I have no problem with disputing what he says, but he’s been taken way too serious. He doesn’t have any political power what so ever, and he doesn’t seem to want any. So he’s not dangerous or anything. He’s a one man act. People who support Israel’s policies use him to attack people who criticize Israel. His work is very easy to criticize, because he is using all the bad things jewish people had done in politics, to make a point about ‘jewishness’. Which seems to me to be a very odd point to make, since you can do it with every group on the planet. He makes the point that jewish people are criticizing and participating in a lot of problems in the world, and explaining this by saying that the jews who criticize problems do this to try to make sure they aren’t attacked as a group. But I don’t see any problem with that. Muslims are participating in Isis, and are criticizing it. But in my opinion it’s a mistake to attack people like Richard Falk for recommending the book. The book has some, in my opinion, plainly ridiculous passages (I didn’t read it in it’s whole I think), but it has some interesting things to say about identity politics (in general). I do believe there is something to be said to criticize the jewish only groups like ‘jewish voice for peace’. I do think they are well intentioned people, and it helps to combat the notion you are antisemitic when you criticize Israel to point at jewish people (on the other hand it’s a very strange thing if you think about it. You never ever have to point to muslims who criticize Saudi-Arabie, to avoid being called anti-muslim’ when you criticize that country ). But to criticize Israel while being jewish you can also do it in an open group which is inclusive. A group that would be called ‘White people against apartheid’, also seems a bit strange. I’m not against the group, I think they are well-meaning people, but I do think there is something to be said that there is something strange in an exclusive group about politics, based on identity.