Steven Plaut

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

The United States is not the only part of the Diaspora plagued by dopey liberals. The UK also has its share.

Some of them seem to be in charge at the "Jewish Telegraph", which serves the Machester-Leeds area of the UK. Among its regular columnists is Uri Geller, so you know how serious a paper it is. It also does not consider Red Ken Livingston to be an anti-Semite.

Another columnist is one Jeremy Rosen, a Rabbi in London with ordination from the Mir Yeshiva. Rosen's column this week is an attack on my earlier column, run in the NY Jewish Press and in several internet web sites, about how the "reports" of Jewish settlers cutting down Palestinian olive trees appear to be lies motivated by a political agenda on the part of people seeking to libel the settlers. Earlier Rosen had referred to the Jewish Press as a "North American journal of Jewish juvenilia." ( Talk about Lashon Ha-Ra!

Rosen's attack can be read at , Rosen also runs it on his personal blog at , with some extra segments.

Let us note that the Jewish Telegraph saw fit to run his attack without having first bothered to run my own piece, which can be read at, thus avoiding the possibility for JT readers actually knowing what is going on or what the original article even said. In other words, a typical job of PC smear and censorship on the part of a Jewish liberal at the Jewish Telegraph. You can read the PAIR of articles, mine and his response, and make up your own mind, but the Jewish Telegraph's readers cannot.

Rosen takes 3 or 4 of my sentences out of context and runs them in an attempt to mock my claims that the "reports" of tree vandalization by settlers are fabrications. I stand by my article, which is fully documented. Indeed the vandalization stories themselves originate with Amira Hass, whom Rosen elsewhere dismisses as an anti-Israel nut.

Rosen then escalates his Lashon Ha-Ra and compares me to Ilan Pappe as an "extremist from Haifa University," smears the NY Jewish Press as "admittedly an extreme right-wing paper that makes Kahana (sic) sound a pussy cat." I guess he has forgoteen that leprosy is the Torah's penalty for Lashon Ha-Ra. He then dismisses my whole claim that Palestinians were chopping down their own trees and blaming it on the settlers because the Israeli government is paying out cash compensation to Palestinians claiming their trees were vandalized. Rosen writes: "As if tight-fisted Israeli exchequers under economic pressure are going to dole out compensation for no good reason."

Jewish liberals never let facts get in the way of their dogmas. The payout of cash compensation by the Israeli government to Palestinians claiming their trees were damaged is a fact, unbelievable perhaps but still true, and has been confirmed by all the liberal and leftist newspapers in Israel.

So much for Rosen's own credibility. I am a bit confused, however, as to how someone claiming to be a Rabbi allows himself to smear me and the Jewish Press baselessly while simply ignoring actual facts.

Most of Rosen's articles involve citing Jewish texts and sources to promote his own liberal ideas in politics. One of them talks about how wonderful it is when Jews marry non-Jews ( ). Rosen considers Noam Chomsky a "brilliant thinker" ( ). Here is his take on Zionism: "I agree with the Satmar point of view only in so far as it removes religion from Zionism." ) Rosen has also expressed support for the campaign of PETA, the animal rights nuts, against kosher meat in the US.

In previous columns Rosen wrote, "Some would say that Israel has brutalized the Palestinians, turning them into crude killers," and generally praised the "Munich" movie. Here is Rosen on the Hamas victory: "(The Hamas) has declared it will continue its Hudnah if Israel does. I would rather have Hamas abiding by its Hudnah while calling for Israel.s destruction than Fatah declaring it supports Israel.s right to exist while doing whatever it can, in whatever way possible, to destroy it. At least if Hamas says something it tends to stick to it.... It was actually Israel that helped establish Hamas because its Divide and Rule policy led it to believe that establishing a counterbalance to Fatah would weaken Palestinian political power."

Speaking of urban legends being passed off as fact by liberuhs....


Of course this Rosen is a brother to Rabbi David Rosen of "inter-religious dialogue" fame, as well as Rabbi Micky Rosen, head of Yakar in Jerusalem, a strong backer of Rabbis for "Human Rights"who hosted Amira Hass a few weeks ago at their "Yakar" institute...

1. New Jersey conference to address subject of leftist anti-Semitism:

2. Is Neturei Karta a terrorist threat?

3. US Campus Wars:

4. Israel's Tenured Left:

5. British leftist lies about Israeli universities:

6. Dershowitz on the Defenestration of Lawrence Summers:

Jacoby on same:

7. Why Mommy is a Democrat

Years ago I visited the Soviet Union before the collapse of communism and
witnessed how young Russian and Ukrainian children were expected to walk
around with little pins showing Baby Lenin, I guess the communist analogy
to Baby Jesus, on their gray poorly-designed clothing.

I was reminded of Baby Lenin pins when I ran across the newest initiative
in liberal brainwashing of the preschool set, "Why Mommy is a Democrat,"
( a
book being promoted to turn Barney fans into drooling Democrats and
Pro-Terror Power Rangers.

Its publishers proclaim that the book helps draw toddlers and young
children to the "core values of the Democratic Party," I guess meaning
appeasing terrorists, socialist redistribution, tax till you drop and
massive new spending, gay marriage, affimative apartheid, and
Hillarycare. The book was composed by one Jeremy Zilber in Madison,
Wisconsin. It costs $8 including shipping. The web site features
endorsements of the book by several politicians.

I am waiting for someone to do a spoof of the book, showing Mommy becoming
a Democrat while seated in a car next to Teddy Kennedy speeding off
towards Chappaquidock.

Maybe Mommy became a Democrat because Daddy would not marry her when she
got pregnant and afterwards refused to pay child support?

8. Ban "Peace Studies":

9. Interested in back postings of Plaut Incitements? They are archived
Pass it on!

Sunday, February 26, 2006

1. Waskow's New "Chaver"

Now if you are like me, you consider the term "Reconstructionist Rabbi"
a bit of an oxymoron. I do not quite know what Reconstructionism *is* (I
prefer to call it Reconstructionist Deconstructionism, by the way), but I
certainly do not consider it to be a legitimate movement within Judaism
(regardless of what it might have once thought it was becoming, back in the
days of Mordecai Kaplan). It is today little more than a whacky-dopey
political movement that is based on "belief" in nothing at all except the
left's agenda. It's "Rabbinic Seminary" was long ago hijacked by
Tikkunites, and evidently was then merged with Rolling Stone Magazine, based
on course contents. Many members of the Reconstructionist congregations I
am familiar with are not even Jewish. Reconstructionism is about as
legitimate a branch of Judaism as is the "Jews for Jesus".

And while the entire movement is muddled and loopy, none come close to
the level of complete lunacy as "Rabbi" Arthur Waskow. Long nicknamed
Rabbi Woodstock in these corners, Waskow has devoted his life to promoting a
pseudo-Judaism based upon bashing Israel, bashing America, green
environmentalist extremism, and recently has even been promoting polygamy as
a great Judaic ethic. His understanding of Judaism evidently comes from
the Easy Rider movie. He plays Rabbi Cheech to Michael Lerner's Rabbi
Chong, and the Cheech-and-Chong tag team have long dominated Tikkun and its

Waskow is not taken seriously by anyone with any semblance of an
understanding of Judaism, but nevertheless is a regular commentator at the
"Jerusalem Report", which has staked out the Jewish Left as its own turf. The
magazine is popular among the Woodstockischer Chassidim.

Which brings us to Rabbi Woodstock's letter in the Jerusalem Report of
March 6, 2006. Responding to complaints among Jewish leaders that
Venezuelan chief Hugo Chavez is an anti-Semitic and anti-American moonbat,
Waskow rushes to Chavez' defense. His letter is entitled "Chaver Chavez".
(I guess since Clinton's use of the term *Chaver*, nothing more demeaning to
it can be done!)

Waskow claims the reports of Hugo making anti-Jewish remarks are
"mistaken". He insists Chavez is helping the poor folks in Philadelphia,
where Waskow tokes, by providing them with cheaper oil. "Now they are
receiving oil at very low prices from the Chavez government," opines the
"Rabbi". We are not sure what Waskow had smoked before making THAT claim!

While he criticizes Chavez for not being environmentalist enough for
Waskow's PETA tastes, he also defends Chavez from attacks by Secretary
Rumsfeld, insisting that while Hitler burned people alive in furnaces,
Chavez is helping keep people alive by giving them oil to heat their
furnaces. Yep, he really writes that!

You may recall that Chavez said in a televised Christmas Eve speech that
"minorities, descendants of those who crucified Christ ... have grabbed all
the wealth of the world for themselves." I do not think he was talking
about the Incas. The Wall Street Journal's "Americas" columnist, Mary
Anastasia O'Grady, charged that his words constituted an "ugly anti-Semitic
swipe that was of a piece with an insidious assault over the past several
years on the country's Jewish community."

Chavez was one of Iraq's friends before the war. The Weekly Standard has
run a long piece<>on
Chavez' anti-Semitism.
He supplied Iraq with goods in violation of the embargo and was seen at
least twice on national TV kissing Saddam Hussein. Earlier last year, the
Caracas police stormed a Jewish pre-school with a lame excuse of looking for
terrorists; they harassed the parents and petrified Jewish children. The
Simon Wiesenthal
and French journals *Lib?ration* and *Le Monde* have accused Ch?vez of being
an anti-Semite. Chavez is so openly anti-Semitic that even Alexander
Cockburn and Counterpunch endorse him.

But Waskow seems to *adore his * Rabbi
indeed seems to confuse him for the Vilna Gaon, not only because of Reb
Hugo's anti-Semitism but of course mainly because of his gutter
All of which makes Arthur Waskow the Harry Belafonte of the Jewish
community, except that Belafonte may know more about real Judaism than Rabbi
Woodstock does.

Here is an older posting on this matter:

After painful research I have now traced the origins of a bizarre sect of
Hassidim. They originate in the Belarussian *stedtel *named *Bialowoodstock*.
They have become known for short as the *Woodstockischer Hassidim*. Their
movement spread at first to Galicia and Moldavia, where followers would
search the forest floors in the Bulkovina in order to find hallucenogenic
mushrooms and cannabis. Later the sect moved its headquarters to
Philadelphia, with devotees as far off as Sebastopol

The Woodstockischers, also called the Mastoolishers, are led by a renowned
Rav known as the Woodstock Rebbe Shlita, although before the era of
perestroika he was also called Arthur Moscow.

His follows are organized into groups called the Havurot of Heaviness.
Occasionally, the Woodstock Rebbe holds his own Tisch-In or Be-In. He also
specializes in romping through the forest while hugging trees.

The Woodstockischer Hassidim are best known for their singing. The following
is a typical song. It is of course in Yiddish, but you may be able to
grasp the basic message in it if you really concentrate:

Und when Der Rebbe Tokes, Und when Der Rebbe Tokes,
A-tokin go all the Hassidim, A-tokin go all the Hassidim.

Und when Der Rebbe Trips, Und When Der Rebbe Trips,
A-trippin go all the Hassidim.

Und when der Rebbe Freaks, Und When Der Rebbe Freaks,
Freaking go all the Hassidim.

Und when Der Rebbe Trucks, und when der Rebbe Trucks,
All the Woodstockischers keep on a-truckin.

2. Some anti-Jewish cartoons that have never upset the Bleeding Hearts and
Caring Crowd:

3. An ex-Israeli anti-Semite endorses a British anti-Semite:
Here is the background to this story:,,30000-1213322,00.html

4. Excerpt from February 17, 2006 report to Ohio Jewish Communities:

BOYCOTTS- JCPA reported this week that the Association of American
University Professors postponed its conference on academic
boycotts. JCPA and its member agencies expressed concern over the
conference's attendees-nearly half of which were outspoken
supporters of an academic boycott of Israel-and the necessity of
such a conference when the AAUP has held a long-standing policy
against academic boycotts. Funders of the conference urged its
postponement when Holocaust-denying material was circulated to
conference attendees as background reading.

5. Who remembers where Chelsea went to school?

6. Barry Chamish smears Jonathan Pollard with yet another loony
conspiracist "theory":

7. When President Bush announced that U.S. funds would be used to help
rebuild a mosque damaged in Iraq this week, one would have expected an
immediate firestorm of outrage from the ACLU and other liberal extremists.

A "Violation of separation of church and state!" they would have been
expected to argue in typical knee-jerk reaction. But, oddly enough, not a
peep out of the ACLU, or the other usual suspects on the loony left.

How to explain this indifference? After all, Bush's proposal involves an
assault on the constitutionally-required separation of church and state,
which, although it does not actually exist, is nevertheless revered as
holy by liberals.

Then I remembered. Liberals pursue church-state arguments only when it
concerns Christian symbols and values. And they do so to advance their
"Tear America Down" agenda.

In other words, its perfectly fine to spend scores of millions of U.S.
taxpayer dollars to rebuild a Mosque in Iraq, but not OK to display a
cross or nativity scene in a public park at Christmas, or to delineate the
Ten Commandments in a court house or other government building in America.

Once again, liberal hypocrisy proves very vexing. One is at a loss to
explain how such misguided and harmful thinking is able to survive in a
sophisticated, modern society like America.

John W. Lillpop
San Jose, Calif.

8. Goober's Latest "Thoughts":

Friday, February 24, 2006

1. So when Do Western Bleeding Hearts NOT Think that Cartoonists Need to
be Repudiated?
By Steven Plaut

All those people whining about how the West needs to be more sensitive
and all when it comes to cartoons depicting Moslems or Islamic symbols
have never had anything to say about the vicious anti-Semitic cartoons of
Michael Leunig, an Australian cartoonist.

Leunig's cartoons are so anti-Semitic that they were subjects of a
practical joke and hoax over the past few days. As you know, Iran is
having its own Holocaust Denial Cartoon contest, to "avenge" the Danish
cartoons that showed the Prophet Mohammed with a bomb in his turban, and
some other offensive images. Perhaps as a prank to show how easily
Leunig's own cartoons can pass for Nazi caricatures, an Australian
freelance journalist operating under the pen name "The Chaser" sent one of
the Leunig's images from 2002 to Iran.s Hamshahri newspaper, which is
holding the cartoon competition on the Holocaust in .retaliation. for the
publication of anti-Muslim images by Denmark.s Jyllands-Posten and other
European newspapers.
Leunig.s cartoon, which was accompanied by a fake email claiming that
the submission was a .show of solidarity with the Muslim world,. was drawn
for The Age in May 2002. The first section of the cartoon consists of a
Jewish concentration camp inmate gazing up at the Nazi slogan, .Work
brings Freedom.. The second section is of an Israeli soldier in 2002
confronted with another lie, .War brings Peace.. Subtle! You can view it
here. He also drew a dumb picture that described the founder of Hamas
merely as an .old Palestinian man in a wheelchair.. An Australian paper
declined to run one of his cartoons that called Australian Prime Minister
John Howard a "suckhole".
Many people have accused the millionaire cartoonist of being an
anti-Semite. Several Australian newspapers have refused to print Leunig's
anti-Semitic cartoon, including The Age and its editor Michael Gawenda,
and this ignited a roar of protest from the Trotsky-Trash and similar
ultra-moonbats. Leunig has also defended Helen Darville (Demidenko), an
author caught up in academic fraud but whose most serious atrocity was
producing a virulently anti-semitic book called The Hand That Signed The
Paper. She blames the Jews for all her problems and David Irving himself
has nothing but praise for Darville.
Ted Lapkin, policy director for the Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs
Council, said there was no denying Leunig's cartoons are offensive. "His
cartoons have offended the Jewish community - but contrast the reaction
here to the Middle East, where they are rampaging the streets over
Paul Gardner, chairman of the Jewish human rights group, the B'nai
B'rith Anti-Defamation Commission, said it was "completely objectionable"
for someone to falsely implicate Leunig by entering his cartoon in such a
competition. But he described the cartoon as "entirely objectionable,
because it made a false analogy between Nazism and the actions of Israel
in its conflict with the Palestinians".

2. Is Juan Cole Moving to Yale?
If so, then pity the end of academic standards at Yale.

Cole is a pseudo-scholar who teaches at the University of Michigan. He
used to be the chief jihadnik at the pro-terror anti-American and
anti-Jewish Middle East Studies Association, a propaganda group pretending
to be a scholarly association. Cole, who led the lobby to clear Saddam of
any ties with terrorism, believes that a group of Jewish
.neo-conservatives. largely runs U.S. policy toward the Middle East. His
recurrent theory is that a nebulous .pro-Likud. cabal controls the U.S.
government from a small number of key positions in the Executive Branch.
Jonathan Calt Harris has declared: "He (Cole) is blindly anti-Israel to
the point of being an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist, an apologist for
radical Islam, and someone who despises American public opinion." Cole has
also pushed the Israel divestment campaign by campus anti-Semites,
supposedly because Arabs are "mistreated" by Israel. Never mind that Arabs
in Israel are treated a thousand times better than are Arabs in Arab
countries. Cole is notoriously dishonest, and is a close comrade of Justin
Raimondo, whom Cole regards as a reliable source.

The Yale Herald reveals the imminent threat to Yale students blowing in
with the hot air from Michigan.

One Yalie expresed her fears:

'Naamah Paley, another sophomore who took his class, pointed out that a
professor can profoundly influence and alter students. perceptions of a
controversial and complex topic. According to Paley, Cole.s lecture on the
history of Zionism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was given on Rosh
Hashanah, when no religious Jewish students were present in class to
contest his views. Moreover, Paley said Cole.s midterm exam concentrated
on the controversial massacres at the Arab village of Deir Yassin and
Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon rather than on balanced
coverage of Israeli history. For Paley, moreover, the close-minded
opinions of a political firebrand like Cole can alienate and stifle
students. Earlier this year, Paley met with Cole to discuss her interest
in studying abroad in Egypt next year. Yet she said she feared engaging
Cole in an argument or even mentioning her Judaism or Zionist beliefs. .I
didn.t want him to see me in his eyes as a Jewish student, but as a
serious student of Middle East studies who wanted to talk to him about
Arabic,. she said.

We recently revealed that Cole still links his personal
web site to that of an unemployed Holocaust Denier and neo-nazi, Kurt
Nimmo, whom Cole considers to be "progressive" and "academic", even though
Nimmo himself (who writes poems about his own hemorrhoids) was even fired
by Counterpunch for his dopey conspiracism and anti-Semitism. I guess
Counterpunch now has higher standards than Yale....

3. Euro-Anti-Semitism Chic:

4. A Nice Blog worth following:

5. Wisse on Harvard's Persecution of Summers:
February 23, 2006

Coup d'.cole

February 23, 2006; Page A17

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- The resignation of Lawrence Summers as president of
Harvard turns the spotlight on the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS),
which has consecrated more time and energy to his ouster than to any other
project of the past five years. Until now, all blame has been leveled at
the president: "Fear and manipulation have been used to govern
maliciously," charged one professor, who has since been awarded with a
deanship. But now that these cowering professors have successfully
unseated their president, scrutiny will quite rightly be leveled at them.
What do they gain from their victory, and what does the rest of the
university stand to lose?

The movement to unseat Mr. Summers remains a mystery to most people
outside Harvard. In the early days of his presidency, he challenged
several tenured professors to account for the direction of their research
and teaching. After some faculty had signed a petition urging divestment
from Israel, he warned against the recurrence of anti-Semitism in a new
guise. At an academic conference on the under-representation of women in
science, he speculated on the implications of the differences between male
and female test scores. At convocation ceremonies he congratulated Harvard
students who served in the ROTC, which had been banned from the campus
since the days of the Vietnam War.

Each of these actions offended one faculty interest group or another, and
jointly they signaled a bold style of leadership in a direction broadly
perceived as "conservative" -- though it was in the service of
once-liberal ideals.

Since most Americans think it appropriate for a president to thus
demonstrate his stewardship and leadership, they could not understand why
such actions should have triggered faculty revolt. Even members of the
media had trouble understanding what the fuss was about: incredulous, for
example, that academics would protest against any expressed opinion. The
governing body that appointed Mr. Summers and gave him a mandate for
change, the Harvard Corporation, seemed for its part to welcome the energy
he brought to the job. Several neglected campus units, such as the Law
School and the School of Education, flourished as a result of his
interventions. Mr. Summers strongly supported new investments in science
and technology, areas where Harvard had been falling behind.

Harvard students frankly blossomed under the special attention he paid
them. No university president in my experience had ever taken such a warm
personal interest in undergraduate education. Not surprisingly, the
students return his affection, polling three to one in favor of his
staying on. The day he announced his resignation, they were out in force
in Harvard Yard, chanting "Five More Years!"

The student newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, has been outspoken in its
criticism of the faculty that demanded the president's ouster. "No
Confidence in 'No Confidence'" ran the headline of an editorial
demonstrating the spuriousness of the charges being brought against the
president, and reminding faculty to stay focused on the educational
process that ought to be its main concern.

Hence, supporters of the president are right to be dismayed by the
corporation's decision to seek or to accept Mr. Summers's resignation. My
colleague Alan Dershowitz calls it an "academic coup d'.tat by . . . the
die-hard left of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences." A second colleague,
Steven Pinker, thinks that the president may have lost the fight himself a
year ago when he apologized to antagonists for his political incorrectness
instead of holding his intellectual ground. For the moment, the attackers
have won the day, asserting their right to dictate to the rest of the
university the accommodations they favor.

But student response to the ouster suggests another long-term outcome.
Although the activists of yesteryear may have found a temporary stronghold
in the universities, a new generation of students has had its fill of
radicalism. Sobered by the heavy financial burdens most of their families
have to bear for their schooling, they want an education solid enough to
warrant the investment. Chastened by the fall-out of the sexual revolution
and the breakdown of the family, they are wary of human experiments that
destabilize society even further. Alert to the war that is being waged
against America, they feel responsible for its defense even when they may
not agree with the policies of the current administration. If the students
I have come to know at Harvard are at all representative, a new moral
seriousness prevails on campus, one that has yet to affect the faculty
members because it does not yet know how to marshal its powers.

As long as FAS went about its business as usual, no one may have noticed
its skewed priorities, but its political victory sets its actions and
inaction in bolder relief. The same professors who fought so hard to oust
their president did not once since the events of 9/11 consider whether
they owed any responsibilities to a country at war.

FAS continued to ban ROTC from campus on the excuse that the military's
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy discriminates against homosexuals. Many
students realize that this is tantamount to letting others do the fighting
while advertising their moral superiority. Several years ago, the
Undergraduate Council voted to give ROTC its approval. Although the
faculty ignored this vote and simply waited for that cohort to graduate,
other students will sooner or later stand up for their contemporaries who
want to serve their country.

"Harvard's greatness has always come from its ability to evolve as the
world and its demands change -- to educate and draw forth the energy of
each successive generation in new and creative ways." These words by Mr.
Summers as he announced his resignation may yet prove true, although he
would not be the one to put them into effect. It is inconceivable that the
currently entrenched culture of grievance should be allowed to continue to
sour the university. Perhaps the corporation ought to have put FAS into
receivership before giving up on its president. Since it has given in for
the moment, we will have to wait a little longer for this new student
generation to teach us courage.

Ms. Wisse is the Martin Peretz Professor of Yiddish Literature and
professor of comparative literature at Harvard.

URL for this article:

6. Livingston suspended:,,30000-1213322,00.html

7. Comment on Conspiracism:

Thursday, February 23, 2006

1. Sleaze

This is not the first time Daniel Abrams has been involved in Israeli
politics. He has close personal ties with Shimon Peres and helps fund the
"Peres Center", the pet "think tank" Peres operates to promote his
"ideas". Israel's State Comptroller is already investigating a $120,000
contribution from Abrams in 2004 to Shimon Peres' campaign for the Labor
Party primaries last November.

Abrams is a wealthy American Jewish liberal, who owns and controls the
"Slim Fast" product line of diet foods.

Years ago I did a spoof of Abrams and his company when he was just about
the investor in the world who accepted Shimon Peres' invitation (after the
first Oslo Accord) to invest in the Gaza Strip. Abrams agreed to set up a
Slim Fast factory there. I did a whole comedy routine based on this. I
will save you the Full Monty thereof, but it involved setting up a factory
for providing low-cal diet foods to the overeating suicide bombers in
Gaza. This way they could trim the fat and avoid getting all that
cellulite all over the celluloid of the film crew taking pictures of the
carnage after they blow themselves up fort peace.

Well, now it turns out that the same Abrams is a bedfellow of Ehud Olmert.
Abrams had contributed NIS 193,000 to Olmert's campaign in the Jerusalem
mayoral elections. But now new ties have been revealed. All the details
are coming out in stages, but Abrams funneled quite a lot of money to
Olmert personally in ways that are pretty obviously violations of Israel's
campaign finance laws.

Now Olmert has been involved in plenty of sleaze in the past. He was
investigated for suspicion of taking bribes
). In 1997 an Israeli court found Olmert innocent of charges that he had
engaged in financial irregularities in the 1988 election campaign, when
Olmert was treasurer of the Likud Party.

Olmert claimed his only "mistake" then was that he signed financial
reports without double-checking them. Olmert also took funds from Marc
Rich, whom you may recall as one of Clinton's weasels, pardoned on
Clinton's last day in office ).
Campaign sleaze is not exactly unusual in Likud-Kadima
), and even less so in the Labor Party. (See )

The current sleaze involving Olmert and Abrams has to do with Olmert's
private home in the expensive Rehavia neighborhood in Jerusalem. Olmert,
while a full-time politician and civil servant, mysteriously raised oodles
of cash to buy his home. The current scandal involves the fact that
Olmert sold his Jerusalem home to Abrams operating through an offshore
company for $2.69 million in 2004, but is still living there and paying
the new owner rent. Why is this a scandal? Cause the home was evidently
sold to Abrams for far more than it was worth and Abrams then leased it
back to Olmert for a rent far BELOW what it is worth. Those of you who
can put two and two together without using Excel might find this
suspicious. Olmert also keeps changing his story about the deal
( ).

The whole story came out because Haaretz started snooping. Haaretz is of
course politically driven, hoping to boost the showing of Peretz and the
Left in the coming elections, but the sleaze is nevertheless what one
would expect from Olmert. (By the way, Netanyahu's people are calling him
"Smolmert", based on "Smol" which means "Left".

2. Leftist Rules of Debating
The following are the basic principles upon which all public debate must
be conducted if you wish to be a true progressive and leftist person who

1. Leftists should be free to call everyone else nasty names, because they
are so moral, but no one should be permitted to call leftists nasty names.

2. For a leftist to call someone nasty names shows social concern and
awareness. For someone to call a leftist a nasty name back is immature and
impolite and avoiding the issues.

3. Leftists need never document their claims.

4. Whenever a leftist is presented with documentation of facts that
contradict the leftist's theology, the leftist must insist that no facts
have been presented at all.

5. No scientific sources that presents facts contradicting leftist
theology are admissable. They must be dismisse as being "right-wing".

6. All arguments may be settled by telling a non-leftist that he reminds
you of Rush Limbaugh.

7. Never ever take an economics course.

8. Never recognize the fact that every idea of Marx's was debunked over
150 years ago. Never read any social science written since Marx. Never
admit that you know that Marx was a racist and anti-Semite.

9. Never visit the library.

10. Never study statistics or public policy analysis.

11. Always say "people of color" so everyone will know you care.

12. Recycle.

13. Whine.

14. Pretend that you do not care about material things, but never sell
your VCR or cellular phone or condo to help the underprivileged.

15. Never admit that life ever involves tradeoffs. After all, when there
are tradeoffs it is harder to feel righteous.

16. Always support proposals that make real problems of the world worse
just as long as advocating them can make you feel caring and righteous.
Remember, it is all about YOU!

17. Never admit that anything could be positive about the United States.

18. Always insist that there are few world problems that could not be
improved through the destruction of Israel.

19. Always insist that you have no idea what political correctness is or
that it exists.

20. Always use the female pronouns half the time or more. That way
everyone will know you are egalitarian.

21. Insist that you are more caring and compassionate than anyone else.

22. Remember, you would prefer that poor people in the Third World starve
rather than that they should embrace capitalism and live like you do.

23. Other people must always be required to relinquish their material
things so that you may feel idealistic and righteous.

24. Your property is scared; other people's property is to be used for
social engineering and doing good.

3. The "New Jews" of Europe:'New_Jews'_Of_Europe.html

4. Rabbi Riskin is considered to be a very loderate and sensible guy:

5. Nice piece on the Dersh:

6. Killing Dead Jews:

7. Hamas Nazoids:

8. A Zionist Moslem:

9. Who says "settlements" have no use?

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

The Rise of Hamas and Decline of Israeli Determination
By: Steven Plaut

In the biblical saga of the exodus from Egypt, there is a great military
mystery. We are told that when the Israelites left Goshen in Egypt, they
had 600,000 men of fighting age in their ranks, and - at least according
to one reading of the text - they were well armed (hamushim). That being
the case, why did they behave in such a cowardly manner, shuddering as
Pharaoh's army approached?

True, comments the great sage Ibn Ezra, the Egyptians had 600 chariots,
but what are those when up against 600,000 fighting men? The medieval
French rabbi Chezkuni makes the same point.

The mystery gets more mysterious just a few lines later. After crossing
into the Sinai wilderness, a handful of Amalekite terrorists harass the
Israelites. But how many Amalekites could there have been, given that they
were living off roots and bugs in the desert with no manna? Yet even then,
the Jews were unable to fight off the Amalekites without Divine
intervention and supernatural assistance.

One explanation of why the Israelites had to spend 40 years in the desert
is that they needed to be cured of their of cowardice and defeatism.
Military challenges and powerful Canaanite kingdoms awaited them in the
campaign to conquer the Promised Land. The generation that had known exile
and slavery was unable to cope with that. It was necessary to wait for the
next generation, born in freedom, to tackle the task.


The generational changing of the guard we read about in the Bible has been
recreated in modern Israel, but in the reverse direction.

The generation that had been raised in exile, suffering persecution and
massacre, entered the Promised Land as military heroes, brilliant
tacticians, and determined fighters. Yet within a short time they had been
replaced with a new generation, one raised in freedom in their own
sovereign state. This new generation lost the determination and courage of
their fathers and grandfathers. It became infected with defeatism and
cowardice; increasingly, it lost its willingness to resist and even to
survive as a nation.

This generational change was not apparent until the emergence of the Oslo
peace process. In Israel's early years, Israelis manifested the courage
and valor of the Israelites of the Book of Joshua. Small militias of Jews
defeated the combined military forces of the invading Arab armies in the
1948-9 War of Independence. Modern Israel fought terrorism with a policy
of "Zero Tolerance" and in the Sinai campaign of 1956 easily defeated
Egyptian forces.

A decade later Israelis crushed the combined military might of the Arab
world and liberated Jerusalem. They again defeated those same forces in
1973, despite being caught in a surprise attack on Yom Kippur. And
Israelis continued to demonstrate courage and resourcefulness in the war
against Arab terror, most dramatically with the rescue at

But some time between 1978 and 1992 a great transformation took place.
Despite the long track record of military successes, the new generation of
Israelis lost its willingness to fight and resist. It convinced itself
that capitulation and appeasement are the only paths to peace. It decided
that self-abasement is the key ingredient to good relations with its

Israelis elected leaders who hectored the new generation over their
selfishness and bigotry, who insisted that the only reason peace had not
yet emerged was that **Israelis** did not desire it enough.

In a Middle East in which the Arabs control territory nearly twice the
size of the Unites States (including Alaska), the new breed of Israeli
leaders insisted that the war was still going on because Israelis held too
much land - almost the size of New Jersey in total.

In a Middle East already containing 22 sovereign Arab states - one of
those states already controlling two-thirds of the land of Mandatory
Palestine - the new breed of political leader in Israel maintained that
creation of a 23rd Arab state could solve the whole conflict.

Back when Israel was behind its 1949 "Green Line" borders, it was
repeatedly attacked by Arab armies seeking its annihilation. But returning
to those same borders (or something close to them), insist Israel's new
leaders, will result in peace and tranquility.

From 1992 onward, Israeli leaders insisted that peace could be achieved by
pretending that war did not exist. And the greatest need of all, urgent
and important above all else, was that the new generation of Israelis
forget all of human and Jewish history, lest they infer from history that
the policy of Oslo appeasement will not work.

In many ways, the Hamas Putsch is the natural and inevitable outcome of 14
years of Israeli policy. It is not at all an exaggeration to say that
Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin installed the Hamas Amalekites in power
when they shook Arafat's hand on the White House lawn in 1993. It was
there and then that they welcomed a Hamas army into the suburbs of Tel
Aviv and Jerusalem. East Jerusalem was turned over to Hamas for all
intents and purposes when Peres and Yossi Beilin sent their
representatives (illegally) to meet with PLO terrorists in Oslo in the
late 1980's.

The Hamas Putsch was not a surprise development but rather the inevitable
fruition of the doctrine of appeasement and capitulation that has been
embraced by an entire generation of Israelis. The "Oslo approach" has
failed at each and every step of the way, producing the opposite of the
results its apologists insisted they would deliver.

Israeli goodwill measures produced escalated terrorism and suicide
bombings. Israeli niceness was interpreted as weakness, and strengthened
the most xenophobic forces and open Islamofascists among the Palestinians.
Israeli flexibility and concessions triggered a worldwide campaign of
anti-Semitism and demonization of Israel, especially in Europe. The
Palestinians did not respond with flexibility and moderation, as the Oslo
Camp had promised, but rather with open preparation for war. Israel has
demonstrated since 1993 that the Jews are on the run, that the Jews have
lost their will to survive. Palestinian Arabs drew the logical conclusion.

With each failure of the "Oslo approach," with each manifestation that
Israel's appeasement was resulting in inflated Palestinian expectations
from armed conflict with Israel and escalating Palestinian intransigence,
Oslo defeatism metastasized further throughout the political system of

In the early 1980's, only the Israeli Communist party and its front groups
were advocating an armed sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and
Gaza. By the late 1990's, this had become not only the platform of the
Israeli Labor Party but also of the Likud. Even the "hawkish" wing of the
Likud, led by Ariel Sharon, adopted what had been the Communist position.

The unilateral Israeli eviction of the settlers from Gaza resulted in a
massive escalation in the firing of rockets and mortars into Jewish
civilian areas in the Negev. Yet the lesson that Israel's political
leaders have drawn from this is that more evictions of Jews, this time
from the West Bank, are what is needed to restore calm.

And in spite of hopes that the Hamas Putsch might at long last wake
Israelis up to the folly of their overnment's policies these past 13
years, acting Prime Minister Olmert's first two responses to the Hamas
victory were to turn over 200 million shekels in tax revenues to the Hamas
and then to send mounted police in to evict Jews from their homes in the
settlement of Amona.

In the coming Knesset elections in Israel, all three major parties are
advocating the same basic strategic position: eviction of Jewish settlers
from most of the West Bank without Arab quid pro quo, turning the other
cheek when rockets land in Jewish areas, and continued support for a
Palestinian state.

Indeed, buried in the Israeli election news is the fact that Israeli
voters have just lost their only ballot option to vote against the Oslo
"peace process" and against the pursuit of peace through appeasement and
self-abasement. The last holdout, the only party in the last parliament
not promoting peace through appeasement, had been the Ichud Leumi party,
itself a coalition of several smaller factions.

The National Religious Party (NRP) or MAFDAL had been paying rhetorical
lip service to opposing Oslo, although few believe it was really opposed.
After all, the NRP had sat in Israeli government coalitions of both Labor
and Likud that implemented earlier Oslo appeasements without batting an
eyelash. One wag suggested that if Israel's government finally decided to
move Israel back to its 1949 borders, the only concern of the NRP would be
that the withdrawal not take place on the Sabbath.

As a coalition partner, the NRP never had any problem abandoning its
nominal opposition to Oslo in exchange for fiscal handouts to its party
institutions and schools. The merging of Ichud Leumi with the NRP means,
first of all, that the new party is abandoning the chance of retaining the
votes of secularist Israeli voters opposed to Oslo - people repulsed by
the NRP. In addition, any voter, of any level of religiosity, who casts a
vote for this new party out of anti-Oslo conviction must know that there
is a distinct chance of seeing his own vote perverted. How long will it
take for the new party to sell out and cash in its Knesset support for
some funds (dare I say 'pork'?) handed over to NRP institutions?

The worse the failures of the Oslo process, the fewer the electoral
possibilities for Israelis to oppose it.

One fundamental plank in the Oslo peace process is to provide the Hamas
entity with a "safe corridor" that links the Gaza Strip with the West
Bank. Israel would be prohibited from stopping the movement of weapons,
explosives, and terrorists along this "safe corridor." The Americans and
the EU have been pressuring Israel to allow the operations of the "safe
corridor" to begin immediately.

Now that there is no Israeli presence in the Gaza Strip, there are also no
obstacles to the massive importing of state-of-the-art advanced weapons
into the area via Egypt. These likely include shoulder-fired missiles.
There will be no more Kassams for Hamas, those pieces of junk held
together by chewing gum and glue.

The emerging Hamas terrorist army will have 21st-century hi-tech weapons.
And the "safe corridor" will ensure that these also reach the West Bank.
Shoulder missiles that can knock down civilian planes will be in the hands
of Hamas terrorists positioned in areas over which planes fly when landing
at and taking off from Ben Gurion Airport.

The most amazing thing is that the Israeli political establishment has
learned absolutely nothing from previous cases of implementation of "safe
corridors." Israel's will not be the first. The most infamous is probably
the "Polish Corridor" that Hitler demanded in 1939.

When Poland was reconstituted after World War I, Danzig remained a free
city and parts of East Prussia remained under German rule. After Hitler
took power, ethnic Germans in Danzig formed a Nazi party and took control
of the city. Following Hitler's success in cowing the West, winning all
his demands at Munich, and then destroying Czechoslovakia, the next item
on the Nazi agenda was a "safe corridor" between Germany proper and
Danzig/East Prussia through Poland. Hitler was sure the West would again
acquiesce and appease.

But Poland dug in its heels and refused the demand for a safe corridor.
Poland understood that the notion of a safe corridor represented the end
of Polish sovereignty on its own territory - that it was little more than
a tactic to divide Poland and make it more vulnerable to invasion. With
Hitler's forces grouping in the West and the Red Army poised to conquer
Poland from the East, Poland, friendless and poorly armed, still chose war
rather than surrender to the demand for a "Polish Corridor."

On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland, with the Red Army following.
After Poland's defeat, Danzig and the Polish Corridor, as well as much
other territory in western Poland, were annexed to Germany. (After World
War II, the entire German population of East Prussia and Danzig was
expelled by Poland.)

In recent years we have been hearing cries from the Israeli Left that the
forthcoming "Palestinian state" must be provided with territorial
"continuity." The only problem is that one look at the map shows that if a
Palestinian state were to have territorial continuity, the Jewish state
would lose its territorial continuity.

This in fact is the point of the demand for a "safe corridor," which would
simply be the first step toward constraining Israeli sovereignty,
toward armed
aggression against Israel and territorial dismemberment. The Polish
government of 1939 understood that the "Polish Corridor" would amount to a
first step on the path to self-annihilation and refused German demands.
The Israeli political establishment has far less backbone and common

The "corridor" is not the only manifestation of the refusal of the Israeli
elite to learn from history. Since the Hamas Putsch, we have been hearing
arguments about how Abu Mazen will stay on as Palestinian president while
Hamas "only" controls the Palestinian parliament. Supposedly this could
mean that Abu Mazen will keep Hamas restrained.

Speaking of historical precedents, this strongly resembles similar
predictions made when Hitler took power and Paul von Hindenberg was Reich
president. Von Hindenberg will keep Hitler restrained, was the accepted
wisdom and media spin of that day.

Of course, within a year von Hindenberg was dead and Hitler had seized all
presidential powers.

But don't bother telling any of that to Israel's leaders. They still
prefer life in a fantasy bubble to learning from history.

1. More on anti-Semitic Jews:

And the Jews for a Second Holocaust are here:

2. Nazis of a Feather:

Will Chomsky join his Buddies in Iran to Deny the Holocaust?
Well, as you know, nazi moonbats of a feather like to flock together. And
now it turns out that the Holocaust Deniers in Iran are recruiting Western
Holocaust Deniers, some who are faculty on American college campuses, to
help the Iranian campaign for a Second Holocaust.

Israel's leftist daily Haaretz reports that Holocaust-deniers from the
West are playing a key role in attempts by Iran to cast doubts on the
veracity of the Holocaust. Documents reveal Iranians have consulted with
well-known Holocaust-deniers from Western countries as part of the Iranian
initiative to hold a conference about the Holocaust. The documents were
published on an Internet site involved in Holocaust denial and reached
scholars at the Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary
Anti-Semitism at Tel Aviv University.

French Holocaust-denier Prof. Robert Faurisson has received a request
regarding the Iran conference from Dr. Jawad Sharbaf, head of the Neda
Institute of Political Sciences, Tehran. Faurisson added that "in accord
with an idea put forth by Prof. Arthur Robert Butz [a Holocaust-denier
from Northwestern University in the U.S.], I shall say we hope to see
President Ahmadinejad create in Iran an international center for
revisionist studies."Faurisson praised Ahmadinejad and added a request
"that Iran make repeated appeals to the Western world for the freeing of
our prisoners of conscience," referring to his colleagues convicted of
denying the Holocaust.

Now, the world's greatest fan of the "scholarship Of Robert Faurisson is
none other than Noam Chomsky, Pol Pot's favorite MIT professor. Since
Chomsky has long campaigned for the "freedom of speech" of Holocaust
Deniers but not for neoconservatives, can there be any doubt that he will
also wish to address the Iranian conference proving that Nazi German did
not kill any Joos?

According to the head of the Tel Aviv Roth Institute, Prof. Dina Porat, in
recent years solidarity between Holocaust-deniers and extremist Muslims
has increased. "Since the law has begun to be enforced regarding
Holocaust-deniers, they often speak of the 'common fate of the
persecuted,' which they feel they share with radical Muslims," Porat said.

3. Georgetown's jihad against civilization:

4. Reforming Academic Hiring:

5. Prager on Jews:

6. The Harvard PC Hitpersons:

Veritas at Harvard
February 22, 2006; Page A14

A Harvard education isn't what it used to be. That's the principal lesson
of yesterday's news that Lawrence Summers is resigning as the 27th
president of the nation's oldest university.

By "used to be," we mean the days before the faculty ran the academic
asylum, the days when administrators, students and, yes, even the trustees
also had a say in setting priorities and making decisions about how a
great university is run. If you remember such a time, you probably
graduated with the Class of 1965 or earlier. In a letter posted on
Harvard's Web site yesterday, Mr. Summers said that "I have reluctantly
concluded that the rifts between me and segments of the Arts and Sciences
faculty make it infeasible for me to advance the agenda of renewal that I
see as crucial to Harvard's future."

Those "rifts" included quarrels with a largely left-wing faculty that has
about as much intellectual diversity as the Pyongyang parliament. Or, as a
group of Harvard protesters so charmingly put it a year or so ago,
"Racist, sexist, anti-gay -- Larry Summers, you must pay." Only on an
American university campus could Mr. Summers, a former Clinton Treasury
Secretary, be portrayed as a radical neocon.

Early in his tenure, Mr. Summers ran up against black studies superstar
Cornel West, when he suggested that the scholar take time out from writing
rap songs to do some serious academic work. He later bucked faculty who
wanted Harvard to end its investments in Israel and warned that
anti-Semitism was no longer just the purview of the ill-educated but is on
the rise in elite institutions. He pushed for the return of ROTC to
Harvard (without success) and told school audiences that the U.S. military
deserves more respect than it was getting on campus.

But his biggest transgression against current Harvard manners was his
suggestion, at an academic conference a year ago, that it might be worth
studying whether there are innate gender differences that might explain
why so few women have reached the pinnacles of science and math. That much
misquoted remark prompted a no-confidence vote by the Harvard Arts and
Sciences faculty, a vote that was widely expected to be repeated next

Mr. Summers's fate has unfortunately become all too typical at elite
schools in recent decades. The Dartmouth faculty looked down on David
McLaughlin as an "anti-intellectual" (he had an M.B.A. instead of a
Ph.D.); he was run out of Hanover in 1987 over bitter quarrels over ROTC
and disinvestment from South Africa. Benno Schmidt left Yale in 2001,
saying his six-year tenure had been marked "by more argument . . . than I
would have wished." Donald Kagan, the dean of Yale College who had handed
in his resignation a few weeks earlier, was franker, noting the threat
from an "imperial faculty."

Mr. Summers isn't known for his bonhomie, and no doubt his personality
didn't make him many friends. But it's also true that, in the wake of his
"gender" comments, he bent over backward to apologize and to placate his
liberal critics -- albeit to no avail. As one Harvard professor told us,
Mr. Summers's retreat in the face of such criticism has left campus
political dissenters even more isolated.

On Harvard's coat of arms, a crimson field contains a trio of open books
on which is imprinted the word "Veritas" -- Latin for "truth." In his
first commencement address as president, Mr. Summers spoke of his vision
of Harvard as a place "open to all ideas" and "committed to a diversity of
perspectives." We wish Mr. Summers's successor good luck with that one.

URL for this article:

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

1. As Israel's election approaches, the most entertaining part of life in
Israel is watching the Meretz version of "The Producers".

Let me explain.

As you recall, "The Producers" was a highly successful and hilarious movie
and Broadway show. (It is even now on the stage in translation to Hebrew
in Tel Aviv.) It is based on the story of some theater producers who
need to produce a terrible flop to extract themseles from financial
difficulties, but a commercial success will ruin them.

The semi-Marxist Meretz Party seems to be operating under the same modus
operandi. It has designed its campaign and election slogans to guarantee
that no one, not even the most devoted self-hating Israeli lemming, will
vote for it. I wonder if a Gush Katif settler has hacked their web site
and campaign computer?

Since you will think that this is another of my spoofs, I direct you to
this web page,, where you can see
the ads for yourself.

The campaign began with billboards proclaiming that "Meretz is the Party
of Arab Lovers", followed by "Meretz is the Party of Lovers of
Homosexuals and Bleeding Hearts". But the cherry on the pie is the new
one, which you can see on the above site, also at the entrance to Haifa on
a huge billboard: A photo of Yossi Beilin's head with a banner
proclaiming "I do not have an Arab Mother."

The slogan is based on an old urban legend whispered about Isreal that
Beilin supposedly had an Arab Mother. (Incorrect as it turns out.) It
could explain a lot of his political behavior. The billboards will not
only disgust a lot of Jews but no doubt enrage a lot of Arab voters, who
are traditionally a significant part of the Meretz contingent.

The only thing now missing would be a new ad, with Beilin in tights,
dancing and prancing to the tune of "Springtime with Hitler in Germany",
singing "Springtime with Hamas in Oslo".

2. Haaretz' Der Sturmer Headline

Just when you think Haaretz could not possibly become any worse, along
it comes to surprise us.

Haaretz is the Israeli Far Leftist daily whose notion of journalistic
plualism resembles that of Pravda back in the days of Brezhnev. It is
little more than a Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew.

The headline in Haaretz this morning is "The Candidate for the Army's
Chief Rabbi: 'The Sabbath is More Important than the Life of Gentiles.'"
At least that is the Hebrew headline. It is tuned down a bit in its
English version, which you can see here:

The article tries to represent the person being considered for the
army's chief rabbi slot (in charge of things like kosher food in the
military and religious issues that come up) as a foaming racist and
primitive bigot. The paper even notes that the rabbi's own children were
opposed to the Gush Katif withdrawal. Oh the humanity!

But reading the article fails to produce a single statement by the
Rabbi that is consistent with the headline. So what gives? Well, it
seems the Rabbi once discussed what should be done if the army captured a
wounded terrorist on the sabbath. He discussed the religious
considerations for whether one should violate the sabbath to save the life
of a murderer/terrorist.

Not exatly the same thing as saying that the Rabbi
considers the sabbath more important than the life of gentiles, huh? The
Rabbi actually reaches the conclusion that the sabbath MAY be violated to
save the terrorist, although adds that this could be for purposes of
allowing intelligence to interrogate him or to avoid fueling loathing of
Jews. I personally think it would be obligatory to execute the terrorist,
sabbath or not, but I am not exactly a rabbinic authority.

Haaretz has a long history of Der-Sturmer-like caricatures and
obscene representations of religious Jews and the paper for the thinking
Israel is not at all troubled that nazis and anti-Semites all over the
globe will
latch on to its lying headline about an Israeli Rabbi from this morning.
To read about past Haaretz anti-Semitic caricatures, see

To get a better feel for what Haaretz is, consider last week's weekend
magazine supplement in the paper for the thinking Israeli. The cover
story was about a Haaretz writer who took a course in getting women into
bed, featuring such advice as How to Screw a Lot of Women without being
Nice to Them. It is accompanied by photos of sluts and bimbos.

This was accompanied by an article by Post-Zionist Tom Segev in which
he tells about how the BBC investigated whether the Israeli media or the
Palestinians are better at reporting on the Middle East conflict (guess
who Segev thinks does a better job). He expresses his anguish that the
Hamas is still regarded by the BBC as a terrorist group.

Then Haaretz runs its
weekly feature by Gideon Levy, a person who has openly called for Israel
to be destroyed and writes in Counterpunch. Levy each Friday runs a sob
story about some Palestinian who was wounded, crippled, or otherwise
is having a sad life. In most cases the po' Palestinian was shot or
wounded as a result of Israelis returning fire after terrorists attack
them, but Levy never mentions that.

Levy has yet to express his anguish at the
killing and maiming of any Jews. This week's Levy-Palestinian lost two
legs from a shell Israel firedback at terrorists. This is followed by a
piece about how a Far-Leftist anti-Zionist actor and playwriter in Israel
(Yehoshua Sobel) is "in love with Amir Peretz". No, not in the Brokeback
Mountain sense. Then there is an article on a brother and sister where
the brother is about to have a sex change operation and the two are shown
in a spread where they are naked and one can examine the bris of the
brother about to become a sister in allits detail. Really.

Haaretz weekend magazine also usually has a set of recipes for
preparing shrimp, ham, or similar items. I mean, you would think they
would leave out the ham recipes if only to avoid offending their Moslem

3. Global Warming:

4. Che Entrepreneurship:

5. Time to Indict some More Holocaust Deniers
by Autonomist Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2006 at 1:51 AM
Jail them!

Well, David Irving is going to prison. He was convicted in Austria of
being a Holocaust Denier, which is a crime in Austria.

All very well, but why is ONLY David Irving going to prison?

Why is not DePaul "University's" Norman Finkelstein going to Austrian
prison, or DePaul's President Dennis Holtschneider for the crime of
employing Finkelstein and defending his "scholarship"? The Anti-Defamation
League has declared him to be a Holocaust denier. How about Northwestern
University's Arthur Butz? How about Jeff Rense, who runs the Holocaust
Denial web site, and his assorted nazi columnists? How about the
University of Ottawa's Michel Chossudovsky?

And then there is the unemployed skinhead and Holocaust Denier, Kurt
Nimmo, or the potty poet from New Mexico, as we affectionately like to
refer to him. Nimmo's reaction to the conviction of Irving on his little
personal web site?

"Now that the .Notorious Holocaust Denier,. as the New York Times
characterized David Irving, has pleaded guilty and faces three years in an
Austrian prison for the crime of deviating from the official,
Zionist-sanctioned and imposed history of the Second World War, we can
expect triumphant ballyhoos from the Zionists, a screaming and obnoxious
declaration of victory for the small outlaw nation of Israel and its
endless blackmailing of millions of people who had nothing to do with
Auschwitz and its discredited gas chambers.
.Mr. Irving.s trial came during a period of intense debate in Europe over
freedom of expression, after European newspapers printed caricatures of
the Prophet Muhammad that set off deadly protests worldwide,. notes the
New York Times. In other words, straying from the Holocaust orthodoxy is a
punishable crime while sacking the Prophet Muhammad is freedom of

Nimmo, best known for his poems about his own hemorrhoids, used to be a
regular columnist for Counterpunch until Alexander Cockburn fired his
poetic posterior for his being a conspiracy nut. Nimmo likes to whine to
his few readers how unfair it is to call him a nazi or Holocaust Denier.
We figure the above citation sets the record straight.

6. Pipes on the Cartoon Jihad ... against HIM!

7. Academic jihadnette:

8. Israel's next Munich?

Monday, February 20, 2006

1. Iran Takes Revenge ... On Danish Pastries
Is there no limit to the barbarism of these Farsi occupiers of Iranian
lands legitimately belonging to the Mongolians?

NOW they are persecuting ... Danish Pastries!

From the Persian press we have learned that bakeries across the capital
were covering up their ads for Danish pastries Thursday after the
confectioners' union ordered the name change in retaliation for
caricatures of the Muslim prophet published in a Danish newspaper.
Iranians love Danish pastries, but when they look for the flaky dessert at
the bakery they now have to ask for "Roses of the Prophet Muhammad."
Iranians love sweets, often bringing candies and pastries to parties.
So-called "Danish pastries" are extremely popular.

"Given the insults by Danish newspapers against the prophet, as of now the
name of Danish pastries will give way to 'Rose of Muhammad' pastries," the
union said in its order. "This is a punishment for those who started
misusing freedom of expression to insult the sanctities of Islam," said
Ahmad Mahmoudi, a cake shop owner in northern Tehran.

In Iran, the pastries are domestically baked, not imported. Iran has cut
all commercial ties with Denmark in retaliation for the prophet cartoons.

Meanwhile Bill Clinton has endorsed the persecution of the cartoon
infidels, while on a visit to Pakistan, World News Daily reports. Clinton
called for the conviction of European papers that published satirical
cartoons of Muhammad, according to reports in the Islamic press and
elsewhere. Clinton condemned the publication of the caricatures by
European newspapers and urged countries concerned to convict the
publishers, according to the reports.

Clinton had nothing to say about whether the Seventh Commandment was
something that deserved respect.

2. Cartoons out? Look what else is prohibited!

3. Lying about AIDS:

4. Trouble in the Conspiracist Asylum:
Conspiracy Creeps Trash Cockburn On 9/11

Surely, one of the last great pleasures in life is watching far-Left
moonbats hiss and claw at one another.

In particular, we cannot get enough of the barbs that some moonbats are
throwing at Alexander Cockburn for his refusal to endorse the "theories"
of conspiracy nuts regarding 9-11. As you may know, there is somewhat of a
cottage industry composed of conspiracists who say that "controlled
demolition" actually brought down the WTC, and that the tens of thousands
of people who saw the hijacked planes hit the towers are either lying
about what they saw or were mass hypnotized into seeing things that never

Now while we happen to think that Cockburn himself should have been
shipped over to Gitmo and placed in a holding cell with the terrorists he
supports, we are pleased that he showed some uncharacteristic good sense
in telling-off the conspiracy kooks, even though in the past Cockburn
himself spent as much time promoting loony conspiracy "theories" as they
do. Cockburn once even claimed that the Jews spread anthrax and Israel was
involved in the 9-11 attacks.

Nevertheless, Cockburn has recently ripped into those who are only
slightly more loony than him:

"The truly bad news is the 9/11 nuts have relocated to Stolen Election. My
inbox is awash with their ravings. People who have spent the last three
years sending me screeds establishing to their own satisfaction that
George Bush personally ordered the attacks on the towers and that Dick
Cheney vectored the planes in are now pummeling me with data on the time
people spent on line waiting to vote in Cuyahoga county, Ohio, and how the
Diebold machines are all jimmied. As usual, the conspiracy nuts think that
plans of inconceivable complexity worked at 100 per cent efficiency, that
Murphy's law was once again in suspense, and that 10,000 co-conspirators
are all going to keep their mouths shut."
We mentioned yesterday that the "Poet of the Posterior," neo-nazi Kurt
Nimmo, squealed outrage at Cockburn for not embracing psychotic
conspiracism. Nimmo claims this makes Cockburn a "gatekeeper" in the
neocon conspiracy, by which we assume Nimmo means "Jewish."

Meanwhile, other conspiracy nuts are sniping at Comrade Cockburn from the
web. Here is a typical example. (Ah, witness what happens when some people
avoid taking their prozac!)

This particular moonbatling writes:

"As a '9/11 nut,' I'm gong to have to take this one personally. Regardless
that ample evidence exists of vote fraud - which could have flipped the
presidential outcome (a matter of concern to most of the world) - I'm
going to have to concentrate on September 11th and your crass dismissal of
valid lines of inquiry. ...On my side, I have several gigabytes of news
articles, half a dozen lawsuits by FBI insiders, and the following reading
list (he lists some other loony blogs)...Where you see '10,000
co-conspirators,' Bush and Cheney would no-doubt see 10,000 pawns. They
aren't 'co-conspirators' if they don't know they are part of a much larger
plan. It would be tough to argue that plausible deniability isn't one of
the Bush family values....In your (ignorant) scenario, the air defenses of
the nation were asleep at the controls for some unnamed reason. They just
allowed airliners to fly all over the northeast unescorted, and in the
case of the Pentagon crash: for over 70 minutes. That's your story, and I
guess you're sticking to it."

Other conspiracy moonbats are fluttering out of their caves to attack
Cockburn. Since poor Alexander has now criticized his fellow moonbats, we
would not be surprised to see some of them accuse him of having set the
demolition charges that they think brought the Towers down.

You may recall that Kurt Nimmo, the "Poet of the Posterior" who writes "poetry" about his own hemorrhoids, used to be a regular columnist for Alexander Cockburn's Counterpunch web magazine. While Counterpunch is a leftwing web site for Bash-America rants, it is also one of the most openly anti-Semitic web sites in America.

Cockburn hates Jews even more than he hates America (although he doesn't hate America enough to give up its perqs and move back to his native rainy British isles). Cockburn published a book, "The Politics of Anti-Semitism," devoted to the thesis that people should not be accused of being anti-Semites just because they hate Jews and want to see Jews murdered. And to make his point, Cockburn even included an anti-American and anti-Semitic rant by our potty poet, Kurt Nimmo, in that book.

Nimmo's chapter included such delicious fabrications as: "As for Baraka's assertion that both the US and Israeli government had prior knowledge of the September 11 attacks, there is clear, ample, and documented evidence they most certainly did."

But Nimmo, who is a high school dropout associated with a variety of Holocaust denier organizations and individuals, was too openly a Neo-Nazi and too much of a flake even for Cockburn and his Counterpunch friends. When Nimmo decided that the US and Israel had really knocked down the WTC on 9-11 to make the poor al-Qaeda people look bad, this was just too much, even for Comrade Cockburn, who canned Nimmo's poetic posterior, and has since refused to run any of Nimmo's rants in Counterpunch.

Nimmo likes to post his inventions on the newsletter put out by the open Holocaust Deniers at the Barnes Review. Nimmo is also buddies with Jeff Rense, who runs the web site. Nimmo insists that Rense himself is not a Holocaust Denier, in spite of the fact that his web site runs hundreds of Holocaust denial articles and promotes "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," so we are waiting to see if Rense sues Nimmo for libel because Nimmo claims that Rense is NOT a Holocaust Denier. Nimmo by the way has appeared on Rense's web site at least 64 times. (Yahoo Search has a much larger number.)

Nimmo, a chronically unemployed photographer-wannabe, has been proclaimed "One of the Ten Best Writers on the Web" by one John Kaminski, who himself is also an unemployed neo-nazi Holocaust denier and Rense columnist, someone who promotes 9-11 conspiracist lunacy along with Nimmo. Nimmo has also praised Kaminski in quid pro quo, lending credence to my theory that nazis of a feather flock together in the same cyber-asylums.

Meanwhile, Nimmo runs a rant on his best-ignored personal web page this weekend in which he tries to explain away why Cockburn dumped him from Counterpunch. While one would be hard pressed to find a single sentence Nimmo has ever written about anything that is either factually correct or grammatically correct, Nimmo outdoes himself in his "Correcting the Record on My Stint Writing for Counterpunch." Here is Nimmo's version of getting the Cockburn axe:
"Cockburn had received negative comments (this apparently irked him) about documentation (sic) I cited indicating government involvement in the terrorist attacks of nine eleven, thus revealing Counterpunch's gatekeeping function, a common enough occurrence on the foundation-funded left (according to the research of Bob Feldman and tax forms, in 1999 CP and the Institute for the Advancement of Journalistic Clarity earned $178,000) from its 'alternative
journalism activity' and unlike most of the other anti-conspiracist alternative media gatekeepers."

In other words, Nimmo was indeed fired by Cockburn, as everyone already knew, for being a subliterate kook and a downright embarrassment for Counterpunch, but Nimmo is now trying to "get even" by claiming that Counterpunch is a part of the neocon conspiracy, a.k.a. "gatekeeping function." Evidently being a gatekeeper is something like a "Zionist" in the Nimmo-Kaminski Hofbrauhaus.

Nimmo also whines that Cockburn never paid him anything, which I suppose might have been a blessing for our potty poet because it may have allowed him to receive food stamps.

Friday, February 17, 2006

1. Yesterday something extraordinary happened in Israel. The Israeli
authorities refused to let three vicious anti-Semites enter Israel. This
of course is unusual and entirely out of character for Israel, which
ordinarily welcomes foreign anti-Semites and then sends them to the West
Bank where they can vandalize Israel's security fence and violently attack
soldiers and police.

So what made Israel behave with sudden uncharacteristic survivalist
dignity yesterday? Well, first of all, the three were so
obviously anti-Semites that Israel's far-leftist daily Haaretz referred to
them as "peace activists".

The three were from the fanatically anti-Israel "European Jews for a
Just Peace". The "just peace" they have in mind is where all the Israeli Jews
have been shipped out in cattle cars to nice work camps. See . EJJP claims to represent 18 different leftist
anti-Jewish groups of European Jews, but we suspect all 18 groups have the
same 8 members. There are only 8 people listed here as members and several have clearly non-Jewish

The terror leader of this group is one Dror Feiler. You probably
remember Feiler as the Swedish ex-Israeli "sculptor" who created a "work
of art" celebrating the mass murderer suicide bomber woman who murdered 23
people in a Haifa restaurant, including members of three generations of a
single family. One child lost his parents and was left alive, blinded.

The bomber beloved by Feiler intentionally stood next to a baby
carriage when she set the bomb off to make sure the baby was blown to
bits. The bomber was a West Bank lawyer, not a starving refugee.
Feiler's "art show" compared her to Snow White in her purity. Feiler was
raised a red diaper baby by his communist mother Pnina Feiler, then moved
to Sweden.

When the Israeli Ambassador to Sweden saw the atrocity that Feiler had
created to celebrate the mass murderer, he vandalized it. Israel's
Lefties then had a conniption at this "destruction of art". Feiler
became the overnight hero for the Sormfront organization of Nazis and
Holocaust Deniers:

When he is not busy celebrating genocide and mass murder of Jews,
Feiler serves as "chairman" of the "European Jews for a Just Peace".
Yesterday three of the group's members were busted when they arrived at
Tel Aviv airport. They were supposed to hook up with Palestinian
terrorists and Israeli leftist thugs and help attack Israeli police
protecting Israel's security fence near the village of Bil'in.

After busting them, Feiler himself gave a press briefing in which he
said, "There is no other country on earth that behaves like this!" He is
of course correct. In any other country, overseas trouble-makers coming
in to assist genocidal terrorists would be taken out back and shot, or at
least shipped off to Gitmo.

Feiler's campaign for genocidal terrorism was earlier discussed by us

We reprint some earlier observations about him:

'Ah, the Israeli left! Every days brings us new wonders from it,
new manifestations of anti-Semitism and treason.

'Among the Israeli or ex-Israeli leftist anti-Semites trekking the
globe is one Mapplethropian ''artist'' named Dror Feiler. Feiler hates
Israel with a passion and supports Jihad and Palestinian terrorism. He
lives in Stockholm with his Swedish wife whence he spreads his views,
including on the Internet. He also claims to be a musician who makes
''music and noise'' and my guess is more of the latter than the former.
( )

'Among Feiler's recent ''artistic'' creations is a work celebrating
the terrorist woman who blew herself up inside the Maxim restaurant in
Haifa, murdering 23 people, some of them Arabs, many of the children.
Feiler seems to think this woman is a great hero, so he drew a portrait of
her floating happily in a pool of Jewish blood. The work is entitled Snow
White and the Madness of Truth
( ). It was
displayed in Sweden in a museum, the Historiska Museet, together with a
poem that included the following phrases:

'She was also a woman as white as snow, as red as blood, and her
hair was as black as ebony. like a weed in her heart until she had no
peace day and night Hanadi Jaradat was a 29-year-old lawyer Weeping
bitterly, she added: "If our nation cannot realize its dream and the goals
of the victims, and live in freedom and dignity, then let the whole world
be erased "Run away, then, you poor child. and the red looked beautiful
upon the white.''

'It was all part of the preparations for some sort of Swedish
conference on ''genocide,'' which by all expectations will end up
endorsing Arab plans to conduct genocide against Jews.

'The art was on display in Stockholm when the Israeli Ambassador
decided to respond to it in a manner almost unseen by Israeli officials
since the start of Oslo appeasement. He responded to it as a Jew and a
Zionist; after asking nicely that it be taken down, he vandalized the
obscenity. Curiously, the Ambassador is an appointee of Labor Party dove
Ehud Barak, who was on Israeli TV soon afterwards cheering on the
Ambassador for this rare act of Israeli self-pride and courage.
Surprisingly, Barak's party and Meretz have NOT suggest that Feiler be
granted the Israel Prize.

'Feiler runs a PLO front group called Jews for Israeli Palestinian
Peace (JIPF). He also serves as head of European Jews for a Just Peace,
which might or might not have other members besides himself. The artist
has filed a complaint with the Swedish police against the Ambassador for
the vandalizing, and it set off a diplomat confrontation between Sweden
and Israel. I personally think the Ambassador should say he was just
engaging in theater and so his actions should be protected artistic

'''This was not a piece of art,'' the ambassador told Sweden's SR
radio news station. ''It was a monstrosity. For me it was intolerable
and an insult to the families of the victims,'' he said. ''As ambassador
[of] Israel I could not remain indifferent to such an obscene
misrepresentation of reality.''

'Feiler describes himself as the ''eye-bleeding ultimate composer
of intifadic and eruptive lung-outs.'' It turns out his parents were
both communist party members in Israel and he was raised on a kibbutz.

'What is most interesting about this is how readily much of the
Israeli Left has been to denounce the ambassador for defending Jewish
dignity and to defend the anti-Semitic artist and his absolute right to
produce such obscenity. The far leftist daily Haaretz ran an editorial,
several op-eds and lots of letters to the editor denouncing the ambassador
as a bully and vandal and defending the piece of ''art.'' They were
joined by many others on the Israeli Left. Suddenly ''artistic''
expression is absolutely protected. Except the theater by the Ambassador
is not.

'Some in the academic Left are also chiming in. Here is a letter
written by Prof. Amiram Goldblum, one of the founders and long-time
leaders in Peace Now, circulated this week on the web:
'''The Stockholm Bully'' The aggressive response of Mazel to what seems
to be an idiotic artistic expression, will remain in public memory as
another display of Israeli violence, deriving from 35 years of occupation.
That is also the source of the governmental response, praising the bully
rather than recalling him and replacing him ASAP. Israel has enough
rednecks in the academy, no need to have them as diplomats.
'Amiram Goldblum, Ph.D. Cell
Professor of Medicinal Chemistry
School of Pharmacy, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
ISRAEL 91120 email:

'Now it is interesting to place this sudden absolutism of the Left
regarding artistic expression in context. This is the very same Israeli
Left that insists that any poster that shows politicians the Left likes in
unflattering manner, such as Yossi Beilin or Yossi Sarid wearing an Arab
kafiya, should be grounds for prosecution for ''incitement.'' This is
the same Left that cheered uncontrollably when Tatiana Suskin, the poor
young woman who had made a poster of the Prophet Mohammed as a pig, was
sentenced to a long prison term. These are leftists who want pornography
suppressed because it dishonors women. This is the same Israeli Left that
has campaigned to tear down and bulldoze a memorial stone marker for
Baruch Goldstein, who shot up the Mosque in Hebron. And this is the Left
that argues that T-shirts that read "Where there are no Arabs there is no
Terrorism" should be jailed for "racism" and "incitement".

'In other words, by defending this nazi obscenity in Sweden, the
Left is showing how openly anti-Semitic and anti-democratic it is.

Here is some more on the Jewish anti-Semites in Europe:

2. Haifa University's Ilan Pappe endorses Holocaust Denier Norman

3. Tikkun Endorses Pappe and other anti-Semites:

4. Ben Dror Yemini, a left of center columnist and editor at Maariv,
calls for preventing Palestinians getting Israeli citizenship by way of
marriage: (in Hebrew -
There is a massive in-migration of Palestinians into Israel by way of
marrying Israeli Arabs and applying for citizenship. Yemini calls for a
halt to this. He will of course be denounced as a racist by the usual
members of the Jews for a Second Holocaust.

5. More Israeli First Amendement:

6. Feminazis:

7. California Public Schools for Jihad:

8. Will this guy now be hired by the Dept of Political Science at Ben

9. Will Amir Peretz merge with these?

10. Appeasement 101:

11. Bunnies: