…by Jonas E. Alexis
Ideologue Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, whose work we have examined in a previous article, declared that Israel over the years has maintained “a robust and vibrant democracy,” and that the Arabs should look up to Israel in order to free themselves from the shackles of undemocratic government.
There is no doubt that Goldhagen knows what he is doing, because scholars of various stripes have shown him the utter silliness of many of his sophomoric arguments. In fact, after much reflection on Goldhagen’s writing, Norman Finkelstein actually called him “the Holocaust industry poster boy.”
Goldhagen knows he is deceiving readers into thinking that Israel is a democratic country. Goldhagen knows that the actual historical account shows that Israel does not even come close to having a vibrant democracy.
Yet the Holocaust industry poster boy continues to perpetuate this fabrication precisely because Zionism cannot work without deliberate fabrications and colossal hoaxes.
What, then, is the actual account? What has the nation of Israel done to the Palestinains over the decades? It is perhaps high time to dispel this “vibrant democracy” myth.
The establishment of Israel in 1948 was a sort of “survival of the fittest” process: thousands upon thousands of Palestinians had to be systematically uprooted, slaughtered, and deported from their homes. Christians in the region suffered as well.
Even David Ben-Gurion, the first prime minister of Israel, conceived the point that injustice had been done to the Palestinians, when he told Nahum Goldmann, president of the World Jewish Congress, that
“If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs.
“We come from Israel, it’s true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Asuchwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?”
“In fact, from the beginning, a sense of urgency gave the first Zionists the profound conviction that the task of reconquering the country had a solid moral basis. The argument of the Jews’ historical right to the land was merely a matter of politics and propaganda.”
He moves on to say that “Whereas the conquests of 1949 were an essential condition for the founding of Israel, the attempt to retain the conquests of 1967 had a strong flavor of imperial expansion.” Moreover, “None of the major leaders of the labor movement believed that the Palestinians deserved the same rights” as the Jews.
Judaizers and Zionists draw the ridiculous conclusions that Israel was outnumbered since its beginning in 1948, and yet they won. The simple fact is that the same Judaizers never define what they mean by “outnumbered.”
Let us take for granted the argument that Israel was outnumbered. The Israeli soldiers were well-trained, while the Arab soldiers were “remarkably ineffective at translating…latent resources into actual military power, while Israel, by contrast, has been especially good at doing so.”
Yigal Yadin, a senior military chief during the war and the IDF’s second chief of staff, believed that “if it had not been for the British presence in Palestine until May 1948, ‘we could have quelled the Arab riot in one month.’”
Therefore, it is not irrational to posit that the 1948 war was in many ways literal ethnic cleansing, and some Jewish historians have made this exact argument. Theodor Hertzl, founder of the Zionist movement, noted in 1895 that “Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor [Palestinians] must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”
Joseph Weitz, director of the Jewish National Fund, likewise declared at the dawn of the twentieth century, “It must be clear that there is no room for both peoples in this country…There is no room for compromise on the point!…We must no leave a single village, not a single tribe.” Similarly, David Ben-Gurion once again declared, “We will expel the Arabs and take their place.”
Recently, Jewish writer Daniel Gordis has made the irresponsible argument that “Accounts of what actually occurred [during the Deir Yassin massacre] are still hotly contested….[Yehuda] Lapidot [Begin’s advisor and fried], continued to insist that there had been no deliberate massacre and the Arabs had resisted much more fiercely than anyone had anticipated.”
Gordis’ book has received positive accolades from Ari Shavit, author of My Promised Land; Yossi Klein Halevi, author of Like Dreamers; Dennis Ross of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy; and more importantly thought-police Deborah Lipstadt.
Lipbstadt has built almost her entire career going after those who (she claims) try to deny the Holocaust, but now Lipstadt is approving a book denying the Deir Yassin massacre, which was a form of ethnic cleansing.
David Irving can be placed behind bars for asking important questions about Nazi Germany, but denying the Deir Yassin massacre is intellectually honest. Lipstadt even called Jimmy Carter’s book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid a “soft-core [of Holocaust] denial.” Lipstadt even went to great length attacking people like Bishop Williamson. It must be noted that Williamson chastises liberals, conservatives, and even Catholics.
Yet as soon as he opened his mouth making an assertion with respect to the Holocaust, all of a sudden he is a wicked person. Lipstadt wrote no less than 18 short articles on the poor Bishop. Lipstadt even cut the Vatican right open for reinstating Williamson, saying things like the Vatican “has made itself look like it is living in the darkest of ages.”
In other words, to be historically virtuous, one has to deny Jewish ethnic cleansing and admit Goyim ethnic cleansing. Moreover, to even probe an important question or posit a historically satisfying assertion about Nazi Germany—as Irving has done—is not academically permissible. If you value your career more than truth and historical honesty, you’ve got to succumb to the Zionist narrative.
What we are seeing here is the Jewish takeover of academia and historical discourse. And what do Catholic universities such as the University of Notre Dame do in response? They invited Lipstadt to beat them over the head Holocaust denial.
Before she began her speech, Lipstadt was already introduced as a person who “may have helped the Vatican see the light” through her “scholarly” blogging. As E. Michael Jones rightly put it a few years ago,
“Holocaust denial is another word for Jewish control of discourse, in particular historical discourse about World War II. A historian who publishes something a powerful Jew, which is to say a Jew with powerful backers, dislikes, that person will be punished.
“If the person in question lives by writing books, as David Irving once did, the Lipstadt brigade will get him blacklisted in the publishing industry. If the person in question is a professor, the big Jews will try to get him fired, as Deborah Lipstadt herself did in the case of Professor David O’Connell…
“More typical is the case of Norman Kinkelstein, who was fired from his job at DePaul University in Chicago. The fact that Finkelstein was a Jew himself doesn’t matter. It’s the big Jews, in this case Alan Dershowitz, who decide who is to live and who is to die in academe and publishing.”
Enough of Lipstadt. Now let us return to our topic.
Israeli writer and “the official historian of the IDF Paratroopers” Uri Milstein has tried mightily to advance the idea that the Deir Yassin massacre was also a myth back in 2012.
Gordis and Milstein’s books are infallible signs that we are in the presence of flesh-and-blood ideologues hopelessly attempting to rewrite history in order to drag the masses into the Zionist narrative. Even Israeli/Zionist historian Benny Morris, quoting Yitzhak Levy, wrote,
“The conquest of the village was carried out with great cruelty. Whole families—women, old people, children—were killed….Some of the prisoners moved to places of detention, including women and children, were murdered viciously by their captors….
“IZL troops had ‘raped a number of girls and murdered them afterwards…’ The IZL and LHI troopers systematically pillaged the village and stripped the inhabitants of jewelry and money. Altogether, 100-120 villages (including combatants) died that day…Most of the villages either fled or were trucked through West Jerusalem and dumped at Musrara, outside the Old City walls.”
Let us reject Gordis’ desperate attempt to rewrite the Zionist holocaust in Palestine once and for all.
It is estimated that “more than half of Palestine’s native population, close to 800,000 people, had been uprooted, 531 villages had been destroyed, and eleven urban neighborhoods emptied of their inhabitants.” The 1948 plan, writes Jewish historian Ilan Pappe, “was a clear-cut case of an ethnic cleansing operation, regarded under international law today as a crime against humanity.”
Other Jewish historians such as Avi Shlaim estimated that the number of Palestinians who have been uprooted from their homes is close to 730,000. Benny Morris conceives the point that the 1948 expulsion of the Palestinians was cruel and atrocious.
Palestinian Christians also suffered greatly during that time. Many of those Christians were separated from their families. Jewish historian Roberta Strauss Feuerlicht estimated that there were about 900,000 Arabs in Palestine; when the dust was settled, 750,000 of those Arabs fled or were largely expelled from the land.
Incidentally, this was a Zionist policy from start to finish. David Ben Gurion wrote,
“We must do everything in our power to ensure that they never return.” He also declared, “We will expel the Arabs and take their places…with the forces at our disposal.” Feuerlicht goes on to say,
“An Israeli censorship board prohibited former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin from including in his memoirs an account of how 50,000 Palestinian civilians were forcibly expelled from two towns near Tel Aviv during the War of Independence in 1948. Rabin said the decision was Ben Gurion’s. Many elderly Arabs and Arab children died of the heat during a forced march to Arab lines.”
“We came to this country which was already populated by Arabs, and we are establishing a Hebrew, that is a Jewish state here…Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages…There is not one place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”
Vladimer (also known as Ze’ev) Jabotinsky, a founding father of right-wing Zionism, introduced the concept of “The Iron Wall” in 1923, which had for its premise that
“all colonization must continue in defiance of the weill of the native population. Therefore, it can continue and develop only under the shield of force which comprises an Iron Wall through which the local population can never break through. To the hackneyed reproach that this point of view is unethical, I answer, ‘absolutely untrue.’ This is our ethic. There is no other ethic.”
After the war, several branches of Zionism began to blossom in new waves such as socialism and communism. A brand new Zionist movement that had its roots during the 1967 Six-Day War was Messianic Zionism, which espoused views such as Arabs are certainly the Amalekites who must be expunged.
We see the same sort of ethnic cleansing through the years. Even the IDF confessed during the Gaza invasion that
“the lives of Palestinians, let’s say, is something very, very less important than the lives of our soldiers…You see people more or less running their life routine, taking a walk, stuff like that. Definitely not terrorists.
“I hear from other crews that they fired at people there. Tried to kill them… People didn’t seem to be too upset about taking human lives…We were allowed to do anything we wanted. Who’s to tell us not to?…You are allowed to do anything you want…for no reason other than it’s cool.”
In the midst of this shameful situation, Lawrence Wright of the New Yorker declared that “the Israeli military adopted painstaking efforts to spare civilian lives in Gaza.” In the same vein, the legendary Alan Dershowitz told us that
“Hamas knew that Israel would never fire at a home with civilians in it. They also knew that if Israeli authorities did not learn there were civilians in the house and fired on it, Hamas would win a public relations victory by displaying the dead. Israel held its fire. The Hamas rockets that were protected by the human shields were then used against Israeli civilians.”
As Norman Finkelstein has shown, the evidence and authorities to which Dershowitz appeal gives a completely different account. In the end, it was a cheap way for Israel to propagate deception about their crimes in Gaza. But no one can actually say Israeli propaganda is just plain propaganda because that may lead to severe consequences.
When the reputable Jewish judge and member of the Human Rights Council Richard Goldstone condemned Israel’s violent actions in the Gaza war, he was immediately labeled as a sell-out and a self-hating Jew, even though he had said publicly that there were victims on both sides and that his deep love for Israel forced him to investigate the issue clearly and concisely.
Goldstone is South-African, and the Jewish organization threatened to disrupt his grandson’s bar mitzvah in Johannesburg if he dared to show up. Alan Dershowitz called Goldtone a “despicable human being,” “an evil, evil man,” “a traitor to the Jewish people,” and the United Nation’s “token court Jew.”
Benjamin Netanyahu likewise declared, “We face three major strategic challenges: the Iranian nuclear program, rockets aimed at our civilians and Goldstone.”
Goldstone was suddenly removed from the Hebrew University’s Board of Govenors, although the university denied that it was related to his report on Israel.
Goldstone later recanted, declaring that “if I had known then what I know now,” he would not have condemned the Israelis for their acts. As John Dugard of the University of Pretoria has shown, Goldstone recanted not because there were verifiable evidence, but because he becan to rely on IDF sources. The Jewish publication Forward declared that Goldstone was completely shaken after a meeting with leading Jewish organizations in South Africa, and that had a huge impact on his later report.
“Debating face to face with the [Jewish] community really shook him,” wrote David Sacks, associate director of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies. The Jewish leaders of course pronounced their anger against Golstone, and that indeed played a pivotal role in his new position.
Sacks continues to say that the Jewish organizations “went in very hard against him.” After one particular meeting with a Jewish group, “There were no smiling handshakes afterwards. Avrom [Krengel]’s opening statement was pretty merciless.” Several members of the United Nations also accused Goldstone of yielding to outside forces and pressure.
It is generally viewed that “several friends cited what they viewed as the cumulative toll of a stream of calumny hurled at the famously unemotional jurist.”
Letty Cottin Pogrebin, a friend of Goldstone, declared, “It has been like watching an innocent man whipped at the stake. His dedication to Israel is so strong and rooted. He suffered at the thought that his work was being used to delegitimize Israel. It truly wounded and pained him.”
“According to these friends, Goldstone didn’t fully understand how politically charged any criticism of Israel could be, and was blindsided by the anger and emotion the report engendered.”
Surely he did not understand. As the Jewish Telegraphic Agency tells us, many Jewish lawyers sued Goldstone, saying that “The Goldstone Report is nothing less than a modern version of the infamous blood libels against the Jewish people.”
Put simply, the Zionists were ethnically slaughtering the Palestinians in 1948, and that Talmudic process has never died out over the past few decades. The Times of Israel has recently reported that “The European Union is willing to provide financial compensation for Palestinian refugees and their descendants who renounce their ‘right of return’ in a final peace deal with Israel…”
Does that make any sense at all? What if some other ethnic groups are willing to provide financial compensation to members of the European Union and their descendants if they renounce their land of birth? Will they be able to accept that challenge? If not, why in the world are they treating decent Palestinian refugees like animals in an Israeli lab experiment? Why the double standard?
No doubt that some Israeli academics such as Neve Gordon, who served as a member of the Israel peace camp for almost thirty years, would refer to the Israel today as “an apartheid state.”
More recently, Jewish scholar Richard Falk, formerly of Princeton, came to the same conclusion, saying that Israel carried out
“systematic and continued effort to change the ethnic composition of East Jerusalem…[Israel’s policies are] unacceptable characteristics of colonialism, apartheid and ethnic cleansing.
“What is called occupation is now more widely understood to be a form of annexation, the embodiment of apartheid in the sense that there’s a discriminatory dual system of law, giving legal protection to the Israeli settlers and subjecting the Palestinian population under occupation to a continuing existence without rights.
“Every increment of enlarging the settlements or every incident of house demolition is a way of worsening the situation confronting the Palestinian people and reducing what prospects they might have as the outcome of supposed peace negotiations.”
Amos Schocken, owner and publisher of Haaretz, declared the same thing, that Israel is an apartheid state.
Gordon would agree with Pappe and other Israeli historians that the 1948 war was indeed ethnic cleansing. Moreover, since the 1940s, at least one particular Israeli group, Fighters for the Freedom of Israel (commonly known as Lehi) viewed themselves “as a master race and the Arabs as a slave race.”
This ethnic cleansing of course continues today, and dozens of former Israeli soldiers are coming out saying that they have indeed mistreated the Palestinians. One of the invidivuals who recognized this in the twentieth century is the Russian Jewish thinker Ahad Ha’am.
After visiting Palestine in 1891, Ha’am began to take the Arab-Israeli issues seriously, and subsequently wrote that the Israelis treated the Arabs unfairly and
“shamefully and without reason and even brag about it, and nobody stands to check this contemptible and dangerous tendency.”
This is again another reason Jewish historians such as Arno J. Mayer would conclude that “Zionism was born out of violence…” David Ben-Gurion made it clear in October of 1937:
“We must expel Arabs and take their places…and, if we have to use force—not to dispossess the Arabs of the negeve and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places—then we have force at our disposal.”
When many Arabs were forced to leave their homes, Chaim Weizmann, Israel’s first president who was very instrumental in the Zionist movement, called it
“a miraculous clearing of the land: the miraculous simplification of Israel’s task.”
These statements were of course repeated in one way or another by Jewish terrorists, including Meir Kahane who in 1971 declared,
“In two years time, [the Arabs]…will come to me, bow to me, lick my feet, and I will be merciful and allow them to leave. Whoever does not will be slaughtered.”
We saw a resurgence of this attitude during the decades after the creation of the nation of Israel, where Talmudic scholars would cite passages from the Talmud saying that God made a mistake in creating the Ismaelites, and Gentiles are “a people like a donkey.”
The Jerusalem Post reported that Ariel Sharon “urged Israeli soldiers to beat Arab schoolchildren in the West Bank.” It was also reported that Sharon gave instructions to “cut of their testicles,” because “the only good Arab is a dead Arab.”
In the process, General Hartabi took his troops in a Hebron school and clubbed Palestinian students. The Palestinians retaliated by throwing a stone at Hartabi’s car. In return, Hartabi terrified the area by ordering his troops to fire in the street and to cut the hot water supply.
This is the true history of Zionism in the Middle East. And when you see the Zionist regime in Israel and America saying that Putin had violated international law in Crimea, you can be sure that you are in the presence of an evil ideology which must be expunged once and for all. After all, American-born Chabad rabbi Yaakov Bleich is already in Ukraine with others saying that Ukraine ought to adopt the American way of pluralism. In other words, Ukraine has to adopt the zionification of America.
Thinking that Putin is completely blind and has no background in history, the Zionist ends up sending him an ultimatum indirectly saying, “Do as I say, not as I do.” As Peter Hitchens of the Daily Mail right points out, it never occurs to those “silly, half-educated politicians” that
“Russia has good historical reasons to fear its neighbours. It never crosses their mind that the borders drawn by the victorious West in 1992, like those drawn at Versailles in 1919, are an unsustainable, unjust mistake.
“They never ask why Britain (or the USA) should be hostile to Russia, or what the quarrel between us actually is. What is it to us whose flag flies over Sevastopol? Yet it matters greatly to those who live there. They cast every Russian action as evil, and every Ukrainian action as saintly.”
As it turns out, those politicians and the people behind the media know what they are doing. For example, suppose some renowned political mush-head and psychotic actually come out and declare,
“This is really beyond all boundaries. It’s about time we grab our guns and kill go kill those damn Israelis together with their leader, because they have stolen Palestinian lands and are now indirectly controlling America. There would be no fu$king way that they would still more lands and control much of the world. [There is] a way to kill those assholes.”
You can be sure that the media would play this record over and over so that they would beat just about everyone over the head with it. Yet this was actually what Yulia Tymoshenko has said about Russia and Putin. Do you really think that the media, the neocons, and the Zionists will let Americans know any time soon? Will they spread the word? You be the judge.
Kudos for Jim W. Dean, who broke the story here at VT!
Lasha Darkmoon pointed out a few weeks ago,
“It was Putin, after all, who had brought the seven crooked Russian oligarchs to book, six of them Jewish; and it was also Putin who managed to claw back much of the plundered wealth that these financial predators had filched from the Soviet Union after its dissolution in 1991…
“It’s therefore in the interests of billionaire oligarchs like Akhmetov and corrupt politicians like Jewess Yulia Tymoshenko — with her crooked business dealings with Semyon Moglievich, head of the Jewish Russian mafia — that Ukraine’s richer region, the Crimea, should remain within full reach of its future expectant plunderers.
“It is to be noted that the glamorous Yulia, with her pretty face and sexy hairstyle, has long been the darling of the Western media. Having become Ukraine’s first Prime Minister in January 2005 and Ukraine’s third richest woman, according to Forbes magazine, Yulia subsequently spent time behind bars on serious corruption charges. There are now plans afoot to make this former jailbird Prime Minister of Ukraine again.”
Darkmoon moved on to declare that Tymoshenko has “close links to the Jewish Russian mafia.”
If that is true, then Tymoshenko has every reason to declare that she longs to put a bullet into Putin’s head. Didn’t they butcher the Tsar family at the dawn of the Bolshevik Revolution? Why should we doubt that they will not try to do it again?
 Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, “Arabs Should Take Cue from Israel,” Jewish Daily Forward, December 12, 2011.
 See for example Albert S. Lindemann, Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); Norman Finkelstein and Ruth Bettina Burn, A Nation on Trial: The Goldhagen Thesis and Historical Truth (New York: Holt, 1998); David Rieff, “The Willing Misinterpreter,” National Interest, October 28, 2009.
 Norman Finkelstein, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History (Berkley: University of California Press, 2008), xxi.
 For a recent development, see for example Shira Robinson, Citizen Strangers: Palestinians and the Birth of Israel’s Liberal Settler State (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2013).
 See for example Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (Oxford: One World, 2007), 180-183.
 Quoted in John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007), 96.
 Zeev Sternhell, The Founding Myths of Israel (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 338.
 Ibid., 336.
 Dave Hunt, Countdown to the Second Coming, 32.
 Mearsheimer and Walt., 81, 82.
 See for example Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (Oxford: One World Publications, 2006). Israeli historian Benny Morris has made similar arguments; see Norman Finkelstein, Beyond Chutzpah, 5, 14.
 Quoted Roberta Strauss Feuerlicht, The Fate of the Jews: A People Torn Between Israeli Power and Jewish Ethics (New York: Times Books, 1983), 242.
 Ibid., 243.
 Quoted in Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, xxiii.
 Daniel Gordis, Menachem Begin: The Battle for Israel’s Soul (New York: Schocken Books, 2014), 75.
 Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth (New York: Penguin, 1994).
 Quoted in Johnny Paul, “Holocaust Scholar Warns of New ‘Soft-Core Denial,’” Jerusalem Post, February 6, 2007.
 For a much extensive discussion on this, see Jones, Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, 1000-1005.
 See E. Michael Jones, “Holocaust Denial and Thought Control: Deborah Lipstadt at Notre Dame University,” Culture Wars, May 2009.
 E. Michael Jones, L’Affaire Williamson: The Catholic Church and Holocaust Denial (South Bend: Fidelity Press, no date).
 Uri Milstein, The Birth of the Palestinian Nation: The Myth of the Deir Yassin Massacre (Springfield, NJ: Gefen Books, 2012).
 Benny Morris, 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 127.
 Pappe, Ethnic Cleansing, xiii.
 Avi Shalim, Israel and Palestine (New York: Verso, 2009), 54.
 Ibid., 55.
 Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code, xxiv.
 Feuerlicht, 243.
 Quoted Baylis Thomas, The Dark Side of Zionism: Israel’s Quest for Security through Dominance (New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009), 19.
 Feuerlicht, 243.
 Ibid., 245.
 Quoted in Baylis Thomas, The Dark Side of Zionism, 17.
 Stephen Sizer, Christian Zionism, 18.
 Quoted in Norman Finkelstein, This Time We Went Too Far: Truth and Consequences of the Gaza Invasion (New York: OR Books, 2010), 88.
 Ibid., 88-89.
 Alan Dershowitz, “Israel’s Policy is Perfectly ‘Proportionate,’” The Wall Street Journal, January 2, 2009.
 Finkelstein, This Time, 86-88.
 See for example Roger Cohen, “The Goldstone Chronicles,” The New York Times, April 7, 2011.
 Chris McGreal, “Goldstone Family Drawn into Row over Gaza Report,” The Guardian, April 30, 2010; Barry Bearak, “South African Judge May Be Kept from Grandson’s Bar Mitzvah,” The New York Times, April 16, 2010.
 McGreal, “Goldstone Family Drawn into Row over Gaza Report.”
 Bearak, “South African Judge May Be Kept from Grandson’s Bar Mitzvah.”
 Abe Selig, “Goldstone Stripped of Honorary Hebruew U Governorship,” The Jerusalem Post, June 5, 2010.
 Natasha Mozgovaya, “Goldstone Affirms our Position that Israel did Not Commit War Crimes in Gaza, U.S. Says,” Haaretz, April 5, 2011.
 John Dugard, “Where Now for the Goldstone Report?,” Newstatemen.com, April 6, 2011.
 Larry Cohler-Esses, Gal Beckerman and Claudia Braude, “Did a Private Meeting Prompt Goldstone to Change His Mind?,” Forward, April 6, 2011.
 Ethan Bronner, “Colleagues Rebuke Gaza Report’s Author,” The New York Times, April 14, 2011; Ed Pilkington, “UN Gaza Report Co-Authors Round on Goldstone,” The Guardian, April 14, 2011.
 Cohler-Esses, Beckeman and Braude, “Did a Private Meeting Prompt Goldstone to Change His Mind?.”
 “Prodded by Danon, U.S. Lawyers Set to Sue Goldstone,” The Jewish Telegraphic Agency, April 7, 2011.
 Neve Gordon, “Boycott Israel,” Lost Angeles Times, August 20, 2009.
 Quoted in Umberto Bacchi, “Israel Guilty of Ethnic Cleansing and Apartheid, Says UN Rapporteur,” International Business Times, March 21, 2014.
 Robert W. Merry, “An Israeli Issues a Dissent over Alleged ‘Apartheid,’” National Interest, November 30, 2011.
 Neve Gordon, Israel’s Occupation (Berkley: The University of California Press, 2008), xix.
 Sasha Polakow-Suransky, The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa (New York: Pantheon Books, 2010), 107.
 See for example Harriet Sherwood, “Former Israeli Soldiers Break the Silence on Military Violation,” Guardian, May 16, 2011.
 Shlaim, Israel and Palestine, 56.
 Arno J. Mayer, Plowshares into Swords: From Zionism to Israel (New York: Verso, 2008), 7.
 Quoted in Shalaim, Israel and Palestine, 58.
 Ibid., 59.
 Quoted in Carig Unger, The Fall of the House of Bush: The Untold Story of How a Band of True Believers Seized the Executive Branch, Started the Iraq War, and Still Imperils America’s Future (New York: Scribner, 2007), 134.
 Ibid., 136.
 Ibid., 134.
 Quoted in Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle (MA: South End Press, 1999), 124.
 Quoted in ibid., 129.
 Ibid., 129.
 Ibid., 129.
Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.