I agree with you but Salaita isn’t saying anything that would exclude Chomsky or Goldman. He is talking about groups that come to left protests as Zionists, to cloak Zionism in progressivism. (“Redwashing,” maybe.) Groups that “frequently wave Israeli flags (or pinkwashed facsimiles).” When Chomsky or Goldman or Avneri or If Not Now come into these progressive spaces, they come not waving their Zionism, as trolls or for redwashing, but as critics of what Israel is doing.
He says explicitly: “‘No Zionists’ isn’t necessarily an individual litmus test. Protest leaders cannot vet the opinions of each participant, nor should they desire that kind of power, but they do influence messaging and sense of community. And in these areas Zionism is a hindrance.”
And he continues: “Plenty of people are opposed to the Israeli occupation but still consider themselves Zionist. Views change all the time, often when we engage new communities. Protest doesn’t exist simply to make a point. It creates an environment in which people can search, debate, and, ideally, grow. I have no problem sharing a picket line with folks whose views on Palestine differ from mine. [Emphasis mine] The problem arises when those with a messianic attachment to the fantasy that Israel and justice are compatible perform displays of Zionism in order to aggravate or proselytize. Lest we forget, Zionism is an expansionist ideology that endeavors to dominate its opponents, so it is difficult to accept the presence of its advocates in good faith.”
Unless I’m very wrong (?) it seems pretty clear from that this last statement is not meant to exile Noam Chomsky from the progressive movement. He means astroturf trolls like Zioness.