Versus the lede sentences three days ago in the Herald Tribune – which is the New York Times – by their correspondent Robert F. Worth writing about the discussions in Washington after that incident about continuing to send arms and ammunition to Lebanon when this is how the Lebanese are behaving. “Earlier this month, Israeli soldiers were pruning a tree on their country’s northern border when a firefight broke out with Lebanese soldiers across the fence, leaving one Israeli and four Lebanese dead. The skirmish seems to have been accidental…” and so on and so forth.

Give me a break. It was immediately clear what had happened. No firefight just “broke out,” and everything was the opposite of accidental. Some hotshot Hezbollahi in the Lebanese Army invited cameramen ahead of time to come down from Beirut to watch as some sniper-assassin drew a bead of that Jew and murdered him.

This is so typical of the New York Times and the Enlightened for whom there are different narratives and who is to say what the truth is?

But when the Jews assert their right to have their own, officially Jewish state, as a nation and a religion, the Enlightened start smirking and sneering at those racist Jews who don’t want to share Palestine with the Ancient Palestinians. Wasn’t Zionism uniquely singled out in the council of nations in 1975 as the only nationalist movement on Planet Earth that was a “form of racism”?

When the Arabs and Muslims assert their national identities as Arabs and Muslims, that’s okay. But among the Enlightened these very days their deep-thinkers of the Left continue to toy with the idea that if the Two-State Solution doesn’t come about, then we will have a One-State Solution in which Israel ceases to exist as exclusively a Jewish state, as Saudi Arabia is exclusively Arab-Muslim. It will become a bi-national state in which both ancient nations can live in perfect harmony and equality, and never mind that for 14 centuries they never did.

So I wish these Israelis would stop calling these Arabs, these Muslims, “Palestinians.” I mean, how did the IDF Spokesman know for sure that they were “Palestinians”? Arabs have been known to travel from their home countries to others in the world to kill people. Volunteers like Osama bin Ladin went to Afghanistan in the 1980s to resist the atheist Russian invaders. For years, Arabs wanting to kill Americans and other Allied soldiers have gone to Syria then crossed over into Iraq. They also have infiltrated via the border between Saudi Arabia and Iraq, which traffic the Saudis did not care for and thus built a long security barrier about which the Enlightened says not one word of protest.

I think it is historically a grievous error on Israel’s part since 9-11 for Israel not to re-brand our neighbors here as Muslims, fanatical Muslims, the same enflamed rag heads who brought down the World Trade Center; the same homicidal maniacs who blew up trains in London and Madrid slaughtering hundreds of innocent people.

I await the day Israelis stop calling these people “Palestinians” and start calling them as their fathers in Zionism called them: Arabs. Herzl, Weizmann, Jabotinsky, across the spectrum they called the Arabs Arabs…

So, not surprisingly on Tuesday when Bibi met Barack, the latter came out of the meeting pleased to tell the press that he was persuaded that Israel is, under Prime Minister Netanyahu’s leadership, ready to “take risks for peace.”

That’s an expression of lengthy pedigree; it has been in the lexicon of the peace processors for years. They believe that one necessary ingredient of successful peace processing is Israel’s readiness to “take risks for peace” – which is code for “retreat and weakening itself by handing over strategically important terrain to the enemy in the belief this will please him and slake his thirst for what Israel possesses. Israel must take a risk for peace by endangering itself even more than it is endangered now.”

And why? To placate, to satisfy, to soothe the savage breast of the Ishmaelites who feel aggrieved because Israel stole Palestine from them. If Israel wants peace, it must compensate the victims of its national movement.

Hence, even more “confidence-building gestures” to be made by Israel. Notice, the Ancient Palestinians are never asked to make their own confidence-building measures, like reducing the quantity of antisemitic bilge on their PA TV station.

Nothing. Never. Goornisht. Only Israel must make confidence-building measures a/k/a baksheesh, tribute. The Ancient Ones never, the aggrieved party in this relationship.

One wishes for a prime minister who when asked by some obnoxious, ignorant journalist like a Thomas Friedman if Israel is prepared to take risks for peace, answers candidly: “What, are you crazy? Do you think we are crazy? We are surrounded on the three sides, 5 and a half million of us, by 300 million barbaric Arabs and Muslims whose core identity, Islam, is a nasty piece of antisemitic nonsense in a league with Mein Kampf or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

“We Jews too, if not ahistorical Israelis, have a history with these Muslims going back 14 centuries, and it’s not a pretty story. And in our own time as well, these cruel savages have bombed us hundreds of times with their suicide maniacs, homicidal Muslim maniacs for whom murdering Jews is the ultimate in piety, more important than life itself. Exploding yourself in the middle of a crowd of unsuspecting Jewish people in an otherwise peaceful civilian setting is worth it – if you take the lives of as many al-Yahud as you can with you.

“That’s who the enemy is, No. 1. No.2: We don’t take risks because we live on the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea on a strip of land 50 miles/80 kilometers across, that’s it.

“Take risks for peace”? The last person in Israel who should be ready to take risks for peace is the prime minister. His first duty is to protect his people. A parent sends his child to school on a school bus and expects the driver to take no chances when on the road with his charges. He must take no risks. And likewise the prime minister of Israel is charged with the safety of his people surrounded by all these brutes.

“No sir,” I would tell Prince Obama Israel will take no risks for peace whatsoever. Let the other side take risks for peace. We took a big risk in 1994 when we handed over a significant amount of land to the Arabs in Yesha and what we got in return was a series of diabolical bombings that took the lives of almost 2,000 Jews and wounded even more physically, and even more emotionally: the surviving family and friends of the dead, the crippled and the mutilated.

I am sick of these peace processors and their process which is all about kowtowing to these barbarians…

I mean, down in the imitation goy university in Beersheva, named for David ben-Gurion, a professor of bioethics was just fired because he told his students that homosexuality was flawed behavior and could be restrained. As he restrains himself from fornication with women he finds attractive because he is married; so this behavior likewise can be contained.

He also said same sex couples raising a child deprive that child of a normal life.

This offended a sodomite in the class who got him fired. And although YNET.com did not report if the professor believes in the G-d of Israel, it did report that he lives in Kiryat Arba, which of course is in “Occupied Palestine.”

Maybe it’s just me, but I think society, Western society has gone crazy in the matter of sodomy. Just last Monday, the U.S Supreme Court said a university can deny recognition of a Christian student group because it will not admit people who sodomize one another (and other non-Christians), for surely it is as anti-Christian a behavior as it is antiJewish.

In a five-to-four decision in Washington, the U.S. Supreme Court sided against that Christian group because of its rejection of sodomites as members in their group.

I think the world has gone mad.

Last week too, in her confirmation hearings, the post-mitzvot Jewess Elena Kagan, which name reveals her descent from Aaron the High Priest, spoke of a decision she made at Harvard having to do with fair treatment regardless of “sexual orientation.”

“Sexual orientation.” That is an invention in a class with “homophobia,” “Islamophobia,” “transgender,” “Ancient Palestinian.” It is a verbal invention whose purpose is to spread a smoke-screen of fantasy over the truth.

“Sexual orientation”? There is no such thing. This expression was invented by sexual deviants to re-brand their deviation as normal and not deviant.

“Sexual orientation” was invented to preach the moral equivalence of normal sexual behavior between men and women, versus abnormal behavior. To say that so-and-so has a different “sexual orientation” is like saying the anorexic has a different nutritional orientation. Most people like to eat. The anorexic prefers not to. What’s the deal?

Of course with the anorexic her different nutritional orientation will kill her. Homosexual orientation does not necessarily kill on an individual basis, but if enough people in a society commit this perversion, the society will die. This is historical fact. The homosexuality of ancient Greece and Rome was a major factor in the disappearance of those cultures and societies.

A couple of months ago in England, somewhere in Cumbria, a Baptist street preacher spoke against sodomy and a complaint was filed, and he was arrested and jailed for basically hurting the feelings of a sodomite who heard him.

And then there is the “transgender” invention associated with the so-called “sex-change.”

The truth is that no man or woman has ever been turned into the opposite sex. This is a verbal fantasy invention. Men and women are distinguished from one another by possessing one of two types of reproductive, bodily organs: the man’s two-part equipment external to the body and the woman’s internal womb. No man has ever been fitted with a womb; no woman with a working set of male equipment.

And in fact, the professional literature regarding the misnamed “transgender” patient never records the desire of the sick one to either father a child or become pregnant to bear and nurse a child. What these slaves of their fantasies want is to wear the clothes of the other sex and pretend to be the other sex – which has nothing to do with procreation and child-rearing and everything to do with the archaic image in Greek and Roman mythology of the hermaphrodite…

In today’s attacks by World-AntiJewry, they came from Gaza on the continent of Asia, dominated once again after all these years, these centuries, these millennia by spiritual descendants of the Philistines whose champion Goliath our David son of Jesse was victorious over, but whose real, genetic descendants today have yet to vanquish.

Israel was also attacked from the port city of Goteborg, Sweden in Scandinavia; also from the continent of North America, specifically at United Nations headquarters in New York City; also from Brussels, Belgium and Strasbourg, France on the continent of Europe.

Not that all the attacks were the same. What stood out was the micro-military act of firing mortars at Jewish villages east of Philistine Gaza; actual weapons that armies use in war. But really a micro-military-like attempt to physically murder Jews, which set it apart from the other attacks. The other barrages from other continents were verbal.

Accusations of crime, of guilt for crime against these very same Neo-Philistines in Gaza and the Neo-Canaanites in antisemitically misnamed in “East Jerusalem.”

That name never ceases to amaze, for its verbal purpose is to set apart, to deny it to Jews. When the Berlin Wall was torn down by Germans in 1989, the Free World wept and laughed and rejoiced for joy that that city divided by not just a wall but a security barrier thrown up by the enemies of freedom, the Commies in Russia and their East German Commie stooges. I remember when it went up around 1960 to keep people oppressed by the evil disciples of the evil Jewish apostate Karl Marx from escaping. And when it was torn down in 1989, the Free World rejoiced.

But after 1967 when Israelis had done the identical thing – tear down a wall that divided their capital city – World AntiJewry did not like that. In a way, 1967 was far more momentous than 1948 when Israel declared independence and fought and won the war, at least up to a cease-fire. Only in 1967 did the heart of the Biblical narrative come into Jewish hands. Judea and Samaria, and above all Jerusalem. Not since before the birth of Christianity had Jews been sovereign in Jerusalem, meaning over the heart of Jerusalem, the only reason for its existence: the Temple Mount.

It is illuminating that Jerusalem, this most contested piece of real estate on our planet that commands no natural resources; sits astride no vital artery of international commerce and business is so important; while its value has never been anything but in the realm of ideas, religious ideas. The heart of Jerusalem is the Temple Mount, site of the Binding of Isaac 3,687 years ago, when the seed of today’s Jewish people was just a nuclear family. And it is no coincidence that that story of the binding of Isaac was stolen and renamed and called Islam, when Ibrahim allegedly bound his son Isma’il at the Kaaba in Mecca.

And that is why the marauding first Muslims built over that site their Golden Dome of the Rock which Muhammed had allegedly mounted before he allegedly leapt to heaven to meet all the prophets who preceded him, before returning to earth the same night to lead his Arabs to Islam, a word meaning “submission” – a word for slaves – submission to Allah.

Jerusalem is the heart of the matter, and today out of UN headquarters in New York City this Korean guy, from the far, Far East speaking in the same of all the nations of Planet Earth accused Israel of planning to illegally destroy Ancient Palestinian dwellings in “East Jerusalem,” by which he and the whole world really mean the Temple Mount above all. Ban Ki-Moon, secretary of the world’s goyim said, “The planned moves are contrary to international law and to the wishes of the Palestinian residents.”

So, he basically called us criminals. Criminals who break the law, in this case international law which supports, he says, “the wishes of the Palestinians.”

But, really, like 95% ran away in part because there were good reasons to do that. So many of them who fled were migrant laborers living in shanty shacks who owned nothing. And it was no big deal to leave behind one’s worldly possessions for what they assumed to be for a few days.

Most of these migrant workers had come from all over Araby. From Morocco to Yemen to Iraq and were illiterate, unskilled manual laborers who had no permanent homes and possessions in Mandatory Palestine.

But then there were other Arabs who did run away and did have homes and possessions; the crème de la crème really. Like Edward Said’s uncle who lived in Jerusalem in the Arab Christian neighborhood of Talbieh next to Jewish Rehavia, an Arab neighborhood for Christians, mostly Lebanese like the Saids, which neighborhood would not have existed without the Zionists first creating Rehavia. These far more sophisticated Arabs – especially those living in Haifa, because they had come recently from Lebanon to get in on the development of the Zionists – still had family in Beirut. And so it was not much of an ordeal when the war began to throw some clothes into a suitcase and drive the family car – an indication of their greater wealth – over the border into Lebanon to spend some time with family as the Arab armies overran developed Palestine and took it away from the Jews. What shameless thieves these Arabs are.

Yes, the first wave of 100,000 Arabs left Palestine even before the war began, following the U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181 of 2 November, 1947 which called for – finally – creating a Jewish state on 12% of the original promise to the Jews.

(The Merchant of Venice, come to think of it, is also about doing business with a Jew and breaking one’s promise to him.)

So the first exodus from Palestine, after word came from New York in early November of ‘47, were these 100,000 richest and most sophisticated Arabs: the lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, successful merchants, Edward Said’s people, who simply picked up and left because they did not want to fight for Palestine – which made Edward Said’s career all the more, in my eyes, contemptibly disgusting.

In a way, the career indignation about the alleged theft of Palestine by us racist Jews was really for Said a masquerade meant to cover the truth that his people did not fight for Palestine. They were cowards.

And this goes for all of them. Mahmoud Abbas as well is on record remembering his flight from Tsfat as a young teenager, when teenage Jewish boys were helping with the war effort. Arafat as well was living in Gaza at the time when he fled to Cairo even before the IDF showed up.

So these first 100,000 Arab refugees were not driven from their homes. And the bulk of the rest weren’t either.

Yet this is the fairy tale of Jewish evil that is in the head, at this very moment, of hundreds of antiJews on nine small vessels having, I am sure, this evening a wonderful time partying aboard ship as they cruise toward Gaza to act out the fairy tale of Jews starving the Ancient Ones to death after having in 1948 stolen their country from them…

As for the Sodomites, “Gay Liberation” it was called, and “Palestinian national liberation both emerged within weeks of each other, the former before man landed on the moon that year and the latter afterwards, but still in the same satanic year when the Rolling Stones sang of their sympathy for the devil and a member of the audience one evening in a Stones concert was stabbed to death.

This was the age as well of the feminists who burst upon the scene in 1966, not coincidently when the birth control pill and other devices became publicly available. Until then, society had scorned sodomites as hedonists for whom sexual pleasure had nothing to do with procreation, the creating other human beings, the next generation. After 1966, when sexually more normal people adopted the revolution in birth control, the gays laughed in the face of proper society by pointing out that now “We are all equal.” If “straights” could separate the unique pleasure of sexuality, why not Sodomites?

And this led to the opening of the flood gates of appetite for all kinds of desires, including making mountains of dollars one would never spend and not be above killing the goose that laid the golden egg of the capitalist system to do that, by wrecking the banking and financial system, milking it to death.
The 1960s was a time when conventional morality collapsed in a variety of ways. Sex, money, and the Arab-Israeli conflict which was turned on its head and transformed into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in which the Jews became once again the villains.

As we have been in every generation for millennia…

And I say, no, because they don’t deserve to have their homes rebuilt. If they are living now among the ruins, tough. They deserve it. These people, this collective as a collective is as hateful of Jews as European Nazis were. And if they don’t like living in the ruins, they should not have applauded when their rocket-launcher boys fired all those thousands of rockets into Jewish apartments in Sderot and homes in the kibbutzim. Off the top of my head, like that poor fellow in Nir Am who created a popular Indian food restaurant which one day took a direct Qassam hit and was completely obliterated. And he never rebuilt.

The nerve, the chutzpa of these Arabs to whine about the rain of armaments the IDF let loose last year. All Israel was doing was returning some of the projectiles launched at us over eight years.

But don’t expect Baroness Catherine and Tony Blair to demand of the Hamas that they pay for the damage they did to us. We have to allow them to rebuild.

Why does Israel have to allow the enemy to rebuild? The enemy is suffering? The enemy brought it on himself.

By the first week in May of 1945, Germany was a landscape of rubble, ruined, bombed out cities and railroads and factories, and there was likely not one journalist in the West who wrote one column weeping over the surviving Germans living in the ruins.

Israel’s problem, Israel’s sin from Day One has been the opposite of the slander of the AntiJews. Israel’s sin has not been its cruelty to the Ancient Ones in Gaza but its mercy.

Israel has every right now to start bombing tomorrow and continue bombing until Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas surrenders, as surely as the German high command surrendered after that Archdevil Hitler killed himself.

The Washington Post today cited Sari Bashi, an Israeli, head of the pro-enemy Israeli NGO called Gisha, which means “approach” or “coming together.” She advocates an end to the blockade and she said, “The restrictions on goods into and out of Gaza was instituted not for security reasons, but rather as part of a declared policy to restrict the movement of people and goods as a means of applying pressure on the Hamas regime.”

She protested this and I ask, “Why?” Hers is an accusation, when there is nothing more normal than this age-old behavior. It is part of siege warfare. What’s the problem, Sari?

She went on kvetching, though I imagine an Israeli like her just hates the sound of Yiddish. She said, “The express purpose of this policy is to block all economic activity in Gaza.”

Of course. What’s the problem?

You know, there have been over the last year numerous items in the news about Europeans either already in clandestine talks with Hamas or gearing up for that soon, and that is what this Israel-bashing is all about. Tony Blair, Baroness Ashton, the Norwegians and the Swedes and the Irish antisemites are nothing these days if not backers of the people in Gaza who brought Hamas to power.

Sixty-five years after Hitler committed suicide, they have come to side with this generation’s Nazi-like Jew-haters and Jew-killers…

To which pseudo-demand, the AP said, Abbas replied, “I say in front of you, Mr. President, that we have nothing to do with incitement against Israel. And we’re not doing that. What we care about is to live in coexistence with Israel in order to bring about the independent Palestinian state that will live side by side with Israel.”

That’s three sentences and three lies. He says, “We have nothing to do with incitement,” number one. He repeated that; that’s two. And then said he wants to “live side by side with Israel.”

These Arabs are chronic, 24/7 liars. They go through their days dissembling, telling people what they want to hear.

This information, by the way, comes from PMW which issued its latest report just the other day on the chronic incitement in the PA media which the chairman of the PA does nothing out, the very same Dr. Abbas. It’s the same-old, same-old Jew-bashing.

When this antisemitic murderer Abbas told Charlie Rose yesterday that his people must have East Jerusalem, this liar was thinking of all of Jerusalem, namely, the old walled city in its entirety, which includes the Temple Mount in its entirety; which includes the Western Wall which was originally just a civil engineer’s retaining wall, because that’s the way it used to be, with the Muslims in control, before Zionism; and certainly before 1967.

The current arrangement in which Israel decides which Muslims may or may not ascend to Haram a-Sharif on Fridays to visit the Dome of the Rock Shrine and pray at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, that has got to go, according to Mahmoud Abbas. All of this land must return to full Muslim sovereign control. The Western Wall too.

This is the word game this murderer of Jews is playing when he asks just for East Jerusalem, making no claim to West Jerusalem, meaning the Zionist additions.

I think there is a consensus among Jews today, even willy-nilly among the non-comatose leftists, that the Oslo process obviously did not succeed. Its architects were hoping to realize the stated Arab goal of the Jews running from all the spoils of 1967 but this process failed, big time.

And so a reasonable person might contemplate starting over; returning to Space One, the status quo ante before Oslo because it failed big time.

A reasonable person might suggest returning to the way things used to be before Israel took this wrong turn, made a hard left turn in 1993 and got all bloodied and is still suffering the consequences of having made that wrong left turn.

And one way of returning, retreating from the wrong-headedness of Oslo might be revoking the tolerance/clemency afforded men like Dr. Abbas. An essential promise made by Israel in 1993 was that once PLO leaders had come into the country, Israel would not pursue them for their previous activities, such as their hundreds of murder attempts a/k/a terrorist atrocities. The slate would be wiped clean.

This was basic to the Oslo process. Without Israel’s signed commitment to write off these Arab atrocities, there could be no Oslo process.

So I suggest, let’s start all over and return to judging Mahmoud Abbas as good, post-Holocaust, Zionist Jews and Israelis used to judge him: as an evil murderer with whom you don’t break bread. You try to kill him.

For yours truly, nothing about Israel has been more immoral than wiping the slate clean for these people. Uncle Shimon and his partner the Communist-raised Yitzhak Rabin and their scientist colleague Dr. Beilin had no right to cleanse these evil people of their heinous, satanic murders of Jews; these murders that were every bit as reprehensible as any murder of Jews in every generation.

Nothing in Oslo to me was more revolting than that photograph of Shimon Peres kissing Arafat on the cheek.

This was the 49th no, the 50th level of tuma/of impurity.

And I’ve always held the belief that it is false for people to think that it is not enough to be right, one also has to be smart, as if there is a contradiction. On the contrary, the right thing to do is the smart thing to do; it is also the moral thing to do.

There is no clash there. In other words, dealing with Fatah and his sidekick Abbas is not only immoral; it is profoundly stupid because such low lifes simply cannot be trusted. What is the point of making a deal with such monstrous men when constitutionally they are wholly untrustworthy? Murderers are not likely to be the type of people who keep their word.

What is the point of negotiating with these cold-blood killers if the only thing trustworthy about them is their chronic untrustworthiness?

Words. They don’t keep their words. They don’t mean what they say…

No, John. That’s not America’s job. I’ll tell you what America’s job is: it is to kill Hezbollah, destroy it. It was Hezbollahi suicide freaks, basically agents of the same crowd that overran the U.S. embassy in Iran in 1979, who in Beirut four years later in April 1983 blew up the U.S. embassy and killed 60 people inside, including – John Brennan, if you are listening, you moron – the whole CIA station; wiped out.

And then more Hezbollahi six months later in October 1983 killed 241 U.S. military personnel, most of them U.S Marines, in that same chaotic, rotten Arab country.

John Brennan is typical of too many CIA and State Department Gentiles who get posted to the Arab Middle East and often have an eye, while still in service, on their retirement when they can look forward to making big bucks negotiating deals for American and other investors with acquaintances they made while working in these oil countries.

What Obama and his Jewish clown sidekick Rahm Emanuel and James Jones and John Brennan and Zbigniew Brzezinski are doing is forfeiting America’s right to protect its own interests which cannot possibly include a nuclear Ian.

Since when did U.S. foreign policy and the decision to go to war slip from the hands of America’s democratically-elected officials in the government and fall into the hands of the U.N. Security Council?

Was there an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that passed when I wasn’t paying attention that awarded the decision to go to war basically to the Russians and the Chinese and the French and Brits and the rest of the nations of the world – except for Israel, of course, which is kept out of this exclusive club? You know, the U.N. which denies Israel the right to be included in the Security Council, uniquely so, is the same organization that has voted on literally thousands of resolutions to smear Israel for its exclusivist, racist exclusion of the Ancient Ones and for its outrageous owning and governing of historic Palestine of the “Palestinians.”

On one of the conservative websites, Fouad Adjami, one of the last of the sober south Lebanon Shiites, at Johns Hopkins, says there are only two people in the world who can stop the Iranians from going nuclear and they are Obama and Netanyahu; and Obama is not going to do it.

How true. This wicked disciple of Wright and Farrakhan is doing nothing serious to prevent the Iranians from going nuclear; and he will do this by supporting this timid resolution at the U.N. while smiling at gullible, dejudaized American Jewish politicos. And at Elie Weisel.

What should be done is for the United States of America to re-take control of its own foreign policy and project its power at Iran by declaring war on that country. The U.S. Constitution does provide for that.

And there is no shortage of legitimate justifications for declaring war like the aforementioned assault on American sovereign soil at the U.S. Embassy in Iran. Invading it in 1979 was legally identical to invading New York City or Boston or L.A.

Blowing up the embassy in Beirut was the equivalent of blowing up the State Department.

Iran has killed other U.S. military personnel in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and aboard the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen.

The U.S. should declare war and give the Iranians an ultimatum: 72 hours to start dismantling their nuclear enterprise or America is going to bomb not only the installations themselves but power plants all over Iran; bomb the parliament, bomb whatever it takes to make the Iranians surrender and agree to American terms which should include an end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

All this turning to the U.N. is a symptom of the decline of the West before the rising power of a renascent Muslim caliphate…

Like Holocaust Deniers who constitutionally simply cannot tolerate conceiving of Jews as innocent victims of irrational, unjust baseless aggression, because they are creatures of evil incarnate, so Erdogan and Ahmadinejad. The latter must deny the Holocaust because he just can’t deal with it, while the former can accept the historical truth of the Holocaust but then he must paint the Jew as Nazi-like himself in order to diminish the moral impact of the meaning of the Holocaust. Haters like Erdogan can accept the historicity of the Holocaust but then must go on to see the Jews on a moral level today equal to Nazis, which mitigates their claim on the conscience of the world. What’s going on these days is nothing less than an hysterical wave of antisemitism the likes of which we have not seen since before the Holocaust. A Nazi-like hatred of Jews in the 1930s which was not confined to Germany or Austria. Make no mistake; it was all over Europe, as today’s Israel-bashing is likewise a global phenomenon.

It is simply a kind of mass hysteria, this international demand that the Jews be put on trial by an international court for their inhuman murder of nine innocent peace activists.

There is a craziness here, which the government of Israel, I believe, is mishandling to the extent it is unaware – is even in denial – as to the crazy antisemitism propelling this heating up of the atmosphere, this hysteria that the Arabs in Gaza are any poorer than they ever were.

Israel denies them building materials for experience has shown that they would not be used to re-build homes and hospitals but be stolen by Hamas and used for their operations of death against us Jews.

I don’t think Bibi and his defense minister, prince of the communes Barak fully understand what is being done to Israel these days. What was done to Jews throughout the Middle Ages. Accused of demonic crimes, tested in rigged trials. Tortured. Executed.

In Jerusalem, they’re just not thinking Jewish enough to my satisfaction…

Interesting word “scapegoat,” invented, if memory serves, by William Tyndale, who was put to death for translating the Christian bible into English so that people could understand it. What a difference between Christendom and Jewishness until the age of Tyndale and subsequent translators. In the Catholic Church, the Latin Vulgate Bible was forbidden most believers because they couldn’t read Latin.

Versus Yiddishkeit which demands not only that our rabbis but all Jewish men read and study all the holy texts. The Jewish rabbinate has no monopoly on what’s written in the Bible and Talmud. And because of that rabbis, when they cite a passage to make a point, if it is inaccurate and/or poorly argued, his listeners will not hesitate to tell him and challenge him.

Versus the Reform rabbis I knew in my youth who were never asked questions because there were no texts, so whatever the rabbi said was unchallengeable. Reform Jews simply do not read let alone live by what’s in the holy books.

But I digress. Roman Catholicism was in a way akin to the Druze religion which is known fully only to their priests; the laity is in the dark. And as part of the evolution of history leading up to the Protestant Reformation was the translating of the Latin Bible into a language Catholics could understand. It was a capital offense to do that, though, which is why Tyndale lost his life.

And when it came to the passage we just read on Shabbat the other day concerning the two goats sacrificed on Yom Kippur by the High Priest in the Temple in Jerusalem on land now in the hands of Ishmaelites who hold it captive as surely as their brethren in Gaza are holding poor Gilad Shalit, William Tyndale in 14th century England translated the term se’ir laazazel, the goat spiritually laden with all the sins of the community chosen to be sent into the desert away from the community to be pushed off a cliff and killed… Tyndale came up with the word in English, he made it up, “scapegoat.”

Later on in history when Israel sank in sinful failure, and the nation of Greece arose, the Greeks too, descendants of Esav, had yearly rituals of expelling from the community a goat who carried the evil spirits. In Biblical Hebrew goat is se’ir and in Greek it’s tragos, whence cometh the word “tragedy.” Today, “tragedy” is misused to stand for misfortune or sad occurrence or accident; originally it was connected to this ritual of expelling bad feelings.

And over time the religious rituals of early Greece led to the composing of poems and stories and dramas which were acted out as part of the ritual. And these early dithyrambs evolved into the theater of Greek tragedy, which commonly concerns man and fate/divinity in conflict.

Aristotle the great theorist of art defined tragedy as a story leading to, in the audience, the purging or expelling of the emotions of pity and fear.

So Tyndale gave the English language the word “scapegoat,” which is directly rooted in the Torah miSinai. It comes as a concept from the Jews, and historically the Jews have been mankind’s scapegoat people who are laden with the community’s – in this case, the international community’s – worst sins. Leastwise it is one way to understand the current moment in the news in which we in Israel are being bashed from all sides…

Still, the blockhead Barak was characteristically way out of line in calling the perpetrators “terrorists.” Hardly. Terrorists cause terror, hysterical fear, and this act of vandalism scared no one. Barak, remember, at the height of the Oslo madness was also a left-wing peacock preening his moral equivalence when he said that if he were a “Palestinian,” he would be a terrorist too. So what is this criticism of terrorism all about? There is a contradiction here.

He was also out of line in assuming Jews did this when the Arabs are perfectly capable, as in the alleged killing of the boy Mohammad ad-Dura, of staging such a deception to smear.

And no less in the realm of unacceptable, witless, even brainless behavior was that of Rabbi Shlomo Riskin of Efrat and Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein of Yeshivat Etzion who not only paid a kind of condolence call on the mosque, they came bearing replacement copies of the burnt Qur’ans.

I find this is just intolerable. It’s a fair bet that both of these learned rabbis have spent no time reading the Qur’an and discovering why Geert Wilders this very week is on trial in Holland for, inter alia, wanting to see the Qur’an banned like Mein Kampf.

The Qur’an is an abomination of a book, at the root of all the evil Muslims are wreaking in the world these days. It is an antisemitic book which no rabbi should ever be replacing. It is one thing to reject the behavior of such crude vandalism and quite another to replace these texts. If the target of these vandals had been a clubhouse of Nazis in which copies of Mein Kampf had been burnt, you just know these two otherwise estimable rabbis wouldn’t even think of replacing the damaged books with new ones….

Seaman: “A few years ago, they were ready to accept this logic, but today, after Israel has surrendered its honor and its principles and has not stood firm on its agreements with the Palestinians, it comes across as one who trips himself up by agreeing with the claims against him…”

Indeed. This is more or less what yours truly never stops kvetching about: Israel never rejects, refutes, demolishes, mocks the outrageous claims of the other side. All these Israelis do is dismiss as futile, in a post-modernist sense, arguing against what the other side says or believes. Instead, Israel just pleads for a deal, a compromise, a sharing of the Land. Idiots like Peres and Rabin never pooh-poohed the ahistorical, mendacious “Palestinian” narrative which has no more validity than the 9-11 narrative of Ahmadinejad. On the contrary, they have accepted it because it is accepted by the world.

What fools these post-Jewish Israelis be. They have from Day One, along with the Jewishly ignorant Herzl and the crank theorists of the socialist Left, seen in antisemitism a material problem solvable with material solutions, when hostility to Zionism has always been the same spiritual hostility to the Jewish people throughout the ages.

These despiritualized Israelis don’t appreciate what a threat Zionism is to Christendom and Islam; to Christianity and Islam as the groundwork of meaning in life for billions of people.

The return of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and our resurrection of this desolation has been one of the turning points, great revolutions in the history of the human race, as portentous as the creation of Judaism itself, Christianity itself and Islam in the first place.

All these Israelis want to do is cut a deal – which Obama’s current offer in a way make a mockery of…

I mean, another major event this past week in New York was the annual UN General Assembly fall session in world leaders come to orate, with one of the stars being Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose crackpot remarks about 9-11 prompted 33 states to leave the hall in protest.

Okay, but why not when dozens of other leaders, including Obama, give speeches supporting the mythical Ancient Palestinians and their putative need for and rights to a state in the heart of the heart of the Land promised to the Jewish people in the Bible?

I mean, if Israel were not so neurotic about its Jewish identity, it would exploit Ahmadinejad’s Muslim madness – there are hundreds of millions like him – to equate his delusional understanding of 9-11 as the so-called “truthers” understand it, as an inside American plot, with the myth of the “Palestinians”? There is a connection.

What Israel should do but never does is marry the madness of these loopy Muslims when it comes to 9-11 to their equally flakey history of Zionism and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

They are really different facets of the same Muslim mishegass…

The aerial photo makes clear this is a community like most of them in Judea and Samaria planned by civil engineers and urban planners, with its roads, homes, schools, grocery stores, playgrounds, synagogues and mini-parks, etc.

And also visible in the photograph next to Beit Aryeh is the Arab settlement called Luban al-Arabiya, which is obviously a little nothing of a scruffy collection of disorganized dwellings – though of course the caption writer at the Herald Tribune called Beit Aryeh – which dwarfs Luban al-Arabiya – a “settlement,” connoting something, new, and I guess moveable/destroyable, versus the “town” that is Luban al-Arabiya, which connotes something permanent, an organized community, when the photograph tells the opposite story.

Also shown is the plenty of land separating the two communities, areas than can be built upon in the future.

Before your eyes is a kind of graphic emblem of the Zionist movement: here is a planned, organized community purposely building its society – versus a smattering of structures in an unplanned mess which is dwarfed by its Jewish neighbor.

What came to mind were the words of the Gentile Prophet Balaam in the Book of Numbers, who came to curse the Children of Israel but instead, what came out of his mouth was praise and wonder: He said, “How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, thy dwellings Yisrael.” Balaam had been summoned from afar to the Sinai Wilderness to curse the Jews but when he saw their encampment, he had nothing but praise for the amazing sight of 12 Tribes, over a million people, some say over two million, living in an organized community of laws, peacefully – versus the life of tribesmen into this century over 3,000 years later for whom life is what Thomas Hobbes called brutish. For example, the life of still basically tribal Arabs in Algeria, in Lebanon, in Iraq where daily they have butchered one another in satanic acts of serial massacres.

Here in this photo is this planned, hilltop community of thousands of Jews living next to this miserable scattering of probably a few hundred Arabs.

This is the story, in a nutshell, of the return of the Jewish people to its Land…

This is pathetic and worst of all, the editor of this newspaper on Friday defended the editing because it truly reflects, he said, the “leading role of Mubarak in the peace process.”

Israel needs to tell the world: this is with whom we are dealing. This is the editor of this venerable newspaper; this is not some marginal crank. The Arabs are so backward and have such little regard for objective truth as the civilized West understands that idea, the idea of friendly peace with them is a fantasy.

Israeli leaders never address the ocean of antisemitic bilge that the Arab-Muslim Middle East swims in, so that their version of truth and therefore of justice between us Jews and the Arabs in our ancient homeland is a pipedream.
All we can hope for is a state of no war until perhaps the end of days when these tribal primitives opt for civilization and peace with one of its progenitors, us Jews…

Unfortunately, Bibi is ill-served by his own formulation. Were I advising him, I would phrase the demand differently in order to clarify the issue. Instead of asking Abbas & Co. to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, I would demand they recognize the rightness of Jews having their own state in their ancient homeland.

For what the sneaky Arabs have done in “recognizing Israel’s right to exist” as Hanina sees things is more of what they have always done, which is play word-games. In fact, contrary to Hanania’s claim that the “Palestinians” have recognized Israel’s right to exist, they have never repealed the PLO Covenant’s clauses calling for the destruction of Israel, as Netanyahu and Clinton claimed in 1998. In fact, in December 1988, they did not do that either as Secretary of State George Schultz at the time claimed they did, which led to U.S. acceptance of the claim Arafat had finally spoken the “magic words,” and therefore the U.S. chose to open talks with those enemies of not only the Jewish people but Western civilization.

What happened at the time was this…

Last Wednesday, in the Herald Tribune, James Carroll was at it again with a third piece on Israel in recent weeks, which exposed once again his own miserable ignorance of the history here, even as he tries to anchor his antiJew views in history. Listen to this: In referring to Haj Amin, he wrote: “Caught between British colonial pressures and the surge in European Jewish arrivals [in the inter-war years] and needing to forge an expressly Palestinian as opposed to Pan-Arabic consciousness, Husseini took a page from the old book of Christian anti-Judaism. He promoted positive Palestinian identity by casting Judaism as a negative foil.”

If James Carroll were listening, I would tell him, “Sir, you don’t know what you are talking about.” Everything here is wrong. This is a concatenation of one mistake after another. He makes it seem as if Haj Amin was caught between British pressure and Jewish in-migration that pressured him to take a page from Christian anti-Judaism.

This has zero grounding in historical fact; none whatsoever. Haj Amin was a Muslim Jew-hater; Christian antiJewism had absolutely nothing to do with his hostility to the Jewish people and of course the Zionist enterprise burgeoning all around him.

And as for having “promoted a positive Palestinian consciousness as opposed to a Pan-Arabic one”: Lord have mercy, this has no bearing on what Haj Amin was all about. He established the newspaper “Southern Syria” to deny the very existence of a country called Palestine, because the geography had no meaning to him. It had meaning then only to Jews and Christians. The League of Nations Mandate was about creating such a map that had not existed in fourteen centuries of Islam. That is why he said, “No, this is Southern Syria.” It was the secular Zionists who were creating a “Palestinian” identity.

Carroll goes on to write that during WWII “On the principle of the enemy of my enemy is my friend, he threw in with Hitler and played the Nazi stooge throughout the war.”

The principle of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” had nothing to do with what he did. This was a Muslim murderer, an assassin who had ignited pogroms in Jerusalem in 1920 and Jaffa in 1921 before he ever heard of Hitler. His principle was his loathing of Jews which was as powerful for him as it is for Ahmadinejad today.

So it was refreshing to see in this morning’s JPost Naftali Bennett defining the menace to our lives as coming from “an ocean of radical Islam’’ – though I would dispute the necessity and even rightness of adding the adjective “radical,” which implies there is another, non-radical kind, which is nonsense. If Islam was not seen as a threat prior to the rise of Khomeini in 1979, that is because it was just quiescent. Historically, Jihad is at the core of Islam. It is by nature a crusading, aggressive ideology, which befits the seed of Ishmael, that highway robber.

Islam is nothing but the theft of Judaism’s notion of a Chosen People and a perversion of the Torah’s injunction to the Chosen People to dispossess the Canaanites and Philistines from this tiny little country.

Islam perverts that and claims the right to dispossess every nation in the entire world…

In Arabic, the first group was called those who were “fil harij,” and the second called “fil dakhil,” meaning those “outside” the land and those “inside” the land under Israeli occupation, who had obviously two very different agendas.

In 1967 right after the Six-Day War, there were prominent Arabs in Judea and Samaria with businesses and property and homes who were ready to recognize Israel’s right to exist on condition Israel withdrew from what had been Jordanian-occupied land.

And there was no shortage of Israelis ready for such a deal. I was not an Israeli yet at the time but supported that too. And it was bandied about in media. Right off the bat after the war there was talk of such a state for the Arabs in Judea and Samaria in both Israel and Arab circles in Ramallah in Hevron, in Jericho, etc.

But Arafat and Abbas eventually put a stop to such talk by murdering local leaders who spoke that way; of a state in Yosh only. That was in fact Fatah’s great fear, for that would mean the end of the aspiration of the refugees of 1948 to return to Tsfat, like Abbas, or Lod like George Habash. and Haifa for other Arabs who fled. For decades a state in Yesha was Yasir Arafat’s and Mahmoud Abbas’ worst nightmare…

Michael Oren, Israel’s ambassador to the U.S., a Bibi loyalist, a substitute mouthpiece for Bibi, praised Abbas last week for having condemned the terrorist slaughter four more Jews, when he did nothing of the kind. In condemning the attack at Beit Haggai, Abbas – exactly like Arafat used to and all these terrorist leaders – condemned all attacks on all people by all sides, which by implication attacks Israel for doing the same thing. In his alleged condemnation of last week’s massacre, he actually attacked Israel for committing such crimes.

But above all, and like so many times in the past, Abbas’ words of condemnation were not of the inherent evil of murdering people like that but of its negative impact on the Ancient Palestinian cause.

It is a playing with words akin to Abbas answering Bibi’s public request for mutual recognition between the Palestinian people’s right to a state and the Jewish people’s right to a state: as before, Abbas snorts, “The PLO recognized the State of Israel in the past, at Oslo, and does not have to recognize Israel as a state again” – which is not the same thing.

Word games. These Arabs, so many of them illiterate, are always playing word games.

While Bibi never goes on the offensive when attacked by Abbas, and in not doing so he leaves the impression the charges in the attack are true.

So his silence does Israel great harm…

And because they would not do that, they invented this “camouflage”” people, this “smoke-screen” nation to hide behind and say that the primary victims of Zionism were these “Palestinians” and that there could be no peace without including their interests in the negotiations. They had to return to the homes that they were driven from – and never mind only a statistically insignificant percentage suffered that fate. In historical truth, most just ran away.

Which fact was another major impetus behind the invention of the “Palestinians.” In historical fact, they ran away; they did not fight. And in fact one of the reasons they were abused by the Arabs over the decades was this fact, and they were held in contempt for it precisely because everyone knew these refugees were not driven from their homes; that they ran away. Never saw an Israeli soldier, most of them.

So what you do is make up a tall-tale, a new version of what happened, the Palestinian Narrative which reconfigures the refugees’ cowardice and transforms it into “Jewish injustice.”

Better to claim one was driven from one’s home by racist Israeli soldiers than to admit to never having fought for one’s home at all. ..

It is attacked for occupying “Palestinian” territory and never says “No, it’s Jewish territory.”

We are our own worst enemies…

What our political scientists miss in their scientific politics is that a major component of the Arabs’ violence against us is their need to prove that they are the Chosen People who have the right to this Land. Their envy is the bitter envy of Ishmael kicked out of the tent, sent away, deprived of his rights to inherit his father’s wealth, material and spiritual as the first-born son. Allowing us Jews to live here in peace, prosperity and ownership is a cosmic offense against Islam and the self-esteem of these people.

Also as Arabs, pre-Islamic Arabs, they remain chronic thieves. They are slaves of their appetite for other people’s money and wealth, and they just want to steal it and so they make up a tall tale called the Palestinian Narrative which gives them title to the Land they covet.

So Saeb Erekat was projecting onto the learned rabbi his own Arab desire for genocide and assassination.

But then there is another piece to this story, the Enlightened presentation of it in the MSM today but first some music…

Versus the lede sentences three days ago in the Herald Tribune – which is the New York Times – by their correspondent Robert F. Worth writing about the discussions in Washington after that incident about continuing to send arms and ammunition to Lebanon when this is how the Lebanese are behaving. “Earlier this month, Israeli soldiers were pruning a tree on their country’s northern border when a firefight broke out with Lebanese soldiers across the fence, leaving one Israeli and four Lebanese dead. The skirmish seems to have been accidental…” and so on and so forth.

Give me a break. It was immediately clear what had happened. No firefight just “broke out,” and everything was the opposite of accidental. Some hotshot Hezbollahi in the Lebanese Army invited cameramen ahead of time to come down from Beirut to watch as some sniper-assassin drew a bead of that Jew and murdered him.

This is so typical of the New York Times and the Enlightened for whom there are different narratives and who is to say what the truth is?

What’s missing in Israel today is a leadership that will answer these wild asses of criminals, these mass murderers like Mahmoud Abbas with counter-claims to this Land and tell them it is our ancient homeland. And unlike in the lands of our dispersion, where we were told where we had to live and could not live, where on a whim we could be driven from the homes we had built for ourselves, here, back in the Israel we Jews brought back to life, no one will tell us where we can and cannot live…

What a strange time to be alive. I wonder what George Orwell would think about this use, rather, abuse of language not to expose the truth but cover it up. Benyamin ben Bentzion is a very smart fellow; surely he knows he is playing a word-game. The first half of his policy calls for a Balestinian state, and then conditions said state with conditions the other side simply cannot agree to.

Abbas, by the way, is doing the same thing, for in truth, in opposition to the verbal surface of reality in his mouth, he doesn’t want a state, not even one that included all of Yosh.

Even if Allah made a miracle for Abbas & Co. and got all of us Jews to become so Enlightened that we all agree, all half-million of us, to pack up and leave our homes because the land rightfully belongs to the Ancient Ones; and we even apologize for stealing it from them in 1967; even if this murderer Abbas got back all of Yesha for a Balestinian state, he still wouldn’t want it. Because then he would have to switch gears and stop being a revolutionary, freedom-fighting Ancient Palestinian guerrilla and start managing a civil society. His PA would no longer be the automatic beneficiary of billions of dollars and euros every year from the UN and the EU and individual country governments. The Ancient Ones would finally – to use the American idiom – have to get off welfare and start supporting themselves as an independent, free nation-state…

And that’s the problem. That’s Obama’s problem. He doesn’t understand that one cannot be faithful to the American people he is supposed to serve, to America’s character and personality over centuries, and accept what Islam has to offer.

In a nutshell, while Obama wants to “welcome” Muslims and “respect” them, the exact opposite strategy is what is necessary for America now. They must be not welcomed but told in no uncertain terms that there are features to the teachings and behaviors of Islam which simply are not American and Americans don’t want them in their country. America must not welcome Muslims and must not respect them, but challenge them and disrespect Islam – if Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Dr. Wafa Sultan and Tarik Hamid and Mosab Abu Hassan and Walid Shoebat are right about Islam.

And there is a precedent in American history for such a stance against Islam; of not treating it like other religions, and that is found in the history of the Mormon religion in America, which for a Biblical generation of forty years and more was resisted by the American people. The state they created, Utah, was denied statehood over the issue because the Mormons were polygamists. The men were allowed to have many wives and Americans said nothing doing…

It is a little known fact that the day before the Pilgrims on the ship Mayflower came ashore in the year 1620 – remembered every year in America’s unique holiday of Thanksgiving – they wrote out an agreement on how they would run their community, which came to be known as the Mayflower Compact. And they wrote a draft of it on the back of a sheet of paper they had previously used during the monotonous weeks at sea, sailing from Holland, to study Hebrew. That paper was a vocabulary list, two columns of words, one in English, one in Hebrew. These were so-called Old Testament Christians, which Book enraptured them and they used for their model of society. They were out to live in a wilderness according to their own religious beliefs, rooted in the so-called Old Testament, people who had been oppressed in England, and one feature of their Christianity was immersing themselves in the Hebrew text in order to really understand what was written.

And after they landed and survived and began to thrive and take root in the New Land, after sixteen years, when a man in those days was a ma (no teenagers in those days) the community saw the need to establish a school to teach the next generation of ministers; for their political-social leaders were their clergy.

And because these Puritans were who they were, they laid out a four-year course of study in what today would be called a seminary, and every year the students had to study Hebrew. And at end of the four-year course – they all got BAs – the best student during the graduation ceremony gave his valedictory speech in Biblical Hebrew.

And as the school expanded, Hebrew nonetheless remained a requirement at what came to be called Harvard College for the next 150 years, until the practice was abandoned in 1786 in the spirit of the anti-religious Enlightenment.

And here we are 224 years later, since Harvard stopped having this valedictory speech in Hebrew – and the American economy, its money bloodstream managed by banks, has been polluted and made worthless because since the 1960s all the old values were flushed down the toilet.

Here in Israel, though, apparently, our bankers never let go of the reins, and the economy here, the Hebrew-speaking economy here, is doing pretty good…

Yeah, of course. And I find it mind-boggling, fascinating and frightening that the United States denies it is at war with Iran. The last thing Pres. Barack Hussein would do is declare war against Iran in the well of the Congress, as FDR declared war on the same spot the day after Pearl Harbor.

It is functionally criminal that Pres. Obama has done nothing about Iran in his time in office because since before 9-11, the Iranians have been an octopus of terror whose tentacles have reached around the globe.

Hezbollah, Hamas, they are Iran hiding behind a veil, a burka of front groups.

Iran is this generation’s Germany as an international menace.

(And so is, by the way, Saudi Arabia if not operationally then because it has been the great source of money to build mosques and medrassas all over the place.)

Yet, when it comes to facing the reality of the menace of Islam and Iran and its active killing of American servicemen via these front organizations, the United States in the hands of Barack Hussein Obama does nothing. How could it when he is incapable of recognizing Islam as being at war with his country? In his mind, Islam is good. The terrorists are not representative; they are extremists.

I think it was while watching Obama speak at Cairo University in June of last year that he revealed himself, at least to my eyes, as, if not a practicing Muslim, than a man who thinks like a Muslim. His relationship to historical truth in that speech was classically Arab-Muslim: a re-writing of history more pleasing to the Arab-Muslim as history, and as a foundation for claims in the present.

At Cairo U. and I think at that Ramadan dinner last week again he said Muslims have been part of America since the beginning. This is functionally delusional. He is referring to a history that never happened.

And that is something I can attest to almost personally. I spent years of my life fascinated in researching the so-called Barbary Period in American history, and for sure there was not one Muslim in the 13 Colonies and then the 13 States for decades. Obama last week made reference to, I heard, Thomas Jefferson greeting a Tunisian ambassador at the White House. There was an episode like that but this hardly qualifies as Islam being a part of America since the beginning.

Well, actually, there is a truth there, if not the one this Muslim thinker Barack Obama thinks: For the first forty years of post-Revolutionary America, the No. 1 foreign policy headache was piracy by Muslims. The U.S. in that period spent about 20% of the annual budget on the problem of Muslim hijacking and hostage-taking, kidnapping Americans and enslaving them as part of Islam’s never-suspended holy war against mankind…

That is why Israel is acting foolishly with this Turkel commission. They want to show the goyim our innocence, in the belief that this will change the black heart of World AntiJewry; change the heart of Tony’s Blair’s sister-in-law who the other day, remember, painted a picture of a cruel, sadistic unit of Israeli soldiers who pounced on that ship and massacred the innocents.

“The Massacre of the Innocents.” That is a term used to refer to an episode in the Gospel of Matthew 2:16-18, when Herod, King in Judea, ordered all male babies slain because the Magi, the magicians who came from the east and prophesied that the Messiah, the King of the Jews, would just now be born in Bethlehem, who would obviously overthrow Herod. He had to kill all the male babies to prevent this from happening.

The King of Judea oversaw the “Murder of Innocents,” what Christianity teaches were the first Christian martyrs.

Five of them; count ‘em, five inquisitions into the reported bestial behavior of the Jews and their Murder of Innocents…

Adolf Hitler the Evil One called the German people the Master Race, which is kind of a mirror-image of the Jewish concept of the Chosen People. If the Jews are a positive force in the world as the Chosen People, than the greatest negative force, the greatest Jew-killer in human history had to oppose them with his counter- idea of a Master Race.

The Jews claim superiority because they have been chosen by G-d. Hitler said there is no such god only Nature and the Aryan race is genetically, biologically, Darwinistically the Master Race, on the basis of its superior biological, genetic superiority, not because of any claims to being chosen by G-d.

Well, here is Mr. Nasrallah, in his turban and robes who is the secretary-general of the Party of God. A variation on a theme: Chosen People. Master Race. Party of God. The party of people who have a special relationship, an attachment to God, to Allah; they are the true chosen of Allah at war with al-Yahud who claim that role for themselves.

The very idea of a Party of God is a variation on the Jewish idea of the Chosen People, an idea they have basically stolen and plagiarized. Islam teaches that Musa atop Mt. Sinai was given Scripture by Allah and it was the Qur’an which he then brought down to the masses of Jews below who re-wrote it and called it the Torah. They re-wrote it and changed the story all around. In the Qu’ran, Hagar is no serving girl of Sarah; and the binding by Ibrahim of his son takes place in Mecca.

The Jews in their Torah, you see, re-wrote the Qur’an, and what Muhammed did was restore the original text to the Believers, a text which features not Ishaq ibn Ibrahim being tied up but Isma’il. Isma’il was tied up by Ibrahim in Mecca. The Jews in their Torah lie about this…

Well, they did something similar when they got to Damascus. There in Roman times the Romans had built a temple to Jupiter, which after the rise of Christianity and the collapse of ancient Rome was turned into a Byzantine church famous for its claim to be in possession of the head of John the Baptist.

And when the Muslims swarmed into Damascus, they took that church over and what they did tells a story. When they first overran the city – with very few people, by the way – they came upon this large, Christian Byzantine community, and so what they did was to enter the church and force the Christians to share it. The Christians were confined to the eastern end of the structure, and the Muslim set up a mithrab – that’s this niche in the wall indicating the direction of Mecca (an idea, praying to a city, they stole from the Jews). And this shared arrangement lasted for the next 70 years, two generations.

Eventually, though, the Christian community in Damascus was pushed out of the center of town away from the old Byzantine church and the Muslims took it over completely and destroyed that which was holy to the Christians and built on the spot today’s tourist attraction, the Great Ummayad Mosque. The author here notes that today maybe ten per cent of Syria is Christian.

This is the pattern. In each generation Muslims do what they can and have patience until they reach their goal of stealing other people’s wealth and all in the name of Islam.

Islam is the religion of a predatory, larcenous people, the Arabs, who were always marauders…

Well, from what I was able to learn today from Israeli sources and the international media, what happened yesterday in the north was a planned assassination of a high Jewish officer, who when buried, his posthumous promotion gave him the rank of lieutenant colonial, Dov Harari, 45, HaShem yikom dammo.

The sniper who murdered him knew exactly what he was doing in targeting the highest ranking Israeli officer in his sights. The Arabs in northern Eretz Yisrael a/k/a southern Lebanon have been protesting in the last day this “provocation” by the Jews who trespassed into Lebanon to prune that tree.

But if so, why didn’t the sniper shoot at the crew operating that cherry picker or whatever it was?

This was a set-up by a known Lebanese Army officer, an ardent Shiite. He invited the press to bring their cameras hours before the operation that he was going to initiate

And for me the most important clue today was in Ronen Bergman’s piece in the Wall Street Journal. He is an Israeli superstar journalist in Arab affairs, in intelligence, the Mossad and military intelligence. He does a program with another host on TV. He’s written books on these topics, has a PhD, speaks Arabic and he began his piece taking note that the day of the murder was the fourth anniversary of the end of the 2006 fighting, the bleeding of Israel by these Muslim maniacs; and the assassination took place several hours before a “highly anticipated televised speech by Hassan Nasrallah,” now in his fourth year of hiding.

So far, it seems as if Hezbollah, with Teheran’s permission, was looking for a repeat of the strategy of 2006, which basically was the entrapment of Israel into reacting exactly as foolishly as it did at the time, that is to say, hastily. Israel reacted then exactly as Teheran wanted: rushing into battle without thinking, with the ulterior purpose of distracting the world from Iran’s own troubles at the time…

That’s who these outfits are, both funded by Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah. They both claim to be Islamist purificationists. They are not nationalists; that is a Western concept. They are Muslims with a mission to over throw all corrupt Islamic governments in the world and conquer all non-Islamic countries.

Haaretz reported this morning that the group that fired off those six rockets yesterday could be any one of a half-dozen groups, cells really, gangs really. Haaretz reported there are at least five groups identified with Al-Qaida or Global Jihad as it is known here: 1-Jaish al-Umma which means “people’s army jaish being an illiterate, mispronunciation of the Hebrew word gai-is.

2-Jaish al-Islam/Army of Islam associated primarily with one clan only in Gaza, the notorious Dughmush family. 3- Jund Ansar Allah, Jund is another word in Arabic for “army.” Ansar which means “apostles” and alludes to Muhammad’s 12 apostles, an idea he stole from Christianity. So this gang in English would be “Allah’s Army of Apostles.”

Then 4- Jaish al-Mumaminin/Army of Believers, 5- Al-Qaida of Palestine and 6- last but not least with the longest name, Kata’ib al-Suyuf a-lHaq Al-Islamiya, in English that would be “The Swords of Islamic Justice Brigades. These are the groups at the moment suspected in last Friday’s firing of a Grad missile into a Jewish apartment house in Ashqelon…

The legal paperwork of the League of Nations also made our rights here crystal clear and said not a word about any “Palestinians” with an equivalent right to a state in this tiny territory.

These Arabs, my book, my work-in-progress documents, spent the first Biblical generation of forty years after the League of Nations Mandate kicked in denying there was such a country as Palestine.

Not until a decade following the birth of Israel, and the shedding of the term “Palestinian” for the Jews in the new state of Israel; not until 1959 is there a conscious effort to pick up the idea of “Palestine” and imagine an historic “Palestinian” people living in it. When the Jews stopped using the words “Palestine” and “Palestinian,” and starting using the words “Israel” and “Israelis”; ten years later the Arabs picked up those words and ever since have made them their own.

In truth these Arabs in their masses can here only came after the Zionists, and because of the Zionists who were creating wealth and job opportunities. So many of the Arabs who ran into Gaza in 1948 had been migrant workers from all over the Arab world who because they were migrant workers had no immovable property to hold onto in the fighting. There was nothing “Palestinian” about them, let alone Ancient Palestinian about these 200,000 migrant workers who ran behind Egyptian lines in 1948-49 and got marooned. Undocumented aliens with no papers.

The Palestinian Narrative is pure invention and the sky would not fall if an Israeli leader would say so in public…

A state without belief in the G-d of Israel and the holiness of His Books and commentaries on them that Jews live by and survive by.

Because these Israelis, these spiritual offspring of the Reform Jew Theodor Herzl don’t believe the ideology of the Jews, they behave the way they do.

The top story, the hot story today was like a flashback to earlier decades in the Judenstaat when Shimon Peres was a notorious, compulsive saboteur of his superiors in government. When he was inferior in power during the Labor-Likud power-sharing agreement under Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, Peres on his own engineered a deal with the Arabs contrary to Shamir’s policy.

It was in that period as well that his long-time rival in Labor Yitzhak Rabin called Peres a khatran bil-tee nil-ey in the mid-1980s; that means a “tireless underminer.” Peres had a reputation for that. Peres pulled off what was the called “the stinking maneuver” in the 1980s, another of his betrayals

And so this morning on Kol Yisrael, whose correspondent Ayala Hasson reported on a source who contacted her, an anonymous man who claims he sat at a table earlier in the month next to Saeb Erekat and Chaim Ramon at the American Colony Hotel and heard Ramon say to Erekat that he was an agent of his former mentor now Pres. Shimon Peres, and that Abbas should continue to refuse to meet with Israel in direct talks.

Indeed, yesterday I think Netanyahu dropped a cryptic remark that his genuine desire for direct talks was being sabotaged, when he said cryptically, “…and not from the right.”

Of course today Peres denied this narrative. Never happened. He didn’t send Ramon to sabotage Bibi’s policy.

So whether or not it did or didn’t, it did resonate with Uncle Shimon’s dirty past as a khatran bil-tee nil-ey/a “tireless underminer.” ..

The goyim among whom we lived did not accept us, but also our liturgy of many years overflows with references to Eretz Yisrael and Yerushalayim. Those who know something of Judaism, if far less than they imagine, think that “Next year in Jerusalem” is said once a year at the Passover seder. Not true. Three times a day six days a week we pray in the 18 Blessings to be returned to Jerusalem. Jews have survived these 1,800 years precisely because the discipline of religion kept this people alive like a life preserver at sea preventing the people from sinking into the ages of human history.

Unlike the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Persians, the Romans, the Hapsburgs, the Ottomans, we are still here. Still alive, alive and kicking; still being fruitful and vital. And we have stayed alive via these “rituals” which when seen from the outside appear to be obsessive-compulsive behaviors; rituals.

When on the contrary, they are free-willed behaviors which may look like rituals when seen from outside but inside they are mnemonics, memory devices; they all have meaning. By observing Passover every year, we never forget the beginning of our people as slaves who escaped; and who, by contrast to their slavery, of their own free will, accepted at Mt. Sinai the commandments which demand to be performed on G-d’s instructions, which behavior contributes mightily to the immortality of the Jewish people.

Put another way, the Jewish religion is the heart of Jewish national identity, which makes the Jewish nation unique among the nations of the world…

Antisemitism at its most basic is telling lies about the alleged evil the Jews have done and are doing, when we have not and are not doing. The alleged evil, the classic example of this is the blood libel, about which an entire book verifying its truth was written by the Defense Minister of Syria in the 1980s, called The Matza of Zion. Down the corridors of time people have accused Jews of this crime, which Jews have absolutely never committed. And this architecture of the mind repeats itself from generation to generation: Jews being accused of horrendous crimes for which they are not guilty and commonly when the guilty party does exist but is shielded by the antiJew lie.

Rashid Khalidi here exposes himself as classic antisemite/Jew-hater because he is right that the Arabs in Gaza are “effectively imprisoned.”

But Israel is not the imprisoner. It is not Israel’s fault; it’s not Israel’s guilt. The Arabs in the slums are there because fellow Arabs like himself, professional, salaried Israel-bashers, don’t want the situation to change. The backers of those slum-dwellers are men like Khalidi himself and the entire scam that UNRWA has been. Those slum-dwellers are kept there by every Arab state that does not offer them citizenship, especially the Arab states that in 1948 attacked Israel; Israel did not attack them.

Rashid al-Khalidi is a textbook specimen of a modern antisemite because he smears Israel with his own side’s guilt; his guilt and that of his Arab brethren; and all the Western states who keep funneling rivers of money into Gaza to keep these people on the dole…

But when the Jews assert their right to have their own, officially Jewish state, as a nation and a religion, the Enlightened start smirking and sneering at those racist Jews who don’t want to share Palestine with the Ancient Palestinians. Wasn’t Zionism uniquely singled out in the council of nations in 1975 as the only nationalist movement on Planet Earth that was a “form of racism”?

When the Arabs and Muslims assert their national identities as Arabs and Muslims, that’s okay. But among the Enlightened these very days their deep-thinkers of the Left continue to toy with the idea that if the Two-State Solution doesn’t come about, then we will have a One-State Solution in which Israel ceases to exist as exclusively a Jewish state, as Saudi Arabia is exclusively Arab-Muslim. It will become a bi-national state in which both ancient nations can live in perfect harmony and equality, and never mind that for 14 centuries they never did.

So I wish these Israelis would stop calling these Arabs, these Muslims, “Palestinians.” I mean, how did the IDF Spokesman know for sure that they were “Palestinians”? Arabs have been known to travel from their home countries to others in the world to kill people. Volunteers like Osama bin Ladin went to Afghanistan in the 1980s to resist the atheist Russian invaders. For years, Arabs wanting to kill Americans and other Allied soldiers have gone to Syria then crossed over into Iraq. They also have infiltrated via the border between Saudi Arabia and Iraq, which traffic the Saudis did not care for and thus built a long security barrier about which the Enlightened says not one word of protest.

I think it is historically a grievous error on Israel’s part since 9-11 for Israel not to re-brand our neighbors here as Muslims, fanatical Muslims, the same enflamed rag heads who brought down the World Trade Center; the same homicidal maniacs who blew up trains in London and Madrid slaughtering hundreds of innocent people.

I await the day Israelis stop calling these people “Palestinians” and start calling them as their fathers in Zionism called them: Arabs. Herzl, Weizmann, Jabotinsky, across the spectrum they called the Arabs Arabs…

Which is why there is not going to be a “Palestinian” state as the antiJews of the world imagine it. It just ain’t going to happen that the people of Israel are going to agree to drive 500,000 Jews from their homes and force them to return to the 9-mile wide waist of a country that Israel had in 1967. And of course after this mass flight and re-settlement program, the Muslims will take complete control of the western slope of the hills of Judea and Samaria overlooking that 9-mile wide strip of congested Jewish life and be free to set up their primitive, portable Qassam rocket launching apparatus. Jews are not going to agree to that.

World antiJewry believes in the future transformation of Judea and Samaria into a Judenrein “Palestinian” state as of right; and until Israel agrees to this “Two-State Solution,” Israel will be the guilty party, the enemy of justice and peace, the criminal victimizer of the Ancient Palestinian people whose land Israel refuses to return.

And in a similar vein to this antiJew demand that Israel retreat to the 1949 cease-fire line, which no sober Israeli will ever agree to, so Israel demands of the Hamites here that they recognize Israel as a Jewish state, which demand from the Muslim viewpoint is likewise simply impossible. At least until they have a Reformation or a Vatican II.

What Netanyahu is doing is demanding that these Arabs sign off on the rightness of Jews living free and independent in our ancient homeland, which is a demand in direct contradiction to the Qur’an and 14 centuries of history between Jews and Arab Muslims. Forget the legendary Golden Age of Spain; the common record of Jewish life under Arab Muslims is a poor one. The Jews suffered every bit as much as Jews in Ashkenaz at Christian hands. The Qur’an repetitively deals with the Jews, and it is clear, as one verse says, that we are Islam’s Enemy No. 1, “more than Christian priests,” according to the verse.

In other words, the last 17 years of peace-making, the bloody handiwork the Jewish Left, Rabin, Peres, Beilin, Indyk, etc. has been an impossible dream dreamed up by ignorant men ignorant of Islam and its historic mistreatment of Jews.

And why? Men like Rabin, Peres and Beilin were raised as antiJew, secular Zionists who thought that if they, as “Israelis,” did not act like Jews, believe like Jews, live like Jews, the Arabs wouldn’t treat them as Jews. The world would treat Israelis as normal people. No more of this Chosen People stuff and persecutions.

No, Israelis like Rabin and Peres and Beilin, Amos Oz, David Grossman, A.B. Yehoshua still believe that if we stop abusing the victims of our parents’ Zionism and do right by the “Palestinians” whose right to this land is every bit as righteous as the Jewish right, only then will peace come.

The implication of this view of course is that all the Arabs want and are justified in wanting is half of Jerusalem and all of Judea and Samaria, and not a square meter more.

Just give them everything Israel took in 1967, give it all back, and they will break out into smiles of gratitude and friendship.

For these radically dejudaized people, because of their radical dejudaization, are incapable of empathically, truly identifying with the Arabs/the Muslims they purport to care for; identify with them as fellow religionists. And because of this defect, they are blind and deaf to the essential religious nature of the Arabs’ complaint against Israel…

What these narcissistic, hedonistic wrong-headed people don’t understand is that Jewish law and living by that law is what keeps the Jewish people alive; exactly as, say, the American people keep alive by living according to the Constitution and all the cases that have come from it. Without living by a written text you bind yourself too, there is nothing to keep the identity of a community intact.

Listen to Rabbi Galia Sadan explain and complain about the Orthodox method of conversion, commonly of the non-Jewish spouse in one of the marriages her stream throws holy water on: “Are we bringing people closer to us, whether as spouses or on their own, in a pleasant, accepting process that understands the tension between a person’s desire to adopt Jewish tradition. And his desire to maintain a modern lifestyle, or are we interested in a humiliating process that causes people to fail? Orthodox conversion is very difficult to complete. It’s an educational process that expects people to become religiously observant, and what can you do if not everyone wants to become religiously observant? People pretend so they’ll get the seal of approval. Our country was revealed in all its glory in 2002 when it declared that it is pluralistic, and that a person can be recognized as a convert in any denomination he chooses. The High Court of Justice ruled that the government must recognize all conversions for all intents and purposes. And now this bill comes along and takes us backward. We’re giving up pluralism, recognizing only the Israeli rabbinate…Giving authority to the Chief Rabbinate means that if you don’t observe the Sabbath, they won’t convert you. If you seek to convert because you want to live according to Jewish tradition but don’t want to observe Shabbat – to live a Jewish but not an orthodox life – you won’t be able to convert though. This is an undemocratic country where there are people who can’t get married.”

Let me stop there. I don’t know about you but this is just brainlessness, takes my breath away.

Time for a break…

Notice too how Carroll says the “Palestinians” finally mounted resistance, in 1936, with the implication that they attacked British occupying forces the way, say, the Minutemen in American in 1776 attacked uniformed British soldiers.

No. As suggested before, they began by murdering Jews at random. And notice the use of the word “resistance.” Carroll has adopted the word Arabs use to describe their terror atrocities to this very day. Hamas calls its violence against Israel “resistance”; so does Hezbollah; so does Bin Ladin. These paranoiacs perceive the very existence of Western civilization as a threat to them, and therefore they must “resist” it.

Carroll calls the violence of 1936-39 a “London-ordered colonial war”. This too bears no true reflection of that decade’s intifada. Carroll uses the word “brutal” but only to refer to Britain’s response, not the brutality of the Arabs who murdered Jews at random just like today; shot up crowds of Jews exiting movie theaters after the show; shot up medical clinics for Jews and medical clinics for Arabs in which Jewish doctors and nurses provided the service. Carroll reserves the word “brutal” for the British.

He writes of “Political institutions and economic systems…devastated” presumably by the British at that time; presumably “Palestinian” political institutions. The truth is they had no political institutions at that time. Just two years before in 1934 they created their first political parties which weren’t even that: they were fancy names given to the two rival families in Jerusalem, the al-Husseini and the Nashashibi families who gussied up their respective clans with political names.

And as for devastating the “Palestinian economy”: the Arabs did that to themselves by calling that April for a national strike of Arab labor to protest Jews coming into the land fleeing Nazi Europe; which strike only boosted the Jewish economy and crippled their own. They did it to themselves.

Lastly, Carroll writes “The Palestinian social fabric was ripped asunder, never fully to be restitched again.”

This is in a class with the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, Arab poetry sucked from a hash pipe. Again, in 1936 there was no “Palestinian” social fabric. In that year the Arabs’ leader Haj Amin was still denying there was such a place as Palestine.

What James Carroll does when he writes about Israel like this is to reflect the “Palestinian narrative” he has downloaded into his head these last 40 years when he should know it is a pile of filthy lies about Jews and the violence here.

He has in his head a false history because he wants to have a false history in which moral equivalence is the background music. He writes “Two peoples who have each defined themselves positively by negative hatred of the other but…each can receive the other’s account of the past and perhaps for the first time, hear it respectfully.”

Yeah, the moral equivalence of our version and their version. For this perverted post-modernist, both sides have a valid memory of history and both sides have a valid claim – and to hell with the historical truth; and I do mean to Hell.

Thus does this post-Catholic priest hang onto a fresh reason for scourging the Jews…

The original sin of Oslo was the decision to trash the principle of not dealing with such evil men as Arafat and Abbas, to engage them in negotiations.

Men like these, these butchers of innocent people in terrorist atrocities deserve not negotiations but only to be hunted down and killed.

Not only is that the moral thing to do, it is the smart, strategic thing to do, for negotiations get you nowhere except deeper into the slime and the last 17 years have been proof of that…

So, not surprisingly on Tuesday when Bibi met Barack, the latter came out of the meeting pleased to tell the press that he was persuaded that Israel is, under Prime Minister Netanyahu’s leadership, ready to “take risks for peace.”

That’s an expression of lengthy pedigree; it has been in the lexicon of the peace processors for years. They believe that one necessary ingredient of successful peace processing is Israel’s readiness to “take risks for peace” – which is code for “retreat and weakening itself by handing over strategically important terrain to the enemy in the belief this will please him and slake his thirst for what Israel possesses. Israel must take a risk for peace by endangering itself even more than it is endangered now.”

And why? To placate, to satisfy, to soothe the savage breast of the Ishmaelites who feel aggrieved because Israel stole Palestine from them. If Israel wants peace, it must compensate the victims of its national movement.

Hence, even more “confidence-building gestures” to be made by Israel. Notice, the Ancient Palestinians are never asked to make their own confidence-building measures, like reducing the quantity of antisemitic bilge on their PA TV station.

Nothing. Never. Goornisht. Only Israel must make confidence-building measures a/k/a baksheesh, tribute. The Ancient Ones never, the aggrieved party in this relationship.

One wishes for a prime minister who when asked by some obnoxious, ignorant journalist like a Thomas Friedman if Israel is prepared to take risks for peace, answers candidly: “What, are you crazy? Do you think we are crazy? We are surrounded on the three sides, 5 and a half million of us, by 300 million barbaric Arabs and Muslims whose core identity, Islam, is a nasty piece of antisemitic nonsense in a league with Mein Kampf or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

“We Jews too, if not ahistorical Israelis, have a history with these Muslims going back 14 centuries, and it’s not a pretty story. And in our own time as well, these cruel savages have bombed us hundreds of times with their suicide maniacs, homicidal Muslim maniacs for whom murdering Jews is the ultimate in piety, more important than life itself. Exploding yourself in the middle of a crowd of unsuspecting Jewish people in an otherwise peaceful civilian setting is worth it – if you take the lives of as many al-Yahud as you can with you.

“That’s who the enemy is, No. 1. No.2: We don’t take risks because we live on the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea on a strip of land 50 miles/80 kilometers across, that’s it.

“Take risks for peace”? The last person in Israel who should be ready to take risks for peace is the prime minister. His first duty is to protect his people. A parent sends his child to school on a school bus and expects the driver to take no chances when on the road with his charges. He must take no risks. And likewise the prime minister of Israel is charged with the safety of his people surrounded by all these brutes.

“No sir,” I would tell Prince Obama Israel will take no risks for peace whatsoever. Let the other side take risks for peace. We took a big risk in 1994 when we handed over a significant amount of land to the Arabs in Yesha and what we got in return was a series of diabolical bombings that took the lives of almost 2,000 Jews and wounded even more physically, and even more emotionally: the surviving family and friends of the dead, the crippled and the mutilated.

I am sick of these peace processors and their process which is all about kowtowing to these barbarians…

The newspapers here have been, these three days of this week, running large advertisements paid for by Yesha Council featuring the faces and quotations of seven of his cabinet ministers vowing the resumption of building in September. It is meant to be a signal to him and Obama that there are people here who are furious at this freeze.

I’m furious, though I give Bibi the benefit of doubt, for, believe it or not, there is something more important than ending the freeze and that is defanging Iran.

The Muslim antisemite in the Oval Office is reported to be demanding that the freeze continue or else no U.S. efforts against Iran.

If that is so, then I would expect Bibi to terminate the freeze as planned because this guy is an antagonist; he is an enemy who is not to be trusted. He is going to screw us no matter what Bibi decides. If he thinks that prolonging the freeze will get this son of a female canine to change his spots, I think he is mistaken.

I only wish Bibi would find his way to laying down the law that Judea and Samaria are not Gross Pointe, Michigan or Tuxedo Park, NY, – restricted communities – but our ancient homeland which is so central to our religion, and no one on this planet has the right to tell us we can’t live in Judea and Samaria. It is not settled wisdom etched in granite that Judea and Samaria must be Judenrein.

Bibi has to go public and declare war against this line of thinking. He has to say that until such time as the Arabs in Yesha publicly, in a referendum monitored by Jimmy Carter, vote in support of the proposition that the Jews have a right to have their state in the ancient homeland; and the Arabs publicly foreswear this ridiculous notion of a “right of return,” the right to flood Israel will millions of hostile Muslims, Israel will live without a peace agreement with these people. And Israel will continue to maintain by force if necessary the right of Jews to live anywhere in the heart of the heart of Promised Land they want to…

I mean, down in the imitation goy university in Beersheva, named for David ben-Gurion, a professor of bioethics was just fired because he told his students that homosexuality was flawed behavior and could be restrained. As he restrains himself from fornication with women he finds attractive because he is married; so this behavior likewise can be contained.

He also said same sex couples raising a child deprive that child of a normal life.

This offended a sodomite in the class who got him fired. And although YNET.com did not report if the professor believes in the G-d of Israel, it did report that he lives in Kiryat Arba, which of course is in “Occupied Palestine.”

Maybe it’s just me, but I think society, Western society has gone crazy in the matter of sodomy. Just last Monday, the U.S Supreme Court said a university can deny recognition of a Christian student group because it will not admit people who sodomize one another (and other non-Christians), for surely it is as anti-Christian a behavior as it is antiJewish.

In a five-to-four decision in Washington, the U.S. Supreme Court sided against that Christian group because of its rejection of sodomites as members in their group.

I think the world has gone mad.

Last week too, in her confirmation hearings, the post-mitzvot Jewess Elena Kagan, which name reveals her descent from Aaron the High Priest, spoke of a decision she made at Harvard having to do with fair treatment regardless of “sexual orientation.”

“Sexual orientation.” That is an invention in a class with “homophobia,” “Islamophobia,” “transgender,” “Ancient Palestinian.” It is a verbal invention whose purpose is to spread a smoke-screen of fantasy over the truth.

“Sexual orientation”? There is no such thing. This expression was invented by sexual deviants to re-brand their deviation as normal and not deviant.

“Sexual orientation” was invented to preach the moral equivalence of normal sexual behavior between men and women, versus abnormal behavior. To say that so-and-so has a different “sexual orientation” is like saying the anorexic has a different nutritional orientation. Most people like to eat. The anorexic prefers not to. What’s the deal?

Of course with the anorexic her different nutritional orientation will kill her. Homosexual orientation does not necessarily kill on an individual basis, but if enough people in a society commit this perversion, the society will die. This is historical fact. The homosexuality of ancient Greece and Rome was a major factor in the disappearance of those cultures and societies.

A couple of months ago in England, somewhere in Cumbria, a Baptist street preacher spoke against sodomy and a complaint was filed, and he was arrested and jailed for basically hurting the feelings of a sodomite who heard him.

And then there is the “transgender” invention associated with the so-called “sex-change.”

The truth is that no man or woman has ever been turned into the opposite sex. This is a verbal fantasy invention. Men and women are distinguished from one another by possessing one of two types of reproductive, bodily organs: the man’s two-part equipment external to the body and the woman’s internal womb. No man has ever been fitted with a womb; no woman with a working set of male equipment.

And in fact, the professional literature regarding the misnamed “transgender” patient never records the desire of the sick one to either father a child or become pregnant to bear and nurse a child. What these slaves of their fantasies want is to wear the clothes of the other sex and pretend to be the other sex – which has nothing to do with procreation and child-rearing and everything to do with the archaic image in Greek and Roman mythology of the hermaphrodite.

This was a Catholic philosophy about as wrong-headed as its pathological and ultimately suicidal installation of celibacy as a priestly ideal. Look at what the Irish Catholics did to themselves: they would take the best brain among the kids and turn into a priest who does not pass on his good DNA. Not only is celibacy perverse, it’s stupid.

And it was the same wrong-headed thinking that had the Church of Rome condemning money-lending as an evil.

When it is not. What a money system does is transform immovable wealth, such as land (real estate) into a liquid commodity that gets passed around. Capitalism, not socialism, creates the greatest material good for the greatest number because it virtually alchemically transforms natural resources/immovable wealth (after gold and silver) into a symbolic piece of paper, which requires literacy to be read. And that’s the way to spread the wealth around. There is a connection between capitalism and democracy for the common man.

And when the English broke from Rome and began their slow rise to world dominance, they had to deal with such as the international Jewish merchants in Venice who, thanks to their multi-lingual abilities and business sense, were the major importers and exporters of the day. And that comedy by Mr. Shakespeare which is now playing in New York by a disappointing Al Pacino was written in that time period when the Jew was still a money-grubbing, blood-thirsty, all-around disgusting person, a figure of ridicule. When Shakespeare first mounted this production, there was, in modern terms, zero political correctness about laughing at and making fun of Jews. Nothing to be ashamed of. This was pre-Holocaust.

On the contrary, in England’s mostly Roman Catholic phase, Christians every Good Friday heard a sermon in the parish church confirming them in the belief that Jews are perfidious. That’s how bad the Jews are. They are perfidious…

Every major terrorist attempt in the name of Islam, 9-11 in New York and 7/7 in London, the recent Times Squares attempt, etc. has been carried out by Muslims over the edge, living out a perfectly satanic life, a Hamitic life in which acts of monstrous violence are pulled off with nary a twinge of conscience.

If these Muslims can in their hundreds of millions applaud a 9-11 as they did, they are capable of launching atomic bombs not only against us, G-d forbid, but have the brains to put a small rocket with an atomic bomb on a cargo ship and sail it from the Persian Gulf into Chesapeake Bay and lob it Qassam-like into downtown Washington, G-d forbid.

There has been much in the news these days, rumors of Israel and/or the U.S. together preparing a strike against Iran. Last week here, former Mossad chief Shabtai Shavit and the current head of the national security bureau for Bibi, Uzi Arad, both separately spoke of the necessity of an Israeli pre-emptive strike. With nuclear missiles in the equation, the dynamics of conflict are different from the mainstream in an old Wild West town where the guy who drew first was the guilty party. With atomic weapons in Iranian hands, we in Israel simply cannot, as Arad explained – not a new thought by him – reserve the right to counter-attack after a nuclear strike against us. We can’t wait for their first strike. As they say in Noo York, ‘Fuggedaboutit”..