'Aemathisphd' - I am familiar with all the facts you narrated in your last post.

I could disagree with some of them, but I have to remind myself, my argument doesn't depend on facts.

It's to do with who controls access to facts, which facts we are encouraged to believe, and which we are discouraged from even investigating.

We know that Israel has overwhelming power in the Western world. President George Bush senior mentioned the size of the Israel lobby compared with its Palestinian equivalent in DC, was called 'anti-Semitic', a ridiculous allegation, and was forced to apologize for merely making a numerically correct statement. President Obama was asked by Helen Thomas if he knew of any nuclear country in the Middle East, and he didn't dare say 'Israel'. The presidents of the USA! Zionists have them by the balls.

When Netahanyu spoke to Congress recently, he got twenty-eight standing ovations. The Senate overwhelmingly passed a resolution supporting the Mavi Marmara massacre. Apart from Israel, only America is proposing to boycott the Palestinian bid for a state in the UN.

When Mearsheimer and Walt toured with their book on the Lobby, newpapers, radio and TV stations wouldn't publicize it, for fear of the Lobby. Academics from the far left to the far right are threatened with unemployment for criticizing Jewish power.

The Anti-Defamation League, an agent of a foreign power, a clear enemy of the basic principles of the US Constitution, is used by numerous aspects of the government, from the Department of Justice to the Department of Education to the Library of Congress, to help censor information, and decide who to spy on.

We are told that Israelis today are victims of terrorism. We know that this is far from the truth.

Knowing all the above, its reasonable to ask if the history we have been taught is entirely free of philo-semitism. This is one reason 'holocaust deniers' exist - they reason that, since we've been told a pack of lies about the position of Jews in the world post-1945, well maybe we've been told lies about before that too (which doesn't mean their conclusions are correct).

I was falsely called a 'holocaust denier', received online threats, and was blacklisted for a job, for merely debating these issues.

On the Eastern front in World War II, one could probably get most people to agree to the following statement:

'One aspect of this period was ethnic conflict. Russians committed terrible crimes against Lithuanians, Latvians, Hungarians, Romanians and Germans. Germans, Lithuanians, Latvians, Hungarians and Romanians committed terrible crimes against Russians and Jews'

What's missing from this picture? What happens when you try to balance it out?

This comes to the nub of my argument. The pro-Jewish bias in our culture isn't the result of knowledge of facts, it precedes it. We select our facts through its sieve. Any attempt to question it is sanctioned. The only thought crime which can lead to imprisonment today in a Western country is questioning the holy truths of Jewish victimhood. Whether these truths are true or not is beside the point - it is a violation of our most basic values to persecute those who doubt them.

So for you to reiterate these stories like we're in a free country is not exactly sticking your neck out. Telling the time-worn narratives of Roman persecution, Christian anti-semitism, etc., etc., is hardly necessary. We get that all the time. What's needed is research into the other side of the story. And most importantly, the aggressive defense of people who try to do that research.

Palestine solidarity starts with consciousness-raising here at home, losing our deference, and our susceptibility to emotional blackmail.