Gutman is right: Anti-Semitic incidents in England spiked after attacks on Gaza and flotilla

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 58 Comments
Howard Gutman

US Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman gave a speech last weekend saying that Israeli actions are fostering anti-Semitism in Muslim communities in Europe. Many rightwingers are now calling for his head, including Bill Kristol, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.

Below are two great responses to the speech. First, Yossi Gurvitz, “Yes Israel is a source of anti-Semitism,” points out the old If it’s the Jewish state, then how can you then complain when people blame the Jews issue —

See, we have a problem with this deceptively simple logic. Israel is a country which claims most of its citizens-to-be to reside outside its borders. Israel claims that a. It is a “Jewish country,” b. That all Jews are its potential citizens, c. That it is OK for her to meddle in the affairs of other countries on behalf of what it thinks are Jewish interests, and, finally, d. That any opprobrium gained by its actions, resulting in hatred or actual violence directed at those it claims to represent, is derived from racial and irrational causes. This, alas, does not make sense.

This is without even without mentioning the hidden point e., rarely mentioned, which says that Israel thinks it is perfectly acceptable to use Jews living in other countries as its agents.

Then Justin Elliott at Salon says that there is rigorous research by a British org that studies anti-Semitism to back up what Gutman is saying:

As it turns out, there is rigorous research that backs up Gutman’s point – that of, in his words, “tension, hatred and sometimes even violence between some members of Muslim communities or Arab immigrant groups and Jews … largely born of and reflecting the tension between Israel, the Palestinian Territories and neighboring Arab states in the Middle East over the continuing Israeli-Palestinian problem.”

The Community Service Trust is thoroughly mainstream British organization that specializes in the study of anti-Semitism and providing security for Jews. The group publishes an annual survey on anti-Semitic incidents in the UK, and its most recent study (.pdf) would seem to vindicate Gutman.

It notes what happened after the IDF killed nine pro-Palestinian activists on a flotilla to break the Gaza blockade in May 2010:

“The only significant trigger event in 2010 occurred when Israeli forces boarded a flotilla of ships bearing pro-Palestinian activists who were trying to break the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza; nine activists were killed during the subsequent on-board clashes. Reactions to this episode led to a monthly total of 81 antisemitic incidents in the UK in June 2010, compared to 49 in June 2009, when there was no comparable trigger event.”

And it also discusses the number of anti-Semitic incidents in 2009, the year of the Israeli bombing campaign in Gaza:

“The record total [of anti-Semitic incidents] in 2009 was triggered by reactions to the Gaza conflict in January of that year, which led to record numbers of incidents in January and February 2009.”

Those two points show a correlation between flare-ups in the Middle East and anti-Semitism. But what about causation?

The report explores this complicated question:

“Clearly, it would not be acceptable to define all anti-Israel activity as antisemitic; but it cannot be ignored that much contemporary antisemitism takes place in the context of, or is motivated by, extreme feelings over the Israel/Palestine issue. Drawing out these distinctions, and deciding on where the dividing lines lie, is one of the most difficult areas of CST’s work in recording and analysing hate crime.”

This point by Community Service Trust echoes Gutman’s sentiments almost exactly.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

58 Responses

  1. marc b.
    December 6, 2011, 2:00 pm

    except that the problem with Justin Elliot’s comment is that it ignores legitimate criticism of the Trust as an advocate for israel, or as Mark Elf of JSF put it, its representatives have used the ‘the smear of anti-semitism’ as a way of defending the policies of the state of israel. The Trust is also a proponent of problematic interpretations of the EUMC working definition of anti-semitism, which incorporate examples of criticism of israel into that definition, so it may not be the best source of information that purports to record incidents of anti-semitism.

    The Community Service Trust may be a thoroughly mainstream British organization that specializes in the study of anti-Semitism and providing security for Jews, etc., etc., but it has come under a fair amount of criticism for its positions. see again JSF, Lenin’s Tomb and others for a Brit perspective on the Trust and EUMC definition.

    • Annie Robbins
      December 6, 2011, 2:29 pm

      personally, it doesn’t matter to me if elliot ignores or even evades the nature of the trust. he’s using the logic of the source to support gutman which is what matters and makes it harder for his detractors to blame gutman.

      • marc b.
        December 6, 2011, 3:28 pm

        i probably wasn’t as clear as i could’ve been, annie. i don’t much like gutman’s ‘new anti-semitism’ argument in the first place, and the Trust logic used to support him is equally problematic.

        Working definition: [as endorsed by the trust]
        “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

        In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity.

        it’s that last bit in particular that is nonsense. in my opinion, there can be no such animal as a manifestation of anti-semitism when the manifestation is directed at a state. and going back to gurvitz’s point, who or what has ‘conceived of the state of israel as a jewish collectivity’? the example used to illustrate how the working definition works makes it appear as if anyone who regards israel as a ‘jewish state’ is anti-semitic. israel views itself as a jewish collective. but maybe i’m talking in circles.

      • MHughes976
        December 6, 2011, 6:37 pm

        We may all define words as we like, provided we make ourselves clear.
        I couldn’t really object to this ‘working definition’ on the grounds that there can’t be hatred directed towards a group – or ‘collectivity’ if you like to be pretentious. I think that such hatreds might well exist. (But we should note that ‘I hate the Nazi Party’ does not imply ‘I hate all individuals who belong to the Nazi Party’.)
        However, I would like to ask if hatred is regarded as always unjustifiable. What if some groups do hateful things? If the answer is that moral opposition is not the same as hatred and that hatred, even in the face of the most hateful behaviour, is always unjustified then I would say that the Ambassador should have paused before taking evidence of moral objection to Israel as evidence of ‘hatred’, which triggers the possibility of ‘anti-Semitism’ under the working definition.
        If by contrast the answer is that it is sadly conceivable that some groups might act so badly that hatred of them becomes justifiable then we cannot condemn anyone simply on the evidence of cherishing some hatred of this sort.
        We could then insist that Israel has never acted that badly or come anywhere near doing so, but that insistence would require further moral reasoning.

      • Annie Robbins
        December 7, 2011, 12:54 pm

        marc, the reason it sounds like you’re talking in circles is because the whole ‘theory’ , as gurvitz makes clear in his excellent article, is circular in nature. it’s designed spin your head around to the degree you can’t get out like an eddy on a river. i had a friend get sucked in and drown in an eddy in yosemite once. there’s a place called lava falls on the colorado river (grand canyon). i almost rode it in 78 all the way but flipped just like this (only smaller raft, we flipped earlier front to back instead of sideways).

        also, i think they release less water into river today and it was less controlled back then. but check the guy stuck in the eddy @2:33. it’s hard getting out of those. that’s how this ‘theory’ is designed to work. so we gotta just understand the river we’re on and pass along the info and if we foul up know how to get outta the eddy. we can do it and the alternative leads to disaster.

      • marc b.
        December 7, 2011, 1:17 pm

        jeez, annie, i make a flubbed argument and you have me spinning the drain down to the river bed. tough crowd.

    • jayn0t
      December 6, 2011, 7:50 pm

      Three points.
      First, its the Community Security Trust
      Second, its definition of ‘anti-Semitic incidents’ is so broad is to be meaningless
      Third, ‘a fair amount of criticism’ from crypto-Zionists is simply a tactical discussion
      See Laura Stewart on Gilad Atzmon’s site about the CST:

  2. eGuard
    December 6, 2011, 2:09 pm

    I don’t trust CST, not even if they help. In October, CST pushed UK Minister May to throw Sheikh Raed Salah in prison. Raed Salah was kept from speaking in Parliament building, for reasons still unclear (The Guardian).

    Just 17 minutes after receiving a report on the activist, prepared by Michael Whine of the Community Security Trust, a UK charity monitoring antisemitism, Faye Johnson, private secretary to the home secretary, emailed about a parliamentary event Salah was due to attend.

    So this is a European institute, crying anti-Semitism without substantiating, having someone jailed and thrown out of the country: same old pattern. Let’s not leave the definition of anti-Semitism to Zionists.

  3. Bill in Maryland
    December 6, 2011, 2:29 pm

    This is key- the Lobby goes to extraordinary lengths to tie Judaism to Zionism, which enables it to label any anti-Israeli sentiment as “anti-Semitism” which can then be used to justify the need for a special refuge for Jews in a Jewish State. It’s self-fulfilling and sick!

  4. hophmi
    December 6, 2011, 2:36 pm

    Same thing I put in Alex Kane’s post: If I said that Islamophobia is caused by the conduct of Muslim radicals, would you condemn me as an Islamophobe? Many here would. Hatred is hatred, and needs to be condemned as such whether there is a cited reason or not.

    • eGuard
      December 6, 2011, 4:47 pm

      Hatred is hatred, and needs to be condemned

      The piont you missed is: why calling in anti-Semitism, when there is no reason.

    • Cliff
      December 6, 2011, 5:14 pm

      If you said that it was the only reason, then sure.

      If you said it played a part, then no. Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism does play a large role in anti-Islamic sentiment.

    • anonymouscomments
      December 6, 2011, 8:12 pm

      If I said that Islamophobia is caused by the conduct of Muslim radicals, would you condemn me as an Islamophobe? Many here would.

      hophmi, i think almost *none* of us would call you an islamophobe if you made that statement. of course, you were *not* nuanced, as gutman was, and therefore your statement is false (or perhaps a gross oversimplification, ignoring the other major causes). but making such a simplistic statement without nuance would not at all speak to whether or not *you* are an islamophobe. it would just let many of us know you have little intellectual depth, were you to mean it.

      in reality, people would be idiotic to not realize that muslim radicals, and specifically terrorist acts, are a major *contributor* to the existence of widespread islamophobia (which exists in israel, europe, and the USA).

      you could state the following, and most of us would agree with the statement as being true (FYI, making a true statement does not make one a bigot, regardless of the common zionist tactic of calling people who make factual observations antisemitic; we are not zionists)-
      The conduct of some Muslim radicals is a major contributor to Islamophobia. We [“we” could be anyone, and such a proclamation could even come from an imam at a given mosque] should work to prevent or dissuade Muslim radicals from carrying out illegal and immoral acts of terrorism, and by minimizing those actions, we will see a decrease in islamophobia.

      of course, there are many contributing factors to islamophobia, but there are 2 major ones-
      1) the actions of islamic terrorists that you speak of, which naturally are a major reason the phenomenon of islamophobia *exists* (although strict atheists, or other theists [christian/jewish/hindu] always have had a *fringe* which was afraid of the other; sometimes manifested as islamophobia)
      2) politicians, media, and individuals in a given society *promoting* and *causing* islamophobia by stressing the threat of islamic terrorism, inflating its prevalence (it is quite rare on a death per capita), promoting narratives full of fear, generalizing all muslims, and conflating the entire religion with the radical groups, etc. etc.

      Hatred is hatred, and needs to be condemned as such whether there is a cited reason or not.

      i think you miss the point entirely. we all condemn islamophobia and antisemitism (regardless of the “root cause” for a given individual). i am sure gutman does. do we need to state this obvious point in EVERY discussion with you? however, it is true that there are actions by *individuals* and *movements* within a given group (islam/judaism), that increase these reprehensible phenomenons significantly. often these actions are immoral and patently illegal under international law. therefore, people are disgusted by these actions IN AND OF THEMSELVES, but we also know they will increase islamophobia/antisemitism. and by recognizing the *causation*, perhaps people within each group can better police their own radical elements; be it rogue individuals, extremist groups, trends, or even political parties in the case of israel.

      most muslims condemn the killing of innocents and terrorist attacks, and are not ashamed to POINT OUT that these actions are a major contributor to islamophobia (and largely served as a prerequisite for much of it). most muslims despise terrorism, and want to work to minimize any such actions within their community. i know enough muslims, and i know how they feel when some zealot does something like the killings at fort hood.

      then comes the complex question of israel. by being a jewish state, while also committing illegal acts (hophmi, i assume you know the myriad of acts i am referring to), it represents a major cause of anti-semitism. often the hatred is not only directed at israelis for multiple reasons. these include the manner in which israel defines itself as the “jewish state”, israel’s citizenship laws, the remarkably high level of support israel gets from jews in the diaspora, and even israel’s political history (where they have employed non-israeli jews in espionage, lobbying, etc.). let me state that even hatred of ISRAELIS, in general, is absurd and reprehensible. luckily, i have not met many muslims/arabs/palestinians who even exhibit this, more limited form of hatred.

      BUT, hatred for israeli *policies*? i hate israeli policies, and any moral informed person should also hate many israeli policies. too bad many jews and many israelis have a blind sport the size of greater israel. many gentiles, especially in america, also have that blindspot, carefully groomed. we hope to change that.

      so you don’t feel so persecuted, let me point out that nationalism and national policies also have a similar effect on americans. i despise the policies of my nation, especially since bush II. the actions of my country are clearly THE main cause of anti-americanism (defined here as irrational hatred towards americans). this does not excuse anti-americanism, but at least i know what causes it. i also do not mind meeting people who hate “americans”. i *understand* where their inexcusable generalized hatred comes from, and i let them know i am critical of america’s policies, and that not all americans are like they think (also we are not all fat, dumb, politically ignorant, etc.). they often come away from the interaction with a different way to view groups/nationalities, and especially an *individual* from a given group.

      i have even met anti-semites, and i do not go ballistic (my father is jewish). i understand *why* they developed their racism, but it does not excuse it. i tell them they are concentrating on a jewish minority (a loud one), and should not judge all jews by the actions of some. i usually note how diverse jewish thought and politics are (as diverse as all groups), and that though you may see jews in prominent positions in banking, the media, and DC, they are also overrepresented on the left, in progressive circles, and in groups criticizing israel. nothing monolithic about jews, as much as israel or AIPAC or the zionist right wants to make it SEEM that way. and despite how much people within the jewish community try to self-censor and enforce “groupthink”.

      blah blah……

      bottom line is that you are sticking your head in the sand if you do not want to inspect the manner in which israeli actions cause antisemitism. and by not seeking to change said israeli policies, you are, by extension, endangering yourself as a jew. sad, totally unfair, but true.

    • American
      December 6, 2011, 11:38 pm

      “If I said that Islamophobia is caused by the conduct of Muslim radicals, would you condemn me as an Islamophobe? Many here would.
      Hatred is hatred, and needs to be condemned as such whether there is a cited reason or not.”

      Is “cited reason” the latest hasbara? Sounds like it to me.
      There are good reasons not to like radical Muslims and good reasons not to like Israeli zionism.
      You can dislike either or both without being a Islamophobe or Judaophobe.

  5. Krauss
    December 6, 2011, 3:03 pm

    No, Phil, this time you’re wrong.

    This is a position I must come against, just like I was against Helen Thomas being welcomed with open arms to the “stop AIPAC” event.

    Israel, for all it’s warts, is not the equivalent of the Jewish people. Many Zionists will sadly conflate this, but that isn’t an excuse for other’s to do the same(even if can be understood why some ignorant people would do it, it shouldn’t be accepted in either case).

    There is genuine anti-Semitism in the Arab world which is very deep. Mein Kampf is a best-seller even in the average Arab bazaars. So is the ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’.

    I live in Europe. We have one orthodox rabbi, very serene, who came from the U.S. to a synagogue here. He gets spit upon, has been beaten several times. But he refuses to hide or shy away from his Jewish identity. He has never even spoken about Israel.

    A reporter for one of the best, most read, newspapers followed him for a day a year ago or so(often behind him when in the public square in one of our major cities) in one of our cities and was absolutely shocked what he saw.

    Many muslim immigrant, and this was not a fringe phenomenon, stopped their cars to specifically call him a dirty Jew, many threatned phsyical violence and many spat on him.

    This situation is not isolated. The vast majority of Jews in this nation, and increasingly in Europe as a whole, are afraid to even wear a kippa in public or in any way identify themselves as Jews since both the muslim and the Jewish communities tend to live in the biggest cities.

    Detailed statisitics over racial hatecrime show that anti-Semitic violence is far, far more common and most of it comes from muslim immigrants.

    Israel is a catalyst for the deep, growing anti-Semitism that ructures in the Arab world, or their immigrant populations. A convenient cover. Israel, I would admit, has probably contributed lately in a very minor way. But a much more important reason, for this a long-term trend, is the rise of Islamism in the Arab world.

    The rise of hatred of Jews has also co-incided with the rise of hatred of women, gays, Christians, even moderate and liberal muslims(especially liberal, muslim women who flee many of these nations if they can).

    And even if they hate Israel(and even if you think that hatred of the Jewish state is somehow acceptable), that’s not an excuse – and can never be one – to hate Jews as a people. Ever.

    Just like I could hate the way Iran is conducting itself, it doesn’t give me an excuse to be a violent racist against Iranians as a people. That would make me a bigot of extreme proportions.

    The word ‘appeasement ‘ has been overrused and I tend to avoid it whenever I can.
    But this piece reeks of it. I’m disappointed and frankly even a little disgusted by it.
    You should know better, Phil.

    • Mooser
      December 6, 2011, 5:04 pm

      “There is genuine anti-Semitism in the Arab world which is very deep. Mein Kampf is a best-seller even in the average Arab bazaars. So is the ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’.”

      Okay, don’t need to read the rest of that comment. My God, what a song-writing team him and Hophmi would make!

    • Donald
      December 6, 2011, 5:12 pm

      “But this piece reeks of it.”

      No it doesn’t. The rest of your post was worth reading, but the last paragraph reeks of political correctness. Phil supplied data that some anti-semitism is driven by hatred of Israel’s actions and you deny it. There is in fact no contradiction between saying that anti-semitism is a real problem in Europe even apart from Israel’s actions, and saying that Israel’s actions increase the problem.

      Incidentally, the rise of Islamism in the Arab world probably has something to do with the Western support given to secular dictatorships, Mubarak included. Your post makes it seem like all the fault here is on the Arab side.

    • hophmi
      December 6, 2011, 5:28 pm

      At least someone here admits that there is actually serious antisemitism in Europe. Now I’ll wait for Phil to actually say something about it.

      • mig
        December 7, 2011, 1:10 am

        hoph :

        At least someone here admits that there is actually serious antisemitism in Europe. Now I’ll wait for Phil to actually say something about it.

        I’m in Europe, and cant see it anywhere. Could someone plz point that place.

      • anonymouscomments
        December 7, 2011, 2:03 am

        krauss and hophmi,

        phil did not excuse antisemitism at all. not even the antisemitism which is *born* of righteous anger. antisemitism is naturally inexcusable, but SO ARE THE ROOTS OF IT WHEN THOSE ACTIONS ARE INEXCUSABLE. he pointed out the *fact* that israeli policies are a contributing factor, which is exemplified by the correlation between antisemitic acts and israeli actions.

        but if you refuse to see the correlation, i have an exponential curve i can show you….

        …and all of us in “the tribe” are in the y-axis. unless we prevent those who portend to speak for us from committing egregious crimes, or at least speak loudly against them, we may eventually be part of that axis. it may be an american revolution under dire economic circumstances, or some other phenomenon in some other place, but on that axis many of us will be.

        sleep tight, but if you actually fear antisemitism, the best place to put your energy may be in altering ISRAELI ACTIONS.

      • eGuard
        December 7, 2011, 6:08 am

        hophmi: there is … serious antisemitism in Europe

        Which is off-topic, again.

      • Mooser
        December 7, 2011, 12:37 pm

        “At least someone here admits that there is actually serious antisemitism in Europe. Now I’ll wait for Phil to actually say something about it.”

        Okay, I’ll accept the premise “that there is actually serious antisemitism in Europe”. Hell, why would I doubt it, after the Holacaust? But if you think that is going to make me trust Zionists you’re crazy. You don’t have any answers to anti-Semitism, and it has been my experience as an ordinary Jew that Zionists thrive on anti-Semitism, and may even promolgate it.
        Get that, Hophmi? The fact that there is anti-Semitism doesn’t convince me that you have any answers for it, or should even be allowed anywhere near the question. After all, anti-Semitism is one of the raw materials of Zionism.

    • tokyobk
      December 6, 2011, 7:04 pm

      Exactly right.

      9/11 led to increases in acts of hatred against Muslims.

      The perpetrators of those acts are completely responsible for their acts and there is no context which justifies them ever.

    • Cliff
      December 7, 2011, 3:48 am

      Krauss, consistently, reports on attitudes towards minorities have shown that it is Muslims who are being harassed more and more. Not Jews.

      I would like to see some documentation that Jews of Europe are being harassed like this on a wide-scale. I’m sure you can produce something given your personal experience.

      I don’t want to see an opinion poll from European Jews because there is a big difference between perception and reality and if you aren’t being harassed at work, at school, in the media then you aren’t being harassed. If you ‘feel’ harassed because people are criticizing Israel more than they criticize Darfur, then shove it. Not the same thing AT ALL.

      I don’t believe for a second that Jews in Europe feel persecuted against.

      Arab anti-semitism is real. So is the anti-semitism that spills over due to Israeli policy.

      Arab anti-Americanism happens for the same reason. Islamophobia happens for the same reason.

    • Theo
      December 7, 2011, 8:37 am


      I do not know in which country you live in, however I also live in Europe and I have never ever seen such attacks you describe.

      However, we can see on a daily base in Israel the jewish attacks on palestinians, on christians and even on tourist without knowing to which religion do they belong, if any. YouTube is full of such videos where orthodox jews attack or shout hateful remarks at non-jews.
      Are you sure that you did not see such an attack and just did not realize that you are in Israel, not in Europe.

      By the way, as long as there are humans on this Earth we had discrimination and hatred against others and we shall always have it.
      If that orthodox rabbi would walk around like an average german, frenchman or italian, he would have absolutely no problems.
      However, if he dresses and goes on the street as a refugee from the year 1,000 BC, then he incites those negative feelings and resentments.
      I also reserve this comment for those in other religions who dress like women or clowns. They stick out like a sore thumb and invite negative vibrations.
      Try assimilation in your country. You can have your jewish religion, but do not advertise it constantly, christians don´t walk around like those clowns in the Vatican.

  6. DICKERSON3870
    December 6, 2011, 3:06 pm

    RE: “…Israel thinks it is perfectly acceptable to use Jews living in other countries as its agents.” ~ Yossi Gurvitz

    ONE NOTORIOUS EXAMPLE: Israel stole uranium from U.S., report will show ~ By Kristin Dailey, The Daily Star, 12/05/11

    [EXCERPTS] WASHINGTON: A U.S.-based research institute will soon publish what it says is “indisputable” evidence that Israel stole weapons-grade uranium for its still-undeclared atomic weapons program from a nuclear reprocessing plant in western Pennsylvania.
    The Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy (IRmep) will release this month a 300-page report detailing the initial findings of a multi-year research project investigating the disappearance of highly enriched uranium from the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (Numec) in Apollo, Pennsylvania in the 1950s and 1960s…
    …When contacted by The Daily Star, Zalman Shapiro, the founder and former president of the Numec, strongly denied that any diversion of materials to Israel had ever taken place at the plant.
    “The story is fabricated. Absolutely fabricated,” said Shapiro, who is now 91 years old.
    Smith said that among the evidence to be included in the report is a DOE document confirming that uranium samples picked up by the CIA outside Israel’s nuclear installation in Dimona bore the same isotopic signature as material produced by the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in the U.S. state of Ohio. The Portsmouth plant was a supplier for Numec…


    • DICKERSON3870
      December 6, 2011, 3:11 pm


      (excerpt) The Lavon Affair refers to a failed Israeli covert operation, code named Operation Susannah, conducted in Egypt in the Summer of 1954. As part of the false flag operation,[1] a group of Egyptian Jews were recruited by Israeli military intelligence for plans to plant bombs inside Egyptian, American and British-owned targets. The attacks were to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood, Egyptian Communists, “unspecified malcontents” or “local nationalists” with the aim of creating a climate of sufficient violence and instability to induce the British government to retain its occupying troops in Egypt’s Suez Canal zone.[2] The operation caused no casualties, except for those members of the cell who committed suicide after being captured.
      The operation became known as the Lavon Affair after the Israeli defense minister Pinhas Lavon, who was forced to resign because of the incident, or euphemistically as the Unfortunate Affair or The Bad Business (Hebrew: העסק ביש‎, HaEsek Bish or העסק הביש, HaEsek HaBish). After being denied for 51 years, the surviving agents were in 2005 officially honored with a certificate of appreciation by the Israeli President Moshe Katzav. . .

      SOURCE –

  7. yourstruly
    December 6, 2011, 3:07 pm

    as someone who for going on 40 years has been speaking about how the zionist entity fosters antisemitism, the ambassador’s statement is a godsend

    oh, but the struggle is about palestinians, not jews?

    how many times have i heard this?

    except it’s about both peoples (all peoples, actually, since perpetual war + global warming = doomsday)

    inextricably linked now, palestinian and jew, on account of what zionism hath wrought with the one about a land without a people for people without a land

    with israel claiming that it speaks for jews everywhere

    and once that claim is shown to be false?


    for palestinians?

    palestinians, jews

    + all living beings

    • yourstruly
      December 7, 2011, 1:53 am

      because when the public realizes that there are so many jews opposing israel’s brutal treatment of palestinians, the fear of being labeled antisemitic for joining said opposition will vanish.

      and once this happens

      for having tricked america into multiple wars on behalf of israel

      those israel-firsters who committed treason beware

  8. eee
    December 6, 2011, 3:12 pm

    Did attacks on Americans in the UK spike after the US attacked Iraq? No. So why did attacks on Jews double after Cast Lead which resulted in much less harm to human life and was a much shorter operation? How about attacks on Russians following Chechnya?

    It is clear that the hatred of Jews is there all the time and that Israeli actions at most motivate people to act, but are not the cause of antisemitism.

    • American
      December 6, 2011, 4:53 pm

      “Did attacks on Americans in the UK spike after the US attacked Iraq?”…eee

      The UK was with the US on the invasion of Iraq. It was sold to Americans and Brits as a war on terror to keep them safe. Nevertheless there were plenty of verbal attacks and insults on America and Americans and on Britain and Brits by those who objected on both sides on the pond. I would guess there was more than one bar or pub fight in this disagreement that wasn’t tallied because it didn’t involve
      a hate crime or ethnic attack. Gentile on gentile attacks for any reason except sexual orientation or race as with blacks aren’t reported as hate crimes, they aren’t a protected class.
      But hatred or dislike of America/ians sure did spike after Iraq.

    • marc b.
      December 6, 2011, 5:09 pm

      It is clear that the hatred of Jews is there all the time and that Israeli actions at most motivate people to act, but are not the cause of antisemitism.

      if that’s the case, why the need for the ‘new anti-semitism’ argument? if anti-semites will invent justifications for their bigotry, israel is more or less irrelevant in your formula.

    • Cliff
      December 6, 2011, 5:17 pm

      There’s a big f***in OCEAN between the US and it’s opponents, genius.

      Arab Americans are mostly conformists. They aren’t latent Islamists.

      There have been – according to the FBI, although they basically groom the Islamists they eventually catch – many failed attacks.

      Terrorism spiked after the US occupation. It was a completely different problem afterwards and much worse.

    • hophmi
      December 6, 2011, 5:30 pm

      Thank you, eee, for bringing some basic logic in here.

      • Cliff
        December 6, 2011, 6:31 pm

        eee after the Itamar murders:

        Hey Phil and Annie and the rest of you guys,

        Can you please ask your Palestinian friends that the next time they murder only the parents? Could you please explain to them that killing three kids including a 3 year old and an infant does not help their cause?

        Who murders random kids sleeping in their beds just because they are Jews? Only very sumud and sensitive people. Please prepare your excuse why Hamas will not condemn this crime and then try explaining how Israelis should really look forward towards living in a one state. I am looking forward to Avi’s explanation why the perpetrators are really heroes. Mooser, do you have any jokes about this you would like to share with us?

        See how this imbecile tries to connect this murder to all of Palestinian society.

        eee said:


        One person did the killing in Itamar in 2002, one person did the killing in Itamar in 2011, and of course it was one person behind each of the dozens of suicide bombings. These child murderers are of course all unique. They are not a product of their own society. Yeah, sure. Your idolization of Palestinian society is grotesque.

        He goes on to say ‘one’ person also carried out suicide bombings, ignoring that these individuals were members of Hamas or other terrorist groups.

        This is the intellectually dishonest racist commentary of Zionism.

        Hophmi, do you also find eee’s argument on who is and is not a Jew imbued with ‘basic logic’?

        Phil why didn’t my other comments go through?

        So we should all follow eee’s logic when it comes to Zionism – blame all Jews! Or blame all Israelis at the very least AND most American Jews.

        Then through this comment back in his face. He might stop worshiping himself for a moment to see what a hilariously egotistical, hypocrite and liar he is. Pay attention hoppy, that applies to you as well.

        This is just one of COUNTLESS idiotic, disgusting racist comments that Zionists on MW make every single day here.

        Yet, hoppy the liar (who said Palestinians were Nazis), calls Phil Weiss a ‘lunatic’ and says he should allow a Zionist writer on MW.

        Poor hophmi, chained to his chair and forced to view MW for all eternity!

      • yo_mamma
        December 7, 2011, 12:29 am

        Zing! Bet that one hurt!

        A rather haunting indictment: as damning as it is accurate. Nice reply, Cliff.

    • Bumblebye
      December 6, 2011, 6:03 pm

      From your bolthole in Israel, you maynot recall the appalled reaction of neocons to the “anti-Americanism” they felt they met with when appearing on UK discussion panels. After 9/11 as well as after Iraq.

    • Potsherd2
      December 6, 2011, 7:04 pm

      Attacks on JEWS?

      It was attacks on Muslims that proliferated after 9/11.

    • eGuard
      December 7, 2011, 6:17 am

      eee Did attacks on Americans in the UK spike after the US attacked Iraq? No. ??? Yes.

      Locally it is called “7/7”, but your paper might have missed it. “Americans” to be understood as “species/sectarian/Nation of Neocons”, which come in denominations like Americans, Londoners, Ashkenazis, Zionists and Liberal Zionists.

  9. seafoid
    December 6, 2011, 3:50 pm

    Israel gave Jews agency. Agency means choice but it also brings reponsibility.
    When gobshites like Danon say this is Jewish land and the Palestinians have no rights and this is on behalf of all Jews and anyone who disagrees is antisemitic they have no leg to stand on. I am not a bit part in some Jewish messianic narrative and neither are 7 billion other goys. Israeli Jews need to cop on.

    • tokyobk
      December 6, 2011, 6:35 pm

      And what does this have to do with the moral and rational link between Israel and Jew hating? If someone thinks Jews are sons of apes and pigs anything will do as a justification and removing Israel won’t matter. If Danon or someone else is an idiot what does that say about the Jews as a whole group.

      People use this same formula to deride Muslims which appalling as well.

  10. American
    December 6, 2011, 4:26 pm

    I don’t think anyone has to trust any source on this.
    I think anyone who follows Israel events can see clearly that tempers flare in direct relation to each act of Israeli aggression.
    But the anti semite hunters will claim that anti semite acts take place more with these events because anti semites think they have a legitimate cover to act out their anti semitism. So you can’t argue with them because they won’t accept any other explanation except anti semitism is always in waiting to burst forth.

    Is there also an explanation for willy nilly anti semitic acts against individual Jews?
    Let’s say a Arab, or anyone, is outraged and furious about Cast Lead. They can’t get to the Israel government and the actual perps so they take it out on the first Jew they come across to get back at the “Jewish state.”
    We know it’s wrong but it’s part of our human nature failings. Like the guy who comes home and kicks the dog as an outlet for his anger or frustration. Anyone who says they have never lashed out in some way at a innocent person in their frustration or anger is lying or a saint.
    Some OWS protestor smashing the car of or attacking some ‘individual’ because he is associated in their mind rightly or wrongly with the Elite 1% would be guilty of the same thing.

  11. MRW
    December 6, 2011, 5:30 pm

    Nice to see cause and effect enter the equation.

  12. MRW
    December 6, 2011, 5:46 pm

    Yossi Gurvitz’s article is superb. I urge everyone to read it. He gets the wash cycle of religious history exactly right.

    Americans can appreciate this analogy Gurvitz gives as well, in aid of the clip Phil highlighted:

    Goldberg’s analogy simply does not work. Saying that all blacks are responsible for the actions of a single criminal, or that this single criminal is an indication that all blacks are criminals, is manifestly racist, but it is nowhere near the mark. Let’s try another analogy. Let’s say a band of rabid black-supremacists invaded a piece of land, claiming it to be their ancestral their homeland, supported by Europeans who wanted those people out of their own country; Let’s say the invaders have ruthlessly drove back the less organized, under-armed surprised locals; Let’s say they have kept the indigent population as second-class citizens, and later invaded another country and exported those methods to it – all the while claiming to represent black people everywhere, such a farcical claim being taken seriously by many countries. Would anyone be surprised if anti-Black sentiment would rise?

    • tokyobk
      December 6, 2011, 7:23 pm

      The anti-black sentiment would be completely the moral onus of the anti black racists in such a case.

    • Shaktimaan
      December 7, 2011, 5:56 am

      So in that scenario you would blame the black-supremacists for the anti black sentiment/violence (presumably committed against peaceful citizens of another state)?

      What if there were dozens of groups who did this exact thing, oppressing, murdering that same group of locals, but on much larger scales… thousands instead of dozens killed. Over decades, again and again. But no one cared about anyone else, just the black supremacists.

      Would you infer that this might be due to bigotry or something similar, since it became clear that people only care about invasion/oppression of this sort when committed by blacks?

  13. Justice Please
    December 6, 2011, 5:56 pm

    “Reactions to this episode led to a monthly total of 81 antisemitic incidents in the UK in June 2010”

    How many of those were truly Jew-hatred? And how many were simply political-Israel-hatred? How many were “I got fired from work so I call Abe Foxman and claim it was because of my boss’ anti-Semitism?”-style events?

  14. American
    December 6, 2011, 9:07 pm

    Well I had a partial explanation for why Jews get attacked..and I do think they get attacked frequently in direct relation to episodes of Israeli aggression.
    For some reason my theory is hung up in moderation.
    But simply said, when some Israeli action causes people to reach their outrage boiling point, whether it’s an Arab or others, some will lash out at any Jew they come across as a way to get back at the Jewish State. Since they don’t have the power to get at the Israel government or the actual perps, a individual Jew bears the brunt of that rage.
    I’ve never kept a list but it seems to me that almost every instance and claim of Jews being harrassed on college campuses and all the disputes in that setting began with arguements about Israel and the occupation or some other Israeli action at it’s core.

  15. colindale
    December 7, 2011, 3:25 am

    It is not the US that is permeated by anti-Semit­ism, in fact quite the reverse. The problem is Israel’s government and its odious agenda.

    Can any well-infor­med, unbiased individual doubt that Netanyahu’­s Likud coalition is, at least in part, responsibl­e for the upsurge in anti-Semit­ism over the past five years, in Europe and around the world?
    Israel’s continuing contempt for the United Nations in giving financial inducement­s to Israelis to vacate their homes to illegally settle on Palestinia­n land is perceived by the internatio­nal community as a criminal act against an oppressed, indigenous people who have been the majority presence in former Palestine for over a thousand years.

    The anti-Semit­ism inculcated by the Likud party agenda is obvious, palpable and extremely dangerous, primarily to the Jewish diaspora but also to the wider world. It needs to be stopped.

  16. hophmi
    December 7, 2011, 3:40 am

    As I said elsewhere, the problem with Gutman’s analysis is that it ignores the fact that there is no rash of Jews attacking Muslims in Europe. Anti-Muslim attacks did not spike after suicide bombings. They haven’t spiked in light of rocket attacks. Jews don’t attack Muslims. Unfortunately, there is a rash of anti-Jewish sentiments among Muslims in Europe that results in physical attacks against Jews. Most Jews in Europe are afraid to walk down the street with their heads covered. That’s a scandal, and the first responsibility for fixing that problem lies in the communities of the perpetrators, not the community of the victims.

    • Donald
      December 7, 2011, 11:43 am

      “That’s a scandal, and the first responsibility for fixing that problem lies in the communities of the perpetrators, not the community of the victims.”

      That’s true and I agree that Muslims in Europe need to fix the problem of anti-semitism within their own community.

      But that’s a general principle. You say that Jews don’t attack Muslims in Europe. That’s true, but Jewish supporters of Israel do support Israeli brutality and oppression of Palestinians. So do Christian Zionists. So I’d say that the same principle applies–Christians and Jews need to take on the people in their respective communities who support immoral policies in the Middle East.

  17. Stogumber
    December 7, 2011, 4:24 am

    I suppose that most intelligent people agree over the basics.
    1. There exists some antisemitism which is only intrapersonally rooted: fostered by the person’s inner insecurities etc and afterwards “projected” on jews.
    2. There exists a lot of antisemitism which is interpersonally rooted: fostered by experiences between jews and non-jews which are (perhaps mis-) interpreted and (more or less correctly) generalized.
    Those two kinds mingle with each other.
    That said, we must understand the message of the CST also in terms of strategical thinking.
    Jews in Europe are deeply divided over matters of strategical alliance: (a) ally with the immigrants against the natives (them still being the ruling majority), or (b) ally with the natives against the Muslim immigrants.
    What CST tells is basically, as Muslim antisemitism is not as bad as traditional Christian antisemitism, there’s still room for an alliance with (the good of the) Muslims against (the bad of the) natives.

  18. tommy
    December 7, 2011, 11:18 am

    Opponents of Israel’s militant expansion with US arms and racial nationalism should be careful when expressing their hostility to direct it towards the state of Israel, Israel’s citizens, Israel’s apologists, and the nation that subsidizes Israel’s crimes against humanity. Using Israel’s crimes as an excuse to commit aggression against Jews just because Israel is a Jewish state is the same mistake Americans made when blaming Muslims for the 9-11 attacks. Jews who support Israel should be opposed nonviolently for their racially informed nationalism that encourages Israeli crimes, and if any action should be taken against them, it should be done through the rule of law.

  19. Mooser
    December 7, 2011, 11:40 am

    The delight that Zionists take in attacks on Jews is palpable in their comments, is it not?

  20. JuliaNoel
    December 8, 2011, 2:59 am

    This old “antiSemitic” furphy really needs to be knocked down as soon as it rears it’s ugly head.

    It is not anti-Semitic to criticize and/or condemn a nation that is committing war crimes against a true Semitic people, the indigenous Palestinians. It would be anti-Semitic NOT to condemn Israel in light of it’s human rights abuses against Semitic people.

    Unlike the indigenous Palestinians, Israelis and Jews are not all Semitic ; those that lived in Palestine before the Nabka of 1948 were Semitic; Muslims, Christians and Jews living there in 1947 were Semitic; the European invaders were, and are, not Semitic. They are Slav and Anglo amongst other ethnicity.

    The term “anti-Semitic” is just another strategy of the Zionists to curtail any justified condemnation of Israel’s crimes. Knock it on it’s ugly head every time it is reared.

Leave a Reply