Occupy Wall Street movement is making room for Palestinian issue

Israel/Palestine
on 36 Comments

As pro-Palestinian discourse begins to make its voice heard in the worldwide Occupy Wall Street movement, right-wing organizations and individuals in the United States, including the Republican National Committee and the Emergency Committee for Israel, have denounced the protests as anti-Semitic and anti-Israel.

As the people-powered movement for social justice and democratic equality, which began in New York City in September, has spread to more than 900 cities in 82 countries worldwide, it has generated a global discourse critical of the economic and political powers and privileges of the world’s richest 1%, and has opened a space for the 99% of humanity to come together in solidarity, united by a common struggle for freedom. As it gains momentum, its message of protest has broadened to target injustices committed not merely on Wall Street but all over the world, including the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Among the myriad posters of protest can be seen messages like ‘End Military Aid to Israel’, ‘Gaza Supports the Occupation of Wall Street’, and, from Palestine, ‘Occupy Wall St., Not Palestine- Freedom for Palestinian Political Prisoners!’ There have also been many organized events in support of Palestinian rights- to give just two of many examples, on Tuesday October 18, Jewish Women for Justice in Israel/Palestine held an event in Boston entitled ‘Occupy Boston, not Palestine’; on October 8, at an anti-war rally at Occupy Chicago, speaker Hatem Abudayyeh, executive director of the Arab American Action Network, discussed the links between Israeli occupation and American imperialism.

As the voice of Occupy Wall Street grows louder and more compelling, right-wing voices have, predictably, risen to attack the movement in any way they can. Pointing out, among the innumerable signs and posters of Occupy Wall Street, a few deplorable manifestations of anti-Semitism, and conflating these with many more genuine criticisms of the State of Israel, conservative Zionist organizations- such as the Emergency Committee for Israel, who released a video on the 13th insisting that ‘hate is not an American value’ (days before board member Rachel Abrams would use her blog, following the release of Gilad Shalit, to call Palestinians “death-worshiping, innocent-butchering, child-sacrificing savages’, ‘devil’s spawn’, and ‘unmanned animals’1)- have used the moment to kill two birds with one stone. On the one hand, they can repeat their familiar mantra that ‘to question Israel is to persecute the Jewish people’, thereby shielding Israel, in the thick of this storm of popular revolt, from legitimate criticism; simultaneously, they can smear Occupy Wall Street as a hateful movement, defending their class interests as card-carrying members of the 1% by seeking to delegitimize a mass uprising which questions their power.

To be sure, Occupy Wall Street has shown the world a few instances of genuine anti-Semitism. When a protester insists that “the smallest group in America controls the money, media and all other things. The fingerprints belong to the Jewish bankers. I am against Jews who rob America. They are one percent who control America. President Obama is a Jewish puppet. The entire economy is Jewish. Every federal judge in the East Coast is Jewish”2, we can discern an irreducibly anti-Semitic leap of logic that, by positing Judaism as the root cause of 21st century corporate and political dominance, blindly swipes at economic, judicial and ideological power structures, ignorantly and erroneously reducing their complexity to a single ethnic explanation- ‘it’s the Jews’. “From the 13th century expulsion of England’s Jews”, says Ryan Jones in Israel Today magazine on Sunday, October 16th, “to the 19th century Russian pogroms to the Nazi Holocaust, sour economic conditions have historically formed the backdrop of rising anti-Semitism”3, and it is pitiful that, 100 years after ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, such superstitious belief still bubbles up, obscuring clear comprehension of the real class enemies.

Yet many of those who have spoken out against anti-Semitism in Occupy Wall Street employ a no less nefarious method of ideological obscurity when, in the same breath, they attack those who speak out against the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Consider this paragraph from the Israeli news outlet Ynet- “Among the signs that could be seen in the protest were, ‘Gaza supports the occupation of Wall Street’, ‘Hitler’s Bankers’, and a sign urging people to Google the following: Wall St. Jews, Jewish billionaires, Jews & Federal Reserve Bank. In addition, the anti-Israel group Code Pink: Women for Peace was spotted as well as other Arab groups.”4

A statement like ‘Gaza supports the occupation of Wall Street’ is not an ignorant racist slur aimed at the Jewish people as an ethnic group, but a cogent political critique of the state of Israel as an occupying power. By claiming that this statement, or that the anti-war group CODEPINK, is anti-Semitic, pro-Israel forces are using a favorite time-tested tactic- shooting down legitimate political criticism of Israel the militarized nation-state, by falsely portraying such criticism as racism aimed at the Jewish people.

The day after the Emergency Committee for Israel published their political ad- which juxtaposed footage of Democrats Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi expressing support for Occupy Wall Street, footage of a few harsh-anti-Semitic outbursts that regrettably occurred on the streets, and photos of pro-Palestinian signs like ‘Gaza supports the occupation of Wall Street’, ending by reminding the viewing public that ‘hate is not an American value’5- columnist MJ Rosenberg correctly identified in an opinion piece for Al Jazeera that “the Emergency Committee for Israel is not concerned about anti-Semitism or Israel. It is, rather, dedicated to defeating Democrats and promoting its billionaire donors’ economic interests…[using] Israel and Jews as devices to direct money and votes toward the Republicans.”6

By super-imposing anti-Semitism upon Occupy Wall Street and the pro-Palestinian struggle, it seeks to stain the left and portray the right as the guardian both of Israel and ‘American’ values. The insistence of right-wing political groups to attack Occupy Wall Street and defend Israel shows to what extent the corporate interests of the American 1% desire a strong Israel to safeguard their imperial programme. By portraying Occupy Wall Street as both anti-Israel and anti-American, then, their actions reveal the very American-Israeli ideological, corporate and military power network they seek to obscure, and highlight, for those who can see past this smokescreen, the common struggle shared between those fighting the occupation of Palestine, and those supporting the occupation of Wall Street. Implying that a strong Israel wants a weak Occupy Wall Street, then, it pits the Occupy Wall Street 99% on the side of Palestinian freedom, and the 1% on the side of Israeli occupation, thereby revealing the contours of battle lines that have already been drawn.

The Occupy Wall Street protesters are clearly realizing that there is a direct economic, political and ideological link between the corporate power they confront on Wall Street, and the Israeli occupation that the Palestinian people confront on a daily basis. As John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt said in their 2007 book ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’, “American taxpayers’ money has subsidized Israel’s economic development and rescued it during periods of financial crisis. American military assistance has strengthened Israel in wartime and helped preserve its military dominance in the Middle East…as of 2005, direct U.S. economic and military assistance to Israel amounted to nearly $154 billion (in 2005 dollars), the bulk of it comprising direct grants rather than loans…remarkably, Israel is the only recipient of U.S. economic aid that does not have to account for how it is spent. Aid to other countries is allocated for specific development projects…but Israel receives a direct lump-sum cash transfer…another form of U.S. support is loan guarantees that permit Israel to borrow from commercial banks at lower rates, thereby saving millions of dollars in interest payments.” (23-28)

Now more than ever, America pours economic and military support in Israel’s direction for political reasons. “The problems that the United States and Israel face in [the Middle East],” Mearsheimer and Walt remind us, “have not lessened….indeed, they may well have grown worse. Iraq is a fiasco, Israelis and Palestinians remain locked in conflict, Hamas and Fatah are battling for dominance within the Palestinian community, and Hezbollah’s role in Lebanon is deeply troubling. Iran is still seeking to acquire full control of the nuclear fuel cycle, groups like al Qaeda remain active and dangerous, and the industrial world is still dependent on Persian Gulf oil. These are all vexing problems, and the United States will not be able to address any or all of them effectively if Americans cannot have a civilized conversation about our interests in the region and the role of all the factors that shape U.S. foreign policy, including the Israel lobby.” (Preface, xi)

By beginning to link a critique of American corporate domination with a critique of American foreign policy in Israel, Occupy Wall Street seeks to initiate such a civilized conversation. The difficulty of speaking about Wall Street’s influence on the American-Israel relationship, however, lies between the signs ‘Zionists control Wall Street’ and ‘Google Wall St. Jews’- both found at Occupy Wall Street- where a delicate and slippery slope separates a significant and objective factual trend (that the rise of neoconservative economic and political hegemony favors a strong Israel) from a dangerous anti-Semitic generalization (that ‘Jews control Wall Street’).

As Phillip Weiss correctly pointed out on October 21, “the neoconservatives who arose…to justify the military occupation of Palestine and American military support for it have helped to corrupt American politics. The neoconservative rise was aided…by the Israel lobby. I don’t think any analysis of our foreign policy can get anywhere without dealing with these facts.”7 Two equally dangerous Fascisms confront level-headed analysis of this neoconservative Zionism- the anti-Semitic Fascism of pointing the finger at an ethno-religious group rather than a concrete neoconservative interest group, and the pro-Israel Fascism of threatening anyone who dares point a finger at American-Israeli imperialism with charges of anti-Semitism.

The Arab Spring, where it sprung up, sought to throw off the yoke of dictatorship within a single country; Occupy Wall Street seeks to disentangle the American dream from a diffuse and all-pervasive system of economic, corporate, and ideological oppression; the Palestinian people seek to liberate themselves from a foreign occupier of their soil. What unites these diverse movements is the struggle for collective liberation. As the BDS movement said in their statement ‘Occupy Wall Street, not Palestine’, released October 13, the same day as the Emergency Committee for Israel’s video- “Our aspirations overlap; our struggles converge. Our oppressors, whether greedy corporations or military occupations, are united in profiting from wars, pillage, environmental destruction, repression and impoverishment. We must unite in our common quest for freedoms, equal rights, social and economic justice, environmental sanity, and world peace. We can no longer afford to be splintered and divided; we can no longer ignore our obligations to join hands in the struggle against wars and corporate exploitation and for a human-friendly world community not a profit-maximizing jungle.”8

The paranoid racism of the few Occupy Wall Street protesters who blame Jews for capitalist corporate domination is deplorable. No less deplorable, however, is the effort by right-wing Zionist power groups to use the specter of anti-Semitism to squash criticism of Israel as an oppressive occupying power. The sparks of pro-Palestinian solidarity that flare up at Occupy Wall Street should be fanned into a flame, as part of the struggle to secure ‘liberty and justice for all’ in the 21st century.

Ben Lorber is an American activist working with the International Solidarity Movement in the West Bank, and a journalist with the Alternative Information Center in Bethlehem. Check out his blog at freepaly.wordpress.com.

36 Responses

  1. DBG
    October 25, 2011, 9:34 am

    Sounds like a fifth column to me. These Palestinian supporters are trying to piggyback on Occupy Wall Street because they know this is the ONLY way they can get visibility.

    The More OWS continues, the more I respect it. I was speculative at the beginning because it looked like a Phish show or something, but as it continues I can see it is important and will hopefully do something great for this country. The main issue most people continue to talk about is lack of focus, this co-opting of OWS to further the cause of a foreign body does not disprove this at all.

    • Chu
      October 25, 2011, 9:59 am

      A Phish show? Sounds like you’re only listening to the media reports, Yonira. The media tried to undermine the protesters every step of the way, and didn’t report on the protests for weeks. Go down to the park and see with your own eyes. Chris Hedges recently published a essay on the history of US protests with respect to OWS.

      And h0w are the Palestinian supporters going to undermine the larger group? You may want to check on what fifth column actually means before using the term.

      • DBG
        October 25, 2011, 11:36 am

        Have you been to a Phish show Chu?

      • Dan Crowther
        October 25, 2011, 8:05 pm

        Ive been to phish shows – and I can say there are alot of similarities.

        Lots of people having a good time, genuinely happy to be with their fellow man – a real sense of community and solidarity; DBG, I can see why you are a little nervous……

      • DBG
        October 25, 2011, 10:29 pm

        how many Dan? favorite song?

    • Woody Tanaka
      October 25, 2011, 10:15 am

      “Sounds like a fifth column to me.”

      You could have just wrote “Insert ironic projection here” in Comic Sans font.

      And, anyway, your comparison doesn’t work. The fact that the US gov. is in the bag for the Zios and for the banksters, is simply two symptoms of the same disease.

    • muzz al atesta
      October 25, 2011, 10:24 am

      glad to hear we’re making you nervous.

      this yank/swiss doubleburger last Saturday in one of the hearts of Kapital:

      Occupy the Banks – Not Palestine

      link to free-palestine.ch

    • richb
      October 25, 2011, 2:13 pm

      The co-opting — with full approval mind you — is going in the opposite direction. See this morning’s Democracy Now where the woman who started the Egyptian revolution had a teach in.

      link to democracynow.org

      • Rusty Pipes
        October 25, 2011, 10:25 pm

        Also on this morning’s Democracy Now, an excellent interview with Greg Palast about Goldman Sachs and their withdrawal of $5000 support of a local credit union. Goldman Sachs portrays it as refusing to support a group that has joined in supporting OWS’s unfair protests of the bank. Palast points out that the money for the credit union is only (a very late) drop in the bucket of the money that Goldman Sachs is required by law, as a condition of its having received Federal bailout money, to disburse to groups that serve the poor.

    • Chaos4700
      October 25, 2011, 10:52 pm

      Last week you were claiming the OWS movement was full of anti-Semites! Whatever, DBG, nobody really takes you seriously. The fifth column trying to make a decoy out of anyone else is perfectly natural for you.

  2. Les
    October 25, 2011, 9:57 am

    Today’s attack on Occupy Oakland looks an awful lot like Israel’s attacks on Palestinians who have the audacity to resist occupation and ethnic cleansing with rubber bullets and grenades paid for by the US which in turn pays Israeli to teach US military and police how to do the same against their enemies whether domestic for our police or foreign for our military. Take note that Albany police have refused to follow Governor Cuomo’s and Albany’s mayor’s order to do the same to Occupy Albany.

  3. jimby
    October 25, 2011, 10:13 am

    please keep the palestinian issue out of OWS. it would alienate the majority of americans who are pig effing ignorant. this movement is important.

    i have seen signs in support of palestinian freedom at every march i attended and are to be expected but to attempt to co-opt this movement would border on criminal insanity.

    i suspect that the author is quite young. the i/p situation is finally changing. i’ve been labeled anti-semite since 1967, the invasion of lebanon in 1982 was all i needed to know. let it change as fast as possible but it is a fringe issue as far as OWS is concerned.

    • jimby
      October 25, 2011, 10:28 am

      i do not mean to suggest that the i/p issue is not hugely important but that it is separate. of course it can be linked to wall street. america’s official position on israel shames me as a citizen and a human being.

      • Ellen
        October 25, 2011, 11:29 am

        jimby, I understand your sentiment. There are dangers to attaching OWS to the continued US Gov. support of Palestinian occupation. Potentially confusing issues, giving detractors a long line.

        But the military industry and arming Israel to support a non-productive conflict industry is part of plundering of the public.

        Besides, every movement starts out as “fringe.”

        How to start a movement:

      • muzz al atesta
        October 25, 2011, 12:54 pm

        “giving detractors a long line”

        we need to take on fascist scum like rachel & elliot abrams and their ilk.

        this movement has gone global & we will certainly not be intimidated by warmongering right-wing welfare queens.

        link to dailymotion.com

      • Mooser
        October 25, 2011, 11:50 am

        jimby, one of my best friends and his wife and daughter went to the Occupy Seattle. Nobody offered them any drugs, and there was no sex. Nobody tried to seduce his daughter (19 yrs. old) into a commune.
        The movement is hopeless. There wasn’t even any alcohol!

      • POA
        October 25, 2011, 7:11 pm

        “Nobody offered them any drugs, and there was no sex. Nobody tried to seduce his daughter (19 yrs. old) into a commune”

        Thats the trouble with kids these days, they are simply too lazy to do anything right.

    • Les
      October 25, 2011, 1:05 pm

      Yours is a kind of switch. Medea Benjamin of Code Pink said that for the longest time Israel/Palestine was a no go area for her because she’s Jewish. When it comes to topics fit for discussion at OWS, let there be not a single no go area. If it’s taboo, like discussing is capitalism good for the US, it sounds like something that desperately needs to be discussed. Israel’s defenders don’t want discussion about Israel/Palestine for the same reason that supporters of the US war against Vietnam did not want the war discussed, the more people learned from any discussion the fewer supporters for the war then and for US support of Israel’s occupation now.

    • lysias
      October 25, 2011, 1:54 pm

      If OWS succeeds in stripping the plutocrats of their power, the Israel Lobby will lose a lot of its power.

  4. jayn0t
    October 25, 2011, 10:20 am

    This article says ‘When a protester insists that “the smallest group in America controls the money, media and all other things…. Obama is a Jewish puppet…”, we can discern an irreducibly anti-Semitic leap of logic… such superstitious belief still bubbles up, obscuring clear comprehension of the real class enemies.’

    Never mind, we can always rely on Marxism to give us a warm fuzzy feeling. Seriously, it’s not as simple as that. It’s like saying complaints about white power in South Africa were a diversion from the class struggle. And Obama IS a puppet, where Jewish interests are concerned, as is the rest of the political establishment. Analyzing the incredible power of the Lobby is not ‘superstition’. Denying it is.

    • maggielorraine
      October 25, 2011, 12:40 pm

      “Analyzing the incredible power of the Lobby is not ‘superstition’. Denying it is.”

      The author quotes at length from The Israel Lobby, do you honestly think that constitutes denial of the lobby’s power? And just so we are clear, it is the Israel Lobby, not the Jewish lobby. Unlike what the Israeli government tries to do, you should not conflate Judaism with Zionism.

    • Les
      October 25, 2011, 1:12 pm

      The two US groups who actually believe there is such a thing as Jewish power are powerless anti-Semites and powerful Zionists. A truly odd couple.

      • jayn0t
        October 25, 2011, 9:28 pm

        The article and the comments illustrate the weakness of the left on the Israel/Palestine question. The anti-apartheid movement wasn’t too hypersensitive about talking about ‘Afrikaner racism’. I don’t conflate Judaism with Zionism, Maggie Lorraine (nice name!) nevertheless, I use the same phrase that is proudly used by many Israelis (and what Les calls ‘anti-Semites’) – “Jewish power” – special rights given to members of an ethnic group, like white power in America 100 years ago or South Africa 30 years ago. Calling using this term ‘paranoid racism’ as the article does is false, divisive, and a white flag to the Zionists.

      • J. Otto Pohl
        October 26, 2011, 6:21 am

        Traditionally Israel has been a leftist cause especially in the US. So of course the left has problems with the issue. In 1948 I do not think there were very many leftists supporting the Palestinians against Zionist ethnic cleansing. The Zionists were supported at that time by the governements of the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Poland, and most self identified American leftists. It was only a few British conservatives, American isolationists, anti-Zionist Jews such as the Elmer Berger, and of course the Arabs themselves that stood in opposition. Israel remained a leftwing cause in the US long after it broke with the USSR. Even today one finds even the most leftwing Democratic politicians are fanatically pro-Israeli. It is from the right with people like Ron Paul that criticism of Israel has traditionally come from in the US.

      • Ellen
        October 26, 2011, 7:53 am

        J. Otto, the Israel industry is not “right” or “left” and never has been. As if it were that simple and stupid.

        I do not know where you get off lecturing nonsense “It was only a few British conservatives, American isolationists, anti-Zionist Jews such as the Elmer Berger, and of course the Arabs themselves that stood in opposition. ”

        Practically the entire US State department was firmly against recognition of an Israeli State in Palestine, recognizing it would create an endless conflict in no one’s interests. And the costs would be a tremendous injustice and displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. It was that simple.

        Research Truman’s fights with State over the issue. Remember that the entire US delegation to the UN almost resigned as they were overrun and undermined by a President who proved to be a Buffoon and way over his head. The US Representative to the UN did resign.

        Those who were deeply against the hasty and disastrous move by US and remained in the State department where then smeared as “Arabists” as the expression took on a new meaning as not a specialist in Semitic language and culture, but an ugly euphemism such as “N i xx er lover. “

      • J. Otto Pohl
        October 26, 2011, 10:27 am

        The Soviet press at the time presented the Zionist cause as a revolutionary socialist one. Although a short time later they changed the Party line. Likewise the ruling party of Israel for over two decades was an explicitly left wing socialist party. I am not sure, how, one can present Israel in the fifties and sixties as not being a leftist government. Their economy was heavily socialized.

        As far as opposition to the formation of Israel in 1948. I meant public opposition. None of the State Dept. people you claim all opposed Zionism could speak out at the time. In fact they carried out the orders of the Truman administration which represented a lot more organized pro-Zionist interests than did the few voices that openly opposed creating Israel. The key word here is openly and publicly. I don’t care that lots of State Dept. workers were privately against creating Israel. That had no effect on anything. The official policy of the US govt. along with most world governments was in support of Zionism in 1948. This was a reflection in the US of organized pro-Zionists being much louder, better organized and having more money and manpower than those that publicly opposed the formation of Israel. This has been the case in the US since before 1948 until today. I do not know why anybody would think it was controversial.

      • jayn0t
        October 26, 2011, 9:13 pm

        Important points, particularly for this left-leaning blog. The Zionist HQ in Israel was called ‘the Red House’, and not just ‘coz of the color of the bricks. The Soviet Union supported the Zionist cause against Britain ‘coz it was ‘anti-imperialist’. In 1948, Jews worldwide, and Zionism in Israel, were overwhelmingly left-wing. The only congressman to call for an end to aid to Israel is a Republican. Ellen makes some good points also. Jewish power is neither left nor right, it adopts whatever politics it needs to serve its ends. I can’t understand why the authors of this blog prefer left to right on the I/P question.

  5. yourstruly
    October 25, 2011, 10:21 am

    to the people of tunisia on behalf of myself + however many like-minded world-changing wannabes there are out there

    here too

    not only that a better world is possible

    possibilities don’t matter much

    no certainty a possibility will ever materialize

    can’t bank on it

    wealth and power in the hands of the people?

    bankable

    securities?

    just and peaceful societies

    by popular will and demand

  6. DICKERSON3870
    October 25, 2011, 1:36 pm

    PETITION – NPR: Reinstate “World of Opera” and its host, Lisa Simeone
    National Public Radio has ceased distribution of the classical music show “World of Opera” because its host, Lisa Simeone, took part in an OSW political protest. – link to huffingtonpost.com
    TO SIGN PETITION - link to change.org

    • DICKERSON3870
      October 25, 2011, 2:51 pm

      RE: “…Lisa Simeone, took part in an OSW political protest.” – me
      CLARIFICATION: Actually, according to the Huffington Post article, she helped organize the ‘Occupy DC Protest’.
      FROM WIKIPEDIA: (excerpt) Occupy D.C. is a peaceful, non-partisan people’s movement focused on spreading the ideas of Occupy Wall Street and Occupy Together in Washington, D.C.[1] The group has been demonstrating in McPherson Square, since October 1, 2011. According to the Occupy D.C. official website, the movement’s goals include “separating money from politics and improving the country’s infrastructure to fix healthcare, education, environment and the economy,” thereby shifting power from the wealthiest 1% of Americans to the underrepresented 99%.[2]
      Occupy D.C. – link to en.wikipedia.org.

  7. tombishop
    October 25, 2011, 1:53 pm

    If you want a complete rundown of the orchestrated campaign to brand OWS as anti-Semitic, see this article at Talk2Action:

    Conservatives Try to Smear Occupy Movement with Charges of Anti-Semitism

    link to talk2action.org

    • DICKERSON3870
      October 25, 2011, 2:27 pm

      Bill Berkowitz is very good on issues that involve a mix of politics and religion. In addition to Talk2Action.org, his articles can be found at AlterNet.org, ReligionDispatches.org, and SmirkingChimp.com.

  8. annie
    October 25, 2011, 2:03 pm

    thank you ben, very happy to hear positive voices for palestine are participating and being heard @OWS.

    i don’t think code pink would appreciate you defining them as anti israel. from their website

    believes in the implementation of human rights and international law on both sides

    believes in supporting and empowering Palestinian self-determination, but we do not take a stance on a two-state or a one-state solution–it is not within our role as internationals or a U.S. based organization to advocate on behalf of a particular solution on behalf of Palestinians

    condemns violence against civilians on both sides, but we see the Israeli occupation and the blockade of Gaza as among the root causes of the conflict, and view the end of the Israeli occupation and a lifting of the blockade of Gaza as key steps towards reaching a just and lasting solution.

    condemns the use of our national resources to financially and diplomatically support the ongoing occupation and blockade
    stands in solidarity with nonviolent activists working for peace, and conscientious objectors, throughout the region and around the world.

    US citizens must tell their Members of Congress that they want them to pursue a balanced, constructive foreign policy that will lead to an end of the occupation and the establishment of a just peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Please call your member of Congress at 202-224-3121 today!

  9. yourstruly
    October 25, 2011, 2:14 pm

    with these israel-firsters calling occupy wall street’s 99%’ers antisemites

    like when little red riding hood screamed “wolf” one too many times

    how soon before nobody (ok, hardly anyone) will be paying attention to them?

Leave a Reply