Thank you, Norway, for getting Europe to stage 3 of Jew-biting

Attorney General Tor Aksel Busch - Norway

The man in the picture above should be allotted a place in history books. He pushed the (willing) population of Europe to the third stage of recognized and approved Jew-hate. To remind you the first two stages:

1. "Some of my best friends are Jews, it is the Zionists over there, in Israel, that I despise and protest."
2. "Criticism of Israel/Zionist Entity is not antisemitic, and my Jewish friends that support Israel are not my friends anymore, I despise and protest them too."

Now, thanks to the gentleman depicted above, we are at the third stage: "Fuck all Jews, they are all Israel". With all the consequences, logical, legal and physical that follow.

The article by Elder of Ziyon tells the story. For the lazy here is a summary:

A Norwegian-Iranian rapper says "fucking Jews" during performance. Whether it was a poor joke or an intended racist slur is immaterial for our purpose. Besides, I am not into trying to interpret a rapper.

Norwegian police (sic!) decided that "Fuck Jews" was not a racist statement. Why is this a matter for police to decide is unclear, but also immaterial.

Then a State Attorney Trude Antonsen agrees with the police's assessment. She decides that the statement is "highly derogatory, offensive and false, but that it is not affected by the criminal code". Whatever. Not very enlightening, but immaterial as well.

And here the hero of this post jumps into the fray:

Attorney General Tor Aksel Busch rejected the appeal on the grounds that "fuck Jews" can be understood as criticism of Israel.

At this point I have to disagree with the learned Elder. He says:

In other words, now pretty much any attack on Jews in Norway can be justified as being merely political, and not racist.

Not in Norway only, dear Elder, I am sorry to say. This is a precedent, soon to be expanded and used by many others, to be sure.

Too bad.

You dare to call yourself friends of Jews?

A Jewish German political activist Aviel Tromm, who describes himself on his Facebook page:

My name is Aviel Tromm, I actively tried to shape politics from 2001 to 2014. I was chairman of the LAG Queer NRW, the party The Left, fractional employee of the city council faction in Brühl and sat there in 8 committees, have worked with the then parliamentary group and was networked with politicians across the country.
To this day, I have friends in various factions of the Bundestag and the European Parliament and I am still fighting actively in the BAK Shalom, but I am no longer a party member! My "career" ended in Essen in 2014 because I sided with Israel.

The letter to the German government, written by him, is borrowed from Benjamin Goldstein's blog.

You all annoy me the way you mentally please yourself with your ‘culture of rememberence’ and your ‘raison d’État’ and how you at the same time learned so much from history that in fifty years Germany will finally be as your murderish grandparents envisioned it – judenrein!

Every time a Jew in Germany gets beaten, you have to act like shocked politicans with your useless Sunday speeches and slogans and you pretend not to be able to understand where that hatred comes from. You prattle in talk shows that there wouldn’t be a place for anti-Semitism in Germany. You carry wreaths to memorials. Oh, how much you love your dead Jews. I’m inclined to attest you a propensity for necrophilia!

But every time when the living Jews resist, when they insist on their right to self-determination, then you’re there to pass UN-Resolutions together with the religious and ideological fanatics, painting Israel as the world’s demon. In [the Nazi propaganda magazine] ‘Stürmer’ they did it with cartoons. You do it with politics.

High-ranking politicans may clap hands when in the European Parliament Mr Abbas spreads the most anti-Semitic narratives. One may loudly speak of an apartheid state or a regime and it’s also perfectly okay for you to lay down flowers and wreaths on the graves of dead terrorists. Still today Europe must be very sad that the Arabs failed to drown the Jews in the Middle East in 1948 like a farmerman who’s killing kittens in a barrel of rain.

Either you’re so stupid that you can’t distinguish scrambled eggs from shit or you do it on purpose. You’re a bunch of lousy hypocrites who present themselves in front of memorials, howling in the minor chords of Klezmer-music, and at the same time you’re working only to get rid of the European Jews.

What did you learn from the last years? What have you done? Anti-Semitic riots throughout Germany, arson attacks on synagogues, endless insults and repressions against Jews and Jewish institutions. What was the consequence? The German parliament of the state NRW, for example, examined the incidents in the City of Essen, condemned them and after that the topic was over. Nothing of practical use followed. The guilty are still sitting exactly where they sat then. The only effective measure was a big rally, which wasn’t initiated by you, but the Central Council of Jews in Germany.

And what are you working on in practice? You condemn and criticize Israel since the 1960s perpetually. You have no understanding for self-defense and security needs. You reject Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and you pump billions of euros into the terrorist structures of Hamas and others on site. And what does that make of you after your own definition? You dare to call yourself friends of Israel and the Jews? Friends? What the hell is wrong with you?

With this policy of ‘friendship’ you created such a one-sided media coverage that there are only two types of Jews in the daily lives of Germans. Jews have almost disappeared completely from everday life.

First type: Jews in Germany appear in news articles about students who have to change schools because of their Jewish identity. Or in documentaries about the Shoa, which have become so irrelevant that they feel like a substitute of the black-and-white picture noise of the analogue TV set.

Second type: Jews encounter the majority of people in Germany as a boogeyman in the news when Israel every so often has to defend itself and even the headlines then leave no qualms that ‘the Jew’ is always the guilty one. In fact, the media almost always reports negatively about Israel. The attacks against the state of Irael are usually only mentioned as the last line in consistently tendencious articles, and politicians of all parties either drown in their calls for temperance or they curse Israel as an apartheid state like [former] Minister of Foreign Affairs Sigmar Gabriel.

The West German post-war narrative is the attempt to avert the guilt. In order not to face the own history Israel is at least equated to the Nazis.

And finally, to crown your hypocrisy, you install anti-Semitism commissioners who have to beg to get heard at all. If they’re listened to, they can have the moral highground for a moment. [Note: I think that he means they are selectively given the mic for purely strategic political advantages.] Fabulous! Great show! So much perversion and deviousness is otherwise known only in psycho thrillers.

The result of over fourty years of German-Israeli ‘friendship’ is that anti-Semitism has become louder, that it’s becoming increasingly dangerous for Jews to walk the streets and that more and more Jews emigrate from Germany.

There’s only left to say that you’re bound by tradition, a German tradition which made it possible to slaughter Jews during the Crusades like livestock, a tradition that was inspired by Martin Luther’s letter of shame ‘From Jews and their lies’, a tradition responsible for the murder of six million Jews on government orders.

It’s not us who have become like your grandparents, no, you’re just as your murderish ancestors desired. At least be honest, this farce is almost unbearable.

Don't you ever change, Russia. Stay classy!

This opus, written by a Facebook user Natalya Kuzmina* in 2017, isn't remarkable in its content. Only in the diligence and verbosity of its creator. Her Russian is quite poor, by the way. But she speaks for many, possibly for a lot over there.

Do not purchase sausage, grounded meat, cutlets, frankfurters. They are made of ritually slain children, which disappear in millions every year.
Blood is pumped out (sic!) from the kids, and meat is processed and arrives to the shops' counters.
Our children are being stolen during the year, and sacrificed for important holidays Purim, Hanukkah, Pesach.
[They] could use the adults as well, but the best are children, since they are clean and innocent.
Such sacrifice of innocence is identified with the virginal sacrifice of Christ.
The children are also taken away by Juvenilka**  and sold to Judeans for organs.
Read Psalter every day for your relatives. The strongest prayer in God's eyes comes from Psalter, especially the night one.
This information will soon be removed from the Internet possibly, forward it to people.

Somehow it doesn't look like vegan propaganda leaflet to me...

(*) Don't try to look her up, there is a myriad of people with the same name (Наталья Кузьмина) он Facebook. The name isn't rare.
(**) A slang moniker for the children social services.

Professor Waxman and discomfort of the British Jews. Oh, and Freedom of Speech...

It so happens that every time I see an article that starts with the "full disclosure" of the kind: "I am Jewish..." or "As a Jew...", I get butterflies in my stomach. This time wasn't any different.

When I have seen the headline of the article in Times of Israel:

Who gets to define anti-Semitism?

I, of course, was slightly thrilled*. I was less thrilled after reading the lede:

The UK Labour Party must protect free speech, including the comments about Israel that most British Jews abhor.

So free speech is the issue then? Hmm...

And then, of course, the "full disclosure" part:

I am a British Jew, though I have spent my adult life in the United States. I’ve found it more comfortable to be a Jew here, but I have always bridled at the notion that Britain is, or is becoming, an inhospitable environment for Jews, whether due to anti-Semitism on the left there or among its large Muslim population.

Quite revealing, especially the part of being more comfortable. I assume that prof. Waxman was already asked about that confession, so I shall leave it alone. Just to mention that the butterflies in my stomach invited a few friends to join the dance. And when prof. Waxman bridled at that notion - what can I say: the butterflies really lost it, each one dancing and jumping up and down to its own music. Inviting more buddies, too.

Now it is my turn to do that "full disclosure" part, I guess. Not being a British Jew, just an oldish Israeli one, with a considerable time done elsewhere (USSR mostly and USA some), I hate the topic of antisemitism. Every one of the few people reading this blog knows that rarely does it go into this murky subject, for various unrelated reasons.

But when many (if not all) of my British friends, Jewish and not so blessed, bitterly complain about that malady in what used to be their political home of preference, when they leave that home in droves, when they start looking elsewhere for acceptance - only a deaf and blind would ignore that.

When the leader of that party is caught again and again in de facto antisemitic acts, like buddying up to terrorists (tell me who your brothers are...). Like declaring the mere existence of Israel bizzare. By seeming unable even to say "Israel", so deeply is the word lodged in his craw.  Etc. etc.

When dignitaries like David Duke and Nick Griffin declare their support for the said leader - tell me who you friends are now.

When the Deputy Leader says things like "Labour faces ‘eternal shame’ over antisemitism."

When the glorious leader himself is forced to issue an artificially sounding half-confession/half denial, which (at least) includes words like "But I do acknowledge there is a real problem that Labour is working to overcome."

What does all of the above leave of prof. Waxman bridling? I don't know and really don't want to.

But all of the above is not really the point of the discussed article, nor of this post. The real point is the big red herring of free speech, placed by prof. Waxman at the center of his article. According to his logic (or his beliefs) it's quite fine (in the framework of free speech, of course) to direct more attention and criticism to Israel’s alleged crimes and misdeeds than toward other democracies. It is cool (free speech) to compare Israeli policies and actions to those of Nazi Germany. It is quite acceptable (free speech) claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour. Etc.

And I wouldn't even comment on that bizarre notion:

The fact that many Jews are justifiably offended by false analogies between Israel and Nazi Germany does not automatically make such analogies anti-Semitic.

Because, as I mentioned already, this is just another piece of the same red herring and as such is besides the point.

To the point: the vaunted freedom of speech prof. Waxman so selflessly defends is not something that should be protected by a political party, it is rather the business of the government and its institutions and the public at large. To use a (randomly chosen, with apologies to prof. Waxman) definition of political party:

A political party is defined as an organised group of people with at least roughly similar political aims and opinions, that seeks to influence public policy by getting its candidates elected to public office.

I strongly doubt that even a man, so liberal in his views as prof. Waxman, will object to the notion that Holocaust deniers, Israel-haters and various other shades of anti-Semites and other racists and bigots, while they might have the freedom of speech protection of their activities and their hate speech, are not entitled to "automatic" (whatever it means) protection of their party membership.

In other words: I might fight to death for your freedom of speech, hateful as your speech might appear, but I wouldn't want to invite you to my party (pun intended).

I hope this dispenses with the red herring in its entirety.

Q.E.D.

(*) And disappointed eventually, since no matter how carefully you read the article, you wouldn't find an answer to this, seemingly trivial, question. Rather a dismissal of the whole by this:

That’s what the British Jewish communal establishment declared in its condemnation of Labour’s definition of anti-Semitism: “It is for Jews to determine for themselves what anti-Semitism is.”

While the feelings and sensitivities of Jews should be considered, they are not sufficient.

One would think (wrongly, apparently) that the issue of defining an insult is in the eyes of the insultee. But prof. Waxman, obviously, doesn't think so. I am not going to deal with this, painfully obvious, strawman, aside of quoting my Facebook British friend, Sarah Minxy Mann Yeager, who expressed it quite well:

People like you are the reason we are running scared. Ask yourself this xxx: if a black person told you they felt there was racism being aimed at them from a political party would you dare to ask them to substantiate it?

If an LGBT person told you they were feeling victimised would you dare to ask them for proof?

Why, as a JEW who tells you there is a palpable threat to their whole group from a political party, do you dare to expect any more substantiation than daily press articles that cover the front pages of our national press from the Daily Telegraph to The Mirror?

If you are curious, YOU go and look. You are clearly not satisfied with the evidence that I have given you and your refusal to believe there is a problem is tantamount to gaslighting.

You are telling me, a JEW, that I am imagining it and there is NO antisemitism. I am telling you there is.

Why is my telling you isufficient? If I were BAME and told your something similar you would not ask for proof.

Review of “Hitler’s Children” by William Grim

This post is mostly a copy/paste of a response to a long article about the apparent nostalgia for the old times that is titled “Hitler’s Children”, written quite a long time ago by one William Grin. But first of all a short preface. The response is written by my penfriend Benjamin Goldstein, a German Jew who is immensely qualified to analyze and criticize the Germany-related content, especially of such a disturbing manner.

The article he is dissecting was sent to me by a friend and, after reading it, I had some doubts about its veracity and a possibility of exaggeration. I have spent only a limited time in Germany by myself, met a limited number of Germans and, being a strict follower of the famous "Don't mention the war" doctrine, have seen mostly good in the people I have encountered. But here comes a man...

Read more »

Jeremy Corbyn and his magic pockets

The many and various Jew-hating outbursts by various members of Labour party, both rank and file and leaders, caused an impressive show of solidarity and protest by British Jews in London.

It is not that Corbyn himself continues to deny the issue. Even before the demo in London he said:

We recognise that anti-Semitism has occurred in pockets within the Labour Party, causing pain and hurt to our Jewish community in the Labour Party and the rest of the country.

And in his letter to the Jewish leaders in reply to their open letter (both in the same link), Corbyn says all the right things.

So what is the problem, you might ask? First of all, the valiant fighter for social justice, equality and peace has done nothing about anti-Semitism during his time at the head of the party. But there is another, more acute issue, and it is Mr Corbyn himself.

The whole brouhaha, if you believe the BBC article, started with Corbyn's approval of an an anti-Semitic mural. A honest mistake, if you believe Corbyn and his minions:

Shadow transport secretary Andy McDonald told Sky News' Sunday with Niall Paterson that the Labour leader "hasn't got an anti-Semitic bone in his body"...

I wouldn't go as far as analyzing the gentleman's bones, besides I wouldn't know how to detect an anti-Semitic one. But the spirit of Corbyn is another matter...

The said spirit let itself to be invited (and joined) at least two virulently Jew-hating Facebook groups, spending several years in each one, without ever noticing the poisonous contents. The same spirit joined on its own another Facebook group of the same ilk and still continues to be a member there.

Another honest mistake, you might say. After all, the group isn't titled anything like "Kill the Jew" or something in this vein. And, being a busy man, Mr Corbyn doesn't have time to really nitpick the small print. Right?

The problem is that even on his own Facebook page our hero allows the racist vermin to proliferate and celebrate their verminity unopposed. And here is a selection of comments to be found on the said page, under the oh how politically correct response to the Jewish leaders, mentioned already here. Enjoy.

And consider what Mr Corbyn says about pockets...

Update 1: A great tweet by Amie:

There is antisemitism of intent, and then there is failure of a party leader in obligation of due diligence re supporters, online links, absent which, through indifference, ignorance, negligence or recklessness, amounts to antisemitism of effect. #CorbynisthePocket

— Amie (@amijudjes) March 27, 2018

Update 2: My cup runneth over:

Jeremy Corbyn is a member of two more virulently anti-Semitic Facebook groups, Guido can reveal, bringing the total up to five. Jezza has been a member of “Jeremy Corbyn Leads Us to VICTORY” since 2015. It is full of post after post about the Rothschilds, comparisons between Israel and the Nazis and “Antichrist Zionist Rothschild Jews”.

***

“Its not anti Semitic to compare Israeli policies to hitlers, it's fair and accurate.”

“I have never seen anti-semiticism in the Labour Party.. but I have seen anti-zionism of which I am
very proud to be an anti-zionist. We need to be VERY clear that protesting against the so-called apartheid state of Israel is not anti-semitic.
The Labour Party needs to be much stronger on this and not tolerate the conflation of anti-zionism with anti-semiticism [sic]”

“It disgusts me that within the PLP are a group of MPs calling themselves Labour Friends of Israel. This is disgraceful. In the time of the South African apartheid if there were a group in the PLP calling themselves the Labour Friends of South Africa, they would not have lasted five minutes. To have this group of MPs in the pockets of the zionist lobbyists is the shame of the Labour Party.”

“I would class the mural as anti establishment, anti capitalism not antisemitic”

“Don’t worry I did not believe a word of the media obsessional distraction techniques.”

“Don't sweat it jez. The mural wasn't antisemitic anyway, the target of the satire was corrupt banks, not Jewishness. If Jews own the banks then yea they're involved. What, are we never allowed to critique anything that in any way involved some people who happened to be Jewish? The usual suspects trying to undermine u, they should be ashamed. It is they who hurt labour's chances not u”

“Ironically most of the right wings are supporter of the zionazi state which make all the sense...racists are alike”

“[...] how by any stretch of the imagination has corbyn used this image an off the cuff comment from years ago is just another ridiculous smear by pro Israeli state lobby in and out of the Labour Party”

“The mural was not antisemetic. This is total foolishness. The painting -- from my interoperation -- is capitalism being portrayed as a game. A lot of Labour MPs have conveyed solidarity for the Palestinians this week, so the mainstream media driven argument of antisemitism is a way of undermining that. In addition, to undermine the success that will happen 3rd May under Jeremy's leadership of the Labour Party.”

“Well well Jeremy Corbyn is now just another politician bought and paid for by the Zionist state of Israel. You don't get to the front benches in the Westminster houses of corruption unless!”

“The mural was not anti-Semitic, it is anti-establishment. It just so happens the Rothschild and the rockerfella family have Jewish backgrounds and are the world's richest families.”

“Luciana Berger MP is a traitor to the labour party! She is contributing to the Tory lies and bogus smear campaigns!”

“I can smell a rat when a labour MP came from Haberdashers private school for girls and secretly has a surname called Goldsmith!”

“Jeremy ...someone needs to man up and tell people live on tv that anti Zionism is not the same as antisemiticism ...and defend robustly against the traditional onslaught that usually comes after...people are sick and tired of this situation and the constant holocaust “reminders “ on tv...”

“Strange how these unfounded accusations of anti-Semitism always gather steam around election time. Almost as though the Jewish community were trying to subvert sovereign British politics by tarnishing the image of an innocent and genuinely nice man and influencing the outcome of a sovereign British election.”

“Jeremy i am a big fan huge one but no one is more racist faschist extremist and crying victims than jews”.

***

Russia, where blood libel never slept

This here blog rarely deals with the ugly and ancient virus of anti-Semitism. There are several reasons why, but to name the chief one - it will most probably be the uselessness. A/S is usually a part of the person's bloodstream, acquired with mother's milk and not susceptible to persuasion, logic or even a liberal application of 2x4. Hopefully this post will continue to be a rare exception.

Russia, the motherland of the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, has been one of the countries richly permeated with the virus. Benevolently looked upon by most Tzars, the virus spread quite widely in all walks of life and, like the ubiquitous Protocols, coming up at many occasions, caused murderous conflagrations during the history. Including the history of the USSR, with only death stopping the homicidal dictator from carrying out his plan of removing the Soviet Jews to Siberia in the beginning of the fifties.

Recent years brought another wave of the epidemic, this time coming from an old and temporary made dormant ROC - Russian Orthodox Church. Being suppressed for the 70 years of the great socialist experiment, ROC flourishes and gains popularity, power and lots and lots of its growing flock's money. It has to be said that the A/S virus has by no means infected all of the ROC priests, but a sizable part of them appeared to be ready to return to the old habit of this church.

A Russian liberal site Grani posted an article The Beilis* case lives and wins

The investigation committee plans to appoint a psychological/historical examination to find out whether the execution of the royal family** was not a ritual murder, said ... Marina Molodtsova, senior investigator for especially important cases of the Russian Federation, at the conference "The Case of the Murder of the Royal Family: New Expertise and Materials ... ".
...
According to her, a council of experts is now being formed to include scientists from the Academy of Sciences, Moscow and St. Petersburg universities, historians, archivists and priests of the Russian Orthodox Church. This research will become possible after the receipt of the conclusions from the historical-archival examination, which is currently being performed by experts.

Other sources name the origin of the libel.

Bishop Tikhon Shevkunov, who is heading a Russian Orthodox Church commission investigating the execution of the Romanov family by firing squad in Yekaterinburg, said at a conference on Monday that many members of the commission believe it was a ritual murder that held special significance for Bolshevik commander Yakov Yurovsky and his men.

“Ritual murder” has in the past referred to a theory that the last emperor was the victim of a Jewish conspiracy, as Mr Yurovsky was of Jewish heritage.

Grani, quoted above, continue with this:

If you delve into the taste of the ritual accusation, you get a very heavy feeling .... Each of us, speaking to a non-believer, must, therefore, remember that, perhaps, at this very moment the non-believer shivers and thinks: "And who knows whether you ever got a sip from a ritual glass?"

There are quite sincere people among the rightwingers. These people quite sincerely believe that Jews consume the blood of Christian babies; at least that among Jews there is such a sect ... In general, this whole thing is much more complicated. It is especially difficult because the belief in ritual murders is common not only among the right. In a neutral, non-partisan mass, even an intelligent one, too, this suspicion is far from eradicated ... Of course, nice people express this doubt not in more elegant form. They usually say: "Of course, we do not doubt that you and your family don't know about it, but... maybe your rabbis know?"

Well, what can I add to that? Only that, as part of a ritual, I am sometimes raising my ritual glass. Its contents are usually red and, on the occasions when fresh blood of gentile children is available, especially tasty. And I drink to the demise of Jew haters, among other wishes.

(*) Beilis case

Menahem Mendel Beilis (sometimes spelled Beiliss; Russian: Менахем Мендель Бейлис, Yiddish: מנחם מענדל בייליס‎; 1874 – 7 July 1934) was a Russian Jew accused of ritual murder in Kiev in the Russian Empire in a notorious 1913 trial, known as the "Beilis trial" or "Beilis affair". The process sparked international criticism of the antisemitic policies of the Russian Empire.

And an important footnote:

Around six months before his death, Beilis was interviewed by the English-language Jewish Daily Bulletin. Asked for “one outstanding impression” of the trial in Kiev, he paid a final tribute to the Russian Gentiles who had helped him to escape the blood libel, such as the detective Krasovsky and the journalist Brazul-Brushkovsky: “There was real heroism, real sacrifice. They knew that by defending me their careers would be ruined, even their very lives would not be safe. But they persisted because they knew I was innocent.”

Yes, it is crucial not to paint all Russians by the same color - the color of hate.

(**) Execution of the royal family

The last Russian emperor Nicholas II and his family were shot in the summer of 1918 in Yekaterinburg. In 2000, the Russian Church canonized Nicholas II and his family members as saints, after the discovery of the burial site near Yekaterinburg, the remains of the members of the imperial family were buried in the tomb of Peter and Paul Cathedral of St. Petersburg. In the fall of 2015, investigators resumed the investigation into the case of the deaths of the Romanovs. Currently, there are also examinations related to the establishment of the authenticity of the remains found in 2007, possibly the prince Alexis and the Grand Duchess Maria.

Berkeley's Hatem Bazian - the most dangerous professor in America?

There is a big difference between protecting freedom of speech and providing, like Berkeley does, a well paid platform for a hate preacher with academic credentials of dubious quality*.

This headline might be a tad too sensationalist, I feel, but it is not mine. I am not keeping a list of all dangerous American professors, of course. For all I know, it might be somebody else, a totally unknown one, from an obscure institution of higher education. One that is right now putting the final bits on the Doomsday Machine in his basement.

Professor Bazian, if you check his page at Berkeley's website, doesn't look very dangerous:

Hatem Bazian (Ph.D, Philosophy and Islamic Studies, UC Berkeley) teaches

• AAS 128AC: Islam in America: Communities and Institutions
• AAS 132: De-Constructing Islamophobia and Othering of Islam.

It is not that I would rush to enroll in these courses, but being one who is into "othering" all religions equally, I might have been inclined to take the AAS 132. To pick up a few useful tips, you know. Otherwise, what can I say: the two courses above are only a short sampler of the myriad of various "studies" that are taught all over US of A and produce hordes of unemployable (with good reason too) graduates with a vague smattering of "ejukayshen" on their pristine brains.

However, some people who do keep tabs on a few selected professors, are not stopping at the Berkeley's website. Canary Mission, for one, has done a sterling job of scrutinizing the good professor, with the result that is a must read. I shall quote only a few selected accomplishments of the man:

Bazian is a leader within the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. He declared September 23, 2014 an “International Day of Action” to call for a complete boycott of Israel on campuses across the United States on the eve of the Jewish New Year, Rosh Hashanah.

Bazian has linked the “liberation of Palestine” with Muslim theology and has reportedly promoted a verse in the Hadith calling for the murder of Jews to establish the “Islamic State of Palestine.”***

Bazian writes prolifically against Israel, publishing his work on his personal website and in other online sites including Mondoweiss and Electronic Intifada. He is the author of an anti-Israel book titled “Palestine … it is something colonial”.

Of course, there is more, much more in the article, but I don't want to spoil your reading any more. You shall learn that the learned professor should by now teach a most advanced Anti-Zionism course (909 or whatever the number is for such level), so successfully he has erased the thin line between the hated Zionists and the hated Jooz.

The picture of professor Bazian, drawn by the Canary Mission, doesn't require further details, methinks. However, a series of questions should be asked regarding Berkeley this famous institution of higher education, this prodigious production line of genius, second to none**. I realize that Berkeley has been for many (too many?) years a strongly left-leaning institution and goes from the left to more left as time goes.

First of all, seeing as how enormously frisky is professor Bazian in his extracurricular activities: isn't such a talented man, obviously a leader, seriously under-occupied by the university?
Then, if the answer to the previous question is negative, can't he be advised to seek a more fulfilling occupation elsewhere? I understand that he is, most probably, a tenured professor, but there are ways and means - if there is a will.
And, the last but not the least: while freedom of speech should be protected by all means, does such prodigious fountain of hate and incitement fit the requirements of an educational outfit of such a high standing?

To summarize: isn't it time to drum the professor of hate out of his lofty position?

(*) Even if we are talking about Berkeley's own graduate.
(**) If you believe this, for instance:

(***) In 1999, The Detroit News reported that Dr. Bazian had said, “The Day of Judgment will not happen until the trees and stones will say, ‘Oh Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.’”
Dr. Bazian denies that he ever said those words. “I would never use that statement,” Dr. Bazian told O’Reilly.

No, Jonathan Freedland, anti-Zionism is not perfectly fine with us

It is, probably, a sad necessity, to repeat from time to time the old position statements. Not that the positions change too much, but people sometimes do veer from a position to position, tending to forget the last held one. As it usually goes.

This post is inspired by a stumble upon discussion between a staunchly anti-Zionist lady, Noura Erakat*, a vaguely pro-Israeli Jonathan Freedland and other minor characters. The discussion was staged by Al Jazeera. Jonathan Freedland has already appeared on these pages, the other protagonist is more of interest. Ms Erakat is a lawyer, so one should be careful describing her... er... anything, but at least she doesn't hide her anti-Zionism and her desire to see the proverbial Palestine "from the river to the sea", if you understand what it means. If not, check out this short paragraph.

So why do I consider Jonathan Freedland to be vaguely pro-Israeli? If you scroll the recording below to about 9:55, you shall hear a response by Mr Freedland to the proud self-declaration by Ms Erakat as an anti-Zionist:

I think it is absolutely fine, and more than fine, of course it's completely legitimate to hold the position she has...

Fine and legitimate? Maybe from the Guardian offices in London it is. Not from where I bother my keyboard. Because, and apologies for repeating the obvious:

Zionism is the national movement of the Jewish people that supports the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel.

While the mission of Zionism in this definition is by and large completed, the anti-Zionism comes as a simple negation of Zionism and has a quite busy program in mind:

The term is broadly defined in the modern era as the opposition to the ethnonationalist and political movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the establishment of a Jewish state as a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel.

In other, simpler words, Jonathan (are you listening? I guess not) the so called "anti-Zionists", whose legitimacy you so warmly confirm, are these same guys we all used to call "Jew-haters" or "anti-Semites", to be historically authentic. These guys who desire to disperse and/or kill us all here again.

Still fine and legitimate, Jonathan?

While I hate to repeat position statements, from where I am, the so called "anti-Zionism" is the same old murderous and hateful beast, albeit with a new PC name.

So there.



(*) As a sample of Ms Erakat's professional creativity, here is her article:

No, Israel Does Not Have the Right to Self-Defense In International Law Against Occupied Palestinian Territory

It was published in 2014, 9 years(!) after disengagement from Gaza strip, which is meant as "Occupied Palestinian Territory" in that headline. While the headline offers enough information as it is, there are some fine examples of word juggling that show a fine, albeit totally unsuccessful legal mind behind the article.

Vitaly Milonov and boiled Christians - a purely technical correction

Some, even many, people were discombobulated by Vitaly Milonov, a Russian MP who used his deep knowledge of history and genealogy to produce a memorable soundbite.

A pro-Kremlin Russian lawmaker came under fire Monday after saying the ancestors of local Jewish opposition figures in Saint-Petersburg “boiled Christians in cauldrons,” sparking indignation from Russia’s Jewish community.Vitaly Milonov, a Duma deputy known for his anti-gay initiatives, lashed out at the weekend at two local lawmakers leading a protest against handing over St. Isaac’s basilica, a top landmark in Russia’s second largest city, to the Russian Orthodox Church.

“Christians survived despite the fact that the ancestors of Boris Vishnevsky and Maksim Reznik boiled us in cauldrons and fed us to animals,” ultra-conservative Milonov said at a rally Sunday to support the controversial handover.

Well, I have to disappoint the budding historian: he got the boiling point incorrectly. Being of nomadic persuasion, we, the Red Sea pedestrians, have never wanted anything to do with cauldrons and other heavy kitchen implements. Not to mention the scarcity of water in our corner of the woods (figuratively speaking, there is mostly sand and stones where we are).

Our standard MO is catch it, kosher butcher it (which is a separate issue to be addressed) and cook it on an improvised spit, using spears, long swords or stout enough branch if lucky and there is a tree or two nearby. Of course, in case of emergency, tartar style could be used too. But there is a caveat or two to all this:

• First of all, the blood: any amateur Jew-baiter knows the blood is the most important part of the deal. Especially in desert conditions, I hope I don't have to expand on this.
• The game: of course, the preference is for children, as all above mentioned Jew-baiters and their aunt know. And, again, in the field, where a child is not available, a woman would be our second preference, for shaving your game in the desert is not an easy task.
• And the last but not the least: of course, there are some dietary restrictions. Even such a succulent and well-fed specimen as Mr Milonov will be a low priority game for us, due to his uncanny resemblance to a forbidden (if tasty) creature. If you know what I mean. If not:

So there.

P.S. As for feeding some people to the animals: well, see caveat 3. Sometimes there is no other choice, and the protein is valuable in the field.

Addendum: About Vitaly Milonov.

This priceless interview (in two parts, two and a half minutes in total), short as it is, should be a mandatory watching for a better picture of the illustrious gentleman.

A dollop of scandalous info about the gentleman:

On December 16, 2013 Fontanka.ru, a St. Petersburg website, published an article according to which a regional charitable organization "Orthodox World", which was co-foundes by Vitaly Milonov and his wife Eva Liburkina, was paid 9.64 million rubles (around 300 thousand USD at the time) from the city budget for the activities conducted by the charity in 2012. According to the report, these funds have bought 19,280 units of food packages, the distribution of which took place before the parliamentary and presidential elections in Krasnoselsky, Kirovsky and Petrograd districts of the city in the autumn of 2011 and the first half of 2012. However, the organization "Orthodox world" itself , according to the Federal Tax Service in St. Petersburg, has been registered only on June 5, 2012, thus the contract and the invoice were dated retroactively. President of the organization (and Milonov's assistant) Alexey Knyazev said that Milonov actively participates in the work of his organization and helps it.

Well, a politician...

Those who know Russian might enjoy this brief summary of our hero's life and deeds. I've decided not to translate it, due to the prevalence of Russian unparliamentary idioms that don't easily give in to translation attempts. Juicy.

Mike Sivier - the discoverer of Norman Finkelstein

Mike Sivier, a newspaper reporter for the best part of 20 years, according to him, was an unknown entity to me. It so happened that I've stumbled on a few posts by my Facebook friends who pointed to an article by Mike Sivier, titled Nobody bothered to check who created that “anti-Semitic” image Naz Shah retweeted, did they?. For a time the referred article was inaccessible for some reason, which only fired up my curiosity.

The article is available now, and isn't it an eye opener indeed! To remind you, the offending map (see above) was tweeted by Naz Shah, a Bradford West MP and, among other offensive tweets, was the reason for the lady's suspension, among several other recent scandals/suspensions.

So Mike Sivier studied the matter and came up with the following:

The map was posted in Norman Finkelstein Solution for Israel-Palestine Conflict‏, on Monday, August 4, 2014, on his blog [link omitted by me].

Professor Finkelstein is described by that hideously inaccurate Wikipedia as “an American political scientist, activist, professor, and author. His primary fields of research are the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the politics of the Holocaust, an interest motivated by the experiences of his parents who were Jewish Holocaust survivors.”

And here Mike triumphantly concluded, in bold letters for our better comprehension:

That’s right – it was posted by a Jewish gentleman.

To give another boost to our poor comprehension, Mike strengthened the message by the following addition, also in bold:

Not only that; he’s the son of two Jewish people who survived the Shoah.

And now comes the killing point:

It puts a different complexion on this whole issue, doesn’t it?

I shall try to answer this question using Mike's method, which assures full comprehension:

No.

You see, Mike, the map that calls for ethnic cleansing is offensive and racist, no matter who produced it. This is the first and the main point. And if someone else (Ms Shah in our case) publishes it again, it doesn't become less racist or less offensive. Which is the second point. Now to the less important matters.

Wikipedia, with all due respect, frequently misses some points. To start with, the person in question is definitely not a gentleman. As for his Jewishness, whatever genetic traces of it he possessed, all of them were thoroughly wiped out by his hate of the said Jewishness, his leeching on the Holocaust-related matters and his other behavior traits. In short, if you belong to a small group of people who consider Kim Philby and Lord Haw-Haw British, go ahead and consider Fink-elstein Jewish, but don't make a public issue of it, please, to avoid embarrassment. And it might do you good to learn that there are Jewish antisemites, as well as Jewish thieves, Jewish liars and Jewish murderers. As for his parents being Holocaust survivors: the parents don't have to pay for the sins of their son.

Going back for a second to the subject of Jewish antisemites. The article we are discussing was reposted in full by one Gilad Atzmon:

_http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2016/5/1/nobody-bothered-to-check-who-created-that-anti-semitic-image-naz-shah-retweeted-did-they_

Following the logic Mike Sivier applied to the case of Norman Finkelstein, the abbreviated version of Atzmon's CV will look like this: "A famous Jewish saxophone player, IDF paratrooper in the past, gentleman". The Sivier version of Atzmon's CV will certainly leave out some other details, like "Holocaust denier, Jew-hater, Israel-hater" and many others. The mere fact that a thoroughly repulsive character like Atzmon has chosen to repost one's article should lead one to some introspection, methinks...

A general remark: if you take the article discussed here on its own, it might be interpreted as a result of a well-meant attempt to defuse the explosive situation. The clumsy transfer of guilt from Naz Shah to a "Jewish gentleman", while not effective at all to justify the act by Ms Shah, could be explained by naivety of the author, although naivety in a veteran journo is a bit of a rarity. But looking at the other articles by Mike Sivier, where he fights tooth and nail against every single accusation of anti-Semitism aimed at this or another Labour figure, it becomes harder and harder to use the excuse of naivety.

What do you say, Mike?

And this re academic freedom, professor Sucharov

Mira Sucharov is Associate Professor of Political Science and Assistant Dean at Carleton University, in Ottawa, Canada, and a blogger at Haaretz.

It was my first encounter with Ms Sucharov's blogging - this article in Haaretz titled Crying Wolf on Campus anti-Semitism: The Vassar College Talk Was No Blood Libel, and I have to say that, even being somewhat familiar with the subtleties of the modern progressive discourse, I spent the reading time in amazement and disbelief. Political Science is marching forward, leaving us heathens in the dust.

There is much to fisk in the article, but I shall leave it for later, trying to focus on something that seems to me (at the moment) to be a very important point. Which in this case is the famous issue of stifling the anti-Zionist discourse and freedom of speech, so dear to prof Sucharov's. "Academic freedom", as she specifies it. The danger to freedom of speech, academic or not, according to prof Sucharov, comes from an article in Wall Street Journal, titled Majoring in Anti-Semitism at Vassar, which expresses a highly negative opinion of goings on in Vassar in general and of the lecture by an anti-Zionist professor, one Jasbir Puar, in particular. The WSJ article, co-authored by two respected scientists with a good deal of experience in education, riled the progressive community so much that, according to prof Sucharov,

Meanwhile, hundreds of faculty members from across the United States have issued a statement to Vassar’s president asking her to “write a letter to the Wall Street Journal…condemning in no uncertain terms the unjustifiable attack on Vassar and on Professor Puar.”

In one particular example of the condemnation:

Ian S. Lustick, a professor of political science at University of Pennsylvania, told me by email that he signed the statement “to show solidarity against the campaign to restrict the space of politically correct discussion on anything pertaining to Israel and Palestinians.”

So the article in WSJ is restricting the "politically correct" (how absurd is that - you be the judge) discussion and stifling the academic freedom? I have read that article twice and can't, no matter how I tried, find a shadow of an attempt to stifle anything. Derision - yes, criticism - in droves (not that prof Sucharov even tried to respond to it) - but nothing to suggest that the authors propose to forbid or otherwise restrict the disgusting phenomenon.

While I can't compete with a political science or gender studies professors in arcane uses of professional English, there are two English words that the nowadays progressive scientists might re-learn, to their benefit. The first one is "debate":

Debate (Noun): A discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal

Here is an example of debate:



The other word is "stifling". The word is a beloved battle cry of the modern anti-Zionists, trumpeted everywhere from the very same platforms the said anti-Zionists claim to be not allowed to.

Stifling (Noun): Forceful prevention; putting down by power or authority. "the stifling of all dissent"

And here is an example of stifling, practiced far and wide in the institutions of high learning in North America lately, with total lack of resistance (and sometimes even with support) from the progressive teachers:



So, to conclude this part: The WSJ article is a good example of debate. Nothing to do with stifling - of academic or any other freedoms. And, speaking about Vassar - here is more stifling, in all its revolting glory.

The rest of this text is about fisking prof Sucharov's Haaretz blog post. Click on "Read more..." if of interest.

Read more »

Kirill Petrenko: the third Jew of the Berlin music?

The story, of course, is deeply unfair to the Berlin Philharmonic - one of the very few top premier orchestras on the planet. And it is deeply distasteful to this here blogger, who vastly prefers not to deal with anti-Semitism at all, the subject being too murky and the term being overused and underused at the same time. What with its modern replacement helpfully called anti-Zionism and all that... no, people who know me also know that I try to shun the subject.

Be it as it may, here are the basics:

Kirill Petrenko, 43, a Russian-born Jew, was appointed last week to replace Sir Simon Rattle, who is leaving to take over the London Symphony Orchestra, in September 2018. Petrenko is currently the director of the Bavarian State Opera in Munich.

Petrenko won the Berlin job despite only having worked with its musicians on three previous occasions. The orchestra made the announcement June 22 at a news conference at its concert hall in Berlin.

For those who don't study the life of conductors (the musical ones): they tend to move all over the globe in the course of their careers, and there is nothing surprising in the fact that a conductor born in Omsk (look it up on Google Maps) ends up in Berlin. So, geographically speaking, this is just another stage in the life of a musical genius.

Racially speaking, however, the appointment stirred some hitherto invisibly smoldering ashes.

Petrenko stopped talking to the media following commentaries by Northern German Radio, or NDR, and Welt Online which used anti-Semitic tropes, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported. The offending material has been removed.

NDR’s Sabine Lange, writing about Petrenko and a German-born contender for the position, described the latter — Christian Thielemann — as a world-renowned expert in the German sound and Petrenko as a mythical, dwarflike figure from Wagner’s operas, “the tiny gnome, the Jewish caricature.”

The Welt Online commentator said that while Petrenko and Thielemann were otherwise comparable, it was “a relief to many” that Petrenko enjoys good interpersonal relations, “as at least one of the female opera singers at this year’s Bayreuth [Wagner] Festival can attest.”

In response, readers noted the anti-Semitic stereotypes of overly competitive and oversexed Jews, and the articles were edited or removed, the Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten, or German Economic News online, reported.

And more:

If that’s not bad enough, Manuel Brug in Die Welt points out that three* leading conductors in Berlin are now Jews – Barenboim and Ivan Fischer are the others.

While the quotes above look quite damning, they could do with some additional digging. Ms Lange used more or less the following wording: "When Christian Thielemann [a German conductor vying for the post that eventually was given to Petrenko] meets Petrenko at the Wagner's festival in Bayreuth it will be like Wotan meeting the dwarf Alberich, the Jewish caricature". The reference to the dwarf Alberich from Wagner’s opera as a Jewish caricature is quite telling. You see, Wagner himself, while being a rabid anti-Semite, never hinted that Alberich was meant to serve as an image of the much hated Jew. Indeed, out of many eminent critics of Wagner only Theodor Adorno held to this opinion, but this is neither here nor there. What is known, however, that during the Nazi period this comparison was widely espoused. The fact of a modern German culture expert referring to this caricature as something obvious is quite disturbing.

Another, seemingly minor but telling point, is the automatic identification of Kirill Petrenko, as well as Daniel Barenboim and Ivan Fischer as members of the Jewish tribe. The first man is of Russian/Austrian origins, the second of Argentinian extraction and the third a Hungarian - how does the learned music expert Manuel Brug establish Jewishness? For all he (and we all) know, Petrenko might be a Buddhist, Barenboim a Zoroastrian and Fischer a deeply religious Catholic or a practicing Seventh-day Adventist. But no, it was enough for Mr Brug to check the tribal belonging of these people's parents, and voilà: a Jewish invasion in the making! The method of identifying (or uncovering?) a Jew in these three cases smells of some olden times we all would like to put behind us, if not to forget (we wouldn't).

Yes, the articles were removed, but the aftertaste lingers:

Both reports were “bursting with anti-Semitic hatred,” one reader wrote to NDR, adding, “This is now apparently OK in Germany again.”

Is it OK in Germany today? A good question that, but a subject for another post.

Many thanks to G.S. for the tip and even more thanks to Y.V. for generously giving me his precious time.

(*) Poor Mr Brug - at the time of writing this he wasn't aware of the depth of Jewish infestation of German music: a fourth Jew, Vladimir Jurowski will be the new Chief Conductor and Artistic Director of the Berlin Radio Symphony Orchestra (RSB). Oh boy, oh boy... what would have Wagner said about it?

Do you still claim it's because of Gaza?

Check this out (but click to enlarge first):

If you still claim it's all about Gaza - oh well, here you are then - you are either a dupe or something much, much worse.

An angry (and brave) young man

This reflects my own feelings, but I'm not sure that I have his level of courage to post as he did.

Okay, I accept that this (from Stand With Us) is old news (from 9 May), but given what has happened over the last couple of days in the Brussels Jewish Museum and now outside a Paris synagogue, this is pertinent.

So, after the shootings at that Kansa City Jewish Community Centre, this young man (Avery by name), posted the following "The Jews ain't leaving. We're never gonna leave. So they can say what they want about my people. Slander us, picket us, even shoot us in our schools and homes. Because every single time they hurt us, we will only come out stronger." He lives just across the road from where the (we now know antisemitic) shooter was arrested.

He goes on to say, in part, that having heard about the event, "I am by no means an observant Jew. I don't keep most of the laws, especially now that I'm in college. But when I heard the news about the shootings back home, you can bet your ass I ran to my dorm and put on my old kippah. Not as a resolution, nor as something that I've committed to doing everyday. I didn't do it for myself or even God for that matter." So, in that case, why did he do it? The clue, of course, is in the first quote. But just in case we haven't got it, he goes on: "I did it as a response to unadulterated evil."

It's good to live in the same world as this young man, an undergrad at Kansas Uni. Long may he thrive. And remain as brave as he was that day.

By Brian Goldfarb.

So, "Jews brought Holocaust on themselves". What else is new in Moscow?

UPI, followed by Haaretz and Jerusalem Post, published an interesting clip from the Russian TV 24:



The transcript of the short conversation, as it appears on America Blog (by John Aravosis):

PROKHANOV: It is strange that Jewish organizations – European and Russian – support Maidan. They do that? They do not realize that they are, with their own hands, closer to the second Holocaust?

HOST EVELYN ZAKAMSKAYA: They also advanced the first [Holocaust].

PROKHANOV: It’s dreadful, it is astonishing blindness — which, apparently, is repeated, because until 1933 in Europe many liberal organizations were feeding Hitler.

HOST EVELYN ZAKAMSKAYA: Yes.

Save some insignificant details, it is a precise transcript of this part of a longer interview. However, the four sources linked above made one mistake of judgment: they focused on the wrong side of the discussion, the TV news announcer Evelyn (actually Evelyna) Zakamskaya. Her mindless "They also advanced the first [Holocaust]" is no more than a sign of casual parlor antisemitism of a stupid glitterati, trying to be attuned to her important guest.

Her guest, Alexandr Prokhanov, however, is a totally different kettle of fish. He is a member of the secretariat of the Writers Union of the Russian Federation and the editor-in-chief of the ultra-nationalist newspaper "Завтра" (Zavtra - Tomorrow). He is a man that, especially in these days of nationalist renaissance, Crimea "reunification" and possible additional land grabs from Ukraine and other neighbors, is busily feeding and leading the murky wave of nationalist intoxication.

He is also a diploma-ed raving anti-Semite, and I don't dispense that characteristic lightly. I had the doubtful pleasure to report on Mr Prokhanov twice: once on his raving ultra-nationalist elegy to Stalin and once on his amazingly stupid wet dreams in Gaza. His Wiki entry and these two posts will tell you all you need to know about this character. Keep in mind, though, that he carries a significant weight in Russia these days.

Of course, his reference to second Holocaust could be taken in two ways: a threat (continue to support Ukrainians and see where it gets you) or a (totally false in his case) expression of care (these Ukrainians will turn on you in response for your support).

Taken into account that just recently Putin used the Ukrainian antisemitism (real, by the way) as one of the straws he is grasping in his unwinnable struggle to explain the Crimea land grab, the Jews of Ukraine are facing a stark choice indeed.

The Donetsk directive: a hoax that reverberates

This leaflet, distributed to the Jews of Ukrainian city of Donetsk* by people alleged to be Russian separatists and requesting that Donetsk Jews register with some ill-defined pro-Russian local authority, has all the telltale signs of a crude provocation. On the face of it, this is a fake intended to present the pro-Russian forces in Donetsk as a dark antisemitic power with the worst intentions.

It orders all Jews aged over 16 years old to register before the government building, which has been occupied by pro-Russian insurgents in defiance of Kiev rule.

Jews would also have to pay a registration fee of $50 (£30) before 3 May and list all real estate and vehicles owned.

The registration and the fee are due because the Jewish leaders "supported the nationalist junta of [Stepan] Bandera in Kiev" and are hostile "to Orthodox Donetsk republic and its citizens.

"In case of failure to register, the perpetrators will be stripped of their citizenship and deported forcibly outside the country with confiscation of property."

To the people with even a smidgen of knowledge of Jewish history this leaflet can't fail to remind a leaflet distributed in 1942 by occupying German army in Kiev, ordering the Jews to present themselves to "authorities" with all their valuables...

Of course, the knowledge that, according to the reports, the leaflet was distributed by "three unidentified men wearing balaclavas and carrying the flag of the Russian Federation", strengthens the suggestion that this act was an intentional (and crude) provocation by the Ukrainian side of the conflict, aimed to paint the Russian separatists in the dirtiest colors.

And of course, the bloody history of the region's political upheavals frequently included Jews as bystander victims, where all sides of almost every conflict felt free to slaughter as many as their mood dictated. From Bohdan Khmelnytsky and up.

The only question is: was that specific provocation a fruit of Ukrainian inventiveness or, taking another step into conspiracy twilight, an even more complicated maneuver by the Moscow tacticians of the dirty tricks? But one can play this game forever, without getting to a firm conclusion.

Meanwhile the Jews of Donetsk will not sleep well...

(*) Donetsk, a Ukraine province with 4.3 million people - 10 percent of Ukraine's population - and 17,000 Jews, is home to much of the country's heavy industry, and is thus the biggest prize of the eastern regions where pro-Russian separatists have captured government buildings in the past week.

PressTV, Gordon Duff and Quenelle

You learn as you live, they say. Some things, like that neo-Nazi Quenelle salute, you don't want to learn at all, probably. But once you had learned it, it doesn't take an effort to learn what Gordon Duff, a "Marine Vietnam veteran", has to say on the subject. To start with, a general definition of the salute:

The Quenelle is the antithesis of Zionism. It is international, inclusive, non-sectarian, steeped in not just humor but a dedication to social justice that turns away from violence.

And now two (adjacent in the original text) paragraphs for you to compare. First this bit of Duff irony:

You see, Jews are victimized. Few non-Jews understand and fewer Jews each day “get it.” Jews are the fodder of “hatred mythology,” an industry of manufactured mythology that is at the root of over 60 years of conflicts and deaths that now number into the millions.

And this passage of a Duff rage:

Whatever is said, there would be no Syrian war without Zionism, no “war on terror,” no Suez crisis, no Chechnian bombings in Russia. We can go further; there would be no Tea Party of warmongers and extremists in the US without the Zionist money behind them, no flood of narcotics into the world’s schools and kindergartens and, most of all, no world economic and monetary crises.

I was quite startled by the depth of knowledge and the level of details Duff displays. Even we, the Elders, don't have that complete a picture of our omnipotence, drugs to kindergartens included. Now you know all about “hatred mythology”, I guess. And, since you have learned about Duff irony, Duff humor and Duff passion, you know almost enough about Duff too.

Still, you can learn more about the critter, it's entertaining. Here it comes, from an old post:

Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran [100% disabled, according to sources, and I am sure it's from the neck up], and Senior Editor at Veterans Today [Senior Editor of a blog - wow!]. His career has included extensive experience in international banking [opened an offshore account, no doubt to keep his Mossad moneys safe] along with such diverse areas as consulting on counter insurgency [slept with a hippi once], defense technologies [built a knuckle duster in his garage] or acting as diplomatic officer of UN humanitarian groups [visited Thailand on a pedo trip]. Gordon Duff's articles are published around the world and translated into a number of languages [of which Arabic translations are prevalent, but who cares?]. He is regularly on TV and radio, a popular and sometimes controversial guest [a nice distraction when a lunatic is needed].

Yeah, and he is also so dim that he is proudly displaying on his site a quote and a link to Haaretz article that states:

It was only a matter of time before conspiracy theorists came out of the woodwork to suggest that Israel is behind the publication of the WikiLeaks trove...

Cool...

Money doesn't smell, right, Mr Weiss?

In preparation of this post, I have learned that the sentence "Money doesn't smell" was coined by Romans, as in "Pecunia non olet", which is the only useful tidbit from the whole story. Otherwise:

They say that there is a rich man with interesting progressive ideas (himself being kind of conservative):

The conservative Silicon Valley millionaire behind a new campaign to raise the minimum wage in California has received approving coverage from left-leaning media outlets despite his long history of funding anti-Israel activism and inflammatory racial research.

Unz’s minimum wage campaign has led to favorable coverage in the New York Times and ABC News and has garnered praise from some on the left, including the Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky.

Peculiar, ain't it? But it is only an appetizer, because:

Unz has also contributed a combined $60,000 in 2010 and 2011 to Mondoweiss, an anti-Zionist blog, and awarded a $108,000 grant to Paul Craig Roberts, a former syndicated columnist accused of promoting anti-Semitism by the ADL.

Mondoweiss is a popular blog, founded and managed "from a progressive Jewish perspective" by a peculiar life form known as Philip Weiss. There are more recipients of Mr Unz's largess you can find in the article, but the most significant one for the purpose is If Americans Knew:

He contributed $10,000 in 2011 to If Americans Knew, an anti-Zionist group that advocates against U.S. aid to Israel...

The author of the article is doing a great favor to If Americans Knew (no links to that place, you can easily look it up), calling it simply anti-Zionist. It is led by one Alison Weir, an obsessed Jew-hater, whose likes are few and whose poisonous teachings and poisonous lies would be welcome (actually are welcome) in any neo-Nazi publication.

So, yes, Mr Weiss: Pecunia non olet indeed. Just don't inhale.

Hat tip: Adam Holland.

Apparently antisemitism doesn’t exist in Europe anymore

A somewhat (but not exceedingly) surprising turn of events, amply described by Liberty Spirit.