Friday, May 31, 2013

AbuKhalil (Angry Arab) Worries about discriminatory exemptions from military service in Israel

Now this is refreshing. Prof. AbuKhalil is worried about the future of the IDF. Not too long ago we saw him exhibit great concern for women's rights in Israel .

Today he seems worried about an uneven distribution of military service burden in Israel:

Justice in Israel

" Each year, a maximum of 1,800 exemptions will be granted to boys who are considered Torah prodigies out of the roughly 8,000 eligible annually for service.  Ultra-Orthodox girls will not be conscripted. They follow strict rules of modesty, and many marry in their late teens."

Let's see if I can understand AbuKhalil's direction here; it must be a concern, as he picked this particular piece of information to post on his justice-loving website. Does he recommend that 17 and 18 year old Jewish women in Israel be forbidden by law to get married so that they can be conscripted to the military? Does he object to the Israeli law that grants deferral of military service to outstanding students who wish to pursue academic studies before doing their military service at the age of 21?

Let me repeat what Hannah Arendt said about the likes of the professor:

As witnesses not of our intentions but of our conduct, we
can be true or false, and the hypocrite's crime is 
that he bears false witness against himself.

How to forget the Holocaust

Read this story:

"... the Muslim people living in the neighborhood voiced that creating such a memorial wouldn’t be acceptable.

On May 4th, National Memorial Day, the school had programs with many lectures about the war as well as an announcement made that the plaque would not be hung in fear that stones would be thrown through the school’s windows."
How to erase a people's history? Fear, intimidation, threats of violence, a sense of entitlement, distortion, slander, re-writing history, boycotting campaigns, etc etc.  
OK. But what can possibly be the Dutch school's justification for bowing to these modern-day Vandals?
It is not as if this development is a singular occurrence or happening in a void. Consider this story. And here is the video:

To re-phrase Heinrich Heine's warning about book burning, those who want to erase the memory of the Holocaust will one day erase (what is left of) the Jewish people.
O, Europa, Europa  ...

The Aristocratic Refugees

In its simple form, aristocracy is a privileged class of people, for whom the rules, laws and duties of  commoners, or just people from other classes, do not apply. I'm using the term here metaphorically (and not sneeringly), well aware that Palestinian refugees in Arab countries are privileged in being kept in this abnormal multigenerational refugee-ness, in a perpetual state of in-between, deprivation, and limbo, by cynical Arab rulers and regimes for their own purposes. The Western Rancid Far-left, collaborates with these regimes in perpetuating the "aristocratic" concept of Palestinian refugees, again, for its own political aims and ideological aspirations. Make no mistake, human rights does not figure into their calculation.

Link here

I de siste hundre årene har verden opplevd mange store flyktningetragedier.  På grunn av krig eller naturkatastrofer måtte mange millioner mennesker flykte fra hjemmene sine og bosette seg i andre land.  De fleste av disse flyktningene kunne aldri komme tilbake til sin opprinnelsessted.  Men det er EN flyktninggruppe som stiller seg i en særstilling – palestinerne.

(Google translation):

 In the last hundred years, the world has experienced many large refugee No rage values. Because of war or natural disasters had many million people flee their homes and settle in other countries. Most of these refugees could not return to their place of origin. But there is a group of refugees who place themselves in a unique position - the Palestinians.

Thursday, May 30, 2013

AbuKhalil Decries Israel's Apartheid


When you open the link he so graciously provides, you read the following:

"Superland Rishon Lezion is trying to minimize damage after its decision not to allow Arab students in its gates on certain days caused tumult. Education Minister to discriminated teacher: I'm shocked"

And then:

"The exposure of this discrimination led the Chairman of the Education, Culture and Sports Committee MK Amram Mitzna to hold an urgent hearing on Monday. Mitzna called on Education Minister Shai Piron to stop schools from sending their students to Superland and the mayor of Rishon Lezion to take legal actions against the discriminators. "This behavior is a slap in the face of the efforts to deal with racism within Israeli society," said Mitzna. [-]
 In wake of the public uproar, the park's management released an additional statement saying: "Recently, the Superland's management responded (possibly mistakenly, but certainly not maliciously) to requests lodged by both Jewish and Arab schools to visit the park separately."

"It should be stressed," the statement reiterated, "that these requests came from both Arab and Jewish schools. The Superland never has, nor will it ever, tolerate any expressions of racism. We apologize to our Jewish and Arab visitors who were hurt as a result of the Superland's consent to the schools' requests."

So while Israelis, young and old, are aspiring for " a joint life, between Jews and Arabs...  Values of equality, partnership and tolerance ..." and are doing everything necessary to follow words with decisive actions, let me remind you what AbuKhalil aspires to:

I was looking forward to the end of the world as it would have permitted me--even for a second--to witness the end of the Zionist entity over Palestine.

Sunday, May 26, 2013

AbuKhalil's Nightmare

What is AA's nightmare?  This:

Palestinian voices for compromise and prosperity:

"At the forum, a group of Israeli and Palestinian moguls announced a new business-led initiative called “Breaking the Impasse,” whose aim was to pressure their respective governments to pursue peace negotiations.

The group is led by a pair of billionaires, Israeli high-tech impresario Yossi Vardi and the Palestinian “Duke of Nablus,” Munib al-Masri, who made his first fortune in oil and gas, and now runs a holding company that owns hotels, mobile carriers and banks. Their goal is to leverage the collective clout of 300 business leaders who signed onto the initiative and persuade wary politicians to reach out for a two-state solution.

“We hear often of the extremists, but the majority is silent,” Vardi said. “We believe that most of the people want to get an end to this conflict.”

“We are worried by the status quo. We want to change the status quo,” said Al-Marsi, who added that the business leaders don’t have specific proposals, but want the two sides to enter into “real negotiations.”
This is what the professor who teaches young American students how to hate Jews at an American university in California has to say of these voices:
I wish that Munib Al-Masri would just shut up.  If he wants to dance and perform for the pleasure of the Israeli occupiers, let him do that, but not on behalf of the Palestinian people.
 For the deranged mind of AbuKhalil, anyone who speaks of peace and compromise between Israel and Palestine is a traitor. He dreams of total annihilation.

Analogies of a Perverted Mind

AA, the perpetually apoplectic professor from California, criticizes an article in the NYT for the following formulation: "Syrian rebel shelling has already killed civilians in Hezbollah-controlled areas of the Bekaa Valley."

His beef, as always, leaves the reader more stumped than illuminated:

What does Hizbullah-controlled mean? Those are areas that voluntarily support Amal and Hizbullah.  Do I live in a Democrat-controlled area in Californian?

In the deranged mind of this consummate hater, the Democratic Party is the exact logical and moral American equivalent of Hezbollah.

Friday, May 24, 2013

Prof. AbuKhalil's Pedagogical Successes

He managed to instill his hatred into at least one of his students: 

"...  one of my students gave me a gift: the book the Deadliest Lies by Abraham Foxman. She said she suffered through the book for a paper she wrote and wanted me to suffer like her. "

Such harmonious alignment of spirit and intellect between teacher and student! And notice the clever student's sense of impeccable timing for both her gift and her explication of it: 

"On the day of the final examination". 

Abe Foxman is AbuKhalil's  bête noire.

In this case he takes issue with Foxman's definition of antisemitism: 

"criticism of Israel that is intensely biased, unfair, and illogical."(p. 174).  Only a brilliant mind can vomit such pearls. "

No supporter of Israel can ever state or say anything. In AbuKhalil's elegant universe of restraint, delicacy of mind and pious adherence to historical fact, they can only vomit.

When I read AbuKhalil's "news" service,  I often recall how Seinfeld's Elaine Benes describes one of Kramer's girlfriends:

" If you could see her personality it would be like one of the Elephant
Man exhibits, you know where they pull off the sheet and everyone gasps."

Change the gender of the subject and you've got an almost adequate description of AA. 

Sunday, May 19, 2013

Never too tired to demonize and slander

Once again, Abukhalil shows concern for Jewish minorities in Israel. Here he is expressing his moral outrage that the Chief Rabbi declared publicly that Karaites are not really Jews. He takes his cue from The Economist, a Canadian weekly not too fond of Israel and always on the lookout for an opportunity to portray Israeli society as sectarian and intolerant.
The article says:

"Once almost as numerous as Rabbanites, today’s Karaites make up less than 1% of Israel’s 6m Jews. Persecution has whittled their number down."
But concealed among the complaint, there is this piece of information: 

The chief rabbinate, Israel’s state religious authority, reluctantly began legitimising their marriages again after a recent order by Israel’s Supreme Court, but it continues to argue that since Karaite rites are not Jewish, Karaites have lesser Jewish rights, too. “Israel is a Jewish state and Jews have superior rights,” says the chief rabbinate’s spokesman. “But the Karaites are not Jewish.”
So, it is another one of those conflicts between religious authorities and secular society with the secular judiciary effortlessly winning the case. So what's the big news here? Only if you read AA's report you would never know any of it. That's the kind of honest intellectual he is; whatever does not serve his rancid politics does not make it into his mind. Very convenient, and pathologically fanatic. truth has no dominion over his intellect. Hatred does.
According to wikipedia:

" Other estimates of the size of the modern Karaite movement put the number at 4,000 Karaites in the United States[citation needed], about 100 families in Istanbul[citation needed], and over 40,000 in Israel[citation needed], the largest communities being in Ramlah, Ashdod and Beer-Sheva. At the 2002 Polish census, only 45 people declared themselves "Karaims", including 43 Polish citizens.[36]"
 I don't know. it doesn't seem  like Karaites are numerous anywhere and they seem to have the greatest numbers in Israel. And what "persecution" has whittled their numbers? The Economist does not say. But the wikipedia article does provide the following information:

In the early 1950s, the Israeli Chief Rabbinate originally objected to the immigration of Karaite Jews to Israel, and unsuccessfully tried to obstruct it. In 2007, however, Rabbi David Ḥayim Chelouche, the chief rabbi of Netayana was quoted in The Jerusalem Post as saying, "A Karaite is a Jew. We accept them as Jews and every one of them who wishes to come back [to mainstream Judaism] we accept back. There was once a question about whether Karaites needed to undergo a token circumcision in order to switch to rabbinic Judaism, but the rabbinate agrees that today that is not necessary."[38]
  Moshe Marzouk, one of the Egyptian Jews executed in 1954 for planting bombs at Cairo in the service of Israeli Military Intelligence (the Lavon Affair) was a Karaite. Marzouk was considered a hero in Israel; however, his Karaite identity was downplayed in newspapers, which usually just described him as an Egyptian Jew. However, in 2001, the Israeli government, through the Israel Postal Authority, issued a special memorial sheet honoring him and many other Karaite Jews that gave their lives for Israel.

In Israel, the Karaite Jewish leadership is directed by a group called Universal Karaite Judaism. Most of the members of its Board of Ḥakhamim are of Egyptian Jewish descent.
 We are familiar with AbuKhalil's tricks but why is the Economist providing such faulty and inflammatory information? Why the demonization, Economist? Schmucks.

Tsk, Tsk, such nefarious doings by Israel's cohorts in China

Please note the incontinent malevolence and the lurid innuendos embedded in the report:

 -(You can quote but please delete... they can really hurt him.)

- the Zionists have been active in buying scholars 

-he resisted opening an Israeli studies program since he saw it for what it is

-here is another angle for Zionist advocacy which is occurring through the Christian channels in China. Apparently the Isaeli Tourism Ministry is inviting the leaders of the Christian communities (of the evangelical variety) to visit the Holy Land.  of them end up being very supportive of Israel afterwards. 
Bad bad academic initiatives.  For Chinese students to learn Hebrew, read Hebrew novels and poems, learn about Israel's history ... all bad bad. A cabal. A conspiracy against Palestinians. Oh, the venality of it all. And watch out, "they"(!) can hurt him. Who's they? Hurt him how?  No names. No verifiable facts. All hearsay and vicious innuendo about a simple outreach by Israeli and Jewish-American academics. And this is from the academic mind a bona fide professor teaching American students at a university of good standing.

Remind you of something?

"With pleasure I say that the Stürmer, more than any other daily or weekly newspaper, has made clear to the people in simple ways the danger of Jewry. Without Julius Streicher and his Stürmer, the importance of a solution to the Jewish question would not be seen to be as critical as it actually is by many citizens. It is therefore to be hoped that those who want to learn unvarnished truth about the Jewish question will read the Stürmer."[4] [Allan Thompson, The media and the Rwanda genocide, IDRC, 2007, p. 334]

" According to Dennis Showalter, "a major challenge of political anti-Semitism involves overcoming the images of the 'Jew next door' — the living, breathing acquaintance or associate whose simple existence appears to deny the validity of that negative stereotype."[7] Der Stürmer's lurid content appealed to a large spectrum of readers who were lower class and less-sophisticated.[2] Der Stürmer was known for its use of simple themes that took little thought. Streicher attacks the Jews in three categories:[7] (wiki)

Compare and contrast, if you dare.

I modestly beg to differ...

Looks like Al-Jazeera removed the diseased article by Joseph Massad from its pages. One could safely characterize this screed of sheer apoplectic hatred as the understated Arab equivalent of George Orwell's two-minutes of hate.

 AbuKhalil and AbuNimah fume and foam at the mouth at this step, attributing it to the uncanny power of the Zionists to effect editorial policies in a media outlet that has consistently and relentlessly and singularly been most hostile towards Israel. As I indicated elsewhere, I wouldn't get excited about any of this kerfuffle among those who compete for first prize on who hates the Zionists (Israeli Jews and anyone who doesn't hate them enough) most. They all understand each other all too well.

I do, however, have a different explanation for the removal of this article (؟)

It is my opinion that the editors of Al-Jazeera, in publishing this article, were not fully aware that its author premised his case on the fact that the Holocaust in which 6 million Jews were industrially exterminated by Nazi Germany (with the willing assistance of other European and non-European leaders) was indeed an event whose historicity could not be denied or doubted. This sort of claim flies in the face of  Arab ethos:

"The latest research on Arab attitudes to Nazi Germany shows that there were Arab and Muslim circles that were opposed to Hitler for political and ideological reasons, including the concern that the persecution of Jews in Europe would galvanize them to migrate to Palestine. But Arab support for the Nazis was more widespread, and there were Arabs who favored the annihilation of the Jews. Furthermore, over time, the more the Holocaust was used as a justification for the establishment of the State of Israel − the more the tendency among Arabs to view it as a Zionist myth and to deny it entirely grew. This trend reached a peak with the international conference of Holocaust deniers that was held in 2006 in Tehran."

Al-Jazeera is nothing if not extremely sensitive to the populist mood of the Arab street. Once the editors realized Massad's article bases its theories on the fact that the Holocaust unquestionably did take place, and that it affirmed that 6 millions of Jews were exterminated by the Nazis, they had no other choice but to remove it from its public platforms. To not do so would open the door to the possibility that someone might well wonder whatever happened to the standard Arab denial that the Holocaust ever took place, or if it did, that only 50-60 Jews were killed?

Update: May 21 2013:   Looks like AJ reconsidered its decision. And why not? Perhaps the fact that Massad is confirming that 6 million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust can be obscured and downgraded by his thesis that it was the Zionists what did it, de facto. All the good Jews, who knew their place and what was expected from them, that AJ and Prof. AbuKhalil might have been able to tolerate were among those 6 million. In fact, all of those 6 million. For, as we know, for the people who engineer public opinion in the Arab world and beyond, there can only be one sort of a good Jew and that is a dead Jew.

You see?    I wonder if AbuKhalil's opposition to Holocaust denial can be seen as one tactic among others, a concern of his, to re-assure Arabs  that Jews are not that smart and powerful, and if it was done once it can be done again. Read his fantasies about the end of Israel-- it computes.

Saturday, May 18, 2013

A Simple Case of Irony: The Zionizer* Zionized

One of the most common types of irony is the situational irony. 

AbuKhalil calls "Zionist" (he fancifully believes it is a slander to be called a Zionist) anyone who would even shake hands with an Israeli or would not share his absolute and self-defining hatred of Israel. These include (according to his singularly unique lights) Palestinian leadership, the Egyptian Muslim Brothers, Saudi Monarchs, the New York Times, to name but a few of the unlikeliest candidates for such a label. And what do you know, the caller of names is being insulted by the very same insult he throws at others. 

Of course the ultimate irony is these are all birds of a feather; the callers of names, the callees of names, the list of suspects called, they all understand each so well.  

How delicious.

* Just   one  example of many


Friday, May 17, 2013

 The Ethical Professor

According to AbuKhalil: " There are more than 3 million Muslims in the United States, and few more than 100 have joined jihad—about one out of every 30,000—suggesting an American Muslim population that remains hostile to jihadist ideology and its exhortations to violence." Using Bergen's figure of 203 jihadist terrorists, that means approximately 0.007 percent of Muslims in the United States have been involved in domestic terror plots since 9/11."

That is to say, a tiny minuscule minority only. So negligible as to suggest "an American Muslim population that remains hostile to jihadist ideology and its exhortations to violence".

According to AbuKhalil: 

"a tiny minisculre minority only

"About half a million settlers live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, of whom a tiny minority engage in violent attacks on Palestinians." 
From the way he chooses to title this quote, embellishing the actual phrase used in it "a tiny minority" to "a tiny minuscule minority only", it is obvious he realizes the absurdity of the argument. Because even a minority of one resorting to violence is reprehensible to those on the receiving end of the violence, as well as to any by-stander repulsed by any type of violence against innocent individuals. 
Note how easily he waves away as negligible, nothing to worry about, the 203 would-be Jihadists residing in the US and their potential, or not so potential, harm to American innocents and compare with his deep concern for the potential (and much inflated) suffering of innocent Palestinians from
 the violence of a tiny minority of "500,000 settlers" (sceptical quotations mark due to the way in which "settler" is defined by these crocodiles, hence their number). 
Or is he trying to suggest that, just as in the case of the Muslim-American community, this is a statistical fact that proves  An Israeli Settler population that remains hostile to anti-Palestinian sentiment and its exhortations to violence ??
I doubt this even occurred to venerable prof.
A double standard, from AbuKhalil?   


The article AbuKhalil's quote is taken from appears in the anti-Israel Guardian, and written from a highly critical point of view. Yet in this article we read: 

"The public security minister, Yitzhak Aharonovich, viewed the attacks with gravity and said police were hunting for those responsible.

A statement from the justice ministry issued on Thursday evening confirmed that a high-level meeting to discuss settler violence had discussed "the need for more serious steps to be taken, including making sure law enforcement have the tools at hand to deal with the criminals responsible".
A measure is to be brought before the cabinet next week following the meeting between Shin Bet officials, the Israeli Defence Forces and government ministers, including Aharonovich, justice minister Tzipi Livni and the attorney general, Yehuda Weinstein."

Israel's government and society view the violence against Palestinians, though coming only from a tiny minority, as extremely dangerous and reprehensible. You don't get that kind of concern from reading the way AbuKhalil dismisses the 203 potential Jihadists' violence to Americans. 

The Tartuff of Marxism-Anarchism "Critiques" Religion

Here he gives his rationale:

... critique of clerics, priests, and rabbis is a national duty and obligation.  Remember that the clerics of Al-Azhar were partners with Sadat in his humiliating deal with Israel.  And the Lebanese Shi`ite cleric, Hasan Mushaymish, has been convicted of spying for Israel.  ... Karl Marx ...said in his introduction to A Contribution to Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right that "and the criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all criticism".

How does Prof. AbuKhalil  explain the necessity to criticize Arab clerics by the Arab masses? Does he bring up the religious oppression of women, of free speech and of free thought the clerics preach to the believers? Does he take a stand against the virulent antisemitism of Muslim clerics?

No. His only criticism begins and ends with one argument: It is absolutely mandatory to "criticize Religion" because of the one or two (if that) religious clerics that happen to support normalization with Israel.

AbuKhalil's stand against religion is essentially the same as his vaunted devotion to Marxism- Anarchism. The only factor that matters is whether something is for or against Israel. He calls that criticism, and he actually brags about it, feeling himself to be standing, no doubt, side by side with Dawkins and Spinoza.

Marx stated in Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right

 "Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.
Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself."

I highlighted in red Marx's main point about the corrosive influence of religion on the rational human being's mind. Now take the self-adorned as Marxist, Prof. AbuKhalil's argument against the clerics and compare it with Marx's  argument for the abolition of religion. Is there any point at which the two connect? Is there a shared spirit of indignation against what clerics do to their own flocks?

What kind of a Marxist is he? A Tartuffian Marxist. Or/and an idiot.

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Priceless gleanings from "Angry Arab News Service":

 The cute terrorist:

"He told me that when Wadi' would stumble on a matter that required a solution, he would watch cartoons until he would come up with something. "
Who was this cutie pie,  and what kind of inspiration was he looking for in Mickie Mouse cartoons?

According to wikipedia,  Wadi Haddad  was he leader of the "military" wing of  Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), organized attacks on Israeli targets, including airplan highjackings, the most famous being  the Dawson's Field hijackings of 1970, and Entebbe.  He employed the services of  much feared and fabled arch-terrorist "Carlos the Jackal"*. Later, Haddad decided to expel Carlos from his team after the latter had been accused of refusing to kill two hostages, and possibly stealing ransom money, following the 1975 assault on the OPEC conference in Vienna. Haddad organized the Entebbe hijacking in June 1976.

Such and such are the objects of Prof. AbuKhalil's adulation.
* "Carlos was forced out of the PFLP by Wadi Haddad shortly after the OPEC kidnapping because he ransomed the Saudi and Iranian ministers instead of killing them, and because he was suspected of keeping part of the ransom for himself. Thus, despite reports to the contrary, he was already out of the organization when it orchestrated the famous hijacking of an Air France jet to Entebbe, Uganda, in 1976. But that portion of the ransom he turned over to Haddad, at least $10 million, was used to finance this and many other terrorist attacks against Israeli and European targets"

 So Niall Ferguson can't be racist because his "best friend" is gay and he is married to a bigot who was born in Somalia

A person who does not like gay persons is a homophobe, not a racist. A person who does not like any race but his own is a racist. But you wouldn't know any of it, because Prof. AbuKhalil is hardly interested in linguistic precision. Because anger makes you really stupid and the first type of stupidity is the misuse of language. I suspect that both Ferguson and his lovely wife, Aayan Hirsi Ali, have provoked his anger not only because they are both critical of Islamic violence and repression of human rights, especially true in the case of the lady, but especially because neither of them shares his apocalyptic view of Israel. In AbuKhalil's moral system, there is no greater sin than not regarding Israel as the greatest evil in the universe from the beginning of time.



Who speaks for the Arab people?

The answer: Western government officials and Western correspondents of course, as in: " but it now appears in the eyes of the Arab world

But the answer is: Angry Arab, of course, (with a few exceptions, like this one).

Diseased Minds

As always I am indebted to Prof. Abukhalil for affording me the opportunity to look through a window into the diseased minds of Palestinian "supporters" like himself and his own beloved comrade Joseph Massad. In this post, on his fabled Angry Arab website, the professor who teaches young Americans at the State University of California quotes his colleague who teaches Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New York, approvingly and without a hint of irony:

  " The Nazis would not be an exception in this anti-Semitic chain of pro-Zionist enthusiasts. Indeed, the Zionists would strike a deal with the Nazis very early in their history. It was in 1933 that the infamous Transfer (Ha'avara) Agreement was signed between the Zionists and the Nazi government to facilitate the transfer of German Jews and their property to Palestine and which broke the international Jewish boycott of Nazi Germany started by American Jews. It was in this spirit that Zionist envoys were dispatched to Palestine to report on the successes of Jewish colonization of the country. Adolf Eichmann returned from his 1937 trip to Palestine full of fantastic stories about the achievements of the racially-separatist Ashkenazi Kibbutz, one of which he visited on Mount Carmel as a guest of the Zionists.
Despite the overwhelming opposition of most German Jews, it was the Zionist Federation of Germany that was the only Jewish group that supported the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, as they agreed with the Nazis that Jews and Aryans were separate and separable races. This was not a tactical support but one based on ideological similitude. The Nazis' Final Solution initially meant the expulsion of Germany's Jews to Madagascar. It is this shared goal of expelling Jews from Europe as a separate unassimilable race that created the affinity between Nazis and Zionists all along."

Note please the insidious and vile attempt to whitewash Nazi eliminationist policies for the Jews: "The Nazis' Final Solution initially meant the expulsion of Germany's Jews to Madagascar." In other words, the Nazis  never intended the Final Solution to be the total extermination of the Jews, merely a transfer. Hence, anyone who claims otherwise slanders the Nazis and their German supporters. 

Let me repeat, these two pals are bona fide professors, each teaching at an American university of good academic standing. And they are defined by their hatredcontempt and fear of and for Jews, for Israel, for history, for truth.      

Update: Another blog found this article by Massad highly disturbing:

 "... it is not much of a stretch to characterise Massad’s thesis as follows: All of Europe’s good Jews were the ones that did not heed to call to make aliya and died in the Holocaust; the Zionist Jews who made it to Palestine and survived were (and are) bad Jews. “The Jewish holocaust killed off the majority of Jews who fought and struggled against European anti-Semitism, including Zionism,” Massad says, and he uses this idea to build the next part of his article:
Post-War West German governments that presented themselves as opening a new page in their relationship with Jews in reality did no such thing. Since the establishment of the country after WWII, every West German government has continued the pro-Zionist Nazi policies unabated. There was never a break with Nazi pro-Zionism. This is to be added to the massive billions that Germany has paid to the Israeli government as compensation for the holocaust, as if Israel and Zionism were the victims of Nazism, when in reality it was anti-Zionist Jews who were killed by the Nazis.
Never mind the families who lost relatives in the Shoah who were living in Israel during the Holocaust. And, never mind the thousands of European refugees of the Holocaust who, unwanted in Europe and the United States, made their way to Palestine both legally and illegally in the years following the Second World War. They, evidently, are undeserving of restitution because they had the gall to make it to Palestine. And, in getting to Palestine, at that point through Massad’s eyes they ceased to be Jewish: they became Zionists. And once one becomes a Zionist, one are no longer a victim of the Holocaust. Remember: “in reality it was anti-Zionist Jews who were killed by the Nazis.”
Massad doesn't beat about the bush here. His entire thesis is based on the principle that a good Jew is a dead Jew ...


Here are some of my past posts in which I wrote about the pre-war events.

A reminder:
" ... in 1937... The Arabs of Palestine, though addressed with the most explicit plea in the report for showing "generosity" to the persecuted Jews of Europe, existentially threatened, did not for a second consider this possibility and continued to mount their pressure on the British to seal the borders. When there was hardly a country in the world open to accept Jewish refugees fleeing from Hitler's ominous programmes, Mandate Palestine, which had been commissioned with the provision of a safe haven for Jews, chose to close ranks with the Arabs and seal the borders, against the Jews.
The only place that would have welcomed these refugees and could have saved hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives, joined the rest of the world's complicity in these crimes.

20 years later  Ben-Gurion wrote: 

"Had partition [referring to the Peel Commission partition plan] been carried out, the history of our people would have been different and six million Jews in Europe would not have been killed—most of them would be in Israel". 

Today, the staple Palestinian argument is that they had no responsibility whatsoever for what happened to the Jews. But they did. They bear at least the same responsibility as as every country that ever refused to accept Jews who were looking to get out of Europe."

Sunday, May 12, 2013

The other side of Angry Arab 

The philosemitic feminist: Prof. AbuKhalil is concerned for Jewish women's rights in Israel

Prof. AbuKhalil is excited by German condescension in including (presumably*) Arab ingredients in their food: They are so cool and multi-culti...


*(Why the sceptical "presumably"?


"Although it is believed to have originated in Persia (present-day Iran) and to have been introduced to Europe through the Turks (badem ezmesi in Turkish, and most notably produced in Edirne), there is some dispute between Hungary and Italy over its origin. [-] Another possible geographic origin is in Spain, then known as Al-Andalus. In Toledo (850-900, though more probably 1150 during the reign of Alfonso VII) this specialty was known as Postre Regio instead of Mazapán) and there are also mentions"
And for croissants with sesame seeds, there is a strong likelihood it is a Macedonian baking tradition.)


Why so petty, Noga, my very few readers may well inquire. Well, here is why: AbuKhalil turns all pink with obsequious pleasure when Germans adopt what he considers ethnic Arab food but when Israelis do the same, he calls them thieves. But as we know, Abukhalil will always find a little warmth in his angry heart for any German.

But here is the typically jocular Israeli answer to such Angry musings.

Friday, May 10, 2013

Indiscriminate Stabbing 

AbuKhalil bristles with indignation at the news:

"... Chris Stone, the American academic, was stabbed in Cairo. Chris is a wonderful human being and an excellent scholar and a great friend of the Palestinian people.  This is how dumb and criminal wholesale hatred and hostility to all Americans is."

Now if Chris Stone  was not a wonderful human being,  or an excellent scholar, or a great friend to Palestinians, would it still be dumb and criminal if he were stabbed in Cairo? Just wondering.

Wednesday, May 08, 2013

The Equalizer 

AbuKhalil is outraged:

"Can you imagine if the New York Times were to refer to a Jewish traditional meal in such language? Can you imagine the uproar and the calls for boycott?

This is about a traditional Egyptian meal:  "Both the holiday and its stinky meal"....
Well, for
1. Jews have better sense than to eat a rotten fish dish*, no matter how ancient the tradition is. 

2. Here is from wikipedia about this particular traditional dish:

Fesikh (Egyptian Arabic: فسيخ fesīḵ  pronounced [feˈsiːx, fɪˈsiːx]) is a traditional Egyptian fish dish consisting of fermented salted and dried gray mullet, of the mugil family, a saltwater fish that lives in both the Mediterranean and the Red Seas. [1] Fesikh is eaten during the Sham el-Nessim festival, which is a spring celebration from ancient times in Egypt.
The traditional process of preparing Fesikh is to dry the fish in the sun before preserving it in salt. The process of is quite elaborate, passing from father to son in certain families. The occupation has a special name in Egypt, fasakhani. Egyptians in the West have used whitefish as an alternative. Each year food poisoning tales involving incorrectly prepared fesikh appear in Egyptian periodicals.
In April 2012, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency issued recalls for whole fesikh mullet, cut up fesikh mullet in oil, and whole fesikh shad that were sold from a store in Toronto. There were 3 reported illnesses associated with the consumption of the products, which may have been contaminated with Clostridium botulinum bacteria.

Considering that it is not just potentially poisonous dish, calling it a "stinky"meal is not exactly an overstatement. (We usually stay away from stinky food --rightly so-- suspecting it might be rotting and harmful to our health). Still, the author should have stuck to more scientific language and called it "ill-smelling fermented fish dish" to arrive at the same affect without unduly ruffling Angry Arab's tender feelings.

3. Why is it that every time something  suspiciously pejorative is said about Arab or Muslim cultures, AA immediately leaps in with: Imagine if they said that about the Jews...!!! Why doesn't he ever think to say, just for the sake of keeping up an appearance of disinterest:  Imagine if they said that about the Chinese? Or the Buddhists? Or Christians? Nah. it wouldn't have the same lip-smacking affect and it wouldn't be so terribly enjoyable.  You see, as far as AA is concerned, Jews are being singled out for the utmost delicate treatment by the media and in other things, like history and such like. So he just points out how unfair it is, how lopsided, how inciting it is to speak of "stinky"" Egyptian meals and not stinky Jewish meals, considering that Jews have always enjoyed such solicitous tenderness from everybody.  He is the EQUALIZER (؟)


* The closest one can get to a Jewish unappetising fish dish would be the famous and nearly inedible gefiltefish which every Jew and his cousin likes to make fun of. It is sweet and floats in some sort of congealed aspic almost designed I suspect to put you off your dinner.

Tuesday, May 07, 2013

He approves ...

"And they also were strong supporter of Palestinian struggle for liberation. Deniz Gezmiş personally fought against zionist invasion in the ranks of Democratic Front For the liberation of Palestine. And here his ID card.  (The story of 68 movement and Palestinian struggle is interesting. Some leftist students were killed when they were fighting in Palestine or in Lebanon, but nobody knows them.)"

What  kind of "fighting" can the DFFLP boast?

Here is an example:

The Ma'alot massacre[1] was a terrorist attack in 1974 which included a two-day hostage-taking of 115 people which ended in the deaths of over 25 hostages. It began when three armed Palestinian terrorists of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine[2] entered Israel from Lebanon. Soon afterwards they attacked a van, killing two Israeli Arab women while injuring a third and entered an apartment building in the town of Ma'alot, where they killed a couple and their four-year-old son.[3] From there, they headed for the Netiv Meir Elementary School, where they took more than 115 people (including 105 children) hostage on 15 May 1974, in Ma'alot. Most of the hostages were teenagers from a high school in Safad on a Gadna field trip spending the night in Maalot...
Ultimately, 25 hostages, including 22 children, were killed and 68 more were injured.

 No surprises there.

Wednesday, May 01, 2013

The Hypocrite 

"Workers of the world, unite.  Amen." writes Prof. AbuKhalil, who likes to define himself (in all seriousness, I suspect) as  "a former Marxist-Leninist, now an anarchist", a feminist, and an "atheist secularist". (wiki)

On his own self-indulgent website", the most recurrent expression of his political inclinations is this:

 I don't like flags and I don't like nationalisms but for Palestine and the Palestinians everything and anything.

 About such as these, Hannah Arendt wrote:

As witnesses not of our intentions but of our conduct, we can be true or false, and the hypocrite's crime is that he bears false witness against himself. What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; but only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core.