US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Commentary :: War and Militarism
My Virulent Anti-Semitism (and theirs)
09 Sep 2006
No justice, no peace...stop the lies! Stop the double standards!
Since Zionist cyber terrorists stoop to deceptive practices such as tampering with the writings of anti-Zionist activists, you should always go to the source of where the original article comes from, in this case, here is the direct link to the original, authentic article:

Here’s the article:

My Virulent Anti-Semitism (and theirs)
by Mark Green

After years of denial, I've concluded that I'm hopelessly anti-Semitic. Why? It's my terrible attitude. Not only do I disdain U.S. militarism in the Middle East, but I've identified its key enabling causes: intellectual dishonesty, democratic corruption and media deception. But it gets worse: I place the primary blame for America's Mideast disasters squarely on organized Jewry.

For those in the know, this makes me not only an anti-Semite, but a "virulent" anti-Semite, which is surely worse. Had I blamed everything on G.W. Bush, "Big Oil", or unnamed hawks in the Pentagon, then everything would be fine. Some might even call me a political leader. But what I've discovered doesn't take me there.

Indeed, America's relentless Mideast military engagements consistently support the agenda of one nation only. That nation is Israel.

It's undeniable that many savvy political observers agree that Israel tends to make its own rules, which is bad enough. What's worse, is that America tends to follow them. Take the war our ruling establishment is threatening to wage against Israel's enemy du jour, Iran. Who would have guessed that the prospect of nuclear energy development 5,000 miles from the nearest American city would bring out the Sixth fleet? Funny thing. As it is, however, Iran's proximity is a mere 450 miles from Israel's which, sadly, is the real reason America's on another war footing. Iran, you see, just happens to support several local resistance movements (called "terrorists", here) that contest Israel's confiscation of land formerly belonging to one neighboring country or another. This might not be such a big deal if not for an unexpected development which has crept up on America in recent years: when Israel gets irritated, Washington gets agitated.

Let's agree that the cheapest and easiest option for U.S. is simple neutrality. It's an old-fashioned idea, sure, and one that's largely forgotten, but it's got a nice ring to it. After all, given the relative strength of Iran's army vs. ours, few experts see this less affluent nation launching a successful attack on the U.S. for about two centuries. So we've got time. Unfortunately, there are lobby pressures here in the U.S. to consider. That's where Israel comes in. Neutrality makes sense for a country with our strengths, power and accomplishments, sure. Only it's not an option. Why? "Strategic necessity". And in addtion to that, don't forget the pro-Israel fundraisers, assorted intellectuals, DC lawyers, policy wonks, movie moguls, Jewish federations, Zionist donors, esteemed academics, news editors, advisors, Holocaust survivors, AIPAC's minions, TV executives, roving bloggers, and more ADL operatives than you can shake a stick at.

In fact, with today's politics being what they are, the option of neutrality--of doing absolutely nothing, of not sending troops--is so totally out of step, so terribly reminiscent of Nazi appeasement (we're told) that it will certainly not even be considered--at least when Israel's foes are concerned. This is what passes for contemporary political wisdom: "Great Powers" must always intervene.

And in no instance is this more true than when the Great Power in question is the United States of America and the intervention in question concerns our plucky, defiant, besieged "democratic" (but only for Jews) ally, the State of Israel!

There are a few drawbacks however. Serial warfare does, unfortunately, get expensive. Plus there's the problem of all those dead and wounded G.I.s....

Then again, nobody said managing an Empire would be easy, right?

Anyway, as for the latest nuclear "crisis" with Iran, first, a little background:

Way back when, decades ago, long before Israel enjoyed the territorial breathing space it now occupies, Jewish operatives secretly decided to acquire enriched uranium. I don't recall them asking anyone's permission. From there, Israel upped the ante and cranked out a stadium full of atomic bombs. When the headline finally broke, Washington didn't fuss much. Nor in fact did N.Y., Hollywood or any of those other heady places where scorn and disapproval rain down upon those miscreants who break vital rules involving The American People and Revered Democratic Values. Later, regional rivals in the Middle East tried to follow Israel's bold example. Leading American voices responded: "How dare they?" Soon thereafter, high government official officials decided that "measures" had to be taken: "These dangerous steps will not be tolerated."

U.S. political morality is less about the rule of law, than about alliances, "interests" and deals. The objective is power. How do we get it? Through the abuse of power. This is how the game is now played. And no government alliance with our great republic is more "special" than the one involving Israel. To merely call this "cronyism" does not even come close to acknowledging the absolute brilliance behind the accomplishments of a small, determined collection of Zionist visionaries. Their extraordinary feat took decades to achieve. And it all happened while the average American snoozed. Here we go:

Billions in foreign aid? No problem.

Zero accountability? Naturally.

Special privileges, special rules? Of course.

Ethnic cleansing? What's the big deal?

Weapons of Mass Destruction? For YOU, anything anytime.

To me, this smells like the deal of the century. But then, I'm a "virulent" anti-Semite.

But for you remaining moralists out there, consider this:

Like Iraq before it, Iran is a signatory to the international Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. Israel however refuses to sign. Israel, and only Israel, gets the perennial green light from above to manufacture and possess nuclear weapons in all the Middle East. This unspecified privilege is rarely discussed, yet it's surely central to Iran's current quest to achieve its own deterrent capabilities. Despite all this, it is Iraq and Iran--not Israel--who face America's wrath for the mere possibility that they could follow the Jewish State's provocative lead. Israel's nuclear arsenal not only makes the possibility of atomic annihilation more likely, but it gives life to an arms race in the world's most volatile region.

Washington, London, New York and Hollywood's collective wisdom on this matter may be summarized as followed: "So?"

U.S. foreign policies have become so uniquely inconsistent, so politicized, that they make a mockery of international law. Can moral decay be far behind? No wonder the U.N. is such a basket case. Like the corpse of a fish, it's rotting from the head down. In supreme deference to Israel, America has discarded its opportunity to lead the world by example, namely, upholding the impartial rule of law. Consequently, America's entire Mideast mission carries the stain of Jewish "exceptionalism". Why so little outcry? The problem is demographic and ideological: America's media and political classes are overstocked with 'Israel-first' loyalists. Their target: U.S. public opinion and the institutions which shape it.

To push this agenda, pro-Israel spin-meisters have convinced Americans into believing that our government's ongoing war dance towards all of Israel's adversaries signal nothing more than the mere convergence of U.S.-Zionist interests. But that's a kosher fairy tale. Israeli fingerprints are all over America's disastrous war in Iraq as well as our continuing confrontation with Iran. And our President's self-righteous claims about spreading "freedom" and "democracy" are just as contrived. Not only have all the original rationalizations for the U.S. invasion of Iraq been discredited, but comparable Israeli misdeeds are consistently met with American aid, diplomatic cover, and state-of-the-art weapons systems. This pattern has endured for decades. And woe to those would-be leaders who dare challenge this glaring double standard, as they tend to disappear.

It can be argued that America is a nation under 'soft occupation' by a shadow government serving a foreign power.

Despite that provocative claim, my anti-Semitism has its accommodating limits. I strive to live harmoniously with those Jews (and others) who refuse to push our nation into needless wars. I even believe that our nation can make peace with most of the "Muslim terrorists" we Americans are programmed to despise. But Western interventionists must give them autonomy and leave them be, since we demand nothing less for ourselves. My anti-Semitism is real, yes, but nuanced. What about yours? Is it incorrect (like mine) or conventional (like Washington's)? After all, the U.S. and Israel bomb, demonize and depopulate areas of high Semitic density way over there (near Israel) with some regularity, yet the ADL, both major political parties in Washington, the American Jewish Committee, FOX News, AIPAC, the majority of Christian evangelicals, and even most mainstream institutions of governance don't seem to mind much. Even the American voter (depending on the headlines) is pretty much on board. What gives? Are some forms of anti-Semitism a good thing? Are some Semites more equal than others?

Indeed, it's clear that the very meaning of the word "Anti-Semitism" is kept deliberately fuzzy, and it is this ambiguity of definition which makes the term so politically useful. After all, we are reminded that the Nazis began their genocidal campaign by making accusations against the Jews, right?--And where did that lead? Thus, the suppression of "hateful" (or even "hurtful") speech is now one of the key unwritten rules of protocol when it comes to criticizing Semitic behavior that is Jewish. Yes, you may respectfully chastise Israel as it sends guided missiles into Arab neighborhoods, but there must be love in your heart! Better yet, just say nothing at all. Leave policy arguments to the Left wing ("pro-peace") Jews who, after 50 years, remain highly visible but dutifully ineffective. As for those other Semites--those "Islomo-fascists," those "homicide bombers"--here is where the rules of discourse and engagement reverse course.

Witness the modern, conventional and politically-correct form of anti-Semitism: identify the Jihadist enemies, vilify them, and crush them. The political movement might be Hamas or Al Queda or Hezbollah. Whatever. Who knows, and who cares? Their respective origins and purposes are as much of a blur in the American Mind as our reasons for hating them. What matters is that they, like Saddam Hussein before them, oppose American (and Israeli) "interests". Thus, we paint Hamas and Hezbollah with the same brush as Al Queda.

Now go out there and vote you American knuckleheads. But watch out for what you say. Racism and bigotry will NOT be tolerated, especially anti-Semitism. What we've got to do is spread freedom, stop terrorism, and fight for... whatever.

But when rhetoric fails to match reality, problems arise. U.S. policies are in an moribund state. Despite the loud chatter about democracy, no nation on earth comes close to matching our quantity of unwelcome soldiers patrolling foreign lands. Yes, the Empire has no clothes, as we're running out of money and friends. Whether or not the average, clueless voter ever figures this out is another matter.

Contributing to this problem, Big Media is in bed with Big Government, as they both need one another to effectively rule the world. America's hand-picked pundit class is not only pro-empire, but overwhelmingly pro-Israel. So the political forecast is grim. Expect continued war, escalating world-wide disgust with U.S.-Israeli hegemony, and a further rise in political cronyism here at home. This, regrettably, is our political future no matter which candidate gets the nod in 2008, since all viable U.S. office-seekers invariably run on the anything-for-Israel platform.

Indeed, when we look closely at the contemporary phenomena of privilege and power in America, we see something quite different than what's commonly advertised. Those scary anti-Semites of the world are actually quite powerless, unfairly mocked, continuously threatened, and often destroyed. And their poor, beleaguered adversaries? American Jews are the most affluent, influential and accomplished minority in U.S. history, criticism of their political actions by 'outsiders' is taboo, and our government is hog wild IN LOVE with the Jewish State. Champagne, anyone?

In fact, it can be argued that we are in the midst of a unparalleled epidemic of PHILO-Semitism. Pound for pound, no nation on earth gets the amount of economic, military and diplomatic cover that we Americans lavish on Israel year after year. Despite the money and bloodshed, America's commitment to the Jewish State remains, to quote former Presidential candidate Al Gore, "unshakable". And President G.W. Bush's infatuation with Israel may be even more off the charts. Indeed, no change of Administration, no U.N. resolution, no war crime charge, or U.S. national emergency, ever diminishishes our federal government's unsettling adoration for the Jewish State. More unsettling still: virtually no public figure dares to ask, "Why"?

When we review our political relationship for the past generation or more, we find that there is simply nothing our nation is unwilling to do for our colonizing, nuclear-ready, ethnic-cleansing, "democratic" ally. Isn't this just a wee bit outrageous? It's certainly unprecedented. The costs of this alliance to the American taxpayer are absolutely astronomical and climbing rapidly. What it's done to our national reputation however, moves us in the opposite direction. Recent polling data indicates that nearly a third of Western Europe considers the U.S. a primary threat to world peace. Our nation's international reputation is probably at an all-time low.

Indeed, it's America's unconditional love for one group of Semites over another that has lead us into a series of needless (and morally questionable) wars. Even America's "War on Terrorism" may eventually be understood as little more than a manufactured pretext to advance bankrupt policies. After all, "terrorism" too is a fuzzy and politicized term. It describes merely a tactic, not an ideology. But the political grievances behind many acts of terror are real. Mideast terrorists hate us for what we do, not for who we are. And what we do is sustain Israeli militarism and expansionism virtually without condition. If this wasn't true, these terrorists could easily turn their sights on other "Western" targets. But don't hold your breath. You will never see Al Queda attacking the likes of Japan, Switzerland or Austria, since these Western nations don't advance meddlesome and hegemonic foreign policies.

In fact, it's American taxpayers and Americans in uniform who are the unwitting fools in this whole scenario. America is a captive bride, the victim of an arranged marriage which, at its core, is loveless. The Israeli affection for the United States is born of political necessity. And their distrust of the American people is unmistakable. This is why we Americans, the "great friends of Israel", are subjected to continuous Holocaust propaganda as well as other kosher narratives day in and day out. America's once modest pride and sense of fairness has given way to collective hubris, guilt and arrogance. Gentleness, fair play and humility do mesh well with war.

How else do you explain the manufactured alarm over one small country's ambition to develop nuclear energy (Iran), while its famously besieged neighbor confiscates land and water by force, systematically destroys non-Jewish property, launches a full-scale international invasion over the kidnapping of two armed soldiers, and moves defiantly towards enlarging its already terrifying arsenal of nuclear weapons? Do you see a happy ending on the horizon?

More perverse still, our very own news media is determined to circulate the false news that it's the U.S., not Israel, which is most threatened by Iran's tiny step into the atomic age. U.S. production of pro-Zionist spin simply never stops, since 'attitude management' on a national scale is a colossal job.

Our Israeli-centric cultural values have created a swelling distortion in our nation's intellectual and political climate, which brings us back to the obsessive use of that overwrought and overused term, "anti-Semitism". Why the fancy lingo? After all, those other Semites aren't at all what that unique term is designed to cover. So why the misleading label? The sacred taboo shields Jews exclusively. Why the avoidance of plain language?

Why? Because plain language tends to undermine vital myths and taboos. When one removes the anti-Semite boogeyman from the political arena, the non-Jewish critic is free to choose sides in a complex struggle involving Jews, Arabs, Persians and Americans. One then can one be legitimately anti-Jewish, pro-Jewish, whatever, just as one can be pro- or anti-Syrian, or pro- or anti-war, or pro- or anti-Republican. The presumed 'Original Sin' of anti-Semitism (concerning Jews) must be lifted from the American Mind. Only then can freedom-of-choice return to the intellectual marketplace. Thereafter, political discourse goes guilt-free. The playing field becomes level again. And finally, the option--the necessity--of exploring pro-Israel excess in American politics is legitimately on the table, where it belongs.

Let's agree and state openly that hostility against Jews because of their genetic profile, economic status, or religious beliefs is utterly wrong. Unprovoked violence against any and all is unacceptable. But special protections and special privileges are a dangerous step in the direction of racial supremacism.

The "anti-Semitism" taboo has become an abused privilege. The taboo assures that certain conduct and behavior (guided by Jewish self-interest) is beyond criticism. The charge of anti-Semitism succeeds by insinuation. The accusation, the suspected "whiff", is designed is to render critics guilty of 'bad character' automatically. As a political tactic it is brilliant, since it manages to keep millions whispering among themselves rather than speaking out publicly. These chains must be broken.

When that day comes, will America regain enough independence of mind to re-evaluate its national prerogatives? It's possible. But the Israel conundrum is surely our greatest challenge. Certainly, all military alliances must be earned. And the double-standards must end as well.

Indeed, the preferential treatment we accord the Jewish State would be illegal if practiced openly within the U.S., since it violates Constitutional provisions mandating equal treatment under the law, as well as the separation of Church (and Synagogue) from State. Isn't it about time our nation started respecting the world's Semitic peoples outside our borders equally, as we're required to do towards the many different ethnic and religious groups living within our borders? This is the core problem: America's "special relationship" with the Jewish State is all about Israel gaining an advantage over its adversaries. And to maintain this preference, we Americans are subjected to a continuous drumbeat of noise involving anti-Semitism, The Holocaust, Islamo-fascism, Nazism and so on. This unending, repetitive chatter subliminally softens us towards bending in the direction of Tel Aviv. Without saying so, Israel requires (and gets) special consideration from Americans each and every day.
The latest "crisis" concerning Iran's quest for nuclear energy/weapons is a valuable example of how this political reflex works. Here the message is clear but mixed: Iranians, Iraqis and non-Jews in the Middle East can't be trusted with nuclear deterrence. But Israel? Your nukes are absolutely fabulous, babe.

No doubt about it: Israel is not only America's most coddled ally, but Israeli-Americans enjoy government-sanctioned, special treatment. Their Semitic cousins on the other hand are the political equivalent of a leper colony. Which brand of Anti-Semitism will YOU be buying? President Bush's brand calls for an American-style Jihad against "Islamic fascism", even though Christians and Muslims have successfully coexisted in the Middle East for centuries. But this was before the invention of the Jewish State. Polling data confirms that Arab Christians throughout the Middle East resent Zionized America every bit as much as their Muslim counterparts. Clearly then, the escalating tension between America and the Arab world does not involve theological differences or America's much-ballyhooed "freedoms". The core issue for millions of Arabs and Persians alike concerns longstanding U.S. policies which favors Israeli interests over those of its neighbors. Foremost, this includes the festering, unresolved issue of Palestine.

Therefore, what's desperately needed now is more responsible criticism of America's Israeli-centric policies, not less. Due to political pressures, anti-Zionist commentators and journalists have been sidelined. No wonder there's so little public discussion on this vital topic: would-be critics have been purged or unfairly smeared.

Under normal circumstances, those waging war, dissembling propaganda, and confiscating lands are required to justify their actions, not the victims. Yet pro-Israeli American culture has turned this tradition on its head.

This undermines our nation's sovereignty, democratic institutions, and the rule of law.

# # #

Mark Green is a former TV talk show host. He is the co-founder and former co-editor of and can be reached at markgreen (at)
See also:

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box: