Friday, January 29, 2010
1. "Haaretz" is the Palestinian daily published in Hebrew. When even Haaretz concedes that a news "story" about a Palestinian "victim" of the Jews was a fraud, you know that the Palestinians themselves concede as much.
In September 2000 a French film crew fraudulently staged the "murder" of the Palestinian boy Mohammed a-Dura, supposedly shot by Israeli troops while slouched in his Daddy's lap. Except it was all theater. It later came out that it was staged. A court in France pronounced that the French TV channel was responsible for fraud. And the dead victim of Zionist aggression is still evidently alive and ticking and running about. That did not stop the "pieta" photo of the dead boy becoming the war poster of the anti-Semites. Iran uses it all the time, as does the PLO, as does the Hamas. The Arab students at my own university do also. So do the Trots.
Well, this week, even Haaretz affirmed that the whole martyrdom of a-Dura was fraud. Many years too late, Haaretz columnist Reuven Pedhatzur discovered the fraud this week and even wrote that a-Dura is probably still running about safe and sound. We figure that at this rate Haaretz might yet discover that the Lindbergh baby is missing.
2. Speaking of atypical journalistic integrity in Israel, Maariv runs a MAJOR expose of the New Israel Fun in today's weekend paper, and even touts the story on the paper's front page. Ben Kaspit, a senior Maariv columnist who leans left of center, bashed the New Israel Fund for its financing of anti-Israel propaganda groups inside Israel. His piece cites at length a study by the Zionist student group "Im Tirtzu," which discovered that 92% of the anti-Israel materials and propaganda picked up and used in the Goldstone Report, the report by the UN commission headed up by Jewish anti-Semitic judge Richard Goldtone, were taken from groups financed by the New Israel Fund. The New Israel Fund is currently chaired by Naomi Hazan, who used to be a Kneseet Member from the semi-Marxist Meretz party. She is extremely proud of the fact that the anti-Israel propaganda was produced with funds from NIF!!
In the US there are laws that restrict even what domestic corporate bodies can spend on local politicking (or at least there were until this past week's Supreme Court ruling). In Israel there are no laws at all against Israeli treasonous Fifth Column organizations that enjoy no support at all inside Israel operating with large amounts of funds donated by foreign anti-Israel and anti-Semitic organizations.
3. The liberal media is crying croc tears over the passing of the communist pseudo-historian and anti-Semitic Jew Howard Zinn, who taught history from a pre-perestroika point of view at Boston University. Zinn was a Bash-America guru for the Left in the US and in EU. His best-known book was "A People's History of the United States," where "people" is being used in the same sense as "the People's Republics" of the Soviet era. Some members of the Jewish Left have also issued boo-hoos about Zinn's death, including the pseudo-rabbi and all-round crackpot (a word formed by mixing crack with pot), Arthur Waskow.
Well, just to put things into their proper perspective, I reprint here an expose of Zinn from Frontpage Magazine:
Collaborators in the Campus War against Israel and the Jews: Howard Zinn
Posted By John Perazzo On October 21, 2009 @ 12:11 am In FrontPage | Comments Disabled
Boston University historian and Professor Emeritus of Political Science Howard Zinn is the author of more than twenty books, most notably A People's History of the United States (1980). Painting America as a nation whose chief contributions to humanity consist of repression, racism, imperialism, and genocide, this Marxist tract ranks among the best-selling history books of all time. A devoted admirer of Mao 's China (which he calls "the closest thing, in the long history of that ancient country, to a people's government") and Castro 's Cuba (which he says "had no bloody record of suppression"), Zinn takes a much darker view not only of America, but also of America's closest ally in the Middle East, Israel.
According to Zinn, Israel's creation in 1948 "meant the dispossession of the Arab majority that lived on that land," and led to "the occupation and subjugation of several million Palestinians" — a situation that "we would today call 'ethnic cleansing.'"
Zinn recalls  that "after the Six-Day War of 1967 and Israel's occupation of territories seized in that war (the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, the Sinai peninsula)," although he himself is a Jew he nonetheless "began to see Israel not simply as a beleaguered little nation surrounded by hostile Arab states, but as an expansionist power." The fact that the new territories Israel gained not as the result of its own aggression, but in a war of self-defense against a massive invasion by the armies of three Arab states — Egypt, Syria and Jordan  — that were seeking to annihilate it did not factor into Zinn's new view of the Middle East.
With regard to the ongoing Mideast conflict today, Zinn places most of the blame for what he terms "the cycle of violence" on Israel's allegedly provocative and unjustified use of disproportionate force: "a rock-throwing [Palestinian] intifada met by [Israeli] over-reaction in the form of broken bones and destroyed homes; [Palestinian] suicide bombers killing innocent Jews followed by [Israeli] bombings which killed ten times as many innocent Arabs."
According to Zinn , Israeli society is filled with deep-seated "xenophobia, militarism, [and] expansionism." He seeks Jewish precedents to buttress his hardcore anti Israel views:
"Some of the wisest Jews of our time — Einstein, Martin Buber — warned of the consequences of a Jewish state. Einstein wrote, at the very inception of Israel: 'My awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain….'"
In this confused formulation, by upholding its right to exist as a Jewish homeland in the face of genocidal enemies, Israel somehow compromises its "essence."
Zinn laments  that "in the occupied territories … a million and more Palestinians live under a cruel military occupation, while our [U.S.] government supplies Israel with high-tech weapons." His objection to U.S. aid to Israel has motivated him to endorse divestment campaigns aimed at companies that contribute in any way to Israel's efforts to curb the violence of Palestinian terrorists — or as Zinn sees them, freedom fighters.
In February of this year, when Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts became the first American college or university to divest its financial holdings in U.S.-based companies because of their alleged role in promoting Israeli injustices against Palestinians, Zinn endorsed  the measure along with such figures as Noam Chomsky  (who has called Israel "virtually a U.S. military base" founded "on the principle of discrimination"); Rashid Khalidi  (who contends that Israel's very existence is "at the expense of the Palestinians" and "fails to meet the most important requirement: justice"); Rep. Cynthia McKinney  (who once quipped that "the Israeli occupation of all territories must end, including Congress"); and Ilan Pappe  (who has openly expressed support  for the Palestinian terror group Hamas  "in its resistance against the Israeli occupation").
Just last month, Zinn was one of 59 clients  of the multi-billion-dollar financial services and retirement firm TIAA-CREF (Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association, College Retirement Equities Fund) to sign a letter calling on the Fund to divest the $257,000 in stocks it held in the company Africa-Israel. Zinn objected to Africa-Israel's role in funding the construction of Israeli settlements located in disputed territories in or near the West Bank. He was again joined in signing the letter by professors Noam Chomsky; George Bisharat  (who complains that greedy Zionists "stole Palestine" from its rightful owners); Joel Beinin  (who says  that the first Palestinian Intifada of 1988-92 was actually "a strike for peace"); and Juan Cole  (who says  Israelis "insist on occupying a people whom they do not wish to absorb, but only to steal from").
Zinn's view of the Middle East conflict is part of his view of his own profession as an "engaged" historian who wants his writing and his teaching of history "to be a part of social struggle"; a "political act" by someone who is "a part of history and not just a recorder and teacher."
in this post:
 According to : http://www.tikkun.org/article.php/HowardZinn-Thepoisonsofnationalism
 Egypt, Syria and Jordan: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guides/Why%20Israel%20Is%20The%20Victim.htm
 laments: http://www.zmag.org/zinncalam.htm
 Noam Chomsky: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1232
 Rashid Khalidi: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1347
 Rep. Cynthia McKinney: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1508
 Ilan Pappe: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1244
 George Bisharat: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2095
 Joel Beinin: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2146
 says: http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/1472
 Norman Finkelstein: http://18.104.22.168/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=36406
 Tony Judt: http://22.214.171.124/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=36238
 Michael Lerner: http://126.96.36.199/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=36178
 Marc H. Ellis: http://188.8.131.52/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=36028
 Image: http://www.addtoany.com/share_save?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffrontpagemag.com%2F2009%2F10%2F21%2Fcollaborators-in-the-campus-war-against-israel-and-the-jews-howard-zinn%2F&linkname=Collaborators%20in%20the%20Campus%20War%20against%20Israel%20and%20the%20Jews%3A%20Howard%20Zinn
Here are some other items worth reading about the "legacy" of Zinn: http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/01/28/leftist-heads-explode-over-howard-zinns-death/
(A close crony of the Chomsky, Zinn also lobbied for anti-Semite Joel Kovel recently: http://peoplesgeography.com/2007/10/10/joel-kovel-overcoming-zionism/)
Thursday, January 28, 2010
1. Tel Aviv University anti-Israel philosophy professors (and friends) produce yet another one sided "book" – a collection of Bash Israel pseudo-academic diatribes:
The Power of Insinuation: the modalities and normative anti-
Israel discourse of Israel's academics as seen through The
Power of Inclusive Exclusion.
The Power of Inclusive Exclusion edited by Adi Ophir, Michal Givoni and Sari Hanafi, Brooklyn:
Zone, 641 pages, (Hardcover), 2009 $25.71
Reviewed by Seth J. Frantzman
The fact that there is yet another book about the "occupation" should not be a surprise. The fact that
it consists ONLY of anti-Israel and anti-Zionist writers is not either. The fact that not a single pro-
Israel writer was invited to participate should be met with yawns. Ideological self-recruiting to
promote a political agenda under the guise of "research" has become trivially common in Israeli
universities and elsewhere.
Books about the conflict are also unique in their attention to the most minor details of the conflict.
Consider Tim Jon Simmerling's Israeli and Palestinian postcards: Presentations of National Self
published in 2004. Or Hollow Land: Israel's Architecture of Occupation by Eyal Weizman, who
coincidentally is also a contributor to this volume reviewed here. It is unlikely a coincidence that the
photo used for the cover of Architecture of Occupation is identical to the one used on the cover of
Power of Inclusive Exclusion. The book was commenced in 2003 as a project "under the auspices of
the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute" (page 26). This organization spends much of its time hosting and
funding extreme anti-Israel discourse. It currently publishes the Marxist Hebrew magazine "Theory
In part, such books are the result of Israeli and Jewish academics who build careers out of churning
out such articles. Dr. David Hirsh, a sociology lecturer at University of London's Goldsmiths
College, recently described these antics: "Israeli anti-Zionists boast that their country carries out the
most important and horrific genocides in the world...[they have] delusions of grandeur." They are
celebrated as minor celebrities by weaving a narrative about being "Jews" and "Israelis" who
supposedly are supposedly courageously standing up against the mainstream. One example of this is
Dr. Anat Matar of Tel Aviv University, who attended a February 17, 2010 London University School
for Oriental and African Studies conference, where she spoke on "Supporting the boycott on Israel: a
View from Within."
Consider the introduction of Inclusive Exclusion, where the editors claim, "This book has been
conceived in an atmosphere that is generally hostile to the kind of political questions and theoretical
perspectives it strives to open." This is nonsense. The academic world is awash with Bash-Israel
diatribes and advocacy "research." Nevertheless every anti-Israel propagandist in academia insists
IsraCampus.Org.il Page 1 of 10
that he or she is challenging the dominant paradigm, "breaking moulds" and "exploding myths." In
loud unison every single one of these people casts himself or herself as the "lone voice" who is
"radically refashioning." In many departments devoted to Middle Eastern studies, for example, every
single person claims to be a "lone voice" who "dares" to speak up about the Israeli occupation. It is
the conformism of the postureurs of non-conformity. In reality it is a form of group think.
3. Dershowitz blasts the bias in the Goldstone Report:
"Much more scurrilous than most of its detractors (and supporters) believe."
4. Israel's leftist McCarthyists did not dawdle for even a few minutes after the Chief Justice was attacked by a thug in court yesterday. Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch was struck by a shoe thrown by a disgruntled hooligan in court over disagreements regarding his alimony payments. The thug probably never even heard the expression "judicial activism."
But Beinisch of course is also the leading advocate in Israel these days of "judicial activism," the theory that holds that unelected judges should have powers of veto over the legislature and the executive branch and should use them to promote the agenda of the "enlightened" Left. That makes her popular with Israel's leftist chatterers and gets her criticized by other folks.
The leftists celebrating Beinisch's "judicial activism" ideas are the same McCarthyist chatterers who insist that the exercise of freedom of speech by non-leftists in Israel is what produces all the political violence in the country, including the murder of Yitzhak Rabin. Well, they are back today, led by Haaretz columnists, insisting that criticism of Beinisch (from the Right?) no doubt set the stage and inspired the shoe hooligan yesterday. Here is Tel Aviv University professor Zeev Segal, a Haaretz regular, at the head of the McCarthyists: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1145659.html A defendant of laws against "incitement," He is all indignant over "those who disobey laws," but has never spoken out against the hundreds of his academic colleagues calling for mutiny and insurrection by Israeli soldiers. For Hebrew readers, here is another professor making the same McCarthyist points: http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3840812,00.html
The solution for hooliganism and for everything else wrong in Israel is thus to silence the Non-Left!!
5. The civil rights activists in Israel who hate civil rights and oppose freedom and equality under the law: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3838854,00.html
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
1. Tel Aviv University – Yossi Schwartz (Dept. of History) Wants to Dissolve Israel
In the world according to Schwartz, then, it's Comrades Lenin and Trotsky who have the answer – the mass murderer and torturer who laid groundwork for the police-state infrastructure for all of Stalin's even larger-scale crimes.'
For full item Go to:
2. More anti-Israel agitprop at the Hebrew University:
3. Progressive wife beating: http://frontpagemag.com/2010/01/26/palestinian-wife-beating-the-jews-made-them-do-it/
4. Wall St Journal: Stop the Trial of Geert Wilders
A Dutch court is forced to compare Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' and the Quran.
What started as a trial against Geert Wilders for alleged Islamophobia has nearly turned into its opposite: a historical case about the message of the Quran. The Amsterdam court trying the controversial Dutch politician is now preoccupied with the question of whether this book, sacred to more than a billion believers, can be compared to one of the most vile publications in the history of Western civilization—Hitler's "Mein Kampf." What could possibly go wrong?
In his writing and speeches, Mr. Wilders has found these two works to be similar in terms of their anti-Semitism and incitement to hatred, and has thus called for a publishing ban on the Quran similar to the one in place for "Mein Kampf." This is what triggered Mr. Wilders's prosecution for discriminatory and insulting remarks against Muslims and Islam. The Dutch politician, though, denies having insulted Muslims. He insists his focus is on radical Islam and the Quran, which he considers to be not only a religious text but also a political pamphlet encouraging Muslims to discriminate against and, if necessary, kill Jews, Christians, apostates and other unbelievers. That's why Mr. Wilders claims the right to criticize and condemn Islam.
Following complaints brought by mostly Muslim and radical leftist activists, Amsterdam's district attorney in 2008 at first found no legal basis for prosecuting Mr. Wilders. Prosecutors were forced to change course only after an activist appeals court last year ordered Mr. Wilders's prosecution—basically condemning the politician before any trial could even begin and before Mr. Wilders had a chance to defend himself. The court's unusual intervention illustrates the Dutch confusion about the conflict between two essential rights: the right to free speech and the right to protection from discrimination.
According to polls, Mr. Wilders's Freedom Party, a libertarian-conservative movement with populist tendencies, is currently the most popular political party in the Netherlands. If elections were held today, Mr. Wilders would be a serious contender for the position of prime minister. Mr. Wilders's detractors are mistaken if they think a conviction would hurt him politically. The trial is a win-win situation for him: If the court rules to restrict Mr. Wilders's right to free speech, many Dutchmen will interpret this as an effort by the politically correct establishment to limit the growing strength of the Freedom Party, which would widen its appeal to many voters. If, on the other hand, the prosecution fails to prove that Mr. Wilders has purposely insulted Muslims because of their religion, Mr. Wilders's views will be seen as vindicated. Again, he will gain politically.
More importantly, Mr. Wilders's prosecution may in the end inadvertently create a crisis between the Netherlands and the Islamic world. On trial is not so much Geert Wilders, but the Holy Book of Islam. On Jan. 20, the first day of the case, Mr. Wilders's defense team presented the court with a list of expert witnesses. It is indicative of his strategy. The expert witnesses, a group of internationally renowned academics on the one hand and, on the other, radical Islamists (among them Mohammed Bouyeri, the killer of Theo van Gogh, and the influential Iranian Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, an outspoken anti-Semite and religious mentor of Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinedjad), are requested to testify about the Quran's message and Mr. Wilders's comparison of the Quran to "Mein Kampf." As Mr. Wilders stated on the first and, so far only, session in court, if his statements about the Quran and "Mein Kampf" are correct, he cannot be convicted for telling the truth. So Mr. Wilders's defense team will concentrate on the extreme and violent paragraphs in the Quran, and compare them to paragraphs in "Mein Kampf."
The prosecution did not object to calling the witnesses for the purpose of shedding light on the Quran and "Mein Kampf" and only objected to the high number of witnesses named (17). The court will thus most likely allow most witnesses on the list to testify. Without doubt, there are many anti-Jewish remarks in the Quran. According to some researchers, there may be more of these in the Quran than in "Mein Kampf." So it is quite conceivable that the court will judge that Geert Wilders was within his right to compare the Quran to "Mein Kampf." Anything is possible in this absurd trial.
The three judges hearing the case—no doubt decent, modest, postmodern Dutchmen with a minimum knowledge of Islam and its culture and traditions—will now be forced to debate the nature of a religious text, something that should have never been heard in the court of an enlightened society. In front of the judges and television cameras, the ancient founding text of an entire civilization will be criticized and weighed against one of the most inhumane texts written in the 20th century—without any doubt a deep insult to Muslims, radical or not.
There is a way out. The district attorney's office has complied with the appeals court's order to prosecute Mr. Wilders. The trial has started. It should now ask the court for an acquittal. This preposterous trial needs to be stopped right now.
Mr. de Winter is a Dutch novelist and adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute.
5. Jewish Arabs and other oxymorons at NYU: http://isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/Editorial%20-%20Lee%20Kaplan%20-%20NYU%20-%20Ella%20Shabiba%20Shohat%20-%20the%20Arab-Jew.htm
6. Tel Aviv University continues its war against Israel: http://isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/TAU%20-%20Anat%20Matar%20-%20calling%20for%20boycott%20of%20Israel%20in%20international%20forum.htm
7. Hebrew University: Dogs and Zionists unwanted: http://isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/HebrewU%20-%20Alon%20Harel%20-%20leftist%20only%20conference%20chairman.htm
Tuesday, January 26, 2010