Hate Mail

SOMEONE WHO OBJECTS to one of the things I recently posted about Israel's genocide in Gaza has asked me:

Free Palestinians in the West Bank and (now) Gaza from Israeli occupation and so-called leaders who are either genocidal terrorists or corrupt AF? 

You have got to be kidding me.  That would be opposed to the current Israeli occupation and genocide and Lebensraum and - I suppose I have to get used to the repugnant phrase now being standard "ethnic cleansing" - by the Likude and other Israeli-fascist coalition under the longest "serving" Israeli PM WHO HAS FOR YEARS BEEN AVOIDING CRIMINAL TRIAL FOR CORRUPTION IN ISRAEL THROUGH WAGING WAR AGAINST PALESTINIANS AND OTHERS, PROVOKING WARS FOR THE UNITED STATES AND OTHERS TO FIGHT WITH IRAQ AND NOW IRAN, ETC.   And those domestic crimes pale in significance to his and other members of his governments actual present criminal indictments in international court for crimes against humanity, war crimes, many more indictments that should be brought against many more Israeli politicians, terrorists encouraged by the government, "settlers," the Israeli military and terrorist-intelligence services, etc.  NONE OF WHICH IS DONE ON BEHALF OF EVEN THOSE PALESTINIANS WHO ARE ISRAELI 'CITIZENS.' OF A SORT, THAT IS UNTIL THEIR HOMES ARE DESTROYED AND APPROPRIATED EITHER "LEGALLY" BY THE OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT OR THROUGH MURDER AND TERROR BY THE "SETTLERS" WHO FORM A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE SUPPORT OF THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT,. . .  I could go on. 

I've got a question for you.  Two, in fact.  Given the genocide in Gaza, the terrorism, murder and theft of property, driving the survivors out in the West Bank, WOULDN'T PALESTINIANS  HAVE TO BE BE INSANE TO NOT PREFER THEIR OWN DESPOTS WHO WOULD, AT LEAST,  NOT DO THAT TO THEM OVER ISRAEL'S ETHNO-DEMOCRACY WHICH PERMITS THAT AND, IN FACT, HAS HAD IT AS POLICY FOR PRETTY MUCH ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE?   Wouldn't any non-Palestinian who sees the status quo you prefer be guilty of choosing genocide for them out of some "principle" that they would never, ever, choose for themselves or their loved ones to be subjected to?   

If I supported that I'd be the equivalent of an American supporter of any other criminal regime who has done that during my lifetime or in history - and I include many a state government and the federal government of the United States, in history and during my lifetime in that statement.   I will not be that kind of a person or "democrat."  

To elaborate, considering all the above and your statement that opposes any Palestinian state,  no doubt ready to see the status quo stand till the last Palestinian is either expelled, forced out or murdered,  do you ever listen to yourself?   The most charitable interpretation of your own definition of the issues involved in the matter of Israel was that its establishment was a massive mistake that ignored every aspect of the predictable* consequences that you, yourself, admit constitutes the status quo.   And you don't have to get to anything like the worst-case scenario that Zionists, those who went to Israel, those who have merely visited as tourists, those many, many who have never been there and have no intention of putting their own asses on the line to maintain the situation, ARE ENTIRELY IN FAVOR OF EVERY CRIME COMMITTED TO PRODUCE THAT STATUS QUO.   And I am fully prepared to believe that the large majority of those Zionists are not Jewish at all but are gentiles, INCLUDING MANY SUCH AS THE "CHRISTIAN-EVANGELICAL-ZIONISTS" WHO ARE CLASSIC ANTI-SEMITES**.

I am a person who believes that Nazism and any ideology which has a history of genocidal violence not only should be, in fact, totally suppressed but so  removed from the possibility of having any role in the human future.   I believe its suppression is a moral imperative and any legal theories or system which permits its perpetuation and chance of succeeding, again, into the future is a clearly and insanely illegitimate and criminal legal theory.   I hold that American style "civil liberties" that holds Nazism is to always have that chance into the future is criminally negligent.  It is, on its face,  insane to allow Nazism any possible chance to do what it holds as its basis of existence ever again out of some daffy notion of equality among ideologies.   I hold the same about many other ideologies with a similar history,  such as the white supremacy, America's indigenous form of fascism which still stains the United States, its Constitution, its legal system and our history from the start and till today.   Its permission out of "civil liberties" is directly responsible for its current resurgence to control our present and future.  For that I loathe the "civil liberties" industry.    I certainly hold the same view of Zionism is as valid as my stand that Nazism should be vigorously, legally suppressed.   I find it impossible to ignore the reality of those who ignore the most public genocide in human history,  matching those by the various governments in the former Yugoslavia and topping them, demanding that Western governments support it and succeeding in that.   I resent Israel for drawing my country into its own crimes,  I especially resent it for drawing my political party and the man who would have stood as the best U.S. President since Lyndon Johnson into supporting it.  

Argue against those arguments on an honest and rational basis and I might,  I MIGHT post your comment.  

*  That is literally predictable in that those consequences of the establishment of a modern Israeli state on Palestine were predicted decades before Israel was declared a state.

**  I have, for the past number of years, adopted the non-hyphenated spelling that Deborah Lipstadt insisted on out of my former respect for her.    Given her involvement in the IHRA coercive and dishonest defining of entirely normal kinds of criticism of the criminal state of Israel as "anti-semitism" and coercing governments and institutions around the world to adopt that dishonest and I now hold criminal cover up to use as a weapon against those legitimate critics,  any respect that shielded her against a normal level of criticism of an academic who has been part of that is gone,  gone to the extent that I have reviewed the criticism of her academic work that Norman Finkelstein has made of it and think much of his criticism is valid.   Given that, I'm reluctant to follow her spelling advice.    Given her academic specialty, it is remarkable to me that she can support a genocide happening in public, gleefully videoed and published immediately online by the genocidalists who are far more public in their genocide than almost any in the past.   She has forfeited any respect I may have once had for her largely due, I will admit it, to her exposure of David Irving.