I just found this on the website of a political party here in Britain. If you agree with it, perhaps you should consider joining:
We will also withdraw all British troops with immediate effect from Iraq. We will never again involve British troops in any more American ‘wars for oil’ or neo-con adventures on behalf of the Zionist government of Israel.
Care to guess where this came from? Make your guesses in the comments, below.
11 Comments on "Against Zionism, neo-cons and US oil wars? This party’s for you"
Comments are closed.
I think it was Respect
I’m guessing Respect or Socialist Worker Party.
Is it the BNP?
Guess it’s the BNP
Bingo!
Respect would have felt obliged to say something about stopping the war and not attacking Iran
Respect, SWP, BNP ….
There’s not really a great deal of difference is there?
This is a demagogic trick that Harry’s Place does much better. The BNP opposes Israel because it is anti-Semitic. The SWP opposes Israel because it is anti-imperialist. It is not hard to make false amalgams of this sort. Jerry Falwell defends Israel, so does Eric Lee. Ergo, Falwell = Lee. For the purposes of political clarity, Mr. Lee would be better advised to explain why the left should support an apartheid state organized under the Star of David.
Omigod. I opposed the Iraq war and object to US and Israeli ‘adventures’. I must be a member of the BNP.
Eric, if I were you I would stick to your useful trade union campaigns …
Hey Louis Proyect let’s debunk a few Judeophobic myths here:
1) Israel is not an “apartheid” state having Arab citizens as well as Jewish ones.What it is though is a country who’s very existence is threatened by both the other states of the region and the considerable numbers of displaced Palestinians who’s needs and desires for statehood of their own must be addressed and were being addressed by Israel until the election of a Hamas Palestinian Government committed to the destruction of Israel and the murder of its Jewish inhabitants.
2) Israel is the only Jewish nation on earth, this one, relatively small, piece of largely desert planet is the only country in the world which is Jewish as opposed to the large number of Christian, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu ones. Why then, if not Judeophobia, have the left singled it out for special opprobrium, the only difference between Israel and many other countries being its’ Jewishness?
3) Most of the Palestinian land described by the left as being under Israeli “occupation” is also always described as having been captured by Israel during the 1967 Middle East War in such a way as to falsely suggest that that was a conflict initiated by the Jews in order to steal Muslim land. Apart from the basic antisemitism of the old blood libel of Jewish greed and theft what is never mentioned is that that war occurred when the Arab neighbours of Israel mounted a sudden surprise mass attack on the holiest day of the Jewish Year (Yom Kippur) in the expectation of catching the Jews at prayer and so succeeding in wiping Israel off the map.The result though was their severe defeat and the occupation of previously Arab land by Israel in order, as they saw it, to ward off the possibility of a repeat attack. Without the Arab attack there would have been no expansion of Israel into the “occupied territories”. That is always conveniently forgotten by the Jew haters.
4) It is impossible to divorce the type of criticism that is leveled at Israel by the hate based left, which is principally based upon the right of Israel to be a Jewish state, from plain old fashioned Jew Hating. The hypocrisy of those on the left who condemn Israel for having the temerity to exist and the cheek of wanting to continue to exist, labelling it Apartheid, whilst seeing no issue with the explicit racism and incitement to religious violence contained in the Koran and widely throughout the Islamic world removes from them any pretence of holding the moral highground as they wish to pretend they do.
Matt is wrong on at least one significant point. He confuses the 1967 and 1973 wars. In the former, when Israel wrested control of the West Bank, Gaza, Sinai, Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, it was Israel which took the military initiative, not the Arabs. It can be argued that this was a war of self-defense, as an Arab attack appeared to be imminent (and I accept this argument), but this was not as clear-cut a case of Arab aggression as the 1973 war. But his main point, historical errors notwithstanding, is valid: the occupied territories were occupied in a war of self-defense forced upon Israel in 1967. Does this mean that Israel should keep those territories and build settlements there? No, it does not. Israel should negotiate a full withdrawal to the 1967 borders with the Palestinians, and close down all its settlements. I think one can accept that Israel has historically been in the right on these matters and still favor a territorial compromise (withdrawal to the 1967 borders). This is what the left should be calling for, but often doesn’t.