The cowardly Zionism of Jonathan Freedland.

In his piece Yearning for the same land in this week’s New Statesman magazine prize winning author and columnist Jonathan Freedland cites four shades of Zionism: secular, religious, left-wing and rightist.

Make that five shades: Freedland Zionism – sitting in one’s comfortable diaspora home while joining in the delegitimisation of Israel.

A May issue of the New Statesman was devoted to Who Speaks for British Jews? This week’s issue asks Israel: the future – Is the dream of a two-state solution dead? In January 2002 the New Statesman’s sickening front cover had the Star of David piercing the Union Jack with the words Kosher Conspiracy? It was an issue devoted to the undue influence of “the Zionist lobby” (see end).

Israel is unique in being the only country whose future, or lack of, is constantly under discussion. And who knew that ripping the heart out of Judaism by giving up places like the Machpelah in Hebron is considered a “dream”?  A necessity in return for an elusive peace maybe, but no dream.

Freedland puts himself among the “left-leaning Zionists”. These are “true Zionists” who think that “the 45-year long occupation is jeopardising the founding Zionist goal of a Jewish, democratic state.”

Freedland doesn’t tell us why the “occupation” is threatening Israel’s Jewish and democratic status but it sounds like the scaremongering of J Street and Yachad.

Yachad, for example, claims that if Israel doesn’t withdraw from the West Bank then by 2020 the Palestinians between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea will outnumber Jews. Minority autocratic rule by Jews over Palestinians will follow or, as Mick Davis, a British Jewish community leader put it recently, “Israel is heading towards an apartheid state”.

Those who cite this thesis never back it up with a source, but that is because it is just more anti-Israel propaganda; a ploy to force Israel to dangerously concede more land.

Yoram Ettinger shows how the numbers of Palestinians on the West Bank are regularly artificially inflated by at least one million and argues that Palestinians and Israeli Arabs can never make up more than 30% of those living between the River and the Sea. Freedland wouldn’t want facts to get in the way of a good story.

Freedland claims to support Israel’s right to exist. He just doesn’t like how Zionism was implemented or current Israeli policy. And he believes that “the security, viability and even the ethical character of the Jewish state matter more than its size.”

He contrasts this position with that of the “hawkish Zionists, heirs of the revisionist tradition of Vladimir Jabotinsky who are territorial maximalists, eager to fly the Israeli flag over all of the West Bank”.

So just how small does Freedland think Israel should have been?

The Peel Commission of 1937 offered the Arabs 80% of British Mandate Palestine and the Jews 20%. The Zionists accepted but Arab leaders rejected this leaving Europe’s Jews to their fate in the gas chambers.

Freedland states “Israel needs to look plainly at the circumstances of its birth and understand why Palestinians regard the event as a catastrophe.” But Arab leaders having rejected, this time, 45% of British Mandate Palestine in 1947 went on to commence hostilities against the Jews instead.

So who are the real “territorial maximalists” here?

In fact the seeds for Arab defeat in 1947-1949 were self-inflicted having been sown during the 1936-39 Arab uprising in British Mandate Palestine which was brutally crushed by the British leaving the Arabs bereft of leaders, fighters and weapons while Zionist militias used the time to build up their reserves.

Freedland then complains that there were no takers in Israel for a “national memorial day to mark the Arab dispossession”.

But why would Israelis commemorate an attempt by Arab leaders to kill them?

Despite all this Arab rejectionism Freedland then, incredibly, goes on to portray Jews and Arabs as drowning nations clinging to the same piece of driftwood. He thinks the Jews who were “gasping for breathe” were right to cling to it in 1948. After 1967, he claims Israel pushed the Palestinians off the shared driftwood and into the sea.

Freedland doesn’t bother analysing what the situation might have been like today had Israel not been in West Bank.  One need only look at the aftermath of Israel’s pullout from Gaza: rockets slamming into Tel Aviv, anyone?

Like in his piece This is Israel? Not the one I Love in the Jewish Chronicle last November Freedland doesn’t like to complicate the issue by mentioning Hamas or Islamic Jihad. No mention of Hamas’ call to kill Jews in its charter or of Hamas’ beliefs that Israel is an “Islamic waqf” and that peaceful solutions are invalid.

Freedland never asks, or answers, why he thinks the Palestinians, who rejected 80% of the territory in 1937 and 45% in 1947 would accept 22% now. In fact he doesn’t criticise the Palestinians once.

Luckily for Freedland he has never had to take a life or death decision. Sadly, he takes the coward’s way out and criticises those unlucky Jews forced to. He yearns for the perfect Israel and until then won’t stop his constant delegitimisation of the Jewish state.

But it gets worse. Alongside Freedland’s piece is a piece by Ali Abunimah. Abunimah calls for a one state solution and the ending of “Israelis’ demand for the supremacy of Jewish rights over those of the Palestinians”. While Geoffrey Wheatcroft, in his book review How the dream died, describes the American “pro-Israel official ‘Jewish establishment'” as “elderly, rich and right-wing”.

“Supremacy of Jewish rights”, Jews described as “rich”? The New Statesman obviously has no problem with keeping sickening anti-Semitic stereotypes alive.


97 responses to “The cowardly Zionism of Jonathan Freedland.

  1. I agree with you about Ali Abunimah.

    Can’t agree with you about Freedland, though. I’m not a fan of this tendency to shriek condemnation at any Israel supporter who steps beyond robotic, mindless hasbarah.

    Freedland isn’t cowardly. He just prefers to take a different approach to you. Given the abuse he always receives for his approach, I’d say he’s actually quite brave to keep up with it.

  2. For the truth about the UJIA/Millis thing go to our wondrous site and see the new page.

  3. “Those who cite this thesis never back it up with a source, but that is because it is just more anti-Israel propaganda; a ploy to force Israel to dangerously concede more land.”

    But Ehud Barack and Ehud Olmert have both supported that argument. Are they, too, engaging in anti-Israel propaganda to force Israel to dangerously concede more land?

    • richardmillett

      I don’t mind the truth as long as someone cites a source. I’m willing to be proved wrong.
      Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

    • Yes Barak and Olmert were also wrong and the failure of Oslo proves that. This issue is not about percentages of land, but totally about there not being an Israel at all. If it were about percentages Arafat would have accepted Olmerts offer of 98% of all his demands but he didn’t because the Hamas and PLO charters still both call for the destruction of all Jews. That’s called genocide reiterated this last year by Al Zahar and Haniyeh with Abass saying not a single Jew will live in a future Palestine. So Richard is right. Freedman needs to widen his reading and understand reality rather than sprout some fantasy dream he has in mind.

      • ” failure of Oslo ” . Oslo was the biggest con trick in history. It has been a rip roaring success.

  4. I don’t know personally whether they are right or wrong.

    I’m just saying that suggesting that only anti-Israel propagandists advance the argument is ridiculous, given that Barack and Olmert have done so.

    Check Barack’s military honours: few people alive have done more for Israel than him.

    • richardmillett

      When did Barak say so. As for Olmert he also made the apartheid analogy. I didn’t suggest they are anti-Israel.
      Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

      • You suggested it by implication. You said the apartheid prediction – which they both support – is: “just more anti-Israel propaganda”.

        Barak said it in 2010:

        “As long as in this territory west of the Jordan river there is only one political entity called Israel it is going to be either non-Jewish, or non-democratic. If this bloc of millions of ­Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state.”

      • richardmillett

        But there isn’t a bloc of millions of palestinians are there? Where’s the source? But it is anti-Israel propaganda. If it isn’t true then it is propaganda.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

  5. As I said, I don’t know for sure how accurate the ‘apartheid prediction’ is.

    I was just pointing out that Barak, Olmert, and many others who clearly have Israel’s best interests at heart, support it.

    And, of course, lots of people who have Israel’s best interests at heart would argue the predicition is flawed.

    I’ve never found enough facts to be sure either way!

  6. Merely to point out that Israel’s future, like its present and its past, won’t be decided by an op-ed in a UK magazine. The kind of discussion above has been repeated ad nauseam, and though it may satisfy writers’ and commenters’ egos, it contributes absolutely nothing to any solution. For the past three years there has been no progress of any kind towards a political settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority; neither side has any motivation for one and the world is, quite correctly, more concerned with the serious economic situation.

    I agree that too much has been made of the so-called demographic issue. The relative percentages of Jews and Arabs in Israel is virtually unchanged in the past 30 years despite all the doomsday prophecies.

    • Palestine to the east and Israel to the west of the Jordan river. There is a large block of disenfranchised Arab Palestinians resoding in Jordan who are working toward this. Join them.

      • Correct. There already is a “two-state solution”.

        1) Israel
        2) Jordan

        Perhaps the jihadis and their socialist friends want a three/four/five state solution?

        Syria may break up. Lebanon may break up.

    • Indeed. It would be a strange ego that thought *any* comments under blog posts were about to advance the peace process. 😉

      • PS, my comment was not in reference to Sharon.

        It was in reference to:

        “The kind of discussion above has been repeated ad nauseam, and though it may satisfy writers’ and commenters’ egos, it contributes absolutely nothing to any solution.”

  7. Paul L Muslin

    I have no doubt that should Milliband ever lead the Labour Party to power
    Freedland will be appointed Foreign Secretary on the basis of the New Statesman article ! ( Fits their thinking like a glove).That said the Current coalition Government would also snap him up if he continues to write historically inaccurate appeasement articles concerning Israel .

  8. Daniel Marks

    Many years ago in the late 80s I heard then mayor of Jerusalem Teddy Kollek explaining why we have to give away pretty much everything, except Jerusalem. He argued demographics, which were much more trendy at the time and said (I paraphrase), “If I thought that a million Jews would immigrate to Israel I’d feel differently, I’d say we could hold these areas and carry on building settlements. But with the number of Jews that we have and the Palestinian birth rate I say it’s impossible.”

    A few years later at the time of the great ex-Soviet immigration I heard Kollek explaining that Israel simply didn’t have enough resources to both absorb the new arrivals and to also build settlements. “We must choose either a million Jews or West Bank settlements.” (paraphrased again). Amazingly, the interviewer remembered his other statement and asked him to explain the inconsistency. Kollek laughed and explained that his views didn’t always have to be uniform.

    My point is that I’ve rarely met anyone who uses the demographic argument in any kind of sincere manner. I’ve heard European intellectuals who negate Israel’s very existence using it; I’ve heard secular assimilated Jews married to non-Jews asking me how I’ll guarantee Israel’s continuation as a Jewish state. I think the most audacious one was a German journalist who asked me about Jewish population growth rates. It’s bad form to first annihilate 6,000,000 and then bitch about there not being enough Jews left.

    In 1948 by the terms of partition there were to be 51% Jews and 49% Arabs in Israel and they had a much higher birthrate then. Since then Israeli Arabs have experienced the greatest fall in childbirth in history. Regarding Judea and Samaria and Gaza, 95% of Palestinians are ruled by ruled by the PA and the Hamas (G-d help them) respectively, and the other 5% are no demographic threat. Israel has a very healthy growth population growth rate. Within a few years the majority of world Jewry will be living here. Some say they already do.

    Originally, those who wished to give away parts of the land of Israel tried to sell it as a way of achieving peace and brotherhood. When that became a joke the demographic argument became popular until the early 90s. Then that went out of fashion and we were told that we have to do what the US wants because we are dependent on her. Nobody takes that one too seriously anymore, so instead we hear about how everything bad that happens from disco violence to road accidents are caused as a result of the “occupation”. However, the Left has for the most part given up trying to convince the electorate preferring to bad mouth us abroad.

    Finally, I’ll say the obvious. In 1948 there were less than half a million Jews in Israel, today there are 6,000,000. During the same time the Jewish population of Britain declined also from about 500,000 to about half that number today. I care not whether Freedland is a coward or not or even whether he means well. Either way, in this matter he is wrong and should be worrying about the future of Anglo Jewry, not Israel.

    All that notwithstanding if Mr Freedland is still genuinely concerned about our demographics, let him join us and bring young Jonathan with him. As the old lady who relieved herself in the ocean was heard to say, “Every little bit helps.”

  9. Anglo Jewry is in fine fettle. There has never been a better time to be a Jew in the UK.

    • Tony Jacobs

      If you really believe that, I suggest you seek psychiatric help. Jewish kids are regularly subjected to (often physical) abuse on the way to and from school. Jewish society stalls at college and university are vandalised, Jewish or pro-Israel trade unionists are abused and you think things are good?
      You’re a nutter.
      p.s. Talking to a holocaust survivor a couple of weeks ago, he remarked that London felt more like 1937 Berlin by the minute.

  10. Daniel ( Whenever I meet a decent goy i shocked and surprised Marks ) isn’t worried about demographics because he plans to give five per cent of the Arabsin the west bank the right to apply for citizenship in the land on which they were born. Why worry we can have a nice apartheid state.

  11. Any news about the rally at Trafalgar Square, the rally to remember the 1972 murder of Olympic athletes, the murder of 11 Israeli athletes?

    The rally to pointedly shame the sharia compliant IOC?

  12. The New Statesman?

    The same New Statesman that published the “Kosher Consipiracy” cover article?

    Who would have thought that Socialists would wallow in rank antisemitism?

  13. There are 7 million people in Israel. Yes, people. Got that Daniel? People, not just Jews. 20% are Palestinian Israelis (that’s what they call themselves so that’s what they must be called). 10% are Haredim,who have a very high birth rate. 50% are Mizrahi…so I make the rest Ashkenazi, who are still the minority ruling elite and the real non-indigeneous squatters.Oh and a considerable number of guest workers. So Jews probably only make up something like 70% of the population. There are 3-4 million Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, who are multiplying but not going forth. The secular Israelis and the Palestinian Israelis have quite a low birth rate. More people emigrate from than immigrate to Israel. Fewer Jews want to make aliyah, despite Daniel’s fantasy above.
    So just do the figures. Forget the two-state solution. It won’t work. Too much deceit and insincerity on both sides, especially the Israeli. The West Bank can never be a Palestinian is too fragmented into ‘cantons’ ‘zones’ and no way will Israel give up Zone C, which is all over the West bank in fragments, thus blocking any Palestinian freedom of movement and contiguity. It is for this reason that Arafat et al have refused the so-called ‘generous’ offers throughout the years. They have never been offered a viable land mass that can be made into a state, because of settlements, barriers and checkpoints. And they won’t be either, which is why negotiations have stalled.
    The only political solution will be a bi-national state with the annexation of the West Bank and Gaza. If the Palestinians have citizenship but no voting rights, then Israel will safely remain a Jewsish state but will remain existentially unsafe (when was it otherwise?). If the Palestinians are given citizenship and voting rights, then that will be the end of Israel as a Jewish entity, as Jews will be outnumbered by Muslims.
    So good luck with all that.

    • richardmillett

      There is talk in Israel by some politicians of annexing the West Bank only and giving the Palestinians voting rights. It is considered that that would not be a demographic threat to Israel’s Jewishness. How do you know they call themselves Palestinian Israelis? Have you canvassed them all?
      Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

      • Yes I am aware of MK Hotovely’s proposition to annexe the West Bank. And I agree with her.
        I have spoken to a number of ‘Israeli Arabs’, and they prefer to be called Palestinian Israelis. They are not happy with the term Israeli Arab. Their Arab identity comes first and Israel is not their nation. Not yet anyway. We shall see.

      • richardmillett

        Maybe you should speak to some more instead of looking for people hostile to Israel which is something I sense that you do. Just a hunch. Can’t imagine why.

      • wait…..did I say they were hostile to Israel? I also made a point of asking them where they would prefer to live…in Israel or in a Palestinian state under the PA. They always reply Israel. In spite of the discrimination and lack of equal opportunities, they like the freedom.

      • richardmillett

        So why would they want a binational state if they prefer Israel? You haven’t a clue, Roger. You hate Israel and Judaism so much you even contradict yourself.

      • did I say they wanted a bi-national state? I wrote that it is my view that a bi-national state is the only solution to the situation and that MKs like Hotovely share this opnion. I didn’t say that the Palestinian Israelis want this. May I be so bold as to ask you to read my comments more carefully Richard?

    • Do you refer to Holocaust survivors and their immediate families when you say “…Ashkenazi, who are still the minority ruling elite and the real non-indigeneous squatters”? Do you not accept that their only protection is to be masters of their fate in a Jewish State? Or maybe you think that humanity has improved since 1945? Srebrenica, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, anyone?

      • The early Zionists and founders and rulers of Israel were not Holocaust survivors. Israel was already on the cards before the Holocaust. The Zionists did almost nothing to help the European Jews during the war, and Ben Gurion expressed quite a callous indifference to their fate, seeing immigration to Palestine as more urgent than saving lives. He even said that if half the kinder transport made it to Palestine he would accept the murder of the other half as a better option than their escape to the UK (the Galut), and the inevitable assimilation and miscegenation as a fate worse than death. That’s how much he cared about Jewish life…human life.
        To say that Israel exists because of the Holocaust is just feeding Arab resentment bleating ‘why should we pay for what the Europeans did to the Jews?’ Sure, the creation of the jewish state was pushed through by the UN vote after the Holocaust, but not for the survivors but post-facto for the victims.

      • richardmillett

        Have you a source for the ben gurion quote?

      • “If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel” Lenni Brenner, The Iron Wall: Zionist Revisionism from Jabotinsky to Shamir (Zed Books, 1984). cites as reference no. 23: Yoav Gelber, ‘ Zionist Policy and the Fate of European Jewry (1939-42)’ Yad Vashem Studies, vol. XII, p. 199.

      • Richard
        it is a BS-argument – Immigration to Palestine was saving lives, so whatever quote they come up with, it must by necessity be out of context because the two are so inextricably linked.

      • full historical context please in 3D of what was going on at the time

  14. Chas Newkey-Burden and Richard Millett, you shouldn’t be arguing! You’re both ‘the good guys’! The central problem here is that both Israel’s true enemies and its self-styled ‘critical friends’ are all for telling the Israeli government what to do and never ask the Palestinian Arabs what, precisely, they want. As far as I can see, what they want is to continue the armed struggle until they receive Israel’s unconditional surrender. How else can you explain the lack of Palestinian Arab counter-offers?

    • richardmillett

      It’s not argument, just debate as a means to find the truth. I would just like to know why people make the demographic threat argument without any proper evidence.

      • I’ll venture an explanation, not necessarily THE explanation. From the War of Independence on, Israeli politicians, perhaps more those on the left than on the right, have been content to play politics at the expense of the truth and at the expense of Israel’s reputation. How often recently have we heard Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni ignore their own failures and shamelessly attack the current government at times of Obama-induced weakness, even doing so from abroad, hoping to curry favour with the international left and board a bandwagon back to power? They go with the flow….with malice. I don’t lump Ehud Barak in with the other two. No one can doubt his personal bravery, but he has proved himself as less than thorough, even careless, on occasion. Maybe that’s all wrong, but who can doubt that many Israeli politicians will do anything to grab a headline? And, as for Israel’s enemies, why should they look Olmert’s and Barak’s gift horses in the mouth?

  15. Why threat ? If it is all cool why not get on with it ? Organise it, one fully democratic state between the river and the sea. If Israel has nothing to fear from it just do it.

    Slight change of tack. The demographic calculation. Don’t forget to factor in the fact that there are approximately a million sane Israeli Jews. Bibi doesn’t forget.

  16. Daniel Marks

    Hi Roger,


    I wrote:

    “In 1948 there were less than half a million Jews in Israel, today there are 6,000,000”

    You then correct me with the following:

    “There are 7 million people in Israel. Yes, people. Got that Daniel? People, not just Jews. 20% are Palestinian Israelis (that’s what they call themselves so that’s what they must be called).”

    Either you’re an idiot, incapable of retaining a single digit, or you are just about the worst propagandist I’ve ever met, and I’ve met some pretty awful ones – believe me.

    The racist codswallop you write about the Mizrahi-Ashkenazi divide is beneath my dignity to even relate to, and that’s saying something too. I’ll just comment that we impatiently await the birth of my first grandson who will be born to a father whose parents are of British and Argentinian Ashkenazi origin and Libyan and Polish father of mixed Mizrahi-Ashkenazi roots.

    Regarding the future Jewish population demographics:

    “Continuation of these trends in the foreseeable future may lead to continuing Jewish population growth in Israel and a decrease in the rest of world Jewry. By the end of the current decade, Israel might comprise for the first time more Jews than the United States. Already, a majority of all Jewish school-age children globally live in Israel. By the end of the third decade of the 21st century, Israel might comprise an absolute majority of world Jewry.”

    That is not me, but Professor Sergio DellaPergola talking. I won’t get into the “Who is a Jew?” question as if you can’t differentiate between a 6 and a 7 you’re not really going to grasp that, are you. To make things simple, my definition of “Who is a Jew?” means that many of those he counts abroad (and a few here), I don’t.

    This is not my fantasy. While I am forever joyful and thankful to my Maker for the continued growth and strengthening of the State of Israel, I take no delight in the low birth rates and assimilation that exists in the diaspora. I wish they were all here, but until that day I hope that my bothers and sisters in exile grow and prosper in every way.

    I wish everyone who is fasting an easy and meaningful Tisha Ba’av and may G-d turn that of next year from a day of mourning to one of joy and celebration. May we all witness the rebuilding of the Temple speedily in our days.

    • Before you rebuild the temple, you’ll need to find an unblemished red heifer to purify all those sins.(Numbers19). And there is another itzy-bitzy problem….there is a building standing on the site that just happens to be sacred to one and a half billion people. So you’ll have to get World War 3 out of the way first, which might be uncomfortable for the rest of us living on planet rational. And I could resent that deeply, Daniel, I warn you. But then looking at the progress of the Israelites and Judeans throughout their history up to the destruction of the second temple, a bloodbath here and there was never a deterrent, was it?
      And forget about the Messiah. He’ll be run out of town by the faithful, because you can guarantee he won’t be telling them what they want to hear. When was it otherwise? In spite of all Isaiah’s warnings….which still stand by the way…they sawed the poor bugger in half. And as for Jesus—well you know all about that.

  17. What would late eve be without a piece of piss poor poetry from Danny ( whenever I meet a decent goy I am shocked and surprised ) Marks.

    Danny have you ever thought about getting your wife to check over your poetry as well as your grammar ?

  18. Sergio DellaPergola is one hell of a scholar. Since Israel has contained more Jews than the US for some considerable time. Maybe I might get to be a professor too ?

  19. I just wish rich and roger weren’t so terribly boring, so utterly predictable

    Couldn’t they come up with something fresh and unheard of every now and then?

  20. Almani Sleiman


    • I don’t get it – 20.000 ????

      • 20,000 dead Syria.

      • …and how many UN/Security Council resolutions? How many Red Cross/Amnesty/Save the Children/War on Want/Guardian condemnations? Who has set up field hospitals along the border to help the injured? Who is trying to hammer the Kurds back across the border into war torn Syria? Which country gets more attention from ignorant tits like the two unreadable R’s of this blog and their ilk across the world? Richard they are making your blog boring and unreadable.

      • richardmillett

        Well it kinda goes to prove the obsession that the two unreadable Rs have.

      • Sharon: It’s all relative . You waffle on obsessively about the same old stuff all the time like a stuck record. Your agenda is obvious and oh so repetitive. Any comment that veers from your obdurate defence of squeaky-clean Israel, the country that can do no wrong in your eyes, is seen as aberrant or boring. If there were no dissenting voices on Richard’s blog, then it would be beyond boring, it would be an unchallenged self-indulgent circle jerk of endless whinging. Is that what Richard wants?

      • richardmillett

        Yes but it would be nice to cut out your Judeophobia. Are you Islamaphobic? I’m curious why you don’t post under your full name. Most people identify themselves. You and Rich don’t. That’s pure cowardice. Even Gert identifies himself.

      • Roger Standen

      • Roger the Rat, based on your recent photo.

  21. Daniel Marks

    Regarding 17,000 or 20,000 I’m not sure that any ones other than the loved ones of those 3,000. It’s a terrible human tragedy, but not yet genocide so the world will prefer to focus on the Olympics.

    • yes that’s right Daniel. The Olympics suck. Commercialised, corrupt, vulgar and kitsch. I loathe competitive sport with all its irrational jingoism, hysteria, obsessive ambition and egomania. Tranquilising the masses with the trivial and irrelevant when the world is burning, distracting them from what really counts. Israel should have boycotted the games and shown itself to be above such a circus.

      • richardmillett

        You sound like great company, Roger. Such a fun person! (Not)

      • yep I’m a miserable misanthropic bastard really. A bit like the prophets of the Old Testament. Always had a soft spot for Jeremiah, Isaiah and Zechariah especially. They didn’t much like the masses either.

      • Daniel Marks

        Yes, because Europe is ignoring the fact Syrians who are massacring other Syrians Israel should have boycotted the games.

        At this point I should ask Roger why he makes such a demand of Israel that he makes of no other countries, and he shall claim that he has made similar demands on various blogs and forums. I’ll then ask for the addresses of such blogs and forums, to verify that he’s not the anti-Semitic bigot that he appears, and after about a fortnight of hounding he’ll claim that they were all mysteriously deleted.

        But just for the hell of it:


        Have you written anywhere that any other countries besides Israel should boycott the games? If you have made this demand exclusively of Israel, could you explain why?

      • Daniel: Because of the indifference and callousness of the OIC towards the Israeli athletes murdered in 1972. Not to mention, sucking up to the Arabs and their threats.
        And I do not make specific demands on Israel to boycott them.
        I regard the Olympics as so offensive that I think ALL countries should boycott them. All decent human beings should do the same. If you watch one minute of them, you are compromised. The last games were held in China, champion violator of human rights. A brutal tyrannical society where life is cheap. And liberal-left dimwit Israel-bashing friends of mine who forever uphold the rights of the Palestinians, happily watched it all then. The rottenness and hypocrisy of it all is clear to see.

      • if there is one country that should boycott the games is Greece, the reason being the complete shambles they have made of the Olympic idea when it became obvious that they couldn’t extend the peace that was once to be held all over Greece during the games couldn’t even be secured for the Olympic village.

        All the rest was part of the ancient games also and thus integral part of the Olympics from birth on.

        It is the peace thing that’s missing and that was back then and should be now the only thing making the whole thing worth it.

        And these days they have extended the non peace even to the sports thing, giving the Lebanese a wall so they avoid seeing Israelis.

  22. And this is why the castigating of Rogge is ridiculous. He is just doing his job. The job of the IOC is to ensure the ” success ” of the games. The games are a success when tv companies, sponsors etc are happy. They are happy when the people are happy. The people are not happy when significant numbers of countries walk out of the games. The people don’t like that so neither do the suits. The ” Olympic family” , and ” Olympic spirit ” bollox is just a sales pitch to make the people feel all warm inside and happy.

    So this minute thing was NEVER going to happen.Who knows what the private feelings of Rogge and his colleagues are ? Call them hypocrites if you will but hypocracy goes with the ” doing a job ” territory..

    Who among us has not done stuff we were very unhappy about because the boss ( the job ) required it ? Apart from Danny I mean, he is a poet and too good for this world.

    So the entirely inevitable result. The families of the victims of Munich return home, now more hurt and bitter than before. And the smug demonstrators for the minute, having used the families for their own agenda(s) shrug and the normal service of their lives resumes.

  23. Well Silke no one could say your incomprehensible gibberish is predictable.

  24. Daniel Marks


    I’m sure that you’d be the first to admit that you’re a worthless anti-Semitic piece of turd, but like the clock that has stopped and tells the time correctly twice a day, you’re right this time my friend. I too despise the Olympics, and even more I hate with a passion being brain-washed into believing that there’s something amiss with me because I do.

    I care not a hoot how many whatever have been injected into chunky little Chinese ladies so that they can lift two or three times their body wait for a few seconds after twenty years of torturous preparation. I am bored silly by 100 meter runners knocking thousandths of seconds from the previous record time and by flat-chested East European teenage girls who never knew the pleasures of childhood as it was determined long ago that their lives would be dedicated to bouncing around on mats.

    However, that is not the reason that the games should be boycotted, if they should, nor is the lack of respect for Jewish lives then or now. If the games warrant being boycotted, it is precisely for the reason that you wrote:

    “Tranquilising the masses with the trivial and irrelevant when the world is burning, distracting them from what really counts.”

    The world is not burning, but many Syrian civilians are and it is a disgrace that their slaughter will received less attention than a fat woman throwing a discus. Yesterday the Iranian foreign minister said that Israel was responsible for the current killings in Syria. That’s a lie, and the proof is that had Israel been responsible for one Syrian death, even by accident, the UN, the EEC the BBC and every other self respecting set of initials would be up in arms.

    Sadly, for the innocent children being murdered today in Haleb, Arabs killing Arabs just isn’t newsworthy. Thank G-d for the Syrian people that “someone” took away their nuclear capability – can you imagine?

    • Apart from the first sentence, I chuckled my way through most of that comment. Thanks for the incisive descriptions of so-called athletes displaying their neurotic egos and OCDs to the world in the obscene spectacle that warrants 30,000 security personnel.
      As an English teacher Daniel, I have a challenge for you. Can you spot the inadvertant homophone error in your comment? Oh and the spelling mistake in mine?

  25. What can one do when Danny ( when ever I meet a decent goy I am shocked and surprised ) Marks accuses someone else of racism? Just regard it as a confirming experience I suppose.

  26. Israel, settlements and international law

  27. Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations–Summer Trip Edition |

  28. Why not six shades of Zionism, Richard?
    Millett Zionism – sitting in one’s comfortable diaspora home while mindlessly blogging support of Israel right or wrong?

    • Or in your case, mindless hatred of Israel.

      • Nothing constructive to add then?

      • Hi Baruch,

        I don’t think that we know you, so welcome to this excellent blog. You have a fine name, I hope you do it justice.

        I read with interest your comments, which were basically a series of ad hominem attacks on Richard. You critize him for having the audacity to defend the policies of a democratically elected Israeli government that enjoys enormous support from the Israeli electorate.

        Since you have no practical alternative to those policies (of that same democratically elected government), you then proceed to attack Richard’s home for its location, and worse still for being “comfortable”, You then say that he for blogs in a mindless fashion, whatever that means. I suspect it may mean that you disagree with his opinions.

        Three comments later, you have still said nothing substantive and made no practical suggestions. It is a sad reflection on the Israeli Left that after their great years of founding a state, reviving the Hebrew language and turning malaria infested swamps to beautiful flower gardens so many of their descendants have become aimless beings whose identity is determined not by what they believe in and what they do – but by what they no longer believe in and their childish opposition to those who do do.

        As a child in the Betar youth movement (in London) our opponents would mock us and ask, “How many kibbutzim have you built?” My sadness regarding the children of those same people is not that they oppose every house in every settlement that we build, but that they have been unable to build a new kibbutz in 30 years. They once mocked us for not serving in the IDF, do I have to continue?

        So Baruch, before you go knocking Richard and his Zionism, why not tell us about yours? Regarding the policies of the democratically elected Israeli government, why not make another tinpot left-wing party yourself and show us who the Israeli people really support? That hasn’t gone too well for the Left in the past 35 years as the Israeli electorate have rejected their ideas time and time again, but you never know. That’s what elections are for.

        Finally, I join you in hoping that your comments not be deleted. In a democracy, t is important to hear monority voices too.

  29. If Carlsberg did blogs – undoubtedly the slogan wouldn’t read “probably the best blog in the world – unless you disagree, in which case your comments won’t get past moderation”.
    As Rich points out above – it seems that the truth isn’t welcome around here!

  30. Or (inspired by the title of this post) perhaps the strapline for this blog site should be changed to “The cowardly blog of Richard Millett” ?
    Seems to fit better than the Carlsberg analogy.

  31. Have you seen that Psychiatrist yet, Gamil?

    • I’m Gamil’s shrink. I think I could help you too Leah. You seem constantly enraged.

      • roger, have you gotten rid of the fleas that make your fur their home?

      • TGAIAI: your fear of and hostility towards our four-legged rodent friends is something I think I can help you with. Gradual desensitisation might do the trick. You know…exposure to what you fear most. Dismantling the irrational phobia with a reality check. Ring any bells? Once we’ve got the rodent issue out of the way, we can start on your other phobias.

      • Poor roger, You seem to be chained to your portrait which honestly identifies your heritage.

      • Roger,

        “The Prophet said;

        “A group of Israelites were lost. Nobody knows what they did. But I do not see them except that they were cursed and changed into rats, for if you put the milk of a she-camel (Leah) in front of a rat, it will not drink it, but if the milk of a sheep is put in front of it, it will drink it.” ”

        Bukhari 4.524: (narrated Abu Huraira)

      • I must admit I am prone to a sheep’s cheese quiche

    • Leah, we are saying, “The beginning of anger is madness and the end of it is regret.”

      All the best

    • Gamil, the Profit also said “Man who drives with hand on horn will come to sticky end, for that witch is upon him will return.”
      In other words, what the feck are you on about?