Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters Fires Back At Accusations of Anti-Semitism Following Criticism of Israel

PIC: Jethro (CC)

PIC: Jethro (CC)

Abby Zimet writes at Common Dreams:

Confronting recent criticism of his support for Palestinian rights and the BDS movement in two furious, personal, open letters, Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters rips the “crude pattern” of equating his and others’ criticisms of “the policies of this government of Israel” with anti-Semitism, viewing it as perhaps “a reaction to the fact that BDS is gaining ground, day by day and year by year, all over the world.” Arguing that dehumanization of the other is “the root of all injustice and oppression” and that “the tree of fear and bigotry bears only bitter fruit,” Waters cites the death of his father fighting the Nazis in Italy to chide critics – especially those penning poisonous pieces about Waters’ “anti-Semitic stench” – with, “Do not presume to preach to me, my father’s son, about anti-Semitism or human rights.”

“Look to your own house and the human rights abuses and racism of the Israeli government you defend. If Jews and Palestinians are to live in peace then there must be a real acknowledgment of the fact that Israel is denying freedom to Palestinians and abusing the term “anti-Semitism” to intimidate people, like me, into silence simply because we seek a better and equal future for Palestinians and Jews alike.”

9 Comments on "Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters Fires Back At Accusations of Anti-Semitism Following Criticism of Israel"

  1. Damian Caligula | Mar 23, 2014 at 1:07 pm |

    Semitic is a language group, not a race. And Palestinians speak a semitic language, therefore anyone who is anti-Palestinian can also be called anti-semitic. The word comes from Hebrew mythology and refers to someone who is a descendant of Noah’s son Shem. Unless you consider the story of Noah to be actual history, the word means nothing as far as race goes.

    • dan miller | Mar 23, 2014 at 2:22 pm |

      Semite, Person speaking one of a group of related languages, presumably derived from a common language, Semitic (see Semitic languages). The term came to include Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, some Ethiopians, and Aramaean tribes including Hebrews. Semitic tribes migrated from the Arabian Peninsula, beginning c. 2500 bc, to the Mediterranean coast, Mesopotamia, and the Nile River delta. In Phoenicia, they became seafarers. In Mesopotamia, they blended with the civilization of Sumer. The Hebrews settled at last with other Semites in Palestine.

      • Damian Caligula | Mar 23, 2014 at 4:49 pm |

        “The term Semitic dates to the eighteenth century AD, when it was derived from the name Shem, one of the sons of Noah, to refer to the group of languages of which Arabic and Hebrew are now the best known living examples. Contrary to popular usage, it does not describe an ethnic, racial or cultural group, but a linguistic family whose members dominated the region between the Sinai to the south, through the area known as the Levant along the coast of the Mediterranean, north through present-day Syria and Asia Minor, and east to the mouth of the Tigris and Euphrates valley.” -The Alphabetic Labyrinth by Johanna Drucker

        • Woobniggurath | Mar 25, 2014 at 12:45 am |

          “When I use a word it means precisely what I wish it to mean.”
          H. Dumpty.

    • Anarchy Pony | Mar 23, 2014 at 4:01 pm |

      Semitic semantics!

  2. Tragically predictable.

    I’m sure that Zionist apologists are able to achieve some of their short term goals with these perpetual charges of racism when faced with criticism of political policies.

    But I do wander about the long term consequences.

    Cry “Wolf” enough and people stop responding. The Holocaust is almost outside of living human memory. Israel’s human rights abuses are not…

    Additionally, some segment of any population has a perverse/contrarian element to their personality.

    Call them racist long enough and that’s what you’ll get.

    • Adam Cornell | Mar 23, 2014 at 4:51 pm |

      Consequences of priming.
      Why is Hitler presented in the main stream as the only bad guy/strong man of his era?
      Why does Hollywood produce so many holocaust/nazi films, and so few concerning the objectively greater brutality of the Soviets?
      There are those who authorized the killing of more than Hitler did, those who were in power longer than he, those who did what he was doing before he did it, and those who did it after, and those who continue to do it.
      The United States oversaw the murder of millions of Native peoples of North America, the murder of millions of Korean and Vietnamese.
      The lesson of the great wars has not been learned. As always, the message is lost behind focus on the messenger. Even a dictator is designed to tell us certain things we don’t want to know about ourselves, like the carthasis a population will engage in when it feels hopeless about it’s capacity to change it’s own future, for example.

      • Woobniggurath | Mar 25, 2014 at 12:47 am |

        It’s the uniforms. General design aesthetic of the Reich. Speer. All looks hot on film.

      • Woobniggurath | Mar 25, 2014 at 12:53 am |

        -The lesson of the great wars has not been learned.-
        In fact a perverted inversion of the lesson has been accepted. Instead of “Wars always renew and regenerate the cycle of conflict” we are taught “No one likes it *wink wink* but sometimes you’ve just got to man up to save your freedom.”

Comments are closed.