Why does Ward Churchill make everyone so upset? Let’s see. He’s advocating that what was done -what is still being done- to Native Americans be recognized as genocide., and he’s being called a anti-semite because of it. Why?

Well, because the jewish people suffered under the Holocaust and as recompense were given Palestine. And just like someone who’s been granted maybe too special a favor, they have to make sure that no one else feels like they can begin lining up for similar treatment. For example, what if Native Americans, who may have suffered 100 million deaths under a systemic program of genocide, what if they decided that their religion had prophesied a return to their native lands, and that -out of guilt- the powers that be should grant them their holy lands, irrespective of who may be presently living there.

There’s an ugly untold story to the Holocaust. Six million jews died; not American jews, not for the most part wealthy jews, but the poor jews. And it is becoming known that world leaders knew about the German programs of extermination. There is doubt now that those jews who were not under threat of extermination may have known about what was happening to their poorer cousins. As unthinkable as was the Holocaust, why can we not stretch our mind to grasp the also unthinkable idea that deaths of millions of poor jews may have been expended to further the cause of Zionism, the notion of a jewish entitlement to the holy land.

When there is talk of genocide in the Balkans or Africa or Southeast Asia or the Americas, Jewish scholars are always at the forefront of the argument against calling it genocide. To them it is some lesser-cide, and certainly no Holocaust. Because the Holocaust by their definition is the worst inhumanity to have been visited upon a people ever, past or future.

The resistance to acknowledge genocide is particularly damnable when it comes to the UN trying to intercede and prevent it. After Bosnia, nations of the world passed a resolution that mandated their intercession in cases of genocide. Could anyone have imagined that their determination to take action would be stymied by having to bicker over the definition of genocide? The uninterrupted ethnic cleansing in the Sudan is the most recent tragic example.

And so no other group of people may lay claim to being the victims of genocide, lest it detract from the genocide suffered by world jewry, lest anyone question the jewish claim, after a 2,000 year absence, to Palestinian lands.

This is why Ward Churchill is so unpopular. And should be I suppose, if you are a zionist. May I say that I don’t believe that I should be considered an anti-semite to say that by definition a Zionist is a bigoted, white-supremist jew.

If you believe that the Israelis are the only qualified caretakers of Jerusalem, do you also believe that the white man has been the best custodian for the holy lands of the American continent’s previous peoples?