Steven Plaut

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

You just might be an "Occupier"
(from this week's Jewish Press, NY, Dec 2 issue)
By Steven Plaut

Many of us are scratching our heads, and in some cases other parts
of our anatomy, trying to make sense of the "Occupy Wall Street"
movement and its sundry clones around the US and now around the world.
Just what do these urchins really want? What do they think and

Well, we thought we would recruit Jeff Foxworthy to try to assist
us. Most of you probably are familiar with the great American
comedian from the Deep South. He is best known for his comedy shticks
based on the refrain, "Then you just might be a redneck." For
example, if you have 24 pickup trucks and none of them work, then you
just might be a redneck. That sort of thing.

Well, it occurs to us that Jeff Foxworthy could really clean up if
he altered his shtick slightly to comment on those "who just might be
Wall Street Occupiers."

Here we go:

1. If you dismiss anything you dislike as "neo-liberalism," then you
just might be a Wall Street Occupier. Never be tricked into
attempting to define that nonsense term.
2. If you refuse to recognize the fact that every idea of Marx's was
debunked over 160 years ago, then you just might be a Wall Street
3. If you wear Nike shoes, designer jeans, and carry your smart phone
to the demonstrations against capitalism, then you just might be a
Wall Street Occupier.
4. If you think that REAL communism could really work but it just has
never been tried or tested, you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
5. If you pretend that you have never heard that communism produces
starvation and cannibalism, then you just might be a Wall Street
6. If you pretend you think the United States controls an empire,
even though you cannot think of any colonies it owns, then you just
might be a Wall Street Occupier.
7. If you think other people must always be required to relinquish
their material things so that you may pursue social justice and feel
idealistic and righteous, then you just might be a Wall Street
8. If you consider your own property to be sacred, while other
people's property should be used for social engineering and doing
good, then you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
9. If you think it is the main purpose of universities to
indoctrinate students in leftwing ideology, then you just might be a
Wall Street Occupier.
10. If you think shooting terrorists constitutes "war crimes," then
you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
11. If you favor academic departments in which only enlightened
leftist opinion may be expressed and where there is no room for
non-leftist dissenting opinion to be heard, then you just might be a
Wall Street Occupier.
12. If you believe that the only legitimate way for Israel to defend
its citizens against terrorism is to capitulate to the demands of the
terrorists, then you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
13. If you believe that eating meat is murder, while partial birth
abortion is not, then you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
14. If you use the term Islamophobia often, but never use the term
Islamofascism, then you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
15. If you believe that everything wrong with the world is because of
the United States, and that anything left over that is wrong with the
world is the fault of the Jews, then you just might be a Wall Street
16. If you think there is nothing useful to be learned from the fact
that Cuba used to be the richest country in Latin America and today is
the poorest country in Latin America, then you just might be a Wall
Street Occupier.
17. If you are not aware of the fact that Cubans steal boats to
sneak into the US but no low-income Americans steal boats to sneak
into Cuba, then you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
18. If you think there is nothing we can learn from comparing the
histories of East Germany with West Germany before the unification, or
North Korean with South Korea, then you just might be a Wall Street
19. If you think that all arguments may be settled by telling a
non-leftist that he
reminds you of Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, then you just might be a
Wall Street Occupier.
20. If you claim that the fact that are proportionately more blacks
in prison than whites proves that the courts and police are racist,
but the fact that there are many more males in prison than females is
because males commit more crimes, then you just might be a Wall Street
21. If you support proposals that make real problems of the world
worse, just as long as advocating them makes you feel caring and
righteous, then you just might be a Wall Street Occupier..
22. If you think Israel is an apartheid regime, then you just might
be a Wall Street Occupier.
23. If you prefer that poor people in the Third World starve rather
than that they should embrace capitalism and live like you do, then
you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
24. If you believe that acts of violence against Jews or Americans
are never terrorism but rather resistance, then you just might be a
Wall Street Occupier.
25. If you think the US itself caused the 9-11 attacks on itself
because of American insensitivity and racism, then you just might be a
Wall Street Occupier.
26. If you believe that terrorism is caused by poverty, then you just
might be a Wall Street Occupier.
27. If you believe that SUVs threaten life on earth, and - more
generally - that the planet is in imminent danger of destruction
unless everyone does what you want them to do, then you just might be
a Wall Street Occupier.
28. If you assert passionately that Marxists care about people, while
Conservatives hate all people and small animals and are not as smart
as leftists, then you just might be a Wall Street Occupier.
29. If you believe that, if one country is rich and another poor, it
must be because the
rich one stole wealth away from the poor one, then you just might be a
Wall Street Occupier.
30. If you demand social justice but have no idea how to define what
it means or explain how to achieve it, then you just might be a Wall
Street Occupier.
31. If you do not think you need to get a job first before you vecome
a leader of the working class, then you just might be a Wall Street

Shalom, Allow us to introduce ourselves.....

Creative Community for Peace is a non-profit organization headed up by a cross section of the creative world - those who create and help create music, movies, and television programs - and their fans.


We may not all share the same politics or the same opinion on the best path to peace in the Middle East. But we do agree that singling out Israel, the only democracy in the region, as a target of cultural boycotts while ignoring the now-recognized human rights issues of her neighbors will not further peace.


We understand the power that our music, our films, our television shows, and all arts have. They have the power to build bridges. Foster better understanding. Encourage dialogue. And hopefully lead toward greater mutual acceptance.


If anything, turn up the music, expose more of our films and television shows to wider audiences, and encourage people from all cultures to interact and build greater dialogue and understanding.


We are reaching out to those who support the message that the arts can build bridges—please join us in this important mission.


The world might just be a better place for it.




Creative Community for Peace informs artists and their representation to help them make a positive decision to play in Israel in the face of threats and disinformation they often face from activists who seek to boycott Israel. Through interpersonal relationship outreach and a sophisticated website developed to support our message and to counter the arguments of the boycott movement.


We have just launched a social media effort to engage with the vast majority of true fans, via social media, who support this aim.


While artists are in Israel, we help arrange their itinerary so they are able to experience the wonder and diversity of Israel's land and her people.


We monitor boycott activity in an attempt to shine a light on how divisive, one-sided and contrary to peace and peaceful intentions these campaigns are.


We continue to encourage artists to play in Israel both in a personal capacity and as a movement of fans. By doing so, they join a host of top artists who have recently played in Israel, including Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, Madonna, Linkin Park, Paul McCartney, The Black Eyed Peas, Bob Dylan and many, many more.







Ronny Hatchwell
Israel Coordinator
Creative Community For Peace

Ronny Hatchwell
Israel Coordinator
Creative Community For Peace

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

From the Jewish Press (NY)

Will Israel Ever Get Serious About Treason?
By: Steven Plaut
Published: November 23rd, 2011 | Latest update: November 23rd, 2011
Earlier this year Israel passed a law that would strip Israelis of
their citizenship if convicted of espionage or treason. Condemned for
this by countries all over the world, almost all of whom have far
harsher anti-treason laws than Israel, the Israeli government has yet
to apply the law to anyone.

Earlier this year Israel passed a law that would strip Israelis of
their citizenship if convicted of espionage or treason. Condemned for
this by countries all over the world, almost all of whom have far
harsher anti-treason laws than Israel, the Israeli government has yet
to apply the law to anyone.

Sometimes called the "Azmi Bishara Law," it was motivated by the fact
that an Arab member of the Israeli parliament, Azmi Bishara, from one
of the Arab parties, had openly engaged in espionage and treason,
including passing on intelligence to the Hizbullah terrorist
organization while it was firing rockets at Israeli civilians. Bishara
is now in hiding and has yet to be prosecuted.

The Anti-Israel Lobby denounced this law as "racist," just as it
denounces everything Israel does as racist (including rescuing Haitian
earthquake victims). The bleating from Bash-Israel NGO groups about
supposed Israeli "apartheid" sound particularly absurd when one
realizes that Israel is one of the few democracies that has not
utilized mass internment of hostile minority populations that identify
and, in some cases, collaborate with the enemy in time of war. And
Israel has yet to charge any of its extreme leftists with treason, no
matter how brazen their words and deeds.

Treason itself is left undefined under Israeli law, and in general it
has been interpreted by legal authorities in Israel so loosely that
virtually no one has ever been prosecuted for it.

On paper Israeli penal law defines treason as "acts that impair the
integrity of Israel" or "impair its sovereignty," and the granting of
assistance to the enemy during time of war. Based on British law,
Article 99(a) of the Israel Criminal Code states, "If a person with
intent to assist an enemy in war against Israel commits an act
calculated to do so, he is liable to the death penalty or to life

It should go without saying that no one has ever been sentenced to
either punishment for treason in Israel. Only a few people engaged in
actual espionage – including nuclear spy Mordecai Vanunu and some
old-time spies for the former Soviet Union – have ever even been
charged with treason.

The Israeli law against treason is little more than a joke. Nearly all
the Arabs who sit in the Knesset openly communicate and even
collaborate with the enemies of Israel. They support their agendas and
some have engaged in violence.

There are far left Israeli Jews who work against the sovereignty and
integrity of their own country every day. Examples of this would
include issuing calls for Israel's destruction or declaring support
for international boycotts against Israel. No one has been prosecuted
for any of that.

The Israeli attorney general is quite militant when it comes to
prosecuting right-wing Israeli Jews for "incitement" and "racism,"
including offenders who wear politically incorrect t-shirts or affix
bumper stickers on their cars that some might find in poor taste.

Bear in mind that Israel is in a permanent state of war. Even so,
Israeli Arabs and Jewish leftists never go to jail for collaborating
with the enemy during times of war.

It is instructive and illuminating to examine the history of what
other Western democracies have done with traitors, especially during
times of war.

Many countries have the death penalty for domestic traitors; some of
these anti-treason laws are quite old. Several countries have been
putting teeth into old anti-treason laws recently because of
international terrorism.

Britain's Treason Act, which allowed for the prosecution of British
nationals supporting the enemy in time of war, went back to 1351. One
famous application of the act was the trial of Roger Casement, who was
accused of collaborating with Germany during World War I. There was
debate during the trial over whether the act applied to treason
committed outside Britain or only on British soil. The prosecution
carried the day and the traitor was executed.
Because of court arguments over the punctuation in the act's original
language, it was said that Casement was "hanged by a comma."

The act was also used to prosecute "Lord Haw-Haw," William Joyce, in
1945. Joyce had served as Hitler's radio propagandist, beaming
pro-Nazi messages into Britain during the war.

Churchill's Britain banned not only fascist newspapers and
organizations during World War II but also the communist newspaper The
Daily Worker.

The British Treason Act provided for mandatory execution of traitors.
It distinguished between high treason and petty treason. In both
cases, the traitor was executed, but in the latter cases his property
was not seized by the Crown. Britain executed sixteen traitors under
the Act during World War II.

The act was suspended in 1946 and later repealed. However, Britain has
other laws against treason. Under the British Crime and Disorder Act
of 1998, the punishment for treason is life imprisonment (it had been
death up until that law was passed).

Canada also has a treason act. It distinguishes between high treason
and other forms, with high treason consisting of acts committed during
time of war. The punishment is mandatory life imprisonment.

Australia has a somewhat similar treason law. Turkey, Ireland and
Brazil have treason acts that provide for execution of traitors, as do
many Third World countries.

The United States has had anti-treason laws that allow for execution
of traitors, though these were seldom applied, and similar laws were
once passed by some individual states. The U.S. also has the Espionage
Act of 1917.

French law provides for life imprisonment for treason, as do statutes
in Hong Kong, India and New Zealand.

Switzerland's treason act usually provides for softer punishments, but
in some cases life imprisonment is a possibility.

Germany also has an anti-treason law with punishments up to life
imprisonment for high treason, defined as attempts to overturn the
constitutional order.

Execution and life imprisonment were not the only responses of Western
democracies to internal treason. In 1939 the British government under
Winston Churchill passed Defense Regulation 18B. It suspended habeas
corpus for Nazi sympathizers and allowed for their wholesale
internment without trial. While enemy aliens were interned under other
laws, this law was used to intern British nationals.

The law's provisions for such arrests were very loose. They included
any suspicion that a person represented a danger to Britain or was a
member of any association hostile to Britain or involved in "acts
prejudicial to the public safety or the defense of the realm or in the
preparation or instigation of such acts."

People could be arrested without warning, including those serving in
the British military. About a thousand were so interned in 1940,
though that number was halved by mid-1943. The law was used to jail
pro-German British citizens, including members of the pro-Nazi British
Union of Fascists party, led by Oswald Mosley. Mosley was arrested in
1940, along with his wife, and held in Holloway Prison. In a
controversial move, Churchill released him in November 1943 due to
health problems. Churchill famously ordered the arrest of George
Pitt-Rivers, another British Nazi sympathizer.

The United States passed its first law against enemy aliens and
against treason in the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798. It allowed for
the internment of enemy aliens in time of war. Among those indicted
under it was an American congressman born in Ireland, Matthew Lyon. It
remained on the books, supplemented by the Sedition Act of 1918, an
initiative of President Woodrow Wilson, which was later repealed.

Abraham Lincoln may have been the most aggressive president when it
came to prosecuting and jailing traitors. He ordered the suspension of
habeas corpus in 1861. He used military tribunals and declarations of
martial law liberally. More than 4,200 trials by military commission
were conducted.
"Copperheads" or Americans in the North who identified with the
rebellion in the South were arrested and jailed. One of the more
famous was Clement Laird Vallandigham, who was deported. Other
Copperheads were also deported and stripped of citizenship. Some
traitors were executed. As many as 13,000 people in the North were
rounded up and jailed under martial law. The Union government took
action against newspapers that identified with the rebellion, closing
some. Those expressing opposition to military conscription in the
North were subject to martial law penalties. Under the Confiscation
Act of 1861, the private property of those – not only Southerners –
accused of treason could be seized.

While all belligerents in World War II took action against enemy
aliens and domestic supporters of the enemy, Britain under Churchill
was particularly uncompromising in this area.

There had been about 20,000 German nationals in Britain in 1930, but
this number grew by about 60,000 after Hitler came to power. At the
start of the war these came under scrutiny and surveillance, even
though some of them were Jewish refugees from Germany and Austria. All
Germans and Austrians over the age of 16 were called before special
tribunals and divided into three groups:

• "High security risks," who were immediately interned. About 600 fell
under this category.

• "Doubtful cases," who were subject to supervision and restrictions
on their movements. There were around 6,500 of these.

• "No security risk," numbering around 64,000, who were not
restricted. Most of these were Jewish refugees from Nazi oppression.

Britain had historically made liberal use of internment as an
instrument against the enemy, especially during the Boer Wars. The
British intensified their operations against potential spies after
1940, arresting Germans, Austrians and Italians in larger numbers.

On May 12, 1940, more than 2,000 male aliens living in British coastal
areas were arrested under special orders of the Home Secretary. The
Treachery Act passed Parliament that same year and allowed for the
prosecution of any alien suspected of espionage or hostile activity,
and included provision for execution of foreign spies.

Churchill ordered that all 19,000 Italians in Britain be rounded up,
even those who had lived in the UK for decades. Internment camps for
these enemy nationals were set up around Britain, including at Huyton
near Liverpool and in large camps on the Isle of Man. In addition,
over 7,000 suspect aliens were deported, mainly to Canada and
Australia. Tragically, in some cases these included non-British Jews,
for fears that German spies might infiltrate Britain while among them.

Canada interned 80,000 people during World War I. While the massive
internment of Japanese-Americans by the United States during World War
II is well known, less well known is the fact that thousands of ethnic
Japanese were interned by the Canadian government.

Australia also ran internment camps, holding as many as 7,000
Australians, plus thousands of aliens sent there by Britain.

While their numbers were much smaller than those of the interned
Japanese-Americans, hundreds of Italian-Americans were interned by the
U.S. during World War II, and other restrictions were applied to
Italian-Americans who were not interned.

German-Americans were subject to restrictions during World War I; over
6,000 were arrested and more than 2,000 were interned. Some 11,000
alien Germans were interned in the United States during World War II.

Surprisingly, given the pro-Nazi sentiments found among some American
ethnic Germans and the operation in the U.S. of several pro-Nazi
organizations in the 1930s, German-Americans were not interned during
World War II, though some other countries in the Western Hemisphere
did intern domestic ethnic Germans. Small numbers of ethnic Germans
were evicted from sensitive coastal areas of the U.S. After Pearl
Harbor the U.S. outlawed the pro-Nazi German American Bund.
Throughout Europe before and during World War II, the ethnic German
minority populations by and large supported Nazi Germany. After the
war, these Germans were expelled en masse by many of those countries,
including democratic Czechoslovakia, in retaliation for their having
identified with the enemy.

The irony is that Israel's Arab population more openly identifies with
the country's enemies than did any of the groups interned during World
War II by Britain and the other Western democracies. Israeli Arabs on
the whole make little attempt to hide their intense hatred for the
democratic country in which they live, though they rarely seek to move
to any of the 22 countries that have an Arab ethnic majority.

Most (but not all) Israeli Arabs support political parties and groups
that are hostile to the existence of Israel and that openly back
genocidal terrorist groups and Muslim countries that seek Israel's

Israeli far-leftist groups, awash in funding from hostile anti-Israel
foreign governments and organizations, engage in sedition and treason
during time of war, led by Israel's academic tenured Far Left. None of
these have been targeted for prosecution by Israel's legal system or
Why not? Why can Taliban John and Jihad Jane be prosecuted in the U.S.
while traitors in Israel enjoy immunity?

It is a Cesspool of anti-Israel Extremist Propaganda and Hate!!,7340,L-4152161,00.html

Recommendation: Shut down 'leftist' department

Council for Higher Education committee says Ben Gurion University's
Politics Department politically biased. Professor: Some committee
members extreme rightists
Tamar Trabelsi-Hadad

In an unprecedented move, an international committee appointed by the
Council for Higher Education has recommended that the Politics and
Government Department at Ben Gurion University be shut down unless it
addresses some of the problems pointed out by the committee.

According to the Yedioth Ahronoth daily, several of the department's
researchers are considered to be radical leftists. Some of them have
even called for an economic, political and cultural boycott on Israel
due to its "apartheid regime."

The committee, which is headed by Professor Thomas Risse from the Free
University in Berlin, expressed its concern that the department's
political inclinations may be resulting in what it referred to as an
imbalance between the opinions of the faculty members and the

"The political science professors must note that the opinions they are
expressing are that the students will be exposed to
alternative viewpoints," the reported stated.

The committee said it was also concerned that the "strong emphasis on
political activism may undermine the research of politics as a
scientific field." The report noted that there is a consensus among
the students that the courses offered to them are politically biased.

It should be noted that Committee member Galia Golan, a professor at
the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, said the demand for a more
"balanced" study program is in direct contrast with the principle of
academic freedom, which she called a pillar of higher education.

The committee mentioned additional administrative problems within the
department, and recommended that Ben Gurion University consider
shutting it down unless necessary changes are implemented.

Professor Dani Filc, who heads the department, said "most of the
report's claims are based on empirical mistakes," adding that the
report was part of a "campaign aimed at hurting the most popular
department in Israel."

Filc said the department would accept the committee's recommendation
to hire more faculty members.

Another senior professor at the department attacked the report, saying
"the committee is external, and some of its members have extreme
right-wing political opinions. It published a false report which is
part of a campaign launched by extremist entities to hurt the

In response to the report, Ben Gurion University President Rivka Carmi
said the department is "well-known throughout the world and claimed it
had been "put under a magnifying glass." She called the report "much
ado about nothing."

Addressing the report's claims, Carmi said some students believe the
department is politically biased, while others say it taught them to
think for themselves.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Peace Through Victory

Posted By Steven Plaut On November 10, 2011

By now, Israel, at the urging and bullying of the world, has tried
pretty much every conceivable idea and option for achieving
tranquility and reconciliation with the Hamas, except for one. Israel
removed its army and civilian population from the Gaza Strip. In what
amounted to the first ethnic self-cleansing in history, Israel evicted
the entire Jewish presence in Gaza. The entire area was turned over
to the Palestinians, lock, stock, barrel, and Jew-free.

The result is of course known. The Hamas immediately converted all of
Gaza into a large rocket launch pad and a base for initiating
terrorist attacks against Israel. It kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad
Shalit and held him incommunicado, refusing medical treatment to him,
even though his arm was filled with shrapnel. Israel in response
provided free electricity and water to the Gazans and sent civilian
supplies into Gaza. Israel never made any serious efforts to stop the
massive tunnel smuggling into Gaza from Egypt, even when it was clear
that the main item being smuggled was weapons. These smuggled weapons
include bomb materials and sophisticated rockets that can now reach
Tel Aviv. Israel responded to the endless rocket attacks against its
own civilians by turning the other cheek. Only after 8000 rocket
strikes did it launch the half-hearted symbolic retaliation in the
"Cast Lead" campaign, withdrawing quickly after it was launched.

There is only one strategy for dealing with the Hamas that Israel has
never attempted. That untried strategy is victory. Israel has never
seriously attempted to achieve peace and tranquility with the Gaza
Palestinians by means of victory. This is somewhat strange, since it
is hard to think of any other war that did not end in peace only after
victory. Instead, the world keeps demanding that Israel respond to
Hamas provocation with an endless series of one-sided "goodwill
measures." Never mind that the only invariable effect of such Israeli
"goodwill measures" has been to trigger more Hamas terrorism. The
only "peace settlement" the Hamas is interested in is one in which
Israelis volunteer to allow themselves to be placed in Hamas-run
extermination camps for Jews.

Victory in the case of the war with the Gaza terrorists would mean
annihilating the Hamas. Interestingly, there is an increasing chorus
of voices inside Israel now calling for peace through victory. One of
these is General Dan Halutz, the controversial erstwhile chief of
staff of the Israeli army. A few days ago a Hamas rocket was fired
into Israel and struck a school building. In response, Halutz called
for a "mortal blow" to be dealt to the Hamas' civilian and "military"
leadership. Then, in a radio interview, Halutz said, "We must bring
back our deterrence vis-à-vis Gaza. It has not existed for even one
moment since Operation Cast Lead and to this day." He has been joined
by other Israeli leaders. The finance minister, Yuval Steinitz (who
is a philosophy professor at my own university when he is not busy in
public life), recently called on Israel to topple the Hamas "regime"
in Gaza if the terror continues.

The terrorist aggression by the Hamas has been carried on nonstop ever
since it seized power in Gaza. Most acts of Hamas barbarism do not
even get reported in the world media, for which dogs biting and
shooting rockets at postmen are passé. Hamas rockets land in Israeli
civilian areas almost every day. Hamas leaders continue to call
openly for Israel's obliteration and for the annihilation of Jews.
All this is surprising only for those who have no understanding of
what the Hamas really is. Anyone who has read the brochure on the
Hamas being distributed by the David Horowitz Freedom Center will know

It has become vogue in many circles to represent Middle East savagery
as part of some sort of "War of Civilizations." It is not. In fact,
the Middle East is simply a war by barbarism against all civilization.
It is also considered chic to represent the Middle East conflict as a
"cycle of violence," and as something fundamentally symmetrical
between Arab terrorists and Israeli soldiers. It is not.

The entire world has convinced itself that violence and terrorism in
the Middle East are the results of Israeli "occupation" over Arabs.
They are wrong. If there is one thing that has become glaringly
obvious in the past two decades it is that the main cause of terrorist
violence in the Middle East is the removal of Israeli occupation over
Arabs. The Gaza violence was not caused by Israeli occupation but by
its removal. The Hezbollah violence and threats from Lebanon were not
caused by Israeli "occupation" of Southern Lebanon but rather by its

Part of the world's problem in understanding such things about the
Middle East is that most people have no idea how small Israel really
is. Without the West Bank, Israel is at its waist about as wide as
the length of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. All of the West Bank is
smaller than the Everglades. The Arab world insists territory
controlled from the Atlantic Ocean to the Persian Gulf is insufficient
for its appetites, but promises that if only Israel agrees to place
its neck in a strategic hangman's noose by turning over the West Bank
to the PLO/Hamas, then peace will prevail. And if Israel refuses to
place its neck in such an Arab noose voluntarily, then this shows that
Israeli aggression is what is behind the violence.

The caterwauling against Israel's decision to shoot back occasionally
at the terrorists is coming from those claiming that Israel was
erected on "Palestinian lands." This is like claiming that Alaska
sits on Russian lands. The Arabs briefly controlled Palestine
militarily, as the Russians briefly owned Alaska. The Jews and not
the Arabs are analogous to the native Eskimos. Israeli settlements
are about as "illegal" as are Eskimo villages in Alaska. There has
never ever in history been a Palestinian state, and there is no such
thing as a Palestinian people, any more than there is a separate Rhode
Islander people. The fact of the matter is that the West Bank and Gaza
are hardly "Palestinian lands."

Even if anyone thinks the Palestinians might have had some legitimate
claim to statehood or sovereignty, the Palestinians forfeited any such
right they might have had due to the past century of Palestinian
atrocities and terror. Just like the Sudeten Germans lost their claim
to any sort of self-determination. True, Israeli governments have
nevertheless naively and foolishly offered to allow the Palestinians
to exercise control over these territories in exchange for peace. But
Israel got war and mass murder of its civilians in exchange, not
peace, so the foolhardy Oslo "peace process" deals are now off and
should never have been implemented. Proposals to "liberate" the West
Bank and end Israeli "occupation" there are nothing more than demands
that Israel allow Gazan barbarism and terrorism to be replicated and
cloned in the West Bank, with Israeli citizens subsequently bathed in
countless thousands of rockets.

The only real way to suppress the carnage is for Israel to re-occupy
Gaza and the West Bank in full, implement open-ended military control
there and a long-term program of Denazification (based in part on the
Allied programs at the end of World War II). Israel needs to expel the
terrorists and destroy their infrastructure. It needs to get serious
about shooting terrorists. Everything else is wishful thinking and

Palestinian "suffering"? If the Palestinians are unhappy with
Israeli anti-terror policies, retaliations, checkpoints and military
incursions, let them stop the terror and desist from murdering
Israelis, or let them move to any of the 22 Arab states. As long as
they persist in the violence, any "suffering" by Palestinians is, much
like the suffering of Germans and Japanese during World War II, their
own fault. The solution is certainly not for Israel to stop resisting
the terror, to stop fighting back, nor for Israel to desist from
trying to protect its citizens.

The endless post-Oslo Middle East violence and terror was triggered
because Israel indicated that it was on the run, exhausted, unwilling
to fight, afraid to resist, and ready to capitulate. It will end only
when Israel returns to its determination to end the terror through
military victory and force of arms. The same United States that has
understood that there is only a military option for dealing with
terror in Iraq and Afghanistan must back up such a return by Israel to
pre-Oslo sanity.

There are no non-military solutions to the problems of terrorism.


Article printed from FrontPage Magazine:

URL to article:

Monday, November 07, 2011

The Histadrut's War against the Israeli Public
By Steven Plaut

"Israel's most justified strike ever," gushed the Jewish Palestinians
over at leftwing Haaretz newspaper. It is a fight for social
justice, chimed in the other media airheads. The students from the
tent protests agree.

Israel's Histadrut trade union federation once again proved itself
this past week as deserving of the moniker I have long attached to it:
The Histadrut is Israel's most important organized crime family. If
only for a few hours before a "Labor Court" issued back-to-work orders

The Histadrut regularly shuts down the country, striking against the
Israeli public by closing vital services. For years Israel has lost
enormous amounts of business deals because business people are afraid
to come to Israel. They are not afraid of the terrorists. They are
afraid of the Histadrut shutting down the airport, stranding them,
making them "Prisoners of Zion, as one wag suggested they be called.
The strikes also sabotage the public transit, the banks, and other
services. Histadrut terrorism in the form of anti-public "sanctions"
takes an enormous economic toll every year.

So just what was the Histadrut so upset over THIS TIME? What was the
cause of its decision to cripple the country in a general strike, one
it threatened would go on indefinitely with no time limit?

The Histadrut was upset that so many Israelis were finding work
through private manpower agencies.

What is so bad about that? The second most important goal of the
Histadrut is to price Israeli workers out of the market so that those
workers cannot get any work at all. The first most important goal is
to serve as the economic SWAT team for the rump Labor Party to help
get it into power and replace the Likud.

Let me explain. There are lots of Israelis, mainly low-skilled
Israelis, who find work through "manpower" agencies. The big
attraction for them to work this way is that they get their entire
salary as salary, without being forced to relinquish large chunks of
it in order for the funds to be sidelined into pension funds,
"provident funds," and other "social savings" schemes. Don't the
workers realize that they will someday be old and need a pension? Of
course they do, but they are now in a period of their lives where they
need the cash more. Many "manpower agency" employees are Russian
immigrants, new in the country. The "agencies" also help find work
for their stable of workers and assist in other ways, for a cut.
Employers favor the system because they are not required to grant
permanent "tenure" to the employees after a few months and can hire
and fire when and whom they please. Through much of the Israeli
economy, especially the public sector, it is far more difficult to
fire a janitor than a tenured professor, even if the janitor is
insubordinate, reckless, or lazy.

My mother uses home helpers provided through manpower agencies. She
is one of those evil tycoons and oligarchs that the Histadrut is
striking against this week. She is 84.
The workers and my mom love the arrangement.

No one is forcing anyone to work through the "manpower agencies."
People choose to do so because the alternative is in many cases not
finding work at all. The Histadrut claims to be battling to "protect"
these "exploited workers," those the Histadrut claims are being worked
like slave laborers. The way the Histadrut wants them protected is
to make hiring them much more expensive. If successive, this will
ensure that many of the "manpower agency employees" are forced into
permanent joblessness.

Let me add that the Histadrut in general seeks to price workers out of
the labor market. The Histadrut represents the pampered and skilled
and higher-paid unionized workers in Israel: the overpaid workers in
the Israeli Electric Company, the overpaid port workers, the medical
doctors, and of course overpaid public servants. The way it protects
its constituents is by seeking to make hiring unskilled workers, who
in a sense are the competition for Histadrut constituents, so
expensive that they will not be hired. Hence employers will need to
substitute skilled Histadrut union employees for the many unskilled
workers priced out of work. This is why the Histadrut always has lead
the campaign to raise the minimum wage. As anyone who has taken
freshman economics knows, one of the main causes of unemployment in
Western economies is the minimum wage. If the Histadrut had its way,
it would raise the minimum wage to $25 an hour, ensuring that
unskilled workers could never get any jobs at all, and so all
employers would have to hire more skilled workers and boost THEIR
wages. The Histadrut jihad against "manpower agency" workers is
driven by the same aims.

That and the passionate desire to sabotage the country so that people
will blame Netanyahu and the Likud and then maybe bring the Labor
Party socialists back to power.

There is one other entity to blame. It is the Likud. Since 1977 the
Likud has held power more often than it has not. And it has done
almost nothing to end the Histadrut terrorism. No Reagan-like
anti-union determinism. Reagan's courage broke the back of the union
extortionists in the US (remember the air traffic controllers strike?)
and produced unprecedented economic growth. The growth in the
American economy under Reagan produced incremental economic value and
production greater than the size of the entire German economy.

But not the Likud and not Netanyahu. The same appeasements so beloved
by them as a tactic for dealing with the terrorists and the Arab
fascists is pretty much the way they have always handled the

Sunday, November 06, 2011,0

Why are John Mearsheimer and Richard Falk Endorsing a Blatantly
Anti-Semitic Book?
Alan Dershowitz
November 4, 2011 | 12:00 am
.As the discourse about Israel on university campuses continues to
degenerate, there is growing concern that some of Israel's most vocal
detractors are crossing a red line between acceptable criticism of
Israel and legitimizing anti-Semitism. The recent endorsements by
several internationally prominent academics—including John Mearsheimer
of the University of Chicago and Richard Falk of Princeton—of an
overtly anti-Semitic book written by a notorious Jew-hater illustrate
this dangerous trend.

The book in question is entitled The Wandering Who? and was written by
Gilad Atzmon, a British jazz musician. Lest there be any doubt about
Atzmon's anti-Semitic credentials, listen to his self-description in
the book itself. He boasts about "drawing many of my insights from a
man who … was an anti-Semite as well as a radical misogynist" and a
hater of "almost everything that fails to be Aryan masculinity"
(89-90). He declares himself a "proud, self-hating Jew" (54), writes
with "contempt" of "the Jew in me" (94), and describes himself as "a
strong opponent of … Jewish-ness" (186). His writings, both online and
in his new book, brim with classic anti-Semitic motifs that are
borrowed from Nazi publications:

Throughout his writings, Atzmon argues that Jews seek to control the world:

· "[W]e must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people
are trying to control the world very seriously."

· "American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of
the elder of Zion' [sic] are an authentic document or rather a forgery
irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy."

Atzmon expands on this theme in The Wandering Who?, repeatedly
conflating "the Jews" and "the Zionist":

· He calls the recent credit crunch "the Zio-punch" (22) and says
it was not "a Jewish conspiracy" because "it was all in the open"

· Paul Wolfowitz, Rahm Emmanuel, and other members of "the Jewish
elite" remain abroad instead of moving to "Zion" because they "have
proved far more effective for the Zionist cause by staying where they
are" (19).

· The American media "failed to warn the American people of the
enemy within" because of money (27).

Atzmon has written that Jews are evil and a menace to humanity:

· "With Fagin and Shylock in mind Israeli barbarism and organ
trafficking seem to be just other events in an endless hellish

· "The Homo Zionicus quickly became a mass murderer, detached from
any recognised form of ethical thinking and engaged in a colossal
crime against humanity."

Atzmon rehearses many of these ideas in The Wandering Who?:

· "[T]o be a Jew is a deep commitment that goes far beyond any
legal or moral order" (20) and this commitment "pulls more and more
Jews into an obscure, dangerous and unethical fellowship" (21).

· If Iran and Israel fight a nuclear war that kills tens of
millions of people, "some may be bold enough to argue that 'Hitler
might have been right after all'" (179).

Atzmon regularly urges his readers to doubt the Holocaust and to
reject Jewish history:

· "It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its
current form, doesn't make any historical sense. … If, for instance,
the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein—free of Jews),
or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched
hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the

· "[E]ven if we accept the Holocaust as the new Anglo-American
liberal-democratic religion, we must allow people to be atheists."

Atzmon reprises some of this language in The Wandering Who?:

· Children should be allowed to question, as he did, "how the
teacher could know that these accusations of Jews making Matza out of
young Goyim's blood were indeed empty or groundless" (185).

· "The Holocaust religion is probably as old as the Jews themselves" (153).

· The history of Jewish persecution is a myth, and if there was
any persecution the Jews brought it on themselves (175, 182).

Atzmon argues that Jews are corrupt and responsible for "why" they are "hated":

· "[I]n order to promote Zionist interests, Israel must generate
significant anti-Jewish sentiment. Cruelty against Palestinian
civilians is a favourite Israeli means of achieving this aim."

· "Jews may have managed to drop their God, but they have
maintained goy-hating and racist ideologies at the heart of their
newly emerging secular political identity. This explains why some
Talmudic goy-hating elements have been transformed within the Zionist
discourse into genocidal practices."

Atzmon returns to this theme repeatedly in The Wandering Who?:

· The "Judaic God" described in Deuteronomy 6:10-12 "is an evil
deity, who leads his people to plunder, robbery and theft" (120).
Atzmon explains that "Israel and Zionism … have instituted the plunder
promised by the Hebrew God in the Judaic holy scriptures" (121).

· The moral of the Book of Esther is that Jews "had better
infiltrate the corridors of power" if they wish to survive (158).

Finally, Atzmon repeatedly declares that Israel is worse than the
Nazis and has actually "apologized" to the Nazis for having earlier
compared them to Israel:

· "Many of us including me tend to equate Israel to Nazi Germany.
Rather often I myself join others and argue that Israelis are the
Nazis of our time. I want to take this opportunity to amend my
statement. Israelis are not the Nazis of our time and the Nazis were
not the Israelis of their time. Israel, is in fact far worse than Nazi
Germany and the above equation is simply meaningless and misleading."

In light of this Der Stürmer-like bigotry against Jews, it should come
as no surprise that even some of the most hard-core anti-Israel
activists have shunned Atzmon out of fear that his anti-Semitism will
discredit their cause. Tony Greenstein, a self-styled "anti-Zionist"
who recently participated in the Palestine Solidarity Campaign's
unprecedented disruption of an Israel Philharmonic Orchestra concert
in London (which Greenstein compared to protesting the Berlin
Philharmonic Orchestra in the 1930s), denounced The Wandering Who? as
"a poisonous anti-Semitic tome." Sue Blackwell, who co-wrote the
Association of University Teachers' motion to boycott Israeli
universities in 2005, removed all links to Atzmon from her website and
placed Atzmon on her list of "nasties" along with David Irving and
Israel Shamir. Socialist Worker, a website that frequently refers to
Israeli "apartheid" and publishes articles with titles such as
"Israel's murderous violence," removed an interview with Atzmon and
called the evidence of Atzmon's anti-Semitism "damning." At least ten
authors associated with the Leftist publisher that published The
Wandering Who? have called on the publisher to distance itself from
Atzmon's views, explaining that the "thrust of Atzmon's work is to
normalise and legitimise anti-Semitism."

Hard-core neo-Nazis, racists, anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers, on
the other hand, have happily counted Atzmon as one of their own. David
Duke, America's premier white supremacist, has posted more than a
dozen of Atzmon's articles on his website over the past five years and
recently praised Atzmon for "writ[ing] such fine articles exposing the
evil of Zionism and Jewish supremacism." Kevin MacDonald, a professor
at Cal State Long Beach whose colleagues formally disassociated
themselves from his "anti-Semitic and white ethnocentric views,"
called Atzmon's book "an invaluable account by someone who clearly
understands the main symptoms of Jewish pathology." Israel Shamir, a
Holocaust denier ("We must deny the concept of Holocaust without doubt
and hesitation") who argues that Jews ritually murdered Christian
children for their blood and that "The rule of the Elders of Zion is
already upon us," refers to Atzmon as a "good friend" and calls Atzmon
one of "the shining stars of the battle" against "the Jewish

But neither Atzmon's well-established reputation for anti-Semitism nor
the copious anti-Semitic filth that fills The Wandering Who? has
deterred Professors John Mearsheimer and Richard Falk from actively
endorsing Atzmon's work. Mearsheimer, the Harrison Distinguished
Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago
and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, calls The
Wandering Who? a "fascinating" book that "should be read widely by
Jews and non-Jews alike." Falk, Milibank Professor of International
Law Emeritus at Princeton University and United Nations Special
Rapporteur on "human rights in the Palestinian territories," calls The
Wandering Who? an "absorbing and moving" book that everyone who
"care[s] about real peace" should "not only read, but reflect upon and
discuss widely." Falk's endorsement appears prominently on the cover
of Atzmon's book. Mearsheimer's endorsement is featured on its first
page. These professors are not merely defending Atzmon's right to
publish such a book; they are endorsing its content and urging their
colleagues, students, and others to read and "reflect upon" the views
expressed by Atzmon. One wonders which portions of this bigoted screed
Professors Mearsheimer and Falk believe their students and others
"should" read and "discuss widely."

Mearsheimer has defended his endorsement (on Stephen Walt's blog) by
questioning whether his critics have even read Atzmon's book. Well,
I've read every word of it, as well as many of Atzmon's blogs. No one
who has read this material could escape the conclusion—which Atzmon
freely admits—that many of his "insights" are borrowed directly from
classic anti-Semitic writings. Mearsheimer claims, however, that he
has endorsed only Atzmon's book and not his other writings. But the
book itself is filled with crass neo-Nazi rants against the "Jew,"
"World Jewry," and "Jewish bankers." He claims that "robbery and
hatred is imbued in Jewish modern political ideology on both the left
and the right" (123). And like other anti-Semites, Atzmon is obsessed
in the book with Jewish names. It was Jews, such as Wolfowitz and
Libby, who pushed the United States into war against Iraq in the
"interests" of "their beloved Jewish state" (26). "How is it that
America failed to restrain its Wolfowitzes?" Atzmon asks (27).

Likewise, according to Atzmon's book, it was "Jewish bankers,"
financiers, economists, writers, and politicians such as Greenspan,
Levy, Aaronovitch, Saban, Friedman, Schiff, and Rothschild who have
caused the economic and political problems of the world, ranging from
the Bolshevik revolution to the wars of the 20th century to the
current economic troubles (27,194). And like other classic
anti-Semites, Atzmon doesn't simply fault the individual Jews he
names; he concocts a worldwide Jewish conspiracy motivated by a
"ruthless Zio-driven" (27) "Jewish ideology" (69) that finds its
source in "the lethal spirit" (122) of the Hebrew Bible. This sort of
conspiratorial drivel is borrowed almost word for word from the
Protocols of the Elders of Zion—the Czarist forgery that became a
staple of Nazi propaganda.

A number of other prominent academics have defended Atzmon and his
endorsers. Brian Leiter, the Llewellyn Professor of Jurisprudence at
the University of Chicago Law School, dismissed the reaction to the
book and to Mearsheimer's "straightforward" endorsement as
"hysterical" and not "advanc[ing] honest intellectual discourse,"
though he acknowledges not having read Atzmon's book. On the basis of
having perused one brief interview with Atzmon, Leiter is nonetheless
prepared to defend him against charges that he is an anti-Semite or a
Holocaust denier: "His positions [do not mark him] as an anti-Semite
[but rather as] cosmopolitan. … He does not deny the Holocaust or the
gas chambers… ." Leiter should read the book, especially pages
175-176, before leaping to Atzmon's defense. There Atzmon reflects
"that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled
to start asking questions. We should ask for historical evidence and
arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained
by political pressure and laws."

James Petras, Bartle Professor of Sociology Emeritus at Binghamton
University, called The Wandering Who? "a series of brilliant
illuminations" and praised Atzmon's "courage." The list of academics
who have endorsed Atzmon also includes William A. Cook, a professor of
English at the University of La Verne in southern California; Makram
Khoury-Machool, a lecturer at the University of Cambridge; and Oren
Ben-Dor of the University of Southampton School of Law.

These endorsements represent a dangerous step toward legitimizing
anti-Semitic rhetoric on university campuses. If respected professors
endorse the views contained in Atzmon's book as "brilliant,"
"fascinating," "absorbing," and "moving," these views—which include
Jewish domination of the world, doubting the Holocaust, blaming "the
Jews" for being so hated, and attributing the current economic
troubles to a "Zio-punch"—risk becoming acceptable among their
students. These endorsements of Atzmon's book are the best evidence
yet that academic discourse is beginning to cross a red line, and that
the crossing of this line must be exposed, rebutted, and rejected in
the marketplace of ideas and in the academy. (Another evidence of this
academic trend in Europe appeared recently on Atzmon's website, where
he brags that he has been invited to "give a talk on ethics at the
Trondheim University" in Norway. This is the same university whose
faculty refused to invite me to speak about the Arab-Israel conflict.)

Accordingly, I hereby challenge Professors Mearsheimer and Falk to a
public debate about why they have endorsed and said such positive
things about so hateful and anti-Semitic a book by so bigoted and
dishonest a writer.

Alan Dershowitz is a professor at Harvard Law School.

See also

Please note also that Atzmon's followers are some of the central
figures participating in teh "ALEF" chat list operated by the
University of Haifa. For details, go here:

Friday, November 04, 2011

Israeli Professors of Hate

From the 1970s, Israel's universities had become home to a new
generation of leftist intellectuals who demonize Israel and the
undermine the struggle for survival of the Jewish people.
From Giulio Meotti
When in 2007 Professor Hillel Weiss of Bar Ilan University was
captured on film cursing the IDF regional commander during the
expulsion of Hebron's Jewish residents, the well- known scholar, a
leading expert on the works of Nobel Laureate author Shai Agnon, was
pulverized in the Israeli media.

The public opinion later discovered that Weiss' anger was the
reasonable reaction of a father protesting against the (twice)
eviction of his children and grandchildren from their homes.

Weiss didn't call on anyone to act upon his words. He called upon G-d.
But Professor Weiss is a patriarch of the right wing movement.

Somehow, the Israeli media doesn't pay the same attention to the
legion of Israeli professors and lecturers from the Jewish Left who
daily take the side of Israel's existential enemies.

From the 1970s, Israel's universities had become home to a new
generation of leftist intellectuals who demonize Israel and the
undermine the struggle for survival of the Jewish people.

A study by Im Tirtzu claimed that more than 90% of the allegations of
"Israeli war crimes" cited in the shameful Goldstone Report were
provided by 16 NGOs who received close to $8 million from the New
Israel Fund between 2006 and 2008, an organization headed by former
Meretz MK Professor Naomi Chazan.

A few days ago, a criminal investigation was opened against Dr. Ayal
Nir, a lecturer at Ben- Gurion University in Be'er Sheva, over a
status on his Facebook page in which he called to "break the necks of
right-wing activists".
 It's an open call for murder of those who
reject his far-leftist opinions.

Today there is a predominance of Israeli academics within the NGOs
that discredit Israel, such as Gush Shalom, B'Tselem, Yesh Gvul, the
Committee to Stop Demolition of Houses in Palestine and the Committee
to Stop Torture.

Steve Plaut has just drawn up a thorough list of them for the Middle
East Quarterly.

The phenomenon goes back to Karl Marx, whose anti-Semitic diatribes
were reflected in outbursts like "money is the jealous god of Israel,
by the side of which no other god may exist... The social emancipation
of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism".

Whether it is Professor Shlomo Sand, who achieved celebrity status in
Europe by publishing a book denying the existence of the Jewish
people, or Professor Oren Yiftachel, who called Israel "a white...
pure settlement colonial society", these Israeli celebrities gained
fame and fortune by trashing their own country and people.

The same phenomenon happened in czarist Russia, when some Jewish
social agitators endorsed pogroms against their own kinsmen, hoping
that by venting their frustrations on Jews, the masses would
ultimately turn on the czar.

At the Ben-Gurion University, Neve Gordon accused the IDF of being
"war criminals" and promoted the boycott of Israel in a Los Angeles
Times editorial. Gordon's articles have also been published on the web
site of Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel and in Iran's state media.

Ze'ev Sternhell, in the midst of the Second Intifada, when his own
students were being butchered on buses and restaurants, declared that
Palestinians should "concentrate their struggle against the

In May 2001, after Arabs sadistically bashed the skulls of two
"settler kids" in Tekoa, Israeli psychiatrist Ruchama Marton declared
that "the settlers raise little monsters".

Anat Matar of Tel Aviv University openly supported boycotts of her own
university. You find professors such as Moshe Zimmermann and other
members of the progressive community who compared the Israelis to the
Nazis. Also professors such as Idith Zertal, who thinks that the
Zionist absorption of Holocaust refugees was a form of rape.

In May 2001, after Arabs sadistically bashed the skulls of two
"settler kids" in Tekoa, Israeli psychiatrist Ruchama Marton declared
that "the settlers raise little monsters".
Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, whose anti-Semithic book "The
Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy" has become a bible for
Israel-bashers in the West,, in 2008 were allowed to deliver a lecture
at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

University of Haifa political science professor Ilan Pappe brackets
Israelis with Nazis and urges academics to delegitimize Israel. Ran
Hacohen from Tel Aviv University described "Israel as fulfilling
Hitler's dream" and referred to the assassination of Hamas leader and
inciter to murder, Ahmed Yassin, as "a milestone in the process of the
barbarization of mankind".

Lev Grinberg, director of the Humphries Institute for Social Research
at Ben-Gurion University, accused the Israeli government, in a Belgian
media, of "state terrorism".

These Israeli academics abuse academic freedom by utilizing their
universities as launching pads to delegitimize their own country and
people. The extreme damage to Israel's reputation and Jewish identity
inflicted by these and other Jewish intellectuals has been greatly

Indeed, with their words and actions, they are boosting pernicious and
deadly Judeophobic propaganda.

Thursday, November 03, 2011

The article is attached here in PDF format.  I think it will interest you.

I was unable to access it in simple text for a smaller file.  If it is
too large for your server, please delete with my apology.

Tuesday, November 01, 2011

1. I inadvertently sent a message yesterday where the address list
was showing. Sorry, I am getting old! Please delete and do not use
that list for sending out messages.

2. A couple of days ago I sent out a posting about Tel Aviv
University's airhead philosophy faculty member, Anat Matar, and her
celebrating the release of mass murderers and terrorists as a great
reason to party. She also defended a terrorist's tossing a grenade
at a bus full of soldiers. Her own son of course was not on that bus
because he was convicted and did jail time for refusing to serve in
the Israeli army.

The same bimbette is in the media today (Hebrew only: ), where she is
essentially saying that there was nothing very objectionable to the
Hamas kidnapping and holding Gilad Shalit incommunicado for so long
because Shalit was "not shooting Bamba from his tank," in her words.

Now for those of you not familiar with the product, one of the great
cultural achievements of Israel is "Bamba" - a high-calorie snack with
peanut butter in the center, which no teenager watching South Park on
television can resist eating.

Of course, Tel Aviv University still needs to explain why they have
given tenure in the philosophy department to a traitor who has Bamba
between her ears.

I would like to call hereby on the Im Tirtzu student activists to go
to the classes of Matar at TAU and to throw Bamba at her.

3. I was just sent a really funny cartoon, which I was unable to
upload onto this message, so let me just tell you what it showed. You
see a Jewish man with a beard speaking into his cell phone as he is
walking down the street and telling his customer, "And not to worry.
If there are any problems with this, I am available to resolve
problems and help 24-6."

I thought that was cute.