Steven Plaut

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

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/lecture
and
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.

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

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.

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.

Posted 5/25/2007 04:37:00 PM

Please open
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Blog.aspx/1#2157

Posted 5/25/2007 12:00:00 PM

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

Posted 5/22/2007 05:30:00 PM

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Blog.aspx/1#2155
Hide 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

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

Posted 5/16/2007 10:15:00 PM

1. DePaul's Disgrace:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/spine?pid=107268
DEPAUL'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

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

Posted 5/16/2007 02:47:00 PM

1. Dershowitz on Nazi Norman and his Chomsky-Goodman marketing agents:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28321
Democracy Not!
By Alan M. Dershowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 16, 2007

Democracy Now!, the hard left radio-television talk show starring Amy
Goodman, boasts of its fairness and of presenting both sides of the
issues. A recent experience with the show exposes this claim as a bold
face lie. A few weeks ago, Noam Chomsky was invited on the show and,
spurred on by Amy Goodman.s question, proceeded to attack me for
conducting a .jihad. against Norman Finkelstein, who is up for tenure at
DePaul University.

For those of you unfamiliar with Norman Finkelstein, he is
Holocaust-justice denier and overt anti-Semite, who repeatedly attacks
Holocaust survivors as frauds and says that Jewish leaders resemble the
grotesque anti-Semitic cartoons published by the Nazis and in Der St.rmer.
He repeatedly calls Israel a Nazi regime and calls prominent Jews, like
me, Nazis and moral perverts. He claims that Elie Wiesel made up his past
and calls him a .wimp.. Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor of The New
Republic, got it absolutely right when he described Finkelstein as
.poison, he.s a disgusting self-hating Jew, he.s something you find under
a rock..

As if to prove Wieseltier.s statements, Finkelstein recently published an
article entitled .Should Alan Dershowitz Target Himself For
Assassination?. In the article he called me .moral pervert who missed the
climactic scene of his little peep show.. To illustrate this point, he
commissioned a Neo-Nazi cartoonist, who had recently finished second in an
Iranian Holocaust denier cartoon contest, to draw a cartoon of me
masturbating in ecstatic joy while watching Lebanese civilians die on a
television set while sitting in a chair labeled .Israel Peep Show. with a
Star of David. If you want to throw up, you can view this cartoon.

Well enough about Finkelstein, let.s get to Democracy Now!. After
learning of the Chomsky attack I had my office call the show and ask for
an opportunity to respond. They conditioned my response on my willingness
to debate Finkelstein or one of his clones. Since I have a policy against
debating anti-Semites, and because I know Finkelstein only name-calls
rather than debates, I insisted on the right to come on the show by myself
and respond to Chomsky.s false charges. After all, Chomsky was on by
himself. Democracy Now!.s Aaron Mate told me that the show has an
absolute policy of never having any controversial guests on without having
a contrary view presented at the same time. Since I rarely listen to the
show, I could not contradict them, though I had my doubts. He spent more
than an hour with me on the phone earnestly trying to sell me a bill of
goods that Democracy Now! always has a balanced presentation and that it
would be unfair to present me alone responding to Chomsky. In the end,
they refused to have me on the show. I then learned that several days
later they had two strong supporters of Finkelstein on their show, without
anyone there to respond to them and present the other side. The net
result of their phony attempt to achieve .balance. was that they had at
least three pro-Finkelstein zealots, on two separate occasions, with no
one presenting an opposing view. So much for balance. So much for
honestly from Mate and Goodman. Democracy Now! is the Pravda of the
airways. Democracy NOT!

2. The Naqba Day Nazis:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28283

3. More Naqba Day - at the "Hebrew" University

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122467
Confrontation as Hebrew University Arab Students Mark 'Nakba'
28 Iyar 5767, 16 May 07 02:34by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz(IsraelNN.com) Arab and
Jewish students at Hebrew University squared off against each other on
campus this Tuesday, despite the ongoing student boycott of classes, when
a group of Arab students staged a march and demonstration condemning the
foundation of the State of Israel as "the catastrophe," or "Nakba" in
Arabic. This was the ninth year that Arab students at the Jerusalem
university have so marked Israel's establishment on May 15 in the civil
calendar (Israelis, however, mark Independence Day on the 5th day of the
month of Iyar, according to the Jewish calendar).

This year, the Arab students' event was particularly inflammatory, as it
fell on the eve of Jerusalem Day, which marks the re-unification of the
capital under Israeli sovereignty during the 1967 Six Day War. The Zionist
student group called Im Tirtzu ("If You Will It") organized an active
patriotic counter-demonstration to greet the Arab student protesters. The
Jerusalem police department, which had been warned of potential clashes,
deployed a heavy presence at the campus entrance, where it eventually
managed to keep the sides separate.

In the morning, dozens of Arab students took an organized trip to the
ruins of an abandoned Arab village in the Jerusalem area. Afterwards, when
the students returned to Hebrew University for a pre-planned anti-Israel
demonstration, they were greeted by an equally large crowd of patriotic
Jewish students waving Israeli flags and chanting pro-Israel slogans. Arab
students claimed that some of the Jewish students attempted to beat them,
leading campus security to separate the two groups and force them off
campus grounds.

Outside the school, the pro- and anti-Israel demonstrations continued,
with the street, police and physical barriers dividing the two groups from
one another.

Arab students chanted pan-Arab and anti-Israel slogans, including the
Palestinian Authority anthem Biladi, "Palestine is Arab" and chants
linking Beirut, Gaza and Jenin. The Arab demonstrators also denigrated
Israel as a "police state," and called for "national unity" over the
"Syrian Golan Heights," terrorist prisoners in Israeli jails and what they
called "the right of return" for Arab refugees currently outside Israel.

As police reinforced their presence, the Arab demonstrators flashed the "V
for Victory" hand gesture and concluded with chants of "Here Palestine was
lost and here we will regain it."

4. Interesting new web magazine:
http://www.covenant.idc.ac.il/index.html

5. Leftist economic lies:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3399580,00.html

Posted 5/15/2007 02:20:00 PM

1. The following appeared in Midstream in the late 1980s. It was never
converted to electronic form, until now. I just stumbled acrosss someone
who put it on line at

http://www.hagshama.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=1662&subject=45
Since I have never posted it, here tis:
On Zionist Youth Movements
By: Steven Plaut

Plaut examines what the role of Zionist youth movements should be in
encouraging aliyah.

I grew up in a Zionist youth movement. Like most of the members of all
Zionist youth organizations, the movement itself played a central role in
my childhood and teen-age years, and perhaps even today exercises a
certain amount of influence upon me. For many years the movement was the
center of gravity in social matters. I have many fond memories of those
years; some of my closest friends today are old movement comrades.

The movements, of course, strive to be much more than social
organizations. Each group has a specific agenda, with immigration to
Israel playing a particularly important role. Each has a political
self-definition and identity. Few other organizations could generate in
teen-agers and college students the same feelings of importance,
righteousness, and of serving the grand cause.

Today I am advancing reluctantly toward middle age. I am also an Israeli.
I intend here to put aside nostalgia in order to engage in a critical
analysis of Zionist youth movements from an adult perspective. I am sure
many will not agree with it; perhaps it may serve as a catalyst for
dialogue.

Zionist youth organizations are worth discussing for the simple reason
that they are the future of and in many ways the most important bodies
within organized Zionism in the Diaspora. To some extent they produce
future Israelis, although this is not their sole function. At minimum they
are extremely influential over their own membership.

The weaknesses of the Zionist youth movements are so obvious when viewed
in retrospect through adult eyes that it seems hard to explain why they
have been and remain so difficult to identify for those participating
directly in those movements. I will discuss several of these shortcomings
that are in my opinion the most harmful and disturbing.

I find the most problematic aspect of the Zionist movement in general and
of the Zionist youth movements in particular to be their divisions and
allegiances along the internal party lines of Israel. Each organization
seems to see itself as the overseas appendage of a specific Israeli party,
following that party's lead and line. Each organization believes its
raison d'etre is to act as a Diaspora base, supplying personnel and
political support for its Israeli counterpart.

This partisan politicization of the Zionist movement is in fact only a
natural extension to the Diaspora of the extensive over-politicization of
all aspects of life in Israel, upon which I have commented elsewhere.
Indeed it extends beyond the Zionist movement proper and into the general
Jewish (and occasionally non-Jewish) communities in the form of partisan
support for Israeli political organizations, e.g. Peace Now, Gush Emunim,
and so on.

Of all the problems that could and should be addressed by organized
Zionism in the Diaspora, or as I prefer to think of it -the Zionist
'opposition" within Diaspora Jewry, can think of none that would be less
relevant and less beneficial than the question of the "proper stance"
vis-a-vis Israeli elections. After all, what importance or relation do
these elections have to the issues facing Diapora Jewry, to the questions
of individual and communal Jewish identity, Jewish education,
assimilation, Anti-Semitism, or even aliyah?

The partisan mobilization consigns the Zionist movement to marginality
because it focuses energy and attention on elections whose outcomes do not
directly affect Diaspora Jews. The latter are by and large ignorant of
what those elections are all about and the issues at play. In any case,
election issues like monetary policy and urban planning are not exactly
the stuff from which dramatic Zionist rallying cries are made.

Several Zionist youth organizations are associated with specific kibbutz
associations in Israel. I can re"' call impassioned debates among American
movement colleagues, sometimes running into the wee hours, over the
advantages and disadvantages of these kibbutz associations. I would wager
that not one Israeli kibbutz member in five can clearly explain or cares
the least about the differences among these associations. (Perhaps the
picture was different 30 years ago.) Among non-kibbutz Israelis virtually
no one knows or cares. Yet in the United States the Zionist youth
movements splintered and passionately "battled" one another over such
irrelevant lines of distinction.

It is ironic to note that the Israeli parties themselves receive very
little benefit from this Diaspora politicization. For example, the flow of
American immigrants to kibbutzim is minuscule; many who join are not
movement graduates, and some are not Jewish. Of movement graduates who
join kibbutzim, many subsequently leave, and many also leave Israel. The
net increment (inflow minus outflow) from all overseas youth movements to
all kibbutzim together is at most a few score per year, and probably at
times is negative. Financial support from the Diaspora organizations to
their Israeli counterparts is also small, and in some cases it too is
probably negative on net. Even the political support for specific Israeli
parties generated in the Diaspora by Zionist and non-Zionist organizations
is not of great value, given the natural (and usually justified)
inclination of Israelis to dismiss as meddling attempts from abroad,
including those from Zionist Jews, to preach to them about their political
alternatives.

These anachronistic partisan loyalties condemn much of the Zionist youth
movement to impotence and render it unable to exploit the scale economies
and momentum that would accompany organizational amalgamation. Even
religious distinctions would not stand in the way of amalgamation as party
loyalties do. American Jews are generally much more tolerant of one
another's religious (or non-religious) inclinations than are Israelis; the
religious heterogeneity of most Diaspora Zionist organizations is a
testament to the feasibility of amalgamation.

Another major problem of the Zionist movements is the role assigned to
aliyah and the way in which the "aliyah issue" is represented. I say this
not because I think aliyah is unimportant (I think it is important) nor
because I think American Jews should not make aliyah (I think they
should). The problem is that aliyah is a major life decision, something on
the same order of magnitude as marriage or parenthood. In the youth
movements, however, it has been reduced to a slogan.

People do not make life decisions -at least not successful ones- on the
basis of slogans. Aliyah must stem from a careful examination of one's
goals, ideology, religious outlook, world-view, etc. It is really not a
one-shot "decision," but rather an ongoing chain of decisions that
continues long after physical relocation to Israel.

Even serious and well-considered aliyah decisions often end in reverse
migration within a few years. Frivolous aliyah decisions seldom succeed.

Part of the problem is that the Zionist youth movements, while excessively
aliyah-centered, are insufficiently Jewish- and educationally-centered.
Herzl once said that in order to get the Jews out of Egypt Moses first had
to get Egypt out of the Jews. The Zionist organizations cannot hope to
create an aliyah stream unless they first succeed in a campaign of serious
Jewish education. Aliyah is a byproduct of deep J ewish commitment and
consciousness. Because there is little Jewish consciousness, and weak
Jewish identity, there is little aliyah. Interestingly, this is very
poorly understood in Israel. Israel continues to pour significant amounts
of money into the network of shlichim, whose function is supposed to be
the encouragement of aliyah. A cabinet minister for absorption is also
supposed to be working at encouraging aliyah.

Perhaps it is time to re-examine the effectiveness of the shaliach idea.
In most cases, the shaliach supplies some technical information or
expedites some bureaucratic chore involved in aliyah -but it is rare that
he or she inspires the decision to make aliyah itself. To increase aliyah,
fundamental Jewish identity issues must be addressed.

The 'sloganization" of aliyah in the youth movements has a number of
negative repercussions. When aliyah is the central focus of youthful
enthusiasm, many forget to ask the obvious next question, "After aliyah,
what?" There are many movement graduates who optimistically made the
immigration decision completely unprepared for life and career thereafter.

Zionist youth organizations are in many cases indifferent toward career
preparation and in some cases downright hostile toward it. In the
kibbutz-oriented movements career goals are often considered ideologically
impure, or are at least relegated to secondary importance, since the
future oleh is to dwell in an agricultural communal proletariat. Many seem
to have been convinced that in kibbutz life skills, training, and
education are expendable. Of course they are not. And in Israeli life
outside the kibbutz confines, these things are certainly no less vital
than they would be in America.

When aliyah is seen as the grand solution, other life problems may remain
unaddressed. It is a truism among veteran olim that every single problem
someone has before aliyah will remain with him after aliyah, with some new
ones to boot. Life in Israel can be extremely rewarding, but no one claims
that it is easy. It is probably impossible to really prepare someone for
many of the tribulations of absorption. But to tackle absorption without
some direction in terms of one's professional goals means that additional
life crises and problems must be tackled at the same time.

There are countless stories about movement graduates who have immigrated
to Israel, joined kibbutzim, and then -ten years down the line -leave the
kibbutz only to find themselves unskilled, under-qualified, bereft of
savings, and with a family to support. Under these circumstances it is not
surprising that many leave Israel altogether. Given a choice between a
fresh start in America vs. blue-collar or low-rung clerical work and
salary in Israel, few breadwinners over 30 will choose the latter.

In some of the youth movements the urgency with which aliyah is stressed
means in effect that immigration takes place by age 20 or so, or else it
is "too late." This reminds me of how single women past a certain early
age are relegated to spinsterhood in some societies.

To arrive in Israel armed with professional skills, or at least with a
clear decision about career direction, is to win half the battle. It also
makes aliyah a more rewarding experience. The youth movements do not seem
to have digested the fact that Israel's swamps have been drained and its
roads have been built. The pioneering challenges of today have changed.
Israel of the 1980s is an advanced modern society full of problems. The
modern pioneer, the immigrant who wishes to devote himself to attempts at
resolving those problems, needs more than the fervor of his Zionist
commitment. He needs skills, degrees, training and of course infinite
patience and energy, to succeed.

Ninety-seven percent of Israelis have voted with their feet against
kibbutz life. Kibbutzim are increasingly marginal to Israeli society in
all senses. Small-town agricultural communal life is in many ways the most
unnatural and the most difficult to adapt to for those raised in urban,
individualist, Western society. The centrality of the kibbutz for so much
of organized Zionism often backfires in that it steers many away from
urban and suburban life-styles available in Israel, the ones chosen by the
vast majority of the Israelis, the ones most amenable for a Western Jew. I
am behind those who choose to live on kibbutzim. I am also behind those
who choose to live in urban or suburban Israel. There is nothing morally
superior about the former.

The aliyah issue is actually only one side of a more general problem,
namely the role of "youth" and of the youth movement. This is particularly
manifested in the attitudes of youth organizations and their members
toward the relative importance of education vs. activism. The movements
revel in the idea that education, or at least Zionist education, can and
should be completed by the late teens, if not sooner. Thereafter the
movement member becomes an educator and activist. The result is a
population of teen-agers and those in their early twenties convinced that
they already know all there is to know (at least all that is important to
know) about Israel, Zionism, Judaism, politics, sociology, etc.

Such an attitude is of course a sure path to intellectual shallowness and
closed-mindedness, and perhaps even anti-intellectualism. Somehow the idea
gets conveyed in the youth movements that solutions and answers are
possible without serious, long years of deep and difficult analysis and
experience. For college-age movement members, Zionist activities often
consist of campus activism and agitprop, but not serious education and
learning. Many of them move to Israel thinking they have the answers to
Israel's problems in their suitcase.

The feeling that answers are already known to movement seniors is
reflected in other ways. Among the Zionist movements, several define
themselves as Socialist, and at least one as Marxist. Members and
individuals in other organizations also sometimes follow Leftish fads.
Zionist youth movement graduates have always been active on the far Left
of the political spectrum, both within Israel and on American campuses.
For some, the transition from the Zionist Left to just plain campus
Leftism (and anti-Zionism) comes easily -another symptom of the
shallowness of movement education.

Marxism, of course, has taken on more of the trappings of a cult than of a
serious social science and "Socialism" is no more than the slogan of the
economically illiterate. The continuing romance with Socialist rhetoric of
so much of the Zionist movement damages that movement in many ways. Though
this is not the place to go into details, I believe the main source of
Israel's economic difficulties is the continuing attempt by its political
elite to run the economy along Socialist lines. The last thing Israel can
use is more "Socialism," that is, more bureaucracy, regulation, government
control of the economy, and taxation. Immigrants who come to Israel with
Socialist banners become part of the economic problem, not the solution.
Ironically, "Socialism" as a slogan and ideal is dead in Israel for
virtually all those outside of the kibbutz, and perhaps even for many
inside. Socialist preaching is a sure method for being dismissed as
irrelevant or just ignored.

Within the Diaspora it also hinders the positive role the Zionist
organizations can play. The bulk of the non-Orthodox community has
replaced Jewish self-interest and survival with the American liberal
agenda as their political identity, indeed as their religion. The role of
Zionism should be to confront American Jewish assimilationism and present
an alternative based on Jewish interests. By singing Socialist tunes the
Zionist movement ends up playing the role of Left-wing opposition within
the Jewish community, rather than Zionist opposition. "Zionists" are then
no more than Jewish liberals in a hurry. In some extreme cases, movement
graduates migrate into the Leftist anti-Zionist opposition groups within
the Jewish community.

I have been speaking very critically, perhaps severely, of organized
Zionist youth movements. I hope my intentions are not misconstrued. I
think that in small doses the movements do some positive things, and there
is potential for doing much better.

The way for organized Zionism to expand its role and its contribution is
to amalgamate its various youth organizations into a very small number of
broad and non-political organizations (preferably just one). Organized
Zionism should divorce itself from Israeli electoral politics and from
kibbutz associations. Its political stance, to the extent that it should
have any, should be supporting the broad Israeli electorate on those
matters for which consensus exists. Its role within the Diaspora should be
first and foremost educational. Its activism within the Jewish community
should be over issues of Jewish self-interest and not the American
electoral questions of Right and Left. Israel should playa central role.
Aliyah should be discussed, even encouraged, but its complexities and
difficulties, too, should be addressed. The idea of spending at least part
of one's life in Israel should be promoted, but not as a slogan, Education
should be a serious, professional, continuing process. Finally, causes of
the Left liberal political agenda mayor may not be justified on their own
grounds. Regardless, they are not the causes of Jewish self-interest, the
Zionist agenda. This should be made crystal clear to all by those in the
Zionist movement; first and foremost, they must learn it themselves.

www.dafka.org/NewsGen.asp?S=4&PageID=1645
How "Stop the ISM" Stopped Al Awda at UC Riverside
By Lee Kaplan and the Stop the ISM Team

http://www.librariansforfairness.org/news_post.asp?NPI=169
Anti-Semitism Lives Among AcademicsPosted: 4/17/2007 2:17:00 PM
Author: Irwin J. Mansdorf

4. A very different Rachel Corrie blog:
http://rachel-corrie.blogspot.com/

5. Jerusalem Indeed!
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3400092,00.html

6. Eurotrash:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/859549.html

Posted 5/14/2007 01:57:00 PM

1. Dig the Khazars?
http://thejewishpress.blogspot.com/2007/05/dig-khazars.html

2. You know how the Moonbats keep inventing stories about Jewish
"settlers" vandalizing "Palestinian" olive trees?
Well, wonder what they will say about THIS vandalizion:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122107
Arabs Uproot 100s of Jewish Trees and Grape Vines in Gush Etzion
Ezra HaLevi

Residents of the Gush Etzion hilltop community of Sde Boaz had hundreds
of grape vines and scores of fruit trees uprooted and destroyed Friday.
The latest vandalism, though the most costly yet, is just the latest in a
string of attacks on the community.s property.

The agricultural, eco-friendly community, located about a mile north of
the town of Neve Daniel, was victim to a similar attack on the Jewish
holiday of Tu B'Shvat earlier this year, when one of its orchards was
destroyed.

Systematic Destruction of Community.s Agriculture
Residents of the agricultural community said that in addition to the
destruction of the Cabernet Sauvignon vineyards and fruit trees Friday,
expensive irrigation systems were damaged and stolen as well. The vandals
used donkeys to plow under the hundreds of vines and uproot the fruit
trees.

.This carob tree was planted so our grandchildren could eat of its
fruits,. said resident Gideon Kelman, holding the broken remains one of
the slow-growing trees. .They have destroyed that..
A resident holds one of the dead fruit trees
A broken carob tree
The milk cartons were used by the Gush Etzion Winery to protect the young
vines from deer
Most of the vines were taken, though a few dozen lay strewn about

Amit Barak, a native of the Galilee city of Nazereth and now in charge of
security in Sde Boaz, said that the entire incident happened during a
three-hour window period Friday morning. .Someone went down this morning
to prune his vines and everything was fine, and then, just a few hours
after he finished, we noticed everything had been destroyed..

The vineyards and fruits trees were located on terraces lower down on the
unfenced community.s hillside that cannot be seen from the community
itself, where the IDF and residents conduct regular patrols.

Irrigation was dragged down to the valley, though some hoses caught on
rocks and were left behind on the way
Residents followed the trail and found some of the irrigation stashed
nearby in the hope, ostensibly, that the vandals would be able to come
back for it later

Left-Wing Incitement Heralds Destruction and Attacks
Arabs and leftists have been frequenting the vicinity on almost a weekly
basis since the initial attack on the community.s orchard. That attack
took place in a valley below the community as residents stood by
peacefully on the Sabbath of Tu B.Shvat, refusing to respond to the
provocations by the crowd of foreign activists, who later attacked IDF
soldiers attempting to carry out an arrest.
Olive sapling planted in the middle of young vineyard on Tu B'Shvat

Last week, foreign activists, at least one claiming to be a journalist,
engaged residents in an hours-long discussion regarding Jewish rights to
live in Judea, Samaria and Israel as a whole. The foreigners, from the
International Solidarity Movement (ISM), Palestine Solidarity Movement
(PSM), Taayush and other groups, claimed to be on a fact-finding tour and
were accompanied by local Arab handlers.

.Every time we take the high road when dealing with leftist provocations,
we pay for it soon after,. said one resident who declined to have his name
published. .The Arabs they bring with them are emboldened by what they
view as our powerlessness and the clear message projected by the police .
that it is open season on Jews and their property. When they turn on the
radio and hear our Defense Minister [Amir Peretz] talking about how the
Jews in Hevron.s Peace House don.t have the right to be in a building they
paid $700,000 for . and they take it as a cue to attack us and grab state
land - land that belongs to Jews and is being systematically grabbed by
the PLO..

Incidentally, at roughly the same time Friday as the most recent
destruction took place, a left-wing/Arab protest against the Partition
Wall took place at the nearby Arab village of Um Salamuna, west of the
town of Efrat. At the protest, one of the main handlers hosting
international activists in the village of Beit Omar was arrested.

What is Worse Than Police Inaction?
Residents decided not to call the police. They said it was a statement of
protest due to police inaction, and even persecution, following such
complaints in the recent past.

Sde Boaz has suffered from a string of attempted robberies, with Arab
thieves caught stealing old cars belonging to a local mechanic as well as
playground equipment, to be sold as scrap metal. Twice residents and IDF
soldiers stationed in the area caught thieves, but after being handed over
to police they were reportedly released from custody. Residents say there
is a concrete police decision not to enforce the law against those
committing crimes against communities considered .unauthorized. by the
government and "illegal" by local and foreign media.
Note: This was not the first such case of Arab-Leftist environmental
terrorism!

3. More Jihad at UCI:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=25421_Open_Letter_to_UC_President_Re-_UC_Irvine&only

4. I don't vouch for the accuracy:
Sarkozy's Jewish roots:
http://www.ajn.com.au/news/news.asp?pgID=3162

or of this:
http://www.ejpress.org/article/16507
Sarkozy has already appointed a pro-Arab foreign minister.

5. "Rabbi" Woody Allen?
http://www.forward.com/articles/the-nebbisher-rebbe/
(No worse than "Rabbi" Mikey Lerner)

6. About those peaceful anti-fence protesters:
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2007/05/leftist-protest-guide-uri-orbach.html

7. Why "harmless stone throwers" should be shot:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122388

8. Fighting the boycott bigots:
http://www.biu.ac.il/academic_freedom/Countering%20the%20Boycott%20-%20March%202007.doc

Posted 5/10/2007 10:45:00 AM

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7117
An Open Letter to the Parents of Rachel Corrie
22 Iyar 5767, 10 May 07 09:19by Prof. Steven Plaut(IsraelNN.com)

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Corrie,

You are continuing with your campaign of demonization and delegitimization
against Israel, a campaign that now manifests itself in a shallow
anti-Israel propaganda play being staged in Seattle. All this, of course,
came after your earlier open letter to the world, "A Call to Action;
Rachel's Words Live," which was reprinted in many different media outfits,
including the viciously anti-Semitic Counterpunch magazine, and the
Guardian of the UK.

In that letter, you begin by recalling that your daughter was "killed by
an Israeli bulldozer," but you neglect to mention the circumstances under
which she was so killed (and the fact that she died from her injuries
while under Palestinian medical care). You then add, "She had been working
in Rafah with a nonviolent resistance organization, the International
Solidarity Movement, trying to stop the demolition of Palestinian homes
and wells."

No, she was not. She was trying to prevent the demolition of tunnels used
to smuggle weapons for Palestinian terrorists seeking to murder Jewish
civilians. The International Solidarity Movement, or ISM, to which she
belonged openly endorses Palestinian "armed struggle" against Jewish
children and civilians and openly collaborates with terrorists . It has
hidden wanted terrorists and their weapons in its offices. It is an
accomplice in murder. Two Arabs who entered Israel under ISM auspices blew
up a Tel Aviv pub and murdered Jews. Lying is not the best way to drum up
sympathy for your dead daughter.

Your daughter was in Rafiah in the Gaza Strip to serve as a human shield
to defend and promote Palestinian terrorism. When you yourselves were
nearly kidnapped in Gaza last year, you were there for the same reason.
You pretend that your daughter died trying to protect an "innocent house."
You are lying again. That "innocent house" she was protecting was
camouflage for a not-so-innocent terrorist smuggling tunnel, and the
residents of that "innocent house" knew all about the tunnel. Explosives
and arms were being smuggled by terrorists through that tunnel to commit
mass murder.

Your daughter was in a war zone as a belligerent, as one who had - perhaps
wittingly and perhaps not - recruited herself on behalf of a genocidal
movement of Arab fascists seeking to destroy Israel and murder as many
Jews as possible. Your daughter died while interfering with an anti-terror
operation carried out by an army in a land in which she had no business
being at all. You demand that we in Israel feel your pain at the loss of
your daughter, yet your daughter conscripted herself as an aid for those
seeking to murder my children.

The raison d'etre of the ISM is to assist Palestinian terrorists murder
Jewish children, and to prevent all Israeli efforts to fight that campaign
of murder. Your daughter foolishly put herself in harm's way by
challenging a large bulldozer and placing herself in a position where the
operator could not see her. You know quite well that the bulldozer
operator was not seeking to harm your daughter. And you know very well
that no harm would have fallen her had she not decided to "play chicken"
with the machine - about as responsible a form of behavior as running
across unlit segments of LA freeways at midnight.

In that earlier open letter of yours you write, "We had not understood the
devastating nature of the Palestinians' situation." Of course, you have
never expressed any interest in the devastating nature of the Jews'
situation. The Jews have been battling Arab fascism and terrorism for a
hundred years, before, during, and after the Nazi Holocaust of six million
Jews. Your daughter was allied with those seeking to continue the
perpetration of Nazi-like atrocities against randomly selected Jews. You
smugly praise the propaganda play about your daughter in London, which
ignored all the other Rachels, the Jewish women victims of terror in
Israel, who were murdered by the genocidal terrorists with whom your
daughter's ISM friends collaborate.

Your daughter, and apparently you as well, never had any understanding of
the Middle East conflict. The Middle East conflict is not about the right
of self-determination of Palestinian Arabs, but rather, it is about the
right to self-determination of Israeli Jews. For a century, the Arabs have
attempted to block any expression of Jewish self-determination, using
violence, armed aggression and terrorism. The Arabs today control 22
countries and territory nearly twice the size of the United States. They
refuse to share even a fraction of one percent of the Middle East with
Jews, even in a territory smaller than New Jersey.

The Arab countries invented the imaginary Palestinian "people" and their
imaginary "plight" after 1967 as a propaganda ploy, in imitation of the
German campaign on behalf of Sudeten self-determination in the 1930s. Just
as the struggle for "Sudeten liberation" was nothing more than a fig leaf
for the German aggression aimed at annihilating Czechoslovakia, so the
struggle for "Palestinian liberation" is nothing more than a jihad to
destroy Israel and its population. And it is in support of that goal that
the ISM operates, even taking its operational orders from terror leaders.

You write, "Clearly, our daughter has become a positive symbol for
people." I am afraid you are mistaken. Your daughter has become a symbol
for dangerous foolhardiness. She committed suicide as an empty gesture
meant to assist murderers and terrorists.

You want the world to mourn for your daughter, who died as part of her
efforts to assist those trying to murder my children. You demand, on the
pages of anti-Semitic propaganda web magazines, that the world mourn your
daughter, but you do not have a single word of sympathy for the families
of the thousands of innocent victims of the terrorists with whom your
daughter chose to ally herself. www.IsraelNationalNews.com Copyright
IsraelNationalNews.com
Subscribe to the free Daily

http://www.jewishpress.com/page.do/21506/The_Latest_From_The_Land_Of_Oz.htmlThe

Latest From The Land Of Oz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By: Kenneth Levin Wednesday, May 9, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amos Oz never tires of finding ways to blame Israel for the absence
of Arab-Israeli peace, no matter how clearly the voices on the other side,
in Palestinian and broader Arab media, mosques, and schools, declare that
their idea of peace is the annihilation of Israel and the destruction of
its people. Nor does the celebrated Israeli novelist tire of grossly
rewriting history to serve his blame-Israel narrative.

His latest article in this vein appeared on the Yediot Aharonot
website on April 29 under the title .Israel Partly at Fault.. Among the
unconscionable falsehoods Oz tosses out in the piece is the statement that
.On the Israeli side there is a fixed tendency to increasingly reject the
.core issues. of the conflict: Refugees. Jerusalem. Borders. Settlements.
This rejection was perhaps what led to the failure of the Oslo Accords..

Was Oz away, visiting some other planet, during, for example, the
Camp David summit in the summer of 2000, when Israel offered to uproot the
great majority of settlements, return virtually to the pre-1967 armistice
lines, divide Jerusalem, and give pre-1967 Israeli territory to the
Palestinians to compensate for the five percent or so of the West Bank
that it would retain?

Was he still off somewhere, beyond the reach of the media, when
Israel sweetened the deal even further a few months later at the Taba
talks?

Has no one told him either of the Israeli proposals or of the
Palestinians. rejections? Or perhaps he knew at one time but has since
forgotten that the Palestinians responded to Israel.s offers by launching
a terror war.

Even on the refugee issue, Israel apparently made some concessions
during the talks in 2000, offering to take in tens of thousands of 1948
refugees and their descendants.

But Oz is so desperate to blame Israel, to define some step that
Israel only need take to resolve the conflict, that he ignores all this.
His focus in this latest piece is the refugee issue, and he agrees that
there can be no .right of return,. that Palestinian demands for such a
.right. are a formula for transforming Israel into another Arab state.

But, he argues, Israel has been too averse to discussing the
problem, and if it would only bring itself to acknowledge some fault for
the plight of the refugees . some partial responsibility . and
preparedness to help resolve the problem in ways short of .return,. then
its doing so, Oz avers, .is likely to send an emotional shockwave through
the Palestinian side. It will serve as an emotional breakthrough of sorts
that will significantly facilitate the continuation of talks..

What talks? And to what end? His argument is at once absurd and
dishonest.

It is absurd, of course, because the Palestinians do not want
resolution of the issue in any manner other than .return. and have made
that clear in innumerable ways, including in the incessant message
proffered by all their instruments of indoctrination.

It is dishonest in that Israel has on numerous occasions expressed
the very preparedness to help that Oz is urging. In addition, while Oz
suggests Israel has always refused to acknowledge any expulsion of
Palestinians during the 1947-48 war, mainstream Israeli historians have
written at least since the late 1950.s about instances of expulsion . most
notably from Arab towns and villages that were part of the Arab blockade
of Jerusalem . which in their totality perhaps accounted for ten to
fifteen percent of the refugees.

(What is rarely written of in glosses on the war and the expulsion
of civilians is the fact that, of Jews living in areas that came under
Arab control, 100% were killed or expelled and none remained at the
fighting.s end. In contrast, within Israeli territory, there remained at
war.s end an Arab community of more than 120,000, constituting about 16%
of Israel.s total population. That community has since grown to number
over a million.)

Oz could send copies of those acknowledgments to every Palestinian
household, and could no doubt even arrange to read the relevant passages
aloud on Israel state television and have their contents endorsed by
leading Israeli officials. But his doing so would not, unfortunately,
serve as any .breakthrough..

Indeed, no step by Israel, short of national suicide, can provide a
.breakthrough. that would open the way to ending the conflict. But Amos Oz
refuses to acknowledge that essential truth, and prefers instead to
conjure up fantastical indictments of Israel and delusional assertions
that, but for this or that Israeli fault, all would be well. It is a
monomania, an idee fixe, that for Oz appears beyond cure.

Kenneth Levin is a psychiatrist and historian. He is the author of
.The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege. (Smith and Kraus
Global), now available in paperback.

3. Anti-Semitism and the German Left:
http://www.jewishpress.com/page.do/21508/The_Anti%2DSemitism_Of_Germany%27s_Left%2DLiberal_Media.html

4. Enlightened Despot
by Richard A. Posner 1 | 2
Posted in full at

http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2007/04/anti-aaron-barak-piece.html
Worth a read!

5. When General Motors Met Hitler:
http://hnn.us/articles/38526.html
http://hnn.us/articles/38255.html

6. Campus Bigotry:
http://phibetacons.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWZjMjE5OWE4YzVlYWU4NmFhZTQ3NzM1YmQ2ZjhmNmU=

7. Those "Apartheid" Pogromchiks:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178431592520&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

8. Iran celebrates Self-Hating British Jewish Uncle Toms:
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Briefs/11294.htm

http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=950
Fighting the Lies

Posted 5/09/2007 05:38:00 PM

http://www.jewishpress.com/page.do/21499/The_Khazar_Myth_and_the_New_Anti%2DSemitism.html

The Khazar Myth and the New Anti-Semitism

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By: Steven Plaut Wednesday, May 9, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

. "Israelis have no history in the Land because they are Khazars, who are
not connected to the land." . Al Hayat Al Jadida, June 16, 2003

.".Oddly, the Zionists were mostly non-Jews whose ancestors had themselves
converted to Judaism around 800 AD in a place called Khazaria, in the
Caucasus Mountains between the Caspian and Black Seas. They were quite
literally Caucasians." . Judicial-inc. website

."In 1917 the Khazar Jews passed a major milestone towards the creation of
their own state in Palestine. The same year they also created the
Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. There followed a Christian holocaust, the
likes of which the world has never seen. The Khazar Jews were once again
in control of Russia after more than 900 years, and they set about the
task of destroying the Russian Christians . over 100-million of them, at
the same time over 20-million religious Jews also died at the hands of the
Khazar Jews." . Aljazeerah.info website

It is one of the great ironies of the 21st century that anti-Zionists and
anti-Semites on both the Left and the Right, have returned to racialist
arguments against Jews that most of us thought had died out after World
War II.

One of the most bizarre aspects of this "re-racializing" of anti-Semitism
is the role played by the Khazar myth.

The newly fashionable Khazar mythology holds that modern day Ashkenazim,
and especially the European leadership of the Zionist movement, are not
Jews at all in the racial sense, but rather descendents from non-Jewish
Khazars; therefore, the Khazar "theorists" claim, Zionists and Israelis
have no legitimate claims to the Land of Israel.

It would be hard to exaggerate how widespread the misuse of the Khazar
myth is among those seeking to delegitimize Israel and Jews today. A
recent investigation showed nearly 30,000 websites using the Khazar
"theory" as a bludgeon against Israel and Zionism.

Some two hundred websites claim to describe a cabal known as the Khazarian
Zionist Bolsheviks (KZV). Neo-Nazi and Holocaust denial organizations and
websites are particularly fond of the Khazar myth. It is also growing in
popularity among left-wing anti-Zionists.

Arab and Islamofascist propagandists have long bandied about the
Ashkenazim as Khazars theory and Iran.s genocidal leaders adore it.
Al-Jazeera has been using the Khazar story to urge a worldwide Christian
religious war against the Khazar pseudo-Jewish imperialists.

Groups promoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion often cite the
nefarious role of Khazars as "proof" of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy (I
counted 700 such websites). And even Jewish anti-Zionist cranks like
Alfred M. Lilienthal and the Swedish "Israel Shamir" have used the Khazar
myth to attack Zionism.

Why are these various groups suddenly interested in a rather esoteric and
archaic group of people in Central Asia that disappeared nearly a
millennium ago?

The answer is very simple.

According to the Khazar theory of the new anti-Semites, most Jews today,
particularly Ashkenazi Jews, are not racially Jews at all but descendents
from the Turkic tribe of Khazars, whose ruling class and parts of its rank
and file population converted to Judaism in the 8th or early 9th century
CE. Hence, argue the racialists, Ashkenazi Jews have no rights to live in
the racially Semitic Middle East and especially not in the Land of Israel.

Fact and Legend

For Jews, the history of the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism is best
known from essays in The Kuzari: In Defense of the Despised Faith, a
medieval book composed by the great Spanish poet and philosopher Judah
Ha-Levi.

Only part of the book actually deals with the Khazar kingdom, about which
little was known, and the historic claims about them in the book are not
considered fully reliable.

In any case, The Kuzari purports to report the debates at the Khazar royal
court that supposedly led to the Khazar elite.s conversion to Judaism.
Other senior Jewish officials in the Spanish Muslim regimes actually
corresponded with the Khazar kingdom . most notably Cordova Rabbi Hasdai
ibn Shaprut (whose letters have survived). And the great Iraqi sage Saadia
Gaon is believed to have maintained correspondence with Jews in the Khazar
kingdom.

It is commonly thought that part of the motivation for the Khazars.
conversion was to establish political neutrality for the Khazar kingdom,
which faced potential threats from the powers of both Christendom and
Islam.

The Khazars themselves left no documentary records. The Arab historian ibn
Fadlan wrote about them, but he did so two centuries after the conversions
to Judaism had occurred. Some Jews, having sought refuge from Byzantine
persecutions, probably lived in the Khazar kingdom long before the
conversion of the royalty there.

One ironic historical twist is that the Khazars contributed to the
Cyrillic alphabet, in which Russian and some other Slovak languages are
written. Saint Cyril came to Khazaria in 860 in an attempt to convert the
Khazars to Christianity. Since the Hebrew of the Khazars and Greek were
the main alphabets known to St. Cyril and the early Slavs, they borrowed
from both.

Western interest in the Khazars was stimulated largely by the 1976 book
The Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler, a writer better known for his
lifelong battles against totalitarianism in all its forms. Koestler.s book
was largely based on the earlier book The History of the Jewish Khazars,
by the historianD.M. Dunlop.

Dunlop rejected the idea that large numbers of Ashkenazi Jews could trace
their origins to the Khazars, but not so Koestler. By grossly and
sensationally exaggerating the role and numbers of Khazar descendents
among European Jewry, Koestler . who was a strong Zionist . inadvertently
provided today.s racialist anti-Semites with all the ammunition they could
want, and many of them frequently cite his book as the basis for their
racialist denunciations of Israel.

A number of more serious books about Khazars are now on the market,
including The Jews of Khazaria by Kevin Alan Brook. Rabbi Bernard
Rosensweig was one of the leading figures in debunking the Khazar theory
of Ashkenazi Jewish origins. Writing in Tradition (16:5, Fall 1977, pages
139-162), he dismissed it as "wobbly scholarly foundations without
historical support."

Likewise, the Swedish archaeologist Bozena Werbart, an expert on the
Khazars, wrote: "In the Khazar kingdom, Koestler wanted to see the origin
of the eastern European Jewry. Nevertheless, all the historical and
linguistic facts contradicted his theories."

As The Encyclopedia of Judaism (1989) emphatically states, "The notion
that Ashkenazi Jewry is descended from the Khazars has absolutely no basis
in fact."

What Became of the Khazars

The actual Khazar kingdom was partly subjugated by the early Russians in
the 10th century, and whatever was left was annihilated as a result of the
Mongol invasions of Central Asia.

What exactly became of the Khazar Jews is simply not known. Those who
retained their Judaism probably integrated themselves into other Jewish
communities around the world. Some groups of Khazars joined the Magyar
invasion into what became Hungary and may have merged with local Jews
already living in those lands; indeed, archeologists have found Jewish
stars in the remains of Hungarian Khazar villages.

Small groups of Khazar mercenaries probably found refuge in other places.
Most likely the largest integration of Khazar Jews among other Jews took
place in Iran and Iraq, the large communities closest to the Khazar
kingdom and with whom close ties had been maintained.

(An urban legend holds that red-haired Jews are descended from Khazars,
though that could hardly explain King David, not to mention Esau. Arthur
Koestler claimed many were blond with blue eyes.)

In any case, Khazar political existence ended a thousand years ago.

So what are we to make of the Khazar myth concerning Ashkenazi Jews and
their supposed lack of legitimate claims to Israel due to their Khazar
origins? The greatest irony is that even if the entire Khazar theory of
Ashkenazi Jews were correct . and virtually none of it is correct . it
would be entirely irrelevant. Judaism has never defined Jews on racial
grounds. Anyone from any race is welcome as a convert to Judaism as long
as he or she is sincere.

The biblical Israelites themselves were already a racial hodgepodge. They
absorbed the "mixed multitude" that left Egypt together with them at the
time of the Exodus. There are biblical references to Jews of different
racial features, including the black-skinned Shulamit mentioned in the
Song of Songs.

Jews always defined themselves in religious, ethnic-national and at times
linguistic terms, but never along racial lines. If all Ashkenazi Jews were
indeed converted Khazars, as the racial anti-Zionists claim, they would be
no less legitimately Jews . and, as such, would have the same legitimate
claims to the Jewish homeland as any other group of Jews. (Given the
traditional Jewish deference to righteous converts, maybe more so.)

Pseudo-History and Poppycock

The actual details of the Khazar theory concerning European Jewry are
simply pseudo-history and crackpot poppycock.

Jews already lived in Europe a thousand years before the Khazar kingdom
was formed. There are no genetic markers or indicators at all showing that
Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Turkic tribes. In fact, there exists
considerable genetic evidence showing that European Jews are closer to
Levantine and Syrian Arabs than to Central Asians.

After the Mongol invasion most Khazars probably assimilated into the
Jewish communities of Iran and Iraq, which of course eventually emerged as
important Sephardic centers, formed mainly of Jews with Semitic racial
characteristics, descended from migrants and exiled Jews from the Land of
Israel. In any case, there are more "Semitic" Sephardic Jews in Israel
today than there are European Ashkenazi Jews. And if the Khazars looked
Turkic, how on earth could they give Ashkenazi Jews a European complexion?

There are other problems. If all Ashkenazi Jews are descended from
converted Khazars, why are there Cohens and Levis among them? One inherits
the status of a Cohen (priest) or Levite from one.s father. Descendants of
converts through the male line can never be a Cohen or a Levite.

And why are there no Khazar surnames among Ashkenazim, or Khazar names for
towns in Europe where Jews lived? And why did most Ashkenazi communities
speak variations of Yiddish rather than Turkic?

As mentioned, the popularity of the Khazar myth among anti-Semites
represents a return of modern anti-Jewish bigotry to the racialism of the
1930.s and earlier.

Nearly every anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi website denounces Zionists and
Israelis as "Khazars." Web chat lists in which Jews defending Israel are
dismissed as "Khazar usurpers" are too numerous to count.

The racialism once again in vogue holds that Jews would only have
legitimate claims to the right of self-determination in their homeland if
they were appropriately Semitic from a racial point of view. Palestine is
part of the Semitic racial lebensraum and those who do not possess the
correct pure racial markings have no business being there. Racial purity
is suddenly the new basis for national rights.

I discovered scores of neo-Nazi websites claiming that "Khazar Zionists"
were really behind the 9/11 attacks. I found thousands of websites
claiming that "Khazar Jew-pretenders" are in a conspiratorial league with
Freemasons, the Vatican, the Illuminati and others to control the world.

Khazar conspiracists get nuttier by the day; a widely cited Ku Klux Klan
website claims that the pro-Israel evangelist Pat Robertson is really a
Khazar Jew. The neo-Nazi American Patriots Friends Network claims Khazars
are themselves descended from the Magog race and secretly control America.

If we take the racialist argument to its logical conclusion, Palestinian
Arabs have the right to exercise all claims to sovereignty in Israel due
to their being true racial Jews, while Zionists are non-Jewish Khazars .
racial imposters and usurpers.

To make things even sillier, Arabs themselves are, of course, a mix of
racial strains, with a particularly large Caucasian component thanks to
Arab intermixing with Spanish and Italian Europeans, Caucasian Berbers,
Vandals, Goths, and even some Vikings.

The racialist delegitimizing of Zionism as "Khazar imperialism" is smack
inside the same insane asylum with the "Jesus was a Palestinian" theory
and the claim that all real Jews (from a racial point of view) converted
to Islam after the Arab conquest of Palestine in the 7th century and so
became Palestinian Arabs.

One can also find countless websites claiming those things.

Posted 5/08/2007 12:51:00 PM

1. This is one of the most wonderful pieces I have read in a while,
reprinted here in full, from

http://sandbox.blog-city.com/israel_lebanon_war_juan_cole.htm
Martin Kramer is definitely one of the funniest web commentators around:

posted Monday, 30 April 2007
"The Israelis tend to launch their wars of choice in the summer, in part
because they know that European and American universities will be the
primary nodes of popular opposition, and the universities are out in the
summer. This war has nothing to do with captured Israeli soldiers." --Juan
Cole at his blog, Informed Comment, July 23, 2006.

The Winograd Commission, the Israeli body established to investigate the
political and military management of the war in Lebanon, released its
interim report today. The material includes the minutes of a crucial
Israeli General Staff meeting in the lead-up to the war. They shed new and
damaging light on its conduct, and they confirm the obvious: Professor
Cole is supremely well-informed about Israel's inner workings. It's
uncanny.

Chief of Staff: Good morning. At the top of the agenda, I want us to take
up a crucial issue, related to the timing of our planned operation in
Lebanon. We've already considered several key factors: the preparedness of
our troops, the situation on the ground in Lebanon, coordination with the
Americans. But there's a paramount matter that I want to revisit before we
present the plan to the Cabinet. It's the academic calendar in foreign
universities.

Neutralizing anti-Israel professors has always been a key ingredient of
our strategy. We all know how vastly influential they are: just think of
Juan Cole, Rashid Khalidi, Norman Finkelstein. So part of our strategic
doctrine in past years has been to launch operations in summer, when
academics are non-operational. Even the French work harder in summer.
That's partly why two of my predecessors chose June to launch the Six-Day
War and the 1982 Lebanon war.

But it's an issue I feel we should revisit. We take a slice of our
strategic doctrine from the Americans. Our own intelligence was surprised
three years ago, when the Pentagon informed us that Operation Iraqi
Freedom would be launched in March, smack in the middle of the academic
year. All our early estimates assumed that the Americans would hold off
until after the last graduation ceremonies in June.

For our discussion today, I've invited Gentleman C, head of Middle East
101, the Mossad unit that tracks American and European academics. I think
we'd all benefit greatly from his insights in planning the timing of our
operation.

Gentleman C, why don't you give us a quick summation of your analysis?

Gentleman C: On the table before each of you, you'll find a comprehensive
study compiled by Middle East 101, looking at the academic year factor in
Israel's wars since 1948. What we've done is a statistical comparison of
the amount of anti-Israel verbiage expended by American and European
professors in all of Israel's wars. I draw your attention to Table 8.
You'll see that in every war, our military operations have taken less
incoming criticism during summer months. We call this the "Away From My
Desk" effect. Professors on summer break are less likely to write op-eds
and show up in the media. There aren't any students to attend their campus
teach-ins, and there's no student press to cover them.

Bottom line is that summer remains an ideal time to launch a war. The
operational readiness of academe is at its lowest.

Director of Military Intelligence: May I? I have a lot of respect for my
opposites in the Mossad, and especially Middle East 101. They do fine
work. And I take my beret off to their targeted character assassination of
Juan Cole. If it weren't for the Mossad's clandestine efforts, Cole would
be at Yale. As you know, it's vitally important to keep people like Cole
outside the 200-kilometer-radius security zone we try to maintain around
New York City.

Chief of Staff: Here, here.

Director of Military Intelligence: That said, we in Military Intelligence
don't share the Mossad's assessment of the "Away From My Desk" effect. It
may be true that the professors manage to fire off more rounds of
criticism during the academic year. But these are mostly short-range
projectiles--teach-ins and classroom agitprop that don't have a range
beyond the campus. Most academics are too preoccupied during the school
year to get off medium- to long-range op-eds in the New York Times or The
Nation. They're too busy preparing lectures, fixing syllabi, keeping
office hours, or quashing rivals in faculty committees.

We think that during the summer, the quality and range of attacks against
us actually increase. You've got professors with lots of time on their
hands, and the more senior, tenured ones are looking for distractions from
their bigger projects. In particular, we think a summer war could expose
us to sustained assault by academic bloggers.

GOC Southern Command: I thought sustained blogging by a professor was
pretty much tantamount to a suicide bombing.

Director of Military Intelligence: There's ample evidence for that. But
we're talking about a group of highly ideological and thoroughly
indoctrinated fanatics. They're quite willing to sacrifice career
prospects in order to advance the cause. The tenured ones, of course,
think they've already died and gone to heaven. They spend most of the year
in classrooms full of near-virgins. It's almost impossible to deter a
tenured professor.

We think the ideal time for an operation is the very first month of the
fall semester, in September. This is crunch-time for professors, who've
got to get all their courses up and running, make sure textbooks are in
the stores, solve scheduling conflicts, and suck up to new deans and
chairpersons. About the only thing professors manage to put on paper in
September is their signatures on drop/add forms, and maybe the occasional
petition.

GOC Home Front Command (with alarm): September? We're not going to launch
a war of choice right in the middle of the Jewish holidays, are we?

Gentleman C: With all due respect, I think my friend from Military
Intelligence underestimates the travel factor in summer. Middle East 101
tracks the movements of professors throughout the world. The
highest-caliber ones are the most likely to disappear in summer for weeks
on end, on "research" trips to London or Provence. We know from
intercepts, and satellite surveillence shared with us by the Americans,
that a lot of them aren't even near a library or archive. Their spouses
have real jobs and need real vacations. We've seen major blogs shut down
entirely for the better part of the summer.

Director of Military Intelligence: Maybe, but a lot of these professors
travel in summer to the Middle East--Beirut, Damascus, Amman. If we launch
a summer operation, they'll suddenly become on-site resources for the
media. If they have to evacuate Lebanon, that becomes a story in itself.
Let's not forget how Rashid Khalidi got started: Beirut, summer of 1982.

Gentleman C (with irritation): Well, who was it who let Khalidi escape
from Beirut?

Director of Military Intelligence (raising voice): Oh? Who authorized
Edward Said to make a visit to Israel? You didn't have to be a prophet to
predict the outcome of that.

Chief of Staff: Gentlemen, please, let's not get sidetracked by past
mistakes. Lord knows we've made plenty of them--bungling the recruitment
of Joel Beinin, letting Ilan Pappe do cushy reserve duty, and the list
goes on. Look, I'd like to continue this discussion all morning, but we do
have other issues on the agenda, like the extent of air power we'll need
to dislodge Hezbollah. I see the Commander of the Air Force is looking at
his watch. Too bad we can't solve the campus problem with air power.

Commander of the Air Force (dryly): Don't say can't. We haven't tried.

Chief of Staff: Well, I'm going to conclude this discussion. My view is
that we should stick with what's worked for us in the past. We'll propose
to go in summer. If we ever do a complete overhaul of doctrine, we can
reconsider. But I think Gentleman C has made a compelling case, and the
empirical data speak for themselves. Agreed?

Director of Military Intelligence: Let the minutes show that I think
otherwise.

Chief of Staff: Duly noted. Oh, and by the way, Gentleman C, what's your
assessment of what Juan Cole might do when we move?

Gentleman C: There's some debate in our shop as to whether he'll stick to
Iraq, or blog furiously about Lebanon. If he Lebanonizes his blog, it'll
be a problem for us, but it'll take some heat off the Americans. They'll
be grateful, and we can trade on that for things we need. Like
bunker-busters.

Chief of Staff: Splendid. Juan Cole might turn out to be one of our
biggest assets. "The work of the righteous is done by others." (Laughter
around the table.)

2. Selective outrage over racism: Hos and Japs:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178096601469&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

3. Oxford wishes to annihilate the US:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTc2NTFmYTI0MGVlYzU5ZTJkNjZhM2E2OGI5NGVjZjk=

3. Self-hating Jew of the week:
http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2007/05/more-self-hating-jews-this-time.html

4. Mickey Abu Mouse:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/blog/index.asp

5. JERUSALEM REPORT,
April 30, 2007, p. 50
VIEWPOINT:

HOW TO FIGHT CAMPUS ISRAEL-BASHERS

Gil Troy

Every spring, representatives of Israel .s universities crisscross the
Diaspora seeking donations. The appeals are deliciously, explicitly,
inspirationally Zionist, inviting Zionist givers to fulfill the modern
Zionist dream by funding Israel .s centers of higher learning. Yet, as
administrators sing this lovely, lucrative Zionist song, some Israeli
professors, funded by these same donor-dollars, preach an ugly
anti-Zionist line.

Israeli academics have helped choreograph the shameful demonization of
Israel and Zionism. They have caricatured Israel as the aggressor and an
oppressor, hailed Palestinian terrorists as freedom fighters, and led
campaigns to boycott their own universities. Many anti-Semitic Websites
highlight Israeli academics trashing the Jewish state. The section in
jewwatch.com, detailing .Jewish Genocides today and yesterday. showcases
one Israeli academic.s 1991 article which popularized the .apartheid.
slur.

I wish we could note these academics. unpatriotic poison, applaud Israel.s
vigorous democracy, toast Israel.s academic freedom, and leave it at that.
But words can kill. The intellectual demonization of Israel has helped
isolate Israel diplomatically, emboldening the terrorists. Moreover, I
feel snookered when I hear university leaders entreating donors to build
the Jewish state, without acknowledging that some of that money is used,
even indirectly, to libel the Jewish national project. And I am outraged
by reports of anti-Zionist intellectual bullying in some departments.

We need vigorous, nuanced responses that preserve academic freedom. The
flow of ideas, like blood flowing to the brain, cannot be restricted
without causing harm. Academics must remain free to pursue foolish,
subversive, distorted ideas, so that tomorrow.s wisdom can be born today.
We should not starve or boycott Israeli universities. Investing in Israeli
research and teaching pays great dividends, creating literate,
sophisticated, citizens and maintaining Israel.s leading role in today.s
information revolutions.

Still, a more balanced campus culture would combat educational
malpractice in the classroom and promote national sanity. Universities
should offer calm, broad-minded, civil alternatives to Israel.s bruising,
polarizing political culture, not replicate it.

Paradoxically, while fighting intolerance and indoctrination, universities
should also cultivate pride, patriotism, altruism, democracy, and yes,
Zionism, in Israeli society. Even as professors and students think
freely, universities should act responsibly. Whether they acknowledge it
or not, universities express their values through the projects they fund,
the problems they pinpoint. If donations can attract scientists to brain
research, business professors to information systems, scholarship to
women.s studies, strategic investments can shape a civics agenda too.
Just as plants lean toward sources of light, professors and students will
respond to visionary leadership.

Recently, Yeshiva University generously endowed a .Center for the Jewish
Future,. an in-house, activist think tank harnessing the university.s
different resources to build an exciting Jewish tomorrow. Imagine what
Israeli universities could accomplish with similar entities. Historians,
philosophers, sociologists, anthropologists, political scientists, and
economists could develop an updated Zionist vision for today.
Interdisciplinary experts on South Africa could study apartheid more
fully, explaining why applying that label to Israel minimizes South
African suffering and distorts reality. Psychologists, social workers,
and educators could join with their colleagues in the more abstract
humanities fields to tackle Israel.s values crisis, cultivating civics in
Israeli classrooms, civility on Israeli streets, equality in Israeli
society, openness in Israeli political discourse, and an ethos of mutual
respect . and honor -- in the Israeli government.

Of course, other professors should feel free to disagree or pursue
different interests. Investing in certain ideas should not discriminate
against iconoclasts. Most funds in the university should remain based on
academic merit. But particular bursaries and efforts should be invested in
propping up Israel . and Zionism . in the war of ideas. Simply beginning
the conversation, defining a mission, challenging universities to live up
to their idyllic self-descriptions will inspire new visionaries even if it
does not silence the cynics.

In fairness, this problem goes beyond Israel. American academics also
delight in bashing the very country which gives them a platform to
pontificate. Too frequently, 1950s McCarthyism has been replaced by an
equally close-minded counter-culture. Political correctness of all stripes
hinders good learning and thinking

Modern universities rarely talk about their missions, except when wooing
young students or rich donors. All universities try to remain free forums
for inquiry while perpetuating certain values. Israel.s universities
should not become indoctrination camps. Still, it is fair to ask what
values are bubbling up in the vacuum of top-down leadership. Israel.s
universities . uniquely motivated by Israel.s need for champions . can
lead here, preserving scholarly objectivity while promoting social
utility. The idea is not to please donors; universities should tackle
this challenge to fulfill themselves and offer Israel desperately needed
ideological, intellectual and moral leadership.

Gil Troy is Professor of History at McGill University and the author of
Why I Am A Zionist: Israel, Jewish Identity and the Challenges of Today.

6. Karsh on the Palestinian "Moderate" Nusseibah:
http://www.spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=2177

7. Academic free speech ... not:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28200

8. Monkey Business
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28196

Posted 5/07/2007 12:59:00 PM

1. The Left sinks to a new low - trotting out a Holocaust Survivor
Imposter!
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28176

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28154
Jewish Divide Over Israel
By Steven Plaut
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 7, 2007

Jewish Divide over Israel
By Edward Alexander and Paul Bogdanor
Transaction Books, 2006.

A little while back I was invited to address a high school class in Haifa
on the subject of Jewish anti-Semitism and Jewish Holocaust Deniers. The
students, and probably also the teachers, were astonished when the topic
was announced. Once the talk had begun, I began to name names of Jewish
anti-Semites and give details. A number of students pounced upon me with
objections. "But, but, but HE is JEWISH," they argued after each example
was named, "so how can HE possibly be considered to be an anti-Semite."
Many believed that the notion of "Jewish Anti-Semite" is in and of itself
a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron.

But not for long. I provided the high schoolers with detailed examples
not only of Jewish anti-Semitism, but also of Israeli Jewish anti-Semites
and even of Israeli Jewish Holocaust Deniers. Yes, they also exist. By
the end of the talk, and having suffered through my long list of examples
and citations of self-hating Jews, the students had swapped disbelief for
bewilderment, shaking their heads in numb sadness.

I mention this incident because those students were not the only ones
around who mistakenly believe that the idea of a "Jewish anti-Semite" is
impossible, a contradiction in terms. Despite the rapid growth in the
plague over the past two decades, many are still totally unaware of it
altogether. And that works in favor of anti-Semitism itself. The
planet's worst anti-Semites, from the communists to the Neo-Nazis to the
Islamofascists, can turn to and publish one Bash-Israel column or internet
article after the other written by Jews, each greeted with the same sense
of serendipity by nave readers, and each celebrated by anti-Semites all
over the world as yet another proof that Israel is a criminal terror state
that must be annihilated. After all, here we have JEWS themselves saying
so.

It is for people unaware of the plague of Jewish anti-Semitism that this
superb book has been written. The book is composed of a collection of
essays composed by the very best Jewish authors in the English-speaking
Jewish world, exposing Jewish anti-Semitism and Jewish anti-Semites. It
is mandatory reading for anyone wishing to understand the madness of
Jewish self-hatred. The only thing that could make the book even more
powerful would be its speedy translation into Hebrew.

The main, but not the only, cause for Jewish anti-Semites around the world
is of course the delegitimization of Israel and Zionism. In most cases,
the villains under examination in the book do not openly declare
themselves anti-Semites, preferring the pose of righteous lovers of
justice for "Palestinians" and haters of Israeli crimes. In one of the
essays in the book, Edward Alexander dismisses such posturing as
"Anti-Semitism Denial", roughly the moral equivalent of Holocaust Denial.
The targets are almost without exception Israel-haters from the Far Left.

One amazing aspect of the book is the revelation of how many of the rogues
under investigation actually hold academic posts at major universities.
Noam Chomsky, of course, has by now become a household name for
anti-Americanism and anti-Jewish bigotry. Chomsky maintains intimate
links with Holocaust Deniers and served as apologist for the Khmer Rouge
while it was conducting genocide on its own people. Nevertheless, Paul
Bogdanor manages to shed fascinating new light on Chomsky in two of the
book's essays. In hundreds of documented facts and citations, Bogdanor
traces Chomsky's candid devotion to seeking Israel's annihilation and the
second Holocaust that would result from it. He shows how Chomsky
legitimizes each and every form of Arab barbarism and terrorism, while
promoting open Neo-Nazis and their views about Jews.

But even Chomsky cannot match the Chicago Neo-Nazi Norman Finkelstein,
focus of a separate essay in the book. Finkelstein, son of Jewish
Holocaust survivors, has made a career out of turning out anti-Semitic
smears for Holocaust Deniers and Islamofascist terrorists. He spent last
summer cheering on the Hizbollah's missile attacks on the Jews.
Finkelstein himself has been declared to be a Holocaust Denier by the
Anti-Defamation League, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and by numerous
others, and Finkelstein is widely referred to as the "Jewish David
Irving." Perhaps that explains Finkelstein's popularity among a certain
strain of Israeli anti-Zionists, such as Neve Gordon from Ben Gurion
University, who praised Finkelstein in an essay of his published on
Neo-Nazi web sites and there compared Finkelstein ethically to the
Prophets in the Bible.

Many of the other rogues exposed in the rest of the book are relatively
unknown in Israel. Daniel Boyarin, an anti-Israel professor at Berkeley
who used to teach at two universities in Israel, is the focus of a
fascinating chapter by Prof. Menachem Kellner from the University of
Haifa. Marc Ellis, a rogue about whom I myself have written at length,[1]
is the focus of a chapter contributed by Alan Mittelman from the Jewish
Theological Seminary.

Regrettably Israeli Jewish anti-Semites play only a relatively small role
in the book, although an excellent chapter by Edward Alexander on
"Israelis against Themselves" is devoted to them. Alexander cites some of
the openly anti-Semitic comments made by Israeli "intellectuals" over the
years, some of which also appear in the wonderful collection of such filth
published by Arieh Stav of the Ariel Center. Alexander traces the
increasing hostility to the Jewish state by people like David Grossman and
Meron Benveniste, although his coverage of Israeli anti-Israel academics
could have been expanded significantly. Another excellent chapter is that
by Efraim Karsh, who has for many years tracked the career of Prof. Banny
Morris from Ben Gurion University. While Morris has recently been
attacked from the Left for moving partly away from his earlier
anti-Zionism, Karsh is not convinced the atonement is for real and
uncovers the long history of pseudo-scholarship and misrepresentation that
forms the bulk of Morris' work.

Three opening essays, including the authors' own excellent introduction,
discuss the problem of Jewish anti-Semitism in general. One of these,
"The Modern 'Hep Hep Hep'" by the renowned American writer Cynthia Ozick,
attracted enormous attention when it first appeared. ('Hep Hep Hep' was
the cry of medieval anti-Semites attacking Jews in pogroms.) Prof. Alvin
Rosenfeld, a well-known American Jewish writer about the Holocaust and
anti-Semitism, provides a chapter on the intellectual fallacies and
failures of "progressive" anti-Israel Jews. He recently made headlines
when the American Jewish Committee, itself a liberal left-leaning
organization, published Rosenfeld's devastating essay, "Progressive.
Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism,. targeting liberal/leftist
anti-Israel Jews in America.[2]

Jewish self-hatred is a unique genre, a disease that does not exist among
other peoples, at least not in anywhere near the degree that it does among
Jews. It is probably not one single disease and it probably has several
different causes.

Up front it needs to be emphasized that Diaspora Jewish self-hatred is not
the same as Israeli Jewish self-hatred, a distinction that is not
adequately made clear in the book. For Diaspora Jewry, self-hatred was
largely a manifestation of Jewish assimilation and loss of Jewish identity
in any form. Once the walls of the ghetto were struck down and many of
the barriers to Jewish participation in modern society were removed, the
real danger to Jewish survival in much of the Diaspora turned out to be
less anti-Semitic violence than assimilation. The secularization of
Diaspora communities removed religion as the anchor of Jewish
consciousness for most Diaspora Jews, especially in the West.

Having intentionally misdefined themselves in order to be accepted by
gentiles as Germans of the Jewish faith, French of the Mosaic persuasion,
Americans of the Jewish religion, most of these Diaspora Jews faced a
profound dilemma once they stopped practicing the Jewish religion. They
were left as generic Germans, French and Americans of no particular
religion at all. By the late 20th century the real threat to Jewish
existence in the Western countries of the Diaspora was less the desire of
anti-Semites to murder them than the desire of gentiles to marry them.

By and large, for such secularized assimilated Jews in the Diaspora,
Jewish "self-hatred" was less a form of anti-Semitism than it was an
expression of indifference to their own Jewish roots and origins. Most
"self-hating" assimilationist Jews in the Diaspora are simply non-Jewish
Jews, people with no interest in belonging to the Jewish community or in
practicing any form of Judaism. By and large they do not actively wish
other Jews harm and most have no sympathy at all for anti-Semites.

There are of course exceptions to that last observation, and those
exceptions are the focus of the Alexander-Bogdanor book. One can of
course find examples of Jewish anti-Semites wooing gentile anti-Semites in
order to be accepted by them, going back to Greek and Roman times. But,
again, such anti-Semitic posturing should probably be seen as a
particularly obscene version of assimilationism. Such Diaspora Jewish
anti-Semites choose their Bash-Israel fashionable positions more out of
desire for social acceptance than out of a serious political outlook.
Surrounded by anti-Semites among whom they wish to mix and whose approval
they seek, they mouth the magic passwords for acceptance about destroying
Israel and opposing Zionism.

But Israeli Jewish anti-Semites are a completely different kettle of fish.
They are not posturing against Israel and against Jews because they are a
small persecuted ethnic minority in some gentile country of residence. It
is true that there is an element of seeking social acceptance for them,
attacking Jews and Israel in order to court favor among overseas
anti-Semites, especially among Israeli leftists. There is also clearly a
repudiation of all attachment to Jews and Jewishness among such people,
where "Canaanism" in the form of post-Jewish Israeliness is almost
universal among Israeli anti-Semites. But that is clearly not the same as
Diaspora assimilationism. Israeli anti-Semites may posture as "Jewish
Palestinians", but none of them are serious trying to learn Arabic or
dress and live as Arabs.

If Diaspora "self-hating" Jews are by and large simply indifferent to
their Jewishness, Israeli Jewish anti-Semites quite openly hate their own
people and country. They invariably identify with and endorse the enemies
of their country. Tali Fahima and Udi Adiv differ from other Israeli
anti-Semites only in the degree of their actual treason. Israeli Jewish
anti-Semites are not seeking social and cultural acceptance as much as
they are seeking the destruction of their own people and the annihilation
of their own country. They resemble far more Lord Haw-Haw or Taliban John
than they do the assimilated suburban American Jew.

As such, Israeli Jewish anti-Semites increasingly resemble the candidly
treasonous fringes of the American and European Left. Just like the
American Left is essentially little more than a movement of
anti-Americanism and can be counted on to endorse every enemy of the
United States and oppose American interests in everything, so the Israeli
Left is motivated by an acute desire to see its own country harmed. The
difference of course is that the anti-American Left in the United States
is harmless and an amusing distraction, whereas the radical self-hating
Israeli Left is actively collaborating with the enemies of its own country
during time of war and when the goal of those enemies is the annihilation
of Israel.

Eric Ericsson, one of the fathers of modern psychology, once wrote that
radical politics is generally a manifestation of an infantile rebellion
against one's parents. Kenneth Levin from Harvard and others have
suggested that psychological and psychiatric analysis is a better tool for
explaining Jewish self-hatred than political analysis, and I personally
think most Israeli Jewish self-hatred can be traced back to problems with
toilet training.

In any case, I can think of nothing more desperately needed in Israel than
a companion book to this excellent one, focusing on Israel's own variety
of the species exposed in it. If anything, the Israeli variety is worse
than its overseas cousins, and it is certainly far more dangerous.
Israeli "progressive" self-bigotry is more openly anti-Semitic. After
all, clueless American Jewish leftist "intellectuals" can afford to wallow
in their delusions about the Middle East without creating any clear and
immediate danger to anything. The Israeli Jewish leftist anti-Semites
are a Fifth Column, operating in a country at war and under threat of
destruction.

Notes:

[1]

www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17755
[2]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/31/arts/31jews.html?ex=1170824400&en=69a7a105abf1e92e&ei=5070&emc=eta1MSN

3. The Finkelstein Promotion Process:
http://www.solomonia.com/blog/archives/010445.shtml

4. The Winograd Commission that was Not:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/6942

5. Feminuts:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7105

6. The Olmert Doctrine:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28177

Posted 5/05/2007 08:56:00 PM

1. Wall Street Journal
Finkelstein's Bigotry
By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ
May 4, 2007; Page A15

In her 1951 best seller, "The Groves of Academe," Mary McCarthy
fictionalized a failed academic who, realizing he wouldn't get tenure,
became a communist so that he could claim that he was being denied tenure
because he was a Red rather than a lousy scholar.

A version of that ploy is being used today. Norman Finkelstein brags that
"never has one of [his] articles been published in a scientific magazine."
By his own account he has been fired by "every school in New York,"
including Brooklyn College, Hunter and NYU. His chairman at one of these
colleges said that Mr. Finkelstein was fired for "incompetence," "mental
instability" and "abuse" of students with politics different from his own.
His prospects seemed bleak, so when radical Islamist Aminah McCloud -- a
follower of Louis Farrakhan -- helped him land a job at DePaul, a school
that Mr. Finkelstein describes as "a third-rate Catholic university," he
accepted "exile."

His prospects did not improve when he wrote a screed against Holocaust
survivors called "The Holocaust Industry." The scholar whose work on the
Holocaust was the "stimulus" for this volume, University of Chicago
professor Peter Novick, warned that: "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. . . .[S]uch an examination reveals that
many of those assertions are pure invention." Nor was he helped when New
York Times reviewer Prof. Omer Bartov, an authority on genocide,
characterized his book as "a novel variation on the anti-Semitic forgery,
'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' . . . brimming with indifference to
historical facts, inner contradictions, strident politics . . . [I]ndecent
. . . juvenile, self-righteous, arrogant and stupid."

On the other hand, Mr. Finkelstein is supported by hard-leftists like Noam
Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn. They regard him as a scholar in a class
with Ward Churchill (the Colorado professor who called the 9/11 victims
"little Eichmanns") -- a characterization with which I would not quarrel.

Facing tenure denial, Mr. Finkelstein opted for a tactic that fit the
times. He expressed views so ad hominem, unscholarly and extreme that he
could claim the decision was being made not on the basis of his
scholarship, but rather on his politics.

Mr. Finkelstein does not do "scholarship" in any meaningful sense.
Although his writings center on Israel (which he compares to Nazi Germany)
and the Holocaust, he has never visited Israel and cannot read or speak
German -- precluding the possibility of original scholarship.

Prof. Bartov characterized his work as an irrational Jewish "conspiracy
theory." The conspirators include Steven Spielberg, NBC and Leon Uris. The
film "Schindler's List," Mr. Finkelstein argues, was designed to divert
attention from our Mideast policy. "Give me a better reason! . . . Who
profits? Basically, there are two beneficiaries from the dogmas [of
Schindler's List]: American Jews and American administration." NBC, he
says, broadcast "Holocaust" to strengthen Israel's position: "In 1978, NBC
produced the series Holocaust. Do you believe, it was a coincidence, 1978?
Just at this time, when peace negotiations between Israel and Egypt took
place in Camp David?" He argues that Leon Uris, the author of "Exodus,"
named his character "Ari" in order to promote Israel's "Nazi" ideology:
"[B]ecause Ari is the diminutive for Aryan. It is the whole admiration for
this blond haired, blue eyed type." (Ari is a traditional name dating back
to the Bible.) He has blamed Sept. 11 on the U.S., claiming that we
"deserve the problem on our hands because some things Bin Laden says are
true.") He says that most alleged Holocaust survivors -- including Elie
Wiesel -- have fabricated their past.

Like other anti-Semites, Mr. Finkelstein generalizes about "the Jews"; for
example: "Just as Israelis . . . courageously put unruly Palestinians in
their place, so American Jews courageously put unruly Blacks in their
place." He says "the main fomenters of anti-Semitism "are 'American Jewish
elites' who need to be stopped." Normally, no one would take such claims
seriously, but he boasts that he "can get away with things which nobody
else can" because his parents were Holocaust survivors.

And then, of course, there is me. In a recent article, "Should Alan
Dershowitz Target Himself for Assassination?" Mr. Finkelstein commissioned
a cartoon by a man who placed second in the Iranian Holocaust-denial
cartoon contest. The Hustler-type cartoon portrayed me as masturbating in
joy while viewing images of dead Lebanese on a TV set labeled "Israel peep
show," with a Star of David prominently featured.

Mr. Finkelstein has accused me of not having written "The Case For Israel"
but when I sent his publisher my handwritten draft, they made him remove
that claim. He has accused virtually every pro-Israel writer, including
me, of "plagiarism." I asked Harvard to conduct an investigation of this
absurd charge. Harvard rejected it, yet he persists.

The final part of Mr. Finkelstein's quest for tenure is to blame his
tenure problems on "outsiders." He claims that I intruded myself into the
DePaul review process, neglecting to mention that I was specifically asked
by the former chairman of DePaul's political science department to "point
[him] to the clearest and most egregious instances of dishonesty on
Finkelstein's part." I responded by providing hard evidence of made-up
quotes and facts -- a pattern that should alone disqualify him from
tenure.

Nevertheless, Mr. Finkelstein's radical colleagues voted for tenure,
having cooked the books by seeking outside evaluations from two of his
ideological soulmates. The dean, however, recommended against tenure. Mr.
Finkelstein then used my letter to stimulate a "Solidarity with
Finkelstein" campaign.

Like the character in the "Groves of Academe," Mr. Finkelstein generated
protests by students and outsiders. He 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?

Mr. Dershowitz, professor of law at Harvard, is the author, most recently,
of "Preemption: A Knife that Cuts Both Ways" (Norton, 2006).

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117824380227591804.html

2. Bishara's Seditious Brethren:
http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2007/05/bisharas-brothers.html

3. Rat Trap:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3395153,00.html

4. Winograd Wins, Olmert Loses:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28134

5. Burying Archeology in PC-ness
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28151