Zionist Conspiracy

1.  A Nakba a Day keeps the Terrorists Away

     The Arabs and the anti-Semites have adopted the term "Nakba," which means catastrophe, to refer to Israel's creation.   In fact, it is the term these people use to refer to the military victory of the Jews in the 1948-49 War of Independence.  The term is sometimes also used to refer to Israel's military victory in the Six Day War in 1967, which has been referred to by some of them as the Second Nakba.

      Since "Nakba" is in essence their term for Israeli victory, I think that all Jews and their allies should adopt the term and advocate with pride the idea of Nakba.   Israel should pursue peace by means of military victory, that is, through means of additional Nakba.   Re-Nakba Now!  A Nakba a Day keeps the Terrorists Away.

    John Kerry is threatening that Israel will face a third Intifada if it does not capitulate to the demands by him and his Palestinian friends.  Israel's response should be that a Third Intifada will be met with a Third Nakba.  

Here are some more ideas, taken from  http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/11654#.Unzq8q8UHQw

-One, two, three, MANY Nakbas!
-Nakba unto Victory!
-A little Nakba never hurt anyone!
-My professor went to a Nakba Day commemoration and all I got was this lousy Tee-shirt.
-Remove the illegal Palestinian settlements sitting on Jewish land!
-Two-state solution:  One for the Jews and One for the Kurds, but none for the Arabs who live down the Lane!
-End the Illegal Syrian Occupation of the Gilad!
-Don't wall them out - ­ Fence them In!
-When this drone is a rockin', we'll come a-knockin'!!
-We switched your 72 virgins with a 72 year -old virgin!

   The Israeli Far Left continues its war against Israeli existence.  It likes to tell Israelis that they need to choose between the "Two State Solution" and the ""One-State Solution."    There very well may develop a situation in which there are two states, one Jewish and one "Palestinian," especially if John Kerry and his Obamacare mentor have their way.  But it will not be a solution to anything at all.  There is no such thing as a Two-State SOLUTION.  When the Left speaks about a "One State Solution," in which Israel is replaced by a bi-national Rwanda style political entity, what they REALLY want is the No-State Solution.   They just do not have the courage to say so openly.

    So let the rest of us say it for them.   What the Left is advocating is a No-State Solution.  One in which Israel will be obliterated and the Jewish population of the Middle East will be eliminated.

2.  A shorter version of the following review appears in the current Middle East Quarterly:

Review of Joel Peters and David Newman, editors, "The Routledge Handbook on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict," Routledge publishers, 2013, 475 pages

Reviewed by Steven Plaut, University of Haifa

     David Newman is a geographer who largely built the notoriously controversial department of politics at Ben Gurion University single-handedly.  Newman's vision for that department was for it to be a monolithic center for one-sided leftist agitprop.  Last year a special international panel of experts appointed by the Israeli Council on Higher Education called for shutting down that department altogether due to its complete absence of pluralism and its very low academic standards, although later backed off after some cosmetic "reforms" were implemented there.[1]  Newman's department is renowned for the one-sided anti-Israel content of its courses and for the "academic conferences" in which no non-leftist is permitted to speak.[2]  Newman also uses his columns in the popular press to promote the agenda of the radical Left in Israel, down to and including justifying and defending world boycotts against Israel, while strongly opposing the extension of rights of freedom of speech to critics of the Far Left.[3]  Not only Newman but his entire department is passionately devoted to the proposition that there is only one permissible point of view with regard to the Arab-Israeli conflict and that is the point of view of the Far Left.   

    All of which is sufficient to explain the naked leftist bias and lack of pluralism that characterizes this supposed "Handbook" of the "Israeli-Palestinian Conflict."  The bias fills the volume and appears on almost every page.  The very choice of defining the Middle East war as the ""Israeli-Palestinian Conflict" in the title sets the tone; the war is NOT and decidedly never was a conflict between Israel and Palestinians but rather a conflict with the entire Arab/Islamic world.  The chapter on Israeli Arabs refers to them with the fashionable far-leftist rhetorical invention as "Israeli Palestinians."  The appendix of the book is crammed full of maps showing Israeli "settlements," but none showing Arab terror attacks or rocket attacks.  Other appendices contain charters, treaties, and statements and these are included to give this pseudo-academic volume of propaganda the appearance of something scholastic.  The chapter on the history of "Palestinians" by Ahmad Samih Khalidi is designed to make it appear that there existed some sort of Palestinian national identity or consciousness before 1967.   Khalidi elsewhere churns out press columns about how Israel's existence is a catasprophe[4] and promotes Israel's obliteration in what he calls a "one-state solution."[5]

    The list of contributors to this volume reads much like a Who's Who of the radical Left.  It includes Galia Golan,[6] a radical leader in the fringe "Peace Now" organization; Paul Scham, another leader of "Peace Now" who thinks that the difference between truth and lies is nothing more than a matter of competing "narratives"; Amal Jamal,[7] a leading anti-Israel political science lecturer at Tel Aviv University; Naomi Chazan,[8] who has headed the radical "New Israel Fund" when it was implicated in involvement in the nefarious Goldstone Report; Arie Arnon,[9] probably the only Marxist economist at any Israeli university and active in the Israeli radical Left; Khaled Hroub,[10] an apologist for the Hamas and writer for Al-Jazeera; Rosemary Hollis, a leader in the anti-Israel "Olive Tree Initiative"[11].   And that is just part of the menagerie. 

     The materials in the chapter on Palestinian "refugees" appear to be taken directly from the web site of the PLO.  The chapter on the PLO criticizes it for allowing itself to be "co-opted" and converted into a tool that serves Israel.  The Arab contributors to the volume all provide chapters with a pro-Palestinian agenda.  Most of the Jewish contributors also provide chapters with a pro-Palestinian agenda.  The chapter on terrorism focuses in large part on supposed "Jewish terrorism" against Arabs before 1948-9.  Several chapters endorse the "New Historians," pseudo-historians engaged in "historic revisionism."  The main exceptions to all this are a chapter by Gerald Steinberg on Israeli unilateralism, and two chapters by Steven Spiegel on the history of American foreign policy in the region.  These are not permitted to voice a conservative pro-Israel set of positions, merely composing neutral non-ideological chapters, and appear to be non-leftist token contributors to allow Newman to roll his eyes when he is accused of bias.  

     Newman's co-editor in the volume is Joel Peters, also a faculty member in the same department at Ben Gurion University as Newman when he is not at Virginia Tech; he has long been promoting Israeli capitulation to Arab diktats and has ties to Palestinian and pro-Syrian organizations and institutions.  Although not as extremist as Newman himself, Peters may be one of the few humans on earth still to regard Israel's withdrawal from Gaza and its conversion into Hamastan as a great success.[12]  His chapter in the volume is a post-modern exercise in exploring competing "narratives" about the Camp David summit, you know - that summit where Israel offered the PLO everything but the kitchen sink and where the Palestinians responded with new aggression, terrorism, and jihad-mongering.

       The main use for such a volume will probably be in western campus "Israel Apartheid Week" festivities.  No serious scholar will regard the book as anything other than a one-sided trunk full of leftist ideology.