Greg Felton at VPL

This evening, I went down to the Vancouver Public Library’s main branch to hear Greg Felton talk. Now, I have to admit that even writing that sentence makes me feel slightly queasy. But this post isn’t going to be a dissection of Felton’s views. You can Google his name & find those out easily enough.

In my mind, there is no question that the library should have gone ahead with this event, despite the high profile opposition to it (see Terry Glavin’s article in the Vancouver Sun (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/editorial/story.html?id=8f4a3c29-1ad4-43fc-bb49-b627feac1810) and City Librarian Paul Whitney’s response to it (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/letters/story.html?id=ac7a78ce-2298-40d7-9bea-647e8c66014a)). Freedom of expression means standing up for everyone’s right to free speech, whether it’s something that’s easy to defend personally, or views that I consider puerile or repugnant. Sure, it would be nice to be able to defend Maxine’s Tree or One Dad, Two Dads.. all the time, but that would be missing the point, right?

There was a depressing predictability about Felton’s presentation, and most of the audience had heard it before: either because they support his position or oppose it. At one point, I counted 3 sleepers in an audience of 80-odd. The debate section was livelier, but most of the back-and-forth had a rehearsed air. No one seemed to be going to this event with an open mind, most people weren’t asking questions, and even when someone did, Felton frequently rambled off on another anti-Zionist conspiracy theory.

My favourite library moment was when a slight woman in bright clothes stood at the front, right next to Paul Whitney (who was taking some stick for hosting the event) and yelled, “Can you stop beating up the librarians?!”

This is the first time in a few years that VPL has put on a Freedom to Read Week event. That’s pretty depressing in itself (and mea culpa as a VPL staffer). The irony is that, at the same time that VPL is holding an author-initiated event that’s nominally given the Freedom to Read Week tag, the library is hosting a provocative, topical series called Speak Up! (http://vpl.ca/speakup/) that’s full of the kind of open-minded debate that gives intellectual freedom a good name. Library-initiated controversy. Now that’s a good thing!

Advertisements

27 thoughts on “Greg Felton at VPL

  1. Beth:

    What do you mean when you said I “frequently rambled off on another anti-Zionist conspiracy theory”?

    That statement implies that what I said was false. If you had been paying attention, you would have known that I defended all my arguments and dispatched every hostile detractor. Too many people who cannot or will not open their minds hide behind the intellectual disconnect of “conspiracy theory.”

    I put it to you: What did I say that was not basewd in fact or logical inference?

    Also, contrary to what you allege, my responses were not “rehearsed”; they were researched.

    For someone who ostensibly supports provocative speakers, you come across as a hypocrite.

    Greg Felton

  2. “For someone who ostensibly supports provocative speakers, you come across as a hypocrite.”

    I’m not a member of the IFC and do not speak on their behalf, but they are not being hypocritical. You are equating the expression of an opinion on your presentation with opposition to your right to speak. Just as you have the right to your opinion, others have the right to form their own opinions about your opinions.

  3. Stephen, you misunderstand.

    I have no problem with Beth having an opinion, but I take exception to her knee-jerk, uninformed comment that I “frequently rambled off on another anti-Zionist conspiracy theory.”

    “Conspiracy thoery” is ther standard denial mechanism that people engage when they cannot or will not respect contrary points of view. To this day people cower behind the shield of “conspiracy theory” to deny the REAL evidence about the planned demolition of the World Trade Centre.

    I mentioned one such point in my talk and it is in my book.

    Beth has no right to dismiss me as she has done, and it is on this score that I charge her with hypocrisy, given that she supports inntellectual freedom. If she had a problem with any specific point I made, then she should have said so.

    So far as I could tell, Beth did not have an informed opinion; rather, her mind was made up before she entered the room.

  4. Comments on beth:

    This wasn’t about freedom-of-speech, and I don’t know why the VPL has so much trouble understanding that. Felton is free to spew his drivel to whomever he wishes, assuming they want to publish it. He can shout from the rooftops, he can write in the Arab Canadian News (as he does). But he does not have an entitlement to speak at the VPL in a taxpayer funded environment. If “controversy” were the goal, surely the VPL could have found more worthy speakers: as one blogger put it: “The question isn’t whether he should or shouldn’t be allowed to speak in public, which few of us would care about, but why it is that with limited resources the library decided this particular author should be the one to represent “freedom to read.” He wasn’t “controversial” in any legitimate sense, no more so than the muttering guy going through the garbage cans looking for empty soda cans. Why, the question then becomes, do library people here think he’s worthy of our time and money when we could have had genuinely interesting people discuss important topics and issues? Why haul in a low-rent anti-Semite?”

    Why indeed? VPL wouldn’t present a flat-earther, and i doubt they’d allow a speaker who, say, railed against gay marriage or abortion to speak either.

    As for Felton himself, see next post

  5. In my (thankfully) limited dealings with Felton, he seems to repeat the following modus operandi:

    1. Make continual accusations about “ad hominem” attacks, when his very words are criticized.

    2. Claim that everything he’s ever said is totally rooted in fact and daring anyone to disprove a single fact: of course, when you do, he simply gets abusive and/or ignoring what you said and repeating the same mantra about how everything he writes is factually accurate over and over.

    3. Very very selective use of facts. For example, his risible claim about Zionist/Nazi collaboration is largely based on a book by “edwin?” Black. Now Black himself has explicitly and totally disassociated himself with Felton’s views, but does that trouble felton, not a whit. In addition, in his zeal to tie the “zionists” to the nazis, he overlooks the fact that as many as 25% of the Nazis’ Jewish victims (i.e. between 1.25 and 1.5 million people) were “zionists,” (ie belonged to zionist organizations), and if you use Felton’s definition of Zionist (anybody who supports a Jewish state in Palestine), the figure would be even higher.
    He also overlooks the fact that while zionists like Kastzner in Hungary may have had secret talks with Eichmann in hopes of freeing hundreds of Jews, the de facto leader of Palestinian Muslims, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, met Hitler regularly, is photographed shaking hands with him, and made radio broadcasts for years during the war on behalf of the nazis. Guess that doesn’t count as collaboration tho’. 🙂

    4. Always blames the “zionist lobby” whenever anybody dares to disagree with him. Here’s what a poster at another blog had to say about Felton blaming the “zionist lobby” for the opposition he faced at the VPL presentation:

    “As if any reasonable person would think there is some lobby at work here sending people out to show opposition to losers like Felton at VPL. What does he mean to imply, that anyone who would support Israel must be part of a lobby? No independent thinker could possibly support Israel?”

    Everything you need to know about Felton and his views are summarized above.

    cheers

  6. I have no idea who you are, vildechaye, but I can assure you that I have dealings with a better class of people than you. Like many of the intellectually disenfranchised zionists who tried to shout me down, you have nothing to say and say it very often. You hide bhind slurs and basless assertions and think yourself smart. What you are is a coward who cannot put together one coherent sentence to show where I said anything harmful or wrong.

    Though rational explanation is probably lost on you, others might mistake you for a sentient being, and thus need to be alerted to the disnformation and ignorance in your, ahem, retort.

    1) My talk was most certainly about free speech, and your denial of that fact betrays you as a hypocrite. Your tedious, though predictable, attacks on the library and your ad hominem attacks on me discredit you from having anything useful to say.

    2) Speaking of the latter, you provide the best proof that the attacks against me ARE ad hominem, as in the slur “low-rent anti-Semite.” Note: the slur has nothing to do with my arguments). How nice of you to shoot yourself in the foot while you shoot off your mouth.

    3) What I write IS rooted in fact. Neither you not any others of your ilk has the balls to make a factual argument, so you are in no position to whinge when I defend my writing.

    4) Edwin Black’s attack on me was baseless as I showed in my lengthy rebuttal to him. I cited him fairly and directly. He tried to deny the teleology of his research to manufacture an excuse for zionist collaboration withw the Nazis. I was not.

    The Grand Mufti drone is standard disinformation. Yes, the Mufti met with Hitler, but only to see if the Nazis would join in an anti-British campaign, but Hitler declined. The Mufti made a few stupid speeches and that was it. In the end the episode was a virtual non-event and did not in any way further the Nazis’ ambitions.

    The same CANNOT be said for the efforts Jewish Nazi collaborators like David Green (ben Gurion) Yitzhak Yezerenitzky (Shamir) Joseph Weitz, Kurt Blumenfeld and Chaim Weizmann who helped the Nazis exterminate Yiddish culture and keep the economy from collapsing. I guess you have no problem with actual war criminals.

    4) The Israel Lobby is a fact and is a pervasive threat to our civil liberties. If you wish to challenge my facts (as if!) make your case or shut up.

  7. Greg–please watch your flamey tone.

    Debating and disagreeing on ideas is fine, however calling someone else a coward, implying that they are stupid, and being rude, as in “make your case or shut up”, is not ok.

  8. Oh, and callibng me, or implying that I am, an anti-Semite is acceptable?!

    What’s to debate when my “opponent” makes no attempt to be honest?

    I have been defamed countless times by the likes of vildechaye, and am sick of blogs allowing such comments to stand.

  9. It’s his standard modus operandi, so don’t be surprised. As expected, he used the “ad hominem” argument — what would a typical felton spew be without it. He shrugs off the Mufti — based on cold hard evidence — but slanders the first prime minister of Israel — who it should be mentioned was/is adored by holocaust survivors, who oughta know who their people’s killers were — indicating my second point re: selective use of facts. As always, claiming everything he says is rooted in “fact,” when those “facts” are in — let’s put it gently — in major dispute and are the diametric opposite of what most serious scholars of these issues believe, especially re: the holocaust, but also about zionism and Jews generally. And, also as always, abusive and nasty as all get out, revealing a glimpse of his true colours. Anyway, i’m glad i got a rise out of him. cheers all.

  10. to be clear–i will not be approving further comments if they are rude or contain insults directed at someone else. i didn’t think it was necessary to have to tell *everyone* that name calling and bad manners will not be tolerated.

    debate nicely or go elsewhere.

  11. vildechaye, one of the core values of libraries in Canada is intellectual freedom (CLA statement, FAQ on IF ).

    From the latter: “Intellectual freedom is an essential part of democracy. To make informed decisions, people need free access to information from many perspectives. Censorship weakens democracy.

    It is important to know what and how other people think. Allowing one idea to be censored opens up the possibility that any idea can be censored.”

    some of the things that the hardest for me to reconcile in my mind are historical children’s books that are horribly racist, like Little Black Sambo. it’s important to have these materials in our library because it’s important to not forget that some people used to think this way about Black people and they were wrong.

    religion and politics are both areas in which there is a huge range of opinions. if they are legal in Canada (i.e. not banned by the government as hate speech) then the public library should have space in their collections, meeting rooms and poster boards for these viewpoints. this is a wise use of taxpayers money IMO.

    i don’t work for VPL, so i can’t comment on the process they used for choosing Greg Felton’s program for Freedom to Read week.

  12. A few more comments, re: Greg Felton’s efforts
    to label me “dishonest.” Here’s just an example of
    real dishonesty (and, by the by, a true “ad hominem”
    attack):
    Felton says: “The Israel Lobby is a fact and is a
    pervasive threat to our civil liberties. If you wish
    to challenge my facts (as if!) make your case or
    shut up.”

    neither I nor the blogger i quoted (nor anyone else
    i can imagine) ever stated there was no israeli
    lobby. The point the blogger I quoted was making was
    simply that you don’t need a “lobby” to be a critic
    of Felton’s nonsense. Specifically, the blogger I
    quoted said: “As if any reasonable person would
    think there is some lobby at work here sending
    people out to show opposition to losers like Felton
    at VPL. What does he mean to imply, that anyone who
    would support Israel must be part of a lobby? No
    independent thinker could possibly support
    Israel?”

    Now think what you will about the above quote, but
    it doesn’t call into question the existence of an
    israeli lobby. What it does call into question is
    that you need to be a part of the israeli lobby to
    critique Greg Felton. As if the nefarious “israeli
    lobby” would actually take the time to send people
    to deal with the likes of felton. I was there. I am
    not a member of any lobby. Nor was the blogger I
    quote, or, I suspect anybody else. But Felton’s
    ego is so big and his conspiracy theories so wild
    that he imagines the dreaded “lobby” is there
    watching his every move. And
    even if they were watching Felton, which i strongly
    doubt, that hardly makes the lobby a “threat to our
    civil liberties.”

    My last word: Felton’s notion that Canada has a zionist
    occuped government reeks of anti-semitism and, to
    any clear minded person, is just so much drivel.
    have a nice day.

  13. For tara:

    I am at a loss to understand why you and apparently other library folks continue to bring up “freedom-of-speech” and censorship vis a vis the complaint about giving Felton a platform at VPL. As i and many others have repeated over and over ad nauseam, it’s not about free speech OR censorship, as Felton is free to talk and publish all he likes. Free speech and non-censorship do not obligate the library to provide him with a speaking platform. his book is another matter, and I have no problems with the library stocking any book, even Mein Kampf, as they are valuable for the historical record and scholastic study. if nothing else.

    Since this is not a difficult concept and I’m sure you, Paul Whitney and all the other library folks grasp it, something else must be going on.

    Little black sambo notwithstanding — that’s a book after all — would you be asking flat-earthers, creationists, anti-women’s liberation, etc. etc. and give them a platform too. remember i’m not talking about their books, i’m talking about paying for a room and security, etc. and showcasing them as you did Felton. I truly doubt it. Somehow, as Terry Glavin points out, it’s become almost “respectable” to be anti-semitic as long as you don’t use the word Jew. Felton’s notion of a zionist-controlled Canadian government is no less absurd than what the flat-earthers and creationists say, but somehow the library thinks it’s ok and against censorship to invite this into the library. No wonder you got complaints from jewish people, since 95% of canadian jews are zionist (by Felton’s definition, anyway), and therefore the controlling zionists he’s always referring to are, for the most part, jews, especially in Canada.

    I would feel better about how the library handles “controversial” topics if you also would invite folks who worry about Islamicisation, or are anti-gay marriage, or strongly anti-abortion, or believe a woman’s place is in the home. I don’t hold any of those positions, but i believe those arguments are no less worthy of the “free speech” you claim to espouse than Felton’s nonsense.

  14. Hi Tara:

    I posted a teperate, legitimate response3 ot vildechaye’s ranting about me and I would like to know why it wasn’t posted.

    He has misrepreseted my arguments and distorted history. I would like to set the record straight.

    He denies that David Ben Gurion was a Nazi sympathist. The historical record is unequivocally proves that he is,

    In a letter to the zionist executive on Dec. 17, 1938, David Ben-Gurion stated: “The saving of Jewish lives from Hitler is considered here as a potential threat to zionism, unless they are brought to Palestine. When zionism had to choose between the Jewish people and the Jewish state, it unhesitatingly preferred the latter…

    “Zionism accepts anti-Semitism as the natural, normal attitude of the non-Jewish world toward the Jew. It does not consider it as a distorted, perverted phenomenon; it is a response to anti-Semitism, but not a confrontation, denunciation or fight against it.“

    I await vildechaye’s response.

    Thank you

  15. Greg, I didn’t approve your last comments because they were snide, rude and insulting. I’ve been very clear about that that insults, even clever ones, are not OK.

  16. Really?

    You allow “anti-Semite” to stand against me, yet my jusifiable consternation at vildechaye’s historical distortions are not acceptable?!

    Such high standards!

  17. So what?

    Felton’s selective use of quotes and facts has already been established. In this case however, the quotes he used do not indicate that Ben Gurion was a “Nazi sympathist [sic]”. They do indicate a man so obsessed with zionism (ie bringing jews to palestine) that he suborned everything else to that goal. Which, when you think about it, makes sense for the “George Washington” of the zionist movement. Ben Gurion made other comments that also sound like he cared more about Zionism than the fate of individual jews, but that hardly makes him a nazi sympathiZER, unlike the grand mufti, who, as i mentioned earlier, met with hitler, was photographed with hitler, and made radio broadcasts for the reich. It’s also worth mentioning that other leading Zionists excoriated Ben Gurion for his 1938 remarks. And that the remarks hardly sum up the complex relationship between the Yishuv (the jewish agency in palestine that ben gurion headed) and the diaspora jews in europe, many of whom, as i’ve mentioned previously, were also zionist.

    In short, while it is true that there is a continuing historical controversy around charges that “Ben-Gurion and his followers, intent on their goal of a Jewish state in Palestine, were willing to let the Jews of Europe die rather than transfer energy and resources to rescuing them,” Felton’s standard modus operandus — selective use of quotes — bizarrely turns the issue into black and white, and worse, where black becomes white and vice versa. In fact, the Palestinian Zionist leadership did attempt to rescue the Jews from the nazis several times, but as has been noted by other historians, “Ben-Gurion was extremely restricted in what he could have done. The Palestine Jewish community was small and it did not have the powers of a state. A quasi-governmental structure existed, but it was always subject to the British mandatory government that ruled Palestine. It had no status in world affairs. It had no army to fight Germany. And it could not even control immigration to Palestine. In 1939 the British had imposed a limit of 75,000 Jews who could enter Palestine over the next five years. In late 1942, when the Nazi program of genocide became known, only 29,000 places remained. Even with knowledge of the Holocaust, Britain held adamantly to that limit. Meanwhile, no other country was willing to take in Jewish refugees except in very small numbers.”

    And most leading Holocaust scholars agree that the Palestine Jewish community could not have done significantly more than it did to rescue European Jews. Ben Gurion’s biographer, Israeli historian Shabtai Teveth, correctly notes that “rescue efforts ‘were defeated first and foremost by the Germans. Second in culpability were Germany’s satellites, followed by the British, who not only failed to lift a finger to rescue Jews but . . . did their best to obstruct . . . rescue efforts in order to block immigration to Palestine. Last came the indifferent world, especially the United States,” and that Ben-Gurion struggled against these obstacles with little success. He also argues, persuasively, that in the final analysis, Ben Gurion’s “lack of success had nothing to do with Zionist ideology, his attitude toward Diaspora Jews or his obsession with a Jewish state.”

    Of course Felton is unlikely to be convinced. But who cares. The fact is, 99% of the Jewish population in the diaspora today, including those holocaust survivors still alive (like my parents), revere Ben Gurion. And believe me, if they believed for a minute that Ben Gurion truly “collaborated” with the Nazis, they would spit on his grave.

    One final thought: Selective use of quotes works both ways.

  18. What a hoot!

    I produce historical evidene that ben Gurion supported the Nazi regime, and that the Grand Mufti’s abortive dalliance wiht Hitler came to nnaught and vildechaye pops a headvalve. Good Grief!

    Rather than face the evidence, Vildecahye agains attacks me for selective use of quotes without once demonstrating that my quote ihad any errors.

    I could also have cited Yizhak Yezernitsky (later “Shamir”) who as a member of the Stern Gang met with Hitler in Bergtesgarten to try to forge a zionist-Nazi alliance.

    I could also have cited Rabbi Joachim Prinz, as I did in my talk, who openly praised the Nazi regime and condemned Jews who “resented” the Third Reich.

    I could also have cited the effors of Morris Ernst, one of FDR’s closest advisors who tried to bring 500,000 Jews to the U.S. but was stopped and vilified by Zionist Jews for being a traitor.

    So much for the official veneration of ben Gurionand the alleged evidence of holocaust “scholars.”

    Once again, history trumps propaganda.

  19. My gosh, what a performance. let’s see what actually has transpired here:

    Mr. Felton’s “proof” that Ben gurion supported the nazi regime. Let’s see what that amounts to: a couple of quotes from speeches, not a call for action, let alone actions by Ben Gurion. Just a couple of speeches that simply state a preference. No alliance, no meetings, no nothing. And that’s the so-called proof. That’s a joke.

    Now the Mufti, that’s a different matter. Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, if bengurion met hitler, was photographed with Hitler, and made speeches for Hitler. I doubt Felton would be so sanguine as to say it was “abortive” and “came to naught.” How can a couple of speeches by BenGurion be more than meetings photographs and speeches for the Mufti?

    Shamir met with Hitler. Now that’s a new one. I did a google search and found some pretty nasty sites that implied that the Stern Gang, which shamir later led, may have proposed some sort of deal with Italian fascists. As the sites got nastier, the stories got worse: the deal was with the fascists AND the nazis, or just with the Nazis, etc. etc. But nowhere, not even on the nastiest of the sites, did I find a single reference to Shamir or any other member of the Stern Gang or any zionist group actually meeting with Hitler. Felton must have had to really burrow through the dregs to find that nasty bit of rumor, which, if true, would be paraded by anti-semites the world over.

    Rabbi joachim Prinz: The following excerpt from the
    Wikipedia entry about Rabbi Prinz is very representative of the mainstream (i.e. historically accepted by historians/scholars, etc.) articles you’ll find in libraries and on the Internet: Joachim Prinz (1902-1988) was a German rabbi who was outspoken against Nazism and became an American Jewish leader. After his emigration to the United States, he became vice-chairman of the World Jewish Congress, an active member of the World Zionist Organization and a participant in the 1963 Civil Rights March on Washington. He was born, on May 10, 1902, in the German country village of Burkhardtsdorf, Prinz was a vocal opponent to Nazism and spent his young years warning others about the dangers of National Socialism long before Adolf Hitler seized power in 1933.[3] At that time, most German Jews who had lived in Germany, with communities dating back as far as the 4th Century, saw Hitler’s gradual rise as a momentary chapter in an otherwise normal, assimilated life.Prinz, who grew up in rural Germany, was already familiar with anti-Semitism. He saw Hitler’s message as a rallying cry that was capturing the hearts of so many around him. He started persuading Jews to leave Germany. Prinz’ message, as a result, made him a constant Gestapo target. He was often arrested and detained on harassment charges by the Gestapo. As his prominence grew in Germany and his fears of Hitler’s reign coming to fruition, he earned the sponsorship of Rabbi Stephen Wise who was a close adviser to President Franklin Roosevelt. In 1937, Prinz immigrated to the United States.

    Felton appears to have seized on the work of Lenni Brenner, an avid anti-zionist who believes that “Prinz definitely thought that Zionism could come to an accommodation with Nazism.” Brenner quotes him as having said : “Well, we thought, in our discussions with intellectuals in the SS movement, that the time would come when they would say, ‘Yes, you live in Germany, you are Jewish people, you are different from us, but we will not kill you, we will permit you to live your own cultural life, and develop your own national capacities and dreams.’
    We thought, at the beginning of the Hitler regime that such a very frank discussion was possible. We found among the SS intellectuals, some people were ready for such a talk. But of course such a talk never took place because the radical element in the Nazi movement won out.”

    Now take that above paragraph as you will, it hardly sounds like someone who : “openly praised the nazi regime and condemned jews who ‘resented’ the third reich,” even if you include Brenner’s quote, which on its own clearly is selective and portrays a totally false picture. Not as false as felton’s though.

    Morris Ernst: All the references to this story were found on either racist, anti-semitic white power sites like Stormfront or rabidly anti-zionist sites. And even if true, it’s just one incident among thousands, and surely there are that many, testifying to the (ultimately futile) tenacity and zeal wiith which jews, zionist and non-zionist alike, tried to rescue their kin from the death camps. naturally, Felton and those who think like him conflate the former and disregard the latter.

    And conflating is what it’s all about. Felton has taken two quotes by BenGurion and a few other stories and conflated them into some weird joint Nazi-Zionist partnership where both sides are somehow responsible for the holocaust of the jews. It would be kinda funny if it weren’t so sick.

    For all the bluster about history, his points are devoid of any historical scholarship and have much in common with David Irving, who used selective quotes to “prove” that Churchill, not Hitler, was responsible for the second world war. Only Felton can only wish to achieve the infamy that Irving did. Very sad.

  20. Such frothing!

    If vidlechaye weren’t so selective in his use of sources or so willing to dismiss contrary evidence I might take him seriously. Any source I cite is immediately disparaged, even if it is Jewish, if it challenges vildechaye’s zionist illusions.

    For him to cite Wikipedia as a source is not interested in real research. Small wonder that he is unfamiliar with the pro-Nazi sympathies of Shamir and others.

    Still, I am waiting for vildechaye to do more than regurgitiate non-cognitive denials. At no time does he demonstrate that my research is false.

    I may have a long wait.

    As I said, history trumps propaganda.

  21. By now we all know that Greg Felton is infallible, his sources are impeccable and his history is questionable. However, in the latest evasion he says:

    1. Selective use of quotes. I don’t use quotes selectively, that’s his department. I don’t “disparage” sources unless they contradict other sources. For example, citing Lenni Brenner when there are dozens, maybe hundreds of other sources who say what the Wikipedia article says is a “selective use of quotes,” wouldn’t you say. As for my use of Wikipedia, why not? I made it clear it was “representative of most of the articles about Prinz,” which could be — and was — confirmed by a mere google search. And like i said in the last response, even Brenner doesn’t conclude that Prinz: “praised the Nazi regime and condemned jews who ‘resented’ the Third Reich.” In fact, by all accounts, Prinz also ‘resented’ it, as he is described in most accounts as a leading anti-nazi, which i have no doubt he was. The most even Brenner says is that he was trying to make an accommodation between the JEWS (note: not Zionists) and the Nazis, which is hardly the same thing as “praising the Nazis and condemning jews.” So I suspect Felton extrapolated from Brenner, which amounts to making it up. Some great historian!

    2. I became very familiar with the Shamir story. I read it on many of the neo-nazi and rabid anti-zionist sites Felton seems to frequent. However, not even those sites — not one — ever stated that Shamir met Hitler in Berchtesgaden, or anywhere else. I think he got carried away and made that one up too.

    3. “at no time does he demonstrate that my research [sic] is false.” Actually, that’s all i do, in this post and all the previous ones, (e.g. the Michael Prinz response which quotes his source as well as mine) but Felton seems to think if he keeps repeating that all his facts are correct and nobody has ever proven him wrong about anything, that must mean it’s really so.

    I agree, history does trump propaganda. The question is, who is spouting propaganda? Felton goes to extremist web sites to gain his facts, whereas the “conventional history” he’s trying to “correct” is the work of thousands of scholars at universities across the Western world — not to mention first-hand accounts and memoirs. So basically it amounts to; where would the great historical philosophers, guys like Herder, Hegel, Ranke, Collingwood, look for real history? Would they go to Oxford/Harvard/Cambridge/U of T/McGill/UBC or to Stormfront and Yvonne Ridley’s web site? (actually it’s a rhetorical question).

  22. It’s always heartening to watch my detractors hang themselves.

    In Vildechaye’s warped parallel universe, quantity of citation equals accuracy. By this logic, the mediaeval theologians were right to put the Earth at the centre of the universie and trace all mankind to Adam and Eve.

    Of course, he does not address himself to the evidence I provide. He is content to deny it, and pretend that he is smart. I show that ben Gurion was pro-Nazi and he cites, well, nothing. I show that shamir was pro-Nazi and he tries to denigrate my sources rather than address the substantive facts behind it.

    Perhaps I need to provide further proof of the Nazi-zionist connection:

    In 1943, Yitzhak Shamir said: “Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat.”
    Oft cited quote found in numerous scholarly sources, including John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby, London Review of Books, March 23, 2006.

    David ben Gurion:
    “The zionist movement…interfered with and hindered other organizations, Jewish and non-Jewish, whenever it imagined that their activity, political or humanitarian, was at variance with Zionist aims or in competition with them, even when these might be helpful to Jews, even when it was a question of life and death…Beit Zvi documents the Zionist leadership’s indifference to saving Jews from the Nazi menace except in cases in which the Jews could be brought to Palestine.…

    “The obtuseness of the Zionist movement towards the fate of European Jewry did not prevent if, of course, from later hurling accusations against the whole world for its indifference towards the Jewish catastrophe or from pressing material, political, and moral demands on the world because of that indifference.”
    Cited in Boas Evron, Jewish State or Israeli Nation? and reproduced in Origin of Arab-Israeli Conflict 3rd. ed., (Jews for Justice: Berkley, Calif), p. 17

    Joseph Weitz, the Jewish National Fund administrator for Zionist colonization (1967): “There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer all of them; not one village, not one tribe, should be left.” (from My Diary and Letters to the Children, Chapter III, p. 293.

    Regarding the Nazis’ genocial hatred of Jews, we have these examples of Zionsit genocidal hatred toward Arabs:

    Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, founder and spiritual leader of the Shas party: “It is forbidden to be merciful to them, you must give them missiles, with relish – annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones. May the Holy Name visit retribution on the Arabs’ heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them, and cause them to be vanquished and cause them to be cast from the world,”, Ma’ariv, April, 9, 2001.

    As further proof we have Shulamit Aloni, former Israeli education minister: “Sharon and the Israeli leadership always try to make Israelis believe the lie that the Palestinians want to throw us to the sea. In fact, we are the ones who commit war crimes against humanity, and I hope Sharon will face justice,” (Roee Nahmias, “Israeli terror is worse,” ynetnews.com, July 29, 2005.)

    Unlike, vildeahaye, I can back my research with specific comments from credible Jewish sources. I guess I am infallible.

    What say you?

  23. A few short comments on Felton’s “infallability” vs. “my warped parallel universe” (talk about pot calling kettle black).

    He talks about “pro-nazi” comments by Bengurion and Shamir. Well i’ve gone back and read everything he has quoted, and nowhere do either actually utter a pro-nazi comment.

    Here are the quotes:
    “Perhaps I need to provide further proof of the Nazi-zionist connection:

    “In 1943, Yitzhak Shamir said: “Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat.”
    Oft cited quote found in numerous scholarly sources, including John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby, London Review of Books, March 23, 2006.
    “David ben Gurion:
    “The zionist movement…interfered with and hindered other organizations, Jewish and non-Jewish, whenever it imagined that their activity, political or humanitarian, was at variance with Zionist aims or in competition with them, even when these might be helpful to Jews, even when it was a question of life and death…Beit Zvi documents the Zionist leadership’s indifference to saving Jews from the Nazi menace except in cases in which the Jews could be brought to Palestine.…
    “The obtuseness of the Zionist movement towards the fate of European Jewry did not prevent if, of course, from later hurling accusations against the whole world for its indifference towards the Jewish catastrophe or from pressing material, political, and moral demands on the world because of that indifference.”
    Cited in Boas Evron, Jewish State or Israeli Nation? and reproduced in Origin of Arab-Israeli Conflict 3rd. ed., (Jews for Justice: Berkley, Calif), p. 17
    Joseph Weitz, the Jewish National Fund administrator for Zionist colonization (1967): “There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer all of them; not one village, not one tribe, should be left.” (from My Diary and Letters to the Children, Chapter III, p. 293.

    Now I ask you people, does even one of those quotes have anything to do with being pro-Nazi? I guess, to Felton, if you are, how did he quote it “indifferent to the plight of euro jews” “obtuseness” or words to that effect, somehow that makes you “pro-nazi,” not that I believe BG or shamir were indifferent or obtuse to the fate of euro Jews, but the extrapolation and conflation that Felton uses is on big display here. I challenge him to produce a quote that is actually “pro-nazi” (i.e. supportive of nazi germany or its goals) by either gent, he should be able to do so easily, since he accuses both of this so often, but so far, he hasn’t. He quotes shamir justifying terrorism (fair enough), but again, that hardly makes him pro-nazi now does it, and if it does, so does the regime who subsidizes the paper he writes for.

    2. For every quote by Jewish leaders denigrating arabs, I can find 10 by Arabs and Palestinians denigrating jews (pigs and apes, anybody). And besides, it is unrelated to the subject, which is that Felton has slandered the Zionist movement by calling them pro-nazi.

    3. Nice to see he quotes good zionists like Shulamit Aloni when it suits him. Again her quote about Sharon, which i dont entirely disagree with, has nothing to do with the subject at hand, which isn’t “state terrorism on palestinians.” Note that I haven’t brought up Palestinian/Arab/Muslim terror attacks against israel or the west in my arguments, because they too aren’t relevant. Doesn’t seem to bother Felton tho.

    So now that i’ve addressed the “evidence” Felton dredges up, i guess he’ll have to try to find another way to make believe that I live in the parallel universe and he’s the rooted one. Unfortunately, that will be hard for the guy who believes that Canada and the U.S. are somehow dominated by those nasty Zionists. Wonder how they got so much power, anyway.

    Anyway, Felton can now have the stage all to himself. I’ve said all I’m going to, and I’m tired of arguing at this low level. Have fun doing “research” at all those fine web sites you seem to scour. I’ll stick to traditional scholarship that hasn’t been discredited anytime a light is shone upon it. cheers all.

  24. when you strip all the rhetoric away, and all the talk about real history etc. the plain truth is that Felton makes unsubstantiated claims and fails to substantiate them. For instance:

    He said Shamir met Hitler. I challenged him on it. He provided nothing to back that up, other than saying Shamir committed terror acts. So come on, show the proof.

    He said Prinz praised the Nazis and condemned jews who resented them. Again, I asked for proof, none has been forthcoming.

    In short, the rest of the chatter is all obfuscation. He can’t back up these claims — some real historian!!!

  25. One more comment from Greg Felton:

    The truly disturbing thing about zionists is their need for ad hominem defamation and self-delusion. Throughout his posts, vildechaye denigrates me, insults my scholarship and denies me the right of free speech at the library, yet never once does he entertain my arguments or show them to be wrong in any regard. He does little more than mock me, deny my arguments, and ignore the evidence of history, especially concerning the Nazi-Zionist collaboration. I could have also cited in this regard Professor Sholmo Sand of Tel Aviv University, who traced the invention of the Jewish “nation” to 19th-century Germany and the same folkish chauvinism that gave rise to German National Socialism, but I doubt even that would have made any difference. The spirit of dissent is the only true freedom a just society affords its people, and those who attack and misrepresent those who do dissent, as has happened on this thread, are threats to all our liberties and defenders of tyranny.

  26. The comment above (#25) is really the last comment in this thread. It has been re-inserted in response to a complaint by Mr. Felton over my initial handing of it. Looking back, disemvoweling him wasn’t a good idea. I’m sorry that it upset Mr. Felton. Given that this is, after all, a blog concerned with Intellectual Freedom, we decided it was appropriate to put back his words.

    This discussion has run its course, and now it is time to move on.

  27. Pingback: Happy Birthday, Blog! | intellectual freedom committee - bcla

Say Something

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s