“Anti-Semitism” Is Morally and Intellectually Imploding



…by Jonas E. Alexis and Nicholas Kollerstrom


Nicholas Kollerstrom has a B.A. in the natural sciences from Cambridge University, with an emphasis on the history and philosophy of science. He is also an astronomer, receiving his Ph.D. from the University College London. He was a former correspondent for the BBC and received grants from the Royal Astronomical Society to do scientific work related to the discovery of Neptune.

Kollerstrom has written numerous technical articles and essays.[1] He is the author of Newton’s Forgotten Lunar Theory: His contribution to the Quest for Longitude (London: Green Lion Press, 2000) and The Metal-Planet Relationship: A Study of Celestial Influence (Eureka, CA: Borderland Sciences Research Foundation, 1993). Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers contained several of his essays on mathematician and astronomer John Couch Adams (1819-1892), astronomer John Flamsteed (1646-1719) and Isaac Newton. But because he has challenged the Holocaust establishment using science and reason, all his work was removed from the Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers.

Kollerstrom was widely cited in the scholarly literature[2]—until he began to look at chemical evidence of how Zyklon was used during World War II.

Jonas E. Alexis: In 2006, a British party parliament group, led by Denis MacShane and backed by a number of prominent Jews and British Neocons such as Melanie Phillips and Emanuele Ottolenghi, released a report entitled the Report of the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism, in which it is stated that “it is the Jewish community itself that is best qualified to determine what does and does not constitute anti-Semitism.”[3]

These could include “conversations, discussions, or pronouncements made in public or private, which cross the line of acceptability” as well as “the widespread change in mood and tone when Jews are discussed, whether in print or broadcast, at universities, or in public or social settings.”[4]

This was certainly not an “inquiry into Antisemitism”; it was obviously a political and ideological project which sought to usurp the critical faculty of anyone who questioned the Powers That Be.

Can we honestly say that it is only the black community that is qualified to determine what constitutes racism, or only the Muslim community that is qualified to determine what constitutes anti-Islamic sentiments? Can anyone see the complete absurdity of this system, not to mention the danger?

The solution to the anti-Semitic issue proposed by the Report of the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism is not logically sound. It is like declaring that only musicians are allowed to say whether a piece of music is good or bad (disqualifying all others, from those to simply enjoy listening to music to philosophers like Plato and Aristotle, who wrote voluminously on the subject).

The anti-Semitism tactic raised by ideologues ceases to enjoy its political status when it is put under the lens of reason. The report makes matters worse by stating that “anti-Semitic discourse is, by its nature, harder to identify and define than a physical attack on a person or place.”[5]

Then why on earth are the authors so quick to declare that only Jews can know what anti-Semitism is? Apparently because anti-Semitism “is more easily recognized by those who experience it than by those who engage in it.”[6] It is these people, then, who believe that “anti-Semitism in public and private discourse has become commonplace.”[7]

We are obviously facing an intolerable situation here. As Joe Sobran rightly wrote years ago, “An ‘anti-semite’ in actual usage, is less often a man who hates Jews than a man certain Jews hate. The word expresses the emotional explosion that occurs in people who simply can’t bear critical discourse about a sacred topic, and who experience criticism as profanation and blasphemy.”[8]

Norman Podhoretz

Sobran was himself labeled as an anti-Semite by Jewish neoconservative Norman Podhoretz, the Jewish Neocon who “secretly urged Bush to bomb Iran.”[9]

Similarly, philosopher Michael Neumann wrote in 2002: “The more things get to count as anti-semitic, the less awful anti-Semitism is going to sound. This happens because, while no one can stop you from inflating definitions, you still don’t control the facts.”[10]

Well said.

Yet many are quick to claim anti-Semitism whenever something negative happens to Jews. When Lord Levy, a strong supporter of Tony Blair, was arrested three times for fraud, Rabbi Yitzchak Schochet suggested that Levy was arrested due to anti-Semitism, even though Levy made it clear that anti-Semitism played no part in his arrests![11] When T. S. Eliot depicted Jews in a controversial way in some of his poetry, he was denounced by many as an anti-Semite.

Yet before publication, Eliot sent many of his poems to Jewish friends such as Sidney Schiff for their input; none of them considered his work as displaying an anti-Semitic spirit. On the contrary,

“In 2003, Professor Ronald Schuchard of Emory University published details of a previously unknown cache of letters from Eliot to Horace Kallen, which reveal that in the early 1940s Eliot was actively helping Jewish refugees from Germany and Austria to re-settle in Britain and America. In letters written after the war, Eliot also voiced support for the state of Israel.[12]

But for noted Jewish literary critic Harold Bloom, that is not proof enough. Bloom, who should know better, goes so far as to say that Eliot’s poetry is a “polite hatred of the Jewish people.”[13]

Bloom needs to get real. If he believes Eliot was a polite anti-Semite, he might want to give Portnoy’s Complaint by Philip Roth a second look. In the book, Roth laments “the longing in all us swarthy Jewboys for those bland blond exotics called shikses.”[14] Shikse (or shiksa) is generally used as a pejorative term for a non-Jewish woman, especially a sexually attractive one.

Portnoy’s Complaint goes on to talk about how a Jewish savior would come “to save the stupid shikse; to rid her of her race’s ignorance; to make this daughter of the heartless oppressor a student of suffering and oppression; to teach her to be compassionate, to bleed a little for the world’s sorrows.”[15]

Once his shikse is free from all sexual and religious constraints, Portnoy and his girlfriend make “the perfect couple: she puts the id back in Yid; I put the oy back in goy.”[16] Shouldn’t Roth then be labeled “anti-Goyim”? Why doesn’t Boom provide a serious critique of Roth’s description of the shikse?

It is high time that all of us started getting real in order to deal with serious issues. To call neutral observation or serious criticism “racist” or “anti-Semitic” without an evidential foundation will not do. A statement or criticism has to be dismissed by reason and logic. But for people like Bloom, this is hard to do because they have metaphysically and categorically rejected Logos, which provides the basis for rational discourse.

Many Jews in the twentieth century have begun to see how some fellow Jews use charges of anti-Semitism and other deceptive tools as weapons. Chaim Bermant (British journalist, economist, and satirist; Orthodox Jew and supporter of Israel) gave an example:

“There is the story of the Jew on a train who kept moaning: ‘Oy, have I got a pain…Oy, have I got a pain…Oy, have I got a pain…Oy…’ Finally one of the passengers, who could stand it no longer, jumped to his feet, searched the length and breadth of the train and came back with a doctor, who gave the Jew a pill, and all was quiet for a minute or two till the voice began again: ‘Oy, did I have a pain…Oy, did…’”

Bermant commented, “It is perhaps time for an end to oying. A sense of guilt does not make for a healthy relationship between ex-persecutor and ex-victim.”[17]

Perhaps people like Bloom should pay attention to Bermant. Perhaps Western leaders and politicians should stop lay games. And perhaps Theresa May should get real. Nicholas Kollerstrom has written an excellent to May, and we should all thank him for his courageous undertaking.

Nicholas Kollerstrom

Nicholas Kollerstrom:

Dear Theresa May,

Kindly allow me to comment upon the erroneous definition of anti-Semitism which you are now imposing upon the British people:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Semites are Arab peoples, and ‘semitic’ is an adjective which alludes to a middle-Eastern group of languages. It cannot allude to white, European Jews. These are normally alluded to as Ashkenazi Khazars, but whatever you call them they are not semitic.

Indeed they almost all support Israel, a nation which exterminates Palestinians by official policy,[18] which has been destroying their land for half a century – and many or most people hate such Jews for this reason. Who are you to tell people what or who they must love or hate? Israel destroys and bombs semitic peoples. Only a tiny proportion of its peoples are semitic.

For thousands of years, the law in this country has been based upon the notion of crime, which alluded to a deed, to something which has been done. Now you are trying to adjust it, to allude to an attitude, which the police are supposed to recognize as ‘hate.’ Will the courts now employ psychologists, to testify that so-and-so has hated, or made someone hate?

How can law-courts ask people to promise to tell the ‘absolute truth’ if their judgements are now going to depend upon an alleged emotion – one moreover where one suspects that the word of the prosecutor is going to be the sole basis for?

You are making an especial law to defend the richest social-ethnic group (not a race) in this country. Thereby you are destroying the key principal of English law, as enshrined in the Magna Carta, whereby all are equal under the law.

All my life ‘crime’ has been generally regarded as a really bad thing, done only by bad people. Now you are endeavouring to change this, so that it may be necessary for persons of good conscience to risk being convicted of it. Your broad brush of ‘anti-semitism’ is like ‘extremism’ so incredibly sweeping that all persons of good conscience may be impelled to take actions which risk being tarred by it.

Please accept my respect for your good office,

Yours truly,



[1] See for example Nicholas Kollerstrom, “John Herschel on the Discovery of Neptune,” Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, 9(2), 151-158 (2006); “Decoding the Antikythera Mechanism,” Astronomy Now, Vol. 21, No. 3, 32–35, 2007; “The Case of the Pilfered Planet: Did the British steal Neptune?,” Scientific American, December 1, 2004; “Overview/Neptune Discovery,” Scientific American, November 22, 2004.

[2] See for example William L. Harper, Isaac Newton’s Scientific Method: Turning Data into Evidence about Gravity and Cosmology (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 65, 162; Nicholas Campion, A History of Western Astrology, Volume II: The Medieval and Modern Worlds (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2009), 310; James Gleick, Isaac Newton (New York: Vantage Books, 2004), 226; Roger Hutchins, British University Observatories 1772-1939 (New York: Routledge, 2008), 91, 94, 105, 117, 155, 156, 158, 460, 467.

[3] “Report of the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism” (http://www.antisemitism.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/All-Party-Parliamentary-Inquiry-into-Antisemitism-REPORT.pdf).

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Joe Sobran, “In Pursuit of Anti-Semitism,” National Review, March 16, 1992. Sobran was eventually fired as an editor at the Neocon flagship National Review for saying devastating but true things.

[9] David Paul Kuhn, “Podhoretz secretly urged Bush to bomb Iran,” Politico, September 24, 2007.

[10] Michael Neumann, “What is Anti-Semitism?” Counterpunch, June 4, 2002.

[11] Jenni Frazer, “Lord Levy: How I Survived,” Jewish Chronicle Online, May 15, 2008.

[12] Ronald Schuchard, “Burbank with a Baedeker, Eliot with a Cigar,” Modernism/Modernity, vol. 10, no. 1, January 2003.

[13] Harold Bloom, “The Jewish Question: British anti-Semitism,” NY Times, April 29, 2010.

[14] E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008), 972.

[15] Ibid., 973.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Chaim Bermant, The Jews (New York: Times Books, 1977), 2.

[18] For scholarly studies on this, see for example Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004); 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008); Ilan Pappe, The Forgotten Palestinians: A History of the Palestinians in Israel (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011); The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (Oxford: One World, 2007); Zeev Sternhell, The Founding Myths of Israel (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999).

All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network (VT).  Some content may be satirical in nature. 
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.
About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. I regularly talk out loud about the Haavara Agreement and other “jew’cy” items such as the International Red Cross stats of 271,301 (magik 6 million) numbers quoted, Balfour Declaration et al for anyone in earshot or how Semiticism is not particular to Khazar Jews and still walk the streets to this day…..maybe I don’t say it loud enough or those listening have less knowledge on said jew’cy items of topic…..how Israel does not get included in Nuclear arms numbers and how Little Britain is run by Jewish interests

  2. Combining the two words, “Jew” and “hater,” two meanings are possible, depending upon whether or not the two are joined with a hyphen. One is someone who hates Jews. The other is a Jew who hates. From the earliest days of human sentience, people who pay attention have noticed that when a man or woman is shielded from the criticism they have earned, they become evildoers (which means one who does evil or sins without repenting.

  3. Anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism.” This is true, but I’d take it a step further and suggest that anti-Judaism is not anti-semitism. For instance, I have no problem with Semites, however, I have a major problem with the Talmud. As far as I’m concerned, the first step in solving any cases of alleged “antisemitism”, starts with identifying who is and who is not a Semite. The vast majority of those who identify themselves as “Jews” are not Semites. Anthropological studies based on craniometry, performed by Jewish medical doctor and former medical examiner of NYC, Maurice Fishberg, concluded that less than 3% of today’s Jews are of Semitic origins. The study clearly indicates that the “pure Semitic” skulls which are used for comparison, belong to Arabs. Once it is determined who is actually a Semite, it can be argued that it is Jews themselves, who are the world’s worst anti-Semites, as nobody causes Arabs more problems than the Jewish state.

    • So, contrary to the findings of that Zio-con funded study, the Jewish community has no business determining what constitutes anti-semitism, when 97 out of 100 Jews are not even Semitic. What’s next, Catholics screaming anti-semitism at those who criticize pedophile priests? This would be just as realistic. When I hear the topic of “anti-semitism” being brought up on MSM, I laugh out loud. What will they do if and when everyone figures out that they aren’t even Semites and that mostly all criticism directed towards them, which has been silenced, is actually warranted and justifiable?

  4. “……whether in print or broadcast, at universities, or in public or social settings.”
    to “usurp the critical faculty” is proven, today “250 academics, including 100 professors, sign a letter denouncing attempts by university officials to silence campus discussion about Israel and its treatment of Palestinians”.
    ….“It is with disbelief that we witness explicit political interference in university affairs in the interests of Israel under the thin disguise of concern about anti-semitism,” “These are outrageous interferences with free expression, and are direct attacks on academic freedom,” http://presstv.ir/Detail/2017/02/28/512378/Exeter-Central-Lancashire-Israel-Apartheid-Week

  5. A Patriarchal thing, with a Matriarchal thing, combined with exceptionalism, is automatic dismissal in any group of men. It requires a good brand to overcome this deficit. To have anti-semitism providing pseudo racial tones, mixed with an apparent affront to religious preference, as a posture, is the best that can be done. Bloodlines only work if it is actually true leadership that is being passed. Depends on motivation and long term effectiveness. I have met fourth generation woodworkers and 13th generation leaders that have a driven resolve to be the best they can be, and often are very good at their jobs. Motivation from the heart and the history and bonding with the land, is much different from motivation that originates elsewhere.
    The brand “anti-semitism” is perishable if classified as a fruit. Spiritual Mathematicians might be a new idea. Non-Perishable Accounting. Impenetrable Past Investment Services. Or my personal favorite, UOME post war collection fund enforced by …….the recipients.

    • Thanks Leno for this link!
      Well, it wasnt really a Debate on Anti- Semitism but US Hate Crime.

      Its probably not a crime to hate Trump but its remarkable that Press Tv tooked a trailer showing the murder of a man from India…a country which wasnt at the list for travel bans.

      The whole thing is a bit too much cooked up by the mediia as it is not even a Muslim Ban… the word Muslim does not exist in this papers.

      There is nothing in compare to the hate created by the tree “Abrahamitic Religions”….they act like “self-anointed permanent hegemons … kind of like when mafia families agree on the distribution of territories and on what measures to enforce against those who don’t comply.”

      We remember about the second commandment (Exod 20: 4-6) of the “almighty god” and on the collective punishment Palestinian families get for crimes made by one of its members. This commandment was taken almost 1:1 into Quran.and it was the beginning of the end of free speach…especially in those countries.

      In fact we are pretty much faced up with the almighty god and the mob who is executing his orders.

    • Khalid, thanks for your replay!
      My allegation that the second commandment was taken almost 1:1 into Quran was wrong. I am very sorry for this mistake.

      Its about one year ago that I searched to find the similarity between OT and Quran about the 10 commandments…and found no comparable text.
      But I found (maybe Takfiri) sites where the text was very equal. What comes close to my theory that the terrorism we see all over the world takes its legitimation mainly from the 2. commandment in the OT ( and Kevin Barrett is right to say that this terror is not an Islamic terror).

      Please do not think I am in disrespect of any creature or any “higher” entity…I am very thankful for any experience in the nature, …especially in the Hindukush / Pakistan where I walked and slept open air for two month. Yes I watched eagles (from below) and I am probably one of the few persons who was in front of a snow leopard when a wild goat escaped to my shelter. I have not been to the red sea but the Indian ocean and had wonderful meetings especially with animals.

      I did not study the Quraan yet …so I was not qualified to say anything about….but I look forward to do it.

  6. Thanks Jonas for keeping up the unsolved issue about the mystery of the Semites.

    “‘semitic’ is an adjective which alludes to a middle-Eastern group of languages”

    The term was created by members of the Göttingen School of History, and specifically by August Ludwig von Schlözer and Johann Gottfried Eichhorn first coined the name “Semitic” in the late 18th century to designate the languages closely related to Arabic, Aramaic, and Hebrew.The choice of name was derived from Shem, one of the three sons of Noah in the genealogical accounts of the biblical Book of Genesis, (wiki)

    The allegation that there are Semites is absurd! First because mythological persons do not trace a genealogical bloodline. All protagonists in the Genesis and the Exodus cannot be found in any historical record simply because they exist only in the “theater” inside the human. Thats what all mythologies have in common that what is inside the human is staged somewhere into the landscape.

    So, how can antisemitism exist when even there are no Semites?

    • Genesis 3.9: “But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?”

      When even for the Lord the “man” is invisible, how can anyone think that it is a story about a male and female homo sapiens and their children?

      The first child (Cain) of recognition killed the second (Abel).

      It remains much on a previous Egyptian Myth about the brother fight between Osiris and Seth…….where Seth killed Osiris and cutted him into 14 pieces and spread them out in “upper” Egypt. Then Isis fertilized herself on the dead Osiris after she found all parts and putted them together in her imagination….and received a son…Horus. All Egyptian Kings got crowned to become this son of Osiris and Isis…..but of course there is no bloodline toward them.

      The construction of the semitic languages is only based on the biblical myth and the fairy tale of Gods chosen people will never fit into any genealogical research.

      The “Kings, Children” birthed out of the hip of Jacob are not the Israelites …it is the “struggle to become princely” its an incarnation of the mythological son in yourself…called Israel.

  7. Logic is thrown out of the window when discussing semite, or antisemite. I have explained to many non Jews, as you have pointed out, that the real semite are the Palestinians. The reaction is always the same, silence.
    I believe that the brainwashing is so acute that society feels a collective guilt at the mere mention of Jewism.
    Has anyone studied why the Jew has been run out of 70+ countries, and hounded for 2000 years? Maybe a pattern will show. The answer may or not be a valid defense strategy for anyone charged under these Orwellian laws.
    If “they” allow it in court.

    • The Jewish debt money system seems to be a major factor in that as it ages there is a mathematical certainty that it will funnel the countries wealth to those controlling the money supply…the bankers. Fiat currency enables it. It goes something like this. It’s the graph of compounding interest. Say you borrow $1 in 1913, when the FED was created and you don’t pay the interest, but capitalize it into the principle (making the principle rise). Over the last 100 years, 6% is a good average. So that’s: (($1 x 1.06) x 1.06) x1.06 for 100 years (or 110 to 2013).

      It takes 29 years for the $1 to become $5, then it takes 11 more years to become $10; then it takes 12 more years to become $20; then 6 more years to be $30; and $5 years to be $40; 4 more years to reach $50, 3 to reach $60 and by 2013 the total is $320; by 2017 it is $404.

      Do you see a pattern of increasing rate of growth? Eventually it’s growth becomes exponential. This is a near perfect match for M3, the US money supply…so they got rid of the economic indicator M3.

      93% of the Greece bailout went to “service the loan” and 7% was split between the Greek gov and the people. That’s what happens…and the US is going full steam ahead to debt slavery, just like many other places that the debt money system has it’s evil roots.

Comments are closed.