himself that what he was part of was neither flattering or glorious.
To read Jesse prose click here
Jewish tribal cultural indoctrination is a full-on, comprehensive process. “Although I was fortunate enough to have parents who did not try to force me into any one set of beliefs, being Jewish was in no way possible to escape growing up”, says Jesse. “It was constantly reinforced at every holiday, every service, and every encounter with the rest of my relatives.”
Inherent to the culture and its maintenance is self-love. “I was forever reminded how intelligent my family was, how important it was to remember where we had come from, and to be proud of all the suffering our people had overcome in order to finally achieve their dream in the perfect society of Israel.”
Jewish ideological and cultural ‘programming’ is rather sophisticated. It is a unique dynamic pattern practiced in both a collective and an individual way. But those who carry the message aren’t themselves fully aware of their role within the tribal ideology they aim to maintain.
Could it be that Zionist-caricature Alan Dershowitz has resorted to comedy as he desperately tries to win his battle against me and my book? What else could explain this intellectually retarded Zionist mouthpiece’s repetition of the same old lies? A few years ago Norman Finkelstein established that Dershowitz is a plagiarist, but now Dershowitz extends this infamous title - Now, he’s actually plagiarising his own phantasmic fibs!
Just a week before Hanukah, fancying himself as a bit of a music critic, Dershowitz described me as an ‘obscure saxophonist’. This was amusing enough, but yesterday Dershowitz elaborated on his notion of ‘obscurity’. In an embarrassingly unimaginative and vindictive article he called Chicago University Professor of Philosophy Brian Leiter a “relatively obscure professor of jurisprudence”. For a native English speaker (and a Harvard Professor) Dershowitz sure has a limited English vocabulary.
Professor Leiter’s crime was obvious enough: he stood up for freedom of expression and open debate. He defended Professor John Mearsheimer who has endorsed ‘The Wandering Who’ and refused to bow to vile and relentless Zionist pressure to withdraw his praise for the book.
Professor John Mearsheimer is subject to a Zionist-trans-Atlantic-attack for supporting my latest book The Wandering Who.
Earlier this year John Mearsheimer, the highly respected international relations theorist and Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, wrote the following preliminary front matter for my book:
‘Gilad Atzmon has written a fascinating and provocative book on Jewish identity in the modern world. He shows how assimilation and liberalism are making it increasingly difficult for Jews in the Diaspora to maintain a powerful sense of their 'Jewishness.' Panicked Jewish leaders, he argues, have turned to Zionism (blind loyalty to Israel) and scaremongering (the threat of another Holocaust) to keep the tribe united and distinct from the surrounding goyim. As Atzmon’s own case demonstrates, this strategy is not working and is causing many Jews great anguish. The Wandering Who? should be widely read by Jews and non-Jews alike.’
It seems as if the Zio-cons on both sides of the pond are now in a state of panic -- In an obviously orchestrated attack, the Zionist mouthpiece The Jewish Chronicle of London, the Islamophobic Award winning ‘Harry’s Place’ and the ex-Israeli concentration camp guard Jeffrey Goldberg* , all launched a typical Hasbara smear & intimidation campaign, in which they labeled both Professor Mearsheimer and myself anti Semites. I was also called a ‘neo Nazi’, a ‘Hitler apologist,’ a ‘Holocaust denier’ and a ‘hatemonger’.
To be honest, it is somewhat amusing that an ex concentration camp guard like Goldberg should label me a ‘Hitler apologist’ or a ‘Holocaust denier’: after all, since Goldberg is an ardent pro-war Zionist who openly and enthusiastically supports a Jews-only, racist, expansionist state, it is clear that he is actually the one who is an advocate of a distinctly Nazi-like ideology and practice.