Vanessa Beeley raises an issue closely aligned to what I've been hitting on here: willful omission of relevant facts and drawing gatekeeping conclusion, ending up with carefully crafted Through A Glass Darkly narrative
https://t.me/VanessaBeeley/34915
Worth a total reprint:
Boycott Counterpunch - Liberal Zionists Posing as "Anti-Imperialists"
We responded to a tweet by Professor David Miller asking why Counterpunch has become cheerleaders for Al Qaeda in Syria, by stating how some years ago it was taken over by a pack of liberal Zionists and Trotskyites by the name of Eric Draitser, Yoav Litvin, and Alexander Reid Ross, the latter of whom was revealed to be a fed. All three of them are liberal Jews who are politically anarchist and Trotskyite.
They feign support for Palestine, claiming they support BDS, but oppose the resistance axis, armed resistance, and other things which actually threaten the existence of the illegitimate entity, referring to the resistance axis as a "neo-fascist" axis. Litvin once referred to himself as a "positive Zionist." They also peddle the "red-brown" theory that a left-right alliance is dangerous because it involves communists and neo-Nazis joining forces. More proof that the Trotskyite western left was bolstered by the CIA in the 60s and 70s (read the book Cultural Cold War by Frances Saunders for more info) in order to oppose "authoritarian" socialist governments, which is why they would also be anti-communist because to them Stalin is representative of everything they hate, referring to him as a "red fascist."
Someone cried in response, saying how can we call Yoav a Zionist when he is pro-BDS and is anti-apartheid? Yoav himself, who was tagged, chimed in to scoff at such an accusation.
That exactly proves our point. Being pro-BDS but anti-resistance means protecting the Zionist entity. Being anti-apartheid but not anti-Zionist normalizes the entity. Martyr Nizar Banat (ra) exposed all of this when he warned about normalizer terms like "apartheid state" and the NGO hijacking of Palestine solidarity, namely J Street and Soros, via Jewish Voice for Peace, IfNotNow, Code Pink, etc. Apartheid is but one symptom of Zionism, which means that he is simply against Netanyahu/Likud and wants an Obama-like figure to come to power and remove all the surface-level bad things that give "israel" bad PR — from showing the true face of Jewish supremacism and anti-"goy" racism to the masses of the world — while still keeping all the land they stole, which is the absence of justice.
Liberal Zionists are also incredibly paternalistic. Years ago, he took the time to publicly engage in a condescending attack against the Palestinian editor of Mint Press News and slander her. See, they don't like any Palestinian or anyone they feign "tolerance" for if they don't fit the carefully crafted narratives they want people to fit in. They don't offer solidarity from a humble perspective, they want lemmings and pawns who don't cross their red lines. That is why Malcolm X was right about white liberals, and his logic also applies to Jewish liberals. They cheerleaded puppet leaders in the 1960s and accused anyone who wasn't within their ideological boxes as "violent" and "extremist," such as what they called Malcolm X. No different, these liberal Zionists will cry like babies and call you an "antisemite" if you are not within their carefully crafted and pre-approved boxes.
Counterpunch is anti-resistance and therefore anti-Palestine. When they refer to Iran, Russia, and China as "competing imperialists," the cheap reductionism of their anarchist worldview conveniently places them in line with American and Zionist foreign policy aims. What a coincidence. Boycott Counterpunch.
Truth to tell, I never extended much cred to them, not even under Cockburn's helm, always sensed guardrails of textbook socialist, labor unionist dogma.
