Is Anti-Semitism More Acceptable Than Criticizing Israel?

Glenn Beck would appear to be the template for the anti-Semitic Zionist. After Beck odiously displayed a puppet show, with Hungarian Holocaust survivor George Soros as the stringer-puller-in-chief. Soros is, of course, ostensibly directing and manipulating the country and politicians on both sides of the “political divide” — presumably toward an end of his creation. Beck’s defense for all of this, is that he is probably a stronger supporter of the state of Israel than his bogeyman and antihero.

Soros is unequivocally far from a humanitarian, and — judging from his behavior in the economic and political arena — not whatsoever a nice guy. He’s known as the man who took down the Bank of England, he was convicted of insider trading in France, he’s enriched himself off of the rapacious practice of speculating on national currencies, and he even once told former Mayalasian leader Dr. Mahathir Mohamad that he was a menace to his own country, because he implemented taboo, at the time; capital controls — a practice that has now been accepted, by even many on the right. But controlling the country via the organizations and non-profits that he supports and donates to? No, that is just absurd.

Beck is “harmless” insofar as he makes scurrilous attacks on anyone left of Cleon Skousen, and so long as he does not take his racial hatred — and hatred of most minority groups — too far outside the lines. It matters not, though apparently, that he’s on a purported news channel and thousands, if not millions, would seem to hang on his every word. And not to mention, of course, that they would seem to be at his predilection to rally in support of neofascism. The FDA is currently banning alcoholic energy drinks in the fifty states in this country, but Glenn Beck’s hokum doesn’t come with any kind of a black box or a warning?

If Glenn Beck came out tomorrow and said he would no longer support the apartheid state of Israel, that would be it. Forget Beck even engaging in such a statement that is that black and white — or “too far” to one side. If he said the United States needs to be an independent broker in the peace process; instead of the lawyer for Israel, it would be curtains for Beck! He’d collect his severance package, and; God-willing, be on to a different venue. Beck can seemingly; however, continue to propagate the most vicious, unsubstantiated and scurrilous kind of attacks upon George Soros, and apparently; continues to clock in — just the same. Who will be the next controllers of America, according to Glenn Beck’s crack investigative “journalism”? There’s an army of groups and people that can be scapegoated, just as Beck has shamefully promoted toward one wealthy Jew.

Fox News, obviously continues in its slide toward oblivion, but make no mistake; however — no matter how far the rhetoric falls down into the gutter — we can continue to be assured that the AIPAC/Likudnik position on Israel will remain unassailed. To question that particular orthodoxy is a far worse faux pas to make, than to project the kind of stuff of Father Coughlin and virulent hate speech on to national television. We already knew that most of these fundamentalist Christian so-called Zionists care nothing for the Jewish people, and now we can unequivocally say that we know the same about the loathsome Murdoch “news” channel. According to their ideology/mythos, of course, the Jews will be engulfed in the Rapture, or converted to worship their God.

Sean Fenley is an independent progressive who would like to see the end of the dictatorial duopoly of the so-called two party adversarial system. He would also like to see some sanity brought to the creation and implementation of current and future U.S. military, economic, foreign and domestic policies. Read other articles by Sean.

19 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. bozh said on November 24th, 2010 at 9:16am #

    however, even white ‘jews’ do not have anything [save the cult] common with real shemites or peoples from around caspian sea and the caucasus.
    i am expecting that we’d eventually learn or get to know that most israeli cultists are being used so that ‘zionists’ [whites christians and ‘jews’] feel good or to spite us who are totally innocent towards white ‘jews’. tnx

  2. MichaelKenny said on November 24th, 2010 at 9:48am #

    After being regarded for a long time as the “nice guy” of the Israel Lobby, it now seems to be open season on Soros! The NGO backing Michael Hudson’s attacks on Latvia, for example, is said to be funded by Soros, or more exactly, his foundation. I’ve never heard of Glen Beck but the idea that Soros might want to control countries via the organizations and non-profits that he supports and donates to is thus not as absurd as all that. Of course, wanting to and actually doing it are two different things. There’s always the pesky “natives” to contend with! The Latvian electorate has just re-elected a government that refused to kowtow to Hudson’s bullying.

  3. hayate said on November 24th, 2010 at 1:08pm #

    “Is Anti-Semitism More Acceptable Than Criticizing Israel?”

    To zionists it is. They need somebody to point a finger at. Antisemitism furthers the cause of zionism, while criticism of apartheid israel puts a damper on their fascism.

  4. hayate said on November 24th, 2010 at 1:13pm #

    BTW, rather than another surplus rant about a “bad cop” (beck) calling a “good cop” (soros) naughty names, I think one’s time is better spent encouraging these two ziofascists to have a duel – using hand grenades in a small room.

  5. Deadbeat said on November 24th, 2010 at 3:01pm #

    Sean Fenley writes …

    no matter how far the rhetoric falls down into the gutter — we can continue to be assured that the AIPAC/Likudnik position on Israel will remain unassailed .

    But what about Labourites? Are they not Zionist as well? It was Shimon Peres whose signature authorized the sale of nuclear weapons to South Africa. I recall Ray McGovern using this very same “weasel” phrase (“I’m not anti-Israel, I’m anti-Likudnik”). Bollocks! Zionism is Zionism no matter if it is AIPAC or Chomsky.

  6. bozh said on November 24th, 2010 at 4:46pm #

    in rereading fenley’s piece, i note that he talks about individuals mostly and matters that i evaluate as of trivial or peripheral import when it comes to presenting an elucidation about why we have israel and u.s invasions in the first place.

    in order to understand why israel was set up, we need to study why any war is waged and not just why europeans, ‘jews’ and nonjews, selected palestina for an invasion.
    it is not enough to only know that ‘jews’ invaded palestina over decades; we need to know which lands permitted ‘jewish ‘ illegal entry to palestine and which ones armed the ‘jews’ so that they cld slay many palestinians and expel anywhere between 7ook to 800k of them.

    it seems to me that, save greece, all christian lands supported israel either diplomaticly or militarily.

    but why? if we put our heads together, we might also find the answer to that question.
    was it for christian lands just the 12th crusade for ‘holy’ land? however, some christians now softening their stance towards palestinians because of the enormous ‘jewish’ crimes that sickens all peace loving people.
    we need also to know why have ‘jews’ rejected birobidjan, madagascar, uganda, and argentina and why ‘jews’ rejected all these areas.
    and why did the christians allowed them to get away with such nonsense?

    and now the same thinking people like churchill, balfour, and even u.k labor party of ’45 onward cannot act as peacemakers having caused such horrendous crimes against much defenseless and occupied people.

    i say occupied people, because league of nations, comprising mostly christian lands had no moral nor legal right to occupy palestina.
    the occupation of that land goes under the name “MANDATE PALESTINA”.
    it wasn’t that at all! tnx more cld be said!

  7. Deadbeat said on November 25th, 2010 at 3:41am #

    bozh writes …

    why did the christians allowed them to get away with such nonsense?

    Did Christians “ALLOW” Jews to get away with this? Such a statement implies that ALL Christian rather than certain ones had POWER to prevent Jews from doing what they wanted. Did they? Or were Jews powerful enough and had enough influence to get what they wanted. Can you clarify?

  8. bozh said on November 25th, 2010 at 12:04pm #

    yes, i had overgeneralized. perhaps not all christians were selecting [a near-totally defenceless land — u.k occupation ensured just that] for conquest.
    greece is a christian land. its govt did not in ’48 recognize israel. i am not sure if it now recognizes israel.
    greeks were one of the first peoples who learned much about judeans. i understand greeks also detested these people.
    even communist lands have recognized israel in ’48. czechoslovakia via yugoslavia supplied ‘jews’ in ’46 with arms.
    they believed that ‘jews’ were communists. they got fooled. they got fooled also by egypt. not iraq, tho! tnx

  9. kanomi said on November 25th, 2010 at 2:46pm #

    This article is unsatisfying, because it is based on some faulty premises.

    The on-screen persona named “Glenn Beck” did not go off on his own and decide to attack George Soros. These were not some off the cuff remarks, such as were used to destroy the careers of Rick Sanchez, Helen Thomas, Octavia Nasr, and others.

    This was a team effort. This was a three day, prepared series of personal attacks, complete with title graphics, scriptwriting, editing, all created for prime time network television by dozens of working professionals. Go watch the documentary “Outfoxed” again – these guys don’t just wake up and decide to attack somebody. They take orders.

    The anti-Soros line was either mandated or the very least approved of by the highest echelons at Fox. Why Murdoch’s faction of the power elite is attacking the Soros faction we will probably never know. Murdoch could be acting on behalf of a political or economic ally. Maybe he wants a share of Soros’ colonial assets. Maybe Soros’ private jet cut ahead of him at the private airport at Davos, or they cooked it up together to give Soros some left-wing cover. Who knows? But to focus on the cardboard cutout of Glenn Beck, let alone his benighted flock, is shooting the messenger.

    In this case, I doubt the ADL leadership will yell much longer about it, because Murdoch is on their side and Beck was probably just being a loyal teleprompt reader. But they have to keep up appearances.

    More to the point, to characterize George Soros as “not a nice guy” is a gross understatement. Beck may be a charlatan and a raconteur, a low-grade propagandist, but he is not a cold-eyed gambler with the lives of others.

    Soros is a consummate insider: a crooked trader, a deep politics player, tied to the neocons, Carlyle Group, and other factions of the ruling elite. His Orwellian-named “Open Society Institute”, along with other examples of this new breed of fake NGOs, work hand in fist with CIA-types to advance the hyper-capitalist agenda overseas and corral the left and subvert democracy domestically.

    As to what he did in the Holocaust, it is a matter of public record. I’m not going to fault the actions of a 14-year-old kid in the midst of a genocidal dictatorship, but his description of the events decades after the fact – not a single expression of terror, sorrow or sympathy, but only detached, almost indifferent calculation – leaves the impression of either one massively traumatized individual, or a stone cold psychopath.

  10. Deadbeat said on November 25th, 2010 at 4:20pm #

    Kanomi writes …

    Soros is a consummate insider: a crooked trader, a deep politics player, tied to the neocons, Carlyle Group, and other factions of the ruling elite. His Orwellian-named “Open Society Institute”, along with other examples of this new breed of fake NGOs, work hand in fist with CIA-types to advance the hyper-capitalist agenda overseas and corral the left and subvert democracy domestically.

    Excellent analysis. Medea Benjamin, a Soros recipient, was instrumental in setting back the Green Party in 2004.

  11. jayn0t said on November 25th, 2010 at 5:33pm #

    “Beck odiously displayed a puppet show, with Hungarian Holocaust survivor George Soros as the stringer-puller-in-chief” – Fenley insinuates that this is ‘anti-Semitic’. But whether or not Soros, or rich American Jews in general, are good string-pullers has nothing to do with the fact that anti-Semites once said something like this about European Jews. Mentioning that Soros is a Holocaust survivor looks like trying to emotionally blackmail us into rejecting Beck’s view.

    “We already knew that most of these fundamentalist Christian so-called Zionists care nothing for the Jewish people, and now we can unequivocally say that we know the same about the loathsome Murdoch “news” channel”. Sorry, that’s typical leftist wishful thinking. Though there ARE people who are pro-Israel and don’t like Jews, by far the most important attitude in the world for drumming up support for Israel is PHILO-Semitism.

    Fenley and most of the left want to be aggressively hostile to two bad things: Zionism and anti-Semitism. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that. Since these two bad things aren’t the same, and in fact often conflict, one has to choose which of the two bad things is the baddest. Did the anti-apartheid movement tie itself in knots trying to be both anti-apartheid and against anti-white attitudes (which did, and do, exist)? No, it decided that apartheid was the greater of the two evils, and ignored the hotheads of the PAC who advocated ethnic cleansing of whites.

  12. Don Hawkins said on November 25th, 2010 at 6:10pm #

    Psychopaths are incapable of authentic deep emotions. In fact, when Robert Hare, a Canadian psychologist who spent his career studying psychopathy, did brain scans on psychopaths while showing them two sets of words, one set of neutral words with no emotional associations and a second set with emotionally charged words, while different areas of the brain lit up in the non-psychopathic control group, in the psychopaths, both sets were processed in the same area of the brain, the area that deals with language. They did not have an emotional reaction until they intellectually concluded that it would be better if they had one, and then they whipped up an emotional response just for show.
    by Clinton Callahan / May 12th, 2008

    Oh crap I think I see people like this on TV. They did not have an emotional reaction until they intellectually concluded that it would be better if they had one, and then they whipped up an emotional response just for show. Am going to watch for this although they are clever ones. Thank’s kanomi that was interesting to read again after two and half years.

  13. Don Hawkins said on November 25th, 2010 at 6:41pm #

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFjMeFaBS7w

    Watch this and two clever human’s.

  14. Sean_F said on November 25th, 2010 at 8:54pm #

    Jaynot said:
    “Beck odiously displayed a puppet show, with Hungarian Holocaust survivor
    George Soros as the stringer-puller-in-chief” – Fenley insinuates that this is ‘anti-Semitic’. But whether or not Soros, or rich American Jews in general, are good string-pullers has nothing to do with the fact that anti-Semites once said something like this about European Jews. Mentioning that Soros is a Holocaust survivor looks like trying to emotionally blackmail us into rejecting Beck’s view.

    Sean said:
    I feel it’s anti-Semitic, b/c I don’t think Beck presents the information and makes the connections necessary to come even close to presenting a serious argument. That any reasonable person would recognize and say, ok Soros does have the kind of power that Beck ascribes to him — or something close to it.

    When you make the same kind of argument that old-fashioned anti-Semites made, you have to meet a pretty high standard (I think) to show that you’re on to something.

    Jaynot said:
    “We already knew that most of these fundamentalist Christian so-called Zionists care nothing for the Jewish people, and now we can unequivocally say that we know the same about the loathsome Murdoch “news” channel”. Sorry, that’s typical leftist wishful thinking. Though there ARE people who are pro-Israel and don’t like Jews, by far the most important attitude in the world for drumming up support for Israel is PHILO-Semitism.

    Sean said:
    So Beck is also a Philo-Semitist ha, ha. Thanks for your comments, very interesting stuff. Interesting look inside your mind… An anti-Semitic, Philo-semitist, Zionist!!? You break a few eggs and you get an omelet (I guess)!

    Jaynot said:
    Fenley and most of the left want to be aggressively hostile to two bad things: Zionism and anti-Semitism. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that. Since these two bad things aren’t the same, and in fact often conflict, one has to choose which of the two bad things is the baddest. Did the anti-apartheid movement tie itself in knots trying to be both anti-apartheid and against anti-white attitudes (which did, and do, exist)? No, it decided that apartheid was the greater of the two evils, and ignored the hotheads of the PAC who advocated ethnic cleansing of whites.

    Sean said:
    I don’t get the argument… Why can’t one be hostile to both Zionism and anti-Semitism? I certainly disagree with Gilad Atzmon… At least what I’ve seen him saying about peace folks in Israel or the Israeli left or whatever (I haven’t been convinced of the view that all Jewish Zionists are bad). He doesn’t see any hope in that. I must say from where I am (US), I don’t have a real good idea of the size of either the peace movement or the far left (or whatever we’d call it) in Israel. But it does sound like it’s at an all time low or close… But obviously I’d hope that will change.

  15. Don Hawkins said on November 26th, 2010 at 4:02am #

    Think about the ramifications of this statement: Psychopaths are, to some extent, self-aware as a group even in childhood! Recognizing their fundamental difference from the rest of humanity, their allegiance would be to others of their kind, that is, to other psychopaths.
    Their own twisted sense of honor compels them to cheat and revile non-psychopaths and their values. In contradiction to the ideals of normal people, psychopaths feel breaking promises and agreements is normal behavior.

    Not only do they covet possessions and power and feel they have the right to them just because they exist and can take them, but they gain special pleasure in usurping and taking from others; what they can plagiarize, swindle, and extort are fruits far sweeter than those they can earn through honest labor. They also learn very early how their personalities can have traumatizing effects on the personalities of non-psychopaths, and how to take advantage of this root of terror for purposes of achieving their goals. Clinton Callahan

    Let’s have a contest on DV to find the best of the best and I wonder is there such a thing as trickle down psychosis when it comes to psychopaths? Let’s see in a mad World only the mad are sane and just on the off chance this could be possible we could look and see.
    Psychosis (from the Greek ψυχή “psyche”, for mind/soul, and -ωσις “-osis”, for abnormal condition) means abnormal condition of the mind, and is a generic psychiatric term for a mental state often described as involving a “loss of contact with reality”. People suffering from psychosis are described as psychotic. Psychosis is given to the more severe forms of psychiatric disorder, during which hallucinations and delusions and impaired insight may occur.

    Loss of contact with reality well I know this should be hard in twenty ten not because there are many who might be a bit out of touch with reality but hard to spot because of how their personalities can have traumatizing effects on the personalities of non-psychopaths, and how to take advantage of this root of terror for purposes of achieving their goals. I put my first choice above James Inhofe as years ago this man seemed to talk like a robot. Heck maybe a new word robochopaths.

  16. Don Hawkins said on November 26th, 2010 at 4:39am #

    Maybe one rule of the contest is to find the leaders of the pack so to speak. Not the people who have been traumatizing by the leaders who take advantage of this root of terror for purposes of achieving their goals and don’t want to bite the hand that feeds them or are just in fear you know as to stand up well a local station giving the ball scores comes to mind or selling car’s used car’s. Fascinating subject just on the off chance of course. A side note where I live we are kind of getting a little low on water no rain and the forecast for the next six months oh well.

  17. jayn0t said on November 26th, 2010 at 9:07am #

    Sean – thanks for replying to my comment. I don’t know if Glenn Beck is philo-, anti-, or adiaphoro-semitic. He probably just says whatever viewers want to hear.

    I disagree that ‘any reasonable person’ would definitely reject the view that George Soros is very powerful. It is emotions, not reason, that lead us to reject the argument that Soros may be a ‘puppet-master’, because he is a Holocaust survivor, because we don’t want to say anything similar to the people who caused that Holocaust! Naturally, Zionists take advantage of our emotions – one of the reasons Zionism is so powerful is that everyone is intimidated by the allegation that all talk of Jewish power is fascist. This is a mistake, and until we resist that emotional blackmail and evaluate talk of Jewish power solely on its merits, and not at all on how much it reminds us of Protocols and Nazis, solidarity will fail, and Palestinians will die.

    “Why can’t one be hostile to both Zionism and anti-Semitism?” — one can – of course one can condemn genocide both by and against Jews. My point is simply that, from a tactical standpoint, it is better to be indifferent (adiophoros) to the charge of ‘anti-Semitism’ because it is impossible to effectively oppose the apartheid state while being sensitive to this widely-used allegation. In my view, carefully trying to explain how one is anti-Zionist but not anti-Semitic, has been ineffective.

    You say “I haven’t been convinced of the view that all Jewish Zionists are bad” – my point isn’t that any particular people is ‘bad’ – for someone raised in the self-righteous atmosphere of a Zionist family, it takes exceptional qualities to break out of it – I don’t say Israelis aren’t bad, I say Gilad Atzmon is great.

  18. mary said on December 4th, 2010 at 3:07am #

    This bunch are worried about Israel being de-legitimized!!!

    A joint operation with the British offshoot of the right wing US Henry Jackson Society and Just Journalism.

    Panel:
    Prosor, the UK Israeli Ambassador
    Lady Deech, a Zionist supporting member of the House of Lords
    Stephen Pollard the editor of the Jewish Chronicle
    Nick Cohen of the Observer (he supported Blair’s Iraq war)
    Bardaji an international Friends of Israel group and an Aznar stooge.

    What a bunch. Fascists, oppressors, and warmongers.

    http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/stories.asp?pageid=49&id=1840

  19. mary said on December 4th, 2010 at 5:59am #

    This is a letter sent today to Alan Mendoza of the Henry Jackson Society.

    Dear Mr Mendoza,

    An acquaintance sent me a notice of your meeting – attached. I wish I could be there to give you my thoughts about ‘de-legitimisation’ but I live 200 miles from London, thank goodness. I note the panel consists of known Zionists, so it is hardly a non-partisan discussion.

    If I should attend, among the many points, I would say the Zionist entity ‘de-legitimises’ itself by a slow genocide of the native people which continues minute by minute and day by day over the 62 years since the euphemism of ethnic cleansing. In bringing a holocaust to other peoples, it denies the Jewish victims in the Nazi holocaust The current examples of each act of genocide are multiple from the greater shoah promised by Vilnai in February 2008 to the PEOPLE of Gaza and executed from 27 December 2008 onwards on to the destruction of the ‘temples of the family’, the homes of those in Silwan and elsewhere.

    It ‘de-legitimises’ itself by joining in the axis with the UK and the US in the destruction of Afghanistan and especially Iraq

    (dhalpin.infoaction.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=104&Itemid=2)

    The history of the Jewish people in recent centuries supposes that ‘Israel’ should obey Mosaic law instead.

    I show but one example of racism and of a destructive and exclusive mentality. The letter to Baroness Deech via ‘Write to Them’ is self explanatory. This ex-governor of the BBC has not had the courtesy to respond initially or to a repeat sending. Therein lies the nub. Racism and its vicious manifestation in Zionism has no defence but it is given free rein in print and over the aether. She has no answer but feels no shame. She has done her vitriolic bit to kick the wheel in the war on Islam.
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………….
    Saturday 21 August 2010

    The Baroness Deech
    House of Lords
    London
    SW1A 0PW

    Dear Lady Deech,

    I heard your responses on Any Questions to those questions re charity for the millions of homeless and hungry people in Pakistan, and secondly regarding the building of a ‘mosque’ near ‘ground zero’ (the name originally given to the centre of a nuclear explosion). I judge that a good many of your words were likely to incite racial and/or religious hatred. You would be informed by this video from MSNBC re the proposed mosque

    (www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZpT2Muxoo0)

    Your stance and words were blatantly anti-Islamic. You should have stated your interest in Israel given your patronage of the Jewish National Fund. Very few listeners would have known that.

    As is often the case, Any Answers were mostly rational and much better informed.

    Yours sincerely,

    David Halpin MB BS FRCS
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………….
    I had a look at your web site. I skimmed the 80 pages plus of ‘Succeeding in Afghanistan’ By George Grant. I noted this sentence. ‘The West was not in Afghanistan on 11th September 2001,…’

    You know the US, and probably with the knowledge of the other two axis members, started planning the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan in July 2001 before the pretext of 2001.

    Mr Mendoza. As a surgeon, it became plain to me a long time ago, that the human species can be divided into the ‘life enhancing’ and the ‘life denying’. Those few adherents of Zionism and of appendages like the Henry Jackson Society are surely in the latter group.

    For truth, reason and justice

    David Halpin FRCS

    ps I do not have Baroness Deech’s contact details. Please forward the whole to her.