ZIONISM UNMASKED: 'Anti-Semitic' - the Label that Stops Criticism

When you can’t criticise a propaganda machine for its promotions, both free speech and democracy are dead.

(BAHRAIN) - If you indulge in ad hominem attacks (attacking the person rather than the issue), you can expect the same in return. The issues related to the anti-Semitic label are many.

First, the expression “anti-Semitic” is a misnomer. It’s defined as “hating Jews or Judeophobia.” The label “anti-Semitism” is wrong because not all Jews are Semites, and many Arabs are.

In 2004, the US Congress passed the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. The Act defines a person as being anti-Semitic for holding any of a number of beliefs. My comments follow each of the 14 items supposedly revealing anti-Semitism.

1. Any assertion, “that the Jewish community controls government, the media, international business and the financial world.”

According to this, it doesn’t matter whether the assertion is true or not. Truth is not an issue. Simply making such a statement violates the Act. In itself, that fact provides strong evidence of control of the US government.

Any criticism of Israel can thus be considered anti-Semitic. Israel can mangle Gaza and get away with it.

Menachem Begin may have led the Irgun in the slaughter and dispossession of thousands of Palestinians, but it’s anti-Semitic to say so.

4. Any criticism of the Jewish religion or its religious leaders with its emphasis on the Talmud and Kabbala.

It’s perfectly acceptable, as free speech, to vilify Islam, but any criticism of Judaism violates the Act.

5. Any criticism of the United States Government and Congress for being under the undue influence by the Jewish-Zionist community, which would include Jewish organizations such as AIPAC.

6. Any criticism of the Jewish-Zionist community for promoting globalism or what some call the “New World Order.”

When you can’t criticise a propaganda machine for its promotions, both free speech and democracy are dead.

7. Placing any blame on Jewish leaders and their followers for inciting the Roman crucifixion of Christ.

8. Citing any facts that could in any way diminish the “six million” figure of Jewish holocaust victims.

I violate the act simply by citing the fact that five million non-Jews died at the hands of the Nazis. This goes beyond stifling free speech.

That’s not a claim. It’s a fact. Israel is full of racist laws. It insists on preserving its racist character and its right to impose apartheid in the West Bank and Gaza.

A rational provision for such a claim would insist on evidence as proof of its validity. To disallow making such a claim is existentially (Israelis love that word) dictatorial.

11. Offering proof that Jews and their leaders created Communism and the Bolshevik revolution in Russia.

It just became illegal to offer proof. Minds are made up. Don’t confuse them with the facts.

13. Asserting that spiritually disobedient Jews do not have the Biblical right to re-occupy Palestine.

The Act passed by the US Congress makes me anti-Semitic. It’s an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. I’m a critic of Israel when they commit wrongs and a critic of America when it does wrong. Despite Congress, that’s not anti-Semitic.

Dr. Paul Balles has lived and worked in the Middle East for 40 years - first as an English professor (Universities of Kuwait and Bahrain), and for the past ten years as a writer, editor and editorial consultant. He's had more than 350 articles published, focusing on companies, personality profiles, entrpreneurs, women achievers, journalists and the media, the Middle East, American politics, the Internet and the Web, consumer reports, Arabs, diplomats, dining out and travel.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

muddytoe April 23, 2011 8:53 pm (Pacific time)

Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004 .....22 USC sec 2271

watchdog November 12, 2010 1:20 pm (Pacific time)

the 2nd amendment is there incase the government tries to take away the 1st--but it certainly seems israel is trying to get them to do just that. wait was that a slur on israel damnn here i go being anti-semtic again. wow truth and anti-semitism just dont mesh do they

Rachel Hoffman July 23, 2010 1:24 am (Pacific time)

"Somehow Zionists believe that they are literally more entitled to live in this earth than other people, that is RACISM pure and simple." Israel is a self-declared Jewish state militarily occupying land rightfully belonging to Palestinians. Israel’s immigration policy discriminates on the basis of religion. Contrary to what Netanyahu would have us believe, the holiest books of the Jews are the Torah and Talmud, and not the New Testament from which he referenced in his recent justification of apartheid. It's another deception that the so-called, self-styled Jew uses to conceal the fact their God is not the same as that of the Christians. Only Jews are allowed to live permanently in Israel, while any Palestinians (whether Muslim or Christian) are barred from ever returning if they leave. Demanding a "Jewish state" with governance dominated by an ethnic group is no different than the KKK demanding that Alabama be a "white state". Both instances exemplify RACISM. Thank you for the insightful article. It's encouraging to see we still have freedom of the press in America, and those with the backbone to expose the truth.

Bontifoli97 April 20, 2010 1:47 pm (Pacific time)

According to the points as they are laid out here I would be rated more toward the "very Anti-Semitic" end of the spectrum, even though I am not an Anti-semite and never have been. That is troubling

Robert Dunn February 20, 2010 11:18 am (Pacific time)

Now many in the world can appreciate why so many Americans like to own guns!

DICKERSON3870 February 15, 2010 11:59 pm (Pacific time)

I’m having a difficult time trying to verify these “14 items”. I did find one site that had the same 14 items and seemed to attribute them to “State Department definitions”. It is possible that this is bogus info that is a consequence of relying upon post after post (beginning nearly a year ago, or earlier) of information that originated with a ‘hoax’ (or something far more pernicious). SEE: Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism: A Report Provided to the United States Congress, United States Department of State, PDF(94 pages) – http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/102301.pdf (NOTE: See the definitions on pages 6 – 7 and in Appendix Two. I don’t see any sign of the language contained in the “14 items” specified in the Balles article.) EXCERPTS from page 7: Examples of the ways in which anti-Semitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel taking into account the overall context could include: • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination.… •Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. • Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis. • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. The EUMC makes clear, however, that criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded in itself as anti-Semitic*. * This definition is adapted from the EUMC “Working Definition of Anti-Semitism” document, which can be found in its entirety in Appendix Two. [ at page 81]

reader February 12, 2010 12:32 pm (Pacific time)

How is this twisted interpretation of a congressional act anything BUT the clear hatred of Jews and Jewish beliefs? Deny it if you want, but know that your words are not "truth", they are the very basis of hate speech. If you don't like want to be persecuted for your own brand of propaganda, maybe you ought to make rational intelligent arguments instead of hate-filled claims, or else deal with the consequences like a law-abiding citizen of the country you live in.

Editor: This is anything but twisted, in fact it straightens out the facts. Somehow Zionists believe that they are literally more entitled to live in this earth than other people, that is RACISM pure and simple. Talk about hatefullness? We just want to see people live. You think you should be able to slaughter tiny children and old people and you whine because a writer calls you out on it. You are in favor of the genocide of Palestine, and yet suggest that we are the ones who 'hate' and that my friend, is pure rubbish. I suggest you read about genocide, learn what it is, and examine what Israel is doing. Also, we published several articles on this subject, follow the links to read them. It takes guts to call out a nation on this type of charge, calling us names does not require guts.

Ersun Warncke February 12, 2010 11:32 am (Pacific time)

Your elaboration of the various points on which people may be accused of anti-semitism may be accurate in the practice of political debate, but it is not supported by the text of the "Global Anti-semitism Review Act." (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_public_lawsanddocid=f:publ332.108) Unless we are reading completely different copies of that act, I can find no support for your claim that these 14 points are defined by the act. In fact, I can only see a connection between these 14 points and the act in question by extreme extrapolation of minor phrases within an act that is primarily focused on actual acts of violence and attempts to "justify or promote racial hatred or incite acts of violence against Jewish people." If you want to make your case through quotations of political activists that equate any criticism of Israel with justification of racial hatred, then that is fine, but that language is not in the act I read. I expect a higher level of intellectual honesty on this issue. I do not believe that it is helpful to muddy the waters with a disingenuous presentation of a piece of legislation that relies heavily on extrapolation and assumption to make the legislation say something that it plainly does not. If you are going to do that, say so, and provide evidence to justify your extrapolations and assumptions.

gp February 12, 2010 6:54 am (Pacific time)

stunned to hear of this legislation. I am proceeding directly to google to read the congressional record.

Jane February 12, 2010 6:43 am (Pacific time)

I guess according to those 14 points, I am anti-Semitic, also.

[Return to Top]