Zionists will do almost anything to avoid debating the one and only issue. The behaviour of and the nature of the Israeli state. It is of course easier to accuse someone of ‘antisemitism’ than to defend gunning down children or bombing clinics. The pity is that some people believe them.
Being emotional, using the holocaust is a favourite tactic of course. Who can forget that young Jewish girl who wept crocodile tears when confronting Norman Finkelstein. Finkelstein called her fakery out for what it is, which he was able to do so as he knows something about it.
For example with the recent gunning down of 62
Palestinians in Gaza Israel’s only defence is that most of them are members of
Hamas. Well so what if they were? Would they therefore accept that the gunning
down of 62 members of Likud was
acceptable if they were not in military fatigues?
The other argument, which is not taken
seriously, is that if they had broken through the border (i.e. the walls of the
prison) then their very presence in Israel would have been threatening. Leaving aside that Israel is unique in the
world in having no borders just how would unarmed Palestinians pose any sort of
Of course they did pose what Israel says is an
‘existentialist’ threat – the very idea of a Return to Israel of the Palestinians
is one of the 7 horrors of the world!
I’m reprinting this because it is useful
for those times, like student meetings,
when people do get into debate with Zionists.
I have often spoke at for example student union general meetings as a
guest speaker. Apart from the fact that
there were usually attempts to prevent me speaking (all of which failed) on
grounds of anti-Semitism, I cannot remember a single time when I lost the
debate. Why? Because when it comes down to it the Zionists
don’t have an argument.
That is why the stress is on being emotional,
on asking people not to take ‘sides’ (as if the Palestinian ‘side’ is
equivalent to the Israeli ‘side’) bring in the bogy of ‘anti-Semitism’ etc.
In other words it is a model guide on how to deceive people
talking points: Avoid the facts and claim victimhood
The following talking
points were distributed on UC Berkeley’s campus in
the days leading up to last night’s debate over divestment. Several
sources on Berkeley’s campus have confirmed that they had seen them on campus,
and that they were adhered to closely by anti-divestment advocates during the
Anti-Divestment Bill: Unifying Strategies for Our
The bill is an attack on our Jewish community. It silences our voices.
in your speech
speech with “Don’t Silence Me” This will have a powerful, unifying
Keep it very
short, about a minute
choosing a side, under false pretense, is to shut down a productive and
meaningful discussion. This can only cause more tensions and conflict. It takes
away OUR voice.
personal, include personal experiences and emphasize feelings of personal
Don’t be afraid to show how you feel (angry, sad, etc.)
always be dissenters; they don’t represent the voice of the Jewish community.
WE are the
voice of the Jewish community at Cal (can refer to all the Jewish student
groups that are against the bill – which collectively represent over 500 Jewish
students on our campus).
If the issue
is so clear, why is it so divisive? This may be one of those occasions when
it’s not appropriate for you (the ASUC senators) to decide something for
everyone on campus.
The Bill is
out of context and based on questionable sources (no need to go into detail).
Thus, the bill is in fact an attack on the JEWISH COMMUNITY.
unjustified attack on Israel is an attack on my Jewish identity. It is
The ASUC and
our university have been hijacked by an extremist agenda, through this bill.
group of partisans are trying to leverage the reputation of UC Berkeley for
their own narrow political purposes. These partisans have NO concern for the
bitter divisiveness they have caused on campus.
of the general student body are telling you (through thousands of emails, etc.)
– loud and clear – that there is no student consensus outside of these partisan
supporters for this bill. The supporters of the bill are demanding that you
choose between them and the other 99% of the students you (the ASUC senators)
Senators didn’t campaign on this issue so they cannot claim to have an
electoral mandate, and every source of data (news stories and opinion pieces in
the paper and associated comments, the e-mails they have received, the
high-pitched debates) attests to the fact that they cannot claim to be
representing a campus consensus or majority.
include in your speech
mention that Israel is being singled out (don’t mention crimes committed by
other countries). Don’t suggest divesting from other countries. It is a weak
argument and implies that Israel has committed war crimes.
DON’T try to
deconstruct the bill. DON’T focus on addressing the fallacies/specifics of the
focus on how it is an attack on the Jewish community.
debate on the Middle East. Supporters of the bill would like to argue on this