As I said, Atzmon’s an interesting touchstone. Most people – and in general, the ones most familiar with the historical modes of anti-Semitic rhetoric – saw that Atzmon was stroking those strings even a decade ago, and it has only gotten louder. But Atzmon learned that with some people, he could shout whatever anti-Semitic crap he wanted at whatever volume he wanted, as long as he was at the same time clanging the “Zionists want to censor me” bell with all his might – which is what he did for his NYC talk, where (a) anti-Zionists announced they would be (b) picketing but not halting the talk, causing Atzmon to clang the bell saying that (not a) Zionists were (not b) planning to halt the talk.
We saw this division here too. Most people quickly got to the root of the problem Atzmon presents for anti-Zionism, but by astounding coincidence, the ones who celebrate Atzmon were also disproportionately the ones running the “IHR is a scholarly institute” game or the “Ashkenazi Jews aren’t actually Jews” game or “there is no anti-Semitism anymore” game or expressing faux confusion about why historians don’t doubt the gas chambers but anti-Semitic neo-fascists do. And that’s only some of the games I see people running in this comment thread. There’s a reason why so many of Atzmon’s (few) defenders aren’t deeply bothered like a normal person would be by Atzmon playing pattycake with David Duke and David Irving and the IHR (and a UK counterpart, Paul Eisen’s DYR): at root, they’re just not anti-racists when it comes to Jews.