“I am not sure that the world is not still too selfish to appreciate the worth of the merits of Zionist aims.—The world is certainly too anti-Semitic and too suspicious of Jewish brains and money. In any case, I find myself alone out here, among gentiles, in upholding Zionism—And that is the irony of the whole situation, for I am also imbued with anti-Semitic feelings—-” [Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen]
In fact, Meinertzhagen’s actions on behalf of the Jewish people were exemplary, even extending to an open outcry against Churchill over the creation of Transjordan
Now, Weisberg’s blog, which is described as a “featured post” titled “Natan Sharansky, Un-Hero” has as introduction, “How can someone of such inspirational courage, wit and humanity label those seeking to advance full equality between Jews and Palestinians as Un-Jews?” He is referring to a paper which appeared in Tablet under the heading, “The Un-Jews” by Natan Sharansky and Gil Troy.
Is it our purpose in life to advance full equality between Jews and Palestinians? It is in the case of all Israeli citizens, be they Jews, Christians, Mohammedans, and any other ethnic groups who qualify.
Are we to sanctify those who have a charter which to this day rejects the Balfour Declaration and encourages armed struggle which manifests itself in daily riots? But this is academic, since the subject paper is about American Jewish behavior towards Israel. It is not speculation that around 70% of American Jews are assimilated. In other words, they are technically Jewish by virtue of having Jewish mothers, while nothing in their daily lives embraces Jewishness. Dennis Prager refers to them as non-Jewish Jews and non-American Americans. Would Weisberg consider this equally offensive?
Beyond the name calling, the given piece appears to be one of how to react to an enemy. Famed psychiatrist, Dr. Kevin Levin, has written extensively on this topic. Writing for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs on July 2, 2006 on “The Psychology of Populations under Chronic Siege”, he summarizes:
* The phenomena of Diaspora Jews embracing as truth the indictments of Jew- haters has been so commonplace that a literature on the subject emerged under the rubric “Jewish self-hatred.” A similar predilection evolved in Israel, particularly among the nation’s cultural elites, in the context of the Arab siege.
* Segments of populations under chronic siege commonly embrace the indictments of the besiegers, however bigoted and outrageous. They hope that by doing so and reforming accordingly, they can assuage the hostility of their tormenters and win relief. This has been an element of the Jewish response to anti-Semitism throughout the history of the Diaspora.
* The paradigm on the level of individual psychology is the psychodynamics of abused children, who almost invariably blame themselves for their predicament, ascribe it to their being “bad”, and nurture fantasies that by being “good” they can mollify their abusers and end the torment.
* The rhetoric of the Israel Peace Movement, its distortions of Arab aims and actions, and its indictments of Israel likewise reflected the psychological impact of chronic besiegement. The Oslo process that the Peace Movement spawned entailed policies grounded in wishful thinking and self-delusion analogous to that of abused children. Israel’s national institutions – political, educational, academic, cultural, and media-related – need to help arm the nation against the allures of Oslo-era delusions, if the Oslo debacle is not to be repeated.
Essayist Aharon Megged observed in 1994, “We have observed witnessed—-an emotional and moral identification by the majority of Israel’s intelligentsia, and its print and electronic media, with people commixed to our annihilation.”
Dr Levin reminds us that on the night of the famous “peace” ceremony on the White House lawn during September 1993, Arafat appeared on Jordanian TV and addressed “Palestinians” and the Arab world pointing to an understanding of Oslo as the 1st phase of the Plan of the Plan of Phases, where diplomacy would supplant militancy. And yet in July 1994 until May 1996 and the fall of the Labor-Meretz government which had choreographed Oslo, over 150 individuals were murdered in terror attacks targeting Israel. The losses exceeded that of any previous 22 month period in the nation’s history. Yet Israel responded with further concessions resulting in the Oslo 2 agreement in the fall of1995.
Because of its repetitiveness among Jews, Levin questions whether the given aberration of self-hatred is a specific Jewish malady. It remains known as the “Stockholm Syndrome”. In a Jerusalem Post Mar.4 2004 Op-Ed entitled. “A Jewish Plague”, Kenneth Levin demonstrates how this sickness is far new and very much alive today.
He brings to mind a few cases. The 13th century French convert Nicholas Donan and 16th century Nuremberg apostate Josef Pfefferkorn were familiar with the burning of Jewish books and promoting more severe restrictions on Jews. In the wave of forced conversions that swept Spain in 1391 with much loss of life, one of those who converted was Solomon Halevi, chief rabbi of Burgos. Wealthy and well-connected, Halevi could likely have resisted with some sacrifice of his status and wealth, but preserving his life. He instead became Paul of Burgos and used his connections to rise ultimately to bishop of that city.
The subject Paul used his status in the Church and his political clout to relentless attacks on Spain’s remaining Jews. With the culmination of his authorship of Castilian proclamations in 1412, the Jews were virtually deprived of any means of supporting themselves, confronting them once again with the choice of conversion or death; and triggering a 2nd wave of mass conversion.
Levin works his way through Karl Marx to Mordechai Vanunu ,whose family originated in Morocco. His engagement in treason is very rare in Israel; apparently motivated by Israel’s besiegement, he also converted to Christianity.
Interestingly, Dr. Levin draws attention to Natan Sharansky, who had been addressing the global upsurge of anti- Semitism and suggested that anti-Israel is a form of it. Indeed, this does not differ from the words of the late Martin Luther King. As Sharansky explains, demonizing the Jewish State, or applying to it standards different from those by which others are measured is clearly anti-Semitic.
What’s in a name? How does the word “Un-Jew” differ from “Self-hating Jew”? Would Ori Weisberg be as angered by the words in Dennis Prager’s, “Bernie Sanders, the non-Jewish Jew and non-American American ” which appeared in National Review of June7, 2016? Prager explains the term “non-Jewish Jew” is not his, but generally attributed to a Jewish historian, Isaac Deutcher, who wrote an essay by that name in 1954. The term describes individuals who, though being born Jewish, identify as citizens of the world rather than as Jews, either nationally or religiously [Judaism consists of a national and people hood identity, not only a religious one].
What, for example, do Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Noam Chomsky, and George Soros have in common? They were [or are] all radicals, were born to Jewish parents, had [or have] no Jewish identity, and do harm to both Jews and non-Jews.
In 1920, when Trotsky was head of the Red Army, Moscow’s chief rabbi, Rabbi Jacob Maze , asked Trotsky to use the army to protect the Jews from pogroms, Trotsky reportedly responded:”Why do you come to me? I am not a Jew.” To which, Rabbi Mazeh answered:” That’s the tragedy. It’s the Trotskys who make revolutions, and it’s the Bronsteins who pay the price.
George Soros, a born Jew, became a radical world citizen, alienated from America and his Jewish origins, and who damages both. Martin Peretz, former editor and publisher of The New Republic, described him in these words:
” George Soros is ostentatiously indifferent to his own Jewishness. He is not a believer. He has no Jewish communal ties. he certainly isn’t a Zionist. He told Connie Bruck in The New Yorker – testily, she recounted – that “I don’t deny the Jews their right to a national existence but I don’t want to be part of it.”
People with no national or religious roots who become politically active, frequently seek to undermine the national and religious identities of others, especially those in their own national and religious group. In the case of Sanders, that means Jewish and American identities.
Soros supports Palestinian nationalism. A consistent feature of radicals is that anti-Jewish and anti-American nationalisms are good, while Jewish and American nationalisms are bad.
As Prager so astutely notes, the radical non-Jewish Jew and radical non-American American love humanity, but they hurt real humans, especially Jews and Americans.
The American Spectator published “On Jews- Haters and Haters of Jews “by Rabbi Dov Fischer on April 24, 2021
As a high-stakes litigation attorney for more than 25 years and an adjunct professor of law of more than 15 years, and a rabbi of Young Israel of Orange County, California, he is well qualified to have authored the subject paper. His interlocutory paragraph is absolutely germane to demand full readership of the paper.
“The Talmud tells in Tractate in Pesachim 49b that, as bad as non-Jewish anti-Semitism can get, no one hates Jews of authenticity as deeply and severely as do other Jews who are outside the pale of Judaic knowledge. With this week’s annual J Street Conference, a hate feast aimed at tearing down the foundational core of the authentic Israel that two-thirds of its population democratically supports, we see how true the Talmud’s sad observation is: No one – truly no one – hates as many Jews as deeply as do Jews of the Left. Of course, it is a sickness.”
Extracting a few gems:
 In as much as a Jew, by definition of 3,000 years, only a person born to a Jewish mother or converted to Judaism according to normative Judaic law, let it be understood that whole swaths of the jStreet membership are not even Jews.
 George Soros has been exposed for having been a major funder of J Street.
 For a week J Street has vied to hurt Israel in every imaginable way within its limited capacity. It urges massive American funding for Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] and his anti-Israel apparatus that rewards terrorists and their families with lifelong generous stipends for murder: Pay to Slay. Even more than that, J Street gives its very platform to Abbas, a lifelong Jew-hater whose doctoral dissertation denied the Holocaust and who, to this day, never has compromised one inch on his absurd territorial demands or demands that Israel allow millions of Arabs to enter the country to replace the Jewish majority.
Another day they provide a platform for two of the most viciously anti-Israel haters in the United States Senate, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Year after year, Warren of Massachusetts is on hand at J Street to attack Israel. Sanders is so deep a hater of the Israeli polity that he is endorsed openly and regularly by unabashed Jew-haters like Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Linda Sarsour. They endorsed him for president.
 There are 325,000 Jews living in East Jerusalem and 475,000 more Jews living elsewhere throughout Judea and Samaria. It is absolutely impossible to uproot 800,000 Jews from their homes. Yes, Yamit’s 2,500 could be uprooted from the Sinai in 1982. Later, Israel reached its maximum expulsion capacity when Ariel Sharon expelled 8,600 Jews from Gush Katif in Gaza in 2005 but still had not completely relocated them in new homes and jobs a decade later. An expulsion of 800,000 Jews now to accommodate Arafat’s political descendants — 100 times the Gush Katif expulsion
As for my fellow TOI Blogger Ori Weisberg’s concerns about “Palestinians”, Victor Sharpe regards them as counterfeit. From Arutz 7: “There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, no such thing as a Palestinian language exists. There has never been any independent, sovereign Palestinian state in all of recorded history.
The Arabs who call themselves Palestinians are indistinguishable from those Arabs who live in the surrounding states such as Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia or the other entities throughout the Middle East created by the colonial powers, France and Britain. Both powers were victorious after the Ottoman Turkish Empire lay defeated at end of World War1.