“In fact, Sephardi Jews — or “Arab Jews” — are far closer to Palestinians than Ashkenazi Jews, who are largely Khazarians.”The interviewer, unfamiliar with the standard cant of the anti-Semite, fails to challenge Atzmon.
So I must do so in his stead.
Why, it’s fair to ask, does Gilad Atzmon, a self-described intellectual whose knowledge of history we are supposed to be inspired by, instead spread an anti-Semitic cock-and-bull story?
And why is Indymedia UK helping him do so?
To be clear: spreading the “Ashkenazi means Khazar” lie is not, taken independently and in isolation, sufficient grounds to conclude that Atzmon is an anti-Semite, rather than simply just another shambolic scholar fooled into not only embracing but (more embarrassingly) spreading a classic antiSemitic fiction.
The most that can be said,when this is taken in isolation, is that it’s obviously best to be quite wary when accepting Atzmonite “history” and that one might be justified in wondering whether the rest of it is also recycled anti-Semitic cant.
But I hasten to point out that this is only one chip in what turns out to be, on examination, a rather tall stack. As the chips accumulate, other ad hoc explanations become increasingly untenable, until for all but the most willfully self-blinkered. the most reasonable conclusion will be: yes, Gilad Atzmon is an antiSemite, and yes, Indymedia UK should indeed no-platform him.
No comments:
Post a Comment