Martin
^^^^^ CB: Yes it is. One thing that has not been said very explicitly here is that those accusing Joseph Wanzala of anti-semitism haven't been accused of racism themselves for their defense of Zionism; or shielding Zionism and Israel of critcism by use of phony anti-Semitism claims. The vast majority of the nations of the world accused Zionists and Israel of racism in a UN reso a number of years back, and Joseph's accusers have ignored that. The representatives of the vast majority of peoples of the world who are the main victims of historical racism cannot be so blithely accused of "racism" (anti-Semitism) by a few white people. So, let me score the defenders of Israel on this thread for defending racism.
Application of "Anti-Semitism" should be restricted to those who are prejudice against Jews in the context and tradition of Europe. To label "anti-Semitic" antagonism against Jews by non-Europeans rooted in the history and conduct of the recently established country of Israel is not only off the mark, but in this context, a racist and perverted defense of a racist ideology and practice. It fails to make the distinction between oppressor and oppressed nation/nationality. In the context of the European tradition, Jews are an oppresssed nationality. In the context of the modern "Middle East" , Israel and the Zionists are an oppressor nation and nationality. To try to cover and defend Israel based on the European historical context is ...well...unprintable. Also, Jews in the U.S., who as a group overall have integrated as American whites, are part of an oppressor nation too, relative to the nations and nationalities that the U.S. is dissing in that region now. To categorize, especially people of color, i.e. non-Europeans who criticize American Zionists as the same as old time ,_white_ anti-Semites, is not only dishonest but racist.
I'd like to identify with Joanna's remarks ,and note that my first draft of a post on this was also unprintable. I can see why Joseph bursts out with eight posts going over the limit in response.
The twisting of the accusation "anti-Semitism" against critics of Israeli racism is analogous to the pernicious reverse discrimination doctrine prominent in the U.S. now.
Anyway, back at y'all. I accuse you. I accuse you of fake and historically distorted use of "anti-semitism", and in that you are racist.
joanna bujes wrote:
>
> No need for the Protocols. The Zionists were very interested in
> eliminating Iraq as an example and as a force to be reckoned with in the
> Middle East. So far, they seem to have gotten their wish.
>
> The notion that the state of Israel has a programme and the will to
> pursue it is not equivalent to some old bugaboo. It's a reality we have
> been living with for over fifty years.
>
> That's all I can say that's printable.
From: joanna bujes <jbujes at covad.net> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Re: Blind, or a coward / antisemitism?
Nothing you write that I disagree with except I guess that I can't see Joseph's anti-semitism that you talk about.
I don't think of Zionism as a Jewish thing actually. Odd, I know.
As for confusing anti-zionism with anti-semitism, it seems that the zionists are the champions at asserting that the two are identical.
Joanna
>