09 March 2012

The Council Has Spoken!

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

08 March 2012

The International Women's Day Conspiracy

This was posted 5 years ago, still relevant and somewhat interesting. 
 
Yesterday, on the 8th of March, the feminist-minded part of humanity joyfully celebrated the International Women’s Day. The holiday was also solemnly celebrated in Russia – hardly the most pro-feminist country in the world. However, Mother Russia has been "blessed" with a communist baggage that, to this day, spurs it to submerge itself in merry-making to mark the festive occasion.

Traditionally, the holiday was vehemently opposed by Russian Orthodox men and women, who were deeply suspicious of the decidedly communist character of the occasion and the message it was sending to womankind, and stingy men, who were unwilling to “waste” their hard-earned money on women.

Now there is another compelling reason not to celebrate the holiday: Andrei Kuraev, a well-known mouthpiece of the Russian Orthodox Church, has suggested in no uncertain terms that the Women’s Day was inspired by Purim, a Jewish holiday, and is part of the cunning Jewish conspiracy to force gentiles to celebrate the Jewish holiday. Here is what the honorable priest writes in his masterly expose:
"Что-то личное ассоциируется у творцов этого праздника с этой датой… Раз мотивы были личными – значит надо присмотреться к личностям. Роднили этих корифеев и героев не только принадлежность к партии революции и преданность идеям Интернационала. Еще у них было этническое родство… Клара Цеткин – еврейка. И для нее вполне естественны ассоциации с историей ее родного народа… Понимаю, что тут не уйти от вопроса – а с чего я взял, что Клара Цеткин помнила Пурим? Ведь она, скорее всего, не была практикующей иудейкой. Но дело совсем не в том, ходила ли Клара Цеткин в синагогу в пору своей революционной деятельности. Дело в том, что в ее памяти не могли не остаться детские воспоминания об этом празднике. Для Клары Цеткин Пурим не был просто книжным воспоминанием. Это то, что с детства входит в сознание иудея. А потому даже для того еврея, который порвал связь со своей национальной религиозной традицией, детское воспоминание о Пуриме очень живо. Так безосновательно ли предположение, что в сознании еврейских лидеров Интернационала женское революционное движение ассоциировалось с именем Эсфири, а 8 марта было избрано ими в силу привычки праздновать в эти дни семейный праздник Пурим?"
The only thing readers who don’t know the Russian language need to learn from the above paragraph is that Clara Zetkin, the woman who started up the whole shebang, was allegedly impelled to organize the occasion by her fond childhood memories of going to synagogue and celebrating Purim.

But you know what? Clara Zetkin was a not Jew. She was a German to the core, born into a family of a deeply religious Christian teacher. Not a Jew. Not a Jew. NOT A JEW.

You should have seen Kuraev’s jaw drop when his fatal mistake was elegantly pointed out. I love to see anti-Semites get lost in the tangled web of their absurd, hate-filled arguments.

07 March 2012

UNESCO vote today will keep Syria on human rights committee


It figures.

Commentless

Too sublime for comments:

From here.

06 March 2012

On one state where there are two

This rather cryptic title was inspired by an opinion piece in the Washington Post, in which Ahmed Noor argues for a one state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I won't go into details, as Judeopundit does a wonderful job here.

There are two sentences in Noor's piece, however, that bother me even more than his "jewish privilege" cliche (so trendy in antisemitic circles):

Palestine and Israel are two parts of the same country — something those who have not been to the region may find hard to imagine. The area of Mandate Palestine — that’s Israel, the West Bank and Gaza — is about the size of New Jersey.
 Too many mistakes in just two sentences - or are those really mistakes?

The area of Mandate Palestine was never a single country forcefully divided, as the first sentence suggests.

The second sentence...oh, here's something to sink my sharp teeth in. Well, let's begin by understanding what the area of Mandate Palestine really was - before 1922, when the british cut the whole territory east of Jordan river off to make room for future Jordan. This is not as easy as it sounds. I had to google long and hard before I could find some accurate maps of the area (most look like the "Israel, West Bank and Gaza" theory), and surprisingly, despite my stubborn belief that hard work doesn't really pay off, I actually managed to find some. Here's such a map, of Mandate Palestine between 1920-1922:



Not quite the size of New Jersey, eh? So, where does this "Mandate Palestine — that’s Israel, the West Bank and Gaza" come from?

Of course, that part of Palestine east of the Jordan river is now in Jordan, just as that part of Palestine west of the Jordan river is now Israel, West Bank and Gaza. However, that Palestine east of said river seems to have mysteriously vanished from the collective memory of palestinians and their supporters. How is that possible that the jordanian Palestine ceased to be Palestine back in 1922, while the israeli territory is still very much Palestine, after more than 60 years? What's sauce for the hashemite goose...is not sauce for the jewish gander, apparently.

Now all that's left for Ahmed Noor to do is fathom why hashemite privileges trump jewish privileges in this troubled area.

The three "no" of Rabbi Michael Knopf

Ha'aretz (who else but?) published an amazing essay titled Would God want Israel to attack Iran? penned by Michael Knopf, Assistant Rabbi of Har Zion Temple in Penn Valley, Pennsylvania.

Being an atheist, I could hardly argue theology, especially of this high level of complexity with the learned Rabbi. Frankly, I don't even know whether Israel itself is that eager to attack Iran. What I do remember from theology is that the ways of God are inscrutable, which makes the whole essay rather pointless to start with. Who knows, maybe exactly at this same moment (which passed when I was correcting a typo in the word "same") God was guiding the hand of a ground crew member that was fixing in place one of these humongous bunker busters on an F16 (or F15 or Piper, for all I know).

But, as I said, I wouldn't argue theology - or fitting various fashion accessories to a warplane, which is another closed book for me. What drew my attention was the following quote from the Rabbi's essay (reposted here with the links, which are important for the purpose of this post):

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, does Iran meet the Talmud’s standard for preemptive killing? Iran is clearly developing nuclear technology, but do we know Iran is planning to build a weapon? No, we do not. And even if we knew that Iran plans to build a nuke, do we know it plans to use it? No. And even if we knew that Iran planned a nuclear attack, do we know its intention is to kill Jews or destroy Israel? No. And even if we knew that Iran planned to attack Israel, do we know that it is imminent? No; most experts believe Iran is still years away from building a weapon. The Talmud implies that we may not “rise up early to kill first” unless those standards are met.
Now, even assuming that God, whose ways, as you must remember by now, are inscrutable, is following* the Talmudic dictum "If one comes to kill you, rise up early to kill him [first]" to the letter, after reading the above quote the following questions must be inevitable:

Would God base his decision and the act that follows that decision on:
  1. A long, jumbled and mumbled article from New York Times that uses available (public) information very selectively to make its point?
  2. A comical piece from Washington Post that masticates again (time # 1025) Juan Cole's "expertise" in Farsi language?
  3. A totally irrelevant (why it was linked at all is a mystery) and obsolete report on US nuclear arsenal? Check the link again if you think I am barmy. Somebody is, apparently...
With all due respect to theological prowess of our Rabbi, I don't see any alternative to the following answers:
  1. No.
  2. No.
  3. No.
All three, of course, qualified (see the inscrutability issue).

Too bad.

(*) This is one tall assumption, keeping in mind Gods' inscrutability. Why would He follow any dictum, even his own as expressed in Talmud?

Ron Paul Dossier

Ron Paul & Don Black, 2007

1. During the Presidential campaign of 2008, Ron Paul was funded by the leader of Stormfront Mr Don Black. Don is also the former leader of KKK. Stormfront officially approved Ron Paul, stating:
Whatever organization you belong to, remember first and foremost that you're a white nationalist, then put aside your differences with one another and work together. Work together to strive to get someone in the Oval Office who agrees with much of what we want for our future. Look at the man, look at the issues, look at our future. Vote for Ron Paul, 2008.

Ron Paul accepted funding from Stormfront. This is not surprising - his publication contains identical views. Although Dr Paul claims that he is not a racist, he accepts neo-nazi donations and refuses to condemn them.

2. As any self-respecting anti-semite, Ron Paul loves to compare Jews and Nazis. According to him Gaza is a concentration camp. Poor Hamas makes only harmless "homemade bombs". How sweet! By the way, this interview was given to islamonazi propaganda outlet "Press TV". Youtube contains multiple other interviews with Ron Paul, where the congressman again compares Gaza to a "concentration camp", claims that Israel "starves Palestinians" (which is a barefaced lie) and promotes Hamas as being "democratic".

3. Here Ron Paul blames Israel for Islamic hatred of the US.

4. Ron Paul likes to repeat that Americans deserved Muslim terrorism.

5. An excellent summary of Ron Paul's anti-semitism and racism is provided by the Republican Security Committee.

6. Jeffrey Lord, a well-known Republican, explains why he believes Ron Paul to be anti-semitic... Paul recommended books by well-known anti-semites from time past.

7. Another good dossier on Paul's racism can be found here.

8. Ron Paul accepts money from RT TV - Russian spy and propaganda operation overseas. Unsurprisingly, RT TV is campaigning for Ron Paul along with Nazis and Islamofascists.

05 March 2012

Mark Zuckerberg - a Mossad agent?

This smashing discovery belongs to some Iranian folks.



Goes a long way to show how much they understand in the workings of the Elders. Like this statement about Zuckerberg :

According to a report on the website brainz.org, which belongs to the American government, he is originally a Jew and his name appears on a list of 50 people who deny the existence of God.
To start with, Mossad, as we have already explained, is a first training stage, call it an incubator, from which the Elders pluck the most promising fellow from time to time to become a junior Elder.

Of course, there is no arguing with the fact that "he is originally a Jew". What do you expect from Mossad?  Sure, originally he was Jewish, but now, being elevated to a position of the Elder, he is much more...

As for Facebook being a Zionist tool for recruitment of spies: take a look at the dark blue color of the status bar on the top of the Facebook list. Watch this bar, if possible without blinking, for about 30 seconds. Have you noticed a slight shimmering of that bar? If yes, it means that you are immune to the subliminal recruitment via Facebook. If not, you are already a Zionist agent. Congratulations. Your first mission will be conveyed to you via the same bar.

04 March 2012

Aakash Dalal and Ron Paul


You may remember that Jews of New Jersey have been terrorized over several months by the fire-bombings of synagogues. Thankfully the perpetrators have been arrested.

It turns out that one of them is a former student of Rutgers university, who now lives in Canada. More to the point, he is a member of "Young Americans for Liberty".

It took me all of the 5 minutes and a couple of searches and... guess who was giving his usual pleasant smile from Mr Dalal's Facebook page?


One has to ask whether there is still a Jew-hater in North America, who hasn't had the pleasure of hugging the honourable candidate.

On Obama and Israel…Again

While I'm on the subject of Israel (and when am I not on the subject of Israel?), here's something from JTA. The headline says it all: Obama says a nuclear Iran is not tolerable. It's a one-page report of a long interview the President gave to Jeffrey Goldberg of Atlantic Magazine (and there's a link in this article to the Goldberg one).

By Brian Goldfarb.

Remark by the editor: this is not to say I disagree with the above, just to mention (again) that the day I'll believe what a politician says is yet to come. And that there is an equally strong opinion to the contrary of what the POTUS says and what Jeffrey G. believes.

We shall see.

03 March 2012

Technicalities: link list

To the (undoubtedly happy) bloggers used to being listed in the Simply Jews link list: due to a problem with Google's Blogger "My Link List" widget and in view of total apathy and lack of response from Google's support center I had to recover the link list manually, with possible loss of some previously existing links.

Since all of you are dear to us here at Simply Jews equally*, please, instead of going into a snit and/or considering to curb your blogging career immediately, notify me in the comments or via simplyjews at gmail dot com about the missing link. I shall do my best to restore the link asap.

(*) Although sometimes we disagree with what you say so strongly it takes all of our considerable willpower to refrain from ripping out... oh well.

Jenny Tonge Goes at last

It's been a long time coming, but it finally happened: the Liberal-Democrat Peer has resigned the whip. As far back as September 2008, she was making unacceptable comments about Jews and Israel: see this from Engage, quoting from even earlier nasty comments. The latest comments come from a meeting on 23 February at Middlesex University. The ever-brave Richard Millett filmed both her contribution and that of Ken O'Keefe, the latter comparing Jews to Nazis (yes, you did read that right, and at a British University).

You can find a short report from The Jewish Chronicle here.

This says it all. While Millett thinks the JC article is a bit heavy on the "neo-con", right wing angle, he 's pleased at the pick-up on his reporting of the meeting and of the outcome. Here is his response to the JC article and to the pressure from others. The two articles below this one at his blog contain all the actual reportage and the videos he took of the meeting.

They make for fascinating, if ugly, viewing.

More on the baroness by Nick Cohen. It's long and detailed and obviously doesn't cover the current disgrace of the Baroness, although I'm sure he will, very soon.

By Brian Goldfarb.

Yes, but did he?

A strange happenstance: two articles that tell a different story each, with the main point being left out. The first one is about a dog:

A dog running into traffic on a busy New Mexico freeway caused a chain reaction that led to a fiery crash involving a semi full of frozen meat that shut down part of the road and backed up traffic for nearly four hours, authorities said.
Yes, the wily dog certainly knew when to run into the traffic. But did it get the meat after all?

The second article is about the (currently) #1 British politician and an extremely tenuous connection someone discovered between said politician and a scandal ridden publication:
Mr Cameron also finally admitted, after three days of speculation, that he had ridden the retired police mount, called Raisa, when it was looked after by Mrs Brooks between 2008 and 2010.

He apologised for allowing a "confusing picture" to emerge about his personal connection to the horse, which he had rode before the election with Mrs Brooks’ husband Charlie, a friend from their Eton school days.
Yes, the picture is clear. But did Cameron use Raisa's manure to fertilize his roses?

Questions, questions...

The Snowe has melted away, but who will take her place?

Andrew Ian Dodge, who has left the Republican Party, disgusted by its Maine leaders' behavior, tells some of it.

02 March 2012

The Council Has Spoken!

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners