Wednesday, April 26, 2017

The Remarkable Pussitued of the Jewish Left

Michael Lumish

Abbie Hoffman
I cannot even begin to tell you how disgusted I am at the cowardice and stupidity of the Jewish left.

This feeling is greatly exacerbated by the fact that I come from that very movement.

The children and grandchildren of communist and socialist Jewish Hellraisers - willing to face billy-clubs in the streets of New York throughout the first two-thirds of the twentieth-century - are absolutely terrified that patriarchal, Islamic Supremacists will call them bad names on their laptops.

It's pathetic.

And they are also terrified of - and therefore deferential toward - Black Lives Matter, which is basically the current iteration of the Panthers.

The truth is that the diaspora Jewish Left is "chickenshit"... as Obama people might put it.

From the soft luxury of the American upper-middle-class they spit contempt at Jews who are tired of kissing anti-Zionist ass.

The Jewish left is filled with privileged cowards wondering what the advance of progressive-left anti-Zionism means to their Social Network.

If you want to see a true split within the diaspora Jewish community, keep insisting that Jews bow our heads before our enemies.

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Fun with antisemitic anti-Zionists

Michael Lumish

I suppose this is rather stupid, but I find "trolling" antisemitic Facebook pages to be kind-of a kick.

There is a page called "Israel is a War Criminal" that I recently became aware of and - as one would expect - they specialize in separating out Jewish people in Israel, if not pro-Israel Jews, more generally, as a unique evil.

Therefore this morning I dropped in briefly to say hello with this little message:

Good morning anti-Zionists! How are you guys today? One of the things that give me a great deal of satisfaction is the knowledge that the Jewish people, after 2,000 years of diaspora have reconstituted our ancient homeland and reclaimed Jerusalem, the ancient capital of the Jewish people. That in itself is a very beautiful thing, I can hardly even tell you. But, y’know, when the Jews who arrived in the Land of Israel from the concentration camps nobody thought that they could actually beat the combined Arab armies. But nobody quite realized that the combined Arab armies were so feminine. 

Former dhimmis, along with Jewish women and half-starved Holocaust survivors actually beat the very cream of the Arab fighting forces in 1948 to re-establish Jewish sovereignty on historically Jewish land. And then to see this small struggling country not only survive but thrive just fills my heart with joy and gladness for the redemption of the Jewish people. Now, of course, Israel is a world leader in a variety of areas including technical and medical sciences, water reclamation, agriculture, not to mention arts and letters. Some of the top universities in the world are in that country. It’s really very gratifying.

Peace to you, please, my friends.

So far responses include these:



And this:
Ade Dino Sutrisno

Life is short. But but the hellfire is for eternity. Peace be upon the prophets and their fervent followers. The killer of the prophets may enjoy this world as much as they can. Prosper and oppress as much as they want. The earth the only paradise they will ever know. For a day will come for them when they will stare in horror.
But, ya know, when I was twelve I used to turn over rocks, too.

Monday, April 24, 2017

France's Dilemma

Doodad

Do they elect a far-right, possible bigot and antisemite who will do a lot to solve the immigration/terrorist problems France is experiencing or will they elect the centrist who won't? Macron supports an open door immigration policy and has expressed confidence in France's ability to absorb more immigrants and welcomes their arrival into Europe, asserting that the influx will have a positive economic impact. His proposal to provide each young adult a "Culture Pass" of 500 which may encourage young people to discover the culture of France and deter terrorism suggests he is somewhat of an idiot but what the heck; this is France after all and if they were that smart they wouldn't have the almost daily terrorism problems they now experience. It's so frequent, one would almost think they were occupying Palestine or something.

I suspect they will elect Macron and live with the consequences. I don't really care because I don't like Le Pen either and I have never forgot France's awful collusion during the Holocaust.


Tuesday, April 18, 2017

UC Berkeley Islamophobia Conference This Weekend

Michael Lumish

I will be writing on the 8th Annual UC Berkeley Islamophobia Conference coming up this weekend for Campus Watch under the auspices of Daniel Pipes' Middle East Forum.

The foremost questions that I have, vis-a-vis Islam and the West, are concerned with the compatibility of Sharia with Enlightenment liberalism.

That is, I fail to understand how a juridical-political system of patriarchal Islamic supremacism can possibly be consistent with the Constitution of the United States or fundamental notions of universal human rights as found, for example, within western feminism.

I also called the cops and the mayor's office in that town because they seem to have lost the plot.

I doubt that I will run into trouble because American Islamism is not the same as progressive-left fascism, but just look at this mess:

Sunday, April 16, 2017

UCLA’s Gelvin Buries Obama’s Middle East Policy Failures

Michael Lumish

{Also published by Campus Watch , the Daily Caller, and Jews Down Under.}

"How will history judge Barack Obama in terms of his policies and actions toward the Middle East?" asked UCLA Professor of Middle Eastern History James Gelvin at UC Berkeley.

A crowd of around 100 students and faculty, some in Muslim attire, crammed into a small conference room in the Center for Middle Eastern Studies in Stephens Hall to hear Gelvin’s lecture. The venue was tight and some students squatted just outside the door near a cameraman filming the lecture for online distribution. He spoke with a map of the Middle East projected onto a wall behind him and near a series of posters reading in Arabic and English, “In Accordance with Sharia Law” and “Have a bit of commitment – Inshallah.”

Gelvin’s answer to his opening question—that Obama’s policies were in line with his predecessors’ during the Cold War—strained credulity and mirrored the Middle East studies establishment’s strategy to defend Obama’s record regardless of the chaos it sparked.

The Trump administration’s airstrikes against a Syrian military airfield following a chemical attack in the six-year civil war that has left hundreds of thousands of Syrians dead and millions displaced is only the most recent evidence of this chaos. Iran’s march toward the production of nuclear weaponry encourages a regional nuclear arms race, while the rise of ISIS and the subsequent slaughter of the Yazidis, Middle Eastern Christians, and thousands of Muslims further reveals Obama’s true legacy.

Gelvin downplayed these shortcomings and said that Obama sought a return to a non-interventionist foreign policy, which he claimed was typical of U.S. behavior in the Middle East during the Cold War.

He began by quoting an unnamed Obama critic who wrote that “the abandonment by the world’s leading power of its leadership responsibilities” led to the disaster that is the Middle East today. Gelvin attacked what he called a consensus among political analysts that Obama sidestepped vital issues, such as Syria, lacked requisite foreign policy experience, and practiced an “overabundance of caution,” thereby projecting American weakness and lack of resolve.

Calling this view false, Gelvin argued that during the Cold War America’s primary foreign policy goals in the Middle East included blocking Soviet intervention, maintaining access to fossil fuels for Western markets, promoting stable pro-Western powers (whether democratic or otherwise), and preserving the independence of the Jewish State of Israel.

The fundamental difference between Bush II and Bill Clinton, according to Gelvin, is that Clinton, as a liberal internationalist, believed the West had the right of intervention so long as it could be justified as representing the will of United Nations. Bush and the so-called “Neo-conservatives” felt less constrained—so much so, in fact, that Gelvin referred to “Neo-conservatism” as the “evil twin” of liberal internationalism, but without the constraints of international law.

Gelvin’s apologia for Obama was unconvincing. Was U.S. policy during the Cold War even remotely “non-interventionist”? Given the U.S.-backed toppling of Iranian Prime Minister Muhammad Mossadeq in 1953, the Suez Crisis of 1956, the direct U.S. intervention in Lebanon in 1958 and again in 1982, and the placing of medium-range ballistic missiles in Turkey prior to the Cuban Missile Crisis, among many other actions, the answer is “no.”

Moreover, it is highly questionable to term Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East “non-interventionist.”

During the falsely named “Arab Spring” in 2011, Obama either enacted or abetted the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, who was killed after U.S.-initiated regime change, and Egypt’s military dictator, Hosni Mubarak, who was removed from power and thrown into prison thanks in part to Obama’s pro-Muslim Brotherhood policies. This is hardly non-interventionist.

Moreover, Obama’s acolytes railed at Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech before Congress opposing the Iranian nuclear deal, and the Obama administration inserted itself directly into the last Israeli election with the intention of ousting Netanyahu from power.

Where Obama was “non-interventionist,” it was to uphold his deal with Iran. Thus, he ignored the pleas of Iranians in the 2009 “green revolution” for support against the regime and chose not to enforce his 2013 “red line” threat against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons.   

Whether Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East was driven by a naïve desire to retreat from traditional U.S. responsibilities around the world or by a high-minded, carefully-vetted analysis with the Cold War as a model, the Middle East is a wreck and Obama eroded the trust of U.S. partners in the region, including Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

Historians of the Middle East will wrangle over Obama’s legacy in that region for years to come and if Gelvin’s analysis is any indication, the tendency to downplay the former president’s failures will persist. As information become available and events unfold that contradict the official narrative, they may find apologetics increasingly difficult.