Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

September 5, 2016

The problem with anti-Semitism

Filed under: anti-Semitism — louisproyect @ 3:28 pm

Christopher Bollyn: believes that being a Jew is a lot like being a wolf

 Off-Guardian is a website deeply committed to the Assadist cause that recently attacked the Ashley Smith article on Syria that appeared on CounterPunch. In making the case for Assad’s genocidal war, these people have the temerity to fault CounterPunch that has published a hundred Rick Sterling articles praising Assad to just one by Ashley Smith attacking him. Their shrieks of outrage would make you think the ratio was reversed. To show you how case-hardened the editorial board and its regular readers are, the article included this qualification:

We’re the first to acknowledge he [Assad] should be named a tyrant – if that is what he is. But Smith’s article doesn’t come close to producing any evidence that Assad is a tyrant or a “brutal dictator.”

But that wasn’t good enough for the wretched Phil Greaves who coined the term “axis of resistance”. He commented:

Next time someone criticizes a dumb line like this…

“We’re the first to agree Assad isn’t beyond criticism and shouldn’t be sanctified by the “enemy of my enemy” syndrome. We’re the first to acknowledge he may entirely deserve to be called a tyrant.”

You should thank them and acknowledge them when you edit it out.

In other words, Greaves was angry that they could even refer to Assad and tyranny in the same sentence, even though they obviously have denied any such connections from day one.

As awful as the article was, it paled in comparison to comments by one Al Sordi [emphasis added] :

These older socialist publications always had a strong jewish presence. Its amazing how many of these intellectuals commenting here will refuse to see the elephant in the room, when it comes to how the anti-war movement was hijacked by zioinists from the get go, and continue to be mislead while the US does Israel’s bidding.

Why is anyone surprised. Many of these socialists and marxists are also zionists, like [Joshua] Frank. BTW Russia Today is the best and honest news and analysis one can find aired anywhere in the US. In comparison with RT, NPR looks like Stalinist propaganda, with its fluff, obfuscation, obvious bias and warm and fuzzy warm mongering.

The “older socialist publications” is a reference to Socialist Worker, the newspaper of the ISO where Smith’s article originally appeared. Or then again, who knows what he was talking about? It is difficult to figure out what someone as addled as Sordi meant.

But the reference to Zionists “like Frank” is a much clearer indication that the guy is a classic anti-Semitic guttersnipe. He is talking about Joshua Frank, whose ethnicity could be Jewish but even if it was, how does that make him a Zionist?

This was not the first time I have run into anti-Semitic tropes on an Assadist website. In December 2013, I ran into a character named Rowan Berkeley who is a frequent commenter at Moon of Alabama, a website with the same commitment to the Baathist cause as Off-Guardian. After I posted a critical comment of an article blaming the Syrian rebels for a “false flag” attack of sarin gas on Ghouta, Berkeley wrote: “Now, Louis, you must understand that the fact that [x] expresses rhetorical support for [y] simply tells you nothing about [y]. Indulging in this kind of guilt by involuntary association is a very common Jewish weakness in argument.”

A very common Jewish weakness in argument? Was it my genes that produced such a weakness? None of this should come as a major surprise. The boundaries between the legitimate leftist groups and individuals who have succumbed to mechanical “anti-imperialism” and filth like Rowan Berkeley is rather porous.

This was demonstrated dramatically when the Brooklyn Commons, a home to a number of groups like WBAI, Jacobin, Indypendent and the Marxist Education Project, scheduled a talk by Christopher Bollyn defending 9/11 conspiracy theories. He was billed as “a rare voice exposing the neocons and their Zionist partners-in-crime who had the means, motive, and opportunity to pull off this game-changing event.” Well, to start with I am mortified that anybody on the left would still be offering a platform for Truthers but that’s not the worst of it.

It turns out that Bollyn is another Rowan Berkeley. A Google search on his name and “Jews” turns up fetid morsels like:

It seems like being a Jew is a lot like being a wolf. Maybe that is where the name came from. As Rudyard Kipling wrote in “The Law for the Wolves”, “…the strength of the pack is the wolf, and the strength of the wolf is the pack.”

In one article, Bollyn recommends a book by Douglas Reed titled “The Controversy of Zion”. Reed was a British fiction writer and political analyst (the two roles obviously overlapped) who viewed communism as a Jewish plot and defended colonial rule in Africa, a rather logical pairing when you stop and think about it. As it happens, Reed’s book can be read online at the VHO website that is dedicated to neo-Nazi material. Chapter 21 is titled “The World Revolution” and contains this eye-opening revelation:

The 19th Century, in the West, differed from the preceding eighteen centuries of the Christian era there in the emergence of two movements with a converging aim, which by the century’s end dominated all its affairs.

The one movement, Zionism, aimed at reassembling a dispersed nation in a territory promised to it by the Jewish god; the second movement, Communism, aimed at the destruction of separate nationhood as such.

Will Bollyn expound on this at the Brooklyn Commons? I suppose that even this might be a pardonable offense given the man’s dedication to the democratic and tolerant values of the Middle East’s leading member of the “axis of resistance”. In an article titled “UN: Israel Supporting Syrian Rebels”, he opines:

This report should help people finally understand that Israel is behind the terrorism, carnage, and madness that has been inflicted on the people of Syria for the past few years.  This is the Syrian chapter of the Zionist “War of Terror” that began with the false-flag terrorism of 9-11.

Well, who knows? Maybe he has a point. After all, Electronic Intifada’s intrepid contributor Rania Khalek has been making the same points in articles and tweets for some time now as demonstrated in “Why has Israel embraced al-Qaida’s branch in Syria?

One good thing that has come out of this is a disavowal of the invitation to Bollyn from the Brooklyn Commons groups alluded to above:

Statement from Multiple Organizations on Christopher Bollyn Event at the Brooklyn Commons

As organizations that work out of the Brooklyn Commons, we reject the antisemitic politics of Christopher Bollyn. We do not have any say in event booking and management at the Commons but agree that such politics should have no place in leftist spaces.

I first heard about the controversy from an article on Jewschool.com by Daniel Sieradski. When I posted a link to it on Facebook, long-time Palestine solidarity activist Amith Gupta referred me to an Electronic Intifada article that exposed Sieradski’s connection to the Israel lobby despite his leftist pretensions:

Sieradski has also provided professional services to groups whose core mission is to influence public opinion in support of the Israeli state by whitewashing its crimes against Palestinians. His LinkedIn profile notes his work with Israel21c, a hasbara organization which “redefines the conversation about Israel” by diverting media and public attention away from Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and instead toward it’s “vibrant diversity, humanity, creativity, innovative spirit, and responsiveness”. The organization, which has also “trained more than 1,500 Israel activists in seven US cities,” is currently headed by former AIPAC President Amy Friedkin.

In a nutshell, this is the problem with anti-Semitism especially when it is cloaked with anti-Zionist verbiage. It gives people like Sieradski the leverage they need to embarrass the left and put it on the defensive. The ADL has exploited Bollyn events in the past to further its goal of making an amalgam between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.

The people who decided to extend an invitation to Bollyn did not exercise due diligence. Five minutes of Googling would have revealed his sordid past. On the other hand, there is the troubling possibility that it was exactly that past that endeared him to them.

The truth is that anti-Semitism is not an existential threat to American Jews. Except for the occasional swastika scrawled on a wall, the bourgeois press would find nothing else to report on. In fact, the ultraright both here and in Europe is now targeting Muslims rather than Jews. Marine Le Pen is a prime example. Her party has attracted French Jews despite her father’s well-known anti-Semitic views:

But since Marine Le Pen took over her father’s party in that same year, it appears as if everything and nothing has changed in the relationship between the FN and French Jewry. Her efforts to “de-demonize” the FN have centered on its anti-Semitic past. Not only did she declare that the Holocaust was the “summit of human barbarity,” but she also gave the bum’s rush to the party’s collection of Holocaust deniers and revisionists. Of course, this housecleaning ultimately swept up her own father when he revealed himself to be a recidivist on the matter of historical details. Last year, when asked during a radio interview whether he still held to his position on the Holocaust, Jean-Marie Le Pen replied, “Yes, absolutely, I still maintain this opinion, because I believe it is the truth and it should shock no one.”

Except, perhaps, his daughter. Shaken by this paternal attempt to undermine her authority, Marine Le Pen launched the process that eventually led to her father’s removal from the party he created. While the series of events burnished her image as a reformer, she had already impressed Roger Cukierman, head of CRIF, the country’s umbrella organization for Jewish institutions. Shortly before the falling-out between father and daughter, Cukierman had announced that Marine Le Pen, unlike her father, was “personally irreproachable” — a remark he quickly walked back in the resulting firestorm of criticism.

No, Jews are not the target now. In fact, the biggest threat that anti-Semitism poses is its usefulness to the Israel lobby that is desperate to make links between anti-Zionism and Jew hatred. When the left gives them ammunition, it is undermining the cause of Palestinian freedom.



  1. whoever wrote this article bless you very wise

    Comment by lina alkaroosh — September 5, 2016 @ 6:38 pm

  2. “The 19th Century, in the West, differed from the preceding eighteen centuries of the Christian era there in the emergence of two movements with a converging aim, which by the century’s end dominated all its affairs.

    The one movement, Zionism, aimed at reassembling a dispersed nation in a territory promised to it by the Jewish god; the second movement, Communism, aimed at the destruction of separate nationhood as such.”

    This is very similar language to what appears in the Hamas Charter.

    Comment by Dave — September 5, 2016 @ 9:07 pm

  3. Yeah, Dave. I understand that the SWP cult that you defend argues that Israel was created as haven for Jews fleeing mortal threats like Hamas. You are as skilled as Daniel Pipes in referencing the evil Hamas. Did you think 20 years ago that you would be echoing the Israel lobby? Sad, really.

    Comment by louisproyect — September 5, 2016 @ 9:25 pm

  4. But this is where a good deal of the anti-Jewish sentiments that you describe in the above essay comes from. Islamist currents that gain space and influence in the absence of any working-class leadership. And of course antisemitism is brought into being by the actions of the Israeli capitalist class as well.

    Comment by Dave — September 5, 2016 @ 9:44 pm

  5. You are out of your fucking mind, Rowlands. Gaza is the closest thing to the Warsaw Ghetto today and you are writing this garbage? What a scandal that the SWP has become a rightwing Zionist cult. But what’s your excuse? You don’t even belong. Talk about mental slavery.

    Comment by louisproyect — September 5, 2016 @ 9:52 pm

  6. “But this is where a good deal of the anti-Jewish sentiments that you describe in the above essay comes from. Islamist currents that gain space and influence in the absence of any working-class leadership.”

    Sounds good when you write it, but I don’t believe it. But there is a growing linkage between some leftists, paleoconservatives and right wing conspiracy theorists, and that is a major source for it. I doubt any of them, with the possible exception of Pat Buchanan, have ever read the Hamas charter.

    Comment by Richard Estes — September 6, 2016 @ 7:08 pm

  7. Anti-Jewish canards were mostly absent (although not completely and totally) from the solidarity movement, not to mention the broader left, during the era when the Palestinian leadership was in the hands of revolutionary nationalists, which is why I would encourage folks to read – or re-read – Arafat’s speech to the United Nations, delivered in 1974. Today, much of the movement in defense of the Palestinian people, especially in the western imperialist countries, is under the influence of the Hamas perspective, which has contributed to the problems we are now encountering. In addition, the international worker’s movement is under the yoke of what is now a 35 year retreat, there has not been an extension of the socialist revolution since the spring of 1975 in Vietnam, and the revolutionary upsurge in Central America during the late 1970’s and 1980’s was defeated. This too has caused disorientation and a multitude of problems, including a particularly rancid form of Stalinism and an inability to identify Jew hatred and take it on in a decisive manner.

    Comment by Dave — September 6, 2016 @ 8:05 pm

  8. You talk about Jew hatred, a symptom of which is the BDS movement according to the Militant newspaper that reads like the NY Post nowadays. The Militant states that the slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is “a euphemism for wiping out the state of Israel, which sits between the river Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea.” The SWP is a Zionist group and you are repeating their filth here. Shame on you.

    Comment by louisproyect — September 6, 2016 @ 8:22 pm

  9. The BDS did not enter life as an antisemitic organization, nor is it an antisemitic organization today. It is a movement in decline which attempted a boycott of Jewish businesses, athletes, academics, authors and cello players without a sufficient leadership to lead it. In the absence of a massive movement with a revolutionary-democratic and non-racialist leadership on the ground inside Palestine in particular but also within Israel, the door was opened to those motivated by slightly different ideas than international solidarity. When the chuck is whittled to the core, the SWP’s position on Palestine, it seems to me, is very much in line with the position of the Cuban government, Fidel Castro and the late Nelson Mandela. Both Fidel and Mandela repeatedly stated their conviction that it is not hard, providing it is something someone wants to do, to advocate for a Palestinian homeland while at the same time opposing the socialism of fools.

    Comment by Dave — September 6, 2016 @ 10:20 pm

  10. Which brings me to the tactical shift of the SWP, as I understand it, advanced in light of a decades long retreat of the Palestinian people, the exhaustion of Arab-bourgeois nationalism, the continuing class differentiation of the Palestinian people which lead to the betrayal in the 1990’s, and the resultant fact that Israel, now nearly 70 years old will not be dismantled or overturned militarily. And I’d describe the hopeful outcome of the tactical shift to be the emergence of a new leadership, for class consciousness to develop, and to provide an opportunity for workers who identify as Palestinian and workers who identify as Israeli to find there way to one another. One – Recognize that Israel exits. Two – For a Palestinian homeland. Three – For a halt to the settlements. Four – For a united front against Jim-Crow like discrimination inside Israel proper. Five – For a united front against Jew hatred anywhere in the world, including within the countries of the Middle East.

    Comment by Dave — September 6, 2016 @ 10:39 pm

  11. It is a movement in decline which attempted a boycott of Jewish businesses, athletes, academics, authors and cello players without a sufficient leadership to lead it.

    You are totally out of your fucking mind. JEWISH BUSINESSES????!!!!!???? You need a political lobotomy.

    Comment by louisproyect — September 7, 2016 @ 12:54 am

  12. Yes, I should have said “Israeli” instead of “Jewish”, as there are non-Jews being boycotted too, notably Palestinian authors and academics seeking discourse on Israeli campuses, and a few cultural performers as well. But the point I was making is that the BDS, as a result of an insufficient leadership within Palestine and inside the western countries were the boycott is being applied, has attracted Jew haters like Alison Weir and a host of others because most of those subjected to the boycott are in fact Jewish. And Jew hatred is a light sleeper under late capitalism. That’s what attracted these reactionaries to the BDS, not solidarity with the Palestinian people. My guess is that Bollyn is a supporter of the boycott as well. I understand you and others disagree, but in my opinion there have been many incidents associated with the BDS that are either on the line or have crossed the line, and taken as a whole I believe the BDS has done more damage than good. On the other hand, there are others within this movement who understand the danger and have attempted to confront it. If a new leadership emerges that is capable of leading a democratic movement inside Palestine with an outreach to the Israeli working people of various nationalities, countries of origin and religions, then the advisability of such a tactic may at some point change. As an aside, it is not precluded that the coming struggle will be re-constituted along the lines of a unitary, democratic state. The working-class leadership under construction will also take up the varied issues associated with the class struggle inside Israel and the territories, such as the plight of the Ethiopian Jews who face racism and brutality, which the BDS seems incapable of addressing.

    Comment by Dave — September 7, 2016 @ 1:18 pm

  13. taken as a whole I believe the BDS has done more damage than good.

    Rowlands, you are a fucking Zionist. The newspaper that you treasure like Jehovah’s Witnesses treasure the Watchtower has written:

    The Times published a column March 18 by Yousef Munayyer, executive director of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, which supports the “Boycott, Divest and Sanction” campaign against Israel. “The biggest losers in this election were those who made the argument that change could come from within Israel,” Munayyer wrote. “It can’t and it won’t.”

    He said he was glad, because if Netanyahu had lost, their boycott efforts would have been weakened.

    Supporters of the boycott say it’s aimed at forcing Tel Aviv to end its control of the West Bank and its embargo of Gaza. But the campaign provides cover for Jew-hatred and calls to wipe Israel off the map.

    This is a 180 degree reversal of everything that the Militant used to say when it was not under the control of a psychotic cult leader. In a normal political organization, there would have been an explanation of why the line changed but in Barnesville, there is no need. You just FOLLOW THE LEADER wherever his diseased mind takes him.

    Every time you write this crap, it reminds me of the damage that is associated with being either part of the cult or a fellow traveler like you.


    Comment by louisproyect — September 7, 2016 @ 1:36 pm

  14. I’ll leave the last word to you, as it’s your blog and I am the guest, but the fact is the Militant has written extensively about it’s tactical shift on Israel and Palestine these past two years since the last Israeli assault on Gaza with dozens of articles and editorials which are available on-line for anyone to read. In reality, the paper has written more about Israel and Palestine, including articles covering every major fight that has taken place in Israel proper and the territories, including coverage on the barrel bombing of the Yarmouk refugee camp by the Assad regime. The Militant has written more on these events than any of the other non-United States related developments, with the possible exception of Syria, Iraq and the Kurdish struggle for self-determination. On matters pertaining to Syria, the Militant’s coverage largely conforms to your view of the unfolding situation.

    Comment by Dave — September 7, 2016 @ 2:20 pm

  15. it’s tactical shift on Israel and Palestine

    Is there some sort of psychological/intellectual problem that afflicts all SWP’ers and its sympathizers? The notion that Israel is a state that is needed for the protection of world Jewry is fundamental to Zionism. This is not “tactics” any more so than whether to vote for a Democrat. It is a question of socialist principles that was articulated in hundreds of articles by Peter Buch, Jon Rothschild, Dave Frankel, George Novack, et al. I understand that SWP’ers and its camp followers like you are required to polish the skills of evasion but this is ridiculous.

    Comment by louisproyect — September 7, 2016 @ 2:31 pm

  16. There has been no revision of the political truth that Jews are not safe anywhere in the world as long as capitalism exists. Nor has the party’s hostile stance towards the Israeli capitalist class and it’s imperialist backers, or it’s advocacy of a Palestinian homeland, changed. Nor has the party’s position on the need to build communist parties in Israel and Palestine, or a combination therein, changed. Nor has the party ruled out the possibility that the struggle will unite around the demand for a unitary state in the future. The tactical perspectives flow from an understanding that history has laid at the feet of the working-classes of the region, and no one else, the task of fulfilling the national aspirations of the Palestinian people. But for any of that to happen the workers who identify as Israeli and those who identify as Palestinian will need to find there way to one another. That will require the emergence of a new leadership in both Palestine and Israel that can relaunch the struggle, cognizant of the world as it is today. Thus the five points listed above which the Militant proposes as a way to move forward. Difficult yes, but not impossible.

    Comment by Dave — September 7, 2016 @ 3:36 pm

  17. There has been no revision of the political truth that Jews are not safe anywhere in the world as long as capitalism exists.

    Your analysis is exactly that of the Labor Zionists. Create a Jewish state by force, which will then lead the Palestinians to the future goal of socialism. You are evidently too ignorant of the history of the region to even be half-aware of that. Maybe you should learn to read other literature besides the Militant newspaper and the back of cereal boxes.

    Comment by louisproyect — September 7, 2016 @ 3:39 pm

  18. The Militant, Vol.60/No.17 April 29, 1996

    Rebellions Don’t Explode Politely

    “Should all armed actions by Hamas be defended uncritically because it speaks in the name of the oppressed?” asks Geoff Mirelowitz. Not so long ago the Militant characterized Hamas as right-wing, he says.

    Washington’s propaganda campaign portrays many young Palestinian fighters as unthinking fanatics motivated by reactionary ideas. But the reality is different: hundreds of thousands of Palestinians continue to resist the Israeli government’s savagery and terror – with whatever methods of struggle they can find. Those fighters are engaged in a progressive struggle that working people around the world rightly identify with.

    For a brief period a few years ago the Militant did erroneously describe Hamas as a right-wing organization. Hamas however, is a bourgeois nationalist organization that has won growing support among workers and youth in the struggle for Palestinian national rights. Members of the organization participated in the intifada (uprising) that began in December 1987. Hamas has a pro-capitalist outlook and leadership. But by staking out a position of unyielding opposition to Israeli rule it attracts many workers and youth who have a healthy hatred of their oppressors and are seeking ways to fight.

    Communists in Palestine would work with and try to recruit to a revolutionary program and organization members and supporters of Hamas, as well as activists in the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). That would not be true if Hamas was a rightist organization.

    Hamas’s surge in popularity is partly a reflection of the resistance against the Zionist occupiers, who are the real terrorists. But support for Hamas also stems from the political retreat and growing bourgeoisification of the PLO with the recoiling of its central leadership from the revolutionary course in the struggle for national self-determination the organization had charted earlier.

    The March 13 imperialist-inspired “antiterrorist summit” showed Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat playing a central role in giving that gathering of world terrorists a facade of Arab representation.

    The Zionist regime has demolished Arabs homes as collective punishment for struggling against the occupation force on and off since 1968, the year after it seized the West Bank and Gaza in the 1967 war. Scores of Palestinians have angrily watched their homes bulldozed or dynamited by Israeli soldiers. Children have been shot down like animals by Israeli troops simply for throwing stones while protesting these atrocities.

    In the absence of revolutionary leadership, the crisis produced the conditions where Hamas has increased its following. Its radical tactic of suicide bombing missions attracts young activists searching for ways to fight their bloodthirsty oppressors in Tel Aviv.

    The spark of resistance has not been extinguished from the Palestinian people despite all the brutal measures inflicted on them. And the fighting Irish republicans continue to resist the British occupiers in Northern Ireland as the Canary Wharf attack reveals.

    Both in Ireland and Palestine communist organizations lack presence, or size and political weight, and therefore cannot directly affect the relationship of class forces or the calculations of the respective ruling classes. That can and will change in the future.

    Until then, however, Irish and Palestinian fighters will look out for themselves with the methods they’ve used for decades. Those methods have problems. But if fighters pledged to stop using them before having better methods and qualitatively stronger allies then the outcome would be unconditional surrender and defeat.

    In 1965, 10 days before his assassination, Malcolm X told a packed audience in London, “When the Afro-Americans reacted against the brutal measures that were executed against them by the police, the press all over the world projected them as rioters.” The revolutionary leader continued, “This doesn’t say it’s intelligent, but whoever heard of a sociological explosion that was done intelligently and politely? And this is what you’re trying to make the Black man do. You’re trying to drive him into a ghetto and make him the victim of every kind of unjust condition imaginable. Then when he explodes, you want him to explode politely!”

    Mirelowitz notes that Nelson Mandela insisted on “minimizing the loss of human life” when he led the armed wing of the African National Congress. It certainly would be fantastic if the Palestinians or the Irish freedom struggle had a leadership of the caliber of Malcolm X, Mandela, or Fidel Castro. But should they stop fighting until leadership of that caliber develops?

    The key task for communists is not to criticize those who are resisting oppression but search them out, fight shoulder to shoulder with them, learn from them, and in the process arm them with the lessons of past struggles. The campaign to sell the Episodes of the Cuban Revolutionary War, for example, is targeted at fighters like the Palestinian suicide bombers who are among the oppressed masses of the world who cry out for action against a common oppressor.


    Comment by louisproyect — September 7, 2016 @ 3:40 pm

  19. The Williams article is interesting, but if memory serves me well, and I’m pretty sure it does, the editorial content of the piece concerning Hamas and other aspects of the article was reversed a few months later, I think by the party convention, or shortly thereafter. In other words, G. M. was right and M.W. not so much. Which is fine, that’s how these thing work. And no one disputes the fact that Israel was created by force, by a colonial settler movement. And no one is celebrating Israeli Independence day, or whatever the fuck it’s called. But it’s also true that a majority Jewish nation with a modern class-struggle has been established in the eastern Mediterranean and one must base a political approach based upon these facts, as is the case with other countries that began life in a similar manner. I think we both agree that Israeli Jews and other Israelis cannot be approached with the program of Hamas, and the leadership of Fatah has no interest in leading a struggle, so my question to you would be on what basis would a democratic-revolutionary movement appeal to these potential allies? If your answer is agitation around a unitary, secular state, then my reply would be – that’s certainly possible, although no one is raising such a formulation at this time. In any event, the prerequisite for such a positive turn of events necessitates a renewed leadership and struggle that can build a bridge among working people of various nationalities, at which point the oppressed and exploited will begin the process of taking as much as they can take, up to and including the establishment of workers and farmers governments that can join with others in the Middle East and the world in the building of socialism.

    Comment by Dave — September 7, 2016 @ 6:25 pm

  20. The Williams article is interesting, but if memory serves me well, and I’m pretty sure it does, the editorial content of the piece concerning Hamas and other aspects of the article was reversed a few months later, I think by the party convention, or shortly thereafter.

    You mean the jackass psychotic cult leader woke up one morning and changed his mind again. You are really clueless. The SWP is filled with sycophants who take their marching orders from Barnes either because they are desperately afraid of being expelled or because they are like you–too stupid to think for themselves.

    Comment by louisproyect — September 7, 2016 @ 6:44 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: