Norman Gary Finkelstein (; born December 8, 1953) is an American, professor, and author. His primary fields of research are the and the politics of the. He is a graduate of and received his in political science at. He has held faculty positions at, and, where he was an from 2001 to 2007.In 2007, after a between Finkelstein and, an academic opponent, Finkelstein was denied tenure at DePaul.
He was placed on administrative leave for the 2007–08 academic year, and on September 5, 2007, he announced his resignation after coming to a settlement with the university on largely undisclosed terms. An official statement from DePaul strongly defended the decision to deny Finkelstein tenure and said that outside influence played no role in the decision. In 2008 he was banned from entering Israel for 10 years for criticizing Israeli policies.Finkelstein taught at in Turkey in 2014–15. Norman Finkelstein at Solidarity stageFinkelstein has written of his parents' experiences during. His mother, Maryla Husyt, grew up in, survived the, the, and two. Her first husband died in the war.
She considered the day of her liberation the most horrible day of her life, as she realized that she was alone, her parents and siblings gone. Norman's father, Zacharias Finkelstein, active in, was a survivor of both the Warsaw Ghetto and the.After the war they met in a in, Austria, and then emigrated to the United States, where his father became a factory worker and his mother a homemaker and later a bookkeeper. Finkelstein's mother was an ardent. Both his parents died in 1995. Of his parents, Finkelstein has recalled that 'they saw the world through the prism of the Nazi Holocaust. They were eternally indebted to the Soviet Union (to whom they attributed the defeat of the Nazis), and so anyone who was anti-Soviet they were extremely harsh on'.
They supported the Soviet Union's approval of the creation of the State of Israel, as enunciated by, who said that Jews had earned the right to a state, but thought that Israel had sold its soul to the West and 'refused to have any truck with it'.Finkelstein grew up in, then, both in, where he attended. In his memoir he recalls strongly identifying with the outrage that his mother, who witnessed the genocidal atrocities of, felt at the carnage the United States wrought in.
One childhood friend recalls his mother's 'emotional investment in left-wing humanitarian causes as bordering on hysteria'. He had 'internalized her indignation', a trait that he admits rendered him 'insufferable' when talking about the, and which imbued him with a 'holier-than-thou' attitude he now regrets. But Finkelstein regards his absorption of his mother's outlook—the refusal to put aside a sense of moral outrage in order to get on with one's life—as a virtue. Subsequently, his reading of played an important role in tailoring the passion bequeathed to him by his mother to the necessity of maintaining intellectual rigor.Finkelstein completed his undergraduate studies at in New York in 1974, after which he studied at the in Paris. A deep admirer of, he was then an ardent and was 'totally devastated' by the news of the trial of the, which led him to abandon.Finkelstein received his in political science in 1980, and later his in political studies, from Princeton.
His doctoral thesis was on. Before gaining academic employment, Finkelstein was a part-time social worker with teenage dropouts in New York. He then taught successively at, and in Chicago. During the, he spent every summer from 1988 in the as a guest of Palestinian families in and.The New York Times reported that Finkelstein left Hunter College in 2001 'after his teaching load and salary were reduced' by the college administration.
He has said he enjoyed teaching at Hunter and was 'unceremoniously kicked out of' the school after begging it to keep him on with just two courses a semester for $12,000 a year. Hunter set conditions that would have required him to spend four days a week teaching, which he thought unacceptable.Beginning with his doctoral thesis at Princeton, Finkelstein's career has been affected by controversy. A self-described 'forensic scholar', he has written sharply critical academic reviews of several prominent writers and scholars whom he accuses of misrepresenting the documentary record in order to defend Israel's policies and practices. His writings have dealt with politically charged topics such as Zionism, the demographic history of Palestine and his allegations of the existence of a that exploits the memory of the Holocaust to further Israeli and financial interests.
Finkelstein's supporters and detractors alike have remarked on his polemical style. His work has been praised by eminent historians such as and, as well as Chomsky.Finkelstein has described himself as 'an old-fashioned communist,' in the sense that he 'sees no value whatsoever in states.'
Academic career. Finkelstein at the, England in 2009. On From Time ImmemorialFinkelstein's doctoral thesis examined the claims made in 's, a best-selling book at the time. Peters's 'history and defense' of Israel deals with the demographic history of. Demographic studies had tended to assert that the population of -controlled Palestine, a 94% majority at the turn of the century, had dwindled toward parity due to massive immigration. Peters radically challenged this picture by arguing that a substantial part of the Palestinian people were descended from immigrants from other Arab countries from the early 19th century onward.
It followed, for Peters and many of her readers, that the picture of a native Palestinian population overwhelmed by Jewish immigration was little more than propaganda, and that in actuality two almost simultaneous waves of immigration met in what had been a relatively unpopulated land. From Time Immemorial was praised by figures as varied as,. Wrote in a jacket endorsement, 'Millions of people the world over, smothered by false history and propaganda, will be grateful for this clear account of the origins of the Palestinians.' Finkelstein asserted that the book was a 'monumental hoax'. He later opined that, while Peters's book received widespread interest and approval in the United States, a scholarly demonstration of its fraudulence and unreliability aroused little attention:By the end of 1984, From Time Immemorial had.received some two hundred favorable notices. In the United States. The only 'false' notes in this crescendoing chorus of praise were the, which ran a highly critical review by Bill Farrell; the small Chicago-based newsweekly, which published a condensed version of this writer's findings; and, who devoted a series of columns in exposing the hoax.
The periodicals in which From Time Immemorial had already been favorably reviewed refused to run any critical correspondence (e.g., ). Periodicals that had yet to review the book rejected a manuscript on the subject as of little or no consequence (e.g., ).
Main article:The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering was published in 2000. In this work Finkelstein argues that and others exploit the memory of the Holocaust as an 'ideological weapon'. Their purpose, writes Finkelstein, is to enable, 'one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, to cast itself as a victim state'; that is, to provide Israel 'immunity to criticism'.
He alleges a 'double shakedown' practiced by 'a repellent gang of plutocrats, hoodlums and hucksters' seeking enormous legal damages and financial settlements from Germany and Switzerland, moneys which then go to the lawyers and institutional actors involved in procuring them rather than actual.The book received a negative reception in many quarters, with critics charging that it was poorly researched and/or allowed others to exploit it for antisemitic purposes. The German historian disparaged the first edition as 'a most trivial book, which appeals to easily aroused anti-Semitic prejudices'.
Israeli Holocaust historian called it 'a lampoon, which takes a serious subject and distorts it for improper purposes. I don't even think it should be reviewed or critiqued as a legitimate book.' The Holocaust Industry was also harshly criticized by Professor, Professor and other reviewers accusing Finkelstein of selective or dubious evidence and misinterpretation of history.The preeminent Holocaust scholar said the book expressed views Hilberg himself subscribed to, in that he too found the exploitation of the Holocaust, as Finkelstein describes, 'detestable'. Asked on another occasion if Finkelstein's analysis might play into the hands of neo-Nazis for antisemitic purposes, Hilberg replied: 'Well, even if they do use it in that fashion, I'm afraid that when it comes to the truth, it has to be said openly, without regard to any consequences that would be undesirable, embarrassing'.In a review in the journal, called the book 'polemical and violent' but also 'in many ways appropriate and convincing'. Traverso entered many reservations against Finkelstein's arguments about the Swiss banks and the reaction in Europe. Traverso agreed (with Hilberg) that the allegations Finkelstein made against a number of Jewish-American institutions are probably correct. He also noted the favorable reception Finkelstein's book received in the German press, with the calling it 'welcome hyberbole'.
But Traverso criticized Finkelstein for ignoring the European aspect of the matter, and said Finkelstein's analysis was too simplistic and crudely materialistic. He concluded that 'Finkelstein’s book contains a core of truth that must be recognised, but it lends itself, due to its style and several of its main arguments, to the worst uses and instrumentalisations'.The historian criticized Finkelstein for absolving Swiss banks of serious misconduct toward Holocaust survivors and depicting the institutions as victims of Jewish terror based on a sentence from an important report annex. 'To support this amazing argument he quotes a statement from the authoritative Report of the Independent Committee of Eminent Persons that 'there was no evidence of systematic discrimination, obstruction of access, misappropriation, or violation of document retention requirements of Swiss law'. Indeed, but these words come from an annex', Cesarani wrote.
Criticism of Alan Dershowitz's The Case for Israel. Shortly after the publication of 's book, Finkelstein derided it as 'a collection of fraud, falsification, plagiarism, and nonsense'. During a debate on, Finkelstein asserted that Dershowitz lacked knowledge about specific contents of his own book. He also claimed that Dershowitz did not write the book and may not have even read it.Finkelstein said there were 20 instances, in as many pages, where Dershowitz's book cites the same sources and passages used by Joan Peters in her book, in largely the same sequence, with in the same places. In two instances, Dershowitz reproduces Peters's errors (see below). From this Finkelstein concluded that Dershowitz had not checked the original sources himself, contrary to the latter's claims. Finkelstein suggests that this copying of quotations amounts to copying ideas.
Examining a copy of a proof of Dershowitz's book he managed to obtain, he found evidence that Dershowitz had his secretarial assistant, Holly Beth Billington, check in the Harvard library the sources he had read in Peters's book. Dershowitz answered the charge in a letter to the 's Press Director Lynne Withey, arguing that Finkelstein had made up the smoking gun quotation by changing its wording (from 'cite' to 'copy') in his book.
In public debate he has said that if 'somebody borrowed the quote without going to check back on whether Mark Twain had said that, obviously that would be a serious charge' but insisted emphatically that he did not do that but had indeed checked the original source.Dershowitz threatened libel action over the charges in Finkelstein's book, as a consequence of which the publisher deleted the word 'plagiarism' from the text before publication. Finkelstein agreed to remove the suggestion that Dershowitz was not the true author of The Case for Israel because, as the publisher said, 'he couldn't document that'.Asserting that he did consult the original sources, Dershowitz said Finkelstein was simply accusing him of good scholarly practice: citing references he learned of initially from Peters's book. Dershowitz denied that he used any of Peters's ideas without citation. 'Plagiarism is taking someone else's words and claiming they're your own. There are no borrowed words from anybody. There are no borrowed ideas from anybody because I fundamentally disagree with the conclusions of Peters's book.' In a footnote in The Case for Israel that cites Peters's book, Dershowitz explicitly denies that he 'relies' on Peters for 'conclusions or data'.In their joint interview on Democracy Now, Finkelstein cited specific passages in Dershowitz's book in which a phrase that he said Peters coined was incorrectly attributed to George Orwell:Peters coins the phrase 'turnspeak'; she says she's using it as a play off of George Orwell, which as all listeners know used the phrase 'Newspeak.'
She coined her own phrase, 'turnspeak'. You go to Mr. Dershowitz's book, he got so confused in his massive borrowings from Joan Peters that on two occasions—I'll cite them for those who have a copy of the book, on page 57 and on page 153—he uses the phrase 'George Orwell's 'turnspeak'.' 'Turnspeak' is not Orwell, Mr. You're the chair at Harvard; you must know that Orwell would never use such a clunky phrase as 'turnspeak'.James O.
Freedman, the former president of, the, and the, defended Dershowitz:I do not understand Finkelstein's charge of plagiarism against Alan Dershowitz. There is no claim that Dershowitz used the words of others without attribution. When he uses the words of others, he quotes them properly and generally cites them to the original sources (Mark Twain, Palestine Royal Commission, etc.) Finkelstein's complaint is that instead he should have cited them to the secondary source, in which Dershowitz may have come upon them. But as emphasizes: 'Importance of attribution.
With all reuse of others' materials, it is important to identify the original as the source. This not only bolsters the claims of, it also helps avoid any accusation of plagiarism.'
This is precisely what Dershowitz did.Responding to an article in by, Dershowitz also cited:Cockburn's claim is that some of the quotes should not have been cited to their original sources but rather to a secondary source, where he believes I stumbled upon them. Even if he were correct that I found all these quotations in Peters's book, the preferred method of citation is to the original source, as emphasizes: 'With all reuse of others' materials, it is important to identify the original as the source. This.helps avoid any accusation of plagiarism. To cite a source from a secondary source ('quoted in.' ) is generally to be discouraged.' Cockburn responded:Quoting, Dershowitz artfully implies that he followed the rules by citing 'the original' as opposed to the secondary source, Peters.
He misrepresents Chicago here, where 'the original' means merely the origin of the borrowed material, which is, in this instance, Peters.Now look at the second bit of the quote from Chicago, chastely separated from the preceding sentence by a demure three-point ellipsis. As my associate Kate Levin has discovered, this passage ('To cite a source from a secondary source.' ) occurs on page 727, which is no less than 590 pages later than the material before the ellipsis, in a section titled 'Citations Taken from Secondary Sources.' Here's the full quote, with what Dershowitz left out set in bold: 'Quoted in'. To cite a source from a secondary source ('quoted in') is generally to be discouraged, since authors are expected to have examined the works they cite. If an original source is unavailable, however, both the original and the secondary source must be listed.'
So Chicago is clearly insisting that unless Dershowitz went to the originals, he was obliged to cite Peters. Finkelstein has conclusively demonstrated that he didn't go to the originals. Plagiarism, QED, plus added time for willful distortion of the language of Chicago's guidelines, cobbling together two separate discussions.On Dershowitz's behalf, dean asked former Harvard president to investigate the assertion of plagiarism; Bok exonerated Dershowitz of the charge. In an April 3, 2007 interview with the, 'Dershowitz confirmed that he had sent a letter last September to faculty members lobbying against Finkelstein's tenure.' In April 2007 Dr.
Frank Menetrez, a former Editor-in-Chief of the, published an analysis of the charges Dershowitz made against Finkelstein and concluded that Dershowitz had misrepresented matters. In a follow-up analysis he concluded that he could find 'no way of avoiding the inference that Dershowitz copied the quotation from Twain from Peters's From Time Immemorial, and not from the original source', as Dershowitz claimed. In an interview given for the film in 2009, Dershowitz said of Finkelstein: 'I don't think he is a Jew. He's Jewish only on his parents' side.' Finkelstein's tenure at DePaul University, Chicago, ended with a vote against granting him tenure. Weeks of protests ensued on campus in support of granting him a position at the university.In September 2006 Dershowitz sent members of 's law and political science faculties what he called 'a dossier of Norman Finkelstein's most egregious academic sins, and especially his outright lies, misquotations, and distortions' and lobbied DePaul's professors, alumni and administrators to deny Finkelstein tenure. DePaul's political science committee investigated his accusations against Finkelstein and concluded that they were not based on legitimate criticism.
The department subsequently invited and, two independent academics with known expertise on the Israel–Palestine conflict, to evaluate the academic merit of Finkelstein's work; they came to the same conclusion.Also in 2006 said 'the repeatedly accused' Finkelstein of being a 'Holocaust denier' and that 'These charges have proved baseless.' Finkelstein's mother survived the, his father survived the, and most of his family was murdered in the Holocaust.In early 2007 the DePaul Political Science Department voted nine to three, and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Personnel Committee five to zero, in favor of giving Finkelstein tenure. The three opposing faculty members subsequently filed a minority report opposing tenure, supported by the Dean of the College, Chuck Suchar. Suchar stated he opposed tenure because Finkelstein's 'personal and reputation-demeaning attacks on Dershowitz, and the Holocaust authors and ' were inconsistent with DePaul's ' values; as examples of the latter, Suchar argued that Finkelstein lacked respect for 'the dignity of the individual' and for 'the rights of others to hold and express different intellectual positions'.
Amidst considerable public debate, Dershowitz actively campaigned to block Finkelstein's tenure bid. In June 2007, a 4–3 vote by DePaul University's Board on Promotion and Tenure (a faculty board), affirmed by the university's president, the Rev., denied Finkelstein tenure.The university denied that Dershowitz, who had been criticized for his campaign against Finkelstein's tenure, played any part in this decision.
At the same time, the university denied tenure to international studies assistant professor Mehrene Larudee, a strong supporter of Finkelstein, despite unanimous support from her department, the Personnel Committee and the dean. Finkelstein said that he would engage in if attempts were made to bar him from teaching his students.The Faculty Council later affirmed the right of Finkelstein and Larudee to appeal, which a university lawyer said was not possible. Council President Anne Bartlett said she was 'terribly concerned' correct procedure was not followed'. DePaul's faculty association considered taking no-confidence votes on administrators, including the president, because of the tenure denials. In a statement issued upon Finkelstein's resignation, DePaul called him 'a prolific scholar and an outstanding teacher'. Dershowitz expressed outrage at the compromise and this statement in particular, saying that the university had 'traded truth for peace'.In June 2007, after two weeks of protests, some DePaul students staged a and in support of both professors denied tenure.
The Illinois Conference of the also sent a letter to the university's president stating, 'It is entirely illegitimate for a university to deny tenure to a professor out of fear that his published research. Might hurt a college's reputation' and that the association has 'explicitly rejected as an appropriate criterion for evaluating faculty members'. In a 2014 interview, professor Matthew Abraham, author of Out of Bounds: Academic Freedom and the Question of Palestine, described the Finkelstein tenure case as 'one of the most significant academic freedom cases in the last fifty years' and said it demonstrated 'the substantial pressure outside parties can place on a mid-tier religious institution when the perspectives advanced by a controversial scholar threaten dominant interests'. Denied entry to Israel in 2008. Terminal 3 of.
Attempting to enter Israel in 2008, Finkelstein was detained at that airport for 24 hours and then sent back to the United StatesOn May 23, 2008, Finkelstein was denied entry to Israel, according to unnamed security officials, because 'of suspicions involving hostile elements in Lebanon' and because he 'did not give a full accounting to interrogators with regard to these suspicions.' Finkelstein had visited south Lebanon and met with Lebanese families during the. He was banned from entering Israel for 10 years.Finkelstein was questioned after his arrival at near Tel Aviv and detained for 24 hours in a holding cell.
After speaking to Israeli attorney he was placed on a flight back to, his point of origin. In an interview with, Finkelstein said, 'I did my best to provide absolutely candid and comprehensive answers to all the questions put to me. I am confident that I have nothing to hide. No suicide missions or secret rendezvous with terrorist organizations.' He had been traveling to visit friends in the West Bank and said he had no interest in visiting Israel.
Sfard said banning Finkelstein from entering the country 'recalls the behavior of the Soviet bloc countries'. Finkelstein's books attempt to examine the works of mainstream scholarship. The authors of whose work he has been critical, including and Dershowitz, along with others, such as, whose work Finkelstein has also cited in his scholarship, have in turn accused Finkelstein of grossly misrepresenting their work, and selectively quoting their books. Morris said in 2007 that 'Finkelstein is a notorious distorter of facts and of my work, not a serious or honest historian.'
Said that Finkelstein displays 'academic courage to speak the truth when no one else is out there to support him. I would say that his place in the whole history of writing history is assured, and that those who in the end are proven right triumph, and he will be among those who will have triumphed, albeit, it so seems, at great cost.' In a for, Avi Shlaim said that Finkelstein 'has a most impressive track record in exposing spurious American-Jewish scholarship on the Arab-Israeli conflict.' He praised Finkelstein for 'all the sterling qualities for which he has become famous: erudition, originality, spark, meticulous attention to detail, intellectual integrity, courage, and formidable forensic skills.' Said that her shared experience with Finkelstein as a child of Holocaust survivors engaged in research on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict gave her a unique position to comment. According to Roy, Finkelstein's scholarship is 'exceptional both for its brilliance and rigor. In the fields of Middle Eastern studies and political science his work is considered seminal and there is no doubt that both disciplines would be intellectually weaker without it.
Norman's power and value, however, do not emanate only from his scholarship but from his character. His life's work, shaped largely but not entirely by his experience as a child of survivors, has been and continues to be informed by a profound concern with human dignity and the danger of dehumanization.' The Israeli newspaper stated that 'it is difficult to sympathize with Finkelstein's opinions and preferences, especially since he decided to support Hezbollah, meet with its fighters and visit the graves of some of its slain operatives.' Still, it argued that he should not be banned from entering Israel, because 'meetings with Hezbollah operatives do not in themselves constitute a security risk'. 2009 film about Finkelsteinis an award-winning documentary film about Finkelstein's life and career, released in 2009 and directed. It has been screened at Amsterdam's, Toronto's, and more than 40 other national and international venues.
It has a freshness rating of 100% on film review aggregator. The same year Finkelstein appeared in (: השמצה; Hashmatsa) a documentary by award-winning Israeli filmmaker. CriticismFinkelstein has been heavily criticized for various aspects of his work and public commentary., whose book Hitler's Willing Executioners Finkelstein criticized, claimed his scholarship has 'everything to do with his burning political agenda'. Has written that, Professor of History at the and a noted Holocaust historian whose work Finkelstein says inspired The Holocaust Industry, has strongly criticized the latter's work, describing it as 'trash'.
Similarly, Dershowitz, whose book The Case for Israel and Finkelstein's response Beyond Chutzpah sparked an ongoing feud between the two, has claimed Finkelstein is complicit in a conspiracy against pro-Israel scholars: 'The mode of attack is consistent. Chomsky selects the target and directs Finkelstein to probe the writings in minute detail and conclude that the writer didn't actually write the work, that it is plagiarized, that it is a hoax and a fraud'. Dershowitz added that Finkelstein has leveled charges against many academics, calling at least 10 'distinguished Jews 'hucksters', 'hoaxters' ( sic), 'thieves', ', and worse.' Although the feud between Finkelstein and Dershowitz received the most attention in the controversy, Finkelstein has maintained that 'the real issue is Israel's human rights record.' Israeli historian, writing for, judged The Holocaust Industry to be marred by the same errors he denounces in those who exploit the Holocaust for profit or politics:It is filled with precisely the kind of shrill hyperbole that Finkelstein rightly deplores in much of the current media hype over the Holocaust; it is brimming with the same indifference to historical facts, inner contradictions, strident politics and dubious contextualizations; and it oozes with the same smug sense of moral and intellectual superiority. Like any, it contains several grains of truth; and like any such theory, it is both irrational and insidious.Finkelstein has accused journalist of 'torturing' or 'being an accessory to torture of' Palestinian prisoners during his service in the, based on statements made in Goldberg's book. Finkelstein says that Goldberg admits to personally sending prisoners to the, which he says has been repeatedly condemned as torture in human rights reports.
Goldberg called the allegation 'ridiculous' and said he had 'never laid a hand on anybody.' Goldberg said his 'principal role' was 'making sure prisoners had fresh fruit.' He called Finkelstein a 'ridiculous figure' and accused him of 'lying and purposely misreading my book.' Statements on Israel. Finkelstein is a sharp critic of the state of Israel. Discussing Finkelstein's book Beyond Chutzpah, Israeli historian Avi Shlaim said that Finkelstein's critique of Israel 'is based on an amazing amount of research. He seems to have read everything.
Norman Finkelstein The Holocaust Industry Pdf 2017
He has gone through the reports of Israeli groups, of human rights groups, and and, all of the reports of. And he deploys all this evidence from Israeli and other sources in order to sustain his critique of Israeli practices, Israeli violations of human rights of the Palestinians, the, the cutting down of trees, the building of the wall—the, which is illegal—the restrictions imposed on the Palestinians in the West Bank, and so on and so forth. I find his critique extremely detailed, well-documented and accurate.' In a 2009 telephone interview with, Finkelstein said:I think Israel, as a number of commentators pointed out, is becoming an insane state. And we have to be honest about that. While the rest of the world wants peace, Europe wants peace, the US wants peace, but this state wants war, war and war. In the first week of the massacres, there were reports in the Israeli press that Israel did not want to put all its ground forces in Gaza because it was preparing attacks on Iran.
Then there were reports it was planning attacks on Lebanon. It is a lunatic state.When asked how he, as the son of Holocaust survivors, felt about Israel's operation in Gaza, Finkelstein replied:It has been a long time since I felt any emotional connection with the state of Israel, which relentlessly and brutally and inhumanly keeps these vicious, murderous wars. It is a vandal state. There is a Russian writer who once described vandal states as Genghis Khan with a telegraph.
Israel is Genghis Khan with a computer. I feel no emotion of affinity with that state. I have some good friends and their families there, and of course I would not want any of them to be hurt.
That said, sometimes I feel that Israel has come out of the boils sic of the hell, a satanic state.The has described Finkelstein as an 'obsessive anti-Zionist' filled with 'vitriolic hatred of Zionism and Israel.' Of being called an anti-Zionist Finkelstein has said: 'It's a superficial term. I am opposed to any state with an ethnic character, not only to Israel.'
Finkelstein is an advocate of a to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Hezbollah and Hamas. A 2006 cartoon depicting Finkelstein's comparisons between the State of Israel and armed Arab groupsFinkelstein has expressed solidarity with and with respect to defensive actions, alleging that Israel invaded Lebanon as a signal of rejection when Hamas was seeking a diplomatic settlement with Israel. He also condemned what he said was Israel's refusal 'to abide by international law and to abide by the opinion of the international community' to settle the conflict.I was of course happy to meet the Hizbullah people, because it is a point of view that is rarely heard in the United States. I have no problem saying that I do want to express solidarity with them, and I am not going to be a coward of sic a hypocrite about it. I don't care about Hizbullah as a political organization.
I don't know much about their politics, and anyhow it's irrelevant. I don't live in Lebanon. It's a choice that the Lebanese have to make: who they want to be their leaders, who they want to represent them. But there is a fundamental principle. People have the right to defend their country from foreign occupiers, and people have the right to defend their country from invaders who are destroying their country. That to me is a very basic, elementary and uncomplicated question.While condemning the targeting of civilians to achieve a political goal, Finkelstein has said he believes Hezbollah has the as long as 'Israel persists in targeting Lebanese civilians until Israel ceases its terrorist acts.'
Finkelstein claims there is an equivalence between and Israel with regard to the military policy of during the. According to Finkelstein, 'the record shows that Israel has routinely targeted civilians for killing' and 'Israel indiscriminately kills civilians'. He concludes that 'the argument, among human rights organizations at any rate, is that. In effect, there's no difference between indiscriminately killing civilians and targeting civilians.' Finkelstein argued one of Israel's primary motivations for launching the was that Hamas was 'signaling that it wanted a diplomatic settlement of the conflict along the June 1967 border.' Finkelstein believes Hamas had joined the international community in 'seeking a diplomatic settlement' and describes Hamas's stance towards Israel prior to the war as a 'peace offensive.' BDS movement.
See also:Finkelstein has made many criticisms of the (BDS) movement. He said, 'I think the solidarity movement has the right tactics. I support the BDS. But I said it will never reach a broad public until and unless they are explicit on their goal. And their goal has to include recognition of Israel; otherwise it's a nonstarter.' Elsewhere he has said he supports a 'lowercase' BDS, making the same point about tactics and goals.In February 2012 in England said that Finkelstein 'launched a blistering attack' on the BDS movement, saying it was a 'hypocritical, dishonest cult', 'like the Munchkin cult in Oz,' that cleverly poses as human rights activists while in reality aiming to destroy Israel.
Finkelstein has said the BDS movement has had very few successes, and that as in a cult, its leaders pretend that they are hugely successful when in reality the general public rejects their extreme views.In a June 2012 appearance on, Finkelstein elaborated on his criticisms of the BDS movement:The problem as I see it with the BDS movement is not the tactic. Who could not support Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions?
Of course you should. And most of the human rights organizations, church organizations have moved in that direction. The problem is the goal. The official BDS movement, they claim to be agnostic, neutral—whatever term you want to use—on the question of Israel. You can't reach a broad public if you are agnostic on the question of Israel.
The broad public wants to know, where do you stand? And if you claim not to have a stand, you lose them. The BDS movement, it always says, and I'm using their language, 'We are a rights-based organization. We are based in international law.'
I agree with that. That's where you have to go: rights-based international law. But the international law is clear.
You read the last sentence of the 2004 International Court of Justice opinion on the wall that Israel has been building in the West Bank, and the last sentence says, 'We look forward to two states: a Palestinian state alongside Israel and at peace with its neighbors.' That's the law. And if you want to go past that law or ignore the Israel part, you'll never reach a broad public. And then it's a cult. Then it's pointless, in my opinion. We're wasting time. And it's only a wasting of time.
It becomes—and I know it's a strong word, and I hope I won't be faulted for it—but it becomes historically criminal, because there was a time where whatever we said, it made no difference. Nobody was listening. You could shout whatever you want—who cares? But now, actually, we can reach people. There is a possibility.
I'm not saying a certainty. I'm not even saying a probability. But there is a possibility that we can reach a broad public. And so we have to be very careful about the words we use, and we have to be very careful about the political strategy we map out.
Otherwise we're going to squander a real opportunity. And I don't want to squander it. Charlie Hebdo shootings. On the shooters of the on January 7, 2015, Finkelstein commented two weeks later:So two despairing and desperate young men act out their despair and desperation against this political pornography no different than, who in the midst of all of this death and destruction decide it's somehow noble to degrade, demean, humiliate and insult the people. I'm sorry, maybe it is very politically incorrect.
I have no sympathy for the staff of Charlie Hebdo. Should they have been killed?
Of course not. But of course, shouldn't have been hung sic. I don't hear that from many people.'
Academic reviews of books by Finkelstein. Massad, Joseph., Review Essay, Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. (Autumn, 2002), pp. 78–89. Cole, Tim., The Public Historian, Vol. (Fall, 2002), pp. 127–31.
Hooglund, Eric. Reviewed work: Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict by Norman Finkelstein, Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol.
3, Special Issue in Honor of Edward W. (Spring, 2004), pp. 123–124.
Pelham, Nicolas. Reviewed Work: International Affairs, Vol.
3, Ethnicity and International Relations. (July 1996), pp. 627–28.
Pappe, Ilan. 'Valuable New Perspectives,' Reviewed Work: Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict. Finkelstein, Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. (Summer, 1997), pp. 113–15.
Beinin, Joel. 'The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict after Oslo', Reviewed work: Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict by Norman G. Middle East Report, No. 201, Israel and Palestine: Two States, Bantustans or Binationalism? (Oct-Dec 1996), pp. 45–47.Reviews of books by Finkelstein. Blokker, Bas (review of Beyond Chutzpah), February 24, 2006.
(review of Beyond Chutzpah), BOOKFORUM (February/March 2006). Review of Beyond Chutzpah in (February 3, 2006). Merkley, Paul Charles. (review of Beyond Chutzpah, in (January/February 2006). ' (review of Beyond Chutzpah; January 2006).
Review of Beyond Chutzpah. November 2005 Volume 18, Number 11. Review of Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History, by Norman G. Finkelstein., October 12, 2005. Bogdanor, Paul.
(review of The Holocaust Industry), Judaism (Fall 2002). (review of The Holocaust Industry), whatnextjournal.co.uk; accessed November 1, 2015. (review of The Holocaust Industry), August 6, 2000Profiles of Finkelstein. Garner, Mandy.
December 16, 2005. December 12, 2005. Rayner, Jay. July 16, 2000. Sheleg, Yair. March 30, 2001.Critics of Finkelstein and replies.
Daniel Goldhagen,. Archived from on December 4, 2002. Retrieved December 2, 2003.
Norman Finkelstein,. William Rubinstein et al., letters to the London Review of Books. David Friedman, at the (archive index), calling Finkelstein a '., archive.org; accessed November 1, 2015.See also. ^ The Associated Press (September 5, 2007).
The International Herald Tribune. ^. DePaul University. September 5, 2007. O'Loughlin, Toni (May 26, 2008).
The Guardian UK. Retrieved May 6, 2015., normanfinkelstein.com; accessed November 1, 2015.By Jordan Michael Smith., July 7, 2015. ^ Finkelstein, Norman G. (June 1, 2005).
Monthly Review. It was only many years later after reading Noam Chomsky that I learned it was possible to unite exacting scholarly rigor with scathing moral outrage; that an intelligent argument didn't have to be an intellectualizing one. ^. Archived from on August 14, 2012. Retrieved November 13, 2011. ^. Retrieved November 13, 2011.
^, New York Times, February 11, 2010. 'The Making of Norman Finkelstein - Reality Asserts Itself (3/4)', YouTube.com; accessed October 31, 2015.
Norman Finkelstein (October 4, 2013). Retrieved October 5, 2013., YouTube.com; accessed October 31, 2015. January 15, 2015, at the Norman Finkelstein.com January 15, 2015. 11:45 minutes onward.
^ Howard, Jennifer (April 13, 2007). Chronicle of Higher Education. 53 (32): A13. Retrieved April 6, 2019.
^ Goodman, Amy (May 9, 2007). Democracy Now!. Retrieved December 7, 2007.
Bruinsma, Jelle (January 5–6, 2008). Archived from on September 9, 2010. Retrieved July 24, 2010.
Edward W. Said, Christopher Hitchens, eds.
CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list CS1 maint: extra text: authors list. Norman Finkelstein. Retrieved November 1, 2015. Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, pp. 45-46. ^ Noam Chomsky (2002).
' 'The Fate of an Honest Intellectual '. The New Press. Pp. 244–248. Yehoshua Porath (January 16, 1986). Peters's Palestine. 21, 22.
(March 27, 1986). Volume 33, Number 5. The New York Review of Books. Retrieved December 5, 2007. Retrieved November 13, 2011. William B. (May/June 1996 ed.).
Archived from on March 11, 2007. ^ Shlaim, Avi (Winter 2006). Journal of Palestine Studies. Archived from (PDF) on November 27, 2010. Finkelstein, Norman (2003). The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering ((2nd ed.) ed.).
P. xi. Finkelstein, Norman (2003). The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering ((2nd ed.) ed.). P. xiii. Alexander, Edward; Bogdanor, Paul, eds.
(2017) 2006. Abingdon, Oxon, London & New York City: Routledge. P. 154. From The New York Times, Book Review Desk, August 6, 2000 (archived). Landau, Ronnie (July 21, 2000).
The Spectator. Evidence cited seems highly selective and dubious. Joffe, Lawrence (September 25, 2007), The Guardian, retrieved May 19, 2012. (August 11, 1985), The New York Times, retrieved May 19, 2012. Woo, Elaine (August 7, 2007), Los Angeles Times, retrieved May 19, 2012. Felix Kellerhoff (January 25, 2003).
Roberto Antonini (August 31, 2000). Swiss National Radio (SBC-SSR). Archived from on March 27, 2006. Traverso, Enzo (July 1, 2003). Historical Materialism.
11 (2): 215–225. Cesarani, David (August 4, 2000).
Times Higher Education. Most remarkably, in the course of his relentless attack on the 'Jewish elites', Finkelstein absolves the Swiss banks of serious misconduct towards Holocaust survivors and depicts them as victims of a Jewish terror campaign. To support this amazing argument he quotes a statement from the authoritative Report of the Independent Committee of Eminent Persons that 'there was no evidence of systematic discrimination, obstruction of access, misappropriation, or violation of document retention requirements of Swiss law'. Indeed, but these words come from an annex. ^ (September 24, 2003). Archived from on December 23, 2004. Norman Finkelstein.
Retrieved November 1, 2015. ^ Norman G. Finkelstein (August 25, 2005). Normanfinkelstein.com. Norman Finkelstein (June 2008). (2nd updated ed.).
University of California Press. Pp. ^ Marcella Bombardieri (July 9, 2005). The Boston Globe reprinted by www.normanfinkelstein.com.
Archived from on March 27, 2006. Daniel J.T. Schuker (July 7, 2005). The Harvard Crimson. Marx, Eric (October 3, 2003). ^ Alexander Cockburn (September 25, 2003).
The Nation. Retrieved June 3, 2009. ^ Alan Dershowitz. Retrieved from JBooks.com. ^ Alan Dershowitz & Alexander Cockburn (October 2003). Normanfinkelstein.com.
Zhou, Kevin (April 4, 2007). ^ Frank Menetrez: 'Dershowitz v. Finkelstein: Who's Right and Who's Wrong?' Included as Epilogue in: Norman G. Finkelstein (2008). University of California Press.
Retrieved May 26, 2013. ^ Frank J. Menetrez; et al. (July 6, 2007). Normanfinkelstein.com, including e-mails attributed to Alan Dershowitz and remarks additional to the original article attributed to Menetrez. Frank J. Menetrez (February 12, 2008).
Archived from on February 18, 2008. Alan M. Dershowitz; Frank J.
Menetrez (February 26, 2008). Archived from on March 1, 2008.; accessed November 1, 2015., Chronicle of Higher Education, April 5, 2007. ^ Richard Forer Breakthrough: Transforming Fear Into Compassion: a New Perspective on the Israel-Palestine Conflict 2010;, pp. 45–46. Powell, Michael (October 9, 2006). The Washington Post.
Retrieved May 17, 2016. Peter N. Kirstein (March 22, 2007)., June 11, 2007. June 11, 2007. DePaul University.
June 6, 2007. Archived from on July 7, 2007. Inside Higher Education.
June 11, 2007. Peter N.
Kirstein (June 9, 2007). Donald MacLeod and agencies (August 29, 2007). The Guardian. Retrieved November 1, 2015.
Winfield Myers (June 8, 2007). Campus Watch.
Archived from on September 27, 2007. Retrieved June 26, 2007. Democracy Now. June 14, 2007. Archived from on November 14, 2007., The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 25, 2007., academeblog.org, March 20, 2014. Katz, Yaakov (May 25, 2008).
Jerusalem Post., May 24, 2008; accessed November 1, 2015. Human Rights Watch. August 1, 2006.
^ Melman, Yossi (May 24, 2008). Archived from on October 16, 2011. Retrieved October 5, 2011. Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. February 7, 2007. Klein, David (2009).
Works and Days. 26 & 27: 307–322. Retrieved May 22, 2014. Editorial (May 27, 2008). Retrieved June 14, 2014. Archived from on December 4, 2002.
Retrieved January 11, 2008. (PDF). 35 (2): 86–99. Archived from (PDF) on November 27, 2010. (PDF). Archived from (PDF) on February 28, 2008. Retrieved January 11, 2008.
Omer Bartov (August 6, 2000). Retrieved February 13, 2007. Finkelstein, Norman. CounterPunch.org.
Finkelstein gives the following quote from Goldberg: The zinzana was the size of a refrigerator box, into which three, four, five or six prisoners were shoveled. The prisoners were seated on a cold and hard plastic floor, limbs draped over limbs, and they shat in a bucket that was emptied once a day.
After a few days in the box, prisoners could no longer stand unaided. 114, where he describes four Palestinians locked 'in a space fit, at most, for two small dogs'). Greenberg, Brad A.
(May 8, 2008). Retrieved November 13, 2011. ^. January 19, 2009. Archived from on December 2, 2014. Retrieved November 13, 2011. Archived from on December 15, 2011.
Retrieved November 13, 2011. Finkelstein, Norman. Archived from on December 10, 2011. Retrieved January 11, 2012. ^. Retrieved October 4, 2013. ^ December 26, 2010, at the.
Knowing Too Much, page 132. Archived from on October 6, 2013. Retrieved November 13, 2011. It is impossible to justify terrorism, which is the targeting of civilians to achieve a political goal. But it's also difficult to make categorical statements of the kind you suggest.
I do believe that Hezbollah has the right to target Israeli civilians if Israel persists in targeting civilians until Israel ceases its terrorist acts. Retrieved November 13, 2011. January 8, 2009.
Retrieved November 13, 2011. ^. Imperial College London.
September 2, 2012. Silverman, Jacobb (August 10, 2012).
The Daily Beast. The Jewish Chronicle. February 16, 2012. Retrieved May 12, 2012.
Norman G. Finkelstein (October 2013). Retrieved October 22, 2013. Democracy Now! June 4, 2014. Retrieved October 12, 2014.; by Mustafa Caglayan;; 19 January 2015. University of California Press.
Retrieved January 9, 2018. Retrieved November 10, 2014.
Retrieved March 24, 2014. Retrieved March 7, 2012. Retrieved March 7, 2012. Retrieved November 13, 2011. April 30, 2007. Archived from on August 12, 2011. Retrieved November 13, 2011.External links.
Wikiquote has quotations related to:Wikimedia Commons has media related to. on., featuring biography, works by Finkelstein, past and upcoming speaking engagements, and other links to information about him and controversies in which he is involved.
bibliography at 'Norman G.