Meretz MK Ran Cohen considers them to be "black ants".
Journalist Amnon Dankner thinks of them as dogs, "tied up in the yard and barking Psalms all night long".
Tour guide Sefi Ben-Yosef sees them as "a humming collection of locusts". Poet Moshe Dor pictures them as "the dark forces of our era".
Columnist Amnon Avramovicz maintains that they are "a death-causing plague".
Commentator Natan Donevitz imagines them as "black swarms".
Yoel Marcus, author and newspaperman, knows they are "black forces" and "soul snatchers".

Playwright Yosef Mondey opines that they are "rude baboons".
The now defunct Marxist daily, Al HaMishmar, the mouthpiece of the Mapam party, held them to be "barbarians...the black front...representing the most mystical, magical, primitive urge...their schools are ‘institutes of darkness’".
Gideon Sammet, journalist and former diplomat, knows they are "the most obscurantist and ugly phenomena of our time".

Shulamit Aloni, former Education Minister and progressive politician, is convinced they are "bloodsuckers...snakes...suckling from the most darkest urges that the Nazi horror suckled from. They are greedy, domineering, evil and primitive, immoral, parasitical and power-hungry".
Uri Avnery, media person, sees them as "bloodsuckers".
Meretz MK Professor Naomi Chazan "a terrible evil...a black genie". Acclaimed writer Amos Oz "armed groups of gangsters, criminals against humanity, sadists, pogromists and murderers...".
(All the quotations appeared in newspapers and other periodicals except for the words of Shulamit Aloni which were spoken in the Knesset Chamber).

And so on and so forth. The "they" are, of course, the Charedim. The religious, and more specifically, the more observant Jews, termed ultra-orthodox.

All the above-mentioned personalities belong to what is known in Israel as the "intellectual elite of the Israeli Left". They include authors, members of Knesset, senior journalists and professors from the academia. These are the ‘peace camp’, the ‘camp of the progressives, the liberals and the pluralists’, who indulge themselves daily in the values of democracy and tolerance. The principle of "the solidarity of man and his equality" is the essence of their spiritual and intellectual existence.

It is well-known that there is no more horrible term of notoriety for them than that of "racism" which belongs solely to the "vengeful and low-browed nationalism" (Yaakov Sharret) and the "dark nationalist clericalism" (Aloni) in their own words.

It is unnecessary to state that there isn’t a group of people in the whole wide world against which these aforementioned humanists would dare to cast even the minimum amount of derision and scornful slander which they save to be used scurrilously against a section of their own people. Too, it would be unthinkable that in a democratic state anywhere that even the most vicious of antisemites would have the nerve to utter any expression that would equal the racial hatred of Israelis in their own country.

The most outlandish phrase that any public official used against Jews and their religion was the black Nation of Islam leader, Lewis Farrakhan, when he related disparagingly to the Jews of New York and termed their faith a "gutter religion". Following the outcry over his remarks, Farrakhan retracted in a fashion and stammered out an apology of sorts. The television personality and journalist, Patrick Buchanan, has for years propounded an anti-Israel position. He claims that he opposes the "destructive influence of the Jews in the media". Buchanan repels any charge of antisemitism but he has not succeeded in convincing anyone. These two statements classify him in America as possessing unmitigated anti-Jewish opinions.

Nevertheless, the one fundamental difference that exists between Farrakhan and Buchanan and the antisemitism of the Israeli "humanist camp" is the racism that is solely a blue-and-white product. The intention of this essay is to explore this element.

One of the most damaging of Israeli antisemitic slogans, which recalls Nazi propaganda and actually replicates it, is the comparison of Charedim to parasites, blood-suckers of the secular community. The terms "parasite" and "blood-suckers" have so deeply embedded themselves into the consciousness of sections of the secular community that the metaphor, at a certain point, has merited a ‘scientific’ explanation. It has become real.

When Uri Avnery wrote that "tens of thousands of Yeshiva students are parasites, sucking the blood of the country" (1), one could relate to the phrase, extreme as it is, as allegorically. After all, there were those who termed members of the kibbutz movement "parasites" following their economic disaster and the transfer of huge sums of public funds to cover their losses. In the same fashion, one could explain away Chaim Be’er’s statement that "they [the religious] grew up as a do-nothing parasite" (2).

However, when Shulamit Aloni posits that "the Charedim are leeches...sitting on us as parasites, drinking our blood literally ...actually shedding our blood..." (3), this, as Ms. Aloni admits, is plainly a blood-libel. Otherwise, why would she emphasize her words by adding "literally" and "actually"? It might be plausible to presume that Aloni really doesn’t believe what she is saying but, nevertheless, she utilizes antisemitic language reminiscent of the "Black Hundreds" and Julius Streicher. Its use illustrates the burning hatred that causes this matron to lose her sense of mental balance.

The proof of this in-built parasitism amongst Charedim was undertaken by one Professor Yitzhak Ginzburg, who calls himself an "expert on infectious diseases". Ginzburg, who, in his own words, is a "researcher and has for years dealt with the scientific aspects of the inter-related links that exist between parasites and their carriers regarding diseases" has found an "amazing similarity" between the behavior of parasites and "what occurs in the Knesset’s hallways and its committees" (4).

In his article, Ginzburg explains:

"The parasite...is a living organism that has lost its ability to produce of itself the materials of its food and therefore it makes efforts to achieve them by imputation from the carrier. The parasite, which makes no contribution to the well-being, benefit and defense of the carrier, is not interested in destroying its carrier. At times, though, in its parasitical exuberance, it may go beyond its normal patterns and will deplete its carrier of resources and even destroy it. The course of parasitism...depends on the complacency of the carrier which does not adequately respond to the parasite at the first stages of the connection. The carrier, finally recognizing the parasite’s existence, attempts to apply its defense mechanism but in many instances, it is already too late".

In order to strangle the "development of the infectious disease" in its infancy, Ginzburg requests that "every caring person in our state, that is, the carriers, should oppose...the parasites...who suck the bone-marrow of our country and push it to the edge of the precipice".

The public relates to such local weeklies as Kol Ha’Ir, which combine a left-wing radicalism with soft porn, in an indifferent and lenient manner. However, it is another matter when HaAretz , which presumes to be Israel’s outstanding daily, publishes an op-ed article from one Ze’ev Fabian, in which he describes how his eyes were opened:

"to understand that the Israeli Jews are in the midst...of a war of existence...the process [of the taking over of the state by religion]...is becoming an ugly wave threatening to sink all of us in a new destruction of Betar. They [the Charedim] do not need a state but a carrier that would feed their parasitism, and when the carrier is enfeebled, or ceases to exist, they will transfer to a new carrier [and this is the essence of] the unholy covenant between the extreme nationalism and the fanatic orthodoxy". (5)

Fabian’s article appeared on the day following the mass terror attack in Jerusalem’s Ben-Yehuda Mall and a week after the slaughter in the city’s Machaneh Yehuda market. Twenty people were killed and hundreds injured. It would have been a rational expectation that he relate to this additional act of Arab barbarism which, openly and declared, seeks to annihilate the Jewish state and its inhabitants. But not so HaAretz.

At the same time that members of the Charedi society, "Grace of Truth", were carrying the shattered bodies, "victims of peace", to burial, this Israeli antisemite found the time to quote from Mein Kampf.

It is unnecessary to state that Ze’ev Fabian is not the problem but the editor who found the most appropriate time to open his journal to an antisemitic onslaught when Jews were burying their dead.

Not only is the comparing of a group of persons, any collection of people, to parasites causing infectious diseases, a la Ginzburg, is brutish racism in its most lowly meaning, but it is a caricature of basic science. (6)

Moreover, in every modern proper country, this Ginzburg (presuming that he is real) would have been sacked immediately from his job for expressing such theories, the academic community would have cast him from its midst, his degree would have been invalidated and most probably, he would have been placed on trial.

In the same vein, it is improbable that any self-respecting newspaper would print such a racist grotesque piece. And if it did so, its editors would have been charged for libel, the responsible editor would have been fired and given a substantial fine.

But all this, as noted, would have happened in a modern proper country. In Israel, a place where the words of a Ginzburg and his ilk are a daily matter, and vicious antisemitism is part and parcel of the media, all this happened without any outcry.

* The previous campaign to compare, scientifically as it were, Jews to parasites were the Nazis. "The Jew leech sucking the country’s blood" was the party slogan that was as widespread as "the Jews are our tragedy". But even the Germans related to the slogan of Jewish parasitism as a metaphor. In the Nazi elite, only Hitler explicitly spoke of the Jews in the terms Ginzburg used (7). For example, Hitler spoke to Horty, the Hungarian Regent, upon his visit to Berlin in August 1943, and explained to him the fact that Jews are like germs that cause infectious diseases and damage the immunization system of the body. One must, therefore, strike before the danger occurs and destroy them. His theory, that the Jews are living parasites inside the carrier-nation, weakening them from within, was developed in his tract:

"The Jews...were always parasites in the body of other nations...their distribution is a typical phenomenon of all parasites; they always seek out new sources of nutrition for the race. The Jew was, and will remain, a typical parasite, that, similar to a leech, expands continually as permitted by its environment. Everywhere it appears, the carrier-nation dies, sooner or later." (8)

The central element of the Socialist-Zionist ethos, which had an influence on the design of the "new Jew", was the concept of "Religion of Labor". But this concept quickly passed from the Tolstoylian naivete of A.D. Gordon to the tough doctrinaire historical materialism and the class ideology. The basic claim was that the source of antisemitism was to be found in the inadequate social layer of exilic Jewry. It was postulated in the "inverted pyramid" of Ber Borochov who espoused that in a normal society, the productive section formed the wide base of the pyramid whereas at the top were to be found the "parasitical elements". The curse of the Jewish inverted pyramid was, therefore, the cause of antisemitism. Socialist Zionism sought to turn the pyramid over, to set it on its base and thereby remove the malediction of antisemitism from the Jew.

The Jew as a "no-productive" parasite, according to Zionist-socialism, is an antisemitic principle that our own Marxists absorbed wholly from the source itself, Karl Marx. This is Marx’s definition, in his own words: "the nationalism of the Jew is a commercial nationalism...what is the worship of the Jew? Trade. And who is the Jew’s God? Mammon... (9) This definition achieved a broad interpretation by Hitler in his Mein Kampf, even if the author, understandably, does not give credit to the source. (10) As presumed, Hitler deals thoroughly with Marx and his theory and treats Marx as the linchpin of Jewish evil but without dealing with Marx’s own antisemitism which Hitler simply copied.

Hitler’s basic position, that "the Jew never produces but always appears as the go-between" (11), and that the Jewish greed is the basis for the hatred of him by the masses, was adopted by socialist Zionism (consciously or otherwise, it does not matter). It served as a powerful element in the formation of the "New Jew", the Israeli living from the work of his own hands, building and fighting, in one hand the spade and in the other the gun. This creature was the antithesis to the exilic middleman, the man of dust (in Chaim Weizmann’s words) who makes a living out of thin air in Sholom Aleichem’s Yohpatz and Katrielevka, those "dirty Jews" of Brener, that when the time came went like "sheep to the slaughter".

Even if some justification could be found for the use that socialist Zionism made of this antisemitic element, in its bitter struggle with the effects of the Exile on the Jew, it should be remembered that in reality, it had nothing to do with the true picture. As Yechezkel Kaufman has repeatedly shown (12) the economic-social stratum of Exile Jewry was no different than the rest of the non-Jewish society surrounding them. If the percentage of Jews in professions of enterprise and finance was above their part in the general society, this stemmed from objective reasons, and in any case, was a major contribution to the economies of the countries they lived in.

The antisemitic propaganda was fed by the Marxist economic doctrine which eventually, after many years, also failed both economically and socially. But the lie took root. The antisemitic principle remained. It was at times dormant but always seeping down, occasionally breaking out until it took bloom in the Jewish state following the Six Days War, and more aggressively, in the 1980s and 1990s with the growth of the Charedi parliamentary representation in the Knesset.

And so, the hatred for the "filthy Jew" of East European antisemitism, that became the "dirty Jews" of the writer Yosef Chaim Brener, achieved a revival amongst Israel’s Left of the "Now" era.

"Israel is a ghetto, albeit better armed than the Warsaw ghetto and in a better economic condition than the Lodz ghetto, but there ends the comparison". This remark, attributed to General (Res.) Benny Peled, former Air Force Chief Commander, is a cutting criticism by the man on the state of Israel. He views the state as an East European township and its leaders as the community synagogue board members. But Peled unwittedly reveals another graver truth and that is the bitter failure of Zionism in its attempt (very heroic it must be stated) to release Israel from the curse of antisemitism.

In his book, "The Jewish State", which first appeared in February 1896, Herzl claimed, it will be recalled, that "immediately upon the preparations for the establishment of the Jewish state...antisemitism will cease at once, everywhere". It is thus only natural that Herzl dedicates but two lines to the matter of a Jewish army: "the Jewish state is intended to be neutral. It needs but a standing professional army...to keep public order both externally and internally".

Herzl, a product of the 19th century positivism, the ‘Spring of the Nations’, the Russian pogroms and the Dreyfus Affair, saw in the downtroddenness of his people the curse of the Exile. The faith of Herzl, as well as other founding fathers of Zionism, wherein political sovereignty is the solution to the matter of antisemitism, became a categorical principle of Zionism and the "I believe" of the Yishuv period, and, in the wake of the Holocaust - of the state of Israel. From Ze’ev Jabotinsky to Ber Borochov, from David Ben-Gurion to Menachem Begin, all took pains to highlight the claim that "the entrance of the Jewish people into history" would rid itself of the curse of antisemitism.

However, not only did antisemitism not "disappear immediately" but the state of Israel became the focus for Jew hatred. During the short history of the state, a brief period of the Jewish people’s chronology, the Jewish state faced those who wished its destruction in five major wars and has had to maintain the largest army in the world in comparison to its population. The time in-between these conflagrations, marked by vicious Arab terror attacks from within and wars of attrition from without, Israel refers to as "days of peace".

The rapid distribution of weapons of mass destruction in the region brings up nightmares of gas ovens as was demonstrated by the mass flight of Israel’s citizens from population centers during the second Gulf War. This element, when aligned with the Nazi character of Islam, which does not hide its intentions and preparations for the Israel’s annihilation, not only does it turn on their head the basic principles of Zionism but it grants them a macabre dimension, which Abba Eban more than adequately defined at the time, when he referred to Israel’s 1967 borders as recalling "the borders of Auschwitz". (13)

And so, at the end of 50 years of sovereignty, the state of Israel was and remains the most dangerous place for the Jews in the world and the difficult choice she faces is to live by the sword or not to live at all.

This cruel alternative demands powers from the depths of one’s being which is a demand to which the Israeli Left cannot stand up. With the double collapse of socialism and Zionism, the Left is left before the ruins of its faith and raison d’etre. It therefore desperately needs a new messianic challenge, for if not, it will find itself discarded, as a tool no one has an use for, on to the garbage pile of history.

The comprehensive de-Zionization that started within Israel’s elites depends much upon the 1975 UN resolution comparing Zionism with racism. That decision, which at the time caused tremors amongst the general public, nevertheless granted legitimization, first with the radical left and then, throughout wider circles which refer to themselves as the "Zionist Left", to identify with the decision. The history revisionism, among those who in their publications term themselves "new historians", from the school of Benny Morris, Avi Shleim and especially Ilan Pappe, present Zionism in the spirit of that UN resolution.

It is proper to remember that Zionism is simple nationalism, just as "Englishness" is the nationalism of the English and "Frenchism" is the nationalism of the French. The casting of derision on Zionism is therefore negating Jewish nationalism which is nothing else than committing national suicide. The lethal mockery called the "peace process", whereby Zionism is slated to lose the reason for its physical and spiritual existence, is the option of Jewish radicalism, which seeks to renew life in something long dead.

As the Left possesses hegemony over the elites that shape the spiritual world of Israel’s secularists, the browbeaten public yields, its brains battered with the orgy of peace, surrendering to the slow-killing drug in which yearnings and delusion have joined with the unique Jewish ability in pathological self- deception of the victim.

And so, the "peace process" a euphemism for the destruction of the state of the Jews, is at one and the same, the goal of the Jewish Left. It is a horrific illustration of the verse "your detractors and destroyers will issue forth from you". It is no wonder then, that while the Arab enemy becomes the ally of the left, all who stand its way is a sworn rival, threatening its existence. Such is the religious community, that of the knitted skullcap and the black yarmulke.

Gush Emunim, the movement identified by the Israeli public with the settling of the areas of Judea and Samaria, is a double threat to the Left, essentially and pragmatically. Judea and Samaria, as well as Jerusalem, are the cradle of the Hebrew nation, and thereby the reason behind Zionism. Any longing or link to these areas represents a threat to the trend of alienation of the Left from both Zionism and Judaism. Moreover, a thriving Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria puts in doubt the establishment of a Palestinian state - the very core belief of Arafat’s Jews. The combination of both these realities is the "obstacle to peace", an antisemitic statement par excellence which has obtained international consensus, and which the Left has taken to heart as a political fundamental principle.

The antisemitic statements originating with such journalists as Orit Shochat, Haim Hefer, Asa Kasher, Dedi Tzucker and others against Gush Emunim (14), could fill a thick volume. But it was Amos Oz, more than any other writer, who gave vent to the venomous hate of the Left for Gush Emunim.

In an article published on June 8, 1989 in the Yediot Ahronot daily, under the title "In the Name of the Life and the Death", Oz penned these phrases:

[Gush Emunim is] "a messianic junta, insular and cruel, a bunch of armed gangsters, criminals against humanity, sadists, pogromists and murderers, that exited out from some dark corner of Judaism...from out of cellars of bestiality and defilement...in order to cause a thirsty and insane blood worship to rule." (15)

Oz’s words, most probably the worst example of Israeli antisemitism to be found in print, best those of Yigal Tumarkin who needs to make provocative headlines in order to assure his position as Israel’s art culture’s enfant terrible. If one could relate in a forgiving fashion to Tumarkin’s pronouncements as well as to the person himself, Oz is a different matter altogether, a national man of letters who does not need the grace of newsprint space in a local Tel Aviv weekly.

Even someone who is unfamiliar with the style of Der Sturmer will easily discern the two classic elements of pathological antisemitism in Oz’s words - hate and fear. Everything is here: gangsters, criminals against humanity, sadists, pogromists and murderers. The long list of synonyms is intended to make their crimes more purposeful, without limit, so that they have branded on their foreheads structural shame, so that their humanity may be taken away.

Oz also plays well on the theme of atavism and pornography. His "sadists" exit from "some dark corner...from cellars of animalism and defilement". (16) It is no error when he ends his diatribe in a crescendo of blood-libel: "in order to cause a thirsty and insane blood worship to rule."

When the Egyptian Al-Haram daily prints an item on Israeli doctors who inject AIDS into Palestinian children, given the antisemitic atmosphere existing in Egypt, one could presume that both writer and reader truly believe the news content. But Oz is no neo-Nazi propagandist, nor a reporter for Al-Haram, who spews forth virtual reality so as to feed his craze. Oz, after all, was born here; he is someone who well knows that any connection with such poppycock is coincidental. He therefore lies, out and out, so as to create "the Big Lie". In addition, he lies knowing well that he won't have to stand trial for his libel. (17)

With all this, the most pragmatic expression of hate towards Gush Emunim is limited to the political echelon. The Gush, a stepson of the National Religious Party, the former historic ally of the Mapai, still benefited from the remainders of the Zionist ethos amidst extensive public circles, where settlement and military service in elite units is still very much accepted. The dismantling of communities or their abandonment, still is an act, opposed to the national consensus (even if it is rapidly diminishing).

The rapidly diminishing self-limitations imposed regarding the issue of relating to Gush Emunim do not apply when the issue is the Charedi camp (18).

The hate displayed toward them merits a general acclamation for the secular community possesses an unconscious antisemitic element, something the Left well utilizes. In addition, vicious statements like those at this article’s beginning, escape punishment for the Charedi community is incapable of fighting back. The mass media instruments are closed to them. And even if opened to them, they prefer not to involve themselves. The Charedi press, such as Yated Neeman and Yoman HaShavua, is completely foreign to the secular community, who are usually unaware of its existence.

The traditional insular nature of the Charedi neighborhoods of Bnei Brak and Mea Shearim has formed within the secular camp atavistic feelings of hatred of the stranger and fear of the unknown. Which is no different essentially from expressions of classic xenophobia. With all this, despite the first steps of relative openness on the part of the Charedi community in becoming part of the ruling political echelon of the "Zionist state", there has been no parallel change amongst the secular public. For all intents, the very opposite has occurred whereby hatred of the Charedim has increased and has assumed an antisemitic character, as pointed out previously.

The explanation for this, paradoxically, as it were, is linked with the openness of the Charedi. This openness took the form of a sharp increase in the power of the Charedi political parties and their representation in the Knesset and, consequentially, their growing participation in the coalition of government. They have become partners in the fateful decision-making process on the national level. This has been understood as a threat to the daily getting-about of the secular community. The Charedi Jew, up until now fixed within his narrow personal ghetto space, has suddenly become a living entity, quite unlike the image of a not dangerous abject and derided curiosity. The latent antisemitism genie has been let loose from out of the bottle. (19)

And so, Israel’s Left-wing racism has achieved a legitimacy even amongst those who do not accept leftist ideology nor its political expressions. An example of this is the case of the Tzomet Party. It does not lag far behind Meretz in besmirching the Charedim even though there exists a major ideological/political cleavage between these two parties.

"When I observe the Charedim, I understand the Nazis". (20) The core of the Nazi racism that Tumarkin "understands", and thereby "accepts" (also suggesting ways to apply), extends from the hatred that is awoken by the dress and manners of the Charedi Jew, which is, in his opinion, "a ridiculous garb, anachronistic and causing disgust" (21). "When you look at them, you understand why there was a Holocaust" (22) The repetitive motif in the sculptor’s remarks was the external appearance of the Charedi Jew, and the connection between that appearance and the in-built wickedness within him.

This motif is central to Israeli antisemites. It also recalls the classic antisemitic derision that Hitler repeated so many times in describing his horror when observing Vienna Jews: "...at times, I felt a deep feeling of revulsion at the smell emanating from these Caftan-wearing Jews". (23)

The repugnance from the mode of Charedi dress crosses political camps. An example of this can be found in the two journalists Yael Lotan and Ora Shem-Or. Lotan, a radical left-winger, wrote in the Al HaMishmar daily "we are disgusted by their black dress, the wigs on the heads of their women, the mikvehs, the necrophilia, the obsessive interest in the bowels of people" (24). Ora Shem-Or, identified with the right, wrote: "we’ve had it with seeing the caftans, shiny from oil over the years, the fur hats, walking through the city streets..." (25)

The evilness of the Charedi is part of the way he dresses; it is a structural part of himself. The physical ugliness, which does not coordinate with the accepted aesthetic look, is therefore part of the moral decadency. Therefore, claims Tumarkin, "the black clothes represent a black flag over elementary morality and our very existence" and adds, "pardon me but visual art is my specialty" (26). In this way, Tumarkin fulfills the Aristotelian command of identifying form with content that he, Tumarkin, is conscious of more than the average Israeli antisemite.

Thus, the war against the Charedim is a condition of existence for the camp of progress and peace and through it, the existence, well-being and improvement of the state of Israel. For "the Charedim are weakening of essence and are imperiling our future" (27). Also, "In Israel, the secularists do not jump into the abyss; they are thrown in by the religious" (28).

Naomi Chazan is one who has successfully expressed this line of hatred of Charedim as a condition for Israel’s existence. The Meretz MK, spoke at the convention of the Humanist Judaism federation, and said: "Only if we succeed to get rid of this terrible bad thing, the taking over of our life by the black devil, can we nurture all that is good in the state". (29) And so, the demonization of Orthodox Judaism and its moral negation to be found in Chazan’s words is proper and fit for the audience before which she spoke, an audience who chose the label "humanist". This remark, uttered against a Judaism perceived as "black", the semantic opposite of humanism, makes that Judaism inhuman, and criminal.

It is now a short way to accept the antisemitic stigma through the Israeli experience. After he has become acquainted with the results of what he terms day and night as "religious coercion", Tommy Lapid understands well the antisemites: "We shouldn’t complain about the Charedim. They are, after all, simply faithfully acting out the role assigned to them by antisemitic literature. They exploit the non-Jew, trade in his blood, and laugh at him behind his back. Only this time, the ‘Goy’ is us". (30) Lapid, it seems, despite the fact that he makes much of the fact that he is a Holocaust survivor, does not perceive the antisemitic paradox in his words.

Yigal Elam follows close behind when he writes: "the suspicion has long been aroused that historical Judaism has been the greatest collaborator with historical antisemitism. And now, I have no qualms about saying this openly regarding my well-founded suspicion." (31) The hated historical Judaism is, according to Elam, the Charedi public.

And Yigal Tumarkin adds: "traditional Judaism fashioned wondrous techniques of parasitism...fanatic self-enclosure of Jews was a firm part of the construction of antisemitism" (32)

The tragedies which have happened to the Jews have originated, therefore, with that "black devil" which takes over our lives, in Naomi Chazan’s words, which "imbibes its mendacity from the poison of the Jewish religion which poisons people" (33), as well as from "that old Charedi which now threatens to cover the earth" (34)

Following upon the theoretical phase which has defined the evil, the next phase, that of application, the "praxis" phase, as Tumarkin and his friends would surely define it, being well-trained in communist terminology, has arrived. In this phase, it is intended to smother the "development of the infectious disease" while in its preliminary stage, as Ginzburg phrased it above.

"The Charedim should be hanged from the lampposts" suggested the Hebrew University scholar, Dr. Uzi Ornan (35); "because they are religiously observant, they should receive the death penalty" wrote Yediot Ahronot (36); "the time has come to bury them" advises Uri Avnery (37); "Meah Shearim should be entered with half-tracks and 50-caliber machine-guns, and to crush them" (38).

Tumarkin interprets the suggestion of Zeev Shternhal, that a civil war be initiated (39), thus: "my true contribution would be if I grabbed a sub-machine-gun, instead of a pen and pencil and killed them" (40). Or, as Naomi Chazan said, mentioned previously (41), "for only thus can we nurture all that is good in this state". This is Tumarkin’s variation on the opening lines of the Horst Wessel anthem: "Und wenn das Judenbaltt vom Messer sprizt, dan geht noch mal so gut" ("and when the Jewish blood spurts from the knife, then it would be better even more so").

At the root of the Israeli antisemitism lies, therefore, the claim that the Charedim are the tragedy of the Jewish people. They are the source for all the calamities that have fallen upon our heads throughout history and they are the basis for all that is wrong in the state of Israel. These claims, that are but a reflection of the Jewish assimilationist’s auto-antisemitism from generation to generation, mainly in Germany, were wrong and disastrous now as they were then. And today, as they were then, they are but an outlet for the anxiety the Jewish radical helplessly feels as he faces the wall of Arab hatred and the cool antisemitsm of the Christian West. Whereas the acceptance of the command (and burden) of "a nation that dwells alone" is injurious for secular messianism and a shattering of the spiritual raison d’etre of the radical Jew, the channeling of the frustration and hate towards the Charedi community is but a necessary outlet. Almost to the extent of being a necessity that cannot be denounced. * The presumptions of Tumarkin, Shem-Or, Lotan and others, that the source of antisemitism lies in the caftan, the shtreimel, the sidelocks and the beard of the Charedi, are clearly in error. They characterize both the short historical memory of the average Leftist as well as his inadequate accomplishments. For the Nazis, even while ridiculing the Charedi Jew with his strange attire, the source for their German Judeophobia was somewhere else. In addition, the aesthetic separation, at that time, did not lack a certain folklore attraction, a powerful element in the positive sense of the expression at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. Ironically, the target of the Nazi antisemitism was not specifically the Charedi Jew but the Jewish assimilationist, for he was the cause of German racism.

The assimilationist at that time, deflected the Nazi hatred to the Ost Juden and in this sense, Tumarkin is a direct descendent of the German Jewish heritage. (42) The slogan the Nazis adopted was Heinrich Von Treitschke’s phrase: "the Jews are our misfortune" ("Die Juden sind unser Ungluck"). German assimilationists internalized this phrase with but a slight change: Die (Ost)Juden sind unser Ungluck".

How terrible was the average Berlin assimilationist’s awakening when he was dragged at dawn to the collection point and sent east to a concentration camp. His identity card was printed with the letter J and alongside his new name. No longer Max, Frantz of Hans but Israel. No more Gretta, Lenni or Hilda but Sarah. With historical irony, so typical of Goebbel’s sense of humor, the Nazis returned to the assimilationist his Jewish identity. And when he was murdered in Treblinka or Dachau , it was as a full Jew and not a partial apostate.

The Jewish assimilationist, according to the Nazi perception, was but a mask behind which hid the Jewish devil in his authentic garb: "the appearance and style of the liberal European Jews are but a thin external veneer", wrote Eichmann in a set of SS orders. It was of this deception that the Nazis warned their countrymen. Not the Jewish Charedi, who kept to his own small world, was the threat to the Nazis. Hitler could tolerate them. At the worst, he could put them in cages, a folklore show. (43)

Before the sub-human Jew is to be treated as he should, the mask had to be ripped off his face so as to remove from off the devil his almost human visage. Such was the Eternal Jew (Der Ewige Jude) and the Jew Suss (Jud Suss) in the two famous films of the Nazi period. Both of them had the plot theme of revealing underneath the Jew the lethal enemy of the Reich.

In the "Eternal Jew", filmed in Polish ghettos immediately after their conquest in 1939, the "authentic Jew in his native habitat" was displayed. The filth, the ugliness, the miserable conditions, the comparison with bloodsucking leeches, the cunning, the greed, the laziness and the hate of all foreign were presented to the viewer in the guise a "documentary film" which draws its forceful expression from the objectivity of the camera which records the "truth".

The repeated motif was the complete identification of the Jewish person from the Polish ghetto with the Jew from Germany which the viewer recognized as the "cultured German". The announcer reads the following text at the beginning of the film:

"The cultured Jew whom we know in Germany knows well how to disguise cunningly his race. This film presents the true picture from the Polish ghettos. It shows the Jew as he truly is prior to them succeeding in hiding behind the mask of the cultured European".

To this end, a group of Jews are filmed "before" and "after". A young man, cleanly shaven, smiling, head uncovered, in a tie and suit could be an innocent and pleasant neighbor. But this is but a veil, for the truth is revealed in his attire and his authentic image when he is bearded, wearing a hat and caftan.

In "The Jew Suss", the main character is a Jewish moneychanger from Frankfurt, dressed in a large hat, with earlocks, speaking in bad dialect, waving his hands about, who assumes the identity of a perfect janitor in the rococo style. But it is in this guise that the Jewish devil in him is uncovered. (44) Tumarkin and company would certainly be surprised to discover that most of the caricatures published in Der Sturmer did not portray the Charedi Jew but Jews similar to Tumarkin, that is, the assimilationist attempting to flee his identity and assuming to be a cultured European.

The conclusion is that crawling on one’s belly before every proven criminal, every antisemite and Jew-hater of the school of Arafat or Assad will not help Tumarkin and friends in the least. So it was with Germany’s Jews at that time when they spoke words of sycophancy in praise of "our Chancellor" (45) It would seem that Tumarkin does not quite comprehend Nazism, even if one would think he very much wants to.

The black caftan and shtreimel, the dominate elements of the male Charedi apparel, stem from the fashion style of 16th century Eastern Europe. They recall the long coat and fur hat that were worn in a broad geographic region defined by the Carpathian Mountains in the south to Lithuania in the north; from Poland’s Vistula River in the west to the banks of the Volga River in the east. The Charedi has clung to this attire for hundreds of years, the same costume that was the symbol of antisemitic caricatures that developed in the 19th century.

In Israel, one must add to this conservative, frozen-in-time wardrobe the aspect of the very different clime and landscape. The conflict of light and shadow, the sirocco, are considerably more highlighted in sun-burnt Israel. The long coat and the fur hat in the Mediterranean summer represent an obvious contradiction to the principle of unity of form and Aristotelian content which lie at the base of common Israeli empirical thought. One should not make light of the antagonism which occurs within us during the summer heat as we remove from off our bodies every unnecessary article of cloth and we observe opposite us a young student all bound up in black from head to toe as if he were walking in the autumn along the banks of the Dnieper at the end of the Middle Ages.

Nevertheless, the Charedi conservatism is not a fashion conservatism of the British type, removed from the mothballs once a generation in honor of the crowning of a king or queen or an object for tourists’ cameras when viewing the changing of the guard. This is an authentic, if stubborn, conservatism which challenges a whole world. In opposition, to start with, to the sweltering sun, the ritual of exposure, exhibitionism and worship of youth and ending in the seasonal and frequent changes in fashion, the Charedi stands defiant, in caftan, determined and stiff-necked, despising change, sure in himself and content with his Maker.

This integrality, of the authentic man, is as if thorns in the eyes of the leftist in our places who is searching after his own identity, which after all, is but a cheap sub-culture copy of an American model. Worse still, naturally, is that the intelligent ones among them know at least, that this "observant" person, and even more so that he is a Charedi, is a cruel mirror from which is reflected the failure of the Israeli "secularist" to escape his Jewish heritage which weighs heavily upon him. All of this - beginning with the collapse of the kibbutz utopianism, passing on to the media brainwashing and ending in the bitter joke called the "peace process" paved with Jewish bodies, all this and more breaks up upon the image of the exilic Jew, dressed in caftan and shtreimel. The hate is therefore an existential necessity, as Satre would have it, for the Israeli leftist, fighting, in a demoniac compulsion, for his own identity.

The release of Yeshiva students from military service is an offense to the principle of the existence of the state of the Jews, forced to live by the sword. The average Israeli, when reaching the age of demobilization from reserve service, has spent between five to six years in uniform, and has gone through three to four wars (if he was lucky and came through his service uninjured, or worse).

The yeshiva student, who "kills" himself in the study of Torah, is an expected and understood source of animosity for the secular Israeli. The explanations that the duty to study Torah so as to preserve the Jewish people, not only are they rejected straight out but they are seen as a despised attempt to exploit religion for instrumentative self-utility. This is all well-known. However, over the course of time, the image of the IDF has been undermined and evading military service is today in fashion among many youngsters liable for enlistment who are publicly proud of their attitude.

The nihilistic trends of Israeli youth have long ceased to be problematic for the extreme left. Over the years, fringe groups who reach out to the center have organized and publish newspapers and bulletins of their own which seek to extend legitimacy to a deep anarchism, hate and frustration, in which can de discerned the seeds of fascism. The sub-culture of violent punk rock together with drugs, group sex and crime are indications of this youth. One is reminded, although in a "soft" sense, of similar groups at the breaking down edges of American metropolitan cities. Their hate is directed toward the IDF which is viewed as the backbone of the national consensus they wish to destroy.

For example, an entire issue of the periodical "Milchemet HaMilim" (The War of Words), the publication of a group calling itself "Isra-Hell Collective" (46), is devoted to a discussion of the various methods of avoiding military service. Among various articles, there is one entitled "21 Tips to Get Out of the Army through the Psychologist" (47). The issue, 27 pages cramped with articles and cartoons (including one antisemitic caricature from an Egyptian magazine which the group claims as their own), denigrates unceasingly the army and the state.

What follows is the writing of a youngster who soldiers had jumped the hitchhiking queue in front of him: Only for soldiers. Screw ‘em. How many times have I heard these words ‘only for soldiers’. Only death for soldiers. You son of a bitch! You and your car should only overturn and all of you, with the f*cking soldiers in this stinking f*cking country should die with you. Would that I could see your picture in the paper under the headline: "Terrible Accident", with your children crying, you idiot, and your smashed body and those of the Judeo-Nazis squashed by Neot Mordechai, you stinking dog, and your reading glasses and your ugly tie soaked with deep red blood... (page 7)"

In another place, on page 9, a kibbutznik from the north describes his feelings upon observing a group of soldiers: They have come down from Lebanon to eat lunch in the dining hall of my kibbutz where I work, in my kibbutz...I want to reiterate again that I hate the IDF, yes, hate. I am not "critical" nor am I "ambivalent" or do "I reserve my opinion" but I hate it" (the emphases are in the original). The aim of this infantile trash (infantile in the clinical sense and not intended as an insult) is to provide an "ideological" support for this hate and deserves attention in another context. But what is important is the burning, authentic and spontaneous hate that every clinical psychologist would diagnose its roots in self-hatred.

These excerpts are culled from a far-out group’s bulletin. However, the weekly Ma’ariv LaNoar is the widest distributed youth periodical in the state. It can be presumed to represent the broad consensus of the 14 to 18 year old age group. Aviv Gefen, the Israeli pop protest singer who has exploited his refusal to serve in the army to his own advantage, was selected by the paper as ‘Man of the Year’ in 1996, one of three. The second was Shimon Peres, who also never served in uniform, and the third was a male model and actor in the Israeli soap opera "Ramat Aviv Gimmel". In an interview with Gefen, he preaches emigrating from Israel. What we see, then, is Gefen, whose personality represents the crisis in Zionism, the fleeing from the battle, literally, being the example to be copied for the Israeli youngster who voted for him because of what he is.

The number of youth that do not return from trips abroad to avoid military service is 13,200. (48) A close look at the social structure of this group indicates that most of them, if not almost all, are secular citizens. The number equals the amount of manpower needed to staff an armored division and is approximately the same figure of Yeshiva students that are excused from enlistment (the number refers to those enlisting in one year). To these 13,200 service evaders must be added an equal number who are excused because of mental problems. The total of secular evaders is therefore is more than twice that of Yeshiva students who avoid military service.

While it is true that in proportion to their number in the general population, the amount of draft dodgers among the Charedim is greater than that of the secular portion of the population, nevertheless, the noise about the issue is louder than the reality. Much worse are the trends of draft evasion and demoralization within the IDF, which are leading to tragedies in an increasing acceleration over the past decade. The way the subject is treated is one of silencing and coming to terms with after the fact.

In the introduction to his massive volume, a classic (49) of its kind, Sandor Gilman claims that self-hatred is a product of the frustration of a minority group (Jews, Blacks, homosexuals) in its attempt to assimilate and blend into the target group within which the assimilation will take place.

Due to the fact that this melting operation is definitely not possible, for a person cannot alter his color, a homosexual cannot become heterosexual and a Jew cannot stop being a Jew, the assimilationist directs his frustration toward himself, that is, persons of his own kind. They are who are responsible for his incapability for assimilating.

Gilman errs in his basic assertion in two main areas: (1) there exists a basic difference between Jews and other minority groups. The blacks and homosexuals have already achieved social legitimacy (and the blacks have gained affirmative action opportunities). Jews, though, and especially the Israeli variety, remain as they have been throughout the centuries, a pariah nation. The vote in the General Assembly of the United Nations in July 1997 is typical. One-hundred and thirty states, the majority of mankind (95% to be exact) decried the Jewish state for preparing land for construction located within the municipal boundaries of its capital. In comparison, the Islamic regime in Sudan has been involved these past few years in genocide. In the last decade, a conservative estimate of those killed totals between 2 and 3 million black Christians, residents of the south of the country. The efforts directed to bringing this issue before the General Assembly have failed. Sudan has never been castigated in any international forum. (50) (2) Gilman's second mistake is more serious and it goes to the very root of the uniqueness of Jewish self-hatred. The Charedi community, with its beliefs and symbols, is the original expression of Judaism, for better or worse. The hate of the community derives from its very authenticity, for it reflects the failure of the secularist to wriggle out of his Judaism. This is not the case with homosexuals and blacks. In fact, the opposite is true. The slogan "black is beautiful" was intended to award legitimacy to the most recognizable symbol of the black race. Likewise, the "Afro" style in hairdressing and apparel as well as makeup that highlights the African element. The demands of homosexuals to remove from them the stain of sexual deviancy and to regard them as equals in every way to the heterosexual community is readily understood. But whereas the other two minorities aspire, in a moral and aesthetic preference, to return to the original thing, the Jewish minority seeks to turn its back on its roots to the extent of developing a racial antisemitism. The fact that the Israeli racist prides himself in his social liberalism and campaigning on behalf of blacks and homosexuals is one of the paradoxes that characterize the pathology of Jewish radicalism.

In search for an analogy, one can point to Jewish antisemitism possessing the characteristics of Catholic antisemitism, also a form of self-hatred with the shared subject of this hate being Judaism. What distinguishes the two, though, is greater than what they share, as will be clarified shortly. The heart of Christian antisemitism was expressed in the Eucharist sacrament, whereby the Church breaks off from the Old Testament. The Eucharist is the most sacred of Christian ceremonies, shared by all denominations. Without it, Christianity is not Christianity. In the course of the ceremony (called, without irony, the Lord’s Feast, that is a meal in which the main course is Jesus’ body and blood), the Christian eats the flesh of the God/Messiah and drinks his blood. This, Christian doctrine establishes, is not symbolic but literal, and is called transubstantiation. That is, a process of physical conversion occurs in which unity (from which stems the term Communia) takes place, between the participant and his God. (51)

It is unnecessary to note the psychological price paid as a result of this pure cannibalistic ceremony by those taking part in it. But the price is not paid by the Christian believer but by the Jewish scapegoat in the form of the famous blood libel claim. The deep link between this cannibalistic celebration and the blood libel is so obvious and apparent that one need not expound on the principle of Freudian projection. (52)

Unlike the Church, the radical Jew in his Israeli guise has no lethal ceremony of forgiveness such as the Eucharist sacrament. But in the blood libel he spreads about his own people, he is no worse than the New Testament.

Up to now, what is similar. But as I previously wrote, what is shared is much less that what divides. The Christian antisemitism, in general and the Catholic version in particular, does not suffer any of the Jewish pathological antisemitism due to the comprehensive spiritual power of Western cutlure that affords the average European antisemite a firm national and spiritual identity. In contradistinction, our own Jewish antisemite, the overlapping excess of Western civilization and lacking identity, finds for himself consolation in American sub-culture on one hand, while on the other, in antisemitic self-arousal.

One need not be a professional historian of culture to acknowledge that any attempt at denial of national heritage leads to spiritual decay and cultural prostitution. Thus, for example, the esoteric phenomenon termed "Israeli cinema" (or as critic Aharon Dolev calls it, "corrupt celluloid") which is a dull copy of the fringes of European radicalism the single purpose of is to raise the wild but aristocratic Palestinian to the level of the divine versus the Judeo-Nazi stormtrooper. As for the Israeli theater which once upon a time was a holiday of Hebrew and a shrine in miniature, it has been taken over by an ugly wave of antisemitism, pornography and inadequate language. Hebrew literature of the now school is a rat race of two or three publishing houses which spare no means so as to increase sales in glorifying one Ram Oren, one Edna Maziya, one Orly Kraus-Weiner, whose book: "Getting Up - An Air Stewardess in a Dark Affair" is the latest hit taking the market by storm. (53)

And so it is, Jewish self-hatred is a singular matter with no existing similarity amongst the nations. The Jewish antisemite will not rest until he removes from his heart the "parasites sucking our blood". But what our radical does not grasp, hasn’t understood nor ever will is that he cannot uproot the "parasites" from out of his heart without removing the heart as well.

I: Mr. Tumarkin, you describe being put off and disgusted at the Charedi attire. Tumarkin: Certainly. It is a ridiculous mode of dress. It is anachronistic and causes loathing.
I: But the fashion of the Dominican hoods, for example, is anachronistic. The dark robe, the hood, the beard, the sandals...
Tumarkin: [interrupts my words and speaks glowingly of the Dominican Order. He describes the shuffling sound of the sandals on the gravel pathways, the proper style of the robe and the aesthetics of Christianity in general]
I: [draw his attention to the fact that the Charedi mode of apparel stems from 16th century fashion in Eastern Europe and ask if, at all, one could define a style of dress that developed in a climate and historical era as "ugly"?] Tumarkin: [understands the emptiness of his point, raise his voice and asks in a nervous manner why don't I ask the Charedim about secular persons. I promise to ask and then quote from what he wrote - "the black clothes represent a black flag over elementary morality and our very existence". And ask, is it your intention to say that what appears to you ugly must be evil? You are an artist and are aware surely of the Aristotelian principle of the identity of the form and content. Is it a fact that the attire being ugly means that it is the symbol of evil.
Tumarkin: Realizes the trap, dips down to the root of the lack of moral-aestethics in his claims, raises his voice and begins to shout: ‘I will never forgive them, those bastards. I remember when I was a kid and I passed them by walking with my mother and they began to cry out that the Holocaust was because of us...this I will never forgive them..."

1. "Help!". Yediot Ahronot, March 9, 1987. Jews, representing Yeshiva students and settlers sitting upon a pile of money at the expense of a (war) invalid in a wheelchair. This is a fixed topic of antisemitic cartoons, developed especially in Der Sturmer in the aftermath of World War I. Now, as then, antisemitism feeds off the big lie. The Charedi section of the population is amongst the poorest in the country. The settlement effort in Judea and Samaria is the cheapest in the history of Zionism, not costing the public a shekel more than any other infrastructure development of any community.

2. "A Light Unto the Nations", Shlomo Cohen published in "Al HaPanim", Keter, 1988 (first appeared in the Hadashot daily newspaper. Cohen leaves much of average Israeli antisemitism behind in his imitating of Der Sturmer themes. Judaism, according to Cohen, in his sarcastic use of the Biblical phrase "Light Unto the Nations", is the absolute and ultimate evil. Judaism is the devil attired in tallit casting a dark shadow to be read over Israel, and with a little graphic imagination, all over the Middle East and from there over the whole world.

3. "Bandalolo", Dan Kedar, Association of Israeli Painters and Sculptors, 1997. Bandalolo, explains Kedar, is the bad man children are warned of if they do not eat their cereal ("Bandalolo will come and take you away"). The devil, dressed in the style of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, former Chief Sefardi Rabbi, with a turban and robe, also possesses a beard in the shape of shark’s teeth. There is a head portrayed as a skull, reminding one of the S.S. Totenkopf symbol. The Magen David, attached to the skull, completes the comparison between Nazism and Judaism. Rachel Shavit, the Tel Aviv branch chairperson of the Artists’ Association , in the notes of the exhibition, describes Kedar’s work as "a personal reaction to the dark days of the black Middle Ages in which we are".

4. From the (now defunct) Monitin magazine, Winter 1994 issue. A Charedi teaches his son to steal. This is a recurrent motif in Nazi children’s literature which showed Jewish schools as places to learn crime. Hitler, in his Mein Kampf, termed then colleges for the learning of crime. Professor Michael Har-Sagor called Yeshivot "schools of darkness". In such institutions, it would appear, "Hitler Youth" are being educated, according to Professor Moshe Zimmerman who referred to the Jewish youth of Hebron in such a term.

5. "Who is A Jew?", Danny Kerman and Aharon Shemi, Kivunim 1989. Their booklet displays 32 caricatures of the characteristics of the religious community. The booklet contains exact replicas of classic antisemitic portrayals, mostly Nazi-inspired. In a broadstroked fashion, these characteristics include: pornography, violence, avarice, fanaticism, shrewd behavior, racism, crime, exploitation and xenophobia. One main difference from other antisemitic literature, not including the contents of the pictures, is the fact that the "Jew" is awarded a normal nose, unlike the usual crooked beak.

6. "The Settler", HaIr, September 10, 1993. This drawing appeared on the frontispiece of a Tel Aviv weekly published by the prestigious Schocken chain. The demonization of the Jew was intended to ostracize him from human society. In the final stage of Nazi and Arab anti-Jewish propaganda, the negating of the human element of the Jew and his becoming the enemy of the human race was in preparation for his eventual physical annihilation. The demonization of the settler (as Dan Tadmor wrote: "a loudmouth, stammering idiot...portions of spit and food leftovers caught up in his unkempt beard...a fool, simpleton, hotheaded, ignorant and cruel", Iton Yerushalayim, May 28, 1993) operates in a similar way, presumably until the day when "there will be here a bloodbath and fratricide in order, once and for all, to wage the just war", HaKibbutz, August 17, 1995.

1. HaOlam HaZeh, November 10, 1988

2. HaAretz Weekend Magazine, March 2, 1984

3. Speeches of the Knesset, July 3, 1991

4. "Isn’t It Enough For Us?", Kol Ha’Ir, January 3, 1992

5. HaAretz, September 7, 1997

6. Since it is difficult to presume that an academic of the natural studies would spew forth such pseudo-scientific claptrap, it is my guess that one of the reporters assumed the false identity of an imagined "Ginzburg" to lend his article authenticity.

7. And, of course, Der Sturmer. But it should be recalled that the Nazi higher echelon despised Julius Streicher and his paper. Streicher continued only because of his friendship with Hitler, a comrade-in-arms from the early days.

8. Hitler, A., Mein Kampf, trans. Manheim, Boston, 1943, p. 150 and pp. 304-305

9. Marx, Karl, "Zur Judenfrage" and in Das Kapital.

10. Mein Kampf, pp. 308-324

11. op. cit., 309

12. Kaufman, Y., "Umma v’Ma’amad", in B’chvlei HaZman, Dvir, 1936

13. Lately, Eban has sought to release himself from this comparison by claiming that his words were taken out of context and that he never uttered them. Eban seeks to mislead the public, hoping they will not locate the source. But this is exactly what he said in an interview granted to the German weekly, Der Spiegel, in its June 1968 issue.

14. The term "Gush Emunim" is actually empty of practical meaning as the movement that began in the wake of the Yom Kippur War is non existent although several of its leaders are still active such as Rabbi Moshe Levinger, Benny Katzover and others. Gush Emunim is a symbol for the Jewish settlement presence across the Green Line.

15. The text represented his speech the previous night before a large crowd of Peace Now demonstrators in Kings of Israel Square, now called Yitzhak Rabin Square.

16. In this phrase of "animalism and defilement" a clinical psychologist could properly describe mechanism of projection. It was Amnon Dankner who wrote of the "birth of the Left-wing mafia took place in dens of hashish and vice" in his book on Dan Ben-Amotz.

17. Oz surprises given his attitude to Gush Emunim personalities in his book, "Here and There in the Land of Israel". Oz argues with the residents of Ofra, but in a respectful mutual way. There is no indication of any animosity, especially one originating in such spewful hate.

18. The sweeping generalization in the term Charedi is problematic. The term covers a wide range of observant Jews, from anti-Zionists to Chabad pro-Israel enthusiasts. Those who yesterday were unsympathetic to the state, share in governmental power and could be considered no less Zionist than the Meretz party, for example.

19. A similar process has taken place in the wake of the peace process with the Arabs. When the Israeli became a real flesh-and-blood person rather than some abstract threat, Arab antisemitism grew incrementally.

20. Tumarkin, Y., "The Soweto of the Religious", Tel Aviv weekly, April 1986. In a conversation with the author, Tumarkin claimed his words had been taken out of context.

21. Spoken in a conversation with the author. See below, p. ???? 22. Tumarkin, Y., Tel Aviv weekly, April 1988

23. op.cit., Mein Kampf, p. 57. Hitler’s adoption of the ancient Middle Ages claim of Feodor Iudaicus, the stinking Jew, would be repeated in the future by the Israeli antisemite Tumarkin who said "the Charedim spread a stench", see Yediot Aharonot, December 20, 1992.

24. quoted in **** published by the Manof Association, p. 46

25. Yediot Ahronot, Seven Days Magazine, September 26, 1984

26. Yediot Ahronot, October 21, 1992

27. Yechezkeli, Motke, Davar, July 4, 1987

28. Kenan, Amos, Yediot Ahronot, December 20, 1985

29. Hadashot, October 30, 1992

30. in his column in Maariv, see Manof, p. 29

31. Chetz, Journal for Thought and Education, Issue 1, p. 9

32. Politika, September 1985

33. Ornan, Uzi, Kol HaIr, December 30, 1983

34. Maariv, November 9, 1988

35. Kol HaIr, December 30, 1983. See also Hadahsot, October 30, 1992

36. June 4, 1984. See the Manof booklet, p. 49

37. HaOlam HaZeh, November 10, 1988

38. In a televised interview on the Erev Hadash program on December 22, 1985

39. When he called for tanks to overrun the Samarian community of Ofra, Maariv, 1988

40. Hadashot, September 28, 1988

41. op. cit., note 29

42. He is part of this heritage together with other Jewish Germans such as Moshe Zimmerman, Yeshayhu Leibovitz, Ilana Hammerman, Yitzhak Leor, Natan Zach, Uri Avnery, Tom Segev, Ilan Pap and others.

43. This idea, which the Nazis toyed with (as with the Lublin reservation), found favor with Israeli antisemites: "if we had locked them up in reservations, and had tourists view them for pay", see: Motke Yehezkeli, Davar, July 4, 1987, op. cit., note 27

44. For further insight, see my book: "The Peace - The Arab Caricature, Studies in the Image of the Jew in the Arab Political Cartoon", Chapter 4, "Ripping Off the Human Mask from the Jewish Devil", Zemora-Beitan, 1996

45. For further references to the flattery Germany’s Jews applied to Hitler see: "Gruelpropaganda", Berlin, 1934, edited by Jakob Trachtenburg with a preface by Hermann Goering. For a concise excerpt, see Nativ, 5/95, page 67.

46. P.O. Box 6579 Tel Aviv. Other journals include "Necrophilia for Youth" and "They’re All Lies".

47. The significance of the number 21 is that it is the medical paragraph number for mental health problems.

48. Maariv, September 18, 1997

49. Gilman, Sandor, Jewish Self-Hatred, Johns Hopkins, 1986

50. See the article of Eliyahu Green "Four Decades Since the Forgotten Sudan Genocide", Nativ, 4/97, p. 37

51. For additional treatment, see Robert Wolf’s article, "’The Lord’s Feast’ - Sources of Jew Hatred in the Christian Ceremony of Cannibalism", Native, 4/91, p. 44.

52. For further reference, see my book "The Peace - The Arab Caricature, Studies in the Image of the Jew in the Arab Political Cartoon", Chapter 2, "The Blood Libel and the Eucharist Sacrament", pp. 23-27.

53. Best Sellers List, HaAretz, October 8, 1997.

---

This page hosted by GeocitiesGet your own FreeHome Page