ZioNazi

ZioNazi:

A Few Political Thoughts by a Pissed-Off Liberal American Jew in the Age of Obama

Introduction: Defaming the Jews on the Progressive-Left

The Betrayal: Stating the Problem

9/11 and America Gone Crazy

The Blogs and Bush Hatred

Progressive-Left Anti-Zionism

Universal Human Rights encounter the Multicultural Ideal

Jewish Stockholm Syndrome and My Departure

The Progressive-Left and the Democratic Party

Chapter 1: BDS and Anti-Semitic Anti-Zionism

Traditional Islamic Jew Hatred

Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union

The New Historians and Edward Said

The Mavi Marmara and the Red-Green Alliance

Chapter 2: Erasing Jewish History

Language and Propaganda

“Jesus was the First Palestinian Shaheed”

Pallywood and the Fabrication of History through Fake Journalism

The Social Construction of Palestinian National Identity

Chapter 3: The Palestinian Colonization of the Progressive Jewish Mind

Post-Modernity and Neo-Colonial Theory

The Oslo Syndrome

Friends as Enemies, Enemies as Friends

The Palestinian Narrative

Chapter 4: The Death of Feminism and the Betrayal of Universal Human Rights

The Betrayal of Women

The Betrayal of Gays

The Betrayal of Jews

The Betrayal of Christians

The Obama Administration

Chapter 5: Killing Oslo and Validating Arab Anti-Jewish Racism

“Total Settlement Freeze”

Biden’s Outrage and Hillary’s Tongue-lashing

A Judenrein Palestinian State

Chapter 6: The “Arab Spring” and the Rise of Political Islam

Befriending the Muslim Brotherhood

Syria and the American Retreat

Chapter 7: Saving Hamas and the Birth of the State of Palestine

Operation “Pillar of Defense”

Mr. Abbas Goes to the United Nations

Kerry’s Threat

Conclusion:

Chapter 8: Moving On

.

Michael Lumish is the editor of Israel Thrives.

Check Also

INTO THE FRAY: The Omar-Tlaib affair: Tough questions for AIPAC.

Notwithstanding AIPAC’s discomfort over the Omar-Tlaib case, there is more that hint of hypocrisy in …

8 comments

  1. Michael

    the above line-up of thoughts cum essay topics cum reality checks, cum reminders of the world’s most ardent and yet to be sorted major issues, require a few a priori clarifications:

    – re; the “betrayals” The gay world was not betrayed simply because the “straight” world did NOT “embrace” it to start with. The Jews were not betrayed by anyone for the same reason.
    The christians only betrayed their own dogmas as they, also, NEVER entered into any “pact” with any other universal religion. Xtianity is an absolute , exclusivist “club”. It does not require , in fact it prohibits, any kind of spiritual alliances, so, again, it cannot be betrayed. From this point of view it is immaculately conceived and followed.

    – Oslo was not killed for the simple reason that it was never alive, it was still born, if born at all.
    Conceptually it is as valid as my relationship with Stefania Sandrelli with whom I fell in love while watching “Divorce Italian Stye”. I did sire thirteen children with her in the first two weeks of our affair, all consumated, you guessed it , in Oslo……and in plain public view at a shopping mall.

    – Palestine has been designed and determined as a place where Jews do not appear even in the slightest shape or concept. As such, Judenrein is not even uttered, simply because it contains the root notion of “Jude” . Furthermore, if and if such oxymoronic entity will ever eventuate, no full quid Yid would EVER desire to be a part or in any part of it. So , a “Judenrein” palestine is a PRECONDITION of any normal Jew for the existence of such a state.

    – Muslim Bro/hood does not spruik for friends, but functions on excluding ANYONE who is not fully fledged as exclusivist as they are. Consequently it does not run on “friends”, but quite obviously on finding and even creating enemies, par excellence and it has mananged to morph some excellent enemies, luckily much better equipped than them from all points of view and action….

    Otherwise all your topics are compulsory as existential exercises if one wants to be in sync with a life worth protecting, defending and, most importantly articulating conceptually.

    Yours is not just food for thought, but a banquet to keep the intellect well fed.

    • Otto,

      thank you for taking the time to give me this criticism.

      I suppose that at this point, after writing for a number of years on the topic, I begin to feel that I have said pretty much everything that I wanted to say and am now in the process of organizing and rethinking.

      People have asked me whether I intend to turn the above outline into a book and the answer is that, for the moment, at least, I am content to focus on it and offer my ongoing revisions to you guys, and others, for criticisms and perhaps support.

      As for the “betrayals,” it is clear that the post-1950s American western-left, as it emerged out of the Civil Rights Movement, made a commitment to universal human rights which it has simply not kept. As someone who comes out of that movement the sense of betrayal is, for me, quite palpable.

      You may be aware of professor Phyllis Chesler, who writes about this from a feminist perspective, and Raymond Ibrahim who is doing a terrific job of documenting the “ethnic cleansing” of the Christians under Islamic rule.

      My sense is that there is a growing feeling among left-wing diaspora Jews that a realignment is taking place, but few of us are sure of its ultimate direction. One thing that we know for certain – although the ostriches among us refuse to admit the obvious – is that anti-Semitic anti-Zionism in the west is primarily driven by an alliance between Arab-Muslim organizations and the progressive-left.

      I do not even begin to scratch the surface of your concerns above, but I do thank you for them and for taking an interest in my writings.

      I will be around and I very much hope that you will be, as well.

      • Michael

        I must qualify at once both my stances and my tone.
        I was, in the main, provocative, while , naturally, wanting ot project “something”.

        The collection of topical sub-essays is not simply a matter of disposition, but, considering your aptitudes and ideological inclinations ( for a better word ), one should find it IMPERATIVE that a cohesive volume ( or two ) should come out from your pen.
        The important stage of identifying the major issues is right there, already done, the notional structure is well withing your intellectual mix, the audiences are in acute need ( whether they realise or conscioulsly demand it or not) of a “lesson” in reality and reason.

        Rephrasing my musings, the notion of betrayal is necessarily valid because it engenders/instigates a reasessment of ETHICAL stands by those who are, at ANY level, relevant in the processes you address.
        The notion of reassessment is one that involves a radical process of EDUCATION of entire INSTITUTIONS. This, in itself, is necessarily again, the hardest job. But it must be done.
        We all depend on structures which have DECISIVE functions. Those structires are monolithical in their “dynamics” and very seldom aware that they need change. Change is an admission of failure and that is, by far, the hardest state to arrive at.
        Michael, you can demonstrate/identify failure and also the converse venues for change/improvement. All we need to see are the RATIONALS you put together. They are, as you relate them, compelling as they are logical, implicitely relate to THE OBVIOUS, an obvious which often escapes those in positions of power and the IMPLEMENTATION OF POWER.

        I got carried away, maybe because I indulge in this kind of sessions on skype for hours with my Son, Felix, who has just finished his first book and is in the middle of his own PhD.
        Doubt seems to be his most trusted companion, as he’s been away from home since finishing school, seven long years on his own, making his Mum and Dad orphaned-by-distance.

        Anyway, Michael, what else is there for you, but the responsibility to use your faculties and powers !!!???

  2. I must qualify my assertion that the “straight” world has not embraced gay rights. This is totally false, but with a few explaining to be offered. In the paradigm shift – compelled by compelling realities – Zionsm in its true form dose not confine itself to the exclusivist notion of a Jewish entity to the exclusion of anything NOT explicitely part of its philosophy.
    This means that, implicit in the Jewish ethics, and that means implicit in very deep sense, what is deemed humanly legitimate must be included and protected.
    Here we may run into some heated arguments. I, for one, regard the gay phenomenon as an intergral part of human nature, not simply because it affirms itself, not simply because IT exists, but because IT IS integrally a segment of our human fold, as conceived and Given by Hashem, together with all other human manifestations. As some may argue that not all human manifestations are to be followed and encouraged, in the case of gay behaviour the essential, definitive factor to be considered and accepted to the exlcusion of any objection, is the presence of affection, by far the most importnat human manifestation. NOTHING else matters in the , actually farcical, continuation of the “argument”.

    Here I must , however, have a word of criticism: the same gay movement has failed , so far, to “retutn the favours” of an active support Zionism is given to it. I am yet to see ONE gay movement manifestation coming out (!!!!!) and support Zionism on the same streets of New York, London, Amsterdam or Sydney/Melbourne. C’mon gays, you owe to Israel !!!!

  3. Has anyone noticed THE tomcat Otto among the pigeons, or have the little birdies taken flight ….???!!

    • Mike doesn’t appear much at the weekend. Others I can’t speak for but people are reading. I wish more people would get involved in dialogue.

      • Shirlee,

        the ratio of readership to commenters always heavily favors the readership in blogs and on-line magazines… as, of course, you know.

        People are, understandably, shy to stick their necks out. Certainly I was for a long time.

        If you want to increase reader participation you might consider adding a “recent comments” sidebar widget.

        The value of it is that people can easily see who is commenting and this encourages participation.

        In any case, congratulations on being nominated for a Hasby!

        :O)

        You’ve got my vote!

      • Thanks for the vote of support Mike. I don’t expect to win. I find it to be quite amazing that I have been nominated after having only been around for about 7 months. It’s interesting to note that since the day before yesterday when EoZ said he was posting the results this week, I’ve had a good many referrals from the site.

        My wish is your command master. I added a comments Widget. I had one in the beginning but it was too big. Now I know what I am doing, I realised I could make it smaller.

        My IT guy said to increase numbers I need Facebook. I’ve refused friend up until now, but now I see the benefit. Someone I know personally who happens to be FB friend of half the world, linked to Pam’s Stephen Fry item. Not have my figures gone higher than when EoZ picks me up, but the conversation is huge. He has thousands of friends