Thursday, May 31, 2007
Posted
5/31/2007 03:37:00 PM
Israel's cabinet minister Haim Ramon slips the tongue to a lass to whom he is not married? Boring! Old News! Want some REAL sensation? Just consider the scoop this week at WND.com by the valiant Aaron Klein: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55901 : "Terror leader arrested having car sex near Arafat's grave Israeli forces raid jeep of longtime wanted militant caught in compromising position" According to Klein: "Khaled Shawish, an officer in Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Force 17 presidential guards, was captured by undercover Israeli police forces following scores of shooting attacks he is suspected of carrying out. Shawish, who doubles as the Ramallah chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, previously boasted of involvement in a West Bank shooting attack in December 2000 that killed Israeli ultranationalist leader Benjamin Kahane and Kahane's wife, Talya...The sources said at the time of his arrest, Shawish was having intercourse in the back seat of his jeep with a Palestinian woman, whose identity is being withheld by WND. The woman was not his wife. The Brigades, founded by Arafat, largely considers the late PLO leader's resting place to be a sacred site." So Shawish was enjoying a car job while rockets were flying into Sderot. We assume that it was NOT Haim Ramon he had with him back there in the car. You may recall that in the early days of Oslo news reports emerged that the PLO headquarters had run up an enormous phone bill for calls placed to phone sex numbers. Israel's phone company is still trying to collect for that bill.
Posted
5/31/2007 02:27:00 PM
1. A CALL FOR BOYCOTT AND DIVESTMENT by Steven Plaut Prof. Haifa Univ. We thought you would be interested in the following document, uncovered by archeologists in Britain. It is a statement that was issued by the Union of British University Lecturers in the year 1938, and was endoxrsed by the civil servants union of Canada, by the Presbyterian Church, and by a host of progressive Jewish professors. In the interests of history scholarship and accuracy, we reprint the document here in full: A Call for Divestment in Czechoslovakia From the Union of British University Lecturers February 12, 1938 Dear Learned Comrades: The Union of British University Lecturers is calling upon lovers of justice and peace throughout the world to boycott all official institutions of Czechoslovakia and especially the Czechoslovak universities. While we have tried other forms of persuasion, the racist regime in Czechoslovakia continues to abuse the human rights of the country.s ethnic Germans, denying the Sudeten Germans their right to self-determination. As was declared by our representatives to the recent goodwill conference held in Berlin, sent there to express out friendship and understanding for the Reich.s peace proposals, we must unambiguously denounce the racist apartheid regime that has long been operating in Czechoslovakia. The Czechoslovak colonialists are illegally occupying the lands of the Sudeten Germans. This occupation must end. In recent months the Sudeten victims of Bohemian occupation have launched a protest movement, which we fully endorse. Regretfully, some the victims of occupation have also engaged in terrorist activities directed against the Czechoslovak apartheid regime. We believe that blame for this should not be assigned to the victims of racism, the Sudetens, and understand the desperation that underlies these Sudeten German operations. Indeed, we urge peace-loving states and churches around the world to join the authorities in Berlin in providing funding to the political groups now operating among the Sudetens and representing them. Recently, the main political group speaking on behalf of the Sudetens has been the Sudeten-German Party (SdP), headed by Konrad Henlein. While some in the world are justifying the Czechoslovak decision not to conduct negotiations with the SdP because of its openly nazi orientation, we demand that Czechoslovakia open immediate talks with it. After all, the SdP enjoys the popular support of the bulk of the Sudeten population and refusal to conduct negotiations with it is anti-democratic. And besides, who are the Czechs to dictate which party and leaders should represent the Sudeten people? Oppressed people unfortunately often are forced into use of violence. And in this case, the Sudetens were victimized by Czechoslovak state terrorism and racism for well over a generation. So what if Czechoslovakia has free and open elections, freedom of speech, and other manifestations of liberal democracy? We consider Czechoslovakia to be a phony democracy, with false freedoms existing only on paper, so long as the Sudeten Germans are second-class citizens. That is why we cooperate with the anti-apartheid groups and movements operating within the Third Reich, which are heralding the struggle against Czechoslovak oppression of Germans. Sure, the Czechoslovak political leaders have offered to consider some forms of local autonomy for the Sudetens. But these offers are humiliating and amount to little more than the creation of German Bantustans for the Sudetens, who would continue to suffer from Czechoslovakian domination. Why should the Sudetens be denied complete self-determination and the control of their own state and army? Why are Sudetens any less entitled to statehood than Czechs and Slovakians? So what if the German Reich already controls most of Central Europe? That should not preclude the rights of the Sudetens to have their own state? Czechoslovakian universities must be boycotted because of their collaboration with the racist regime in Prague! The universities continue to discriminate against Germans by conducting their classes in Czech, and by refusing to allow swastika banners to be hoisted on campus. We have also received reports that there were attempts in one university to expel a pro-German professor, although those attempts failed. Another university conducts courses in a satellite campus located inside occupied Sudetenland! Accordingly, we believe that researchers and scholars at Czechoslovakian universities need to be taught a firm lesson. This can only be accomplished using the same divestment tactics that were so successfully utilized in other struggles, such as against the Italian conquest of Ethiopia. Part of the statement for divestment includes this: .Czechoslovakia continues to grab the lands of the Sudeten people for ever-expanding Bohemian settlements, building Czechoslovakian-only roadways, and the construction of a giant wall and fence that is confiscating a significant portion of the Sudeten land. 83% of the Sudetenland water has been taken for Czechoslovakian use, leaving Sudetens with desperate water shortages. Czechoslovakia has destroyed the homes of more than 28,000 Sudetens in four and a half years. Hundreds of thousands of ancient fir trees and vast tracts of agricultural land have also been destroyed.. The Union of British University Lecturers has also voted for and hereby demands the divesting of funds from all companies that support the Czechoslovak occupation of the Sudeten Territories. Our resolution contains statements of action: - That a committee be convened in the conference to create and maintain a list of companies that support in a significant way the Czechoslovak occupation of Sudeten territories. The list will be delivered to all university associations, conference churches and conference investment managers. - We call upon Czechoslovakia, as well as the U.S. government, Britain, the government of Poland, and the newly-elected Sudeten leadership to respect all people and find solutions based on international law and human rights. - We affirm the right of Sudeten Germans to freedom of movement in all lands, and believe that Prague should be declared an open city for people of all faiths and creeds. Peace can yet be achieved. Boycott Czechoslovakia Now! WHAT occupied territories? http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1528 Had your breakfast already? Don't look at this: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3405955,00.html
Posted
5/31/2007 10:13:00 AM
Subject: Support the Boycott! End the Occupation! A Call for Action against Occupation from the Israel Professor for Justice and Peace We, Israeli professors for justice and peace, do hereby appeal to researchers, academics, scholars, and teachers in Israel and throughout the world to take a firm and clear stand against continuing occupation and denial of rights. We are of course referring to the continuing occupation of territories by Britain in which Britain clearly has no right to be. We demand that all British universities be boycotted and all academics at those universities be boycotted until these same people and institutions come out clearly and openly in favor of immediate unconditional removal of all British occupation from these territories. We demand a moratorium on all funding of academic research in Britain by sources for funding everywhere and divestment from Britain in all its forms. Unlike Israel's "occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the latter of which is not occupied any longer in any way, which has lasted a mere 40 years, but Britain's occupations of territories has lasted centuries. Take for example the clearly illegal British occupation of Gibraltar. There Britain maintains an illegal settlement in open defiance of all international accepted standards of legitimacy and concepts of national rights. Moreover, Britain has placed there an illegal security fence that prevents non-British nationals from entering Gibraltar. This apartheid fence is a human rights atrocity and must be torn down at once. And until it is, the entire world should divest from Britain and boycott British universities. Then there are those clearly illegal British settlements constructed on occupied Argentinian territory in the Falkland Islands. What clearer example is there of the continuing colonial aggression of white European imperialism against the Third World?! But Britain's illegal settlements have also been constructed elsewhere. Britain continues to maintain settlements on the Channel Islands that obviously belong to France. While it is true that Britain earlier ended its occupation of Hong Kong and India, that is no excuse for its settlements elsewhere. After all, Israel ended its occupation of Sinai but that has not stopped the British University and College Union, representing more than 120,000 college-level educators, from voting May 30 to pass a resolution calling for a boycott of Israeli academics and universities as well as a moratorium on European Union funding of Israeli research. And what about Britain's occupation forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. True, Afghanistan and Iraq were terrorist enclaves, but since when does THAT serve as legitimization of dispatch of occupation forces? British professors clearly do not think that Israel has any right to use force against terrorists attacking its population, so why should British forces do so! Of course the very worst cases of illegal British occupation of the territories of The Other are in Wales, Scotland and Ireland. These are occupations imposed upon those oppressed population by force of arms. And in Ireland, the occupation produced genocidal levels of mortality. These occupations have lasted for centuries! The moral indifference by British academics to these continued barbarous occupations and to the denial of self-determination for Scots, Welsh, and the Northern Irish is clearly as unforgivable as the failure of some academics in apartheid South Africa to speak out against abuses there. Moreover, Britain itself is a racist apartheid society. Not only the Welsh, but Moslems, blacks, and Asians suffer from discrimination and disadvantage inside Britain. Their wages are lower than those of white Englishmen and they face discrimination in housing! British universities have failed to redress these inequalities. If divestment from South Africa was justified, how much more so must it be in THIS case. In fact, 27 British professors have ENDORSED our calls for imposing an international boycott of their own universities! These courageous heroic souls must be supported! We have sat in silence for much too long. The time has come. Please join us in calling for an open-ended boycott of British academics and universities until all these cases of occupation are ended! Israeli Professors for Justice and Peace Steven Plaut, Chairperson
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Posted
5/29/2007 03:35:00 PM
1. The Tribulations of Herr Trivers: (followup on earlier item) http://insidehighered.com/news/2007/05/29/lectureand http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/05/27/scientist_says_harvard_canceled_talk/2. The Latest on Nazi Normie: http://chicagojewishnews.com/story.htm?sid=1&id=250747 3. The front page of Yediot Ahronot, Israel's largest daily, today reports that Israel's Ministry of Tourism is planning a major campaign to attract homosexual tourists to Israel. As part of the campaign, the Ministry of Tourism, whose Minister is from the party of Avigdor Lieberman, will advertise gay tourism using a large color photo (which appears on the front page of the paper and can be seen here
http://www.ynet.co.il/PicServer2/20022007/1123952/YE0627491-wa.jpg), showing two men wearing yarmulkas kissing with the Old City of Jerusalem in the background. The Ministry seems to have gotten its symbols confused. While both men wear yarmulkas, the one in the foreground is covered with tattoos. The Torah prohibits tattoos. Come to think of it, it also prohibits sodomy. http://thejewishpress.blogspot.com/2007/05/ministry-of-tourism-in-israel-goes-pink.html 4. The same paper, Yediot, reports that in all of Sderot there is only one homeless person. He is a mute and deaf. He does not hear the Kassam rockets that land. SO the municipality gave him a vibrating beeper. Israel's government is not considering as an alternative to the beeper turning Gaza into a parking lot.
5. The same paper, Yediot, reports that a professor at Ben Gurion University is suspected of having arranged for his son to get a PhD from the same university without having to fulfill the requirements for the degree. The police have been informed. Of course, Ben Gurion University has a long history of trashing academic standards for non-academic reasons, so it is a bit strange seeing the university suddenly upset when one of its professors is accused of doing it for his son.
6. A Japanese politician suspected of accepting bribes just committed suicide. Of course, Japanese politicians have a sense of honor. If Israeli politicians who take bribes committed suicide, who would be left to run th egovernment?
Posted
5/29/2007 12:14:00 PM
An Unstable Academic Threatens Alan Dershowitz By Steven Plaut FrontPageMagazine.com | May 29, 2007 http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28494 (go to article for links) On May 4, 2007, Professor Dershowitz took his campaign against Norman Finkelstein to the Wall Street Journal, publishing an Op-Ed there entitled "Finkelstein's Bigotry". In it Dershowitz again explains why no self-respecting university should employ a fraud and pseudo-scholar like Finkelstein, especially one with widespread ties to Islamic terrorists and anti-Semitic neo-Nazis. Dershowitz notes that Finkelstein brags that "never has one of [his] articles been published in a scientific magazine." By that he means academic journals. Yes, Finkelstein has yet to publish a scholarly article in a refereed academic journal, the sine qua non for tenure at any serious university. His entire "record" consists of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic propaganda "books", which get published on the basis of their commercial potential (bashing Jews is a great seller), not their academic quality. Finkelstein has been fired from every college job he ever held before DePaul. Dershowitz notes that Finkelstein only went to DePaul out of desperation, after "radical Islamist Aminah McCloud -- a follower of Louis Farrakhan -- helped him land a job at DePaul." Dershowitz adds that Finkelstein himself dismisses DePaul as "a third-rate Catholic university." In the Wall Street Journal piece, after reviewing Finkelstein's history of fraud and anti-Jewish bigotry, Dershowitz concludes thus: He (Finkelstein) has encouraged radical goons to email threatening messages; "Look forward to a visit from me," reads one. "Nazis like [you] need to be confronted directly." He has threatened to sue if he loses -- while complaining about outside interference. No university should be afraid of truth -- regardless of its source -- especially when truth consists of Mr. Finkelstein's own words. Whether or not he receives tenure, Mr. Finkelstein will persist in his unscholarly, ad hominems against supporters of Israel, Holocaust survivors and the U.S. But for the time being, the question remains: Will his bigotry receive the imprimatur of the largest Catholic university in the America? Dershowitz was too much a gentleman to reveal to readers of the Wall Street Journal the name of the toady for Finkelstein who sent him the obscene threatening letter in question. But the perp has now "outed" himself. It is none other than Rutgers University professor of anthropology and biology Robert Trivers! Ever since LeRoy Jones, a.k.a. Amiri Baraka, resigned from being New Jersey's resident "poet laureate" thanks to his trashy, anti-Semitic and anti-American"poetry", Trivers has arguably been the Garden State's most notorious "intellectual" extremist. Besides biology, he is renowned as a hater of America and Israel. Trivers is a biologist, and . unlike most political extremists of his ilk . actually has academic publications to his name, even distinguished ones. He is also a close crony of Noam Chomsky and collaborates with Chomsky in producing leftist agitprop. Here is a sample of the wisdom of Trivers-cum-Chomsky: "We find repeatedly now.in wasps, in birds and in monkeys.that when organisms realize they're being deceived they get pissed off. And they often attack the deceiver." The two also claim there that the American government intentionally let the Challenger space shuttle blow up. Trivers' letter in the Wall Street Journal taking credit for sending vulgar threats to Dershowitz follows in full: What I Said to Dershowitz Wall Street Journal, May 23, 2007; Page A15 In regard to Alan Dershowitz's commentary "Finkelstein's Bigotry" (editorial page, May 4): In it he asserts that "He [Norman Finkelstein] has encouraged radical goons to email threatening messages; 'Look forward to a visit from me,' reads one. 'Nazis like [you] need to be confronted directly.'" But all of this is untrue. I wrote the letter in question (April 15, 2007), but without Prof. Finkelstein's knowledge, interest or approval. The key sentences had nothing to do with Prof. Finkelstein: "Regarding your rationalization of Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilians, let me just say that if there is a repeat of Israeli butchery toward Lebanon and if you decide once again to rationalize it publicly, look forward to a visit from me. Nazis -- and Nazi-like apologists such as yourself -- need to be confronted directly." As for being an academic goon: I am late responding because I was in Europe lecturing after receiving the Crafoord Prize from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. Robert Trivers Professor of Anthropology and Biological Sciences Rutgers University Somerset, N.J. His juvenile boasting about getting a biology prize aside, Trivers is not best known for his biological writings at all but rather for his long collaboration with Huey Newton and the Black Panthers. Perhaps it is not surprising that someone who cheers Hizbollah terrorism and thinks Israel practices "butchery" when it retaliates against the Hizbollah should also have long served as an apologist for Afrofascist racism and American domestic terrorists. Trivers started his academic career at Harvard. As a Harvard undergraduate he had a nervous breakdown and was denied admissions into the University's Law program. Instead, he moved into biology in 1967 to study lizards. After getting his PhD, he taught at Harvard for a while but got turned down for tenure. In embittered response, he stopped academic work altogether for many years. The Guardian (UK) on August 27, 2005 wrote, "Robert Trivers could have been one of the great romantic heroes of 20th-century science if he'd died in the '70s, as some people supposed he would." Early on, he proposed a theory about the effects on the gender of offspring in animals that was later largely debunked. From Harvard he moved to the University of California at Santa Cruz, long a hotbed of political radicalism. (UCSC employed Angela Davis gave the Black Panthers' Huey Newton a "PhD".) Trivers later described the move to UCSC thus: "It was a once-in-a-lifetime mistake, in the sense that I can't afford to make another one like that. I survived, and I helped raise my children for a while; but that was all." Biological research having lost its attraction for him at the time, he devoted his energies to the Black Panthers. According to John Brockman as cited in the Boston Globe, ''Over the years there were rumors about a series of breakdowns; he was in Jamaica; in jail. He fell off the map.'' He established contact with Huey Newton while the latter was in prison. Newton liked Trivers' theories about "self-deception." They became close chums. Trivers officially joined the Panthers in 1979. He turned out articles for them claiming that IQ tests were being used to oppress black folks. Newton and his co-terrorists were willing to forgive Trivers the fact that he is white. Trivers had grown up in Jamaica; his father was a Jewish refugee from Lithuania. (Burney Le Boeufas calls him "the blackest white man I know.") Trivers published "research" together with Newton, including an analysis of the role of self-deception by the flight crew in the crash of Air Florida Flight 90 (Trivers, R.L. & Newton, H.P. Science Digest 'The crash of flight 90: doomed by self-deception?' November 1982). Newton was godfather to Trivers' youngest daughter. Trivers still features large in the "Dr. Huey Newton" collection at Stanford University. Trivers has never abandoned his leftist extremism and PC wackiness. Trivers' career includes ten days in a police lock-up over a disputed hotel bill. According to the Guardian, " His language matches the macho clothes: for an Ivy League professor, he says 'fuck' a lot." Trivers thinks population growth and "reproductive success" (which drives evolution) are more dangerous than nuclear war and endorses zero-population growth. At Rutgers he has been involved in "Palestinian solidarity" activities and efforts to "divest" from Israel. As the Wall Street Journal letter shows, Trivers thinks Israel defending itself from terrorist aggression is "butchery", and we can just imagine what he thinks of the unjustified American "aggression" against Iwo Jima in World War II. Trivers has tried to deploy his biological theories on "self-deception" as ammunition for the Left's attempt to force an American capitulation in Iraq. He says: "Then the 1990s, the era of Clinton and feel-goodism: when he lied, nobody died. Well, half a million Iraqis died in the 1990s, and that's just counting children, .. I fear that we'll spend our lives always describing in retrospect what deceit and self-deception just did to us and not getting to the point where we can try to prevent some of the bullshit ahead of time." So much for his scientific discourse and accuracy. 2.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28469 The Islamic Reconquest of Palestine By P. David Hornik FrontPageMagazine.com | May 29, 2007 3. Fighting the Jihadists at UCI http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28497
4. Well, the Labor Party primaries are over and the Labor Party members basically demonstrated that they do not want any of the three candidates to lead the party. I share those sentiments. None of the contenders got the required 40% of the primary votes. That means the two with the most votes now will face one another in a runoff.
Thosee two are both incompetent leftwing capitulationist McClellenist ex-generals. The Labor party often choses as its leaders incompetent leftwing capitulationist McClellenist ex-generals. The Labor Party thinks that if it is headed by an ex-general, then the voters will overlook the fact that it is a party of national self-annihilation, capitulation, incompetence and corruption. The two ex-generals now facing one another in the runoff are Ehud Barak, known in these quarters as Ehud NeBARAKnezzer, thanks to his attempt at destroying Jerusalem in 2000 by offering it to the Palestinian Authority, and Ami Ayalon, the bald version of Yossi Beilin. Ayalon was head of Israel's navy and later of military intelligence and so bears blame for some of the collosal failures of Israeli military intelligence. Barak is the sleazy corrupt politician who was Prime Minister from 1999-2001 and who invited the Hezbollah to drop 4000 katyusha rockets on Israeli civilians when he ordered Israel's cowardly unilateral surrender to the Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in 2000. What a choice! The kingmaker in all this is Amir Peretz, who will auction off his contingent of 22% of Labor Party members (who voted for him in the primaries) to the ex-general making him the best set of promises. 5. Israel's contribution to Western security: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3405913,00.html 6. The Suspense is Over! Syria's Assad wins second term Some 97.62 percent of voters reelect Bashar Assad, interior minister says
Monday, May 28, 2007
Posted
5/28/2007 01:10:00 PM
1. Holocaust Denial on University of Haifa Chat List http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Blog.aspx/1#2161 2. A rare non-treasonous Op-Ed in Haaretz: Sderot is us By Ari Shavit
Every night, Sderot Mayor Eli Moyal tours his city, checking the number of houses with lights on. Last week the number of lights dropped each evening. On the eve of Shavuot it reached a nadir. Whole apartment blocks stood empty. On the street where Moyal himself lives only a few residents remained. At its height, Sderot had a population of 24,000, the exhausted mayor says. In recent years, when the Qassam attacks mounted, the number fell to about 20,000. But now, with the refugees whom Hamas chased out being scattered throughout the country, no more than 10,000 people remain in the city. And suddenly the feeling is that perhaps it has really happened: Perhaps Sderot has been broken. But Sderot has still not been broken. If the rocket attacks cease, most people will return. Without security, without hope, without happiness - a depressing return to no-choice. So the basic fact remains: Sderot 2007 is a city that seems cursed. A frontier city with no home front. A frontier city with no aura of heroism. A frontier city that the government should protect, but isn't protecting. A frontier city that the nation should be standing behind, but is not. A frontier city abandoned by the center of the country. It should not have been like this. Sderot is not Gush Katif. There is no debate. On the contrary: Sderot is a "Green Line" city. Sderot is a post-withdrawal city. Sderot is the righteous Israeli city after the occupation. Sderot is the future. Indeed, it is the litmus test that will teach us in real time what we can expect in the future when we withdraw completely. This being the case, Sderot should have been the apple of the eye of all those preaching withdrawal in the past, and of everyone who still believes in withdrawal. Sderot should have been the city of peace writers and peace singers and peace industrialists. A "peace now" city. A city of Israeli solidarity. A city of mutual responsibility. A city where strong Israelis stand together with Israelis who are less strong in the face of Islamic zealotry. All this is not happening. Bank Hapoalim is funding the new emergency center there. But the large sum needed to renovate the city's shelters was raised by American evangelical Christians. The major community work in the city is being done by Hanan Porat. Yitzhak Mordechai is working in Sderot, and Arcadi Gaydamak is amusing himself there in the absence of the center of the country. Enlightened, satiated Israel is not standing with all its strength behind Sderot. The attack on Sderot is a strategic attack on peace. It is an attack on the two-state solution. If the attack succeeds, there will be no chance of any future withdrawal. If the attack succeeds, the occupation will be perpetuated. Therefore, before the great political decision is made on how to act in Gaza, a moral decision has to be made about Sderot. Sderot must become the national project of the current period. Its residents cannot be expected to confront the Qassams alone. In the face of buses removing people from the city, buses of supporters must set out for it. In the face of the economic collapse of Sderot should come an unprecedented economic embrace of it by government and nongovernment bodies alike. At the same time, it should be made clear that there is one law for Sderot and Tzahala: A Qassam on Sderot is like a Qassam on Kikar Hamedina. The insensitivity has got to stop. Sderot has to be defined as the Israeli front line. The struggle for the city should be viewed as both a struggle for Israeli sovereignty and as a symbol of the responsibility of Israelis for each other. Sderot is us, all of us. We rise and fall with Sderot. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=863798 http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/863798.html 3. Ehud NeBARAKnezzer: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3404840,00.html 4. May 26, 2007
COMMENTARY: THE WEEKEND INTERVIEW By STAFF Dealing With Iran By JAMES TARANTO May 26, 2007; Page A9 NEW YORK -- Benjamin Netanyahu runs a few minutes late for our Monday afternoon meeting. When he arrives in his midtown Manhattan hotel suite, he explains that he has just received word from home of the latest Palestinian war crime. "Hamas fired 15 rockets into Israel today. One of them hit a car, killed a woman," says Mr. Netanyahu, the former Israeli prime minister and now leader of the opposition. The victim, 32-year-old Shirel Friedman, was on her way to see her mother. For the 57-year-old Mr. Netanyahu, there is a sort of grim vindication in such attacks. He quit the government of then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in August 2005, objecting to Mr. Sharon's plan for unilateral withdrawal from Gaza. "I had a very big argument with him on this," Mr. Netanyahu recalls. "He thought that we would have the right of free action -- that we would garner international support for any reaction. I thought that is a very thin sheet of ice -- the international community can turn against you as quickly as it turns for you -- but the overwhelming fact is that the Muslim militants and Iran will find a new base, a few miles from Tel Aviv, with the ability to cover the south of the country and the center of the country with rockets." Five years earlier, Ehud Barak, Mr. Netanyahu's successor as prime minister, had similarly withdrawn from southern Lebanon, creating a safe haven for Hezbollah, which has periodically rocketed cities in Israel's north. In both cases, Mr. Netanyahu says, Israel's leaders were "captivated by a concept, and the concept was that we purchase security from retreat, from withdrawals -- that is, that the way to stop the attacks on us is to placate our enemies by unilaterally withdrawing from territory under our control, thereby robbing them of the pretext to attack us. In fact, this was interpreted exactly in the opposite manner. . . . It was interpreted not as a sign of strength but as a show of weakness."
"There is not much difference" between Hezbollah and Hamas, Mr. Netanyahu says. "They are both supported by Iran, supplied by Iran, inspired by Iran." They share a common goal, "to get us to withdraw from more territory -- of course this time not so-called occupied territory, but Israel proper. For them, any inch of Israel is occupied territory, and the 'liberation' will be culminated when Israel ceases to exist." Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, made that clear in 2005, when he declared that "Israel must be wiped off the map" -- a particularly chilling pronouncement given that his regime is seeking weapons that would make it capable of doing just that. "This could be the rise of the first undeterrable, fanatical nuclear power in the world," says Mr. Netanyahu. "It's an apocalyptic, messianic sect that could possess nuclear weapons, to the detriment of all mankind." How to deal with the Iranian nuclear threat has proved a conundrum for America and the West, including Israel. Mr. Netanyahu acknowledges that military strikes would pose "complications and difficulties" and thus "should be a last resort." But diplomacy has been tried for several years with scant results. Mr. Netanyahu proposes a third way. The Iranian regime, he argues, is economically vulnerable. He is in America to urge state and local pension funds to divest from foreign companies that do business in Iran (U.S. law already keeps American firms out). "This could be very effective," he tells me, "because Iran is in desperate need of new investments for its sagging oil industry. It's curtailed its oil production by 7%, I think, in each of the last three years. It's running unemployment to a rate of close to 20%, and Ahmadinejad is continuously being criticized from rivals within the regime and outside the regime for failing to deliver on economic problems." Divestment "could stop Iran dead in its tracks," Mr. Netanyahu argues. "We're talking about several dozen companies . . . that are propping up the energy sector in Iran and a few other relevant sectors. They are eminently susceptible to stock prices. Their chief executives are compensated by stock prices. Divestment depresses stock prices and immediately forces reconsideration." This in turn would squeeze "Iranian economic elites," who Mr. Netanyahu says are motivated by money, not ideology. "That elite funds and finances a lot of politicians, and when they see their own holdings and their own businesses endangered, they'll put pressure to either block the nuclear program or to change the regime." Mr. Netanyahu believes Americans across the political spectrum could unite behind the principle that "a regime that promotes genocide cannot receive American taxpayers' savings . . . through European intermediaries." And the idea is catching on. Last year Missouri's treasurer, Sarah Steelman, established a terror-free mutual fund and spearheaded a move to divest the $6.9 billion State Employees Retirement System from companies that do business in Iran and other terror-supporting nations. Earlier this month Florida's Legislature unanimously approved a bill mandating divestment from companies with ties to Iran or Sudan. On Capitol Hill, Sens. Barack Obama (D., Ill.) and Sam Brownback (R., Kan.) have introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, which would create a federal list of investors in Iran and shield fund managers from lawsuits if they disinvest. The big prize, of course, is California, whose $247 billion pension fund is the nation's biggest. "I spoke to Gov. [Arnold] Schwarzenegger on this a few weeks ago," Mr. Netanyahu says. "He said he'd look into it. I'm going to call him, possibly before I leave tonight." On Tuesday an official from the Israeli Embassy in Washington emailed me that Mr. Netanyahu "did get in touch with Governor Schwarzenegger yesterday. . . . The Governor was aware of the divestment bill and said that it may get passed by the end of the summer." With Democrats seeking retreat from Iraq, bipartisanship is in short supply in America just now. Two days after Mr. Netanyahu and I spoke, a major presidential candidate for the first time announced that he no longer even believes there is a "global war on terror." John Edwards, who voted for the Iraq war in 2002, now dismisses the entire war on terror as "a slogan designed only for politics . . . a bumper sticker, not a plan." I ask Mr. Netanyahu if the U.S. made a mistake in liberating Iraq. He says it did not: "I think it was right to bring down Saddam Hussein, who murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people." But he brings the discussion back to Iran. "It would have been prudent to use the rapidity of success of victory -- that is, the fact that the U.S. had accomplished in three weeks what Iran couldn't accomplish in 10 years and a million casualties -- to deliver a stern warning to Iran to dismantle its nuclear program. In a way, this was achieved without design with Libya's nuclear program that had been much more advanced than anyone understood. . . . That same leverage could have been used on Iran." If Mr. Netanyahu seems preoccupied with Iran, it is not because he is dismissive of other threats, including al Qaeda. "Of the two, Iran is more dangerous, because the Sunni militants so far have not gotten their hands on a nuclear weapons program. . . . If the Taliban were to topple the current regime in Pakistan and get their hands on nuclear weapons, I would say they're more dangerous than Iran, or equally dangerous." He sees al Qaeda as existing on a continuum with Tehran's Shiite fundamentalists: "They're now competing with each other on the soil of Lebanon to gain paramountcy -- al Qaeda in the north and Hezbollah in the south. But both of them practice suicide attacks, both of them have the cult of death, and both of them are absolutely uninhibited in the use of force against their chosen enemies. Now, is there a difference? Yeah, I suppose. I think one wants to send us back to the ninth century and one wants to send us back to the seventh century." The Shiite extremists, Mr. Netanyahu quips, "give us two centuries extra." Yet he is careful to distinguish between "militant Islam" and the broader Muslim population. "Militant Islam condemns and intimidates and kills Muslims before anyone else. That's what they're about. The infidels are defined first as the renegades of Islam -- that is, Muslims who do not practice some . . . pre-medieval religious creed that is hopelessly antiquated for most Muslims and most Arabs." Because of the militants' power to intimidate and the weak civic institutions in Arab societies, Mr. Netanyahu is wary of pushing those societies too quickly toward electoral democracy. He thinks it was a mistake to allow Hamas to compete in last year's Palestinian voting. "But I think that one element that should be expedited as rapidly as possible is the democratization of markets. I think that expanding economic freedom is just as important -- in some cases more important -- in moderating societies than accelerated moves to political freedoms without the proper democratic institutions." I ask if he can point to any positive examples in the Arab world. "How about Dubai? How about the Gulf states? What you see there is quite remarkable. It also tells you that Arabs and Muslims are not inherently or genetically programmed to oppose free markets. That's just nonsense. With the right system of incentives and economic freedoms, you see this explosive growth that I, frankly, admire. . . . We always said that if we have peace, then we'll have prosperity. It may be the other way around." In the aftermath of last summer's war with Hezbollah, public confidence in Israel's government has hit bottom. Recent opinion polls give Prime Minister Ehud Olmert a dismal 3% approval rating. Mr. Netanyahu is happy to pile on: "The right strategy . . . is to use superior force, come in from their rear, at their most vulnerable point, and use a lot of ground power to physically eliminate them. . . . None of this was done, and the people felt that this failure was too stinging to be left alone, so they want a change of government." He faults the government for "lack of experience . . . lack of decisiveness, lack of leadership." And he worries that Israel faces near-term threats on three fronts: Lebanon, Gaza and Syria, "which is arming feverishly." Is a political comeback in his future? "I hope that we can get to elections as soon as possible," he says. "But that's a decision for 61 out of 120 Knesset members to make, and they're not going to readily part with their jobs." Mr. Taranto is editor of OpinionJournal.com1. URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118014371809915480.html Hyperlinks in this Article: (1) http://OpinionJournal.com
5. This made my day: http://www.israellycool.com/blog/_archives/2007/5/26/2977321.html 6. Elect Ehud Barak and Make Haifa look like this again thanks to thousands more Katyushas: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3385759,00.html
7. Mega-Moonbat Reuven Kaminer, an anti-Israel extremist, has a conniption over Israel Academia Monitor. They must be doing something right!: http://www.reuvenkaminer.com/english/?p=115 'Some of you may have come across a group of right wing Jewish loonies on the internet by the name "Israel-academic-monitors (sic)." Well, the loonies have a zombie machine that scans the net for any appearance by a democratic (sic) Israeli academician. Automatically, they send out links to what they consider "anti-Israeli" or anti-Semitic statements made by that academician. Well, the loonies' zombie machine sighted Baruch Kimmerling's name in articles on his death and sure enough, the emails warning the world about Baruch Kimmerling are now scattered all over the net. Of course, they - the monitors - would explain that it is all automatic. Even so, I ask them, gentlemen, have you no shame?' Dirt on Kaminer:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/002425.php#c27648 Kaminer is a mini-chief in the Stalinist HADASH Arab communist party: http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/kaminer261005.html 8. It is always pleasant to see one of Israel's Oslo lefties return to planet earth. Ben Kaspit is an establishment leftist who is one of the main columnists in Maariv. He has long supported Oslo self-annihilation and capitulation. Well, on May 17, 07 he wrote (my translation):
"The vision of murderous gangs, chaos, and Islamist extremism at the gates of Ashkelon is now being realized as we watch. This is the grand and colossal failure of the Gaza Withdrawal.... We are now paying the price for that." Welcome to the campus of the University of Duh.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Posted
5/26/2007 09:19:00 PM
The Road Map of the Harlot by Steven Plaut There are legends about her origins. Some say she is the very snake from the Garden of Eden itself. She reappears in different forms and under different names throughout human history. Many regard her as a she-demon from the netherworld. Everywhere, she has the same Modus Operandi: Come and show me your true vulnerability, she cried, and I promise we will live in peace forever, trust me. If you doubt my sincerity then YOU are the villain!
But she is best known to us as Delilah, the harlot of Gaza. It was then that Samson went to her and lay with her. Reveal to me your true vulnerability, she insisted. I will not use it against you. Trust me. We will dwell together in peace. But he was shrewd. Piece of cake, he teased, all you have to do is bind me up with seven vines that were never dried. And no sooner did he offer her this goodwill gesture for peace than her Tanzim descended upon him and bound him with the very same vines. Death to the Occupier, she screamed. In fire and spirit we will redeem thee, oh Gaza. But he broke those bindings like thread and launched a reprisal raid for which the entire world condemned him as aggressor. You colonialist imperialist, she sneered. Make fun of my Peace of the Brave, will you? But Samson was under pressure from the entire world, including the White Pyramid, to smooth things over with the harlot. Reveal to me your true vulnerability, she insisted. So what if last time I used it to entrap you? This time I am sincere. Oh, alright, he agreed. Anything for some shut-eye. If you bind me with brand new ropes from Sears that have never been used before, I will be as weak as a newborn kitten. Rapid-eye-movement sleep had barely set in when the Tanzim leaped into the boudoir. Death to the Occupier, screamed the harlot, and her militia men attacked the sleeping paratrooper. But he arose and implemented a campaign of targeted assassinations against his tormentors. What, again you mock me? Where is your sense of trust?, sighed the harlot. And now the White Pyramid was getting impatient. It wanted the Philistines pacified so that it could pursue its campaign against the Chaldeans. I was just testing you, said Samson all goo-goo eyed. Now that I know you are my sincere sweet turtle dove, I will let you in on my true secret. Just weave seven locks of my hair into a Valentine's card, and I will be as Silly Putty in your hands. She did, but he just tore them off, got up and walked out. You cad, she wailed. You demon! The White Pyramid was really getting irritated now with the obstinacy of the guy and Belgium was going to try him for war crimes having to do with the foxes with burning tails ruining the fields of the Philistines. She is sincere this time, insisted the Secretary of State, you must put her good will to the test. That is true, insisted the Euro eunuchs. The Council of Kingdoms denounced the warrior as an aggressor. Professors from the tribe of Dan insisted that the Philistines were sincerely interested in making Peace Now. The Post-Zionist followers of Bilaam were calling for international sanctions against him. Human rights activists were demanding that he stop taunting the harlot. Oh alright, sighed the warrior in appeasement, if not in utter exhaustion. If you give me a Marine crew cut, then I will be as helpless as a chad gadya. But you gotta cross your heart and promise this time, and no more of your tricks! This time, you better be sincere. We know what followed. Samson eventually did get his revenge, but at the cost of his own Oslo-like self-destruction. But what ever became of the harlot of Gaza? The Bible is silent about that. Was she in that pagan temple brought down upon the heads of the savage in his feat of targeted assassination? Apparently not, or it would have been so noted. The she-demon wandered the world, showing up in unexpected places. She married King Ahab and sent out her shaheeds to murder the prophets of God. She tried to lure Odysseus to his destruction. She was almost captured in Salem, Massachusetts. She possessed the souls of the world leaders in the 1930s, as they submitted themselves to her charms. Show me your true vulnerability, she cooed. And after each round, her terror Tanzim stormed in and carried out atrocities, only to be followed by new flirtations and new peace programs based on the same old theme: Trust me, so what if I lied to you in the past, this time I am sincere. She went into hiding again until 1992. It was then that she crept out from her grotto beneath the fever swamp and once again painted her harlot face. Stepping upon the shore in her old Gaza stomping grounds, she sighed and taunted. Show me your true vulnerability, she said. Trust me, I only want to know out of curiosity. I would never use it against you. This is my sincere peace offer. And like Delilah of old, and like Delilah's love-struck gargantuan paramour, time after time she repeats the same strategy and he responds with the same tributes of puppy love. Her suitor never learns from her past behavior, never wises up, never tires of self-delusion. After each betrayal, she returns with the same siren call. Just expose your vulnerability to me. Just place your neck in this friendly noose. It is for peace, you see. So what if I lied to you every single time in the past. It was all because YOU did not truly trust me, she responds with melodramatically hurt feelings. You never went all the way, placing your very existence in my hands. And until you abandon your suspicions and obstinacy, until you show me your true love, by accepting my Road Map and placing your neck in my noose, we have nothing to talk about and the rockets will continue to fly.
Friday, May 25, 2007
Posted
5/25/2007 12:00:00 PM
1. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/862876.html Haaretz, Last update - 18:34 24/05/2007 Report: Nobel laureate cancels U.K. trip over 'widespread anti-Israel, anti-Semitic current' By Haaretz Service An American Nobel prize laureate has withdrawn from a speaking engagement at a London university, citing anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiment in the United Kingdom, a British newspaper reported Thursday. According to The Guardian, Professor Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas told the Imperial College that his decision was motivated by a move by Britain's National Union of Journalists to boycott Israeli products. Weinberg had been due to honor Pakistani physicist Abdus Salam, a co-winner of the 1979 Nobel Prize for physics, The Guardian said. The paper quoted Weinberg as telling the college that he believes the NUJ's move stems from the "desire to pander to the growing Muslim minority in Britain." In his letter of withdrawal, Weinberg wrote that, "given the history of the attacks on Israel and the oppressiveness and aggressiveness of other countries in the Middle East and elsewhere, boycotting Israel indicated a moral blindness for which it is hard to find any explanation other than anti-Semitism." The Guardian said that Weinberg also pulled out of a 2006 conference at Durham University due to a boycott of Israeli academics imposed by lecturers' union NATFHE. 2. Mikey Lerner's Moonbat Black Anti-Semite Friend: http://www.frontpagemag.com/blog/index.asp 3. Leftist Uber-Moonbat Aviad Kleinberg, history prof at Tel Aviv University, finds some subversion: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3404201,00.html 4. The Kassamization of Israeli Arabs: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708666171&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull 5. Chozer B'tshuva: May 25, 2007 Wall St Journal How to End 'Islamophobia' By TAWFIK HAMID May 25, 2007; Page A15 Islamic organizations regularly accuse non-Muslims of "Islamophobia," a fear and disdain for everything Islamic. On May 17, this accusation bubbled up again as foreign ministers from the Organization of the Islamic Conference called Islamophobia "the worst form of terrorism." These ministers also warned, according to the Arab News, that this form of discrimination would cause millions of Muslims in Western countries, "many of whom were already underprivileged," to be "further alienated." In America, perhaps the most conspicuous organization to persistently accuse opponents of Islamophobia is the Council of American Islamic Relations. CAIR has taken up the legal case of the "Flying Imams," the six individuals who were pulled from a US Airways flight in Minneapolis this past November after engaging in suspicious behavior before takeoff. Not long ago, CAIR filed a "John Doe" lawsuit that would have made passengers liable for "malicious" complaints about suspicious Muslim passengers. In an interview at the time, CAIR spokesman Nihad Awad accused Rep. Peter King (R., N.Y.) of being an "extremist" who "encourages Islamophobia" for pointing out what most people would think is obvious, that such a lawsuit would have a chilling effect on passengers who witnessed alarming activity and wished to report it. We can only assume that Mr. Awad believes flyers should passively remain in a state of fear as they travel and submissively risk their lives. In this case, Congress is acting appropriately and considering passing a law sponsored by Mr. King that would grant passengers immunity from such lawsuits. It may seem bizarre, but Islamic reformers are not immune to the charge of "Islamophobia" either. For 20 years, I have preached a reformed interpretation of Islam that teaches peace and respects human rights. I have consistently spoken out -- with dozens of other Muslim and Arab reformers -- against the mistreatment of women, gays and religious minorities in the Islamic world. We have pointed out the violent teachings of Salafism and the imperative of Westerners to protect themselves against it. Yet according to CAIR's Michigan spokeswoman, Zeinab Chami, I am "the latest weapon in the Islamophobe arsenal." If standing against the violent edicts of Shariah law is "Islamophobic," then I will treat her accusation as a badge of honor. Muslims must ask what prompts this "phobia" in the first place. When we in the West examine the worldwide atrocities perpetrated daily in the name of Islam, it is vital to question if we -- Muslims -- should lay the blame on others for Islamophobia or if we should first look hard at ourselves. According to a recent Pew Global Attitudes survey, "younger Muslims in the U.S. are much more likely than older Muslim Americans to say that suicide bombing in the defense of Islam can be at least sometimes justified." About one out of every four American Muslims under 30 think suicide bombing in defense of Islam is justified in at least some circumstances. Twenty-eight percent believe that Muslims did not carry out the 9/11 attacks and 32% declined to answer that question. While the survey has been represented in the media as proof of moderation among American Muslims, the actual results should yield the opposite conclusion. If, as the Pew study estimates, there are 2.35 million Muslims in America, that means there are a substantial number of people in the U.S. who think suicide bombing is sometimes justified. Similarly, if 5% of American Muslims support al Qaeda, that's more than 100,000 people. To bring an end to Islamophobia, we must employ a holistic approach that treats the core of the disease. It will not suffice to merely suppress the symptoms. It is imperative to adopt new Islamic teachings that do not allow killing apostates (Redda Law). Islamic authorities must provide mainstream Islamic books that forbid polygamy and beating women. Accepted Islamic doctrine should take a strong stand against slavery and the raping of female war prisoners, as happens in Darfur under the explicit canons of Shariah ("Ma Malakat Aimanikum"). Muslims should teach, everywhere and universally, that a woman's testimony in court counts as much as a man's, that women should not be punished if they marry whom they please or dress as they wish. We Muslims should publicly show our strong disapproval for the growing number of attacks by Muslims against other faiths and against other Muslims. Let us not even dwell on 9/11, Madrid, London, Bali and countless other scenes of carnage. It has been estimated that of the two million refugees fleeing Islamic terror in Iraq, 40% are Christian, and many of them seek a haven in Lebanon, where the Christian population itself has declined by 60%. Even in Turkey, Islamists recently found it necessary to slit the throats of three Christians for publishing Bibles. Of course, Islamist attacks are not limited to Christians and Jews. Why do we hear no Muslim condemnation of the ongoing slaughter of Buddhists in Thailand by Islamic groups? Why was there silence over the Mumbai train bombings which took the lives of over 200 Hindus in 2006? We must not forget that innocent Muslims, too, are suffering. Indeed, the most common murderers of Muslims are, and have always been, other Muslims. Where is the Muslim outcry over the Sunni-Shiite violence in Iraq? Islamophobia could end when masses of Muslims demonstrate in the streets against videos displaying innocent people being beheaded with the same vigor we employ against airlines, Israel and cartoons of Muhammad. It might cease when Muslims unambiguously and publicly insist that Shariah law should have no binding legal status in free, democratic societies. It is well past time that Muslims cease using the charge of "Islamophobia" as a tool to intimidate and blackmail those who speak up against suspicious passengers and against those who rightly criticize current Islamic practices and preachings. Instead, Muslims must engage in honest and humble introspection. Muslims should -- must -- develop strategies to rescue our religion by combating the tyranny of Salafi Islam and its dreadful consequences. Among more important outcomes, this will also put an end to so-called Islamophobia. Dr. Hamid, a onetime member of Jemaah Islamiya, an Islamist terrorist group, is a medical doctor and Muslim reformer living in the West. URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118006099020814345.html
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Posted
5/22/2007 05:30:00 PM
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Blog.aspx/1#2155Hide the Twinkies by Steven Plaut YNET News reports that Oprah Winfrey (which probably should be spelled Wingfry) will be waddling into town.
Oprah has a history of running Israel-bashing pro-Palestinian articles in a magazine she publishes: "O" Magazine. She also has made insensitive and ignorant comments about the Holocaust. Whenever the subject of terrorism is broached on her show, Oprah studiously avoids allowing anyone to link it to Palestinians or the Hizbollah. She interviewed mothers of suicide bombers who were distraught because their houses were bulldozed. There was no mention of Israeli babies and their mothers being blown up in buses, pizza parlours blown to smithereens, nor Jewish teens murdered while at the disco in Tel Aviv. Not even the Jews murdered when two guests of the International Solidarity Movement blew up Mike's Place in Tel Aviv. Debbie Schlussel has dubbed her the affable Joseph Goebbels of daytime talk TV. Columnist Naomi Ragen demolished Oprah for her politicized bias. The Anti-Defamation League has denounced her for bias, noting that 'Palestinian girls will be rescued when their leaders say "No" to the incitement, hate and violence that has permeated their political and cultural landscape for years now.' Maybe she can analyze the problems of self-esteem among suicide bombers and other terrorists. Israel may need Doctor Phil to treat us after Oprah leaves town, to return to her bored overeating overspending housewives with the closet reorganization crises. 2. The ISM terrorizes along with the Hamas: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7140
3. Herr Finkelstein and Penn: http://img103.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dailypennsylvanianadrw5.jpg
Posted
5/22/2007 10:19:00 AM
1. Subject: The "Then Maybe They Will" Doctrine The "THEN MAYBE THEY WILL" Doctrine
By Steven Plaut For the past 30 years the Israeli political establishment has been a prisoner of the "THEN MAYBE THEY WILL" doctrine. Each and every major policy decision made by Israel's political establishment has reflected the power of wishful thinking and faith in the make-pretend. ******************************************************** If Israel gives Sinai back to the Egyptians THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop the Nazi-like anti-Semitic propaganda in state-run media. If Israel gives Sinai back to the Egyptians THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop the smuggling of explosives and weapons from Egypt to Palestinian terrorists. If Israel "recognizes" the "Palestinian people," THEN MAYBE THEY WILL recognize Israel. If Israel agrees to limited autonomy for "Palestinian" Arabs at Camp David, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop seeking Israel's destruction and the world will not try to set up an independent Palestinian Arab terror state. If Israel recognizes the right of the "Palestinian people" to self-determination, THEN MAYBE THE ARABS WILL recognize the right of Jews to self-determination. If Israel grants its Arab citizens affirmative action preferences, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop cheering terrorists and stop seeking the annihilation of Israel and of its Jewish population. If Israel turns the other cheek after Kassam rocket attacks from Gaza, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop being fired. If Israel ignores Hezbollah border violations, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop too. If Israel provides the "Palestinian Authority" with arms and funds, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not be used for terror atrocities against Israel. If Israel conducts a unilateral withdrawal from all of southern Lebanon and allows the Hizbollah to station rockets on the border, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not shoot any. If Israel officially agrees to let the "Palestinians" have a state, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL abandon their agenda of annihilating Israel. If Israel turns the Gaza Strip over to the Palestinians, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not use it as a base for terror attacks against Israel. If Israel grants all religions unlimited freedom in Jerusalem, including Moslem control of the Temple Mount, THEN MAYBE THE WORLD WILL acknowledge the legitimacy of Israeli control of the city. If Israeli politicians pay for 75% of the costs of Israeli universities, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not become centers for anti-Israel leftist sedition. If Israel expels all the Jewish settlers from Gaza as a gesture of friendship towards the Palestinians, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL reciprocate with friendship towards the Jews. If Israel refrains from retaliating against the Hizbollah terrorists after they murder captive Israeli soldiers in cold blood, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not seek to kidnap any more soldiers. If Israel allows the Palestinians to hold "elections", THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not elect the Hamas. If the Palestinians elect the Hamas, THEN MAYBE IT WILL not pursue a program of aggression and terrorism against Israel. If Israel refrains from retaliation after dozens of Kassam rockets turn Sderot into the Israeli Guernica, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop all by themselves. If Israel sets free thousands of jailed Palestinian terrorists, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL renounce violence and not murder any more Jews. If Israel allows bands of far-leftist traitors to seize control of many departments in its universities, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not collaborate with Israel's enemies. If Israel allows dozens of foreign "solidarity" protesters to enter Israel for purposes of helping terrorism, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not attack Israeli soldiers and police violently nor collaborate with terrorists. If Israel sits back while the Syrians exert their hegemony over Lebanon, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL rein in the Hizbollah and stop border attacks on Israel. If Israel agrees to hold talks with representatives of the PLO, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL put a stop to Palestinian terrorism. If Israel agrees to hold talks with representatives of the PLO, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL suppress the Hamas and Jihad terrorists and prevent the Hamas from taking power within the "Palestinian Authority." If Israel holds talks with terrorists, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL renounce their genocidal ambitions and seek peace. If the Israeli courts and Attorney General suppress freedom of speech for anti-Oslo dissidents, THEN MAYBE THE ARABS WILL stop anti-Semitic incitement. If Israeli politicians raise the minimum wage, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not thus cause unemployment to skyrocket. If Israel agrees to one ceasefire after another with the Arabs, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL eventually comply with one. If Israel criminalizes and bans "radical" Jewish dissident organizations, THEN MAYBE THE ARABS WILL do the same with Arab terrorist groups. If Israel sets up street signs in Arabic and otherwise demonstrates its goodwill towards Arabs with endless gestures, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL reciprocate with renunciation of hatred and violence against Israel. If Israel agrees to the stationing of UN troops in Lebanon, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL actually do something to stop terror attacks on Israel. If Israel allows Arabs in Israel to build illegally, including on public lands, turning a blind eye to violations, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL become pro-Israel and loyal. If Israel agrees to let the Moslems control the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL respond with friendship and moderation. If Israel overfunds Arab municipalities, covering their fiscal deficits run up intentionally, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL become pro-Israel and loyal. If the Israeli media and chattering classes demonize the settlers, THEN MAYBE THE ARABS WILL want to make peace with Israel. If Israel returns the Golan Heights to Syria THEN MAYBE SYRIA WILL seek peace and reject the idea of using the Heights again to attack Israel. If Israel allows the "Palestinian Authority" to control parts of the West Bank, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL not fire rockets at the Jews the same way they do from Gaza. If Israel agrees not to build weapons of mass destruction, THEN MAYBE THE ARABS AND IRANIANS WILL not seek to build any either. If Israel agrees to evacuate the Jews from the Negev, THEN MAYBE THEY WILL stop firing Kassam rockets at Israel. If Israel agrees to place its neck in the Oslo noose, THEN MAYBE THE ARABS WILL not pull the rope. 2. Midstream used to be an important Zionist magazine and still sometimes runs important Zionist articles. But evidently it is having second thoughts about its commitment to Israel. In the last it runs a screed by Arthur Waskow, the anti-Israel anti-Zionist far-Leftist hippy "rabbi" (Reconstructionist "ordination"): http://www.midstreamthf.com/200703/feature.html Waskow is consistently anti-Israel and pro-Arab. He is also anti-American. His theology is pagan. He promotes "Eco-Judaism" paganism and vedic tree worship and polygamy. What is such a buffoon doing in Midtstream? Its people can be contacted at: Address 633 Third Avenue, 21st Floor New York, NY 10017 Contact Phone: (212) 339-6020 Fax: (212) 318-6176 Email: midstreamTHF@aol.com Leo Haber, Editor Cecile Bittkower, Editorial Assistant Fraidy Burstein, Production Manager Sam E. Bloch, Business Manager 2. Israel's Post-Zionist Pseudo-Scholars promote blood libels: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/israel_studies/v008/8.3friling.html http://inscribe.iupress.org/doi/abs/10.2979/ISR.2003.8.3.25 3. From Tom Gross: DAVID IRVING AND HIS JEWISH COUNTERPART, NORMAN FINKELSTEIN Convicted Holocaust denier David Irving was ejected from the Warsaw book fair on Saturday. He had planned to display his books there. Polish organizers said there was no room at the book fair for a man who denied that the Nazis murdered six million Jews, half of whom were Polish citizens. "We asked him to leave," said Grzegorz Guzowski, the book fair organizer. "Our employees helped him pack up his things, and our car drove him to the address he specified." (For more, see the first article below.) Among previous dispatches on Irving, see "David Irving: Auschwitz 'was a tourist attraction' (& British Muslims scrap Holocaust Day)" (Jan. 31, 2007), www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000823.html. The second article below is by Marty Peretz, who strongly criticizes the decision by DePaul University, the largest private educational institution in Chicago, to consider Norman Finkelstein for tenure. Peretz cites "The wife of the neo-Nazi and Holocaust denier Ernst Zuendel (who) gushed... Finkelstein is a Jewish David Irving." For more on Finkelstein and DePaul University, see the twelfth note in the dispatch, "Auschwitz death toll was higher, UK government archives reveal" (April 16, 2007), www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000845.html. Among others I quote the respected German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, which wrote about Finkelstein: His "assertions are pure invention... No facts alleged by Finkelstein should be assumed to be really facts, no quotation in his book should be assumed to be accurate, without taking the time to carefully compare his claims with the sources he cites." BUT THE BBC DECIDE TO GIVE HIM MORE AND MORE AIRTIME Despite (or perhaps because of) Finkelstein's distortions of the Holocaust, the BBC is increasing the times they invite him on their programs to air his hateful views. For example, earlier this month BBC World TV carried an appearance by Finkelstein at the prestigious Oxford Union at Oxford University where Finkelstein was given plenty of air time to spread disinformation. (The BBC doesn't usually carry broadcasts from the Oxford Union.) (The BBC's coverage of the ongoing violence in Gaza and southern Israel in recent days has also been particularly duplicitous, omitting lots of pertinent facts vital to understanding Israel's viewpoint, facts which were not omitted by CNN International and France 24, France.s new global 24-hour TV news network.) Among other recent comments made by Norman Finkelstein, the man DePaul University now wants to give tenure to: "Israel has embarked, in its own words, on a war of annihilation against the Lebanese people. Not a day passes when the language they use doesn't escalate... This is pure and simple Nazi language... Right now, and I say it publicly, right now we are all Hizbullah... And every victory of Hizbullah over the vandals and the marauders, the invaders and the murderers; every victory by Hizbullah over Israel is also a victory for liberty and a victory for freedom... the monsters and freaks in the White House and their collaborators in Tel Aviv . so far as I'm concerned they can all drop dead." "FINKELSTEIN IS A JEWISH DAVID IRVING" DePaul's disgrace By Marty Peretz The New Republic May 12, 2007 www.tnr.com/blog/spine?pid=107268 4. Waking up at last?: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708647450&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
5. The Left (including the Jewish Asslibs) = ALSO wrong about Iraq: May 22, 2007 Wall St Journal The Left's Iraq Muddle By BOB KERREY May 22, 2007; Page A15
At this year's graduation celebration at The New School in New York, Iranian lawyer, human-rights activist and Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi delivered our commencement address. This brave woman, who has been imprisoned for her criticism of the Iranian government, had many good and wise things to say to our graduates, which earned their applause. But one applause line troubled me. Ms. Ebadi said: "democracy cannot be imposed with military force." What troubled me about this statement -- a commonly heard criticism of U.S. involvement in Iraq -- is that those who say such things seem to forget the good U.S. arms have done in imposing democracy on countries like Japan and Germany, or Bosnia more recently. Let me restate the case for this Iraq war from the U.S. point of view. The U.S. led an invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein because Iraq was rightly seen as a threat following Sept. 11, 2001. For two decades we had suffered attacks by radical Islamic groups but were lulled into a false sense of complacency because all previous attacks were "over there." It was our nation and our people who had been identified by Osama bin Laden as the "head of the snake." But suddenly Middle Eastern radicals had demonstrated extraordinary capacity to reach our shores.
As for Saddam, he had refused to comply with numerous U.N. Security Council resolutions outlining specific requirements related to disclosure of his weapons programs. He could have complied with the Security Council resolutions with the greatest of ease. He chose not to because he was stealing and extorting billions of dollars from the U.N. Oil for Food program. No matter how incompetent the Bush administration and no matter how poorly they chose their words to describe themselves and their political opponents, Iraq was a larger national security risk after Sept. 11 than it was before. And no matter how much we might want to turn the clock back and either avoid the invasion itself or the blunders that followed, we cannot. The war to overthrow Saddam Hussein is over. What remains is a war to overthrow the government of Iraq. Some who have been critical of this effort from the beginning have consistently based their opposition on their preference for a dictator we can control or contain at a much lower cost. From the start they said the price tag for creating an environment where democracy could take root in Iraq would be high. Those critics can go to sleep at night knowing they were right. The critics who bother me the most are those who ordinarily would not be on the side of supporting dictatorships, who are arguing today that only military intervention can prevent the genocide of Darfur, or who argued yesterday for military intervention in Bosnia, Somalia and Rwanda to ease the sectarian violence that was tearing those places apart. Suppose we had not invaded Iraq and Hussein had been overthrown by Shiite and Kurdish insurgents. Suppose al Qaeda then undermined their new democracy and inflamed sectarian tensions to the same level of violence we are seeing today. Wouldn't you expect the same people who are urging a unilateral and immediate withdrawal to be urging military intervention to end this carnage? I would. American liberals need to face these truths: The demand for self-government was and remains strong in Iraq despite all our mistakes and the violent efforts of al Qaeda, Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias to disrupt it. Al Qaeda in particular has targeted for abduction and murder those who are essential to a functioning democracy: school teachers, aid workers, private contractors working to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure, police officers and anyone who cooperates with the Iraqi government. Much of Iraq's middle class has fled the country in fear. With these facts on the scales, what does your conscience tell you to do? If the answer is nothing, that it is not our responsibility or that this is all about oil, then no wonder today we Democrats are not trusted with the reins of power. American lawmakers who are watching public opinion tell them to move away from Iraq as quickly as possible should remember this: Concessions will not work with either al Qaeda or other foreign fighters who will not rest until they have killed or driven into exile the last remaining Iraqi who favors democracy. The key question for Congress is whether or not Iraq has become the primary battleground against the same radical Islamists who declared war on the U.S. in the 1990s and who have carried out a series of terrorist operations including 9/11. The answer is emphatically, "yes." This does not mean that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11; he was not. Nor does it mean that the war to overthrow him was justified -- though I believe it was. It only means that a unilateral withdrawal from Iraq would hand Osama bin Laden a substantial psychological victory. Those who argue that radical Islamic terrorism has arrived in Iraq because of the U.S.-led invasion are right. But they are right because radical Islam opposes democracy in Iraq. If our purpose had been to substitute a dictator who was more cooperative and supportive of the West, these groups wouldn't have lasted a week. Finally, Jim Webb said something during his campaign for the Senate that should be emblazoned on the desks of all 535 members of Congress: You do not have to occupy a country in order to fight the terrorists who are inside it. Upon that truth I believe it is possible to build what doesn't exist today in Washington: a bipartisan strategy to deal with the long-term threat of terrorism. The American people will need that consensus regardless of when, and under what circumstances, we withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq. We must not allow terrorist sanctuaries to develop any place on earth. Whether these fighters are finding refuge in Syria, Iran, Pakistan or elsewhere, we cannot afford diplomatic or political excuses to prevent us from using military force to eliminate them. Mr. Kerrey, a former Democratic senator from Nebraska and member of the 9/11 Commission, is president of The New School. URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117980246981610453.html
Monday, May 21, 2007
Posted
5/21/2007 11:13:00 AM
1. An interesting New Ally against the Academic Fifth Column in Israel One segment of the Israeli population is generally unaware of the mischief and dangers related to Israel's academic fifth column . namely, the Orthodox. By and large these folks do not take advanced university degrees, and when they do it is usually at Bar Ilan University, which is a relatively minor arena of Post-Zionist agitation. Over the weekend a major article was published that may signal a change in this.
"Besheva" is a free weekly distributed mainly through synagogues over Shabbat in Israel, dealing partly with religious issues and partly with politics, in Hebrew only. It is nominally connected with the Israel National News (Arutz 7) web site but seems to be produced independently. This past weekend, May 17, it carried a full page article by Rabbi Eliezer Melamed about Israeli universities. Rabbi Melamed is one of the best known and most respected Rabbis among the Orthodox religious Zionist movement. He is a respected "posek" or issuer of Rabbinic rulings regarding religious questions (see http://www.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/Hmidrash.asp?cat=149 ). He sometimes also speaks about politics (as an example, see http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/489 ). He heads a yeshiva at Har Bracha in the West Bank. (Here is a short bio: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/126266 ) In the weekend column, part of his article was devoted to questions regarding college tuition and the ongoing current student strike in Israel, which has lasted now for about 2 months. Melamed denounced the strike and the strike leaders, and declared it unjust and immoral. But then he went on to write a broadside attack on the leftwing "Post-Zionist" faculty members at Israeli universities, who devote their energies to demonizing Israel and denouncing Israel's legitimacy. He notes that these are a particularly common plague in the Schools of Social Sciences and the Humanities. He writes (page 40): "We cannot support Israeli academia without reservation. Too many things going on there are not in accordance with our values. From the schools of social sciences and the humanities there are emerging numerous voices that abhor Jewish tradition and values and are the worst anti-Zionists, people who denounce Israel for almost every conceivable and imaginary evil. "The academic establishment does nothing to rein these people in. To the contrary, these people enjoy every defense in the name of academic freedom. But these are the very schools and departments from which we should expect efforts to strengthen the Israeli spirit rather than vicious attacks against it. Why should Israeli citizens finance the salaries of such people?! To the contrary . let's have some REAL freedom of choice. Those who wish to study with such people should pay for this out of their own pockets, while those who don't wish to - will not. Why should these people earn the same salaries as those in the natural sciences who actually make contributions of priceless value to Israel? "It will be entirely unsurprising if it turns out that forces from the Radical Left are actually behind the long ongoing student strike, the same Radical Left whose power base is in the departments of social sciences and humanities at the universities. Have the students even investigated for whom these people are working? Which hostile or foreign interests are they serving? Perhaps tuition is nothing more than a misleading banner to recruit students for their real agenda. For all these reasons, the students should not participate in the strike." From out of Jerusalem shall Torah Go Forth, but from out of Israel Academia Monitor (www.israel-academia-monitor.com ) is going the news about the mischief of Israel's academic fifth column, and it is reaching important new audiences! 2. Stanford's Joel Beinin, professor of jihad, finds a death threat: http://www.campus-watch.org/weblog/id/74 See also http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz072202.asp
3. Too little, too late: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708647907&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
4. Roll Call of Treason: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28306
5, Israel's partisan Attorney General - "moral turpitude" is something that characterizes people whose politics he does not like http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122481
6. The Pro-Terror NGO "Doctors without Borders" collaborates with terrorists: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122487
7. The "Asafsaf" does not like flags: http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/32512/format/html/displaystory.html
8. Tell Hilton what you think! http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28346
9. Climate Change WHAT? http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=927b9303-802a-23ad-494b-dccb00b51a12&Region_id=&Issue_id=
10. Baruch Kimmerling, who just died, was one of the worst members of Israel's academic Fifth Column. A far leftist anti-Zionist, an activist in the Stalinist HADASH party, Kimmerling wrote a series of books in which he literally invented "Palestinian" nationalism and history. Here are some earlier items on Kimmerling: http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14906 http://www.meforum.org/article/1608 http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2004/12/tale-of-reversed-narrative.html http://www.jewishpress.com/print.do/17693/Terrorism_Without_%22Occupation%22:_%3Ci%3ESome_Lessons_From_The_Early_Arab_Pogroms%3C%2Fi%3E.html
http://www.paulbogdanor.com/seliktar.pdf Here is a typical Kimmerling screed: http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar05/Kimmerling0329.htm
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Posted
5/16/2007 10:15:00 PM
1. DePaul's Disgrace: http://www.tnr.com/blog/spine?pid=107268DEPAUL'S DISGRACE: Oh, for sure. At my campus and at your campus, there was usually a nutcase professor who had very odd views, really very odd, about this and that. A professor of engineering would believe that blacks were stupid or that woman should stay home and do the wash...or a professor of chemistry would believe that the Holocaust was a historical invention. It was unpleasant. Maybe even worse than unpleasant. But it somehow didn't go to very heart of the university which was that teachers should be experts in their fields. Well, you know about Norman Finkelstein who is truly a nutcase teacher in the field for which DePaul University is now considering him for tenure. Our Leon Wieseltier has called him "poison, he's a disgusting self-hating Jew, he's something you find under a rock." Omer Bartov, the world-renowned scholar of genocide at Brown University, wrote in the New York Times that Finkelstein's The Holocaust Industry is "an ideological fanatic's view.by a writer so reckless and ruthless in his attacks... [His theory is] both irrational and insidious.an international Jewish conspiracy verges on paranoia and would serve anti-Semites." If his these words from critics are not sufficient, how about those from his fans? The wife of the neo-Nazi and Holocaust denier Ernst Zuendel has gushed, "I feel like a kid in a candy store. Finkelstein is a Jewish David Irving." OK, don't take my word. Listen to him on YouTube for yourself. If you can't stand listening and watching, take the easy route...and just read. I'm going to try and be brief this afternoon, I know it's hot, and so many people have already said so many important things. I want to make basically 3 points. Number one, in my view reasonable people can disagree about how the conflict in Lebanon began, but reasonable people cannot disagree about what's happening now. The conflict is perfectly clear to anyone who looks at it honestly. Israel has embarked, in its own words, on a war of annihilation against the Lebanese people. Not a day passes when the language they use doesn't escalate. One day they say for each Hezbollah rocket we will destroy 10 Lebanese homes. The next day they say we will flatten southern Lebanon. The next day they say we will cleanse southern Lebanon. The next day they say we will obliterate and pulverize southern Lebanon. We have to be honest about what they are saying. This is pure and simple Nazi language. They're talking about -- and we shouldn't be afraid to use that analogy. They are waging a war of annihilation against the Lebanese people.
Number two, I heard a few days ago a member or several members of the House of Representatives say, "We are all Israelis now." Now, I beg to differ. Right now, and I say it publicly, right now we are all Hezbollah. All of us. You can have differences, disagreements with their ideology, with their values, with their organization. But right now at this moment that is totally and utterly irrelevant; just as, for those of you who are older in this meeting, in the 1940s you can disagree with Stalin and Stalinism and the Soviet Union on this and on that. And there were excellent reasons for disagreeing. But every victory of the Red Army over the Nazi invaders was a victory for liberty and a victory for freedom. And every victory of Hezbollah over the vandals and the marauders, the invaders and the murderers; every victory by Hezbollah over Israel is also a victory for liberty and a victory for freedom. One last point, and that is the question of Israel. I personally remain committed to the belief that ordinary people, Jewish and Muslim, Jewish and Arab, if left to their own devices, they can live together in peace, freedom, mutual dignity and mutual respect. But if Israel proves itself unable to live in mutual dignity and mutual respect with its Arab neighbors; if it chooses to become the garrison state for the United States whose only purpose and being is to enslave the Arab people; if it chooses, I am not saying it is, I am saying but if it chooses then it's losing its right to be there in the Middle East. It's no different than Da Nang airbase during the Vietnam War if your only purpose is to wreak murder, wreak havoc, destroy, level, pulverize, flatten, cleanse. If that's your purpose, if that's your raison d'etre, then you've lost your right to be there. One last point. For those of you who are indifferent to moral arguments, there remains a, the fancy word is a realpolitik argument, a real world argument. And the real world is, Israel is courting its own disaster. Maybe the blind, the arrogant, those who are drunk with power, intoxicated with their weapons, they don't see it; but rational people, reasonable people see what's going on. Hezbollah is not, thank goodness, the PLO. They're serious, they're committed, they're determined. Hopefully, and I mean hopefully, reasonable, sane people will see that, and will recognize that even if they don't like the Arabs, and even if they don't like Muslims, it's a wiser strategy, it's a more prudent strategy just from the vantage point of self interest. It's wiser and more prudent to learn to live with your neighbors rather than try to destroy them, because sooner or later before you destroy them they will destroy you; which means at the end of the day we all have a common purpose, though maybe we don't see it. And the common purpose is we are all fighting, resisting, struggling to make this world a decent place, a fair place, a place where dignity and mutual respect is allowed for; and where everyone can live, everyone to live who wants to live in mutual respect and mutual dignity. Those who do not -- the monsters and freaks in the White House and their collaborators in Tel Aviv -- so far as I'm concerned they can all drop dead. But let's the rest of us struggle, work hard, reach out to everybody. Make it a common struggle for a common goal -- truth and justice. Thank you. 2. Raise University Tuition in Israel! http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Message.aspx/2146
3.
http://thejewishpress.blogspot.com/2007/05/man-bites-dog-and-haaretz-discovers.html Wednesday, May 16, 2007 Man Bites Dog and Haaretz discovers "Terrorism" It is said that dogs biting men are not news but when a man bites a dog, THAT makes the headlines! (To right, photo of the "Jewish terrorist" with the psychiatric problems.) Newspapers love reversal of roles and stereotypes. When Arabs murder Jews simply because they are Jews, it is hardly news. THAT happens all the time. Boring! Haaretz, Israel's leftwing Post-Zionist daily, sometimes called the Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew, has never been very interested in Arabs murdering Jews because they are Jews. Following the lead of the overseas Bash-Israel media, Haaretz always refers to such perps as "activists" and "militants". The "T" word (terrorism) is never used to refer to Arab murders of Jews in stories at Haaretz. But let a Jew go and murder an Arab, and Haaretz runs banner headlines about "Jewish terrorism". In 2005 when Eden Natan-Zada, a mentally ill 19-year-old AWOL Israeli soldier, killed four Arabs on a bus in Shfaram (and was then himself murdered by the mob there), Haaretz headlines screamed about the Jewish "terrorist who murdered Arabs because they are Arabs." This week Julian Soufir, a French Jew living in Israel, murdered an Arab, claiming he did so because he just wanted to kill an Arab. He was arrested and is pleading not guilty by reasons or mental illness, and he may well be mentally ill. He has been under psychiatric care since some domestic violence incidents. Justice Muki Landman wrote in his judgment that the investigation material indicated that the suspect suffered from a mental illness. "Under these circumstances, and due to the fact that in the best interest of the investigation and reaching the truth it is imperative that his mental condition be evaluated." But Haaretz has yet another example of the worldwide scourge of "Jewish terrorism." Pluralism at Haaretz resembles that in Pravda back in the days of Brezhnev. There is only one correct opinion, that of the ultra-Left, and it is repeated ad nauseum by almost all writers in the paper. Today Haaretz runs an Op-Ed by one of its countless leftists, Goel Pinto, demanding that Jews collectively apologize to Arabs for "Jewish terrorism". We can't seem to recall many cases when Arabs apologized for mass murders of Jews because they are Jews. Pinto in Haaretz blasts Jews, especially French Jews, for being "racist". His evidence? Many of them voted for Sarkozy! Of course most French citizens voted for Sarkozy. Pinto adds: 'The Jewish murderer Soufir immigrated to Israel before he murdered an Arab - and not because of any shortage of Muslims in France. Rather, it was because in France many Jews prefer to wrap themselves in the tallit of victimhood - and the anti-Jewish incidents there give them sufficient ammunition to do so....Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Acting President Dalia Itzik should pay a visit to the family of the murder victim and ask for forgiveness in the name of the state and the Jewish people....This is also the appropriate time for the heads of France's Jewish community, led by Chief Rabbi Yosef Sitruk, to visit the Great Mosque of Paris and to ask for forgiveness. Forgiveness for the murder, but also for the anti-Muslim racism that is rooted in their community, which is one of the main causes for the deterioration in relations between Jews and Muslims in France.' Now here is a thought. Since reversal of stereotype is so newsworthy, maybe Haaretz should try an experiment in it and reverse its own role playing and stereotype. All it need do to create the biggest Man Bites Dog story in decades is come out clearly in favor of Israel's right to defend itself against Arab terrorism and Islamofascist aggression, including by means of assassinating terrorists, and also come out clearly in opposition to Palestinian demands, including the "right of return."
4. The Folly of Withdrawal: http://www.jewishpress.com/page.do/21557/Withdrawal%3A_The_Root_Of_Defeat.html
5. Jews: 1; Moonbats: 0: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122474
|