Viewpoints » Contributors

Shunning an academic endorser of anti-Semitism

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz criticizes John Mearsheimer’s praise of a controversial text on Jewish identity.

Imagine your son or daughter is admitted to the University of Chicago, one of the world’s most elite institutions of learning, and tells you that he has been lucky enough to have a course with one of the university’s most prominent professors, John Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Then imagine your child tells you that his favorite professor has just recommended that everyone should read a “fascinating and provocative” book that makes the following assertions of fact:

While the Holocaust “was not at all an historical narrative,” the “accusations of Jews making matzo out of young Goyim’s blood,” may be true (page 175, 185).

Jews caused the recent credit crunch, which the author calls “the Zio-punch” (page 22).

The American media “failed to warn the American people of the enemy within” because of money (page 27).

“[M]ore and more Jews are being pulled into an obscure, dangerous and unethical fellowship” (page 21).

If Iran and Israel fight a nuclear war that kills millions of people, “some may be bold enough to argue that ‘Hitler might have been right after all’” (page 179).

The “new Jewish religion…could well be the most sinister religion known to man…” (page 149).

The author of the book containing these statements has told students that he cannot “say whether it’s right or not to burn down a synagogue. I can say that it is a rational act.” He has also apologized to the Nazis for having earlier compared them to Israel:

“Many of us including me tend to equate Israel to Nazi Germany. Rather often I myself join others and argue that Israelis are the Nazis of our time. I want to take this opportunity to amend my statement. Israelis are not the Nazis of our time and the Nazis were not the Israelis of their time. Israel is in fact far worse than Nazi Germany and the above equation is simply meaningless and misleading.”

He has written that we “must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously,” and that “with Fagin and Shylock in mind, Israeli barbarism and organ trafficking seem to be just other events in an endless hellish continuum.”

The scenario described above—a prominent professor endorsing the content of a blatantly anti-Semitic book—is not imaginary. John Mearsheimer has in fact written a glowing endorsement (this “fascinating and provocative” book “should be widely read.”) of a virulently anti-Semitic book by an infamously bigoted author.

The book is titled The Wandering Who? and has just been published by Gilad Atzmon, a British saxophonist and well-known bigot, who acknowledges that many of the “insights” in his book come from a man who “was an anti-Semite” and a hater of “almost everything that fails to be Aryan masculinity” (page 89-90). He declares himself a “proud self-hating Jew” and writes of his “contempt” of “the Jew in me” (page 94). Mearsheimer’s endorsement appears prominently on the first page of the book. He is not merely defending Atzmon’s right to publish this anti-Semitic book; he is endorsing the book’s content.

Mearsheimer was joined in his endorsement of this anti-Semitic book by Richard Falk, the Milibank Professor of International Law Emeritus at Princeton University. Falk’s endorsement, which appears on the cover of The Wandering Who?, calls the book “absorbing,” “moving,” and “transformative.” He says the book has “integrity” and should not only “be read but reflect[ed] upon and discuss[ed] widely.” One wonders precisely which part of the book Falk wants his students to discuss widely: that the Holocaust is “not an historical narrative”? That Jews may be guilty of “making matzo out of young Goyim’s blood”? or the possibility that “Hitler may have been right after all”?

I have certainly seen strong academic endorsements of books that are extreme in their hatred of Israel, but never in my long professional life have I encountered prominent American academics endorsing blatant anti-Semitism. A red line has been crossed for the first time, and this dangerous and unprecedented crossing must be noted and responded to.

Professor Mearsheimer should neither be fired nor censured for his endorsement of the world’s oldest bigotry, because his academic freedom gives him the right to endorse anti-Semitic views and to endorse any book he chooses.

But unless Mearsheimer publicly withdraws his endorsement, he should be shunned by his colleagues and his students for collaborating with evil. Mearsheimer may not be an anti-Semite himself, but he has given aid and comfort to anti-Semitism by urging his students to take seriously the content of The Wandering Who?

The sad reality is that Mearsheimer is not being shunned. He is being supported by his colleague, Brian Leiter, the Llewellyn Professor of Jurisprudence at the University of Chicago Law School, who says that the criticism of Mearsheimer is “hysterical” because Atzmon’s “positions [do not mark him] as an anti-Semite [but rather as] cosmopolitan.” Mearsheimer is also being supported by my Harvard colleague, Professor Stephen Walt and several other American academics.

Therein lies the shame—and the danger.

Alan Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.

  • SS

    This has to be a joke. No way Alan “I plagerize and then blame other people” Dershowitz would be allowed to publish in a place like Chicago Maroon.

  • Gideon

    What can you say? He’s absolutely right. We’ve known this about Mearsheimer for a number of years now, but really — how can the rest of the UChicago community stand behind him?

    • Elliot

      Maybe if SS were able to spell “plagiarize”, he could have done some research. He might have even discovered that Derek Bok (then president of Harvard) investigated Finkelstein’s accusations of plagiarism and determined that the charges were false.

      • Joe

        Not so Elliott. Let’s clarify

        Finkelstein demonstrated beyond any question that at least several pages in “A Case for Israel” were amateurishly plagiarized. Whether Dersh wrote it or not. Dean Kagan, well known member of the same Zionist club the Dersh is in, “cleared” him. With no documentation nor rebuttal of the points raised by Fink and others (Cockburn et al).

  • Peter

    Curious that’s there’s no hyperlink to what Leiter wrote:

    Dershowitz follows the strategy of most of the other hysterical critics, short snippets, without context.

  • DJ

    The thing I really don’t understand about this whole Mearsheimer issue is why he would endorse a book that was written by a clear anti-semite. All it does is take away from and delegitimize his other works (e.g. “The Israel Lobby”) which up until this point were taken seriously as intellectual and academic writings. Atzmon is a saxophone player (a great one apparently) and a demagogue, supporting him gets Mearsheimer nothing except the chance at a little bit of attention. Grow up, act more professionally.

    Also, does Dershowitz realize that this whole scandal already blew through about a month and a half ago?

    • eli

      Doesn’t Leiter simply address what Atzmon said in an interview? I didn’t see the portion talking about parts from a book.

    • Bertram Silver

      obviousy these University of Chicago need to visit some of the former German concentration camps to see where ththeir fellow humans were murdered, gassed and burned.
      It would probably be a waste of time anyway as these “academics” can not stand to see the facts that disagree with their
      own perception of the “truth”

      They are “clawing” to lift themselves above their peers for personal recognition by writing outrageous books.

      They are a ridiculous lot and of no consequence to me.

      They are in need of “help” and one can only feel sorry for them.

      • Joe

        Actually, not even the most ardent Holocaust Believers still push the story that the camps in Germany had gas chambers. The official story now goes — and has gone for decades — that all the death camps were in Poland and Ukraine

  • Peter

    Perhaps he endorsed the book because he read it and thought it worthwhile? Has anyone here read it? Did the Chicago Maroon bother to check the quotes in the Dershowitz article to see whether they were genuine or taken out of context? If not, then why did they run it?

    • anti-facist

      the “CAMPS” as many refer to them is where many thousand antifascists died, some happened to be Jewish. Many antifascist Christians died there as they are currently now being pushed out of their homeland in Israel. The Bolsheviks murder millions of Christians, the Christian Armenian genocide still needs closer examination.

  • Wow

    There should have been some fact checking done by the editors before publishing this garbage

  • Glyn

    Peter – what purpose was served by including that link? It proves nothing. Either Atzmon wrote the sentences attributed to him by Deshowitz or he didn’t. The attribution of the criticism of Mearsheimer to a “right wing smear” campaign, as the link suggests, is just name calling. The link is about an interview with Atzmon, which was self-serving. I don’t care that Atzmon positions himself as an enlightened humanist in the interview. I do care whether John endorsed a hateful anti-semitic rant that, if Dershowitz’s quotes are accurate, harken back to blood libels and pogroms. Oh, and Peter: what is the “context” you refer to?

  • Harrison O’Toole

    The comments attacking Professor Dershowitz’ veracity and the accuracy of his quotations are scurrilous and scandalous. You may not agree with him (obviously you don’t) but to attack his scholarly integrity is not the way to go. It is absurd. I notice that the “terms of service” of The Chicago Maroon are freely violated in this Comment section, specifically this: “They are free of personal attacks on article subjects or authors”. They are far from free of attack on the article subject or its author.

    The fact that this despicable conduct by the deplorable Mearsheimer “blew through here” a month or more ago is irrelevant. Millions of readers and thinkers across the country were unaware of this scandal until The Maroon published as distinguished a law professor as Alan Dershowitz. Until then, it hadn’t made its way out of the cloistered little world of Hyde Park. Thank God for Alan Dershowitz and his generous suggestion that Mearssheimer and his
    ignorant colleague, Prof. Leiter and the egregious Prof. Walt of Harvard be shunned. They all should have been shunned years ago.

    If you Chicago undergraduates shunned Mearsheimer’s courses, you could learn a lot from other professors. If you want your own anti-Semitism to be reinforced, by all means, flood the pernicious, bigoted Mearsheimer’s classes in droves. You’ll learn to be a Jew-hater and an Israel-hater just like him.

    • Peter

      It’s just amazing how gullible people here are. Don’t you know that Dershowitz always lies through his teeth when he’s on a vendetta, and he’s been on a vendetta against Mearsheimer for years?

      Take that very first “quote” Dershowitz offers:

      While the Holocaust “was not at all an historical narrative,” the “accusations of Jews making matzo out of young Goyim’s blood,” may be true (page 175, 185).

      10 pages, two quotes, paraphrase by Dershowitz. Isn’t anyone suspicious? I got ahold of the Atzmon book, and here’s what’s really going on on those ten pages.

      By “historical narrative” Atzmon means some of the claims made about the Holocaut, not the reality of the Holocaust. He in particular wants to deny the claim that Jewish suffering is unique in human history, and that genocides are unique. That’s part of the “narrative” he criticizes. He’s right, by the way.

      How do we know Atzmon clearly believes in the realiyt of the Holocaust? Because he writes about it at pp. 185-186, which Dershowitz pretends to have read. He writes about being a kid in Israel, and how “chilling” it was to be in a community full of Holocaust survivors. He remarks how discreet and dignified these people were, never trying to invoke their horrible experiences for political purposes. And then he expresses his anger when Zionists started invoking the Holocaust for political purposes. He says nothing, nada, to suggest that the blood libel is true.

      Why don’t some of you gullible people look at the actual book.

  • Brad

    Alan Dershowitz is slandering both Gilad Atzmon and his book.

    Notice how Dershowitz has made this about blurbs on a book by prominent people (and there are many others with such authority that endorsed the book). Notice how he asked to debate Falk or Mearsheimer but NOT Gilad Atzmon. Why is that? Is it because the contents of the book might actually get discussed and debated, considered and weighed: Ideas worth discussing and debating.

    At any rate, Atzmon provides a point by point response to Dershowitz. Give that a read but by all means read the book as well.

    Dershowitz’ Lies and Glitches by Gilad Atzmon

    By this point, when Dershowitz condemns something, one ought to be very skeptical. Read the book and make up your own mind. Maybe Mearsheimer, Falk and numerous other respected people support the book for good reasons.

    Maybe the panel of Jews and non-Jews discussing the book at its book opening thought it worthy for a reason also.

    Panel Discussion on Jewish Identity Politics:

  • Dan

    Dershowitz is slandering Atzmon? Atzmon refutes Dershowitz “point by point”? You’ve got to be kidding me.

    All Dersh did was quote Atzmon. In fact, at your link, Atzmon explicitly stands by those quotes! He says that Jews were, in fact, guilty of ritual murder of Christians. He says that Israel is, in fact, worse than Nazi Germany.

    By all means, everyone should read Atzmon’s “response.” That my former professor and advisor endorses this garbage is a disgrace to my degree and a taint on this institution.

    • Brendan

      Slander is spoken. Libel is written.

    • Steven Strimling

      I went to the link you provided. The extent of Atzmon’s defense is that “anti-Semitism is a false hatred of Jews. Seeing as what I accuse them of is not false, I am NOT anti-Semitic!” He has one or two points that are incorrectly attributted to Amtzon, but most of the quotes he stands by. He is worse than David Duke in that he is Jewish and just as big a kook as Duke! Hashem yerahem!

  • Daniel

    Slander? Come on. Half of the article is quotations from The Wandering Who or Atzmon speeches. Mearsheimer and Falk endorsed some of those words and the author. That is a fact.

    I also don’t know why this should surprise anyone. Mearsheimer recently made a list of good Jews and bad Jews in America:

    Falk has espoused a 9/11 conspiracy theory and published anti-semitic cartoons on his blog:–dnGZT-nvsc/Th8s-kY000I/AAAAAAAAeek/2n0WmbsWmIA/s400/RIchard%2BFalk%2527s%2Bcartoon.jpg

    Did the maroon fact check? I assume so. Even if it didn’t The New Republic, the Huffington Post, and many other sources have published versions of this Dershowitz article. The Atlantic, The Daily Beast, JTA, JPost and many other sources have also reported on this issue:

    But if you don’t trust any of those sources you can just do a google books search:

    And if you want to see some embarrassingly bad reporting on this issue that definitely didn’t fact check, take a look at the Maroon’s first take on this controversy. The author falsely reported that The Atlantic failed to provide any actual quotations from the book in their criticism of Mearsheimer:

  • It is an interesting question why a plagiarist, liar and racist is the kind of person to plug for an attack on another plagiarist, liar and racist.

    The editors of the Marron don’t understand that publishing Dershowitz attacking Atzmon is the best way to raise the profile of Atzmon among people who are familiar with Dershowitz’s record. Being attacked by Dershowitz is usually a compliment.

    Unfortunately, in this rare case, everything Dershowitz says about Atzmon is true. But likewise, everything Atzmon says about Dershowitz is also true.

    For information, here is what I wrote about Atzmon:

  • Unfortunately Dershowitz is the last person to attack Atzmon as a racist. Dershowitz has gone out of his way to support Israel’s racism against the Palestinian – the refusal to lease land to non-Jews, the 2 systems of law in the Occupied Territories, the ethnic cleansing of the Negev etc.

    So Atzmon’s undoubted anti-Semitism is something that activists in the Palestine Solidarity movement have to pick up on because Dershowitz is tarnished goods.

    I recommend that you read my Guide to the Sayings of Gilad Atzmon, the anti-Semitic jazzman

  • Brendan

    I’m tired of people conflating legitimate critics of the politics and policies of Israel its American supporters as being “anti-Semites.”

    It’s a straw man argument akin to saying that people who are “pro-life” are “anti-woman” – one need not be an anti-Semite to hold highly critical views of Israeli politics/policies and its American supporters.

    Playing the racism card is a pathetic and cliched move. But there’s a love aphorism used in the 12-Step recovery communities that I think fits such instances “If you spot it, you got it.”

  • Trish Williams

    Exactly how is declaring that Jews are guilty of ritual murder of Christians in any way related to legitimate criticism of the politics and policies of Israel? Mearsheimer is now exposed as a documented Jew-hater, a fake intellectual who uses his academic post to endorse the writing of a man who espouses neo-Nazi views. Promoting hatred through calumny is not academic, nor is it intellectual, nor is “legitimate criticism of Israel.”

    • Brendan

      Prof. Mearsheimer did not make a declaration that Jews are guilty of ritual murder of Christians.

      Why don’t you try reading what he ACTUALLY said:

      “Gilad Atzmon has written a fascinating and provocative book on Jewish identity in the modern world. He shows how assimilation and liberalism are making it increasingly difficult for Jews in the Diaspora to maintain a powerful sense of their ‘Jewishness.’ Panicked Jewish leaders, he argues, have turned to Zionism (blind loyalty to Israel) and scaremongering (the threat of another Holocaust) to keep the tribe united and distinct from the surrounding goyim. As Atzmon’s own case demonstrates, this strategy is not working and is causing many Jews great anguish. The Wandering Who? should be widely read by Jews and non-Jews alike.”

      The rest of the quotations in Prof. Dershowitz’s letter are, ostensibly, extracted from the contents of Mr. Atzmon’s book.

      Instead of kowtowing to demagoguery, why don’t you try thinking for yourself?

  • Steph

    This whole controversey has helped my nephew make a decision. It’s obvious Hitler Youth is alive and well at U of C so as a jew he should go to Northwestern.

    The fact that this worthless obvious Nazi sympathiser is a profesor at U of C and has students defending him shows that no jew is safe at U of C.

    • bruno

      That’s idiotic, Steph.

      Not only are there no Hitler Youth HERE, but Northwestern actually has a Holocaust denier professor.

    • lol


    • Leah H

      It’s sad that Jews can’t feel comfortable at school or in the public arena. No one should be subjected to fear due to religion or values.

      • Joe

        If Jews cannot feel comfortable at school or in the public arena, tnhey have only their parents to thank for making them into paranoid people. Try walking around in America while black, brown, a Muslim. Then you would know what real oppression is, as opposed to your selff imposed imaginary oppression

  • sam g.

    Obviously, the fact that Atzmon, Mearsheimer, Falk, Walt and their cohorts, are still alive today, shows that they do not have the courage to write and support a similar book critical of Islam.
    It is safe to slander and defame Jews and Israel.

  • Meyer

    Dershowitz is wrong. Those morons should be sacked, because they are bringing disrepute to the schools that employ them.

    How can such stupid and bigoted people continue to bear the title “professor”? I thought you needed intelligence to be awarded that moniker.

    Holocaust denial, matzo from blood, all this rubbish is substituting opinion for (well documented) fact and has no place in Universities. Perhaps next we’ll be told that the holocaust archives at Bad Arolsen are made up? That the films of the liberation of the camps taken by US forces were done in a studio? That the stringent laws covering the permissible content of matzo were only developed recently as a cover-up?

    What planet do these guys come from? I can’t even believe that this debate is happening, it’s so surreal. You’re supposed to find truth and wisdom in Universities. To suggest that people with these views should continue to teach there is ridiculous. They should be publicly shamed, sacked and replaced with people who do have brains.

    People pay good money for their kids to go to University so they’ll get an education. Being taught by these clowns breaks the contract between the University and the parents, and corrupts the students rather than educates them. No matter which way you look at it, it is a travesty and must be stopped.

    • EccoLa

      You are absolutely right that such professors should be sacked. That is one point where I strenuously disagree with Dershowitz’ article. The entire concept of “academic freedom” has morphed into something ludicrous and self-serving.

      We hear endless whining from professors regarding their “academic freedom” but we hear nothing anymore regarding their “professional standards.” It was once explicitly understood that professors did not opine on matters outside their professional realm (eg your mathematics prof ought not start class with a rant about the US President, etc.), nor was a professor to indoctrinate or teach his personal subjective perspective. See:

      The academy was built upon the idea of a search for absolute truths.With post-modernist theory denying such a thing is even valid, professors now give free reign to indulge their personal predelictions and biases, and frequently substitute indoctrination for teaching.

      With the abandonment of professional standards, there is no basis for “academic freedom” or tenure any longer.

      “Academic freedom” is neither a god-given nor Constituionally based right. It is a concept, nothing more. Now that academia no longer hold to professional standards, they have no right to claim “academic freedom” to indulge themselves in all matter of patently non-academic endeavors in their classrooms.

      Mearsheimer should be sacked for egregious behavior as measured by professional standards. And the alumni ought to stop giving entirely to help the trustees and administration clarify their thinking as to their own responsibilities.

      The rot runs deep in academia today and these institutions need to be overhauled. The quickest route is to stop giving them money and lobby congress to stop funding them until they return to responsible self-management and professional standards. Since the early 1970s, the trustees have punted on their institutional governance responsibilities, ditto the administration, and the inmates are running the asylums.

      I don’t give a dime to my Ivy League alma mater a number of cretins are tenured. There are many more deserving institutions for my charitable dollars. If philanthropists and legislators turned off the spigots, we’d see a bracing turnaround in the corruption and irresponsibility that supports “professors” like Mearsheimer.

  • Peter

    Why doesn’t it occur to Meyer, or any of the other critical commenters, that no one–not Mearsheimer, or Falk, or Atzmon–is actually denying the Holocaust, affirming bloodlibels, or anyting else? Why doesn’t it occur to anyone that Alan Dershowitz is a liar, who ha been defaming Mearsheimer every since the 2007 book on the Israel Lobby. Go look at the pages cited by Dershowitz: in each case, he’s lied about the content of the book.

  • Jeffrey J. Melnick

    I have long held that the liberal movement both in the U.S., and abroad is thick with anti-Semites. Yet Jews of the liberal left are for the most part comfortable to stand shoulder to shoulder with them. Some of you will argue that this is not so, and that the examples offered up merely represent an irrelevant fringe. They argue that such fringes can be found in all movements of every stripe. Well, if that is indeed the case, then please help me to understand the silence from “mainstream” liberals and the television, radio and print media that have been traditionally sympathetic to the liberal movement (CBS, NBC, CNBC, MSNBC, Noam Chomsky, Joy Behar, Tavis Smiley, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times etc. etc. etc). Why have they not immediately and vociferously distanced themselves from this so called “Anti-Semitic fringe” and its actors like John Mearsheimer? Not only have the liberal media not done so, they have disavowed the very existence of this fact by not reporting it. Conversely and in stark contrast, why is it that even in the absence of a shred of evidence, the very rumor of the “N” word having been uttered at a Tea Party rally, caused hyperventilation with wide coverage ad nauseam by the media of the liberal left? Please help me to understand this, because unless you know something I don’t, those of you in the liberal left seem to be comfortable in the company of bigots and hypocrites.

  • Lou Adams

    Interesting that someone can openly and with out shame publish a book like this and that others appear to defend it and attack it’s critics.
    Wake up Jews, Antisemitism is no longer in the closet but out in the open and justifying itself just like on this page.

  • If anti-Semitism is no longer in the closet who is to blame for this Lou? Maybe it is those who used ‘anti-Semitism’ as a form of abuse to hurl at supporters of the Palestinians and anti-Zionists. You drained the concept of all meaning until one day you found out that people thought you were crying wolf (remember the story?).

    Alan Dershowitz and others might be on stronger ground IF they had opposed the lease of land to Jews only, the establishment of 2 legal systems in the W est Bank, the torture of Palestinian children, the 99.7% conviction rate in the military courts, the concept of a Jewish state which means nothing other than that if you are Jewish you have privileges and if you are an Arab you don’t.

    Indeed maybe you will question why there is no Israeli nationality unlike most other countries where citizenship and nationality are coterminous.

    Atzmon has managed to thrive because of such hypocrisy. And worse. You associate all Jews with Israel’s actions. When it blows up a family or bombs children with white phosphorous it’s done in the name of ‘the Jews’. Is it any wonder that anti-Semitism has started rearing its head. Once again Zionism has managed to produce endanger those whom it was purportedly set up to help protect.

  • Don Rico

    Who would ever expect that anti-semitism would somehow vanish?
    Sometimes classroom bullies wear neckties and purport to have street cred. Don’t worry about it. They have spots reserved for them in gehenna, for chrissakes. I have a Ph.D. from Chicago. Oh well.

  • Andrew Benjamin

    Israel and Jew bashing is fun. However there’s no point in it, just to elevate the Palestinian cause, a fake cause if there ever was one.

    Let me clarify:. Atzmon, from what I hear, is not only a self-admitted self-hater (a rarity even among leftwing Jews where self-hate is rather commonplace), but he is allegedly married to an Arab woman. There is nothing wrong with that in principle and common in Apartheid Israel. Considering that in tolerant and free Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, Lybia, Somalia, Tunisia or the Emirates, a Muslim cannot marry a Jew or build a synagogue. In these non-apartheid nations Jews would be killed on sight.

    That’s because these states are better and freer than Israel. in these nations diversity is a given and women enjoy all the rights not allowed them in Israel. Gays are persecuted in Israel and not in Muslim nations, right?

    Or try to build a new Christian church in Mecca and Medina. Surely, as Israelis wantonly murder Muslims before baking their blood into matzoh, the Copts of Egypt run around with no fear at all and their women are never raped. Look up the story about The Rape of Lara Logan. Yes, that Lara of CNN.

    Why Arabs polled in Israel want to stay in Israel is beyond me. Considering life is so much better in Cairo.

    Apartheid Israel’s population is 23% Muslims who can travel freely, go to universities paid for by Israel, are the highest educated Muslims in that part of the world, get free health care (they are even bused in from the territories to get these services for free), some serve in the forces and police, can intermarry, and eat in any restaurant of their choice. That is what apartheid Israel looks like. That’s why Atzmon is a truth teller.

    In the free and tolerant nations of Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Somalia, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, the Emirates, Iraq and Iran, just like in Israel Jews serve on the Supreme Court bench, marry Muslims, govern cities, and become beauty pageant winners.

    Not really. It is in Israel that a Muslim judge has sentenced a former Israel prime minister to seven years in jail, a Muslim is a Supreme Court judge, a Muslim is the Deputy Speaker in Parliament, many Muslims govern cities and towns, and a Miss Israel is a Muslim. That is because Israel is an intolerant and racist Nazi-Apartheid state full of concentration camps and starving Arab prisoners.

    Let me clarify it a little more: There is a narrative that is based in untruths. That narrative is the problem, not the Jews. And not Israel.

    Gilad Atzmon is a professional propagandist whose life mission is to disseminate this narrative and embellish it like a science fiction novelist teleports his characters to other planets. However, no matter how these stories are embellished and prettied up, each is still a false narrative, because it takes a false premise logically to its false conclusion.

    Historian Newt Gingrich, an American politician, had the balls for the first time to say it on the national stage as it is. Balls that no European politician has. Maybe that is why Europe is in the shape it finds itself.

    As I said, the man is a historian. Gingrich put some reality into the surreal discussion of the Middle East conflict and (as he put it) the delusional nature of the current “peace process.”

    The Palestinians are indeed an “invented people”
    — invented by the Nasser dictatorship and KGB by the way — and the Hitlerian lie that Israel occupies one square inch of “Arab” let alone “Palestinian” land needs to be buried for any clarity on what the conflict is about, let alone progress towards peace.

    Of course there is no peace in the Middle East and there can be no peace so long as the Muslim Arabs want to kill the Jews and destroy the Jewish state. That is the explicit goal of the enemies of Israel in the terrorist entities of Gaza and the West Bank, and also of Israel’s principal enemy the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

    The Palestinians indeed, are an invention. invented by the Soviets in their existential struggle during the Cold War for hegemony over the mideast. Read the history and you’ll find out why.

    Newt Gingrich’s gutsy statements — if he will hold to them — could change the nature of the debate not only about how to deal with the Islamic terrorists of the Middle East but with the Islamic jihad itself. For the campaign to destroy Israel is at bottom a campaign to restore the Muslim (not Arab) ummah — as it was under the Turkish empire and the caliphate.

    According to CNN, a Palestinian spokesman called Gingrich’s observation that the Palestinians are “an invented people” quote “the most racist I’ve ever seen.” This just shows what brazen liars Palestinian spokesmen are. Everything that Gingrich said was obvious fact. For nearly 2,000 years “Palestine” referred to region not a people — just as “New England” refers to a region not a people. In 1948 the Arabs of the Palestine region were not talking about a Palestinian state and were not referring to themselves as Palestinians. That came in 1964 with the creation of the PLO, engineered by the KGB and the Jew-hating dictator of Egypt, Gamel Abdel Nasser​. Even then the PLO charter (which is still available on the web) did not call for the liberation of the West Bank or Gaza (annexed by Jordan and Egypt respectively) but for the destruction of the Jewish state. Jew hatred is what has driven the conflict in the Middle East which is more precisely described as a genocidal war against the Jews.

    For those who have an issue with the statements above, all I can say is to look up the writings and books of KGB agent Ion Mihai Pocepa. Pocepa details all of the above, including the time Arafat and Abbas spent in KGB special operations as students.

    From Frontpage:

    Newt Gingrich​ touched off a mini-firestorm when he told a Jewish television channel that the Palestinians are an “invented” people “who are in fact Arabs,” and “who were historically part of the Arab community.” This simple statement of historical fact was of course met with the usual bluster from the Palestinians, who called the statements “ignorant,” “despicable,” and of course “racist,” a meaningless charge. And what response from the Palestinians would be complete without the usual threat that the statement they don’t like will “increase the cycle of violence,” as Palestinian lead negotiator Saeb Erekat​ put it?

    The truly “ignorant,” however, are those who have bought the “Palestinian homeland” propaganda. Where was all this talk about a homeland for the Palestinians in 1948, when the Arab armies invaded Israel? Their aim was not to create a Palestinian state, but rather to carve up the rest of British Mandatory Palestine, as the secretary-general of the Arab League, Abdel Rahman Azzam, confessed at the time: “Abdullah [ruler of Transjordan] was to swallow up the central hill regions of Palestine . . . The Egyptians would get the Negev. The Galilee would go to Syria, except that the coastal part as far as Acre would be added to the Lebanon.” Until 1967, the so-called “West Bank” was part of Jordan, but none of the Arab nations agitated for the creation of a Palestinian state. The “Palestinian homeland” became a tactical weapon after violence failed to achieve the real aim, the destruction of Israel.

    In fact, the Palestinians themselves have admitted that the “Palestinian homeland” is a tactical weapon for the destruction of Israel.

    Listen to Zuheir Muhsein, a member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization executive committee, from an interview with a Dutch Touw newspaper given in 1977: “The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”

    Muhsein’s statement is consistent with the stated aims of the Palestinian leadership for the last half century: to destroy Israel in “stages.” In 1993, on the same day that the Oslo Accords handed over the West Bank to the PLO, Yasser Arafat​ told Jordanian television, “Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do it in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty [sic] there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.” Indeed, before 1967, Palestinians did speak of a homeland, but it was not to exist in the West Bank, but in Israel. The 1964 PLO Charter Article 24 explicitly said, “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area.” After 1967, this article was removed for strategic purposes. Thus any content to the notion of a “Palestinian homeland” is inextricably predicated on the destruction of Israel, as Article 2 of the 1968 Charter makes clear: “Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.” Consistent with this principle, Arafat said in 1970, “We shall never stop until we can go back home and Israel is destroyed, peace for us means Israel’s destruction and nothing else.” In other words, the “two-state solution” that Westerners continue to chant like a mantra will not resolve the conflict between Israel and the Arabs.”

    So who is Gilad Atzmon? A man working for the PA. It’s that simple.

    Let me clarify further:

    There are no such facts, and never were any such facts as a “Palestinian People,” nation, country, culture, civilization, archeology and ancient artifacts, history, language, cuisine, religion, art, music, currency or coin.

    If you disagree, how come we have never uncovered evidence of any of the above before 1964? If you disagree, please provide the evidence for ANY of the characteristics listed.

    Surprisingly, every one of the characteristics listed above can be called Hebraic. Because we have millions of tons of physical and documented evidence to prove it to be so.

    The “Palestinians” are a myth, a comical invention alike the Unicorn, Gaia, Bush’s Service Record, John Kerry’s Cambodia Incursion, Obama’s Birth Certificate, Hillary’s sex life, and Global Warming.

    In conclusion. This discussion and the above comments address several levels of antisemitism: the political antisemitism of the Meirhsimer-Walt’s which may have an European source for the world’s most ancient hatred: the Arab antisemitism which is about the re-establishment of the Umma and the Caliphate – and NOT, about the Plight of the Palestinians, and the leftist antisemitism – a leftover left from the Soviet era that was created to establish Russian hegemony over the mideast. That Soviet era antisemitism, allying with the Arabs, and now Iran, is still in play.

    That is why the Arabs were once Soviet clients and why that arrangement once lost, was a great strategic loss for the Russian czars.

    And that last is why the US has had security treaties with the Saudis since Truman and why Reagan sold AWACs to the Saudis in the eighties.

    And that is why the LEFT was out in the streets protesting against the sale.

    The criminality of Israel alluded to by the Judeophobics is simply a narrative and a fantasy. If just 1% were true, that would have been too much.

    The Jews are hated because they are successful, inventive, charitable, kind, brilliant and mostly, because they’re good. There is no group of people on this planet who have contributed even a fraction as much to bettering the welfare of mankind as the Jews have…and in recent years, as Israel has.

    It is amazing to think that every computer that has contributed to these discussions has had an Israeli brain inside it. And every chat application. And every security application.

    Think about it. Without the Israeli brains behind computers, software and security, what would the antisemites like the Atzmons and Meirsheimers have done with their lives? I say, not much.

    I refer you to:

  • Leah H

    I go to the University of Wisconsin, but I am from Chicago and always admired the University of Chicago for its high academic standing and reputation. However, after learning Mearsheimer goes unopposed at your school I feel ashamed. Mearsheimer and Atzmon are people who breed hateful and their intentions are cruel and hurtful.

    Why can’t people understand that Israelis want peace? Go to Israel! visit!

    Sad and disturbing.

  • Ozzie
  • Bertram Silver

    how does such garbageget published, and who pays to hae it published

  • Faye Wachs

    Ok so on the blood libel… One more time, we don’t make matzah out of the blood of non Jews. They aren’t Kosher. Anyone who can’t put that one together is too illogical to be tolerated in academia.

  • HaroldT

    I pray that Peter is not another Quisling Jew, but rather a neo-Nazi like Mearsheimer. I also trust that all Jews at the universities boycott lectures by these anti-Semites.
    Thank G.D for Jews like Dershowitz