Monday, April 30, 2007
Avineri Attacks Moonbats for Proposing to do away with Hatikva to Appease the Arabs
2. Neuwirth gets some justice at last:
3. Haaretz helps the Iranians build nukes:
4. Nancy the Ninny:
5. After the Haaretz Canaanites came out in favor of dumping Hatikva as
the national anthem, they were answered by Prof. Shlomo Avineri. Avineri is
hardly a hardcore rightwinger. He was a cheerleader for Oslo, even
endorsing the leftwing campaign of McCarthyism against free speech for the
Right (enodrsing the false claim that rightwing rhetoric caused the Rabin
In the past he was quite close to Peres' positions, but recently has
shifted a bit toward center. Here is his piece:
Don't sing, but show respect
By Shlomo Avineri
It is not every day that a publisher decides to print his positions in his
newspaper, and therefore great importance should be attached to what Amos
Schocken wrote in his article, "Toward the next 60 years" (April 19). Many
of the points he raises are correct and logical, especially regarding the
imperviousness of the government and Israeli society to many material and
social aspects of the Arab public's life in Israel.
It is difficult, however, to agree with him on one point - the issue of
the national anthem. It is certainly possible to understand the feelings
of Israel's Arab citizens who find it difficult to identify with "the
Jewish soul's yearning," but making this the starting point for a proposal
to replace "Hatikva" with what Schocken calls a democratic and egalitarian
anthem is a far cry. If the anthem is nothing but the lowest common
denominator acceptable to all groups in Israel, then one must take into
account the ultra-Orthodox Jewish public, for whom "Hatikva" is not
acceptable due to its Zionist nature. Furthermore, for the Jewish
national-religious public, "Hatikva" is defective because it does not
mention the Lord.
A serious look at national anthems around the world - and I am sure Mr.
Schocken will not object to going beyond the provincial Israeli confines -
finds the large majority to be problematic. It is enough to cite as
examples two strictly democratic countries - Britain and France. The
British national anthem entreats the Lord to watch over the country's
monarch, who is also the head of the Anglican Church. Millions of
Catholics, non-Anglican Protestants, Muslims and Jews, among others, live
in Britain today. There is also no small number of republicans there who
would like to do away with the institution of the monarchy completely. Did
Jews or Muslims ever suggest changing the British national anthem? Did any
British liberal ever claim that the anthem's words affect his rights or
The French national anthem, "La Marseillaise," is a revolutionary song
full of violence and threats against those who oppose the Republic. It is
no secret that to this day, there are many millions in France who consider
the execution of Louis XVI a historic crime, and one could imagine that
they disagree with the words of the anthem. However, they do not propose
For better or for worse, a national anthem symbolizes the dominant
historical trend - which sometimes (as in France) was born of blood and
fire. I understand the difficulty of Israeli Arabs, just like that of Jews
or Muslims in Britain, or royalists or Muslims in France - but the latter
are not suggesting their national anthems be changed. Citizens may decline
to sing the anthem, but they should be expected to respect the symbols of
In neither Britain nor France does the minority question the legitimacy of
the body politic that represents the beliefs, the symbols and the
narrative of the majority. In Israel, the Arab proposal to change
"Hatikva" stems not from the difficulty of singing the words of the
anthem, but rather from the desire to question the State of Israel as the
national state of the Jews. It is preferable to say these things openly.
The Schocken family, like tens of thousands of other Jewish families in
Germany, enjoyed equal rights and unprecedented economic prosperity during
the period of the German emperors, Kaiser Wilhelm I and Kaiser Wilhelm II.
Did any one of them consider demanding that the German national anthem be
changed because it was an anthem of emperors and Christians?
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Judge Posner on Justice Barak
judges in America and arguably in the world. He long served as professor
at the University of Chicago, is
considered one of the fathers of the "law and economics" school of
thought, was the chief justice of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh
Circuit. His name has sometimes been raised as a possible US Supreme
Court judge. He has written numerous books and academic articles
(http://www.law.uchicago.edu/faculty/posner-r ). And he thinks Judge
Aharon Barak, who recently retired as Chief Justice of Israel's Supreme
Court, was one of the worst senior judges in the world. He is not shy
about saying so.
Haaretz today (Hebrew only)
) reports at length on Posner's attack on Judge Aharon Barak. Posner
calls Barak a legal buccaneer, reports Haaretz. Posner claims that he
agrees with Robert Bork when the latter characterized Barak as breaking
all records for judicial hubris. Posner's comments also appear in a
review of Barak's new book in the New Republic
Posner attacks Barak for his anti-democratic "judicial activism" and
claims Barak invented out of thin air and with no legal basis a right of
"judicial review" of laws in Israel by its judges. He compares Barak's
invention of judicial powers to Napoleon crowning himself emperor. He
accuses Barak of seeking to grab rule away from legislators for judges.
He warns American courts not to rely on foreign legal opinions such as
those written by Barak, because they are not based on proper respect for
democracy and the role of judges.
2. Can we send Haim Ramon to India?
3. Henry Siegman identifies the obstacle to peace on the leftwing
Neo-Nazi web site Counterpunch:
4. Selective Relativism:
5. Dersh on Goobers
6. The UnJihad comes to Stanford:
Anti-Zionist Israeli to direct movie for Israel's 60th birthday
See also http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122203
for how you can help.
8. Haaretz would prefer to see Azmi Bishara as President of Israel:
Thursday, April 26, 2007
The answer is Old Sparky
The Graffiti says "Lesbians against Means of Arms" (but in Hebrew slang,
the word for arms - Zayen - also means penis)
The Hebrew article makes it clear that the lesbians in question not only
hate men but also all Jews, even those without penises.
2. Jihad comes to UC-Riverside
4. Praising Terror:
5. The Answer is Old Sparky
Capital Punishment Wins another Round of Argument
by Steven Plaut
8 Iyar 5767, 4/26/2007
Whenever the issue of the death penalty arises, including in Israel, its
opponents start screaming about all the "wrongfully convicted and
executed" people. The urban myth of wrongfully executed innocents is one
of the most common in the media.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal this week, judge Morris B. Hoffman
(Colorado district court judge and an adjunct professor of law at the
University of Colorado) takes a serious look at that claim. It is
'One of the earliest and most oft-cited works on wrongful convictions was
a 1987 study done by Hugo Bedau and Michael Radelet, claiming that 23 of
the 350 capital defendants whose cases they examined (including Sacco and
Vanzetti) were executed despite their factual innocence. Yet the method by
which Mr. Bedau (a philosopher) and Mr. Radelet (a sociologist) determined
whether the executed defendants were actually innocent was to reconstruct
from the trial record, and contemporaneous newspaper reports, a one-sided
narrative from which some doubt about factual guilt might plausibly be
argued. Scholars immediately criticized this methodology, and challenged
Messrs. Bedau and Radelet to come up with a single case of a demonstrably
innocent person executed in America in the modern era. Messrs. Bedau and
Radelet have not only been unable to do so. One of them has recently
admitted that their label "innocent" was really just a way of saying there
were errors in the trial, that guilt seemed to them to be a "close call,"
and that some of those close calls must surely, as a statistical matter,
have involved some factually innocent people....It is a giant leap from an
erroneous trial ruling to reversible error, and another giant leap from
reversible error to actual innocence.'
Hoffman goes on to calculate the wrongful post-trial conviction rate in
the US as only 0.013%. But since only 5% of cases go to court trial in the
US, the overall wrongful conviction rate is around 0.00065%. And there is
no evidence that any wrongfully convicted person was ever executed in the
So instead of trying to deal with terrorism through capitulation and
appeasement, maybe Israel should try capital punishment! The entire
country was forced into the Oslo debacle under the slogan "Let's give it a
try." So regarding capital punishment, why not give it a try?
April 26, 2007
The 'Innocence' Myth
By MORRIS B. HOFFMAN
April 26, 2007; Page A19
Criminal defendants in the United States are sometimes wrongfully
convicted. If that's news to you, you don't know much about human
fallibility. You must also have somehow managed to avoid the increasingly
shrill polemics issuing, daily it seems, from our nation's law schools and
their "innocence projects," which have spent the last 20 years trying to
paint a picture of our criminal justice system so dismal that a rightful
conviction seems the exception and not the rule.
The director of one of those innocence projects said in a 2002 magazine
interview that "we as a nation" would rather have the criminal justice
system convict 10 innocent people than let one guilty person go free,
inverting the famous Blackstone Ratio. Today, that project's Web site
lists as one of its missions the duty to educate the public about the
"prevalence" of wrongful convictions.
But what is the real wrongful conviction rate? Innocence projects, and the
liturgies that have grown up around them, are strangely silent when it
comes to that question. And of course in imperfect complex systems, it is
the error rate that matters. That means we must look not only at the
number of wrongfully convicted defendants, but also at the number of
rightly convicted ones. And there lies the empirical challenge.
Before the advent of DNA testing, there were only a few narrow
circumstances in which we could confidently assess a defendant's guilt by
any method other than the trial itself. In the era before the corpus
delicti rule was vigorously enforced, "victims" of "murder" occasionally
resurfaced very much alive. Fingerprints and some other kinds of pre-DNA
forensic evidence discovered after trial could sometimes do the trick.
Later confessions by the "real" criminal could also prove convictions
wrongful, though, of course, there is the problem of false confessions.
Perhaps because of these definitional challenges, there has been very
little in the way of comprehensive study of wrongful conviction rates. But
that hasn't stopped the mythmakers. One of the earliest and most oft-cited
works on wrongful convictions was a 1987 study done by Hugo Bedau and
Michael Radelet, claiming that 23 of the 350 capital defendants whose
cases they examined (including Sacco and Vanzetti) were executed despite
their factual innocence. Yet the method by which Mr. Bedau (a philosopher)
and Mr. Radelet (a sociologist) determined whether the executed defendants
were actually innocent was to reconstruct from the trial record, and
contemporaneous newspaper reports, a one-sided narrative from which some
doubt about factual guilt might plausibly be argued.
Scholars immediately criticized this methodology, and challenged Messrs.
Bedau and Radelet to come up with a single case of a demonstrably innocent
person executed in America in the modern era. Messrs. Bedau and Radelet
have not only been unable to do so, one of them has recently admitted that
their label "innocent" was really just a way of saying there were errors
in the trial, that guilt seemed to them to be a "close call," and that
some of those close calls must surely, as a statistical matter, have
involved some factually innocent people.
The mythmakers also directly conflate trial error rates with wrongful
conviction rates. Studies showing astonishingly high error rates in
capital trials have very little to do with the question of the rate at
which innocent people are being convicted. I can't remember a single trial
over which I have presided -- including dozens of homicides -- in which,
looking back, I didn't make at least one error in ruling on objections. It
is a giant leap from an erroneous trial ruling to reversible error, and
another giant leap from reversible error to actual innocence.
Much of the empirical confusion about wrongful conviction rates has been
driven by histrionics over the death penalty. To a large and unfortunate
extent, the debate about wrongful convictions in a capital context has
become a proxy for arguments in favor and against the death penalty. Lost
in the cross fire is any reliable data about the actual wrongful
But the innocence data can be mined for some approximations. And those
approximations suggest that the actual rate of wrongful convictions in the
United States is vanishingly small.
In the first place, almost all criminal defendants plead guilty. The
national plea bargaining rate is around 95%. That means that even if
juries get it right only 80% of the time (an assumption at which most
sensible scholars would cringe), the overall post-trial wrongful
conviction rate would still be only around 1%.
But the real wrongful conviction rate is almost certainly lower, and
significantly so. Earlier this week the innocence project at Cardozo
School of Law issued a press release celebrating the 200th person
exonerated by DNA testing. But in the 20 years innocence projects have
been operating, there were roughly two million criminal trials in the U.S.
Assuming as many as 25% of those trials resulted in acquittals (and
ignoring, as the innocence merchants are wont to do, the problem of
wrongful acquittals), the wrongful post-trial conviction rate is only
0.013%. Since only 5% of cases are tried, that would place the overall
wrongful conviction rate at around 0.00065%.
Of course, this is just a lower bound estimate, based on several
admittedly questionable assumptions, including that the innocence-project
data is representative, and that no innocent people plead guilty. But even
if this estimate is an order of magnitude or two low, it is still
considerably less than the mythmakers would have us believe.
Even cases that make it to trial are rarely about factual innocence --
that is, whether the defendant actually committed the acts with which he
is charged. Yes, there are the occasional "whodunits" -- I even had a
homicide whodunit earlier this year -- and even categories of cases in
which factual guilt is more likely to be a legitimately contested issue,
such as sex assaults. But those cases are very much the exception. The
vast majority of criminal trials in America are not about factual guilt or
innocence, they are about the defendant's state of mind at the time of the
crime, and therefore about the level of offense of which the defendant
will be convicted.
Exaggerations about the unreliability of the criminal justice system are
not just matters of scholastic impurity and pedagogical extremism; they
threaten to become self-fulfilling. In a system as dependent on plea
bargaining as ours, a widespread belief that the system is hopelessly
unreliable will only encourage innocent defendants to plead guilty to
lesser offenses. It also leaves many jurors, who expect "whodunits,"
unprepared for the real work of the typical criminal jury -- to decide the
defendant's level of culpability -- and therefore unduly resistant to
defenses based on lack of culpability.
Of course, the work of innocence projects is incredibly important and
should be celebrated, even if the projects had identified just one
wrongfully convicted defendant, let alone hundreds. That's because trials
should be about truth, and errors in truth detection -- whether convicting
the innocent or acquitting the guilty -- should concern us all. Innocence
projects may also have significant things to teach us about discrete
points in the criminal justice system that are particularly prone to error
(such as coerced confessions and cross-racial identification).
But it is a mistake for them to stretch their results beyond all
statistical sense. All defendants are entitled at trial to the scrupulous
presumption of their innocence. They are not entitled to the
post-conviction presumption that the criminal justice system is about as
reliable as tossing a coin.
Mr. Hoffman is a Colorado district court judge and an adjunct professor of
law at the University of Colorado. This article was adapted from a
forthcoming issue of the Chicago-Kent Law Review.
URL for this article:
7. Virginia vs Israel
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
The Post-Zionist Hatikva
the national anthem. You see, Hatikva mentions the Jewish soul yearning.
And we can't have any of that in "a state of all its citizens", you see,
some of whom are not Jewish and others of whom have no soul. Never mind
that the "state of all its citizens", that meaningless slogan of the
Moonbatocracy, happens to contain a very large majority of Jews. So when
"all the citizens" is that state make a decision democratically, it is
often likely to be one that serves the interests of the state's Jews. The
"state of all its citizens" is the one that passed and maintains the Law
of Return and the state use of Jewish symbolism. Such symbolism drives
the Left to conniptions of course. Never mind that they have never
objected to any of those crosses on the flags of Europe or the Christmas
accouterments everywhere in the West. Not to mention the Islamofascist
slogans and symbols of the "Fat'h" and the Palestinian Authority.
Meanwhile, with Israel Independence Day barbecue odors still in the air,
here is an English translation of Hatikva:
As long as deep in the heart,
the soul of a Jew yearns,
and towards the east
an eye to Zion looks out.
Our hope is not yet lost,
the hope of two thousand years,
to be a free people in our land,
the land of Zion and Jerusalem.
To be a free people in our land,
the land of Zion and Jerusalem.
Here is an example of how the Post-Zionist post-survivalist Left in Israel
would like Hatikva to be rephrased:
As long as deep in the pocket,
the soul of a secularist postmodern consumer yearns,
and towards the east
an eye to Iran's struggle against Western imperialism looks out.
Our hope is not yet lost,
the hope of forty years,
to be an unfree people in our land,
the land of Palestine and al-Quds.
To be an unfree people in our land,
the land of Palestine and al-Quds.
2. From *Washington Post*:
Why Boycott Israel?
By Richard Cohen
In Iran, the government overturned the convictions of six men who, among
other things, killed a young couple because they were walking together
in public. In China, local authorities seized about 60 women and
forcibly aborted their pregnancies. In Russia, the Putin government
expanded its control of the media. In Cuba . . . oh, well, you already
know. But what you may not know is that given such a vast palette of
injustice and depredations, the British National Union of Journalists
made a truly original move: It singled out Israel to boycott.
The boycott, mind you, is not a journalistic one. Instead, it will
extend to lemons and melons and that sort of thing. The boycott was
issued as "a gesture of support for the Palestinian people," some of
whom, as it happens, abducted a BBC correspondent, Alan Johnston. One
group has claimed that it executed him, although no proof has been
offered. Suffice it to say the situation is dire.
What possessed the journalist union's board -- in a vote of 66 to 54 --
to take such action? The question is worth posing because it followed a
similar vote last year by British academics (later rescinded) to avoid,
under pain of death or something, their Israeli colleagues. And, more
important, it is yet another bleat, in Europe and in this country, from
people and organizations that, for good reasons and bad, have simply had
it with Israel. Why won't the pushy Jewish state shape up?
In some sense, it is a fair enough question. The wrongful and
counterproductive occupation of the West Bank is now in its 40th year.
Settlements continue to go up, and the government of Ehud Olmert, weak
and hapless, is unable or unwilling to contain them. The government
proved its incompetence in the Lebanon war of the summer past, managing
to enhance Hezbollah's standing and not managing to retrieve the two
captured soldiers in whose name the war was launched in the first place.
For Israel -- but really for Lebanese civilians most of all -- the war
was a disaster.
But Sudan kills by the score in Darfur and Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe
beats his opponents to a pulp, and in almost all of the Arab world there
is no such thing as freedom of the press. In Israel there not only is,
but the press is as rambunctious as can be found anywhere.
The British journalists say they are moved by the plight of the
Palestinian people, and they are right to be. But the misery of a Gazan
or a West Banker is not solely Israel's doing. The government of Gaza is
the political arm of a terrorist organization, and if the West Bank is
suffering -- and it is -- the cause is not only Israeli land lust but
also a morbid Israeli fear of terrorism. British journalists would no
doubt approve similar measures if London's city buses had not once but
repeatedly been blown to smithereens by passengers with the exact fare
and belts of explosives.
So what explains this fury at Israel -- and only at Israel? What
explains this need to denounce, to boycott? Some of it surely comes from
the uncritical support that Israel gets from the United States, which to
lefties all over the world is a vile state, maybe worthy -- if it were
not for jeans, movies and hip-hop -- of a boycott itself.
Some of it no doubt reflects frustration from the efforts of Jewish
organizations to suffocate any criticism of Israel and to hurl the
epithet "anti-Semite" at anyone with an odd bent to his thinking. But
some of it, surely, is anti-Semitism itself, a rage at the impudent,
pushy Jew and this state created in the midst of the Arab world.
Forgotten, conveniently and appallingly, is history itself and the
reason for Israel's creation. This does not excuse injustice to
Palestinians, it merely explains. But it is an explanation so soaked
with the blood of Jews as to seem utterly concocted: It cannot be! But it
The British journalists, like the academics before them, dare to tread
where an army of goons has gone before. If they do not recognize the
ember of anti-Semitism still glowing within them, they ought to park
themselves before a mirror and ask why, of all the nations, they single
out Israel for reprimand and obloquy. This business of assigning to Jews
a special burden, for seeing in them more of mankind's bad qualities and
less of its good, has a dark and ugly pedigree: the Chosen People, again
-- and again in the wrong way.
3. Campus Double Standards:
4. Shilling for the Hezbollah:
5. .I found Saddam.s WMD bunkers.
6. From Yehuda Poch:
Gary Bauer's posting contains the following:
Ban Toilet Paper?
Pop singer Sheryl Crow had a busy weekend. Saturday night, Crow and Laurie
David, a producer of Al Gore.s eco-fiction .An Inconvenient Truth,.
decided to mix it up with Karl Rove over global warming at the annual
White House Correspondents. dinner. According to numerous press reports,
Mr. Rove didn.t take too kindly to their interruption and heated words
were exchanged. I.m willing to give Rove the benefit of the doubt,
especially if Ms. Crow was attempting to explain her latest theory. In an
effort to save the planet, the environmentalist Left has devised a
.brilliant. plan . ban toilet paper. No, I.m not making this up. Ms. Crow
has been traveling the country on her .Stop Global Warming College Tour,.
visiting our institutions of higher learning and preaching from the
.Gospel according to Gore.. She has maintained a blog on her web site, and
here is part of her entry from April 19th:
.I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy
ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming.
Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in
my mind, worth investigating. .I propose a limitation be put on how many
squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. .I think we . can
make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course,
on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required..
Given the source, it would be easy to dismiss such bizarre statements.
(You may recall Crow once informed us that her foreign policy solution to
terrorism and war was .not to have enemies..) But, these folks are
serious. Last month the New York Times ran a 2,200 word report entitled,
.The Year Without Toilet Paper,. about a Manhattan couple that well, you
get the point. Granted, Ms. Crow admits she.s only in the .earliest
stages. of developing her thoughts, but I have wonder how she plans on
enforcing this. Does she propose we start rationing toilet paper so you
can buy only one roll a week? Should the government require metered
dispensers in every bathroom assessing taxes on excessive square usage?
The fact that Sheryl Crow can indulge herself by pondering how much toilet
paper we consume is a testament to the greatness of our country, and our
extraordinary liberty and opportunity. At the same time, it demonstrates
yet again just how out of touch Hollywood liberals are with Main Street,
U.S.A., where most folks are more concerned about paying their bills,
protecting their kids, and preserving our prosperity.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
About that "Apartheid Wall"
About the "Apartheid Wall"
by Steven Plaut
6 Iyar 5767, 4/24/2007
Anti-Semites have been whining about Israel's "Apartheid Wall".
In recent months, instead of screaming "Butcher all Jews," the
anti-Semites have been whining about Israel's "Apartheid Wall". It is an
"Apartheid Wall," because it makes it harder for Arab terrorists to murder
Jewish civilians, and the people who oppose the wall all support mass
murder of Jews. Even seemingly respectable people, like Professor Juan
Cole, an Israel-basher whose attempt to take a job at Yale was blocked
last year by a sudden attack of common sense, these days calls it the
"Apartheid Wall." Juan of a Kind has never bothered to mention on his web
site that the wall was constructed to stop Palestinian mass murderers.
An irrelevant detail.
Basically, anyone who refers to Israel's wall as an "Apartheid Wall"
should be regarded as a pro-terror, pro-murder anti-Semitic slimeball.
Now comes a story about another security wall, one the moonbatocracy is
not labelling a "Apartheid Wall" (yet). Seems that the US is now building
a wall to keep the Sunni and Shiite terrorists in Baghdad from murdering
one another. The Islamofascists are already complaining about it because
if the bloodshed in Baghdad were to drop, how would they organize the
entire Middle East in anti-Americanism. It might even disarm the
anti-American campus Left in the US!
So building gated neighborhoods to keep Sunnis and Shiites from being
murdered seems to be legit. But preventing Jewish children from being
murdered is an act of racism and imperialism.
Here's a thought. How about instead of an "Apartheid Wall" Israel builds
an "Anti-Apartheid Gallows," on which Arab and Jewish traitors may be
hanged with fraternity and egalitarian compassion, and no artificial
barrier separating them?
2. Azmi Bishara flees Israel minutes ahead of being arrested for treason
and being a spy. But he has at least ONE "academic" cheerleader and groupie:
3. The Media's Pogrom against Israel:
4. The Explosion of Anti-Semitism:
Monday, April 23, 2007
The Protocols of Herr Sivan
explanations for what is happening to Israel and the Jewish people:
'Everyone must ask: Why were the Jews so blind as not to see the evil
coming? Why were they so complacent when the sword was being brandished
before their faces? But the fact is that for many years our "prophets" so
lulled us that we no longer saw reality and failed to anticipate the
'Every charge made by the Jew-haters has thus been repeated without change
by some of our own brethren. Is it any surprise, therefore, that these
uncircumcised of heart did not attempt to prevent the disaster and were
not aroused to come to the rescue of their people in its time of trouble?
On the contrary, we can be sure that their ilk have been, and always will
be, a stumbling block and a plague to the whole House of Israel...
'It is useless to try to convince those Jews who hate Zion and Jerusalem,
and whose sole wish is to make us forget the memory of our ancestors, our
beliefs, and our sense of kinship. Having destroyed our traditions and
mocked and derided the whole heritage of Israel, why should they spare the
Land from their venom?'
- Peretz Smolenskin, "Let Us Search Our Ways" (1881).
2. The Protocols of Herr Sivan:
INN (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122203) reports that
the vicious anti-Israel leftist Eyal Sivan was chosen to serve as the
official governmental marketer of Jaffa oranges. Sivan specializes in
making anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hate propaganda films. He who also
teaches in the cinema department of Israel's Sapir college in the Negev.
Tom Gross reports that he was one of the clowns participating in "Israel
Apartheid Week" Nuremberg Rallies. Sivan may be best known for having
filed a frivolous SLAPP "libel suit" against French philosopher Alain
Finkielkraut, after the latter called him an Anti-Semite. The French
court eventually tossed Sivan's case out. Israel Media Watch claims that
Sivan's film "The Specialist" showed senior Nazi official Adolf Eichmann
in a favorable light. Sivan, says IMW, did not deny he had used cinematic
manipulation to achieve this end, and this film, too, hurt the feelings of
From a previous posting from July 2006:
French Court Dismisses Malicious SLAPP "Libel" Suit against Jewish
PARIS (EJP)--- French-Jewish philosopher Alain Finkielkraut has been
discharged by a Paris court after being sued by an Israeli film director
whom he described as "one of the current actors of Jewish anti-Semitism".
Interviewed in 2003 on the French Jewish radio RJC about Eyal Sivan's
film, "Route 181, fragments d'un voyage en Palestine-Israel" (Road 181,
Extracts from a Palestinian-Israeli journey), which was broadcast on a TV
station, Finkielkraut called the film maker "one of the actors of today's
particularly hard and frightening Jewish anti-Semitism".
The philosopher criticised Sivan for having made a link between the
Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and the Holocaust.
"But those who are sewing a Star of David on our chest want to claim the
yellow star for themselves," Finkielkraut said at the time.
Eyal Sivan, a leftwing militant, decided to sue Finkielkraut for his
"slanderous words which constitute an infringement to my honour and
In the past, Eyal Sivan has supported actively the boycott of Israeli
products in order to denounce Israeli policies towards the Palestinians.
Israeli professor and former ambassador to France Eli Barnavi testified in
court for Alain Finkielkraut while two other Israeli professors, among
them Haim Bresheeth, testified in favour of Sivan.
Film maker Eyal Sivan
Finkielkraut, who also received the support of Claude Lanzmann, director
of the famous film "Shoah", said that he reacted to the "violent
unilateral character" of Sivan's movie which represents the history of
Israeli-Palestinian relations "as the aggression of one people crazed by
the Shoah against a profoundly peaceful people."
"I don't know why this man is indignant about being called anti-Semitic,
that's what he is," Lanzmann said when he testified in favour of
Sivan's "Road 81" film was distributed in small independent Paris
The film maker accused Finkielkraut of being one of those people "ready to
fight against the last Israeli citizen, including myself, to preserve the
state of Israel". "This is not my position," he added.
The court rejected Sivan's complaint.
"Finkielkraut only credited the other side with intellectual attitudes and
never attributed a precise fact which could be proved," the presiding
judge, Nicolas Bonnal, said.
"Above all he gave a critical analysis of Sivan's work and of its
political positions," he added.
Sivan told EJP he was surprised by the ruling.
"It is clear to me that I was the victim of defamation," he stressed.
"This has nothing to do with a simple opinion debate."
In another case, Finkielkraut has been sued and accused of libel by French
anti-racist association MRAP (Movement Against Racism and for Friendship
Among Peoples) for comments made during a conference in 2003 on
''Anti-Semitism: the Left against itself''.
In a reference to the failure of the Durban conference on racism in 2001,
Finkielkraut said: "a movement was created in Durban against racism and
for popular anti-Semitism".
Comments about French identity
MRAP's president Mouloud Aounit, took it as a personal attack and accused
Finkielkraut of hinting that MRAP was anti-Semitic. A public prosecutor
representative has asked for Finkielkraut's discharge. The decision will
be made shortly.
Finkielkraut, who is one of France's most notable French intellectuals
along with two other Jews, Bernard-Henri Levy and Andr Glucksmann, already
made headlines at the end of last year when he had to apologize for
comments about the riots which took place around France in an interview
with Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
In the interview, Finkielkraut underlined that many immigrant do not
identify with France.
"If immigrants say 'the French' when they are referring to the whites,
then we are lost. If their identity is located somewhere else and they're
only in France for utilitarian reasons, then we're lost.
"I have to admit that the Jews are also starting to use this France. I say
to them, 'if for your France is a utilitarian matter, but your identity is
Judaism, then be honest with yourself: you have Israel."
Some of Finkielkraut's answers were translated to French and published in
the national newspaper Le Monde before they grew into a general
controversy and condemnation of Finkielkraut, who was accused of racism.
From left to right
Considered as a free-speaker in politically-correct France, Alain
Finkielkraut has been described by some as one of the leading
"neo-reactionary" figures along with interior minister and presidential
candidate, Nicolas Sarkozy.
Finkielkraut started his career as a militant of the left but drifted
through the years to the right, making many enemies on the way.
In 2005 he strongly defended a petition against anti-white racism in
French suburbs. Controversial French comic Dieudonne told EJP Finkielkraut
was "one of his main enemies."
The philosopher claims he is being harassed by his opponents with repeated
lawsuits but other intellectuals accuse him in private of provoking
controversies in order to get publicity and sell more books.
Finkielkraut has a weekly show on national French radio and on the Jewish
Afterword: Had Sivan been allowed to forum shop the suit into Nazareth
Court, Finkelkraut would have been found guilty of "slander", as would
Deborah Lipstadt. David Irving however would have been awarded a large
cash award in damages.
3. WHAT right of return? by Dersh:
4. Rare victory for common sense:
5. Professors for a Strong Israel
Statement to the Press - 22 April 2007
Re: Professor Yosef Ben-Shlomo z"l
Professors for a Strong Israel mourns the loss of Professor Yosef
Ben-Shlomo, a great man of letters and of the spirit, a formative force in
public opinion and a devoted lover of the Land of Israel and of the
settlement enterprise. He gave over his last years to teaching in the
pre-military academies, in the hopes of instilling Jewish and Zionist
values in his students and training them in analytical thinking.
We recall as well Prof. Ben-Shlomo's participation in hunger strikes that
PSI organized to protest Ehud Barak's dangerous and defeatist policy as
We offer our condolences to the Ben-Shlomo family.
Professors for a Strong Israel
Tel: 050-551 8940
6. What to do with Bishara:
7. US Officialdom and the Middle East:
8. Apologizing for Islamist anti-Semitism:
Monday, April 23, 2007
Maariv Celebrates Independence Day by Orthodox Bashing
The headline in Maariv came out on Israel's Memorial Day, hours before the
59th Independence Day celebrations were about to begin. "The family of
Rabbi Elyashiv Were Celebrating when the Mourning Siren Sounded," screamed
the headline. It referred to the family of Rabbi Yosef Sholom Elyashiv,
one of the most important of the Ashkenazi rabbis in Israel, generally
considered the heir to Rabbi Elazar Shach as leader of the "Lithuanians".
The headline aroused immediate anger and resentment throughout Israel.
Memorial Day in Israel always begins with a siren in the evening, during
which the entire country stands at attention for a moment of
contemplation. The fruitloops from the Neturei Karta always make a point
of showing their contempt for the Israeli dead soldiers and refuse to
participate. But that is just one more example of the fact that the
members of the Neturei Karta cult hold contempt in general for us actual
Jews. Some other groups of Chareidi extremists sometimes mimic them when
the siren sounds. But here was the family of Rabbi Elyashi himself joining
the loonies in showing disrespect for the Israeli dead?
Except they weren't. In reading the actual news story, it turns out that
the real scandal here is the low level of journalistic integrity of
Maariv. The story was a complete fabrication. The family of the Rabbi did
not show disrespect.
To the contrary.
The whole true story was that on the afternoon BEFORE Memorial Day began,
the family of the Rabbi held a Bar Mitzvah celebratory meal. It was held
without music and some other normal outward accouterments of celebration,
because it took place during the Omer, during which celebrations for Bar
Mitvahs and bris ceremonies are toneddown. Knowing that Memorial Day was
coming and that the siren would sound at 8:00 PM, the Bar Mitvah took
place from 4 PM until 6 PM, and was ended long before Memorial Day began
It is true that Maariv also claims to have spoken with a nameless busybody
who claimed that there was more celebrating that evening in a soup kitchen
in Bnei Barak run for the poor he had entered, honoring the family, and
claimed he heard some music as well. Maariv journalists took his word for
it and did not bother to find out if this were so or if the family of
Rabbi Elyashiv were even involved.
So the scandalous headline in Maariv REALLY should have read: "Maariv
Journalists were Inventing anti-Orthodox Lies while the Mourning Sirens
Academic Whoring for Finkelstein
By Steven Plaut
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 23, 2007
The Finkelstein Affair
By Steven Plaut
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 23, 2007
Academic hiring and promotion processes are mysterious procedures poorly
understood by the public. While supposedly designed to ensure quality
control and the maintenance of standards of scholarship, in fact they are
all too often subordinated to intentional subversion, including when this
is done out of political ideology.
The most notorious example in recent days of corruption of the promotion
process has been the attempt by radical leftist faculty members at DePaul
University to obtain tenure for the pseudo-scholar and Holocaust
trivializer Norman Finkelstein. The Finkelstein affair is unusual in that
the politicization has been exposed so thoroughly in the media and is now
so obvious and explicit. In part, this has been thanks to the fact that
Finkelstein himself, or his close followers, have published the supposedly
classified secret documents related to his promotion on the web. How can
it be that someone like Finkelstein was hired in the first place,
especially by an institution with ties to the church and committed to
Catholic ethical standards? Ironically, the answer was provided
inadvertently by Finkelstein and his followers when they publicized
(probably illegally) these key documents related to his tenure bid. These
documents show how easy it is for extremists with no scholarly credentials
to recruit on their behalf respected academics who share their political
Finkelstein, the assistant professor in political science at DePaul
University best known for his cheerleading the Hizbollah and his endless
smearing of Holocaust survivors, has a completely empty record of academic
publication. He has never produced a single paper published in a refereed
scholarly journal. Instead, he turns out one anti-Semitic book after
another, as well as hate screeds for propaganda magazines and web sites.
His "books" are published by firms making editorial decisions based on
commercial considerations rather than the quality of their scholarship.
Finkelstein's long history of Jew-baiting is by now well known, as is his
history of vulgarity and juvenile smear mongering. Finkelstein has
proclaimed Holocaust denier David Irving (who insists there were no gas
chambers at Auschwitz) a great historian. Finkelstein's personal web site
is a collection of bigotries, including death threats and pornographic
cartoons, as well as countless smug smears against all Holocaust
survivors. Finkelstein's "books" have been dismissed as
pseudo-scholarship by nearly every serious historian to review them. He
has used his position at DePaul University in Chicago to promote his open
celebration of Middle East terrorism. He maintains the most intimate ties
with Holocaust Deniers and he is himself considered by the Anti-Defamation
League, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and many others to be a Holocaust
It would be hard to find a more illuminating lesson about the dark side of
campus hiring and promotion than the Finkelstein affair. From the
classified documents that Finkelstein himself has illicitly (and probably
illegally) published about his promotion, anyone can see the obvious
political forces at work. Finkelstein was hired in the first place
because his crude anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism endeared him to
academic radicals generally and to those who dominate the political
science department at DePaul in particular. Despite the fact that
Finkelstein's antics have served to make DePaul into something of an
international laughingstock of higher education, the political science
department recommended granting Finkelstein tenure by a vote of 9 to 3.
Were Finkelstein pro-Israel, he would not have stood a chance of getting
tenure with his existing "academic record."
The syllabi of Finkelstein's courses have appeared on the web and they
consist of nothing more than one-sided political indoctrination.
Naturally, his courses are popular among his students, who just happen to
be the radical and jihadi DePaul students, not driven away by his
in-classroom harangues. The politically conscripted tenure committee at
DePaul lauded his "teaching popularity" on such a basis. Even more
amazingly, it cited Finkelstein's frequent anti-Semitic speeches and
racist public incitements, including his famous collaborations with the
Hizbollah and with neo-Nazi organizations, as valuable "service to the
To achieve their goal, his political science comrades saw to it that only
two outside "experts" wrote letters of evaluation for Finkelstein's tenure
consideration. These two happen to share Finkelstein.s anti-Israel and
anti-Semitic agendas. The first was John Mearsheimer of the University of
Chicago, whose tract written with Stephen Walt maintaining that the
American media and America.s foreign policy is controlled by a Jewish
cabal has made him infamous. His assault on Israel and American Jews has
made him a propaganda favorite of radical Islamic groups like CAIR, and he
makes no secret either of his antipathy for Israel nor his desire to see
America weakened and "deterred."
The second academic reference for Finkelstein was provided by Professor
Ian Lustick, of the University of Pennsylvania, who has hosted Finkelstein
several times at Penn, is a far leftist, anti-America and unabashedly
anti-Israel. He earned some notoriety for his expressing regret that
America did not lose more soldiers in the campaign to topple the Taliban
in Afghanistan. Lustick likes to describe America's foreign policy as
being under the control of a "cabal" (his word); writing in the
anti-American, anti-Israel magazine, The Nation, a magazine hostile to
America and Israel and sympathetic to radical Islamicists, wrote:
"This campaign for an invasion of Iraq is thus aptly understood as a
supply-side war because it is not driven by a particular threat, a
particularly accentuated threat or a "demand" for war associated with the
struggle against Al Qaeda, but because of the combination of an enormous
supply of military power and political capital and the proximity to the
highest echelons of the American government of a small cabal long ago
committed to just this sort of war."
His deconstruction of terrorism runs like this:
"Lustick dismisses the concept of terrorism as a valid conceptual term.
Instead, he embraces what he terms an 'extensive', as opposed to an
'intensive', definition of terrorism that is not bound by any limiting
'conditions'. This, he claims, enables one to classify activities as
'terrorist' if they encompass any violent 'actions and threats' by
governmental militaries and even 'tax collectors', as well as insurgents."
Lustick was an instrumental player in getting a pro-Israel professor at
Penn, Francisco Gil-White, fired. Gil-White did not benefit from the same
mass political conscription on his behalf that Finkelstein enjoys.
Lustick is an advocate on behalf of, and evidently sees himself a member
of, the "New Historian" group of pseudo-academics who rewrite Middle East
history from the Arab point of view. He has close ties the with Michael
Lerner, editor of the radical magazine Tikkun, and is active in several
anti-Israel leftist groups.
DePaul's recruitment of Lustick and Mearsheimer to "evaluate"
Finkelstein's "scholarship" is a bit like asking Hezbollah imam, Hassan
Nasrallah, to evaluate Noam Chomsky's service to America.
But Lustick and Mearsheimer have not been the only professors to supply
academic support services on behalf of Norman Finkelstein. The moment
news came out that the Dean at DePaul was seeking to deny Finkelstein
tenure, an outpouring of support for Finkelstein's "scholarship" took
place from tenured radicals and academic jihadi. The Middle East Studies
Association (MESA) which is boycotting a scholarship program designed to
train American students in Arabic to help their country.s defense publicly
endorsed Finkelstein's tenure bid. Legions of other political extremists,
from DePaul's Palestinian radicals to Professor Peter N. Kirstein who
regards America as a terrorist state, to journalist Robert Fisk (who holds
identical views), joined in support of Finkelstein.s tenure.
In the midst of the Ward Churchill affair a couple of years back, one of
the key questions the media failed to raise was how a charlatan like
Churchill could have been hired and promoted at a major university in the
first place. After all, his "academic record" was little more than a
joke, a collection of shallow anti-American hate propaganda tracts. He
was a notorious liar, faking his Indian ethnicity, and had been involved
in academic fraud. So how on earth could a serious university have hired
These mysteries are explainable only by understanding how academic hiring
and promotion take place, and how that process may be subverted and
corrupted. This process is largely unknown to the general public and even
to students and alumni. In far too many schools, the process is easily
subordinated to political agendas. In all cases, the outward appearance of
the de jure hiring and promotion procedures work pretty much in a similar
manner. The academic records of faculty members are reviewed, evaluations
from outside experts are solicited. The publication and teaching records
of the candidate are critically examined. Campus promotion committees and
other university officials form an opinion and make recommendations.
All very nice, on paper.
The problem is that the system lends itself to easy manipulation,
especially by those operating on behalf of a political agenda. Every
stage of the faculty evaluation process can be twisted and perverted by
those seeking to hire or promote someone out of a sense of personal or
political solidarity. This subversion may be the greatest open secret in
all of academia. My guess is that in any honest survey of professors,
nearly every one could attest to knowing of such cases. The result of
this subversion of academic hiring and promotion is that hundreds, and
probably thousands, of faculty members with ludicrous and embarrassingly
insipid academic records have been hired and tenured by the university
system as acts of political and personal solidarity.
Occasionally, university insiders rebel against the attempt to impose upon
them politicized hiring decisions, sometimes with the help of outraged
alumni. The prospective hiring last year of Juan Cole by Yale University
was regarded by many as a done deal until pressures forced the university
to take a clear and unbiased look at his real academic record. At the
University of Colorado, Interim Chancellor Phil DiStefano recently issued
a notice of intent to dismiss Churchill from his faculty position there,
defying the massive leftist public campaign on Churchill's behalf. Some
other less-publicized rebellions have similarly blocked attempts at
politicized hiring and promotion.
Two things are certain. Not a single one of the academics raving about
Finkelstein's remarkable "scholarship" would be supporting him if it were
not for his hatred of Israel and America -- in short his political
credentials as a member in good standing of the academic left.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Prof. Yosef ben-Shlomo, who died over the weekend, was one of the most
interesting intellectuals in Israel. In a country where being a professor
is almost synonymous with being a leftist pinhead, Ben-Shlomo was one of
the most interesting and most entertaining of the counter-exceptions.
Born in Krakow, he had been a professor of philosophy at Tel Aviv
University, and after he retired virtually the entire philosophy
department at TAU was taken over by far-leftist anti-Zionists, becoming
politically one of the worst academic departments in all of Israel.
Ben Shlomo, while not religious himself as an adult, was a student of
Gershom Sholem, wrote about Sholem, and also wrote extensively about Rabbi
Kook (the intellectual godfather of religious Zionism)
While Ben-Shlomo had been a leftist before the Six Day War, thereafter he
found himself in the position of arguably the leading anti-Left
intellectual in Israel
(http://www.think-israel.org/benshlomo.transfer.html ). He often appeared
on television and in the rest of the media. Haaretz dubbed him the
"Yishayahu Leibowitz of the Right", referring to the far-Left but
extremely religious anti-Zionist professor of philosophy and chemistry at
the Hebrew University, who died several years ago. While Leibowitz was a
total moonbat politically, denouncing Zionists as "Judeo-Nazis", his
writings about rabbinic sources and the Torah portions are insightful and
deep, and frankly they are part of my regular study tools. Ben-Shlomo,
who was something of a prophet of secularism and was an admirer of
Spinoza, was completely on the mark politically when it came to national
issues. He also was a sharp critic of the emerging emptiness of
secularist culture in Israel. At the same time, he endorsed the
mainly-religious Gush Emunim movement that built settlements. After Oslo,
he emerged as one of the most militant opponents of the "peace process"
(http://www.acpr.org.il/publications/policy-papers/pp054-xs.html ). He
should have won the Israel Prize many times over, but the prize is usually
reserved for far-leftists (like Shulamit Aloni and Yigal Tomarkin).
He insisted that Israeli secularists could be returned to the roots of
Zionism and pioneering, rescued from the post-Zionist Left and cultural
emptiness. He vocally denounced Sharon and Olmert for the abandonment of
Gush Katif and the driving out of the Jewish settlers of the Gaza Strip.
He even endorsed the refusal of soldiers to carry out the evictions of
those settlers. He regularly denounced the leftist hegemony over Israel's
He denounced the self-hatred and defeatism of the Israeli Left.
After A.B. Yehoshua called for an Israel that would be "normal" and like
all other states, Ben-Shlomo denounced him for going to a protest against
the Begin government for the Sabra and Shatilla events. If you want
Israel to be like all other nations, and so refuse to say "You have Chosen
us from All Nations" in prayer, then what were you doing there?, asked Ben
Shlomo. You should act like the British and French would have in a
A typical yet interesting anecdote was reported in the Israeli media just
before he died. Ben-Shlomo was once debating with a leftist about
"Palestinian rights". Palestinians have no rights at all, Ben-Shlomo
told the leftist, because a Palestinian came into the palace in the days
of King David and stole all the jewels there. Nonsense, replied the
leftist, there were not even any Palestinians in existence back then.
Exactly, said Prof. Ben-Shlomo with a mischievous grin.
Last year Tel Aviv University held a day long conference in his honor.
The hall was so jammed that students were hanging on to the windows to
hear him speak (http://www.inn.co.il/Besheva/Article.aspx/6226 ).
3. More on Lying with Statistics:
4. A Plan for Peace with Iran:
Friday, April 20, 2007
Israel at 59 - Facing Unpleasant Fact about the Middle East
By Steven Plaut
The world is now well into the post-Oslo. post-911 era, in which the
delusions and denials of reality that were the foundations of the "Middle
East peace process" are at last being acknowledged for what they were.
For those returning to the planet Earth from Fantasyland in the "Oslo"
parallel universe, it behooves them and us all to bear in mind some of the
unpleasant facts of life about the Middle East.
1. The Arab world has never come to terms with Israel's existence within
ANY set of borders whatsoever and is still seeking the annihilation of
Israel and its population.
2. ANY Palestinian state, regardless of who rules it, will produce
escalated violence, terror and warfare in the Middle East, and neither
stability nor peaceful relations. ANY Palestinian state will seek warfare
with Israel and not solutions to the economic and social problems of its
3. The only reason Arafat and the PLO ever wanted control of the West Bank
and Gaza Strip was to use them as bases for attacks on Israel. This is the
only real use to which they will be put by any future Palestinian state.
4. There is no alternative that will stop the bloodshed and war in the
Middle East other than the adoption by Israel of an unambiguous policy of
R&D, that is, of Re-Occupation and Denazification of the West Bank and
Gaza Strip. Every other alternative proposal for stabilization and
pacification is delusional.
5. Denazification of the West Bank and Gaza Strip must be based partly on
the programs of Denazification imposed on Germany and Japan by the Allies
after World War II, but in part must be different. Such Denazification
policies will have to stay in place for decades. There is no other way by
which Israel can prevent the daily massacre of its civilians by
6. The bulk of Palestinians have lived outside Israeli "occupation" for
years, and their "liberation" from Israeli "occupation" only produced
Nazification, terrorism, mass murders, and violence. Their pacification
requires re-imposing of open-ended martial rule upon them by Israel.
7. The instability of the Middle East is not caused by Israeli occupation
of Palestinian lands but by PLO occupation of Israeli lands.
8. There was never in history an Arab Palestinian state. There is no
justification whatsoever for one now (other than perhaps in Jordan).
9. The Palestinians have no legitimate claim to the right to set up their
own state. It is doubtful whether they ever did have such a right, but -
even if they once did - they forfeited it thanks to decades of terrorism,
savagery, mass murders and barbarism.
10. Palestinians are Arabs. The Arabs already rule 22 states. There is no
reason why they should be entitled to a 23rd state, and creation of a 23rd
Arab state, "Palestine", in the West Bank and Gaza will escalate Middle
East violence and world terrorism.
11. The Palestinians are not and never were a "nation". They are not even
a tribe. They are a branch of Arabs with only minor and secondary cultural
differences that distinguish them from Syrians, Lebanese or Jordanians.
12. The Middle East conflict cannot be resolved through endless
exhibitions of niceness and restraint by Israel. Israeli niceness,
restraint, and goodwill gestures are interpreted by the Arab world as
weakness and as signs that the Jews, like Paul McCartney's Band, are on
13. The Palestinians are not "mistreated" by Israel, but ARE poorly
treated by the Palestinian Authority. The treatment of Arabs by Israel is
a thousand times better than the treatment of Arabs by Arab countries.
14. The only Arabs in the Middle East with any semblance of civil rights
are those who live under Israeli rule.
15. If the intifada "uprising" were in fact a product of oppression and
mistreatment of Arabs by a government, then Israel should be the only
country in the Middle East that does NOT have an intifada.
16. Oslo has radicalized and Sudetenized most Israeli Arabs, who now
identify with and openly support Arab parties and politicians who call
openly for terror violence against Jews and the destruction of Israel.
17. There exists no set of concessions by Israel that would result in the
Arab states coming to terms with Israel's existence.
18. There are no Arab democracies and no support for democracy among
significant minorities within the Arab world.
19. Israeli assassination of Palestinian terrorists is in fact a
substitute for retaliation in kind against the Palestinians for bombings
of Israeli children and other civilians. The alternative to such
assassinations is bombings of Palestinian civilians.
20. Israeli settlements are the "mine canaries" of the Arab world. There
is no reason why Jewish civilians should not be free to live in peace
within Arab countries truly seeking peace with Israel, just as Arabs live
at peace within Israel and within the United States. The attitude of the
Arab world in general and of the Palestinian Authority in particular
towards such "settlements" is indicative of their attitudes towards Israel
and Jews in general. If the Palestinians are NOT seeking peace with the
Jews, and indeed they are not, then the real problem is that Israel has
built too few settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
21. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that does NOT deal with
Islamist terror through wholesale massacres of the people in whose midst
the terrorists operate.
22. There is an inverse relationship between the material comfort of Arabs
living under Israeli rule and political moderation. The better off they
are in a material sense, the more violent and radical they are. More
generally, Arab radicalism and terror are positively correlated with
comfort and education and wealth. Bin Laden and his people are filthy
rich. There have been no undernourished Palestinian suicide bombers.
Many have been college students.
23. Palestinians endorse terrorism and violence against Jews by
24. Israeli Arabs endorse terror and violence against Jews by large
majorities. They also support bin Laden and the Hizbollah.
25. There are no visible Palestinian public figures who oppose violence,
terror and Islamist fascism. There are no Palestinian "moderate" leaders,
only a few Palestinian fascists who speak English well and elegantly, like
26. There is not and never has been a Palestinian "peace movement" nor a
Syrian "peace movement".
27. Syria has no legitimate claim to the Golan Heights. Its claim to the
Golan is far less legitimate than German's claim to Alsace and Lorraine.
28. The PLO, and not just the Hamas, is itself very much a manifestation
of Islamist fascism and was founded by Islamist fundamentalists. Its
head, Abu Mazen, is no more "moderate" than the heads of the Hamas and
29. Asking Arafat to arrest the terrorists is a bit like asking Osama bin
Laden to arrest those responsible for the September 11 attacks on the US
or asking Hitler to take steps against those who invaded Poland. It is
all part of the Oslo era of mass delusion and make-pretend.
30. Peace cannot be achieved through pretending that war does not exist.
31. The Israeli Left is responsible for the bloodshed in Israel. The
Israeli Left rescued the PLO from oblivion in the early 1990s, armed it,
and allowed it to become entrenched in the suburbs of Tel Aviv and
Jerusalem. The Israeli Left is as wacky as is the pro-Taliban, pro-Saddam
campus Left in the United States. It is today as anti-Israel as the US
far Left is anti-American.
32. Ehud Olmert and his crew have yet to detach themselves from the pipe
dreams and denials of reality imposed on the country by the Israeli Left,
those that produced the Oslo debacle. They continue to insist they favor
creation of a Palestinian state.
33. The only peaceful terrorist is a dead terrorist.
34. Israel cannot restore the credibility of its military prowess through
"signaling," but rather only through using that prowess and putting its
military might to actual use.
35. Unilateral withdrawal by Israel produces massive terrorist
aggression. Anyone nursing doubts should contemplate what Israel's 2000
withdrawal from Southern Lebanon produced in the summer of 2006.
3. Animal rights nuts:
4. Feminizts go Islamofascist:
5. About that "Lobby"...
WHy is Israel not jailing ITS Holocaust Deniers?
EU: Holocaust Deniers to Be Jailed for 1-3 Years
(IsraelNN.com) After nearly six years of deliberations, the European Union
has adopted a uniform policy regarding punishment of racism, Holocaust
denial and prejudice.
Ministers of Interior and Justice from 27 countries decided that deniers
of genocide . including the Holocaust . are to be jailed for one to three
years. Parliaments of the individual member states have yet to ratify the
Under the suggested law, EU countries would agree to punish anyone who
incites violence and hatred towards a person r group because of their
race, color, religion and ethnicity. Nazi symbols will not be banned by
the EU, although member states France, Belgium, Germany, Austria and Spain
classify their use as a criminal offense.
8. Heterophobes lust after Arabs and soldiers with waxed legs:
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Azmi Bishara's Buddies at the NIF
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Bishara's Ties with the New Israel Fund
Azmi Bishara is the Arab fascist Knesset Member who has made a career out
of running to Syria and Lebanon where he hugs terrorists and calls for
Israel to be annihlated. Those Israeli politicians who let him back in the
country should have been tarred and feathered. Bishara's desire to see
Israel annihilated has never been strong enough though for him to give up
his nice Knesset perqs. Within the past two weeks, Bishara fled Israel
ahead of the subpoenas for treason that were expected to be issued
I think the most fascinating aspect of the new Azmi Bashara Affair is his
intimate connection with the New Israel Fund (NIF). The NIF has long
divided its resources between funding Israeli PC goofiness and funding
Israeli anti-Israel treason.
Bashara is a Knesset Member from one of the Arab Stalinist-Fascist parties
in Israel. Bashara has a long history of calling for escalated terrorist
activity against Jews. That of course is all protected free speech in
post-survivalist Israel. He has never been prosecuted for treason, unlike
Oswald Mosley in Britain during the 1940s. (Mosley was the head of the
pro-Nazi British fascists. Mosley, unlike Bashara, spent the war in
prison. Put there by Churchill. (Of course Israel has been ruled by a
series of Neville Chamberlains.)
When Yitzhak Rabin died, Bashara denounced him as a "mass murderer". The
Attorney General did nothing, preferring instead to throw into jail all
those Jews who said "Got his comeuppance" about Rabin.
Now you may recall that years back the New Israel Fund adopted Bashara as
its official mascot. The New Israel Fund is a leftist Tikkunesque fund in
the US that raises money for politically correct causes in Israel,
including Arab terrorism and treason. It funds gay groups, religious
"pluralism" groups, but its main contribution is to funnel money into the
countless tiny Marxist or communist-front "peace" groups, which would not
exist without the New Israel Fund, and so on. It paid the legal bills for
the defense of arch-terrorist Marwan Barghouti.
The "New Israel" that the New Israel Fund seeks to fund is in fact
About 10 years back, the New Israel Fund managed to hornswaggle the
Smithsonian Institute into letting IT organize festivities to mark
Israel.s 50th anniversary as an independent state. And who do you think
the NIF decided should represent Israel? None other than Azmi Bashara, of
course!! Just a typical sabra, kova tembel and all, eating felafel and
Of course Bashara is as representative of Israel as the NIF is of US
Jewry. The New Israel Fund in fact planned to invite several others to
stage one of those familiar Jewish-Arab unity events in which Jewish
leftists join Arab fascists in calling for Israel to be destroyed.
At the time, the valiant Americans for a Safe Israel had a word in the ear
of the Smithsonian, which - once it discovered who and what the New Israel
Fund actually was - cancelled the taxpayer-funded jihad. The Tikkunies of
the New Israel Fund then threw a tantrum and screamed about "McCarthyism"
and suppression of free speech.
The Empty Rage of Jewish 'Progressives'
By: Kenneth Levin
3. Neuwirth vs. the violent Jewish Left:
5. April 17, 2007
Hezbollah's German Helpers
By ALEXANDER RITZMANN and MARK DUBOWITZ
April 17, 2007
Hezbollah arrived in the European Union back in the 1980s, along with
refugees from the civil war in Lebanon. Despite its deadly track record
and a 2005 European Parliament resolution recommending the banning of the
Iranian-funded group, it is still legal on the Continent. France, Spain,
Belgium and Sweden prevent the EU from jointly designating Hezbollah as a
Holding currently both the E.U. and G-8 presidencies, Berlin would be in a
strong position to head the fight against an organization dedicated to the
destruction of Israel and the replacement of Lebanon's fragile democracy
with a Tehran-backed Islamic state. So far, however, Germany has
squandered this unique opportunity to push for a Hezbollah ban. Berlin's
passivity is consistent with its tolerant approach toward the "Party of
God" over the past two decades.
While under the watchful eye of German law enforcement and intelligence,
Hezbollah enjoys significant operational freedom. In the late 1990s, for
example, it was able to recruit in Germany Steven Smyrek, a German convert
to Islam, and train him in Lebanon as a suicide bomber. He was luckily
arrested at Tel Aviv airport before he could blow up Israeli civilians.
German security services believe that about 900 Hezbollah core activists
are in the country and regularly meet in 30 cultural community centers and
mosques. These activists financially support Hezbollah in Lebanon through
fund-raising organizations, such as the "Orphans Project Lebanon
Association." This harmless-sounding charity belongs to the Lebanese
"al-Shahid (the Martyr) Association," which is part of the Hezbollah
network that supports the families of militia fighters and suicide
According to a German government report from February, the attitude of
Hezbollah supporters in Germany "is characterized by a far-reaching,
unlimited acceptance of the ideology and policy (of Hezbollah)." Berlin is
also aware that representatives of Hezbollah's "foreign affairs office" in
Lebanon regularly travel to Germany to give orders to their followers.
* * *
So why does the German government tolerate these activities?
First, the Hezbollah leadership in Beirut recognizes the value of a German
safe haven. It demands that Hezbollah followers carefully obey German law,
which Berlin claims they do "to a large extent." Experience from attacks
in the U.S., Britain and elsewhere suggest, though, that terrorists follow
the law up and until the point they decide to strike.
Second, too many Germany policymakers uncritically accept the idea that
there is supposedly a political Hezbollah -- an Islamist but legitimate
movement independent of those Hezbollah terrorists who have murdered
hundreds of people around the world. To believe that fairy tale, they even
ignore Hezbollah's own words. As Mohammed Fannish, member of the
"political bureau" of Hezbollah and former Lebanese energy minister put it
in 2002: "I can state that there is no separating between Hezbollah's
military and political arms."
Hezbollah's leadership, the Shurah Council, controls the totality of its
activities -- social, political and what it calls "military." Funding for
Hezbollah is fungible: Money collected in Germany supposedly for social
and political causes frees up funds for terrorist attacks.
In ignoring the threat from Hezbollah, the German government puts hope
above experience. While it tries to spare German citizens from the wrath
of Hezbollah, it plays down the danger of a group that seeks to destroy
both Lebanese democracy and the Jewish state. In the end, this approach
also compromises the safety of German citizens. On July 31, 2006, two
Lebanese students, Yussuf Mohammed El Hajdib and Jihad Hamad, placed bombs
hidden in suitcases on two regional trains in Germany, but they failed to
go off. Germany's federal law enforcement agency concluded that a
successful explosion would have resulted in a tragedy on par with the
London subway attacks of July 2005. The two suspects said they wanted to
take revenge for the Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed.
Just four month earlier, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah repeatedly
urged Muslims on Hezbollah's TV-station al-Manar "to take a decisive
stand" in the cartoon controversy. He said that he is certain that,
"...not only millions, but hundreds of millions of Muslims are ready and
willing to sacrifice their lives in order to defend the honor of their
Prophet. And you are among them." The German federal prosecutor is still
investigating the organizational affiliations of the two Lebanese terror
What is well established already is that al-Manar broadcasts into Germany
(and the rest of Europe), the Middle East and North Africa. While eight
out of 10 satellite providers (including four European) have dropped
al-Manar, ARABSAT, majority-owned by the Saudi government, and Nilesat,
owned by the Egyptian government, continue these broadcasts. Hezbollah
TV's deadly mix of racial hatred, anti-Semitism, glorification of
terrorism and incitement to violence are popular among Arabic-speaking
youth in Europe. Young Muslims in Berlin recently asked in a German TV
show to explain their hatred of the U.S. and Jews cited al-Manar as one of
their primary sources of information.
In the past, the German government has shown strong resolve when it saw a
threat to German security. It banned the Hamas "charity" al-Aqsa as well
as the radical Sunni Islamist Hizb-ut Tahrir group. And it joined the EU
in designating the PKK, the radical Kurdish group, as a terrorist
Would branding the "Party of God" a terrorist group make any difference?
Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah himself gave the answer in March 2005
when he told Arab media that European blacklisting would "destroy
Hezbollah. The sources of our funding will dry up and the sources of
moral, political and material support will be destroyed."
With so much power comes great responsibility to act.
Mr. Ritzmann, a former member of the Berlin State Parliament, is a senior
fellow at the Brussels-based European Foundation for Democracy. Mr.
Dubowitz is chief operating officer of the Washington-based Foundation for
Defense of Democracies and director of its Coalition Against Terrorist
URL for this article:
6. If they had any sense, they'd be recruiting at Ben Gurion University!
8. The coming summer war?
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
On Yom Hashoah, Israeli Holocaust survivor dies trying to save Virginia students
2. Israel's NEXT War:
3. David Duke endorses Nazi Norman:
4. [Note by Tom Gross]
AUSCHWITZ DEATH TOLL WAS HIGHER, UK GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES REVEAL
The release by the British government National Archives of a chilling,
hand-written confession letter by Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hoss,
strongly suggests that the death toll at Auschwitz was two million, not
1.5 million as previously thought, reports the (London) Jewish Chronicle
in a front-page article.
Hoss's letter was neatly written out and counter-signed by his British
jailer. He matter of factly states that he "personally arranged on the
instructions of Himmler in May 1941, the gassing of two million
persons, between June-July 1941 and the end of 1943, during which time I
commandant of Auschwitz."
In an accompanying note, British officials say that the confession was
written entirely voluntarily. Hoss was later executed by the Polish
5. The "Human Rights" Pogromchiks:
6. See attachment - Ben Dror Yemini on Israeli Arabs
Monday, April 16, 2007
commemorates the Shoah by rededicating itself to creating a second one.
One third of Israeli youth understand where the Left is leading the
3. They Uproot Trees
The Palestinians Uproot Trees, Don't They?
The tree has long symbolized the battle over sovereignty between Jews and
Arabs. So far we've only heard about Jews uprooting Arab trees. In recent
months we've often heard cases of the reverse
Ran Farhi (3/25/2007)
In recent years the Israeli media has extensively reported the cutting
of Palestinian olive trees, and the settlers are invariably the number one
suspects. Omedia has discussed doubts regarding the identity of those
responsible for damaging the trees, and suggested Palestinians as well
be cutting down trees to receive compensation from Israel or to blacken
name of their settler neighbors. Last year Palestinians were caught
red-handed cutting down olive trees. Despite such reservations, there is
ongoing Palestinian campaign to make it axiomatic that if an olive grove
exists the land must be Palestinian.
And the Palestinians and their supporters from leftist organizations who
collaborate in planting olive trees in areas where land ownership is
or in dispute have good reason. Olive trees give the Palestinians presumed
ownership over the territory. In such cases Jews are hesitant to remove
illegally planted saplings, fearing they will be accused of cutting down
trees and face arrest.
Aside from planting olive trees in numerous locations there are cases
Palestinians, in conjunction with pro-Palestinian activists (both Israeli
Jews and foreigners), cut down Jewish trees in Judea and Samaria.
Sometimes the uprooting is accompanied by planting olive trees in that
very same area
for the purpose of asserting a reverse claim. The absurd in all this is
the Civil Administration is late in arriving and then generally declares
area a closed military zone, which bars Jews from approaching the site. In
recent months at least three incidents of uprooting occurred. That they
received little media exposure goes without saying.
The Uprooting of the Sdeh Boaz Garden
Nearly a month ago on Tu Bishvat (Feb. 3, which fell on Shabbat) a group
15 Palestinians and seven radical leftists, including the notorious
activist Ezra Naawi, arrived at the Sdeh Boaz outpost in Gush Etzion and
uprooted dozens of Jewish fruit trees. They then proceeded to plant olive
trees in their stead, an action tantamount to planting a stake for the
Palestinians. The fruit trees had been planted three years ago. A wooden
structure erected by Jews at the spot was wrecked.
According to the outpost residents, their relations with Palestinian
in the vicinity are relatively good and they claimed most of the
disturbances in the region are instigated by leftist activists. "The
Palestinians in the adjoining fields work here on a daily basis unmolested
and in a number of cases we have even helped each other out," says Amit
Barak, a resident of the outpost. "It's a pity that a group of extremists
activists looking for weekend action creates disturbances that harm both
sides. Amit claims near the outpost there are dozens of plots belonging to
Arabs who cultivate their lands unhindered, whereas the extreme left
activists arrived in the company of Palestinians who do not own land in
After the uprooting the residents of the outpost received a directive not
approach the area of their garden, since it was suddenly declared a closed
The Palestinians Uprooted 4,000 Trees
Two days after Tu Bishvat, on a Monday, a massive uprooting of saplings
place on a piece of land belonging to Israelis. The previous day members
the Bnei Akiva youth movement from the school in Sussya had set out, with
authorization, to plant 5,000 pine and cypress trees on a plot of land
the Meitarim Industrial Zone in the South Hebron Hills (8 km south of
The youths' attempt at planting was hindered by a leftist activist,
Reform Rabbi Arik Ascherman, who aids the Palestinians. He tried to
them from continuing, and only after Civil Administration personnel
on the scene and showed him the required permits were they allowed to
The areas where the trees were planted is included in the master plan for
the industrial zone, which permits Jews to plant there. That night
Palestinians uprooted 4,000 of the trees. Ironically the area actually
belongs to the Jewish National Fund, and who happens to be the local
National Fund representative in the South Hebron Hills? None other than a
Palestinian from the village of Yatta!
They Plant Olives and Uproot Bushes
On the Nof Hanesher Farm, located near the community of Beit Yatir and run
by Yaakov Talia, Palestinians planted hundreds of olive trees on land
had cultivated for 15 years. This land was then expropriated from Talia by
an order signed by Central Command Head Yair Naveh. The order bars Jews
entering the area, while granting Palestinians access. The Palestinians
advantage of the opportunity to create facts on the ground, planting
hundreds of olive trees.
Meanwhile Talia reported Palestinians had cut down his hyssop bushes,
were on the pastureland where he was permitted to graze. These bushes are
essential for his flock, and he maintains they were cut down to reduce
source of food.
This accumulation of facts attests to a situation in which Israel is
gradually conceding its sovereignty and its rule of law while abandoning
Jewish agricultural property to the mercy of the Palestinians. The myth
the Palestinians are deeply attached to trees, perhaps as opposed to the
Jews, plays into the hands of those who use trees for political purposes.
When the trees belong to Jews, the tree is merely considered another tool
the Israeli-Palestinian struggle. It is well known that the Jewish-Arab
conflict in Israel is tied to the struggle over land, such as the struggle
between the Jewish National Fund's pine and cypress forests (only in
years have they begun planting olive trees), and olive groves, typically
seen as a Palestinian symbol.
All of the above information was only made public on Arutz Sheva, a radio
station identified with the settlers, and never managed to reach the
public. Why was such pertinent information never published in Ha'aretz or
central news sites such as NRG? Such information is obviously newsworthy.
Perhaps these media outlets consider the uprooting of Jewish trees by
Palestinians too commonplace - a "dog bites man" story - or see it as a
curiosity. Whatever the reason, tree removal by Palestinians deserves
exposure as well.
4. Rabbi impersonator Michael Lerner finds a new "meaning" in Holocaust
Mikey of Meaning has a long history of fraud:
5. The new Campus Anti-Semitism:
6. Olmert's Yom Hashoa address included:
'Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, a keynote speaker at the ceremony, warned of
those who "had not yet learned the lesson the Holocaust. Many gather at
respectable academic institutions, with hatred of Israel blinding them."'
Did he mean Ben Gurion University?
Meanwhile, Olmert spent Holocaust Remembrance Day with his Holocaust
7. As part of its continuing campaign for the annihilation of Israel,
Haaretz - the Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew - is running a
series of articles denouncing the trips by Israeli high school students to
see the detah camps in Poland. These trips actually change the students
into Zionists and people unwilling to commit Oslo, the columnists at
Haaretz argue with straight faces. Among the columns opposed to the trips
is one by two high school students. From th enames, one of those appears
to be the son of a leftwing professor of political science at teh Hebrew
8. Current Events Question: When a BBC reporter is murdered in cold
blood by Palestinian saages, how long does it take for the BBC to blame it
all on the Jews?
9. DePaul's reckless regard for the truth:
10. The University of Indoctrination: