"Alcott believes that ‘Atzmon is here too severe in his critique’ when he attacks Jewish anti-Zionists for merely trying to rehabilitate the idea of being Jewish.  If that were true then the next question would be so what?  Isn’t that another way of saying that there are some people who wish to assert a secular Jewish identity apart from Zionism.  Is that wrong?  In fact those of us who are Jewish and anti-Zionist face the most bitter attacks of the Zionists, as ‘traitors’ as Rabbi Shochet tried to do on BBC1’s Big Questions today when I disagreed with him.  The reason for their vitriol is that we are the living proof that there is nothing ‘Jewish’ about what Israel does.  Further that supporting the Palestinians is anti-Semitic.  The fact that Atzmon reserves most of his bile, not for Dershowitz but us shows where he is really coming from."

http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2013/02/gilad-atzmon-rejecting-any.html

responding to

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/02/01/the-case-of-gilad-atzmon

No, Tony, the reason overt Zionists attack left-wing tribal activists like you so viciously is not because there is nothing 'Jewish' about what Israel does. It's because it makes you look good. Zionist spokesmen like Alan Dershowitz make hysterical denunciations of pathetic groups like Jewish Voice for Peace, and it makes it look like they are effective critics of Zionism. The result is that the solidarity movement gives them more credit than they deserve. No, it's not a conspiracy, but over-the-top denunciation is a tried-and-tested method for giving credibility to useless reformists, and in this case, gatekeepers for Jewish power.