Activism

Gilad Atzmon’s attack against me – the ‘merchant of JVP’

Two days ago, Gilad Atzmon published a piece on his blog, titled “the questions that Jonathan Ofir prefers to avoid”. These were questions he sent to me when he wanted to interview me over a year ago. At that point I didn’t know much about Atzmon, only read a few quotes, and recall being warned in advance by a friend, but I had given him a chance, when he approached. Then came the questions. 

Atzmon’s questions referred to my piece “To my fellow Israelis: We can stop this”. Among them: 

Do you really believe that the Jews or the Israelis can “stop it now”?

Have Jews ever stopped themselves voluntarily?

Obviously, I agree with you that Israel and Zionism are engaged in horrendous crimes. But as far as I can tell, Jewish Bolsheviks were engaged in crimes of an even greater scale.

According to Yuri Slezkin, Jews were “Stalin’s willing executioners”. Neocons, a Jewish American political school have inflicted greater disasters than Israel or Zionism.

Is it possible that Zionism is just one symptom of a disastrous Jewish political continuum?

Can you imagine a peace loving Jewish political existence?

Can you point at such a body in Jewish history?

I did a bit more background check, saw a video of a talk. The point of the questions appeared to be that ‘Jewishness’ was the problem, and if I didn’t concede to it, I would probably be regarded as an ‘anti-Zionist Zionist’ or ‘Zionist gatekeeper’ as Atzmon likes to say. I saw where it was going, and I realized that I would lose any way I answered. I politely backed out. I got admonished for lack of ‘intellectual integrity’. At that point I already knew that a distance had to be kept, and that anything I did or said would likely be held against me.  

But a few days ago, Michael Lesher wrote on Facebook that he was going to be doing a talk in New York on Sunday April 30 at which Atzmon would also be speaking. I thought it merited warning (and Lesher admitted to not actually knowing Atzmon), so I described my experience in the comments, and noted I hadn’t spoken about the issue publicly before.

Atzmon came on the thread:

“You Jonathan .. I also didn’t write about it publicly but i probably should.. I will just publish the questions you were not willing to answer so everyone knows what you are and who you work for.. correction .. by now everyone knows ..”.

After another person expressed support for what I write in general, Atzmon wrote:

“The tribe …. my dear,, spreading the myth of the good J (the banal AZZ’ mantra – zionism is bad but Js are good ..)..”

Then Atzmon published the piece called “the questions that Jonathan Ofir prefers to avoid,” and shared the link on the thread, writing:

“You asked for it,, now eat it”.

Now it gets even more interesting. Atzmon writes:

“You see Jonathan… out of your cyber ghetto we really do not appreciate this gatekeeping project you subscribe to… we are not afraid of any form of criticsm ,, we are not afraid of history revisionism either..we believe instead in free exchange ,,, we want more Athens and less Jerusalem..Reading Michael Lesher I get the impression that despite him being an orthodox Jew and unlike you, he also subscribes to athens ..Lesher criticism of contemporary rabbinical society is genuinely universal…anyway,, feel free to discuss the topic on my page,,,it is an open space just to make sure people of your ilk can meet the opposition”.

Notice, the use of double and triple commas. It seems very idiosyncratic for Atzmon. It’s interesting, because then comes a supporter of Atzmon who writes:

“Jonathan, I am not sure at this point of who you truly are, but i definitely notice you also admit not knowing much about Gilad Atzmon, and there is no doubt in my mind that you haven’t bothered yourself to read his book nor did you followed any of his talks proper ,,, so maybe before condemning Gilad’s message you should learn to listen,,, I believe this is an important piece to start with,,, [linking to a 2007 article by Atzmon].

Atzmon is delighted with this comment – and even with himself:

“my god [xxx],, how did you find it… Incredible … I moved a bit since then but it is indeed strong… And it explains very well why Ofir and the JVP are disturbed by my work.. i point at the J they are desperate to conceal the J ….”

At this point, I began to feel very much like Ali Abunimah, who wrote in response to Atzmon in 2013:

“I do not usually write in response to nonsensical online allegations by bigots. If I did I would have little time for anything else. However, I thought it was important to do so in this case.”

And why is this important, beyond the simple offensive ad hominem attacks that are part of Atzmon’s way and style? Because Atzmon makes his attacks against people whom he sees as subscribing to a global Jewish dominance. He believes that even attempts at Palestine solidarity such as BDS have been overtaken by ‘Jewish gatekeepers’ for Judeo-centric agendas, as it were. For Atzmon, ‘Zionism’ is just a mask for the real issue that is responsible for Palestinian suffering and much else: “Jewishness”. When Atzmon twisted Abunimah’s words, he wrote that

[Abunimah] “is just dishonest/stupid. Abunimah calls Israelis Zionists because he needs the so called Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists to support his operation.”

So for Atzmon, those ‘liberal Jews’ who may come as far as challenging and opposing Zionism, are often ‘AZZ’s’ (‘anti-Zionist Zionists’). Thus Abunimah, who opposes all forms of racism including anti-Semitism, is for Atzmon simply a “Sabbath goy” (a gentile who performs work for Jews).

In 2012, various Palestinian writers and activists including Abunimah, BDS co-founder Omar Barghouti, professor Joseph Massad and others officially disavowed the racism and anti-Semitism of Gilad Atzmon.

So what does Atzmon want with me? He seems to want to expose me as a supposed “JVP merchant”, a “dedicated Jewish gatekeeper”. Now those terms can seem puzzling for some. What is this coded language? JVP stands for Jewish Voice for Peace. Atzmon believes that the American Jewish organization, which also supports BDS, is really about ‘Jewishness’ and giving Jews good PR, as it were. He says that “Liberal Jews want to make the [Palestinian] solidarity movement a Goyrein zone” and talks about “JVP, BDS and Jewish liberal terror”.

What is this “merchant” word about? Well, if you think about Shylock, the Jewish character from Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice, the word is a code for the stereotype of the sleazy Jew. This is not just my unfounded association. Atzmon is fully aware of these stereotypes, as he writes:

“Shylock is the blood-thirsty merchant. With Fagin [the Jewish dealer of stolen goods in Dicken’s Oliver Twist, ed.] and Shylock in mind Israeli barbarism and organ trafficking seem to be just other events in an endless hellish continuum.”

Atzmon’s language about me is further condescending, as he regards me as a “boy”, and alters my last name to “offir”. He obviously thinks this is amusing.

So, Atzmon believes I work for JVP (which I don’t, but I support their aims, am on their Facebook group and receive their mails).

Even those who desperately try to defend Atzmon’s statements as merely critical ones, seem somewhat unconvincing when you actually take a look at statements from his book ‘The Wandering Who?’, as in:

“It took me many years to understand that the Holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative [for] historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and political lobbies. It took me years to grasp that my great-grandmother wasn’t made into a ‘soap’ or a ‘lampshade’ as I was taught in Israel. She probably perished of exhaustion, typhus or maybe even by mass shooting… The fate of my great-grandmother was not so different from hundreds of thousands of German civilians who died in deliberate, indiscriminate bombing, just because they were Germans. Similarly, people in Hiroshima died just because they were Japanese… [As devastating as it was], at a certain moment in time, a horrible chapter was given an exceptional meta-historical status.” (pp 175, 149).

Thus – no gassings mentioned, and so many others killed. Not that big a deal in itself, as it were. This can be said to be the “soft core holocaust denial” which Deborah Lipstadt refers to, also in relation to the current US administration’s approach:

“Soft-core denial is much more insidious and squishier but when you know something is not quite right,” she told us [Washington Post]. “When you take out the identity of the victims, when those victims were specifically targeted, that is a form of rewriting history, and that’s what denial is all about.” 

Given, Atzmon seems to be somewhat more educated on this one than White House Spokesperson Sean Spicer, but this only means his assertions are often harder to spot.

Atzmon writes in his attack on me:

“I recently read a disgusting private exchange between Ofir and a peace activist where Ofir used the most abusive crypto Zionist tactics and argumentation (antisemitism, holocaust denial you name it.) I have since then witnessed Ofir disseminating the usual kosher progressive mantra. I am not impressed”.

Atzmon does not provide quotes, so it’s very hard to see what he’s talking about, and in what context. Talking about anti-Semitism in itself is not contentious – neither is usage of the term Holocaust denial. Leveling those charges against an individual is something I rarely do. If I establish such aspects in a person, I usually just disengage completely. I have blocked numerous anti-Semites and Holocaust-deniers in social media. They should just be ignored and disassociated from. 

I could also simply have chosen to ignore Atzmon, or disconnect, as I did a year ago. Was it a mistake to warn publicly about him, and provoke his ire? I’m not sure, but it brought his public attack against me. Would it then be wise to ignore that? I have thought about it for a few days, and reached the conclusion that it’s more than just about me. Like Ali Abunimah, I thought that it was important to do so in this case, to make a public response.

Gilad Atzmon thinks that “time is ripe for the rest of us to know what questions Jonathan Ofir would prefer to avoid.” I think more people need to know about Gilad Atzmon’s bigotry and anti-Semitism, under the guise of a ‘peace activist’.

As for Atzmon’s questions, I regularly voice my critique on both Zionism and Judaism, and I don’t need a person like Atzmon leading me up the path.

Atzmon’s questions speak volumes on their own.

306 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

All 100 senators sign letter asking for equal treatment of Israel at the U.N. Washington Post April 29, 2017

JONATHAN OFIR- “The point of the questions appeared to be that ‘Jewishness’ was the problem, and if I didn’t concede to it, I would probably be regarded as an ‘anti-Zionist Zionist’ or ‘Zionist gatekeeper’ as Atzmon likes to say. I saw where it was going, and I realized that I would lose any way I answered.”

Lose what? Why would answering Atzmon’s questions, which apparently you agreed to, have been such a problem? You make it sound like you are a victim under attack. Since these interview questions were prefaced by positive comments about your video, why the fear? It is at least somewhat informative that your listing of Atzmon’s questions appear cherry-picked for effect. Below are the first question and part of the second question which appear to me non-threatening.

“1. Your decision to present your moving appeal in English is a significant choice. Rather than talking to Israelis you talk about Israel. I went through a similar transition, rather than talking to Jews I made a decision to talk about Jews.

What led to your decision?

2. I am slightly confused by your attitude to Zionism:

a. You seem to argue that Judaism and Zionism are distinct entities; is this really the case? Is there a clear dichotomy? Where does Judaism end and Zionism starts? After all, rabbinical Jews are atthe forefront of the racist crimes against Palestinians.

b. I understand that some rabbinical communities are opposed to Israeli and Zionistcrimes, but they are certainly small in number and have limited influence, don’t you agree?” http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2017/4/27/the-questions-jonathan-ofir-prefers-to-avoid

I think a discussion on Judaism versus Zionism versus “Jewishness” could have helped clarify your respective positions. I suspect that your “background check” indicated to you that any association with Atzmon would have negative consequences for you with much of organized Jewry, so you opted out.

JONATHAN OFIR- “This can be said to be the “soft core holocaust denial”….”

“This can be said?” Are you saying it or disingenuously implying it? While Atzmon lacks Finkelstein’s scholarly prose, their views are at least somewhat similar. There was the historical Nazi holocaust and there is the Zionist constructed Holocaust narrative which they exploit. The insistence that the Holocaust was both uniquely evil and the culmination of 2000 years of Gentile Jew-hatred is part of the Zionist narrative. To question the narrative is not the same as denying the essential facts of the event. I might add that Norman Finkelstein has also been accused of being a Holocaust denier and anti-Semite.

Atzmon is not alone in trying to analyze the effect of Judaism and Jewishness upon the Jewish state. Israel Shahak felt that “Historical Judaism and its two successors, Jewish Orthodoxy and Zionism, are both sworn enemies of the concept of an open society as applied to Israel. A Jewish state, whether based on its present Jewish ideology or, if it becomes more Jewish in character than it is now, on the principles of Jewish Orthodoxy, cannot ever contain an open society.” (p13, “Jewish History, Jewish Religion,” Israel Shahak)

There are a few other things, however, I’ll leave it at this.

Gilad atzmon is a rabid dog.

My answer to Atzmon’s questions would be along the lines that Judaism is a set of religious precepts and Zionism the belief that those who are Jewish, and only they, have an inherent right, now commonly called birthright, to a share of sovereignty over Palestine, others having a share only by the reasonable generosity of the true heirs. I consider Zionism to be a false proposition. If Judaism implies Zionism then the precepts of Judaism must, for me, be false to an important degree. It would seem that the majority of those considering themselves to be of Jewish religion do consider that Zionism is implied, but there is a dissenting minority. I think it’s fairly clear that the link is not logically watertight, so it is possible, to use Atzmon’s terminology, for Judaism to end short of Zionism as a set of beliefs about God and ethical behaviour. I do understand Atzmon’s reluctance to believe that the dissenting religious minority or the other relevant, overlapping minority, that of dissenting Israelis, stands any foreseeable chance of stopping the Zionist agenda, which has been marked with so much success, admiration and
reward, in its tracks. It is still right and important to make the effort, though. Maybe Almighty God will bend the arc of the universe a bit. I think that Atzmon’s questions should be answered rather than refused.
Some Soviet people of Jewish background did terrible things, granted. They suffered also. But the truth or falsity of the Zionist idea is the question and we will not find the answer to that question in the records of the past or its chapters of atrocity.

Part of me understands the torments of Atzmon. The part that sees neocons continue to walk among us, free as birds, even rewarded – amply – while their crimes resulted in rivers of blood on the other part of the world. I cringe at the sight of horrific war criminals, every bit as abominable as certain fascist types, people like Feith, whose hands are dripping with the blood of innocents , being actually interviewed on TV as if they were not criminal serial killers. Even considered for a job in Trump’s administration – which sort of smelled like Eichmann appointed to a UN’s human Rights commission or something (luckily for us all, even trump could not go that far). This part of me cannot forgive the jewish community that sheltered and covered up for the likes of Wolfowitz, kagan, Ledeen et al with platitudes about – hey, it’s not just jews! what about Cheney? oh sure. Cheney. that totally mclarifies things, don’t it?

Possibly, though temperamentally very different from Atzmon, I too would launch at tirades if cornered by certain individuals. The ones who hold the Feith et al cover-up by the jewish establishment guilty as charged (for being basically willing to forgive the thugs for Empire and israel) but then recoil at expanding beria’s ethnicity to a historical cover up by the entire jewish establishment of Russia. Unlike Atzmon though I would never be so quick to hold an entire community (even a tribe) guilty because of some Jewish connection by some to some very bad things.

Still, on bad days, I rant much as Atzmon does. On bad days when the magnitude of the crimes and abominations committed against the Syrian people, the Iraqi people, the Libyan people, the Yemeni people, become impossible to ignore. I know many jewish people (and of course, many many non-jewish people), people i respect, expressed their disgust with the neocons every bit as deeply and clearly as I did and do. I also know that many of the jewish people who failed to be suitably disgusted simply because they had not much knowledge about foreign affaires in general, much as most Americans. After all, it’s the unique privilege of those who live in the heart of the beast to not know what the beast does when it goes on its rampages.

But still, there is that little voice that says – of all its subjects and citizens, the Jews of the Empire should not use apathy or ignorance as a way out of witnessing that which must be witnessed, if civilization is to continue. If too many of them do just that, then perhaps they are all guilty?

All that being said, a world without the like of Ofir is a sad world indeed. I have never seen an article of his I didn’t like or appreciate. Of all the people out there, if I were Atzmon, I would let it slide, Even on a bad day.