This article was originally published in Danish on March 3, 2024.

Povl H. Riis-Knudsen reviews the Danish and only edition of the book. However, the book review is of interest to an international Western audience.

---

By Povl H. Riis-Knudsen

BOOK REVIEW AND MORE
Morten Thing
Israel, et mislykket samfund, en mislykket stat (Israel, a failed society, a failed state)
Solidaritet 2023

It is with the utmost despondency that one reads, these days, a large portion of the posts on Facebook regarding the current situation in Gaza. Although many of these are written by otherwise sensible people, far too many of them reveal a catastrophic lack of reflection and an even greater lack of historical knowledge. There seems to be almost a vacuum here. Far too many people uncritically accept Israel’s version of Middle Eastern history, even though it is based on one of the grossest falsifications of history circulating regarding current political conditions. Criticism of Israel seems to be something close to sacrilege.

This is primarily due to four factors:

First, for a great many people, it is difficult to feel any sympathy for Muslims at all. Perhaps not because they have studied Islam, but because they rightly view the Muslim invasion of Western Europe as one of the greatest threats to our continent’s continued existence ever, and when this invasion is then linked to these foreigners’ vociferous demonstrations in support of the sorely afflicted civilian population in Gaza, well, it is hardly surprising that large segments of the population are repulsed and distance themselves from this, throwing their full support behind Israel, which is viewed as a quasi-European state, “the only democracy in the Middle East,” a statement that, however, reflects a very loose handling of the truth. It is, however, necessary to separate the conflict surrounding Palestine from the immigration issue here. There are, however, similarities. The Palestinians have been displaced from their own land by Jewish immigrants—just as we are being displaced by foreigners—especially from the Arab world. We are thus in the same situation as the Palestinians, so perhaps we should try to understand them. A large portion of our uninvited guests are precisely Palestinians (who, incidentally, are largely Christian). They are only here because they have been displaced by Israel. And the other Arab migrants are here primarily because the U.S., following close consultation with Israel, has destroyed one well-ordered Arab country after another: Lebanon, Iraq, Libya, Syria… Everywhere, progressive, and often Western-oriented, governments have been subjected to an American “regime change” ordered by Israel—and everywhere, the result has been chaos, just as planned.

I have written about the specific details and refer here only to the articles “Should European Nationalists Support Israel?”, “Unreciprocated love,” and “On Palestine”. Let me emphasize that the displaced Palestinians do not belong here—they must return to Palestine! Israel’s plan, however, is for us to have even more of them. Israel intends to distribute the remaining Palestinian population among European countries! So why do we actually support Israel? To bring more Palestinians to the country?

Secondly, the prevailing “holocaust religion” has given the Jews a moral carte blanche, allowing them to do whatever they want without being held accountable; indeed, they can even do to others what they themselves were subjected to and still wail about today. Surely the Jews should be the first not to inflict a holocaust on others, but perhaps one should reflect on why the Jews, of all peoples in the diaspora, have been subjected to one holocaust after another almost constantly since the so-called “captivity” in Egypt in Genesis. Here it is described in detail why the Jews were persecuted, and this pattern of behavior has accompanied them ever since. There is virtually no European country from which they have not been expelled, and the number of pogroms has been no small matter. Many other peoples have a large diaspora. This applies, for example, to the Armenians, the Chinese, or the Irish. They have never been subjected to massive persecutions unrelated to local labor disputes, where the latter two groups have often been accused of undercutting local workers. It is never that sort of thing that has ever been the reason for the persecution of the Jews.

Thirdly, there is our so-called Judeo-Christian heritage. An expression of this form of Judeophilia can be found, for example, in Kristeligt Dagblad on December 30, 2023, under the headline “If Jesus were not a Jew, he could not be the savior of the world”. Jens Ole Christensen, an associate professor at the Danish National Church’s Education and Knowledge Center, explains this in the article as follows: “For the promise was tied to a descendant of Abraham and King David. It was from that lineage that the Savior of the world was to be born”. And later: “Thus, he was to assume the obligations of the Old Testament law. And that is why the Christian church—when it takes its own DNA seriously—has a special relationship with Jews. We are closely related to them on a level that goes deeper than similarities in faith, culture, and sacred scriptures. We are genetically indebted to them when it comes to the most precious thing in our lives: the Jew Jesus of Nazareth.” On January 13, Ole Andersen, secretary-general of the Jewish propaganda center “Ordet og Israel,” (The word and Israel) expressed the same sentiment there as follows: “If you hate Jews, then you also hate Jesus”, while also referring to John 4:22: “Salvation comes from the Jews!”. Now is the time for us to pause so that readers can cancel their membership in the Danish National Church, if they haven’t already done so long ago. Jens Ole Christensen undeniably treats the concept of “genetics” somewhat carelessly, and overall, one overlooks the fact that we do not follow Jewish law, that Jesus himself said: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matt. 15:24), that it was the Jews who had Jesus crucified, and not the Romans – Pilate would rather have crucified the murderer Barabbas, but the Jews demanded Barabbas’ release and Jesus on the cross – “Crucify him, crucify him!” they shout (Luke 23:21) – and that the Jews, in fact, do not recognize him as the Messiah. He tried to clean things up, among other things by driving the money-changers out of the temple—something Jews certainly do not easily forgive. And besides, Jesus himself distances himself from Judaism and the Jews: “You have the devil as your father, and you are willing to do whatever your father desires.” (John 8:44). Good old Jesus really has a tough job here! Theology and facts are irreconcilable, and with the Bible in hand, one can, strictly speaking, “prove” anything. Finally, it is overwhelmingly likely that this Jesus, whom we all know so well, never existed¹ —but that is beside the point. In our culture, he exists, and without him there would be major gaps in our painting, our music, and our literature. And to be fair, it must also be said that the Old Testament, regrettably, is likewise part of our cultural heritage as a foreign element from the Middle East.

In today’s Denmark, there are unfortunately hardly many who are familiar with the Jewish religious scriptures. It has become quite a pastime to find horrific passages in the Quran and the Hadiths. There are many of them, but the Quran does, after all, contain more than just these horrific passages, even though it is, of course, an immensely primitive book with an incredibly limited vocabulary². The Old Testament, however, contains at least as many horrific passages as the Quran—but it naturally also contains much beautiful poetry, and it is psychologically and humanly far deeper than the Quran. The Old Testament was written for highly intelligent people, the Quran for illiterate shepherds and camel drivers.

The Old Testament, however, is one long account of the Jews’ genocide of the people who previously inhabited the land they today call Israel. I will mention just one example, taken from Morten Thing’s book, which I will discuss in more detail later. It concerns the extermination of the Midianites, as described in Numbers, chapter 31. Verses 7–10 read as follows:

“They went out to battle against the Midianites, as the Lord had commanded Moses, and killed all the males; and besides those who were slain, they also killed the kings of Midian—Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian; they also killed Balaam, the son of Beor, with the sword. And the Israelites took the Midianite women and children captive, and all their livestock, all their flocks, and all their goods they took as plunder; and they set fire to all their cities in the inhabited areas and to all their encampments.”

One would have thought they had done a good day’s work, but it wasn’t good enough.

“And Moses said to them, ‘Have you spared all the women? It was they who, on Balaam’s advice, caused the Israelites to be unfaithful to the LORD in the matter of Peor³, so that the plague struck the congregation of the LORD. Therefore, kill all the male children and all the women who have known a man and had sexual relations with men; but all the young girls who have not had sexual relations with men, you shall let live and keep.” (15–18)

That was the Midianites. Later it will be the turn of the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, among others. And they must,

“For you are a people holy to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be his own possession out of all the peoples on the face of the earth.” (Deuteronomy 7:6)… : “You shall be blessed above all other peoples.” (7:14) “And all the peoples that the LORD your God gives you, you shall consume without mercy;” (7:16). “The LORD your God will also send the hornet against them until those who remain and hide from you are destroyed.” (7:20).

This is surely blatant racism, isn’t it?

The Old Testament is, as mentioned, a detailed account of the Jews’ ethnic cleansing of all the peoples who stood in their way, and it is not lacking in horrific atrocities. They have been working on this project since ancient times, and they are still doing so in Palestine using the same formula, only with modern American and German weapons. And note: It is the Jews who are God’s chosen people —not us. So where is our spiritual kinship with them? People talk so much about how Islam demands submission, but Christians have blindly submitted to a Jewish god who has another people—namely, the Jews—as his chosen people, and whose interests he serves.

For the sake of good order, we should also, in this connection, draw attention to the Jewish “hadiths” collected in the Talmud, a massive work that interprets and explains the Torah (the Five Books of Moses) and, moreover, interprets what the scribes believe to be God the Lord’s intention with it all, and His intention is only for the Jews, for “non-Jews and slaves are destined to be exterminated” (Fol. 45a). The Talmud is a goldmine for those seeking horrific passages—but The Talmud consists—just like The Quran—not only of horrific passages.

I cannot unconditionally subscribe to the idea of a shared Jewish-Christian culture. The origins of Christianity strike me as being, at least in part, a Jewish invention aimed at the destruction of the Roman Empire, and since it succeeded so well, they moved on. Today, the Jewish elite has found other messages with the same destructive purpose. One can, of course, debate how historically OT is, but one thing is certain: It is an expression of the Jewish self-understanding. You cannot reason with people who believe in fairy tales to such an extent that they think the Jews have the right to exterminate the Palestinians because their God has granted them this right. They are a case for psychiatry.

Fourth, both the mass media and economic, political, and intellectual life in the West are dominated by Jewish interests, allowing them to freely create a Jewish narrative about both Israel and Europe. Without realizing it, we have become accustomed to not viewing the world from a European perspective, but from a Jewish perspective, as our entire cultural life today is viewed exclusively through a Jewish prism that distorts our values beyond recognition and creates an alternative false reality.

This is just an introduction.

Morten Thing is an interesting, exceptionally knowledgeable, and never boring cultural historian. His father was part of the communist wing of the resistance movement during the occupation, and his mother was a Russian Jew. He was, at least to some extent, raised as a Jew, spent his youth on a kibbutz, and has since engaged intensively with Jewish affairs and Jewish languages. His other area of research has been communism. No one in their right mind could accuse Morten Thing of being anti-Semitic. But Morten Thing has a sense of justice that compels him to be critical of the Jewish state of Israel.

He begins his book with a substantial section on Zionism and the plans for a Jewish homeland. One of the first proposals for the location of such a homeland was Uganda, but Argentina was also in the picture. Palestine, however, seemed to be a more logical choice, and with the Balfour Declaration in 1917, the establishment of a Jewish state in the future British Mandate of Palestine became official British policy, though this state was in no way to infringe upon the rights of the Arabs living there. This declaration in itself increased Jewish immigration to Palestine even before the establishment of the State of Israel. During Thing’s stay at the kibbutz, the following was carefully instilled in him:

“The Jews were a people without a land; Palestine was a land without a people. What could be more natural than for the Jews to move into this land!”⁴

Golda Meir put it this way in an interview in the Sunday Times on June 15, 1969:

“There was no such thing as Palestinians. When has there ever been an independent Palestinian people with a Palestinian state? … It wasn’t as if there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country from them. They did not exist.”

This is the official Jewish mythology—a typical expression of Jewish pilpul. A mendacious claim so brazen that we goyim cannot bring ourselves to believe that anyone could lie so shamelessly, and which, when repeated often enough, becomes a false “truth.” Let me just problematize this statement a bit, because this is, after all, what you see repeated ad nauseam on Facebook by half-educated thugs who haven’t familiarized themselves with the facts before forming their infallible opinions.

Are you only a people if you have an independent nation-state? May I remind you that there has never been a Ukrainian state (consequently, there is probably no Ukrainian people either), just as there have never been independent states called the Czech Republic, Slovakia, North Macedonia, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, etc., etc., etc. Virtually no African peoples had a state before around 1960, and very few of the African states we know today are nation-states—so do these many different African peoples not exist? That is, of course, utter nonsense. Of course, it is possible to be a people without having a country. Think, for example, of the Basques, the Roma, the Frisians, and countless other peoples. Yes, the Jews themselves are an example of this. That is, if the Jews are a people. As Thing points out, the Jews are vastly different, both ethnically (racially) and culturally, and they speak a wide variety of Jewish languages, typically dialects of the languages spoken in their host countries. The only thing that unites them is religion. Does that constitute a people? Are Jehovah’s Witnesses a people? Are Buddhists?

The crux of the matter is that the land of Palestine was not a land without a people. People actually lived there, and they were called Palestinians, just as the inhabitants of Jutland are called Jutlanders. Palestine has pretty much always been a political football between great powers. Palestinians are Arabs in the same way that we are Europeans. Being an Arab is not a nationality. Ironically, the core of the Palestinian people consists precisely of Jews who remained behind and, following Islam’s conquest of Palestine, were Arabized and Islamized, as pointed out by Morten Thing. What happened in Palestine would be equivalent to a foreign people settling in Jutland and expelling the Jutlanders because they do not exist. They have no independent country—they are only Danes, so they can simply move to the islands.

Another part of Israeli mythology is that the Palestinians (who did not exist) voluntarily left their homes and handed everything over to the Jews. Morten Thing documents with all the clarity one could wish for that this is not how it happened. The Palestinians were driven from their homeland through terror. Mass shootings, mass rapes, the burning of villages, the poisoning of wells, the poisoning of the water supply in the cities, bombings, etc. And so-called “Danish” Jews—including the later editor-in-chief of Politiken and Mossad agent Herbert Pundik and Chief Rabbi Bent Melchior—participated in these festivities without ever being prosecuted or punished for them. These purges began long before the State of Israel was proclaimed, and they have continued ever since with varying intensity. What we see in Gaza today is merely a continuation of the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine⁵ —and anyone who can look at this and still cheer for Israel is no human being. And if the Palestinians who currently—temporarily—live in Denmark seem radicalized, cold-hearted, and calculating to us, it is probably not so surprising, as many of them have experienced this cleansing firsthand, such as the massacre in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut, carried out by Christian Lebanese on Israel’s orders—a wound in Lebanon that will never heal.

Let us quote a bit from Things’s excellent and extremely well-documented account:

“On March 10 (1948), ‘Plan Dalet’ was adopted. The first targets were Palestinian urban centers, all of which were occupied by the Zionists by the end of April. 250,000 were displaced.
Deir Yassin was a Palestinian village situated on a hill west of Jerusalem. The Haganah had entered into a non-aggression pact with the village, and since the village was part of Plan Dalet, the Haganah left the work to the Irgun and Lehi⁶ On April 9, 1948, the groups occupied the village and fired machine guns at the houses, killing many. They then gathered the survivors in one place and murdered them all. Several of the women had been raped beforehand. Ninety-three were killed, including 30 babies. Contemporary estimates put the number of victims in Deir Yassin at 254, but this figure was likely intentionally inflated to intimidate the Palestinians. Menachem Begin, the leader of the Irgun, described the effect among the Palestinians of spreading such rumors in his book “The Revolt”:
“Arabs throughout the country, who had been misled into believing the wild story of the ‘Irgun massacre,’ were seized by boundless panic and began to flee for their lives. This mass exodus quickly developed into a frenzied, uncontrolled, wild flight. Of the nearly 800,000 who lived in what is now the territory of the State of Israel, only about 165,000 remain. The political and economic significance of this development can hardly be overestimated.”⁷

So much for the “voluntary emigration.” And Thing continues the list: Khibat Nasr al-din, Haifa (where the order was: “Kill every Arab you meet, set fire to everything that can burn, and blow up the doors”), Safad (9,500 displaced), Hotel Semiramis, Jerusalem, Jaffa Gate, Jerusalem, Akko (where typhoid bacteria were introduced into the water supply), Gaza, Jaffa, Shaykh Muwannis, Khibat Nasr al-Din, Ayn al-Zaytun, Abu Shusha, Tantura, Lydda, Ramla…..

The list is virtually endless, and everywhere the massacres—marked by rape, torture, and murder—were carried out with a cruelty that defies human imagination. This is what the Palestinians call Al Nakba, the catastrophe. Since then, most of them have lived in refugee camps, deprived of all their property. If some might find the descriptions reminiscent of the biblical accounts in Numbers, it is only natural. It is the continuation of the same story.

When people today speak of “Israel’s right to defend itself”, one can only say that Israel, as an occupying power, has no right whatsoever—and certainly not to the collective punishment of the civilian population in Gaza. That is what international law says. But they couldn’t care less about that when it suits the interests of the U.S. and the Jews. Imagine, for example, that Russia had carried out a similar punishment against Ukraine following Ukraine’s eight years of bombardment of the Donbas, which resulted in 14,000 civilian casualties—over which no one in the West sheds so much as a single tear. There would have been an outcry about “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” from the very same politicians in the West who today deny that the genocide the world witnesses daily in Gaza is a genocide. This speaks to the extent of Jewish power over Western politicians and the media. And it must be the civilized world’s task to crush this power—and to hold Israeli politicians and their Western puppets accountable before a Nuremberg-style tribunal.

Morten Thing devotes the next section to anti-Semitism. Much can be written about it—including a lot of nonsense—but Thing tries to cut to the chase, and that is a good approach. As mentioned, I believe that the foundation of anti-Semitism lies in the Jewish population’s belief that they are God’s chosen people, and that therefore different rules apply to them than to others. This determines their group behavior and simultaneously binds them together in a community that sets them apart from the outside world. Their life in the diaspora has led them to develop a survival strategy that places the group well above the individual—something we could learn a lot from! But when one does not wish to be part of the surrounding society’s national and religious community, one becomes frowned upon. When one simultaneously seeks to influence and control the development of the host societies (I refer again to Genesis, which serves as the model), well, then things will inevitably go wrong, especially because we are dealing with a highly gifted group of people who generally do well, but whose belief in their divine chosenness seems to prevent them from pausing to ask themselves why they are always persecuted.

This anti-Semitism has taken various forms throughout history; in Europe, most often a religious one. They killed Jesus and do not acknowledge him. Therefore, attempts are made to convert them, and when that fails, people sometimes turn vehemently against them. Their historical role as moneylenders and tax collectors has not helped matters.

Then, in earlier centuries, rumors of human sacrifices—especially of children—were circulated. These were compiled by Helmut Schram in the book Der jüdische Ritualmord, Theodor Fritsch Verlag, 1943. The Americans tried with all their might to eradicate that book after 1945, and I must honestly admit that I have always shrugged off these stories and dismissed them as nonsense on par with equally detailed accounts of vampires. But perhaps there is a connection between the two kinds of accounts. The discovery of tunnels beneath a synagogue in Brooklyn, equipped with mattresses, high chairs, etc., as well as detailed information about Jeffrey Epstein and his gang’s doings, where the lending out of underage girls belongs to the more innocent part of their activities—well, I’m starting to not know what to believe. But honestly, it’s all a bit too bizarre for my imagination. Yet it has certainly played a role in historical anti-Semitism.⁸

With the publication of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion at the end of the 19th century, anti-Semitism took on a political face. Morten Thing himself has published The Protocols⁹, likely the only Danish edition still available today, along with a detailed argument proving that they are forgeries. Some of his arguments are stronger than others. For example, he believes that no one with such plans would write them down. That may seem very logical, but it probably doesn’t hold up; Barbara Lerner Spectre¹⁰ happily explains on camera how Jews play a leading role in making Europe multiethnic. It is a clear-cut confession, and Bent Melchior has never made a secret of the Jewish efforts to promote the immigration of foreigners to Denmark. But of course, one cannot prove the authenticity of The Protocols, and it doesn’t really matter anyway. If, as some believe, they were written by the Tsar’s secret police, it only shows that they fully understood the issue. To me, it doesn’t matter whether they are genuine or fake. The question is whether they describe a real development—or whether it’s just nonsense. One would have to be both blind and deaf to believe the latter.

For Arab anti-Semitism (which, in this context, is an absurd term, since Arabs are also Semites), the Protocols play a major role alongside a long series of other, more or less serious writings from the same period. The real background for the Arabs’ hatred of the Jews, however, is Israel, and that is a far more tangible and understandable basis than anything else. The use of The Protocols and similar writings actually harms the Arab cause.

A modern anti-Semitism, if one can call it that, stems from the obvious Jewish influence throughout our society¹¹. It doesn’t take many searches online to confirm the decisive Jewish influence on American politics¹², mass media, and cultural life¹³ —including queer theories, gender theories, trans theories, critical race theories¹⁴, anti-whiteness theories, in short, the entire “woke” spectrum—and economic life. It can be summed up very briefly: almost total Jewish control. If one wishes, one could say that what we see today is the realization of the Protocols, regardless of their authorship. The essence of Jewish influence in the West is dissolution.¹⁵ It fosters anti-Semitism.

When people today speak of a “catastrophic” rise in anti-Semitism in Europe, however, this does not refer to rising anti-Semitism among Europeans—but rather to open hatred from the people whom we have knowingly allowed to enter our society—supported by Jewish leaders such as Bent Melchior. This anti-Semitism is entirely self-inflicted, and it is currently being amplified by Israel’s actions in Gaza. It is making—if possible—Europeans even more pro-Jewish.

There is much talk about combating anti-Semitism. In this context, I would like to quote the Israeli holocaust survivor and peace activist Israel Shahak¹⁶: “Anti-Semitism and Jewish chauvinism can only be combated simultaneously.”

But back to Morten Thing. He believes, perhaps putting it a bit bluntly, that it is anti-Semitism that has influenced the Jews’ own perception of themselves. Yes, which came first: the chicken or the egg? He also adds yet another form of anti-Semitism: the racial one. I have omitted that one, for it is the vaguest of all, since the Jews have, to a large extent, become intermingled with their host peoples, even though they have tried to avoid it—and since they themselves emphasize religion as what makes them Jews. One could say that the Jews constitute a kind of “spiritual race” .

He quotes Rabbi Michael Melchior as saying that “anti-Semitism always lies latent in the cultural milieu and is awakened by something in the atmosphere.” Of course, one could say that: Anti-Semitism will always be there as long as the cause of anti-Semitism exists. See the Shahak quote above.

It is, of course, this latent anti-Semitism that also forms the backdrop to the Jews’ most recent holocaust, which is by no means a purely German phenomenon. Poles, Lithuanians, and Ukrainians hated the Jews more than the Germans—because they were more closely entangled with them in daily life—and they certainly did their part to decimate the Jewish population in Eastern Europe. This holocaust has today become part of the Jewish self-image. They have become victims, and victims have a special status—they are, by definition, morally superior. However, it is not this moral superiority that we see demonstrated in Gaza today!

For Thing, however, it is absolutely crucial that anti-Semitism and the holocaust have been instrumentalized so that criticism of the State of Israel is perceived as anti-Semitic, and thus in many countries will be subject to criminal law. Morten Thing considers identifying criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism to be completely wrong, and one can only agree with him on this. One can certainly be pro-Jewish, yet believe that the State of Israel, as it behaves today, is highly open to criticism. After all, there are a great many prominent Jews who feel the same way! Morten Thing himself is a good local example of this. People like Chomsky, Ilan Pappe, and the aforementioned Shahak are other good examples, but there are many more. Finally, there are Orthodox Jews who reject the State of Israel on religious grounds. According to them, the biblical conditions for the return of the Jews have not yet been met.

I might add, for my part, that it is already considered anti-Semitic to even discuss the holocaust, which is, after all, a historical event and should therefore be a legitimate subject of a serious historical discussion. Such a discussion should take place among historians and not in the courts.

Morten Thing’s criticism of Israel also extends to the Hebrew language. In Thing’s view, Hebrew is a new constructed language and not a revival of the ancient Biblical Hebrew language, which, however, has never been completely dead, as it has been used by Jews in religious and ceremonial contexts throughout the years; but it is, of course, true that modern Hebrew differs significantly from the language of the Bible. After all, it must be usable in all aspects of daily life, encompassing all the things and concepts that, for better or worse, belong to the modern world. For example, one must be able to buy a train ticket in Hebrew. Consequently, extensive work has naturally been done on the language, which is generally regarded by linguists and philologists as perhaps the only truly successful attempt to save a nearly extinct language—even though it has undergone major changes in the process. But Morten Thing is, of course, right that it is not without its problems. Ivrit has, after all, displaced a long list of other languages that are the native tongues of immigrant Jews. This applies first and foremost to Yiddish, which was spoken in two different dialects by most Northern and Eastern European Jews, and it was the language spoken by most immigrants to Israel (and most victims of the holocaust) spoke. However, this also applies to Judezmo (usually called Ladino or Judeo-Spanish) and many others, including major European languages such as German and Russian, which are still the native languages of many Jews.¹⁷ It should be noted, however, that Hebrew, had it developed naturally and organically, would also have undergone very significant changes over the course of approximately 2,000 years. Danish does not have texts dating back that far. Some of the oldest we have are the golden horns from Gallehus (ca. 400 CE). The inscription reads: ek hlewagastiR holtijaR horna tawido. There you go, today only philologists can read it: I, Lægæst, son of Holt (or from Holt), made the horn. Equally significant changes would have taken place in Hebrew. So yes, Ivrit is an artificial language, but then again, perhaps not entirely.

When Thing attacks the language, it is of course also because he attacks the Jewish state for being racist and seeking to create an artificial Jewish identity that denies the diversity of the Jewish people. It is governed by European Jews, and all other Jews—for example, Jews from Arab countries, from Asia, or from Ethiopia—are regarded as second-class citizens. That can hardly surprise anyone. I am thinking not only of the biological mixing but also of European Jews’ appropriation of European culture. When European travelers feel so at home in Israel, it is precisely because it resembles a European country and has European standards of living. Had the Ethiopian Jews been in power, it would have been a completely different country, one in which I suspect even Morten Thing would not have felt at home. So yes, Israel is certainly a racist state. All in all, there is much about Israel that I like very much. It is a country for one people, and it will preserve this people’s identity and culture—and their common language. Isn’t that wonderful! It is today the world’s only semi-national socialist state. Why can’t we in Europe have such states, where we are ourselves and nurture our own culture? And why is it especially Jews who condemn any attempt to create such a European state—a Denmark for the Danes, for example? See the aforementioned Barbara Lerner Spectre (and many other Jews).

Thing also attacks the myth that the Arab countries expelled the Jews, which is the official justification for Israel’s refusal to pay compensation to the displaced Palestinians. The situation varies from country to country, and Morten Thing reviews them all. Yet another Israeli lie. It is so often claimed that the Palestinians who remained in Israel and obtained Israeli citizenship are treated just like the Jews, but that is also a myth. In practice, a great distinction is made between them. Jews are preferred for leadership positions, and Arab Israelis cannot own land. Of course, the situation is absolutely dire for the Arabs in the so-called autonomous areas, which the Israelis have gradually simply taken over, and where Palestinians are treated worse than Jews in the Third Reich in the 1930s. They are, in practice, without rights. The goal is quite simply to drive them out. So no, Israel has no right to defend itself.

I have addressed the issue in depth in my review of Chomsky and Pappes’ book On Palestine My disheartening answer to that question is: No! By establishing Israel, the West created an intractable problem. In an ideal world, I would think it perfectly fine for the Jews to have their own state. Why shouldn’t they? I would just think that virtually all Jews should live there and keep their hands off our affairs. But I think it’s a problem that you simply give them another people’s land and expel that people. It is quite simply unacceptable. I have a hard time reconciling these two viewpoints! But where could one find a country without inhabitants? I can only think of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. I could probably find quite a few people who would think that was a really good solution, but it would cause great harm to the unique wildlife—and the Jews would hardly be won over by the idea.

On one single point, I must take issue with Morten Thing. He believes, “that race no longer has any scientific significance, since all humans come from Africa and thus share genes with Africans”. That is, of course, utter nonsense — quite apart from the fact that the theory that we all come from Africa is also controversial. But even if we did, the statement would still be utter nonsense. We all come from some chemical reaction or another. Originally, we lived in the water, but one of our ancestors crawled onto land, adapted, and from there all animal life evolved, including humans. Even if we were to imagine that we all came from Africa 300,000 years ago, we have, of course, undergone various changes during that time as we have adapted to different geographical and climatic living conditions. We share 99% of our genes with chimpanzees—but that last 2% makes a huge difference—at least for some of us. We also share a large number of genes with our houseplants, but we are not a geranium. The different human races are not genetically identical.

For the intellectually curious, I recommend Issa Nakhleh: Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem, New York: Intercontinental Books, 1991. 2 volumes. You can look up just about anything here. Among other things, there is a list with descriptions of all Jewish terrorist attacks and abuses against the Palestinians, including a number of photos. All information can be verified.

---

Notes

1. See, for example, Geoff Roberts: The True Origins of Jesus: The Myth behind the Man, Christian Alternative Books 2023. ↩︎
2. Only 1,875 different words, according to Professor Dr. Hans Jansen in “Islam for Pigs, Monkeys, Donkeys, and Other Beasts”, Van Praag, Amsterdam 2008. (Islam for Pigs, Monkeys, Donkeys, and Other Animals). ↩︎
3. Numbers 25:1–9. The people had begun to commit adultery with Moabite and Midianite women. In other terms, this was “racial defilement,” even though they were all related. ↩︎
4. p. 47 ↩︎
5. See Ilan Pappe (Jewish historian): The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, 2007, Ten Myths About Israel, 2017, as well as several other books on the subject. See also my review of “On Palestine”. ↩︎
6. Haganah, Irgun, and Lehi are all terrorist organizations. ↩︎
7. Thing, p. 93 and more following pages. ↩︎
8. The most serious treatment of this issue can be found in Ariel Toaff: Passovers of Blood: The Jews of Europe and Ritual Murders. 2007. ↩︎
9. Morten Thing: Antisemitismens bibel. Historien om smædeskriftet Zions Vises Protokoller, (The Bible of Anti-Semitism. The History of the Slanderous Text The Protocols of the Elders of Zion) Informations Forlag, 2014. ↩︎
10. “I believe there is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe because Europe has not yet learned to be multicultural, and I believe we will be part of the birth pangs of this transformation, which must necessarily take place. Europe will no longer be the homogeneous society it once was in the last century. The Jews will be at the center of this transformation of Europe. It is a massive change for Europe. We are now transitioning into a multicultural state, and people will hate the Jews because of our leading role in this change. But without this leading role and without this change, Europe will not survive.” ↩︎
11. David Duke: Jewish Supremacism, Free Speech Press, Mandeville 2003. ↩︎
12. John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt: The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York 2007, James Petras: The Power of Israel in the United States, Clarity Press, Atlanta 2006. ↩︎
13. Kevin Macdonald: The Culture of Critique, 1st Books Library, 2002. ↩︎
14. https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/06/21/critical-race-theory-as-a-jewish-intellectual-weapon/ ↩︎
15. Kevin MacDonald notes that “Jews, as a highly cohesive group, have an interest in advocating a completely atomistic, individualistic society in which ingroup-outgroup distinctions are not salient to gentiles.”[i] It is therefore in Jewish interests to subvert all non-Jewish social categories — whether these be based on race, religion or gender boundaries and roles. Hence their recent championing of the concept of “fluidity” which is the very antithesis of anything separate, homogeneous, or with clear boundaries. All cohesive (and evolutionarily adaptive) social categories that have characterized Western civilization have been subverted by Jewish activists. See also: https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/10/09/jill-soloway-and-the-transgender-agenda-part-1/ ↩︎
16. Israel Shahak: Jewish History, Jewish Religion, Pluto Press, London & Boulder Co. 1994 ↩︎
17. The issue is addressed by Spolsky and Shomamy in Hebrew After a Century of RLS Efforts in Joshua A. Fishmann: Can threatened languages be saved? Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, Buffalo, Toronto, Sydney 2001. ↩︎