Thursday, March 29, 2012
upset because some soccer hooligans in Jerusalem ran into a nearby
mall after a soccer match and were screaming anti-Arab slogans there,
including "Death to Arabs." The Left is upset at this new
manifestation of Jewish racism and is holding protest rallies.
Hmmm. Well, let us first point out that the same leftists so upset by
these outbursts of soccer hooliganism have never had much to say about
Arab racism. Arabs do not just chant "Death to Jews," they also
murder Jews and cheer on those who murder Jews. Never a whisper of a
protest from any leftists.
Secondly, Israel has seen a mass of incidents in recent weeks in which
Arab street thugs assault and beat and try to murder randomly passing
Jews. These include the attempted lynch of two out-of-uniform
soldiers in Haifa, and several incidents in Jerusalem. (See
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4209530,00.html and this:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/154266 ) Arabs
throwing rocks at Jews have become so common that the media do not
bother reporting it. Not a single word about any of that from these
holier than everyone Leftist rally participants.
As far as I know, those Jerusalem soccer hooligans merely screamed
offensive slogans but never assaulted anyone. Screaming racist
statements against Arabs and against Jews has become common at Israeli
soccer matches, and is less political than simple beer-drenched
rowdiness. Soccer hooliganism is not exactly rare in the civilized
world and – if anything – its dimensions in Israel are smaller than in
the UK and the rest of the EU. No, of course I do not approve of the
hooliganism, and have in the past proposed that soccer hooliganism be
dealt with by passing a law that, after all such hooliganism, all news
reports about soccer games and all stadium commentary by MC's must be
in Latin for 6 months. Soccer hooligans themselves should be
sentenced to 18 months of Talmud study.
2. Speaking of the selective discoveries of "racism" by the Left: I
really liked this:
Chasing the Great White Whale of American Racism
Posted By Ann Coulter On March 29, 2012
Even after the Duke lacrosse case, Texaco executives allegedly using
the N-word in private meetings — which turned out to be "St. Nicholas"
— the Tawana Brawley case, not to mention virtual hailstorms of racist
graffiti and nooses materializing on college campuses, all of which
invariably end up having been put there by the alleged victims, the
Non-Fox Media (NFM) didn't even pause before conjuring a racist plot
in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Florida last month. Like
Captain Ahab searching for the Great White Whale, the NFM is
constantly on the hunt for proof of America as "Mississippi Burning."
Over St. Patrick's Day weekend, the month after Martin was killed,
gangs in Chicago shot 10 people dead, including a 6-year-old girl,
Aliyah Shell, who was sitting with her mother on their front porch.
One imagines MSNBC hosts heaving a sigh of relief that little Aliyah
was not shot by a white man, and was thus spared the horror of being a
victim of racism.
As it happens, Trayvon Martin wasn't shot by a white man either, but
by George Zimmerman, a mixed-race Hispanic who lives in a diverse (47
percent white) gated community and tutors black kids.
But Hispanic is close enough for the NFM. They're chasing the Great
White Whale of racist America and don't have time to check to see if
the whale is actually a guppy.
Since the cat leapt out of the bag on Zimmerman being Hispanic, the
media have begun calling him a "white Hispanic."
Not being a race-obsessed liberal, I don't particularly care, but it's
indisputable that Zimmerman is brown. I saw his face carved on the
side of a Mayan temple in the Yucatan. Using his mother's maiden name,
he would be admitted to the University of Michigan law school on a
Apart from that, pretty much all that is known with certainty is that
Zimmerman called the police to report a suspicious character in his
neighborhood, and shortly thereafter he shot and killed Martin.
On the basis of little else, the media conjured a Hollywood script: A
"white" man was "stalking" a little black kid — who could be Obama's
son! — confronted him, beat him senseless as the small black child
screamed for help, and finally shot the kid dead, "just because he was
black."Two weeks of nonstop hysteria later, it turns out that every
part of that gripping plot is based on nothing that could be called a
reasonable assumption, much less a fact.
The NFM's theory of the case might be true, just as it might be true
that the loud bang I just heard outside my door is Godzilla returning
to terrorize Manhattan. I, like the NFM, have no facts supporting my
theory. (Although mine is more credible because Al Sharpton is not
involved and none of my facts are provably false, such as the NFM's
claim about Zimmerman being "white.")
First of all, there's no reason to believe Zimmerman followed Martin
after the police told him not to, which is the linchpin of much
Zimmerman told the police, his friends and his lawyer that he walked
back to his car after hanging up with the police and was waylaid by
Martin. No witnesses have told the press otherwise.
We don't know if -– as the NFM has baldly asserted — it was Martin
yelling "Help!" during the struggle. Before the case became a
nationwide sensation, the lead detective told the Orlando (Fla.)
Sentinel that the police had played all the 911 calls for Martin's
father, and he said the voice crying "Help!" was not his son's.
(The father has subsequently retracted that.)
Before the shooting was even a twinkle in the eye of MSNBC, an
eyewitness gave a detailed account to the local media, indicating that
it was Martin who was on top of Zimmerman, pummeling him, as Zimmerman
The police report says Zimmerman's nose was bleeding and his back
covered in grass stains when they arrived at the scene. His lawyer and
friends say he was treated for a broken nose the next day.
There's no sense in arguing in public about such facts. The medical
records exist or they do not.
Of course, the information contradicting the media's fantasy comes to
us only in the form of witness statements and police reports appearing
in the press, not as evidence in a formal criminal investigation.
It's hard to tell where the NFM's suppositions are coming from
inasmuch as they simply report their version as hard fact. But all
their evidence seems to come only from Martin's family and girlfriend.
Can we start trying all criminal defendants based exclusively on the
testimony of the victim's friends and relatives?
Among the reasons to be suspicious of the media as impartial judges of
the evidence is that they keep showing us snapshots from Martin's
childhood, rather than any recent photos.
Without doing research, the average person would think Martin was a
slight 12-year-old whippersnapper at the time of the shooting, rather
than a strapping 6-foot, 160-pound 17-year-old. Indeed, he was 3
inches taller than Zimmerman, according to the police report.
Why aren't they showing us Zimmerman's baby pictures? (And why didn't
we get to see baby pictures of the Duke lacrosse players? I bet they
CNN ceaselessly reported the allegation that Zimmerman could be heard
in the background of one 911 call using an archaic racial epithet.
Before playing the tape, correspondent Gary Tuchman first announced
what the slur was supposed to be ("f*****g coon").
There's nothing like suggesting the answer in advance to improve
reliability! Police should try that in lineups.
Then the same network that couldn't find the Jeremiah Wright tapes for
sale in a church lobby brought in "one of the best audio experts in
the business" to enhance the tape — take the bass away here, add
volume there — and played the 1.6-second loop again and again, just in
case you were not suggestible enough the first time.
Still, all that can be heard on the enhanced tape is "cha-chu,
But Tuchman wrapped up this demonstration by saying, "You know, it
sounds like this allegation could be accurate, but I wouldn't swear to
it in court. That's what it sounds like to me."
To the small percentage of CNN's audience with triple-digit IQs, it
was comedy gold. The only thing missing was Tipper Gore playing the
audio backward to reveal satanic lyrics.
(Incidentally, the Nexis transcript of the indecipherable "cha-chu"
sound reads: "ZIMMERMAN: F*****g coons, f*****g coons. F*****g coons.
F*****g coons. F*****g coons." Except it doesn't use asterisks.)
All this may give you an inkling of why we rely on the criminal
justice system to determine guilt in criminal cases and not the fervid
imaginations of the race-obsessed media.
3. One of the goofiest sides of the Radical Left concerns the
obsessive political exhibitionism of radical leftists with regard to
the female genital parts. This manifests itself in the now ubiquitous
set of performances of the feminist "drama" called (excuse my French)
"The Vagina Monologues." See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vagina_Monologues. Check out the
part of that page about the case of Robert Swope!
This abomination is performed like clockwork or regular as
douching on college campuses, and it is hard to get away from it in
other places as well. It is also the cornerstone of the so-called
"V-Day" movement and its activities. I will give you a hint – the "V"
does not stand for Oy Vey. For details, see http://www.vday.org/home.
Most of us got over our urge to display and discuss our genitalia
around the same time that we learned to ride a tricycle. But not
Well, at one of the universities in Europe where I frequent, the
local feminists will be staging the "Monologues" and as part of the
promotion, they have announced that they will be offering people free
Being a helpful sort, I distributed a mass campus inquiry as to
whether the feminists organizing the event will be asking people to
exhibit their progressive identification with the Third World by
performing female circumcisions on the cupcakes.
This might be a good time to re-post this:
Yuli Tamir Goes A-Snipping
Can the procedure be performed from the neck up?
Hold on to your -- er -- hats!
Before pouncing upon me for posting a tasteless spoof, let me forewarn
you that this is NOT a spoof. It is for real, and any nausea you feel
should be directed against the actual cause, not your humble
Nevertheless you can check it all out for yourself. It is there in
black and white. Never mind that the Israeli mainstream media have
hidden the story for the past 11 years, trying to protect the rep of
the Labor Party's daffiest leader.
Israel's Minister of Education, Yael "Yuli" Tamir, has campaigned
publicly for the common form of female mutilation in the Third World
known as "Clitoridectomy." It means what you think it means. "Yuli,"
back in 1996 when she launched her campaign, was a Professor at Tel
Aviv University and had just joined Labor. Previously she had been
Shulamit Aloni's sidekick in the "RATZ" party. She was in the news
the past few weeks for proposing that Arab students in Israel learn
from textbooks that portray Israel's very existence and creation as a
"Naqba" or catastrophe.
The "Boston Review" is a left-leaning political and literary quarterly
in Boston, the sort "anarchists" read. In its summer 1996 issue it
ran Tamir's own article entitled, "Hands Off Clitoridectomy." Its
theme was that all those Westerners expressing revulsion at the
practice of slicing up female genitalia in certain parts of the world
are themselves evil insensitive chauvistic philistine racists.
Westerners should stop criticizing and allow the Third World to carry
on with its enlightened multicultural clitorectomies.
She rants thus in the article:
'In discussions about multiculturalism, clitoridectomy is now the
trump card, taking over the role once played by cannibalism, slavery,
lynchings, or the Indian tradition of Sati: "Is this the kind of
tradition you would like to protect?" liberals ask embarrassed
multiculturalists, who immediately qualify their cultural pluralism.
Clitoridectomy defines the boundary between us and them, between
cultures we can tolerate and those we must condemn....
'Furthermore, it seems clear that Western conceptions of female beauty
encourage women to undergo a wide range of painful, medically
unnecessary, and potentially damaging processes -- extreme diets,
depilation, face lifts, fat pumping, silicone implants. Of course,
adult women do these things to their own bodies, and, it is said,
their decisions are freely made. But would our gut reaction to female
circumcision be very different if it were performed on consenting
adults? It is not unlikely that girls at the age of 13 or 14, who are
considered in traditional societies as adults mature enough to wed and
bear children, would "consent" to the mutilation of their bodies if
they were convinced that marriage and children were contingent on so
doing. Many women who followed the tradition of Sati seemed to do it
as a matter of choice....
'But our own culture fosters false beliefs of a similar kind.
According to Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth, some 75 percent of women
aged 18-35 believe that they are fat, whereas only 25 percent are
medically overweight.1 Still more heartbreaking is the fact that the
majority of the 30,000 women who responded to a Glamour questionnaire
preferred losing 10-15 pounds to success in work or in love. So the
fostering of such beliefs cannot differentiate their culture from our
own and explain our hostility to it....A fulfilling sex life is
certainly one good, but there are others. ...
'My purpose, however, is not to justify clitoridectomy, but to expose
the roots of the deep hostility to it -- to reveal the smug,
unjustified self-satisfaction lurking behind the current condemnation
of clitoridectomy. Referring to clitoridectomy, and emphasizing the
distance of the practice from our own conventions, allows us to
condemn them for what they do to their women, support the struggle of
their women against their primitive, inhuman culture, and remain
silent on the status of women in our society.'
We have a suggestion for the Olmert government. Remove the worst
embarrassment in the cabinet by performing a small procedure of