Accueil > Sociétés Civiles à Parlement Européen > VOIX DE LA VERITE, VOIES DE LA SAGESSE, dont celle de l’ONU

Toutes tendances confondues, ces voix s’accordent sur un dénominateur commun : l’Apartheid !

VOIX DE LA VERITE, VOIES DE LA SAGESSE, dont celle de l’ONU

Florilège d’analyses dont certaines datent déjà de plus de 10 ans.

lundi 23 octobre 2006

Avi Shlaim
Historien israélien, professeur à Oxford


If you look at Israel’s specific policies on the West Bank - the illegal Jewish settlements, the brutal military repression of the Arabs, the abuses of human rights, the habitual disregard for international law, the building of the so-called ’security barrier’, the roads for the exclusive use of Jewish settlers - all make up a pretty ugly picture. If that is not apartheid, I don’t know what is.

[ interview par D. Atapattu | The Palestine Chronicle Weekly Journal | 13 mai 2004 ]

Ben Yair
Juge israélien


Nous commettons des crimes qui bafouent le droit international et la morale publique. Les « liquidations ciblées » sont du terrorisme d’Etat. Dès lors qu’un pouvoir érige deux systèmes juridiques différents, l’un démocratique et libéral, l’autre répressif et cruel, là commence l’apartheid. Lorsque deux populations n’ont ni le même statut ni les mêmes droits, qu’une armée défend la propriété des uns et détruit celle des autres, qu’un colon a droit a beaucoup plus d’eau qu’un indigène, que la ségrégation est inscrite dans la loi, il n’y a pas d’autre terme pour définir cette situation qu’un apartheid.

[ interview par S. Cypel | Le Monde (France) | 10 février 2002 ]

Jimmy Carter
Ancien président des Etats-Unis


Israel’s current policy in the territories, Carter writes in the book’s (*) summary, is « a system of apartheid, with two peoples occupying the same land but completely separated from each other, with Israelis totally dominant and suppressing violence by depriving Palestinians of their basic human rights. »

(*) Palestine : Peace Not Apartheid, Simon & Schuster, 2006

Forward (USA)

Mordechai Vanunu
Activiste israélien


[Mordechaï] Vanunu juge qu’un État Juif n’a pas lieu d’exister et prône la création d’un État binational dans lequel les Palestiniens et les Juifs auraient les mêmes droits. « Durant la première moitié du XXe siècle, il y avait un vrai problème d’antisémitisme, dit-il. Aujourd’hui, des réfugiés de toutes les guerres sont disséminés à travers le monde et les Juifs ne sont qu’une minorité parmi d’autres. Ils ne sont plus en danger. Ils n’ont plus besoin d’un refuge. Ce dont Israël a besoin, c’est d’une vraie démocratie. Le jour où il y aura un premier ministre et un chef du Mossad palestiniens, je serai fier d’appartenir à ce pays. Mais pour l’instant Israël est un État juif raciste, où règne un apartheid antipalestinien. Je ne veux plus y vivre. »

Le Figaro (France)

Israel Shamir
Journaliste, écrivain et traducteur israélien


There is a linguistic trap, one of those Zionists are quite good at. Here is the way out : the ’destruction of Israel’ is not like ’destruction of Italy’. Nobody has the idea to ruin Israeli cities and to kill, loot and displace Israeli citizens, or to push Jews into the sea, as Zionists claim. Instead of ’destruction’, it is better to speak of deconstruction of the apartheid state and creation of the state of equality, based on universal suffrage. The victory of the North against the South was not ’the destruction of the Confederacy’, but ’reconstruction of the South’, termination of slavery and creation of new, more equal entity. Likewise Rhodesia and South Africa were reconstructed into Zimbabwe and new South Africa. That is the purpose of the Palestinians and Jews objecting to the apartheid.

« Not destruction, but deconstruction »

Juan Goytisolo
Ecrivain espagnol


Le plan de Sharon, dévoilé avec courage et une grande lucidité par l’anthropologue israélien Jeff Halper ("Offensive finale pour en finir avec les Palestiniens", El País du 11 février), témoigne de la volonté du premier ministre israélien de réaliser d’un seul coup son vieux rêve d’arracher coûte que coûte à ses ennemis l’acceptation d’un « mini-Etat morcelé, dépendant, sans aucune continuité territoriale, sans économie fiable, et sans véritable souveraineté ». Pour aboutir à ses fins, toutes les méthodes d’intimidation et de violence seront bonnes : assassinats ciblés, destruction d’habitations, couvre-feu imposé pendant des semaines, confiscation des terres, maintien de la population palestinienne sous un régime d’apartheid inhumain et dégradant. (...) L’instauration d’un régime d’apartheid autour des ghettos et des enclaves palestiniennes à l’aube de ce troisième millénaire constitue un cas flagrant d’anachronisme. Lorsqu’on sait que l’abrogation du système ségrégationniste en Afrique du Sud, il y a une douzaine d’années, ne fut possible que grâce à la pression internationale, comment expliquer cette résignation silencieuse devant l’état d’exception permanent imposé par un Etat qui se considère lui aussi comme exceptionnel ?

Le Monde (France)

Amira Hass
Journaliste israélienne


Sometimes when the power has been shut down we have sat shrouded in darkness, and the sense of discrimination has become as tangible and powerful as night and day. Several hundred Palestinians families have long lived in the Katif Bloc area and earn their living from agriculture. Even today they are forbidden to hookup to the electric grid and are obliged to make do with private generators or candlelight. Once, when Palestinian vehicles were still allowed on the settlement roads, I drove to the Neve Dekalim settlement after staying with friends in Khan Yunis. My friends had no running water during the day ; at night the family would turn on a noisy generator and fill up the tank on the roof - with salty water, which often gave out in the afternoon or slowed to a thin trickle. As soon as I reached Neve Dekalim, I ran to the Regional Council rest room and let the cool, plentiful water run over my hands and face. Sweet and refreshing, the free-flowing water still had an aftertaste, the bitter flavor - I couldn’t help but imagine - of apartheid.

Drinking the Sea at Gaza

Desmond Tutu
Former Archbishop of Cape Town (South Africa)
Chairman of South Africa’s truth and reconciliation commission


I’ve been very deeply distressed in my visit to the Holy Land ; it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa.

The Guardian (UK)

Ami Ayalon
Ancien directeur du Shin Beth (sécurité intérieure)


Plus significative encore est la récente prise de position de l’amiral Ami Ayalon, qui il y a peu dirigeait les services de sécurité (Shin Beth) : les Palestiniens « avaient espéré obtenir un Etat viable et une certaine dose de justice, en acceptant - ce qui était pour eux un grand compromis - de renoncer aux territoires qui constituent Israël dans ses frontières de 1948. Une partie des Palestiniens pensent aujourd’hui que le compromis que nous leur proposons est indigne. A leurs yeux, nous n’avons cédé que sous la menace ; nous avons interrompu les négociations, pour ne les reprendre que sous la pression de la violence. Une démocratie juive peut-elle accepter l’apartheid ? A mon avis, non ».

[ M. Warschawski | Le Monde diplomatique (France) | Janvier 2001 ]

Noam Chomsky
Linguiste, professeur, écrivain et activiste américain


Barak’s chief peace negotiator explained in 1998 that the goal of the Oslo process is to ensure that Palestine remains a permanent neo-colonialist dependency. It can be called « a state, » just as apartheid South Africa was happy to call the Bantustans « states. »

Socialist Worker (UK)

A year ago, the Hebrew University sociologist Baruch Kimmerling observed that « what we feared has come true - War appears an unavoidable fate », an « evil colonial » war. His colleague Ze’ev Sternhell noted that the Israeli leadership was now engaged in « colonial policing, which recalls the takeover by the white police of the poor neighbourhoods of the blacks in South Africa during the apartheid era ». Both stress the obvious : there is no symmetry between the « ethno-national groups » in this conflict, which is centred in territories that have been under harsh military occupation for 35 years. The Oslo « peace process », begun in 1993, changed the modalities of the occupation, but not the basic concept. Shortly before joining the Ehud Barak government, historian Shlomo Ben-Ami wrote that « the Oslo agreements were founded on a neo-colonialist basis, on a life of dependence of one on the other forever ». (...) It is understandable that maps are not to be found in the US mainstream. Nor is their prototype, the Bantustan « homelands » of apartheid South Africa, ever mentioned. (...) Not surprisingly, the guiding principle of the occupation has been incessant humiliation. Israeli plans for Palestinians have followed the guidelines formulated by Moshe Dayan, one of the Labour leaders more sympathetic to the Palestinian plight. Thirty years ago Dayan advised the cabinet that Israel should make it clear to refugees that « we have no solution, you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wishes may leave ». When challenged, he responded by citing Ben-Gurion, who said that « whoever approaches the Zionist problem from a moral aspect is not a Zionist ». He could have also cited Chaim Weizmann, first president of Israel, who held that the fate of the « several hundred thousand negroes » in the Jewish homeland « is a matter of no consequence ».

The Guardian (UK)

Jim Crow South was kind of informal apartheid, but here it’s formalized. So, for example, if you look at the land laws, and decode it all, what it amounts to is that about ninety percent of the land inside Israel is reserved to what’s called « people of Jewish race, religion and origin. » [...] That’s in the contract between the state of Israel and the Jewish National Fund, which is a non-Israeli organization, which, however, by various bureaucratic arrangements, administers the land. So it turns out to have a major role in the land administration authority. All of this is covered up enough so that nobody can say, « Look, here’s an apartheid law. » You have to pull it out of the various regulations and practices, but it’s there. Effectively, it means that about ninety percent of the land, in one fashion or another, is reserved for the Jewish citizens of Israel. [...] fact it’s presented as a very progressive, socialist legislation. Because the land is nationalized, it’s not under private ownership, and this is regarded as very progressive, Western, leftist, you know, « this is terrific, » but it’s just a technique for ensuring that the land would be reserved for Jewish citizens, not Arab citizens. And then that shows up in every other way you can imagine, whether you have village development or schools, sewage-the usual things that just sharply discriminate. So, in that sense, there is kind of an apartheid structure, and it’s built into the system. It’s also built into the immigration laws and all sorts of other things.

Journal of South African and American Comparative Studies

Rabbi Elmer Berger
Théologien, philosophe et activiste


This system makes its Jewish citizens and potential citizens, who have never even lived in the state, more equal than those who have a recognized claim to Palestinian nationality. In that sense, Dr. Berger perceived Zionist legislation as more grotesque than apartheid in South Africa.

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (USA)

Stéphane Hessel
Ambassadeur de France


Les termes d’apartheid et d’ethnocratie conviennent au sort réservé non seulement aux Palestiniens de Cisjordanie et de Gaza, dont aucun des droits fondamentaux n’est plus respecté et qui sont soumis aux violations, exactions, humiliations qui leur sont quotidiennement infligées, mais aussi à la population arabe d’Israël, qu’une politique subtile mais perverse marginalise économiquement, prive de terres, de droits et de ressources, et donc de toute promotion économique, sociale et culturelle véritable.

Le Monde (France)

George Galloway
Membre du parlement britannique


It’s preposterous that a gangster state, a rogue state, should have most-favoured-nation status in trading with the European Union. These goods that they are selling in the European Union are goods often purchased on stolen land, almost always produced with stolen water, and in any case are exports of a regime which is in breach of more United Nations Security Council resolutions than all the other countries in the world put together. This is a regime which should be shunned like the apartheid regime in South Africa, not rewarded. The only sanction we have ever placed on Sharon’s Israel is to force them to participate in the Eurovision song contest and redraw the map of Europe so that they can play in our European football tournaments. So it’s time to get tough with the Zionist state, and in Europe I intend to press that case.

The Electronic Intifada (USA)

Eitan Felner
Défenseur israélien des droits de l’homme (Betselem)


En donnant aux colons les mêmes droits que ceux de ses citoyens, Israël a établi un système de ségrégation et de discrimination dans lequel deux populations vivant dans la même région sont régies par deux systèmes de lois différents. Les Palestiniens sont soumis à la loi militaire et jugés le plus souvent par des cours militaires ; mais des Israéliens qui commettent les mêmes délits sont passibles de la loi et des cours civiles israéliennes. Les colons juifs jouissent des mêmes droits que les juifs en Israël : totale liberté de mouvement, de parole et d’organisation, participation aux élections locales et nationales (israéliennes), sécurité sociale, système de santé, etc. Pour les Palestiniens vivant à quelques centaines de mètres des colonies, la liberté de mouvement est sérieusement limitée. Ils ne peuvent pas voter pour limiter les pouvoirs de l’armée d’occupation et ils ne jouissent pas de la sécurité sociale israélienne. En afrikaans, on appelait ce sytème l’apartheid.

[ Le Monde diplomatique | Manière de voir 54 | 11/12-2000 ]

Allegra Pacheco
Avocate israélienne


Last month, I was part of a group of 60 Israeli peace activists issuing a warning that resonates today. « We believe that the negotiations currently being conducted between representatives of the State of Israel and Palestinian representatives under the supervision of the United States will likely frame the basis for future war, » our warning said. « The establishment of a Palestinian state truncated by a massive system of bypass roads, encircled by Israeli settlement blocs, subject to closures and restrictions on freedom of movement and commerce, with no control of its borders or natural resources, will only create a reality of apartheid ; a Palestinian state as a Bantustan. »

The New York Times (USA)

Gideon Levy
Journaliste israélien


I was particularly impressed with reporter Gideon Levy and photographer Miki Kratsman, both Israelis, who took up my request to visit the West Bank by arranging an expedition into Hebron on the day after al-nakba, the Catastrophe, the Palestinian commemoration of the British partition of Palestine in 1948. Levy said, « [This is] perhaps the most abject place in the occupied territories. No other place can better illustrate the brutal essence of the Israeli occupation and the local version of apartheid. »

[ Raymond Louw | IPI Global Journalist | 2001 ]

Azmi Bishara
Député israélien de la Knesset


L’occupation israélienne n’est pas une colonisation au-delà des mers, à visée économique, qui disparaîtrait avec la fin des intérêts économiques de l’occupant, ni un mandat colonial mis en place par une organisation internationale et dont la mission est limitée dans le temps. Il s’agit d’une colonisation qui a opéré, il n’y a pas si longtemps, le remplacement d’une population par une autre. C’est pourquoi sa violence est structurelle. Si le terrorisme était défini indépendamment de celui qui le commet, on dirait qu’il s’agit d’un terrorisme d’Etat. L’imbrication démographique et économique des occupants et des occupés rend la situation comparable à un régime d’apartheid, où deux populations vivent dans le même espace politique, mais dans deux systèmes de droit différents, l’une étant soumise à l’autre. Aujourd’hui, cet apartheid israélo-palestinien est en passe de s’appliquer également aux citoyens arabes d’Israël, d’autant que la démocratie israélienne souffre, à la base, de nombreuses contradictions liées à l’imbrication de la religion, de l’Etat et de la nation, ce qui fait que l’appartenance ethnique y est placée au-dessus de la citoyenneté.

Le Monde (France)

Ralph Schoenman
Journaliste, auteur et activiste


Four overriding myths have shaped the consciousness of most people in our society about Zionism. The first is that of « A land without a people for a people without a land. » This myth was sedulously cultivated by early Zionists to promote the fiction that Palestine was a remote, desolate place ready for the taking. This claim was quickly followed by denial of Palestinian identity, nationhood or legitimate entitlement to the land in which the Palestinian people have lived throughout their recorded history. The second is the myth of Israeli democracy. Innumerable newspaper stories or television references to the Israeli state are followed by the assertion that it is the only « real » democracy in the Middle East. In fact, Israel is as democratic as the apartheid state of South Africa. Civil liberty, due process and the most basic human rights are by law denied those who do not meet racial, religious criteria.

The Hidden History of Zionism

Uri Davis
Anthropologue et activiste israélien


J’aimerais d’abord faire une distinction entre racisme et apartheid. Le racisme est un sentiment négatif certes, mais pas plus répandu en Israël qu’aux Etats-Unis ou dans d’autres pays membres de l’ONU. Mais en Israël le racisme est inscrit dans les lois votées par le Parlement. La discrimination des populations non juives, principalement arabes palestiniennes, est un acte légal, comme l’était la différence de traitement entre Blancs et Noirs en Afrique du Sud. Dans les deux cas, il ne s’agit donc plus seulement de racisme, mais d’apartheid, à savoir un système politique ayant légalisé et institutionnalisé le racisme.

[ interview par R. Haller | Le Courrier (Suisse) | 24 mai 2004 ]

John Dugard
Anthropologue et activiste sud-africain


South African law professor John Dugard, the special rapporteur for the United Nations on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories, has written in a report to the UN General Assembly that there is « an apartheid regime » in the territories « worse than the one that existed in South Africa. » [...] Dugard was a member of a Truth Commission at the end of the apartheid regime, and was appointed by the UN in 2001 as special rapporteur for human rights in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. He called for a general arms embargo against Israel in May, in response to the IDF operations in Rafah, similar to the arms embargo imposed on South Africa in 1977.

Haaretz (Israel)

Edgar Morin
Sociologue français


Quoi qu’il arrive, ce sont les minorités laïques, capables d’autocritique, de compréhension d’autrui, de conscience de la complexité, qui, de part et d’autre, travaillent pour sauver l’avenir. Il y a en Israël une minorité lucide qui démythifie le thème de la « terre sans peuple », révèle les aspects occultés de la guerre de 1948, montre que la mémoire victimaire du passé ne doit pas faire oublier les victimes palestiniennes présentes, et s’en prend au « culte de la Shoah » en tant qu’il sépare à jamais les juifs du monde des gentils. Le retour sur l’expérience juive devrait donner la capacité de comprendre la souffrance palestinienne et montrer à Israël qu’il inflige en un demi-siècle aux Palestiniens ce qu’il a lui-même souffert des Européens durant plus d’un millénaire : dépossession, expulsions, ségrégation, ghettoïsations répétées, avanies, prédations, humiliations, vexations, déni, mépris.

Le Monde (France)

Norman Finkelstein
Professeur, écrivain et activiste américain


I don’t think the comparison with South Africa is exactly precise for a number of reasons. Israel proper—pre June `67 Israel, is a fairly lively democracy, Palestinian Arabs do enjoy rights of citizenship (as) second class citizens, it is probably similar to the situation to Blacks in the American South before the civil rights movement. The difference is that in the US South, Blacks did not have the right to vote, but that question is due to numbers, where American Blacks were the majority in several states in the South and that is why they were disenfranchised, whereas Israel’s unstated official policy is that they will tolerate a minority of approximately 15%, so long as the Arabs remain around this percentage its OK to give them the right to vote because it won’t affect the Jewish majority. In addition to the second-class citizenship of the Israeli Arabs, there is also the occupation in the West Bank and Gaza, and that too is not really comparable to South Africa because I think it is much worse.

[ interview par D. Atapattu | www.counterpunch.org <http://www.counterpunch.org> (USA) | 13 décembre 2001 ]

Edward Said
Professeur, écrivain et activiste américain


The conflict between Zionism and the Palestinian people is admittedly more complex than the battle against Apartheid, even if in both cases one people paid and the other is still paying a very heavy price in dispossession, ethnic cleansing, military occupation and massive social injustice. The Jews are a people with a tragic history of persecution and genocide. Bound by their ancient faith to the land of Palestine, their « return » to a homeland promised them by British imperialism was perceived by much of the world (but especially by a Christian West responsible for the worst excesses of anti-Semitism) as a heroic and justified restitution for what they suffered. Yet, for years and years, few paid attention to the conquest of Palestine by Jewish forces, or to the Arab people already there who endured its exorbitant cost in the destruction of their society, the expulsion of the majority, and the hideous system of laws — a virtual Apartheid — that still discriminates against them inside Israel and in the occupied territories. Palestinians were the silent victims of a gross injustice, quickly shuffled offstage by a triumphalist chorus of how amazing Israel was.

Al-Ahram Weekly (Egypte)

Israel Shahak
Professeur et écrivain israélien


You cannot have humane Zionism, it is a contradiction in terms. It is my considered opinion that the State of Israel is a racist state in the full meaning of the term.

Pi-Ha’aton (Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

Israel Shahak was scholarly in his presentation but blunt and courageous as he excoriated Israel for its racist policies, which he called « a form of apartheid », giving examples and comparisons galore. We had a personal chat before the meeting. He came across as a cultured but very sad man. He was clearly troubled that his fellow Jews and Israeli countrymen could be so hypocritical and callous in their dealings with Palestinians. He was even more saddened by the blindness of the Diaspora Jewish population to Israel’s shameless double standards and Zionism’s fraudulent propaganda overseas.

[ E. Zündel | « A Tribute to Israel Shahak » | 2001 ]

Assaf Oron
Refusenik et auteur d’une lettre ouverte aux juifs américains


Because the Palestinians are too painfully close, like a rival sibling (and - may I add - because they have always been so weak), we have singled them out for a special treatment. Having them under our rule, we’ve allowed ourselves to trample them like dirt, like dogs. We’ve been doing it even to our own Palestinian citizens (especially before 1966), but we have perfected our treatment in this strange no man’s land created in 1967, and known as the Occupied Territories. There we have created an entirely hallucinatory reality, in which the true humans, members of the Nation of Masters, could move and settle freely and safely, while the sub-humans, the Nation of Slaves, were shoved into the corners, and kept invisible and controlled under our IDF boots. I know. I’ve been there. I was taught how to do this, back in the mid-1980ms. I did and witnessed as a matter of fact, deeds that I’m ashamed to remember to this day.

« Open Letter To American Jews »

Lance Selfa
Journaliste, auteur et activiste


In 1977, Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan announced that Israel would not abide by the international arms embargo against the racist South African apartheid egime. Even an Israeli newspaper conceded, « It is a clear and open secret known to everybody that in [South African] army camps one can find Israeli officers in not insignificant numbers who are busy teaching white soldiers to fight Black terrorists with methods imported from Israel. »

International Socialist Review

Shulamit Aloni
Ancien ministre israélien de l’éducation


Israel is a racist state that commits war crimes and resorts to terrorism worse than that employed by the Palestinians, former Education Minister Shulamit Aloni charged in an unusually scathing interview with Nazareth-based Arab-Israeli newspaper Kul al-Arab. [...] « Only in a country like this can a murderer reach the post of Defense Minister, » she charged. « Israel, in fact, is no different than racist South Africa as long as it presents itself as Jewish state instead of a state of all its citizens. »

[ www.ynetnews.com <http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/Ar...> | R. Nahmias | 03 août 2005 ]

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379


The General Assembly,

Recalling its resolution 1904 (XVIII) of 20 November 1963, proclaiming the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and in particular its affirmation that « any doctrine of racial differentiation or superiority is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous » and its expression of alarm at « the manifestations of racial discrimination still in evidence in some areas in the world, some of which are imposed by certain Governments by means of legislative, administrative or other measures », Recalling also that, in its resolution 3151 G (XXVIII) of 14 December 1953, the General Assembly condemned, inter alia, the unholy alliance between South African racism and Zionism,

Taking note of the Declaration of Mexico on the Equality of Women and Their Contribution to Development and Peace 1975, proclaimed by the World Conference of the Intenrational Women’s Year, held at Mexico City from 19 June to 2 July 1975, which promulgated the principle that « international co-operation and peace require the achievement of national liberation and independence, the elimination of colonialism and neo-colonialism, foreign occupation, Zionism, apartheid and racial discrimination in all its forms, as well as the recognition of the dignity of peoples and their right to self-determination »,

Taking note also of resolution 77 (XII) adopted by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity at its twelfth ordinary session, held at Kampala from 28 July to 1 August 1975, which considered « that the racist regime in occupied Palestine and the racist regime in Zimbabwe and South Africa have a comon imperialist origin, forming a whole and having the same racist structure and being organically linked in their policy aimed at repression of the dignity and integrity of the human being »,

Taking note also of the Political Declaration and Strategy to Strengthen International Peace and Security and to Intensify Solidarity and Mutual Assistance among Non-Aligned Countries, adopted at the Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries held at Lima from 25 to 30 August 1975, which most severely condemned Zionism as a threat to world peace and security and called upon all countries to oppose this racist and imperialist ideology,

Determines that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.

[ November 10, 1975 ]

... et d’autres voix encore :


However, realizing the underlying racism of Israel, many diaspora Jews today experience profound sadness. Unfortunately, most of these stay silent, perhaps by the fear that Jewish self-critique in public will feed anti-Semitism. Nonetheless, noting the unparalleled power diaspora and American Jews enjoy today, their silence represent a tacit approval of the apartheid behavior of the « Jewish State ». Some Jews however, spoke out, becoming Israel’s harshest-ever critics. The list includes such famous people and thinkers (whose names are, not surprisingly, totally blacked out in mainstream media) as Noam Chomsky, Alfred Lilienthal, Israel Shahak, rabbi Elmer Berger, Moshe Menuhin, Yehudi Menuhin, Lenni Brenner, and Norman Finkelstein. This site is partially dedicated to these courageous individuals with the hope that all other Jews and Zionists will follow suit.

Mission Statement