Criminalizing Criticism of Israel

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by sameeh55, May 7, 2009.

  1. The End of Free Speech?
    Criminalizing Criticism of Israel
    On October 16, 2004, President George W. Bush signed the Israel Lobby's bill, the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. This legislation requires the US Department of State to monitor anti-semitism world wide.

    To monitor anti-semitism, it has to be defined. What is the definition? Basically, as defined by the Israel Lobby and Abe Foxman, it boils down to any criticism of Israel or Jews.

    Rahm Israel Emanuel hasn't been mopping floors at the White House.
    As soon as he gets the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 passed, it will become a crime for any American to tell the truth about Israel's treatment of Palestinians and theft of their lands.

    It will be a crime for Christians to acknowledge the New Testament's account of Jews demanding the crucifixion of Jesus.

    It will be a crime to report the extraordinary influence of the Israel Lobby on the White House and Congress, such as the AIPAC-written resolutions praising Israel for its war crimes against the Palestinians in Gaza that were endorsed by 100 per cent of the US Senate and 99 per cent of the House of Representatives, while the rest of the world condemned Israel for its barbarity.

    It will be a crime to doubt the Holocaust.

    It will become a crime to note the disproportionate representation of Jews in the media, finance, and foreign policy.

    In other words, it means the end of free speech, free inquiry, and the First Amendment to the Constitution. Any facts or truths that cast aspersion upon Israel will simply be banned.
    Given the hubris of the US government, which leads Washington to apply US law to every country and organization, what will happen to the International Red Cross, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and the various human rights organizations that have demanded investigations of Israel's military assault on Gaza's civilian population? Will they all be arrested for the hate crime of excessive criticism of Israel ?

    This is a serious question.

    A recent UN report, which is yet to be released in its entirety, blames Israel for the deaths and injuries that occurred within the United Nations premises in Gaza . The Israeli government has responded by charging that the UN report is “tendentious, patently biased, which puts the UN report into the State Department's category of excessive criticism and strong anti-Israel sentiment.

    Israel is getting away with its blatant use of the American government to silence its critics despite the fact that the Israeli press and Israeli soldiers have exposed the Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the premeditated murder of women and children urged upon the Israeli invaders by rabbis. These acts are clearly war crimes.

    It was the Israeli press that published the pictures of the Israeli soldier's T-shirts that indicate that the willful murder of women and children is now the culture of the Israeli army. The T-shirts are horrific expressions of barbarity. For example, one shows a pregnant Palestinian woman with a crosshairs over her stomach and the slogan, One shot, two kills. These T-shirts are an indication that Israel's policy toward the Palestinians is one of extermination.

    It has been true for years that the most potent criticism of Israel's mistreatment of the Palestinians comes from the Israeli press and Israeli peace groups. For example, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz and Jeff Halper of ICAHD have shown a moral conscience that apparently does not exist in the Western democracies where Israel's crimes are covered up and even praised.

    Will the American hate crime bill be applied to Haaretz and Jeff Halper? Will American commentators who say nothing themselves but simply report what Haaretz and Halper have said be arrested for spreading hatred of Israel , an anti-semitic act?

    Many Americans have been brainwashed by the propaganda that Palestinians are terrorists who threaten innocent Israel . These Americans will see the censorship as merely part of the necessary war on terror. They will accept the demonization of fellow citizens who report unpalatable facts about Israel and agree that such people should be punished for aiding and abetting terrorists.

    A massive push is underway to criminalize criticism of Israel . American university professors have fallen victim to the well organized attempt to eliminate all criticism of Israel . Norman Finkelstein was denied tenure at a Catholic university because of the power of the Israel Lobby. Now the Israel Lobby is after University of California (at Santa Barbara ,) professor Wiliam Robinson. Robinson's crime: his course on global affairs included some reading assignments critical of Israel's invasion of Gaza .

    The Israel Lobby apparently succeeded in convincing the Obama Justice (sic) Department that it is anti-semitic to accuse two Jewish AIPAC officials, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, of spying. The Israel Lobby succeeded in getting their trial delayed for four years, and now Attorney General Eric Holder has dropped charges. Yet, Larry Franklin, the DOD official accused of giving secret material to Rosen and Weissman, is serving 12 years and 7 months in prison.

    The absurdity is extraordinary. The two Israeli agents are not guilty of receiving secrets, but the American official is guilty of giving secrets to them! If there is no spy in the story, how was Franklin convicted of giving secrets to a spy?

    Criminalizing criticism of Israel destroys any hope of America having an independent foreign policy in the Middle East that serves American rather than Israeli interests. It eliminates any prospect of Americans escaping from their enculturation with Israeli propaganda.

    To keep American minds captive, the Lobby is working to ban as anti-semitic any truth or disagreeable fact that pertains to Israel . It is permissible to criticize every other country in the world, but it is anti-semitic to criticize Israel , and anti-semitism will soon be a universal hate-crime in the Western world.

    Most of Europe has already criminalized doubting the Holocaust. It is a crime even to confirm that it happened but to conclude that less than 6 million Jews were murdered.
    Why is the Holocaust a subject that is off limits to examination? How could a case buttressed by hard facts possibly be endangered by kooks and anti-semitics? Surely the case doesn't need to be protected by thought control.
    Imprisoning people for doubts is the antithesis of modernity.

    Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@
  2. http://ww3zionism. blogspot. com/2009/ 05/are-you- legally-anti- semitic.html

    Tuesday, May 5, 2009
    Are You Legally Anti-Semitic?
    Antisemitism as defined by Congress and the US State Dept

    On Oct 16, 2004 AD, President Bush signed into law the global anti-Semitism review act; which is quite interesting. The United States state Department list the following sets of beliefs as being anti-Semitic.

    1. Any assertion that the Jewish community controls government, the media, international business and the financial world is anti-Semitic.

    2. Any strong anti-Israel sentiment is anti-Semitic.

    3. Virulent criticism of Israel's leaders, past or present, is anti-Semitic.

    4. Criticism of the Jewish religion or its religious leaders or literature, especially the Talmud and the Kabala is anti-Semitic. [I wonder if that includes the traditions of the elders that Jesus criticized. And woe unto the Pharisees that Jesus said.]

    5. Criticism of the US government and congress for being under influences of the Jewish/Zionist community, including AIPEC, is anti-Semitic.

    6. Criticism of the Jewish/Zionist community for promoting Globalism, [the New World Order] is anti-Semitic.

    7. Blaming Jewish leaders and their followers for inciting the Roman crucifixion of Christ is anti-Semitic.

    8. Diminishing the 6 million figure of the holocaust victims is anti-Semitic.

    9. Calling Israel a racist state is anti-Semitic.

    10. Asserting that there exists a Zionist conspiracy is anti-Semitic.

    11. Claiming the Jews and their leaders created the Bolshevik revolution is Russia is anti-Semitic. [I guess you have to revise history].

    12. Making derogatory statements about Jewish persons is anti-Semitic. Now isn't this interesting and all inclusive?


    P.S. If you have functioning brain matter between your ears, you're probably legally anti-semitic. Anti-semitism seems to go hand and hand with truth and knowing truth.
    at 5/05/2009

    See comment at gthe above link.
  3. I see our resident arab nationalist cannot give up his reason for being (criticism of israel). If arabs found more productive pursuits other than saying "death to america, death to israel", their life would be better.
  4. The stupid words that come out of people's mouth whenever their interests are threatned. How old are you fuck face?

    Let me give you a hint;

    Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@
  5. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    LOL. I am 25 and you just made it into "gutter" category.
  6. I thought this is what you said last time? Do I have your word for it?
  7. You should honestly find a more worthwhile pursuit than writing about "evils" of Israel on an internet forum. If one looks at your post history 99% of your posts would be about how bad Israel is. Let it go.

    As a short commentary (no time for elegant posts) I shall give the example of 2 countries that were bulldozed by history and turned "lemons into lemonade". Those two countries are Germany and Japan.

    Germany lost two world wars and at the end of WWII it got split in two, occupied and certain parts of it were given to other countries (specifically Poland and Soviet Union, subsequently Russia). It was bombed out, lost many young (and not so young) men and had a ruined economy. Nevertheless, it turned into Europe's largest economy and one of the largest in the world (and that is even taking into account East Germany has been quite dysfunctional even post unification)

    Japan lost WWII, got occupied, got bombed out, nuked, had a destroyed economy and lost many men. Nevertheless, it turned into world's second largest economy with considerable expertise in precision manufacturing and that is even taking into account that japan is largely devoid of natural resources.

    So why did I give the example of Germany and Japan? Simple, "the arab street" needs to stop bitching about occupied territories and "evilness of Israel" and do something productive to impress the world.

    It also needs to realize that western world "runs the show" and that lecturing europe&us about israel and racism is not productive. Idiot ahmadenijad recently went to geneva and decided to lecture europe. Even before that he expressed notions of why did not europe create israel in europe instead of the middle east. The man is hopeless but is par for the course in the region.

    "the arab street" needs to realize that prophet mohammed is not going to take them anywhere and they need to become secular. They also need to stop thinking of Hezbollah and Hamas as heroes, because those two organizations don't impress people in the west.

    Furthermore, they need to embrace reality and recognize israel because quite frankly their lack of recognition does not impact israel's ability to exist but recognizing israel would put them on a path from extremism and into civilized discourse.

    And finally, they need to go towards something productive instead of building skyscrapers in the desert (UAE), being oil sheiks (saudi arabia) or shouting death to israel/death to america.
  8. Tresor


    I do not know the US legislation system well, so excuse me my question: does ''President George W. Bush signed the Israel Lobby's bill'' means that the bill prior to signing by Bush passed through US Parliament and after Bush signed, the bill became the binding law in US?

  9. If you are willing to discuss this matter in a civilized manner, I would be more than happy to elaborate on every point you mentioned

  10. auspiv


    yes, you are right. in the US, congress makes and passes bills, and then the president has to sign the bills into law.
    #10     May 8, 2009