“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” Abraham Lincoln

Clarkson, Thatcher and Rowan Laxton.

HP covers Rowan Laxton’s racist outbursts at a gym.

All in all it is a wonder that, so far, his remarks have received little to no coverage in the mainstream British press, outside of the Daily Mail and Torygraph.

If the racist remarks of a senior British diplomat are not news worthy, then what is?

Wrong type of racism? surely not?

Update: Pickled Politics has it too, the comments box is revealing, see if you can spot the Far Right loons (hint: look for the world ‘semite’)

Update 2: Hours later and little of the British media has picked up the story, via google news the key words Rowan Laxton comes back with 16 entries:

Atlantic Online,, Canada, Ha’aretz, Israel, Times Online, UK, Metro, UK, PRESS TV, Iran, FOXNews, Arutz Sheva, Israel, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, NY,Ynetnews, Israel,, UK, Jerusalem Post, Israel, This is London, UK ,Ha’aretz, Israel and, United Kingdom.

Update 3: Hours later and still little coverage in the media, but at HP one of the posters makes the astute comment:

“…If we start to excuse ‘casual’ racism we are embarking on a journey down a very slippery slope. Recent events – Carol Thatcher, Princes Philip and Harry etc. have shown that the media has no sympathy for ‘casual’ racism when it relates to other ethnic groups. Why should Jews be of any less concern to them? …”

Update 4: Hours later and, according to google news, only two other news outlets have picked it up: Londonist, UK and The Associated Press.

I assume that some D notice is functioning at the Beeb ?

Update 5: Searching the Guardian comes up with no article, only one comment on Cif by a poster on their whole site. The BBC has nothing but an old article on Mr. Laxton from his days in Afghanistan as British charge d’affaires.

Update 6: I shall make this post sticky (stay at the top of the blog) for a while, newer posts will initially come below it. Google news shows one more entry, but nothing major from the UK media. The story is doing the rounds of the blogs, on LiveLeak and Huffington Post but they toned down the reality of Mr. Laxton’s comments. I assume that such swearing is a bit of a no-no for Huffington?

Update 7: Meryl Yourish picks up on an interesting point “The case could not have come at a worse time for the Foreign Office. Next week, Britain is hosting an international summit on combating anti-Semitism, with politicians from 35 countries.”

Update 8:
There was a strong exchange of views in the comments box on this topic, which I let go, even though I found many of the arguments borderline racist. But what interested me was the venom which was aimed at “Zionists”. I couldn’t make out if the poster “Gazza” was really on the Left or Far Right.

Still his answer about “Khazas” gave the game away. See my previous post for the warning signs, For UCU Activists – How To Avoid Re-posting from Neo-Nazi, Ku Klux Klan or White Power Web Sites.

Comments now closed, I have had enough of the Fas. for a while.

Written by modernityblog

09/02/2009 at 15:29

Posted in Uncategorized

39 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. What is more newsworthy than the comments themselves is that this guy was arrested because of politically incorrect comments he made while watching news reports. These, I suppose, are the kind of freedoms the muslim world hates the west for? lol


    10/02/2009 at 00:20

  2. Tell that fucking cunt Rowan Laxton to come to visit me here in Louisville Kentucky – I shut his fucking stupid mouth for him. Fucking piece of cowardly shit.

    Neil Blumberg

    10/02/2009 at 00:54

  3. To #1 (Crystal:

    If I’m not mistaken, Crystal, religious hate-speech is not anyone’s “freedom” in your country, nor is it merely politically incorrect. Laxton’s outburst was not so much what the “Muslim World” hates you for as a great example of the manner by which (part of) that “Muslim World” hates you. If you can’t distinguish that, maybe you’ve got more in common with your intolerant conception of the Muslim World than you think.

    To #2 (Neil):

    Is that some sort of performative statement about the stupidity of hateful language?


    10/02/2009 at 01:02

  4. News worthy?

    well, a senior diplomat using racially offensive language in public, even after he was told to stop?

    it says something about his attitude, and given Laxton is a Foreign Office specialist on the Middle East, his bias and hatred is all too obvious

    that’s why?


    10/02/2009 at 01:07

  5. Careful modernityblog! You can’t just mean “racially offensive”. Laxton didn’t just use the N-word, nor did he use the C-word like Neil above. What he said was specific and hateful enough to be deemed to be inciting religious hatred *by the police*, which is a much bigger deal, not “politically incorrect” like # 1 suggests or # 2 enacts.

    Still no BBC coverage…?


    10/02/2009 at 01:22

  6. careful?

    saying “Fucking Jews” (on and on) in the context of Laxton’s professional position and HOW he did it counts as racially offensive


    10/02/2009 at 01:52

  7. Sorry, I guess the point is it’s not just offensive, it crosses a huge glaring line, says the police at the very least, that’s what I’m trying to point out to #1 as well.


    10/02/2009 at 01:57

  8. And of course we should mention his brilliant peace plan: to murder every conscripted Israeli teenager… And of course the classic slip between Israeli and Jew…

    Honestly, the more I think of it, the more #2’s words start to come to mind.

    How many hours and STILL no bbc coverage?… wtf are they waiting for?


    10/02/2009 at 02:06

  9. Good on Laxton, I have no problems with his “outburst”. What is billed as a “anti-semitic tirade” is just a natural reaction to watching the outrageous war-crimes perpetrated by the rascist Zionist state against Palestines’ indigenous peoples.

    Has anyone actualy considered that because he is a Middle East expert with the Foreign Office, his views carry greater weight than the brainless know-nothing pro-Zion nutjobs that seem to be springing up from under every rock? It appears that he knows the truth of the rascist apartheid entity called Israel, and feels a righteous anger that should be felt by any open-minded person.

    It is noteable that most Israelis are of AshkeNAZI background (ie Eastern Europeans who converted to Judaism in the 6th century), so they are not truly semites, unlike the Palestinians and true Levantine Jews who are the descendants of the Hebrew-speaking people of antiquity (an irony that is lost on 99% of the public). No doubt the rabid zio-fascists types will froth at the mouth over a lowly goy uttering the unspeakable truth, but do I sound like I care?

    BTW Neil Blumberg – your pathetic ape-like response marks you as a true Zionist. Agressive, violent and close-minded. Your views are irrelevant in an age ruled by law and reason.


    10/02/2009 at 03:55

  10. Neil, I am not quite sure how his words make him a coward.

    I have one question about this guy, is he a leftist who, himself, agrees with this kind of orweillen laws that toss people into prison for ‘hate speech’ That does not impact how I feel about the principle here, but I am just curious.
    And yes, to the person who responded to me, I do live in a country where people can make comments like these without being charged with a crime. Words like this would be met with ‘outrage’ however and the person would be penalized in other ways. Of course you can say anything you want about white gentiles or Christians and that will get you little more than a pat on the back from the tolerance crowd.


    10/02/2009 at 05:25

  11. I would agree that this guy has a bias that makes him unfit for his particular job. I would however say the same exact thing about people who have a pro Israel bias. In the united states, that pro Israeli bias is a must for political figures who have any hope of getting anywhere.


    10/02/2009 at 05:34

  12. Crystal, might I ask what very free country you hail from? I think UK laws on hate-speech are reasonable. Obviously we all have to draw a line somewhere or the other and there will be a grey area.

    That’s right about pro-Israel bias and American politicians. I’d say that’s because their constituents are racist, though. You probably think otherwise…. In any event, the politician who goes off on “the fucking muslims” will and should also be cast off here.

    Gazza: You are wrong. Most Israeli Jews are either 1) Arab Jews or 2) their descendants. — and those numbers don’t include a half-Arab like myself 😀

    (which half of me would you like to send back, Gazza? Keep in mind, I’m a lefty!)


    10/02/2009 at 07:12

  13. It is because a whole hell of a lot of jewish money funds both the Republican and the democratic parties and because of the influence of powerful and influental organizations like AIPAC. Former president Jimmy Carter has said that if a politician does not have the stamp of approval of AIPAC, that politician is done for. Needless to say, that is way too much power for an organization, that puts the interest of a foreign nation over the one they live in, to have. If I were to talk about these things in a way certain people did not like in one of those countries that have hate speech laws I could face some heat. Certain people would say such ideas are anti semitic, when they are in fact true. That begins to get at the reasons I have a problem with such laws. People hide behind them to shield themselves from legitimate criticisms. A person in a free nation should be able to say what is on their mind without fear of big brother throwing them in the slammer. Some western nations, these days are as obsessed with ideas about “tolerance” at all costs, even at the costs of personal freedoms, in the same way, for example, Muslims nations are in regards to shielding religion(Islam)from criticism.
    Imho, if a man can be arrested and charged with a crime for merely stating an angry opinion after watching a news program, freedoms are pretty non existent, or in serious jeopardy. There is a definite “big brother” feel to stuff like this.


    10/02/2009 at 09:30

  14. “A person in a free nation should be able to say what is on their mind without fear of big brother throwing them in the slammer.”

    Indeed. In America, if Laxton were charges at all it would be for “disorderly conduct,” as the content of his tirade is protected by the Constitution. His job, as an officer of his nation’s diplomacy, is not. He should be fired so he can establish himself in his appropriate station as a columnist for The Guardian.


    10/02/2009 at 10:16

  15. From the legal perspective, freedom of speech offers no immunity to the offence defined by s.5 Public Order Act 1986, use of threatening words or behaviour. An offence which can be religiously or racially aggravated by virtue of s.28 Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

    This is very reassuring that people around him at London Business School did not let go neither on the spot nor later when his status was revealed, that is Deputy Head of the South Asia Group, Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

    London Business School seems to be one of the few decent institutions in the country.

    London Business School

    10/02/2009 at 14:03

  16. What I’m saying, Crystal, is that you’re conflating his “angry opinion” with what reasonable people saw at the time as incitement of violence. There’s a reason clan marches are banned…

    And here we go with “Jewish money”. What bullshit. If you think they’re “in fact true” you’re twice over an idiot, the second time for being certain about something you have no experience of.


    10/02/2009 at 15:45

  17. strange… the whole world can say “fucking yankees” or “fucking frenchies”, nothing happens…. say one bad word about jews and you risk 7 years of jail…what a shame!

    daniel f.

    10/02/2009 at 19:33

  18. And here we go with “Jewish money”. What bullshit. If you think they’re “in fact true” you’re twice over an idiot, the second time for being certain about something you have no experience of.

    Comment by Oren — Tuesday, 10 February, 2009 @ 3:45 pm

    Oren, you are the idiot. Who in his right mind would try to deny the reality of the political power of the Jewish lobbies? It was sickening to watch Obama prostrating himself in front of AIPAC and delivering a fawning & obsequious declaration of loyalty to the Zionist cause. There was no doubt as to who was the nigger and who was the master.


    10/02/2009 at 22:52

  19. Oren, you should let go of this notion that ignorant=politically incorrect. Here is part of an article from 1997

    And even though American Jews represent just about 2 percent of the American population, their political largesse has made them central to the money system that drives national politics.

    I recall reading a much more recent article on the same subject, I will find that one for you also.

    What is ignorant is basing all of your opinions in regards to jews on what jewish organizations declare to be off limits, anti semitic type thinking.


    10/02/2009 at 23:32

  20. Oren, why do you suppose it was during the last election that candidates from both the republican and democratic parties viewed the jewish vote as so important. Their population numbers alone should make them insignificant. They are not, though, because that 2% of the population has a whole lot of money and pull.


    10/02/2009 at 23:35

  21. A summary of pro-Israel campaign donations for the period of 1990 – 2008 collected by Center for Responsive Politics indicates current totals and a general increase in proportional donations to the Republican party since 1996.[15] The Washington Post summarized earlier, 1990-2006, data and concluded that “Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990.”[16] In contrast, Arab-Americans and Muslim PACs contributed slightly less than $800,000 during the same (1990-2006) period.[17]

    JJ Goldberg wrote in his 1994 book Jewish Power that 45% of the Democratic Party’s fundraising and 25% of that for the Republican Party came from Jewish-funded Political Action Committees.[18] Richard Cohen, a columnist for the Washington Post, updated those figures in 2006 citing figures of 60% and 35% respectively for the Democratic and Republican Parties. According to the Washington Post, Democratic presidential candidates depend on Jewish sources for 60% of money from private sources.[19]


    11/02/2009 at 00:27

  22. out of curiosity, what OTHER lobby groups exist in the US?

    and what are the details of their funding/donations?


    11/02/2009 at 03:02

  23. Crystal, you’re moving between Jewish donations Jewish lobby groups and pro-Israel groups in those figures. Who is conflating Jews and the pro-Israel movement now? Yeah, Jews are politically active and donate a lot of money too — what does that have to do with pro-Israel groups?

    And let’s just saying calling you ignorant was giving you the benefit of the doubt. There are a lot of worse words people can use for that kind of data manipulation. Being offensive and inciting violence are two different ballgames.

    To quote: “What is ignorant is basing all of your opinions in regards to jews on what jewish organizations declare to be off limits, anti semitic type thinking.”

    I don’t even know how to read that statement. “You can’t base an opinion off of something declared… antisemitic”? You must mean “NOT basing my opinions off of what they declare off limits. ”

    Well, I don’t even know what they declare off limits. I’m not sure who “jewish groups” even are, and I doubt I’ve ever read anything by “them”. I would say we can all agree that conflating Israeli groups and Jewish groups, and over-emphasizing the importance of Jews and Jewish money is antisemitic, but I think you’re the only person who’s been doing that here, right?

    I quote you: “Democratic presidential candidates depend on Jewish sources for 60% of money from private sources.” — you used Jewish money as evidence of Israel bias… yup, your words not mine. Personally, my $5 went to Obama for a new food policy regarding corn subsidies.

    By the way, 45 million dollars over 18 years? You’ve got to be kidding me, that’s 2.5 million a year! That won’t buy you squatter’s rights on K-street! I’m sure there’s more to it than that… Did you forget a 0?


    11/02/2009 at 06:24

  24. Crystal, pay no attention to Oren’s ramblings. He is attempting to deny the obvious (and failing) and then using the age-old jewish trick of equating critism with “anti-semitism” in an attempt to silence dissent. Just ignore him, and hopefully he’ll just run of of steam.

    Oren, you state that “I’m not sure who “jewish groups” even are, and I doubt I’ve ever read anything by “them”.” You are joking right? Try the following pro-israel lobby groups and jewish-funded/dominated “think-tanks” for size:

    AIPAC (grand-daddy of them all), Washington Institute for Near East Policy, American Enterprise Institute AEI, Hudson Institute, Heritage Foundation, Stand for Israel, Political Action Committee(PAC),Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, Center for Security Policy, Foreign Policy Research Institute, American Jewish Congress, Israel On Campus Coalition, Anti-Defamation League ADL, Zionist Organization of America, Union of Progressive Zionists

    Enough for you? Some like the Union of Progressive Zionists seem to have a mostly benign agenda, while others like AIPAC have hands literally soaked in blood. This constellation of single-minded organised Jewry is relentless in using jewish money to corrupt US politics and silence dissent against the rascist and apartheid Israeli oppressor. It is because of these groups that US goverment policy has become so disastrously skewed to serve Zionist ambitions.

    Jimmy Carter summarises the corrupting influence nicely:

    “The many controversial issues concerning Palestine and the path to peace for Israel are intensely debated among Israelis and throughout other nations – but not in the United States. For the last 30 years, I have witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts. This reluctance to criticize any policies of the Israeli government is because of the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the American-Israel Political Action Committee and the absence of any significant contrary voices. […] What is even more difficult to comprehend is why the editorial pages of the major newspapers and magazines in the United States exercise similar self-restraint, quite contrary to private assessments expressed quite forcefully by their correspondents in the Holy Land.”

    Mr Carter, the man who brought Egypt to Camp David and secured a peace treaty that lasts to this day, is derided by the Jewish lobbyists as biased and an “anti-semite” because he has the courgae to look the Beast in the eye, and give it its true name.


    11/02/2009 at 07:24

  25. which Beast is that, Gazza?


    11/02/2009 at 22:06

  26. Oren, I think you didn’t really give crystal the benefit of the doubt – although otherwise I admire your patience. On the question of Jewish control of Washington (I think they like to call it ZOG?) here’s an interesting from Christopher Hitchens that briefly reviews what is a much more subtle relationship than that described by Merscheimer or anyone here. And Hitchens is hardly an Israel apologist.

    Crystal –and anyone else curious whether the Jewish 2% controls DC, take a look: and there are plenty other place you can look without going into Israel apologist publications, like The nation Magazine, that shine a light on the creepy assertions about Jewish Power.

    Daniel f. if your analogy is specious and if you seriously think that an undersecretary of Middle Eastern affairs could say that the “fucking Arabs should be wiped off the face of the earth,” and not get the boot, you’re crazy.

    And Gazza – well, it would be a bigger stretch than Crystal’s case to give you any befit of the doubt… and not cloud your paranoia with reality but here’s a link that shows who runs the AEI
    and here’s the Hoover institute:
    and it would take too much patience to pluck through he rest of your racist post… Oren maybe? seriously Gazza, if you think Jews would name an institution after Herbert Hoover, I own a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you. And here’s the upside: you get to charge Jews for commuting!

    danny b.

    11/02/2009 at 23:46

  27. Danny B,

    Firstly, I’m not sure why you refer to the Hoover Institute, as I certainly have not. Any issues I have with this organisation is due to its conservative nature, rather than any (non-existant) Zionist proclivities.

    As for AEI, this den of vipers is blatantly neoconservative in its outlook, and is well stocked with “Israel-first” types. AEI is not outwardly Jewish, but is ideologically aligned to the Zionist cause as it draws much of its support from religious conservatives and christian fundamentalists.

    Finally, you claim my post is rascist? What rubbish. Again, we see the Zionists use the cry of racism to silence their critics. I may be staunchly anti-Zionist, but that is because I recognise that Zionism is yet another form of insidious racial supremacy, little different to fascism. Zionists claim that Jews are “Gods Chosen People”. Zionists claim Jews have been awarded sole custody of a patch of land for perpetuity and they refuse to recognise the rights of other indigenous peoples. Zionists claim the right to oppress, dispossess, harass, victimise, loot and murder others in blatant disregard of international law or world opinion. Zionists, in their rage that their victims should dare to resist, launch unprovoked assaults and slaughter innocents by the thousands….

    Damnit, I could quote the litany of the crimes committed by the Zionists till my fingers bled, and yet there still will be legions of mendacious Zionist stooges who will continue to defend this arrogant, criminal nation. Your efforts will ultimately be for naught however. In the not too distant future, the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan river will have an Arab majority, and the Occupied Territories will be so fragmented that the Two State Solution will be unfeasible. As Israels leaders are now realising (and lamenting) they face two stark choices – remain a democracy and abandon the idea of a jewish dominated state, or embrace apartheid. The latter is unacceptable to the rest of the planet, and Israel would be doomed were it to go down this path. The former means the defeat of Zionism and the end of the fascist dream.

    I admit, I will be cracking a big bottle of champagne when that day comes. I can see the headlines now…

    “Israeli public approves referendum to rename state as Palestine – dominant arab parties rejoice”

    Read it and weep…


    12/02/2009 at 01:18

  28. You’re right. You didn’t say Hoover Institute. I apologize.

    You did say Heritage foundation. Their major financing is not from a Jewish banker, but rather Richard Mellon Scaife. Can you get less Jewish than a Mellon Scaife? There may be some Jews in the org., but for a think tank, its hardly Jewish. (Here’s the link: — there’s even an Arab and a member of a family with an anti-Semitic pedigree, the Coors. )

    If you list organizations that are critical of Israel you can find a lot of Jews too by the way. Whether it’s The Human Rights Watch, JPAC, Amnesty International, PSR, Tikkun Olam, etc. And perhaps the 60 million or so born again Christians have an influence on a pro-Israel tilt. Or maybe many politicians sincerely think America should have a tight relationship with Israel and not be too tight with fundamentalist Hamas – and presuming this is impossible without a Jewish cabal pulling strings is sounding rather bizarre.

    Please don’t be confused, I do NOT think you are racist because you disagree with Israel. That would be silly. Here’s some actual reasons:

    Your strident defense of someone who says “Jews should be wiped off the face of the earth” – I mean if you “don’t have a problem with that,” maybe you shouldn’t have a problem with being called a racist. Your pre-victimization whining with remarks like calling yourself a “lowly goy” as if that were either really an epithet said or felt towards you, or relevant to anything you were saying is suspicious. Using the term AshkeNAZI and buying into the whole Khazar thingee (btw, until the Russian immigration of the last few years there was not a majority of the Jews you find ironic. ) Your use of the term “Jewish lobbies” until you backtrack in your last post and talk of “neocons” and “pro-Israel tilt.” Your calling non-Jewish foundations Jewish funded and dominated…

    …Those are the reasons I call you a racist. You do sane critics of Israel a disservice.

    Personally I don’t think the Washington is doing Israel any good by supporting its violent and self-Destructive actions and encouraging its lack of meaningful dialogue with Palestinians. But racists who spread conspiracy theories aren’t doing the Palestinians any more good than fundamentalist Christians who push for a Greater Israel agenda are doing.

    Regarding cracking open that bottle of Champaign when Israel resigns itself to becoming part of the Sharia loving Hamas majority – I wouldn’t hold your breath. On second thought, feel free.

    danny b.

    12/02/2009 at 02:07

  29. I am letting this dialogue continue, because I am genuinely curious at some of the thinking, which seems to be “I am not a racist, just anti-Zionist, and look how much control Jews have in the US, ops I meant ‘Zionists'”

    because ANYONE remotely educated or familiar with pre-WW2 Europe will remember those similar arguments, that Jews monopolise whole professions and try to control governments,

    So what I am asking is, why do you EXCLUDE the existence of OTHER lobbies from consideration?

    and why do these argument have such a historical ring to them?

    btw, I still haven’t got an answer to my question concerning this comment “has the courgae to look the Beast in the eye, “

    who’s the Beast, Gazza?


    12/02/2009 at 03:05

  30. danny b., Gazza is right — I’m not patient enough to pluck through all of that. On Carter, I would say his own statement is pretty hilarious — he assumes that AIPAC is successful in stymie-ing debate in DC, but then wonders why the rest of the country’s editorial pages are also unfair. Well I think Carter should take my advice: when everyone seems to be acting absurdly and unfairly, you’re either wrong, or there is some serious ideological work at play.

    I’m not sure which one he should assume, but I will say that I think the real reason Americans are so one-sided is ideology: specifically, racism.

    Gazza, most Americans would look at your screen name and immediately discount anything you say! Why? Cause Americans really, really don’t like anything that sounds dark or Arab and they identify with groups they perceive as more white (shh, don’t tell them half of Israelis are from the Arab world). They won’t *ever* give you the benefit of the doubt. This is the ideological reason why Americans are overwhelmingly and unquestioningly in support of Israel no matter what it does. It’s not pretty, but that’s the real reason.

    In case you want a counterfactual to PROVE this is not “Jewish Influence”. You can find this unanimity on some other issues too. For example, Americans HATE Russia. Their unwavering support of the questionable and probably in-the-wrong Georgian regime is pretty ideologically driven.

    Other than that, Gazza, you still haven’t explained to me what half of me you’ll send back, the Right or the Left. You may have a harder time with my brother’s daughters who you will need to quarter 🙂

    Crystal, I apologize for not giving you the benefit of the doubt, as danny b. says. I stand by my criticism of your conflation of jewish groups, jewish donations and AIPAC. And no I don’t think I’ve ever read anything produced by AIPAC or a pro-Israeli organization (although of course I read both pro and anti zionist blogs. To my knowledge non are affiliated… or is that how they get you!?).

    Good talking to you all!


    12/02/2009 at 03:17

  31. who’s the Beast, Gazza?

    Comment by modernityblog — Thursday, 12 February, 2009 @ 3:05 am

    You mean this is not a rhetorical question? Could have fooled me…

    The Beast is a multiheaded creature called Zionism – arrogance, inhumanity, cruelty, self-delusion, brutality etc all the dark aspects of the human pysche. As Nazism possessed these things in excess, so do the victims of Nazism now display the same traits. Not to the same extent, that much is clear, but it is really only a question of degree. There are no extermination camps like Sobibor, but Gaza is truly a larger version of the Warsaw Ghetto. Israel has bottled up 1.5 million people and subjected them to extreme deprivation, denying them free access to lifes essentials (food, medicine, travel) and has mercilessly crushed the Gazan economy with the blockade (a functioning society requires more than just blankets and bread). Like the Nazis, when the inmates rebelled, the jailers pour death and destruction on them, both resistance fighter and civilian alike.

    For those who refuse to accept the ghetto analogy, consider this: If China walled off Lhasa in Tibet and subjected that population to the same treatment, there would be unprecedented outrage worldwide. US politician would be fighting amongst themselves for camera-time to pound the pulpit and decry Chinese brutality. Military assault against the city resulting in deaths of hundreds would be condemned and rightly called a crime. Why therefore, not Israel?


    12/02/2009 at 04:19

  32. danny b. — Thursday, 12 February, 2009 @ 2:07 am

    “And perhaps the 60 million or so born again Christians have an influence on a pro-Israel tilt”

    Yep, you hit the nail on the head there. Christian nutjobs fantisize about the “End Times” when all the Jews are supposed to convert to Christianity. Talk about delusional! Wonder what the Rabbis think of that!

    “Those are the reasons I call you a racist”

    Those are not reasons, they are excuses.

    1) Rowan Laxton AFAIK didnt say anything of the sort. In a fit of rage over the latest Zionist crimes, he said that the IDF should be wiped out. Is this any worse than calling for Hamas to be wiped out? In any event, this outburst was due to rage more than anything else.

    2) Ashkenazi jews ARE descended from the Khazar peoples, regardless of the noisy smokescreen thrown up by Zionists. I have no doubt that over the centuries their bloodlines have mixed with true semitic jews, but this doesn’t change the basic fact. Zionists still deny that Judaism in the first few centuries AD had a strong missonary zeal, probably because this would be an admission that the jewish diaspora is not the result of a scattering of the hebrew-speaking people across the globe, but more from the spread of the religion. This accounts for the obvious ethic diversity of Jews, as it does for Christians. Noone claims Christians are semitic peoples just because the religion saw its genesis in the Holy Land, yet Zionist jews make this very connection and declare it as evident truth. They invoke the so-called (non existant) Exodus to explain the diaspora, while the most obvious explanation is treated as heresey.

    3) Jewish lobbies, neocons etc how to describe them? Thats semantics. Read Walt and Mearsheimer. Why do you expect me to summarise their work wihin a few sentances?

    4) “racists who spread conspiracy theories?” Not-guilty on both counts. Jewish influence on US politics is not a conspiracy theory. Its a fact, and judging by his speech to AIPAC, Obama knows it too.

    5) “Sharia loving Hamas majority”? Not all Islamic organisations advocate Sharia. Hamas is in this category. BTW I guess the Israeli & US governments now regret their early support of Hamas, you remember when the PLO were the terrorists and the Islamist factions were supposed to undermine them? Talk about blowback! Your bravado regarding Israels future is comical, and full of hot air. The South African apartheid regime was also defiant, until its number was up. The Africaaners weathered the transition quite well, so it’ll be interesting to see how the Zionists and hardline religious orthodox fare. My guess is their road will be a little bumpy.


    12/02/2009 at 04:58

  33. ahh Gazza, gotcha:

    “Ashkenazi jews ARE descended from the Khazar peoples,”

    bingo, that’s your politics, the extreme right. nuff said.

    case closed.


    12/02/2009 at 05:01

  34. Fine, live in denial if you wish. Console yourself with dodgy genetic research with subjective conclusions matching pre-conceived outcomes. Its all bogus, and ultimately pointless.

    Israel is an artificial entity, built on a false history and is a doomed experiment.

    Actually, i’m a leftist, always have been. So you are wrong on that count too.

    BTW, my nick is Gazza, as in Gary, not a mis-spelling of Israels’ southern gulag.

    [Editor’s note: you really haven’t got a clue, have you? genes? Khaza? all Far Right guff.

    Check it out scan the Aryan Nation sites, you’ll find that your venom is made from the same as theirs, good bye.]


    12/02/2009 at 05:12

  35. Gazza,

    1. No , I don’t think it’s any worse than calling for Hamas to be wiped off the face of the earth. Hamas was elected by the Palestinians, has a broad base of support and calling for it to be wiped off the face of the earth would be calling for mass murder.

    2. Regarding the Khazars, you put it best yourself: “Fine, live in denial if you wish. Console yourself with dodgy genetic research with subjective conclusions matching pre-conceived outcomes. Its all bogus, and ultimately pointless.” Bogus because the finality, despite you choice of capitalization, is ridiculous. The debate is far from conclusive. Pointless because, well what did you mean? Was it that the blood connection is really pointless? Yes. Good point.

    3. In your scrambled logic “proving’ undue Jewish influence of American affairs you confuse Jewish groups, Jewish neocons, non-Jewish neocons, and non neo-con conservatives. Not that racists conspiracies need to sound rational – but couldn’t you try a little harder? Walt and Mercheimer are sloppy (and not racist) but even in their sloppiness they are better argued. So no, don’t try to explain them. You may want to read this bit from Chrstoppher Hitchens who is a frequent cirtic of Israe but takes exception toe W&M overly simple approach:

    4. Regarding whether you’re a rascit I think I’ve made myself clear. Regarding Obama as proof – is there really a need to rely on a conspiracy to explain a politician’s posturing? On the one hand he is inherently pro-Israel for many reasons having nothing to do with need Jewish money that I’m sure you’re aware of, and he’s in front of the Israel lobby. You think he’d tell anti-Irish jokes at the TS. Patrick’s day parade? Or talk about improving ties with Castro in Florida? He’s a politician.

    5. Not all Islamic groups support Sharia – I agree. That’s why I mentioned Hamas – the elected government of the Palestinians. Here’s the thing, in South Africa Mandela went out of his way to tell his followers, who had plenty to be angry about, that they needed to see the world through their oppressors eyes too. To understand them. To understand their fears. And to accept them. The leaders of Hamas talk about Jews as being sons of apes and pigs and throwing Jews into the sea. They more open minded ones support Sharia which would make the Jews into dhimmis – second class citizens, fine for the 12th century, not so hot today. But if you want to hold your breath for the Palestinian Mandela be my guest.

    It’s nice to see that as an avowed leftist you find much to share with realists Walt and Mersheimer. Anti-semitism can makes friends of enemies. Soemthing extreme left and right can break bread over. (Not to say that W & M are anti-Semitic, but you can run across their stuff, and for that matter Khazar tropes, on plenty extreme sites on the left and right.)

    Anyway, I’m on my way to an Elders of Zion meeting and I have to pick up salami and mustard on the way. Fuck! I misplaced Obama’s Blackberry number! Have a good night!

    danny b.

    12/02/2009 at 08:25

  36. Left, Left, Left, Right, Left. Sounds like a fascist army beat if you ask me.


    12/02/2009 at 08:30

  37. For the record, and for danny b. and modernityblog’s sake, I should mention the Wiki on W&M’s book has a nice partial list of criticisms including notable anti-Zionists who are very anti the book, including Noam Chomsky and Benny Morris, both of whom find the arguments misleading and wrong (and cre-epy).

    Joseph Massad is also on there as a critic, as well as a list of others and, of course, a host of criticisms from people with Khazar names like “Goldberg”, which I’m sure will not interest people Gazza!


    12/02/2009 at 08:53

  38. I should add that fascists have long used critical Jewish authors as a bolster for their weak arguments, bu as I said, Gents,

    This thread is CLOSED.


    12/02/2009 at 15:25

  39. […] with an intimate knowledge of the subject, such as Engage or other anti-fascist organisations, as some Foreign Office officials don’t have a particularly good record in this […]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: