America's entanglement with Israel
with 12 comments
Written by Maidhc Ó Cathail
July 16, 2012 at 8:21 am
Posted in Uncategorized
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
Both Chomsky and Finkelstein are against BDS movement and both of them agree that foreign Jews occupying Palestine since 1948 – “have right to exist”. I believe Blankfort also agrees with them on that issue. Jeff, however, is not a hypocrite when it comes to rights of the Palestinian victims. He has called late Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas “double agents” aka traitors.
The AIPAC is not the only group working as the “fifth column” in the United States – there are over 50 other Jewish and Christian groups who work for Israeli interests also.
Israel lobby groups not only control the Congress, Senate and the White House – it also controls the judicial and law enforcement. Something confirmed by another American Jewish writer and blogger, Max Blumenthal.
July 16, 2012 at 12:18 pm
I think you’ll find that Jeff Blankfort does not agree with Chomsky and Finkelstein on Israel’s alleged “right to exist” on the Palestinian land occupied before 1967.
Maidhc Ó Cathail
July 16, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Well sir, I’m afraid, you misunderstood my comment. Jeff Blankfort, Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein – are all committed to the “existence of the Zionist entity” on 78% of Palestinian land prior to the 1967 war. I know two of my Jewish blogger friends, Roger Tucker and Gilad Atzmon – and Helen Thomas doesn’t agree with those three Jewish writers.
July 16, 2012 at 5:19 pm
I’m not sure from where that confusion arose, but to make it clear, I do NOT believe Israel has a “right to exist” nor exist PERIOD either as an exclusively Jewish state which, no doubt, its majority would like to be, or as a Jewish dominated state. People have a right to exist but not when that existence is based on the continued dispossession and oppression of another people which is what has defined Israel’s entire existence. No other state has demanded anything other that its legal existence be recognized but as we have seen throughout history, states come and go, as, given its history and behavior, will Israel. It was Henry Kissinger, BTW, who came up with the idea that no US official could speak with a representative of the PLO until it recognized Israel’s “right to exist,” and that became US policy until Arafat recognized Israel on his way to undermining the first Intifada and the great betrayal at Oslo.
July 16, 2012 at 5:20 pm
Well, even Finklestein has implied, on rare occasions to be sure, that the two state solution is a rest area, so to speak, on the road to a one state solution.
Now you can accuse him of diversionary tactics or worse if you wish, but he has more than implied, in this respect, an ultimate anti-Zionism.
July 16, 2012 at 7:46 pm
I noticed a comment at the YouTube site where an individual asked where the Noam Chomsky interview was.
I guess it is because Jeffrey Blankfort references the interview several times.
Here is a copy of both interviews including transcript.
Archive Reference: On Topic
U.S. – Israel Relations
Kathleen Wells interviews Noam Chomsky and Jeffrey Blankfort
August 16, 2010
July 17, 2012 at 3:19 am
Thanks for posting. Actually, it was Kathleen Wells who refers to her Chomsky interview during the interview with Jeff Blankfort.
July 17, 2012 at 8:12 am
Kathleen Wells is a political correspondent for ‘Race-Talk’.
Noam Chomsky, though, is a strong critic of US foreign policy – has never supported armed struggle against Israel. He also favors the so-called ‘two-state’ solution and believes in Israel’s right to exist as ‘Jewish state’. Chomsky never publically questioned the Zionist version of the holocaust (‘Six Million Died’). Chomsky is against academic boycott of Israel. Chomsky doesn’t believe that the US foreign policy is controlled by the Jewish groups especially the AIPAC. Chomsky also doesn’t like Israel being compared with the apartheid South Africa.
Roger Tucker, Jew Editor/Publisher of “One Democratic State” website – in an article, titled “Open Letter to Uri Avnery, Noam Chomsky and Jimmy Carter”, claimed that none of them is friend to Palestinian victims of the foreign Zionist Jew settlers because in fact they themselves are ‘Crypto-Zionists’ hiding behind the facade of ‘humanism’.
July 17, 2012 at 12:57 pm
Uri Avnery has never denied that he is a Zionist and unlike the double-talking Chomsky, is openly against BDS. Some of what he writes is occasionally useful. I have not read Tucker’s piece and don’t know who he is but to describe Carter as an enemy of the Palestinian people at this point in time and a crypto-zionist is not only wrong, it is stupid. The Zionists’ know better which is why they are continuously ripping him for having made the most public connection yet between Israel and Apartheid and having refused to bend to them and change the title of his book, “Palestine: Peace, not Apartheid.”
The real problem is Chomsky who I will argue is one of Israel’s most important assets in the US. He has “earned” that distinction by having almost single handedly deflected attention from the role of the Israel Lobby/American Jewish Establishment in shaping US Middle East policies within the ranks of the rather pathetic Palestinian solidarity movement and provided ammunition to the crypto-Zionists/Jewish tribalists within its ranks. That he is still doing it despite the fact that the Jewish establishment is now doing its dirty work quite openly makes him a clear winner over, for example, the likes of Alan Dershowitz, who is not nearly so clever as his Massachusetts buddy, Noam. For the low-down on Chomsky, here’s a piece that I wrote about seven years ago. Chomsky, the “world’s leading intellectual,” we are told by nothing less than the NY Times, told his supporters that he would not read it which, of course, relieved him from the duty of responding. Here it is: http://www.leftcurve.org/LC29WebPages/Chomsky.html
July 17, 2012 at 5:12 pm
I dont think it’s a coincidence that Chomsky is commonly referred to as one of if not the ‘greatest intellectual on earth’ despite his obvious stubborn inaccuracies in both his political analysis and his linguistic studies. With regards his Israel-Palestine analysis, it is because of those innccuracies that he has so many friends or at least, a lack of enemies and plenty of people willing to give him a platform to communicate his thoughts. He is the type of enemy that the Israelis like, the type who always blames the US for anything Israel does. With enemies like Chomsky …
July 17, 2012 at 5:56 pm
One of the reasons I find Jeffrey Blankfort so credible is his accessibility. I always appreciate how you make yourself available to address questions in the comments section of the blogs in which you’re posted.
July 19, 2012 at 6:40 am
JEFFREY BLANKFORT = an extreme-left antisemitic nutjob who makes Noam Chomsky seem moderate
September 23, 2013 at 10:15 pm
search site archives