Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Noam Chomsky: A Question of Zionism

CHOMSKY IS A ZIONIST!

HUGO CHAVEZ MAKDE A MISTAKE!



I adore Hugo Chavez, but I was very disappointed with him when he introduced Chomsky’s book as his choice to educate the world’s public on the perils of imperialism. There are many great writers who write about the subject more eloquently and lucidly than Chomsky. My gripe with Chomsky is that he is a ZIONIST! If you ever watched any of hid DVD’s, he talks about when he was a youngster and how he and his family were yearning and longing to settle in Palestine and waiting for the right opportune time to snatch the land from the Arabs. Chomsky is anti-imperialist as it applies to the rest of the world with the exception of Palestine. Chomsky being raised a Zionist is very emotional when it comes to his Zionist state.

Here are two excerpts by Jeff Blankfort (also Jewish) about Chomsky.
...............
Yes, Chomsky tends to simplify US politics, blaming everything on the elites and whoever is in the White House while avoiding the role of Congress. Today, eleven members of the Senate are Jewish, that is 11% of the 100 members while only 2% of the American population is Jewish. He and his supporters, either directly or indirectly, raise the specter of anti-Semitism, of provoking anti-Semitism, and what happens is that people keep their mouth shut. Now, Chomsky, who was a Zionist when he was younger--he lived in Israel, he has friends in Israel, was considering moving to Israel-- admitted in 1974 that this might influence his perspective – and he wanted his readers to know that. He wrote this in 1974 and yet few people who read Chomsky today know that. They do not know that he was Zionist, that he considered living in Israel.

Chomsky, of course, is the most important one. They criticize Israel, you see, because that's important, you have to do that, but they deflect the main responsibility on to the US and thus while not absolving Israel, shield it from punishment such as sanctions, boycotts and divestment.

Zionist Chomsky 1974" -sophie

The crux of this comment of course brings into question professor Noam Chomsky's integrity and his adroitness about long-standing ties to Zionism and how his volumes on empire and Palestine malaise coexist in an apparent dichotomy.

It can be said that these charges against Mr. Chomsky are unfair and delve into a genre of oversimplification, i.e., the issue is not a simple, either or, matter. Mr. Chomsky of course being of Jewish descent should necessarily, love who he is and have linkages to his people and culture. The ability to be "one's self," whether Arab, Asian, Aborigine, etc., is at the nucleus of the Peace and Justice Movement.

A query must arise at this juncture to ascertain whether Jewishness amounts to Zionism? Are they the same - or one being the facilitator of the other? This is the case in some instances, but is not universalized.

Wherefore, we should not preclude this innate right of Jewishness in the guise of weeding out sinister Zionists. Nevertheless, the stark implication remains that Zionism must account for the ills perpetrated against Palestinians.

Moreover, can it honestly, be held that being against the abuses meted out by Israel on the Palestinians and having a love for Israel [as problematic as its creation was and continues to be] are diametrically, opposing concepts? Are they mutually exclusive notions that cannot exist in one entity, in the heart and mind of Mr. Chomsky - in the reality of the Levant? I think the possibility is all too, possible and their congruence, if at all possible, suggest that such a merger signals a hopeful mindset, which may avail a future normalcy, wherein a just solution may emanate.

Is this assertion wishful thinking or, does it serve justice and peace?

The question of course remains whether agitating for Palestinian aspirations within a confine of deep seated convictions of justice and equality can exist simultaneously, with a fait accompli of a homeland for Jews created by decree of world powers without the consent or counsel of the indigenous people?

It is without doubt that the Palestinian people have suffered at the hands of the Zionist State and its supporters in the West and elsewhere. It is also a certainty that the Jewish State seems entrenched in Palestine and sits with a conventional and nuclear arsenal facing outward, which is pointed at anyone who it perceives as a threat. It is similarly, obvious that Palestinians will not relinquish their sociopolitical rights despite the overwhelming econo-military power of Israel and are set on using any means necessary to assert these dutiful aspirations.

Can we turn back the clock? This is impossible as far as we know. Is there a solution that can both, satisfy Zionism and the panoply of usurped Palestinians' rights? We must find one.

What are your views on the ostensibly, dubious intellectual and political integrity of those who manage to merge these opposing and contradictory views into a body as Noam Chomsky is accused? Finally, has Mr. Chomsky moved on from the original views of 1974 and now holds mitigating and neutral views?


Below are some articles that highlight the authors' views on the dubious intellectual and political integrity of Noam Chomsky.

Please, at your leisure address these questions. Thanking you in advance for your input and your continued agitation for peace and justice.

One love,
Ricot

Please find below the list of the above mentioned articles.

1. http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2006/02/jeffrey-blankfort-interview-must-read.html

2. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/May05/Blankfort0525.htm

3. http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20060328.htm

4. http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2006/02/23/p6720

5. http://peacepalestinedocuments.blogspot.com/2005/07/about-noam-chomsky-reflections-from.html

6. http://www.palestinesolidaritymovement.org/mkabed.htm

7. http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2006/01/01/p5648

8. http://www.doublestandards.org/merhav1.html

9. http://www.axisoflogic.com/cgi-bin/exec/view.pl?archive=144&num=21643

10. http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=5240

11. http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=6109§ionID=22

12. http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=6110§ionID=22

Prime Minister Sharret Diary - Sacred Terrorism

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/essays/rokach.html

Confer http://www.geocities.com/alabasters_archive/sacred_terror.html

1) Chomsky was for sanctions against Apartheid South Africa but not against his Zionist state.

2) Chomsky was for boycotts against South Africa but opposes it for his Zionist state.

Dear Anomalous:

I don’t know what “Jewishness” means and I don’t give a damn! My objection is that an alien European people used various excuses to steal Palestine:

A) [god gave them Arab land.] I say ‘FUCK THE JEW GOD! if he is the type of god who encourages his ‘chosen’ to be damned thieves.

B) [They are coming back after two thousands years.] how is the European Jew with no ancestry to the land coming back to the Arab soil?

C) [The United Nations gave the European Jewry Arab soil.] As the Iranian president said in his recent UN speech, is there a single member who would vote for the theft of the land had it been his own land? Of course not! Don’t forget my post earlier today directing viewers to go to the online Truman library. There, we learn that Jews (1) intimidated the American president (Truman) to go along with the theft of Arab land (2) those conniving Jews called heads of state such Haiti, pretending to be Truman, and threatened them with withdrawal of American fund unless they voted for the Jew state. Haiti changed its vote to ‘yes’ believing it was indeed the president of the United States who was on the other end of the phone line.

D) [The Germans and most Europeans hated the Jews.] But what have the Arabs got to do with it?

No Anomalous! there will never be peace as long as these criminal murdering european Jews are in the midst of Arabs. The European Jews came to Palestine hoping to duplicate the native American Indians' fate upon the Palestinians, but the European Jews have been disappointed, and the Jews’ disappointment looms larger as evidenced by the tenacity of the Lebanese resistance warriors.

Anomalous: next time you have doubts in your head about if and when the Arabs should love Europe’s Jewry, ask a rape victim. Ask her what her notions are about her rapist. There you will find the answers to most of your questions above. Sophie.


Albeit, there are doubts in my head about a plethora of things however, love between Palestinians and Europe's Jewry is not one of them. The point I was trying to make although, loosely, connected to a general concept of love, revolves around current reality - stoic and coldly calculated.

So please don't shoot the messenger, offer water instead. Avail the courtesy of a welcoming chair to ease the strains of a long journey.

The time for old questions is fading fast over the horizon and the dawn of new solutions glows and arises bright like the sun into our realm - to be touched, full of adoring scents and viewed with gleeful eyes. Far in the distance wanes certitude and universals enmeshed in an intransigent tradition of pointed queries and finger pointing that must necessarily, be vanquished by an overwhelming, looming realization that peace among 'humanity' is wrought with compromise and arduous travail. Therefore, if and when must become then and now - from pain to gain - which may avail a viable solution. Dream with me Sophie! Because dreams are the building blocks we utilize to shape the world anew.

U.S. Jewish Solidarity with Muslim and Arab Peoples of the Middle East:

As Jews of conscience living in the United States, we are outraged by the violence being perpetrated in our name both as Jews and as U.S. citizens. We, the undersigned, represent Jews across the United States who are choosing to stand in solidarity with the peoples of Gaza and Lebanon.

Mr. Chomsky of course being of Jewish descent should necessarily, love who he is and have linkages to his people and culture.
tom to Anomalous

What is usually unstated or unnoticed is that there is big strain of Jewish self hatred in Zionist ideology. In many ways the ideal Zionist is the complete opposite of the caricature of the Diaspora Jew, who is usually portrayed in Zionist literature as a weak, bookish victim, unwilling to defend himself. In fact, the opportunity to oppress Arabs is seen as a chance too exorcise his own victimhood and transform his identity.

There is a strain of idealism in Zionism, that serves as a fig leaf for its more brutal and inhumane aspects, as long as the issue is not looked at too closely. This idealism is what attracted the young Chomsky. Unfortunately, when the expulsion and occupation of the Palestinians is unable to be ignored by would be idealists any longer, the usual response is not only to stop vocally supporting Israel, but to stop talking about the issue at all.

Sophie,

I like you too. However, simple is sometimes best. Moreover, an invocation of simplicity doesn't add much.

Besides, there isn't much of a gulf between our conceptions of this matter. The striking difference being temporal, instead of a focus on the spatial.

Inherent in my comments were some of the things you mentioned in your last post. A resolute future encompassing justice would of course necessitate a new Zion, but also deem a new Palestine. This offing does not signify a Palestine that has acquiesced its rightful throne instead speaks to a transformed Palestine in the throes of a mutual peace. All in all, this offing commands an offering at the altar of peace, love and justice.

I will read the piece you recommended and hope it doesn't harden my heart once more before my long journey to this place where solutions reign supreme.

Dear Anomalous:

You are a sweetie! I like you. trust me, coming from me, it is a huge compliment to you, because I am brutally honest. you are about the only one to be complimented on this site.

I am not a regular poster here. I initially came here lured by a mirage, the name of the site was alluring, only to find out that the site-holder is not angry at al, but a mousy, mild, timid and a disgraceful apologist for Jews. I also hold the opinion that he is genuinely retarded for reasons stated earlier. If you are curious, search for the world ‘retarded’ on this message thread (I believe it was on this message thread, I could be wrong)

I would like for to read the following links and get back to me at sophie8844@gmail.com

http://theunjustmedia.com/the%20zionist_plan_for_the_middle_east.htm

http://www.marxists.de/middleast/schoenman/

http://www.christusrex.org/www2/koestler/

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/oralhist/wright.htm

sophie ,
I share your suspicion to chomsky,but I believe your reason that his family when he was child wanted to immigrate to Israel m is not good enough to label him with such word , in my opinion.
I have another reason, in "Peace propaganda & the promised land" , he insists that Israel's policy of remaining in ocupied territory after 1967 UN resolution is very condemnable , he criticizes Israel a lot , but he never mentions that basicaly UN 1948 statement which has created Israel was one terrible mistake . I felt like he was condemning Israel's greed rather than it's existence .

here professor Abukhalil (maybe) refers to it :

"...I will give you one example: when Chomsky left the meeting with Nasrallah he was under the impression, as he told a friend in Beirut, that Nasrallah had told him that he believes in distributing Palestinians around the Arab world. My friend immediately realized that this must have been an error in translation by Nasrallah's interpreter ,... "

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2006/07/nasrallahs-profile-in-washington-post.html

It comes after owner of this blog repeats it over and over that chomsky liked nasrallah (for ex. told this to his sister)

but still I want to be just suspicious of him and wait for better evidences.-lida

US Tax payer: CHOMSKY A GATEKEEPER FOR ZIONISM

SHAHAK ON CHOMSKY: HE "HELPS THE ZIONISTS VERY MUCH"

Israel Shahak wrote the following to Jeff Blankfort:

I had the same, only greater, differences of opinion with Noam Chomsky, who is my personal friend for quite a time, on the subject of AIPAC and the influence of the Jewish lobby in general as you have. What is more, a number of mutual friends of Chomsky and me have also tried to influence him, in vain, on that point.

I am afraid that he is, with all his wonderful qualities and the work he does, quite dogmatic on many things. I have no doubt that his grievous mistake about the lack of importance of AIPAC, which he repeats quite often, helps the Zionists very much as you so graphically described. [64]

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/May05/Blankfort0525.htm

Like As'ad and Joseph Massad, Chomsky and Zunes are gatekeepers for the Israel Lobby: they have played a key role in neutralizing any effective political resistance to Zionist influence on US policy with their lies and disinformation, artfully mixed in with many accurate insights.

Why and how Chomsky obfuscate his Zionism in a mantra of anti-imperialism

http://www.palestinesolidaritymovement.org/mkabed.htm

Sophie: Chomsky being very biased in favor of his own tribe, the European Jews. Take a look. These excerpts are from the article.

1. Chomsky’s version of the ‘argument from prudence’ takes note of the ‘international support’ that exists for the two-state program but fails to mention consistent international support for the return of the refugees.

2. The best explanation of this selective deference is the exceptionalism that, as Noah Cohen and others have explained so clearly, propels Chomsky to resist the implementation of basic human rights in Palestine on the grounds that Israel’s ‘historical vulnerability’ makes it unique amongst colonial nations that commit massive atrocities against the indigenous peoples they conquer.

3. As a result, the logic goes, Israel ought to be held to a different set of standards

We can whirl Chomsky until the cows home. Except for the gullible, the writing is clearly on the wall that Chomsky is a Zionist at heart. Yes, Chomsky does advocate to be anti-imperialist, but that ideology stops at the gates of his fake stolen Jew state they have deceptively named “Israel”. Yea, right, I can also call myself the Queen of Sheba, right? does that make me one? So funny these Zionist Jews! You should see them huffin’ and puffin' to proclaim themselves as ‘Israelis’, but mention the word ‘Jew’ and you will observe them wilt. I think they need to believe that there is no shame in being a Jew, no need to hide behind a biblical hocus/pocus called ‘Israeli’. Self-respect begins at home.

Virgil Johnson: There are a number of things that I agree with Chomsky, and there are a few things I disagree with on. It is indeed hard to extricate yourself from an empathy with people of your origin - it almost creates a desperation at times.

Then again, I have always wondered why in the end Chomsky makes a judgement that it may be politically impossible to change the current state of affairs in Palestine. At the same time I see him lending his support to almost every worthy endeavor to expose what is taking place. It is like a tautology to me, perhaps it is beyond my understanding.

Another instance that disturbs me with regard to Chomsky is his heavy criticism of America's foreign aggression, and yet when it comes time to vote he tells people to vote for individuals like Kerry (last election). Why would you even imply that this is the direction that people should vote? Especially in light of his excessive sword rattling against the Middle Eastern region - as if to outdo Bush.

I do not know Mr. Chomsky personally, but if I were to meet him and had the chance I would question him in regard to these issues. That is all I have to say regarding this matter.

Orbitz: "It is indeed hard to extricate yourself from an empathy with people of your origin - it almost creates a desperation at times."

No, I agree with that point. I don't think it's human nature (if you do think it is, then you'll open a big kettle of fish). I would more prefer to think we are socialised into our identities.

We can all feel a sense of empathy to those who share a common origin with us, but beyond that, can we identify with a movements and governments that claim a representative role of a people or a nation. Above that, can we reduce a people to those who claim this role? Here prejudicial attitudes enter, leading to racism and bigotry of different forms.

Interestingly, certain societies socialise their people with high communal identities, I think America is a case example. Please correct me if I am wrong, but the whole curriculum, the allengiance given to a flag and the curriculum taught enforce this from a tender age. The question is not to feel an empathy to a people, but how can we divorce people from those who use this empathy to then proclaim that they are the nation or the people. Empathy, shouldn't be used as a battering ram for a form of tribalism and identity, regardless of the equation of the oppressor and the opressed. Sophie, was claiming Chomsky was using the latter form of empathy I described, and she views all "Jews" behaving in that form only. Yet, there is no proof for such a claim, either way it does not matter, because in her logic a "Jew will be a Jew will be a Jew"

Yes, Chomsky is contradicting himself if he claims that a two state solution is politically impossible to zionism to then jump to a conclusion it is the only pragmatic solution. But can you prove that he his behaving in the racist caricature of the "internationist Jew", using his aura of objectivity to pass in a deceptive way his propaganda, in a way that only"Jews can do", ad infinitum to anyother racist caricature of any people on the planet.

Orbitz: (replying to Sophie) "It shows up very rarely and when it does, the blame is shifted onto AMERICA. Clever dude, this Chomsky dude, huh?"

Could it be possible that this is a valid point, made by many commentators across the board. Why do you suppose this position is due to his ethnicity and not due to a valid political position. Have you considered the arguments he makes for this position? A position that I happen to agree with, due to the nature of imperialism.

Sophie, in terms of your conclusions we agree! But it's your prejudice and sometimes racism that I have a real problem with, you don't need it, and you can reach the same conclusion without using it. Above all it's false. Many of the strongest opponents of Zionism come from European Jewish backgorunds.

Orbitz,

I read, Finkelstein’s Boycott: A Meta-Narrative on the Ills of 'Liberal
-Zionism,’ by Mohammed Abed and found it on point. Reparations and restoration is indeed the moral solution to the Zionist-Palestinian issue.

Do you have any statistics on post-Apartheid migration from South Africa of the white minority? Presumably, the former rulers have maintained economic their economic power and the attached privileges therefrom inside the new regime of formal equality.

If migration has been minimal then it could instruct on the future state of affairs inside a just state in historic Palestine. I tend to think that in the case of historic Palestine there would be an exodus, if not en masse certainly, over a relatively short time span.

Yes, restoration of Palestinian refugees is the deep dark taboo. In fact the Israeli encroachments may be directly, related to it. Zionists may calculate that the more lands they confiscate the greater leverage they will obtain to nullify any political state that would preclude Jewish exclusivity.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home