Why it’s impossible to take the Free Gaza movement seriously but dangerous not to do so

I once saw a police procedural (I think Hill Street Blues) where a cop outlined the anatomy of any crime thus: means, opportunity, motive (or, as I like to say, MOM). All three elements are needed for the successful perpetration of an offense. I’d like to turn your attention to two examples in Ferguson, Missouri of what I consider offenses, and mess with the order slightly because while I can spot the means and opportunity of these distortions I am still struggling with the motive.

First Case:

Opportunity

The Michael Brown shooting by police officer Darryl Wilson is the latest strain at the seams of racial tension in the USA. An innocent unarmed 18 year old black man, his hands aloft, is pumped with six rounds of lead for being near the scene of a crime. The shame, outrage and concern is justified.

Means

A group of protesters wishing to make a statement block the entrance to a government building and are arrested. Among them is Hedy Epstein, a 90 year old activist with the added credentials of being a holocaust survivor (more accurately she was rescued by the kindertransport) and a Free Gaza advocate.

The Offense

On Naomi Wolf’s status, the lead into the link to the story:

“90 year old Holocaust survivor arrested in Ferguson. For peaceful protest. Is it a coincidence that she is a vocal member of the Free Gaza movement?”

Note there is no mention even of Michael Brown. Naomi Wolf pretends to be simply applauding a soul sister. In reality she’s throwing a bone thick with Israel-as-Evil fat for her minions to gnaw, as a browse through the frenzied talkback reveals.

Consequence

Blissful affirmation of the Terrible Truth about Israel – Not only is it devoid of conscience, but its own conscience has abandoned it (in the form of Hedy and Naomi).

Second Case

Opportunity – as above

Means – police use force, including teargas and rubber bullets to disperse the angry mob who are protesting what happened to Michael Brown.

The Offense

Rhania Khalek writes an op-ed decrying indirect but clear Israeli involvement in the oppression of yet another disenfranchised unjustly treated population, from which I quote:

“Former St. Louis Police Department police chief Joseph Mokwa is listed as having traveled to Israel as part of a LEEP (Law Enforcement Exchange Program) conference in February 2008. Following nationwide outrage and embarrassment, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon pulled St. Louis County Police forces out of Ferguson and placed the Missouri Highway Patrol in charge of policing demonstrators. The St. Louis Police Department voluntarily removed its officers from Ferguson. As a result, Ferguson no longer looks like occupied territory…”

As outlandish as this claim is, note that the county police chief who is supposedly trained in and enforcing Israeli oppression policy and tactics is not even active!

The Consequence

The Terrible Truth about Israel is revealed. A Machiavellian sect systematically bringing the world to its knees, including, but certainly not limited to, the good people of Ferguson, Missouri.

The Motive

As I said, this is the part I need your help with: why why why?

Why would people choose to skewer Israel and add to the canard of antisemitic claims ? Is it because we killed Jesus and didn’t recognise him as the Messiah, then desecrated the host? Because we have a long and proud tradition of killing innocent children and drinking their blood, most recently as perfected in our operations in Gaza? Because we are trying to corrupt the world with pornography and Judensau-like beastiality, a world we control anyway because of our grip on the banks and the media? Is it because we are responsible for all wars and calamities inflicted on humanity? Or is it simply because we are a racist, rootless bunch of cowards, slavers and organ harvesters?

As Michael Curtis has pointed out in the same reference, no other group of people in the world (and here he means Jews and not Israelis) has been charged simultaneously with:

alienation from society and cosmopolitanism; being isolationists and intermingling with other people; being capitalist exploiters and agents of international finance, and also revolutionary marxists; having a materialistic mentality and being people of the Book; acting as militant aggressors, and being cowardly pacifists; adhering to a superstitious religion and being agents of secularism; upholding a rigid law while also being morally decadent;being a chosen people, and having an inferior human nature;being both arrogant and timid; emphasizing individualism and yet upholding communal adherence; being guilty of the crucifixion of Christ, and blamed for the invention of Christianity.

Curtis points out that this catalogue of contradictory accusations cannot possibly be true and no single people could feasibly have such a total monopoly on evil.

Or can we?