Trending Topics:

Nobel laureate Smith has been repeatedly smeared as anti-Semite, but remained dedicated to anti-Zionism

US Politics
on 24 Comments

As we noted the other day, the Palestinian solidarity community is reveling in the fact that George P. Smith won the Nobel Prize in chemistry because the 77-year-old retired biologist has long been outspoken on Palestinian rights. It’s not often that prestige is associated with the Palestinian side; though Vanessa Redgrave, Roger Waters, Stephen Hawking and Noam Chomsky are precedents.

Looking back over Smith’s public record on Palestine, you can see his evolution and dedication to ideals, and also the fierce opposition that he has met, in Columbia, Missouri.

It appears that Smith began as many of us did in the U.S., with co-existence efforts. In 2007, Smith was a leader of an inter-faith breakfast at the University of Missouri and a member of a Jewish group called Boone Tikkun. “Working to heal the Israel-Palestine conflict is the primary focus for us,” he told the student newspaper then.

Three years later his Jewish group folded into PIPA, Palestine Israel Peace Association, another co-existence effort at the school. The group was led by a Palestinian doctoral student. And one of its leaders said, “We want it to be about the conflict, but we want it to be both sides.”

In 2012, Smith wrote a piece for us in which he called for democracy between the river and the sea and described his own progress from liberal Zionism.

Another term for apartheid in Palestine is Zionism, the ranks of former liberal Zionists swelling steadily as one by one we reluctantly, belatedly come to acknowledge the equation.

By 2015, Smith was reported to be a “self-proclaimed ‘post-Zionist’ and ‘Nakba Jew-in-law’.” And also an anti-Zionist.

In that year, several Jewish groups sent a letter to the University of Missouri’s chancellor saying that anti-Semitic vandalism on campus had been fostered by “virulently anti-Israel events,” including a panel discussion titled “Palestine in Context,” the school paper reported, “during which MU Professor George Smith called for an end to Zionism.”

Smith wrote a letter to the student paper to explain that anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitic but an equal-rights movement opposed to a “Jewish sectarian regime” and dispossession and oppression of Palestinians. An excerpt:

Anti-Zionism is a social justice movement patterned after the civil rights campaign in the U.S. and the anti-Apartheid campaign in South Africa. Its core demand is equal rights for all the people who are currently governed by the Jewish sectarian regime in Israel. Half of those people are Palestinian Arabs, who are subject to discriminatory Jewish ethnocratic rule in Israel; to ongoing dispossession and oppressive Israeli military rule in the occupied West Bank; and to a destructive economic siege and periodic bloody assaults in Gaza. Anti-Zionism’s signature tactic is the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel until it complies with international law, as called for in 2005 by 170 Palestinian civil society organizations. It totally rejects anti-Semitism and the expulsion of Israeli Jews from the homeland they share with Palestinian Arabs. It seeks to replace Jewish ethnocratic governance with a liberal democracy that guarantees equal rights for all citizens — not with Palestinian Arab ethnocratic governance. It does not threaten Jewish students at Mizzou or any other campus, though it seeks to persuade them to join its struggle for justice. A small but rapidly growing minority of Jews have already joined, including in leadership roles.

Shoshana Lewin, a Mizzou graduate (who is evidently an editor at the Jewish Journal in L.A.), responded that Smith was a “so-called” professor spewing hate:

With all the hatred lately around campus, there is absolutely no purpose in running a letter from anti-Semite, anti-Israel “so-called” professor George Smith. His letter drips with hate and intolerance.

That strikes me as a very unfair attack. In all the articles I’ve read, Smith’s tone has been moderate (just as his Nobel acceptance speech last week was remarkable for its deference to a broad scientific community). For instance, in March 2015, +972 wrote a piece on the new activism among Palestinians in Israel, in which a young Palestinian said, “Society has come to a point where you can’t even think of an Arab-Jewish coalition,” and Smith wrote a comment in concern:

I hope this is wrong. If Palestinian liberation is unwilling to welcome Israeli Jewish partners, the way the African National Congress welcomed justice-loving whites during the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa, the day of liberation will be put off, perhaps indefinitely. This magazine and many other signs show that there are plenty of justice-loving Jews, both in Israel and elsewhere. If the conflict is nothing more than a squabble between nationalities for sovereignty over land, Zionism will resist indefinitely, with all the superior force at its disposal, and the global community will not interfere. It’s the equal rights movement’s task to help Israel’s Jews liberate themselves from Zionism.

At that time, Smith as an emeritus professor sought to offer a course on Zionism at the University of Missouri. The course proposal came under great political pressure from the Israel lobby as a promotion of “bigotry and misinformation” and was ultimately canceled for lack of enrollment to the delight of pro-Israel groups.

“Smith said he was unable to recruit during the enrollment period and believes that is why there was no interest in the class,” the student paper at the University of Missouri reported.

The Jewish News Service reported on the political pressure: “Sixteen local, national, and international organizations wrote a letter to MU Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin urging him to cancel the class before it became ‘a stain on your university’s reputation and a disservice to students. … Smith’s proposed course would certainly contribute to a campus climate favorable to anti-Semitic acts.’”

The JNS said that Smith would have taught works by anti-Zionist authors such as Ilan Pappé, “who has accused Israel of ethnic cleansing.” And it said that in letters to the editor, Smith “uses phrases such as ‘Zionist mythology’ and accuses Israel of ‘colonization of the Occupied Palestinian Territories.’”

The JNS accused Smith of heckling an Israeli reservist who had visited the school as part of a StandWithUs tour of Israeli soldiers. But Smith demurred:

“I do go to pro-Zionist meetings, but I don’t disrupt. I am just vocal with my questions,” he told JNS.org. “People have freedom of speech. Our university does not sensor [sic] our political speech—or any other kind of speech.”

One student said the class would be “a front for Dr. George Smith to spew anti-Israel propaganda,” the JNS reported; and Smith was smeared as a bully:

Students feared that if Smith has few qualms about using intimidation in group meetings, he would be equally as uninhibited in the classroom. The university, however, did not share those same sentiments.

Though the JNS did allow Smith to defend himself with typical self-effacement:

“Can an activist teach a class? It runs against the fundamental principles of academic honesty for a teacher to use his position of power to push a particular point of view. What I claimed—and who knows if I really could have lived up to this—was that if a student comes into this course convinced and committed to Zionism then that student will leave a better Zionist,” he said.

The JNS also said that the Jewish community would not rest in keeping Smith from ever teaching his class:

[A]n affidavit is being prepared by Jewish community activists, in conjunction with the university legal department, that would help ensure Smith will be turned down next time he tries to teach about Zionism.

A source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because her testimony is tantamount to the affidavit, said four students that don’t feel safe with Smith leading anything on this topic have provided evidence. She has provided a series of harassing anti-Israel emails from Smith that will back up this case.

That hysteria was reflected in a newspaper I used to write for, the Observer, by an Israel advocate named Paul Miller who likened Smith to David Duke:

Would you let David Duke teach a class on African-American history? How about Anita Bryant starting an LGBTQ studies program? Beyond incomprehensible—the makings of a Saturday Night Live skit. But this is no laughing matter. This insanity is a reality, and your children are being indoctrinated.

George Smith despises Israel. The University of Missouri (Mizzou) biology professor has called the creation of the Jewish State “a shameful chapter in Jewish history.”

Smith was then featured on the website Canary Mission, which seeks to inflict career damage on students and professors who speak up for Palestine.

Smith on Canary Mission

Smith did not walk away. A year ago, on the anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, he contributed a piece to the Columbia Daily Tribune, “How Palestine Became Jewish.” Smith quoted a wide range of historical/ideological sources from Charles Glass to Avi Shlaim to Tom Segev to Alison Weir.

The Balfour Declaration reflected in some part the sincere Christian Zionism of Prime Minister David Lloyd George and of Balfour himself. Far more important, however, was the considerable political influence of British Zionists under the able leadership of Chaim Weizmann, and of American Zionists led by Louis Brandeis, a close adviser to President Woodrow Wilson. The last half of 1916 had been a perilous low-point in Britain’s fortunes in World War I; Britain was desperate for allies. Zionists exploited this situation by linking British support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine to the belated U.S. decision to enter the war on Britain’s side in April 1917 — a decision Brandeis had argued for…

More than 90 percent of Palestine’s population in 1917 were Arabs (including local Sephardi Jews), but they did not figure in Britain’s policy. As Balfour famously remarked in 1919, the aspirations of Zionist settlers were “of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land.” …

Neither Britain nor Zionists had the right to dictate the fate of Palestine. … Today there can be no excuse for celebrating this sordid chapter in settler-colonialist injustice, especially in light of the ongoing nakba: the catastrophe that Palestine’s “non-Jewish communities” continue to suffer in consequence.

George P. Smith is the only University of Missouri professor to win the Nobel Prize, and the school is today hugely proud of the scientific work he carried out in its labs. If his intellectual record shows anything, he is not one to rest on his laurels.

P.S. To repeat from our earlier coverage of Smith’s award: The New York Times in its long report on the prize never mentioned Smith’s anti-Zionism.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

24 Responses

  1. DaBakr
    DaBakr
    October 8, 2018, 2:25 pm

    “As we noted…..” PW has become an expert muckraking hack. Plant a story about a humble Nobel scientist and mention he happens to hold some sympathetic views towards the plight of palestinians. Wait a day then bleat out how he’s been “attacked”. Nobody but pw gives a shit whether he is pro bds in light of his Nobel prize. He accomplished something important for humanity and he isn’t rabidly political. Imagine that

    • Cliff
      Cliff
      October 8, 2018, 2:56 pm

      His politics matters and the fact that he is accomplished matters.

      Just because youre a cultist lunatic like a Scientologist (but crazy for Israel) doesnt change that fact.

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr
        October 8, 2018, 3:14 pm

        @c

        Do his politics matter in relation to his prize in science? If so, it’s a great argument for the further delegitimization of the Nobel. Smith’s politics on bds are no more important to the science prize then all the zionist jews who’ve won prizes over the years. Hawkings also supported bds for a short time without it diminishing his accomplishments. Only the peace Prize itself ironically can award two killers like Arafat and Rabin …. Or an unaccomplished neophyte like Obama. The point is… Smith did not make his prize about politics, MW did.

        @an

        Ok. Of course palestinian supporters care about this. I wasn’t referring to Palestinian n people or supporters but point taken

      • Misterioso
        Misterioso
        October 9, 2018, 10:05 am

        @DaBakr

        “Hawking[s, sic] also supported bds for a short time…”

        Sigh. More proof that you’re just another blathering Zionist bull crap artist. In fact, Stephen Hawking stood shoulder to shoulder with the Palestinians until the day he died.

        To wit:
        https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/03/stephen-hawking-supported-palestinian-180314085553648.html

        “How Stephen Hawking supported the Palestinian cause”
        “The renowned scientist, who has passed away, will be remembered not only for his work, but his support for Palestine.” Al Jazeera, 14 March, 2018.

        “Stephen Hawking, the world-renowned scientist who passed away on Wednesday at the age of 76, was known not only for his ground breaking work but also for his support for Palestine.

        “Hawking, who had motor neurone disease, made headlines in May 2013 when he decided to boycott a high-profile conference in Israel where he was scheduled to speak.

        “The physicist was working at the Cambridge University in the UK at the time.

        “The Presidential Conference, an academic event held in Jerusalem, was being hosted by the late Israeli President, Shimon Peres.

        “In a letter Hawking sent to the organisers on May 3, he said the ‘policy of the present Israeli government is likely to lead to disaster’.

        “‘I accepted the invitation to the Presidential Conference with the intention that this would not only allow me to express my opinion on the prospects for a peace settlement but also because it would allow me to lecture on the West Bank.’

        “‘I accepted the invitation to the Presidential Conference with the intention that this would not only allow me to express my opinion on the prospects for a peace settlement but also because it would allow me to lecture on the West Bank.’

        “‘However, I have received a number of emails from Palestinian academics. They are unanimous that I should respect the boycott. In view of this, I must withdraw from the conference.’

        “‘Had I attended, I would have stated my opinion that the policy of the present Israeli government is likely to lead to disaster,’ the letter read.”

        “And, with the approval of Hawking, the British Committee for Universities of Palestine, an organisation of UK-based academics to support the academic boycott of Israel, said in a statement at the time: ‘This is his independent decision to respect the boycott, based upon his knowledge of Palestine, and on the unanimous advice of his own academic contacts there.’

        “Hawking’s decision was widely celebrated by Palestinian activists and academics.”

        “‘Palestinians deeply appreciate Stephen Hawking’s support for an academic boycott of Israel,’ Omar Barghouti, a founding member of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement (BDS), said.

        “‘We think this will rekindle the kind of interest among international academics in academic boycotts that was present in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.’

        “Ali Abunimah, a Palestinian-American journalist, wrote: ‘When we look back in a few years, Hawking’s decision to respect BDS may be seen as a turning point – the moment when boycotting Israel as a stance for justice went mainstream.’

        “Support for Palestinian students”

        “Hawking’s sympathy with the Palestinian cause extended beyond a boycott of Israel.

        “Last year, he asked his millions of Facebook followers to contribute financially to the Palestinian Advanced Physics School – a physics lecture series for masters students in the occupied West Bank.

        “‘I support the rights of scientists everywhere to freedom of movement, publication and collaboration,’ he wrote.”

        A video for your further much needed edification:

        “Stephen Hawking on the Gaza debacle”

        Al Jazeera English

        Published on Jan 27, 2009

        “Stephen Hawking on the Gaza debacle – Riz Khan show,” Jan 26, 2009

        “Riz Khan is joined by Daniel Barenboim and Stephen Hawking, two geniuses of their respective fields who are calling for a solution on Gaza – from outside the political system.”

        To state the obvious, Professor George P. Smith is in good company.

    • annie
      annie
      October 8, 2018, 3:02 pm

      Nobody but pw gives a shit whether he is pro bds in light of his Nobel prize.

      oh that’s not true. a lot of palestinians are very happy. i am very happy too. dabakr, relax. it’s news.

      phil, i am glad you posted and linked to that rabidly fanatical letter to the editor by Shoshana Lewin where she claimed “His letter drips with hate and intolerance”, it’s so typical of pro israel defenders, to personally smear in this hypocritical fashion (she sounds like she’s talking about herself). this tendency, to slander ideological opponents which include lying and accusation of hatred, is rife in the zionist movement as evidenced by the “hack” comment above.

      thanks for your awesome article. oh yeah, i read an interview with george smith yesterday by his son. he said he would be likely be donating his prize money. what a wonderful person.

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 8, 2018, 3:15 pm

        || annie: … phil, i am glad you posted and linked to that rabidly fanatical letter to the editor by Shoshana Lewin where she claimed “His letter drips with hate and intolerance” … ||

        It takes a truly f*cked up mind – in this case, a Zionist mind – to equate equality (“a liberal democracy that guarantees equal rights for all citizens”) with “hate and intolerance”.

      • annie
        annie
        October 8, 2018, 8:02 pm

        exactly eljay, truly.

      • JWalters
        JWalters
        October 8, 2018, 9:11 pm

        Well put. And this is not merely the frothing at the mouth of an individual. It is a consistent Zionist STRATEGY to ignore the facts of the debate and focus on character assassinating the opposition. The pathology here is dangerously deep and organized.

    • bcg
      bcg
      October 8, 2018, 3:05 pm

      @DeBakr: There’s a dynamic here I just don’t understand. If it is in fact true that “Nobody but pw gives a shit whether he is pro bds in light of his Nobel prize.” then….why even bother to expend a single erg of energy and waste a nanosecond of time (Smith can explain to you what an erg is) posting on this issue?

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr
        October 8, 2018, 3:28 pm

        @b

        Is Smith going to tell me to buy a Concept2 rowing machine? I already have a model C for decades. Greatest workout. it always makes me smile when commenters here ask why anybody would expend any amount of energy posting. why why why

        fyi: PW would refer to most of its readers.

      • Misterioso
        Misterioso
        October 9, 2018, 10:28 am

        @beg

        “then….why even bother to expend a single erg of energy and waste a nanosecond of time (Smith can explain to you what an erg is) posting on this issue?”

        Thanks for posting the obvious question. DeBakr and his fellow Zionist zealots are in panic mode. They are losing the battle and feel the walls closing in on them. It’s only a matter of time.

    • CigarGod
      CigarGod
      October 9, 2018, 11:49 am

      Ha!
      In other words, Phil is all alone, like a lunatic on a street corner, so no one wants to associate with Phil, eh Dabaker?
      You sure know how to bolster a logical fallacy.

    • Misterioso
      Misterioso
      October 9, 2018, 12:42 pm

      @DaBakr

      “Plant a story about a humble Nobel scientist and mention he happens to hold some sympathetic views towards the plight of palestinians.”

      Sigh. “..he [Professor George P. Smith] happens to hold some sympathetic views towards the plight of Palestinians.”

      Do some basic research. His “views towards the plight of Palestinians” are far beyond “sympathetic.”

      In fact, he is a tireless, very well informed and unflinching advocate for Palestinians.

      To wit:

      Haaretz, Oct. 3/18 – by Alison Kaplan.

      “Nobel Prize Winner George P. Smith Is a Long time pro-Palestine, BDS Activist.”

      “Anti-Zionist’ scientist says he is opposed to ‘Jewish ethnic sovereignty over other peoples’ and is featured on the controversial Canary Mission website.”

      “George P. Smith, one of the winners of the 2018 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, is a veteran supporter of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement as part of his pro-Palestinian activism.

      “Smith, professor emeritus of biological sciences at the University of Missouri in Columbia, was named Wednesday as a co-winner of the prestigious award for his efforts in harnessing evolution to produce new enzymes and antibodies.

      “Smith’s political activity has made him a controversial figure at the University of Missouri, where he is a tenured professor, and a target of pro-Israel groups. He appears on the controversial Canary Mission website, which publishes online dossiers on pro-Palestinian professors, students and campus speakers, and has been referenced by Israeli officials when refusing activists entry to the country.

      “His most controversial moment came in 2015 when he attempted to teach an honors tutorial outside his academic field called ‘Perspective on Zionism.’ The course was to have included as a central text ‘The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine’ by Israeli historian and anti-Zionist Ilan Pappe, according to a report in the Columbia Daily Tribune that quoted Smith as defining his position as wishing ‘not for Israel’s Jewish population to be expelled,’ but ‘an end to the discriminatory regime in Palestine.’ He is opposed, he said, to ‘Jewish ethnic sovereignty over other peoples.’

      “Following protests by university alumni, pro-Israel student groups and an outcry by pro-Israel advocacy groups, his course was canceled, the cancellation attributed to ‘a lack of enrollment.’

      “That controversy, however, has not deterred Smith from continuing to speak out. He has continued to write Op-Eds and letters to newspapers on the Israel-Palestine conflict.

      In April, he penned an opinion piece condemning Israeli actions in Gaza, identifying himself as a member of Mid-Missourians for Justice in Palestine and the Missouri Right to Boycott coalition.

      “Smith opened by recounting then-Israeli army Gen. Moshe Dayan’s words in 1956 declaring at the funeral of an Israeli killed by Palestinians on the Gaza border: ‘Without the steel helmet and the cannon’s maw we will not be able to plant a tree and build a home. Let us not be deterred from seeing the loathing that is inflaming … the hundreds of thousands of Arabs who live around us … lest the sword be stricken from our fist and our lives cut down.”

      “In his conclusion, Smith called the BDS movement ‘Palestinian civil society’s call for the global community of conscience to ostracize Israeli businesses and institutions until Israel repudiates Dayan’s abhorrent syllogism and the Palestinian people, including the exiles, achieve full equality with Jews in their shared homeland.’”

      DaBakr, you’ve got to get out more. You’re drowning in hasbara lies.

  2. bcg
    bcg
    October 8, 2018, 4:38 pm

    @DeBakr: In one sense Smith’s achievements in chemistry don’t validate his political ideas – of course there is no shortage of famous scientists with crackpot ideas. But in another sense his Nobel is totally relevant: we’re herd animals to a great extent and people pay attention to opinion leaders, they pay attention to members of society who are high achievers. From a social-psychology standpoint it’s crazy to claim that Smith’s Nobel is completely irrelevant.

    I might add that the Hasbara line is that anyone who criticizes Israel is some sort of foaming-at-the-mouth anti-semite who dreams of the destruction of the Jewish people and who can barely put together a coherent thought – to the extent that people like Smith who obviously don’t fit that mold show up, it’s important.

    I’m not asking “why anyone would expend any amount of energy posting” – I’m asking why you, you in particular, would post on some topic that you claim to be absolutely certain “no one gives a shit about”. Still a valid question, I think.

    • annie
      annie
      October 8, 2018, 8:10 pm

      I’m asking why you, you in particular, would post on some topic that you claim to be absolutely certain “no one gives a shit about”.

      that’s what spammers do. top comment on an article like this is hot real estate. insult author and claim no one gives a shit (iow, lying spam point scoring, see hasbara handbook). best ignored.

  3. John Douglas
    John Douglas
    October 8, 2018, 4:44 pm

    Do I hear it claimed that George P. Smith, as merely a great scientist, can have nothing to say about Zionism? Do we forget how the early Zionists glommed onto Albert Einstein, his popularity and prestige! Come to think of it, though Einstein’s views (uninformed as they were by the past 60-odd years of history) differed from Smith’s, there were very important similarities. I’m certain that the ideas of an Einstein today would respect Smith’s ideas far more that those of DeBakr and the Netanyahuists.

    • Joshua Laskin
      Joshua Laskin
      October 8, 2018, 8:20 pm

      Einstein was quite clear, about his opposition to a Jewish state. After he died, Zionists fabricated a letter, in which he supposedly really wants a Jewish state–in contradiction to everything he ever said, or wrote before–which they then sent to all the newspapers. Talkin’bout, plum shameless. How low won’t they go? Down; down; don’t stop … Lower.

    • Jackdaw
      Jackdaw
      October 9, 2018, 4:35 am

      Smith can say what he wants about Zionism, and than move on to another subject like normal people do.

      It’s the obsession that’s the rub.
      The obsession. The Mondoweiss, Phil, Adam, Annie, eljay, et al, obsession.

      Obessed by what?
      Or should I say, by who?

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 9, 2018, 8:18 am

        You should say “with whom”.

        When “normal” people say “X is a bad thing”, and then move on to some other subject, nothing gets done about X. X continues. It is only when people get obsessed with X that they take action to stop X.

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 9, 2018, 8:37 am

        || Jackdaw: Smith can say what he wants about Zionism, and than move on to another subject like normal people do.

        It’s the obsession that’s the rub.
        The obsession. The Mondoweiss, Phil, Adam, Annie, eljay, et al, obsession.

        Obessed by what?
        Or should I say, by who? ||

        “et al” includes you and your fellow Zionists who frequent MW.

        Your obsession (by what? or should I say, by who?) is showing.

      • bcg
        bcg
        October 9, 2018, 8:41 am

        Apartheid.

  4. friendofpalestine
    friendofpalestine
    October 9, 2018, 2:48 am

    Interesting article about Nobel laureate Smith. Also interesting about the bit by Smith that got omitted. Here is what he wrote:

    The Balfour Declaration reflected in some part the sincere Christian Zionism of Prime Minister David Lloyd George and of Balfour himself. Far more important, however, was the considerable political influence of British Zionists under the able leadership of Chaim Weizmann, and of American Zionists led by Louis Brandeis, a close advisor to President Woodrow Wilson. The last half of 1916 had been a perilous low-point in Britain’s fortunes in World War I; Britain was desperate for allies. Zionists exploited this situation by linking British support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine to the belated U.S. decision to enter the war on Britain’s side in April 1917 — a decision Brandeis had argued for. Alison Weir’s study of U.S. engagement with Zionism, Against Our Better Judgment, includes a chapter on this little-known aspect of World War I history.

    • genesto
      genesto
      October 9, 2018, 12:28 pm

      Thanks for pointing this out. I look forward to reading Mondo every day and believe it to be one of the best journals on Israel/Palestine (Miko Peled, BTW, would simply call it Palestine) available. However, it’s high time to stop censoring Alison Weir, who has done some of the best work on this subject I’ve ever read. Her seminal book, “Against our Better Judgement”, should be required reading on the subject. Instead, her book is ignored (or outright condemned) and she continues to be treated as a pariah by much of the so-called solidarity community.

      ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! THIS HAS TO STOP!!

      (Note: I’ll be interested in seeing how long this post remains. I expect it to be removed shortly).

  5. Vera Gottlieb
    Vera Gottlieb
    October 9, 2018, 11:31 am

    Seems like we have the ‘freedom’ to express our opinion(s) as long as it is the opinion of the Zionists. This business of smearing a differing opinion is going much too far and, sadly, most of the world is allowing israel to intimidate us. Well, israel ain’t intimidating me!!! I am of Jewish background and most certainly AGAINST israel’s policy of ethnic cleansing. I find the Zionists’ behavior shaming…putting it mildly. Schande!

Leave a Reply