Israeli Nazi Calls For Genocide

Israel’s actions go well beyond spin. If we were to call them what they truly are, the words crimes against humanity, apartheid and genocide would be in every story written, not just in the last few weeks, but since the establishment of Israel. Michael Ratner, the president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights

Anti-Semitism is the stick of choice wielded by those determined to beat down any critique premised on parallels between the war crimes of Israel and those of Nazi Germany. The term "Nazi", applied outside of its historical location, when not bestowed on those who are open about their Nazism in the post Hitler era is a comparative one. It is not chosen for its analytical exactitude. It is a deeply emotive term often applied for ethical strategic reasons, meant to invoke powerful moral inhibitors against the type of activity the Nazis were renowned for: massacring civilians, destroying infrastructure, slaughtering children inter alia.

Jewish people in general would for historical and cultural reasons resile from the term being used to describe anything associated with Jewishness and presumably the Jewish state in Israel. It would be wholly remiss to apply it to the actions of Jewish people as a mere smear, lacking in any substance, designed to hurt as distinct from imposing some sort of clarity on matters. It seems there is an acuity vacuum in serious need of being filled if the gluttonous narcissist Rachel Weinstein is in any way representative of wider Jewish opinion.

Reading her self-indulgent scrawl it is hard to dissociate her utter indifference to human misery from that of Himmler when he said:

Most of you know what it means when 100 bodies lie side by side, or when 500 or a 1,000 lie there. To have stuck it out – apart from exceptions caused by human weakness – and to have remained decent, that has made us tough.

The cookie wielding Weinstein remained tough, and carried on gorging herself on Hershey's Syrup and M & Ms to the words ‘They tried to kill us, we won, LET’S EAT!’

Callous indifference to the deaths of thousands is a necessary but, on its own, an insufficient condition of a Nazi-like genocidal perspective. A crucial plank of Nazism – one reason it is so reviled and feared – is the eliminationsist-cum-genocidal ethos that it embraced. When people advocate genocide it is normal for their critics to compare them with Nazis. Hutu Power in Rwanda and its main architect Theoneste Bagosara have frequently been compared to the Nazis because of their genocidal ideology and practice. For this reason being Jewish does not immunise one against being a carrier of a strain of the Nazi virus. Jewish people who advocate genocide merit the Nazi comparison and no amount of special pleading, privilege or circumstance should allow them to evade it. In a bid to deflect the criticism they will smear, censor, marginalise and ostracise. Those who think the parallel is valid should not acquiesce in egregious attempts to shut them up.

Not that advocating genocide is a national pastime in Israel. Many citizens of the country, even when they agree with the war on Gaza and support the war crimes would nevertheless find themselves appalled at the suggestion that a final solution of the Palestinian question is to be found along similar lines as finalised rather than devised at the Wannsee conference in 1942. As with every political project it would be wrong to look at its most extreme component and suggest it is representative of the whole. Yet:

Genocide is a crime many shy away from in describing the actions of Israel against Palestinians, but the current and historical record arguably make that term appropriate. There are two parts to genocide: the intent to kill all or part of a specific national, ethnic, racial, or religious group and the actual acts of doing so. It has been argued that Israel and its leaders do not have the intent to destroy “part” of the Palestinian people, but the record proves otherwise. From the thousands killed in the 1947-48 expulsions to the killings in refugee camps such as Jenin and Sabra Shatilla, to the thousands killed in Gaza in the last month, Israel’s leaders have shown an alarming willingness to kill large portions of the Palestinian populations … an “incremental genocide,” according to renowned Israeli writer Ilan Pappé.

On the opening day of this month The Times of Israel featured a blog by Yochanan Gordon. The Times later pulled it on the grounds that it was not policy to check blogs and it allowed a large measure of freedom. Perhaps. Although it is hard to escape the thought that a neo Nazi blogger advocating the gassing of Jewish kids in Tel Aviv would never have seen the light of day. The suspicion has to be that the blogger’s post got through because of whom he was advocating genocide against and because what he said did not seem so out of place with much of the sentiment floating around Israeli circles in recent years. The case of Ayelet Shaked has already been cited on this blog but it is not an isolated one. In 2008 the then Israeli deputy defence minister,

Matan Vilnai advocated Holocaust against the Palestinians.

In his piece, titled When Genocide is Permissible Yochanan Gordon argued:

The sad reality is that Israel gets it, but its hands are being tied by world leaders … But there’s going to have to come a time where Israel feels threatened enough where it has no other choice but to defy international warnings – because this is life or death. What other way then is there to deal with an enemy of this nature other than obliterate them completely? … If political leaders and military experts determine that the only way to achieve its goal of sustaining quiet is through genocide is it then permissible to achieve those responsible goals?

Yochanan Gordon is an Israeli Nazi and it is not anti-Semitic to say so. It is Holocaust Denial to state otherwise.