web analytics
August 26, 2016 / 22 Av, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘left’

Study: German Extreme Left also Extremely Anti-Semitic

Wednesday, July 20th, 2016

An online survey of 36,000 people conducted by the Free University Berlin (FU) suggests that anti-Semitic attitudes among the German far-left are more widespread than has been generally believed, Die Welt reported.

34% of individuals identified by the study as belonging to the “extreme left” agreed with the statement that Jews had “too much influence” in Germany.

Among the “radical left,” — which, unlike the “extreme left,” supports democracy and the German constitution, 16% agreed with the statement.

Altogether, 10% of Germans surveyed agreed Jews had “too much influence” in Germany.

The Freie Universität Berlin, often abbreviated as FU Berlin or just FU, is one of the most prominent universities in Germany.

Individuals identified by the survey as being on the extreme left and radical left made up 17 percent of respondents.

A high proportion of the far left agreed with the anti-Semitic stereotype that Jews are “greedy.” 34% of the extreme left, and 13% of the left agreed with the statement, while across the entire political spectrum only 8% did.

The researchers, Monika Deutz-Schroeder and Klaus Schroeder, also examined the use of violence by the far left, concluding that while the far left does not represent an immediate threat to German democracy, its propensity to violence is probably going to increase.

14% of respondents on the extreme left consider politically motivated violence to be justified, compared with only 7% across German society.

Schroeder complained to Die Welt that the extreme left’s connections to many politically motivated acts of violence are not reported. For example, according to the official report, 600 violent crimes each year are carried out by leftists who are not identified as “extremists.” But Schroeder argued that, by definition, “anyone who tries to create political change through violence is an extremist. Period.”

David Israel

A Soldier’s Mother: The Marketplace of the Left: Times of Israel Censors a Soldier’s Mother

Wednesday, July 6th, 2016

Wow…cowards…OMG…WOW…

I posted a comment to the Times of Israel right now on an article attacking a blogger for explaining why he is no longer comfortable blogging at the Times of Israel…

Within about a minute, my comment was removed. Marketplace of Ideas? Yeah, not…

Anyone who wants to borrow my comment and post it…please do – I think everyone should copy and paste this…until they either allow freedom of speech or they change their slogan to “the marketplace of the left” and their name to the Times of Palestine.

The article attacking the blogger is here: Looking for a Fight in All the Wrong Places and attacks a fellow journalist for his outrage and his decision to leave the Times of Israel after writing well over 100 posts for them.

Against my better judgment, I’ll ask that you go to that article and consider posting my comment in your name. The Times of Israel is wrong, and so is the author of this article.

My comment (the one that was deleted…did I mention that they are cowards?) is here:

Actually, if you read the post made by the Times of Israel (referenced in my article: The Friggin Times of Israel) you’ll note that the complaint is even stronger than in the article you cite. It is interesting that in their coverage of the Tel Aviv terror attack, Tel Aviv as a noun (a city) was only referenced once; other times, as adjectives to explain which police force, which hospital, whatever. In the article on Hallel’s murder, the terror attack was referenced as a “stabbing attack” while the Tel Aviv attack wasn’t called a “shooting attack” but a “terror attack. And more – Hallel “died’ but the victims in the Tel Aviv attack were all “killed”…they didn’t die…they were killed (actually, to be honest, they were murdered).

And reference to Kiryat Arba as a settlement appears something like three or four times in that short article – it’s a settlement, a settlement, a settlement. Yeah we got that…given that Tel Aviv, where four people were murdered is only referenced once, isn’t it interesting that it was imperative to mention FOUR times, that Kiryat Arba is a settlement

As others have pointed out, using the term “West Bank” is clearly political and without question, the Times of Israel considers it “occupied” even if we were lucky enough this time to avoid that. But when used in relation to the bedroom in which Hallel was murdered, that is most definitely intentional and quite despicable and I commend “the author” for announcing publicly his disgust at yet another outrageous article attempting to blur lines and hide the truth.

I stopped writing for the Times of Israel several months ago after I was accused of “threatening” and “endangering” a writer/journalist/blogger simply by quoting the very outrageous words and clear incitement she used against an IDF soldier.

The fact is, I can name no less than five right-wing bloggers who have decided to give TOI a pass rather than put up with any more abuse.

How many different ways do you need it proven to you that the “West Bank” was definitely inserted in there to sway opinions? Hallel wasn’t murdere; she died. It wasn’t a terror attack; it was a “stabbing attack”. and, of course, it wasn’t just a bedroom where a child was brutally murdered…it was a “West Bank bedroom”. I’m a bit surprised, given that you live in the “West Bank” that you are not angered by this attempt, yet again, to separate this poor child from other Israelis.

I think criticizing someone’s post like this, attempting to censor someone’s opinion, is sadly typical of the Times of Israel. The original author has the right to his very correct opinion that feeds into the overall anti-Israel bias against Israel all over the world. When our own bloggers and journalists and media outlets can’t report and discuss such a horrible act using the correct words, what chance is there that others will get it right?

Hallel was murdered. In a terror attack. In her bedroom. Get it right; or don’t write it at all.

Paula Stern

Why Can’t The Left Stand Netanyahu?

Thursday, June 30th, 2016

Everyone is talking about the two-state solution, brought to us directly from the ideological study hall of the Left. So is Netanyahu. And Netanyahu is not only talking about it – he is literally begging Herzog to join his government so that he can rid himself of Bennett and do exactly what the Left wants.

He even enlisted the Egyptian president to give it another small push to make it happen. And to convince the still skeptical Left, he sent his right-hand man, Natan Eshel, to detail his plans in the most explicit and detailed manner in the radical leftist Ha’aretz newspaper.

But they prefer to attack Herzog, who almost made their dream come true, so that they can continue to hate Netanyahu. They organize their own parliament in Herzliya  – the type of parliament that doesn’t require non-essentials like a nation or democratic elections – a parliament that gets much more attention from the media than the elected parliament in Jerusalem.

And they feature two ex-chiefs of staff and an ex-defense minister in their parliament. And of course, all the headlines, all the news shows, and all the spotlights are directed at these two wannabe leaders, both of whom have inflicted immeasurable strategic damage on Israel. “Finally,” they gloat, “a true opposition to Netanyahu has risen.”

But why do they hate Netanyahu so much – even though he is doing everything to make their dream come true? Why, instead of supporting him and enabling him to realize their dream, do they prefer to hate him?

The answer is because Netanyahu managed to steal the Right before they could. And without the Right, it is impossible to win elections. They try to masquerade, just like Netanyahu. They put together groups of generals for security. Security is the catch phrase. It sounds rightist. They also put together all kinds of organizations, with lots of money from the New Israel Fund – in the guise of a moderate Right – a responsible, security-oriented Right. But the masks are too clumsy and the people are not really that stupid.

Only Netanyahu really knows how to steal the Right, not to say anything (the Likud doesn’t even have a platform), and to win elections. So how can they not hate him?

Moshe Feiglin

Rightwing NGO Proves the Left Has No Sense of Humor, Introspection [video]

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016

Israel’s remaining vestige of leftwing cultural tradition, Ha’aretz, fell for a rightwing hoax that exposed it as utterly bereft of the capacity for introspection, and worse, utterly without a sense of humor. This absence of humor could be attributed both to the paper’s proud tradition of German publishing (Ve don’t like jokes, sank you very much), as well as to the decline of the Israeli left, which used to do funny.

What’s good for the goose, the gander should at least try once, figured Israeli rightwing NGO Regavim, which is usually engaged in tracking European Union and Arab violations of real estate regulations in areas legally under Israeli control in Judea and Samaria. If upwards of 30 Israeli and Arab leftwing NGOs are receiving millions of euros annually to influence Israeli policy, why not invest a couple of shekels in influencing European policy? Take, for instance, the Brexit referendum coming up this week, in which Britons will decide whether or not to leave the European Union, and which all UK citizens find annoying, humiliating and repressive, but about half of them say it’s worth it for the economic benefits (which brings to mind certain obvious professions).

So Regavim launched a campaign featuring a website with a message to expat Britons in Israel to vote yes on leaving the EU: Support Israel – Leave Europe, which features some inflammatory text, actually making their case about the goose and the gander:

“The EU pumps hundreds of millions of pounds into Israel annually through an array of NGOs in addition to the Palestinian Authority. With over 200 land disputes worldwide, the EU’s constant singling out of Israel is tantamount to state sponsored anti-Semitism.

“For decades, the pro-Israel community has sat and watched as the Europeans increase their influence and meddle with the lives and future of the people of Israel. Finally Israel supporters in the UK and abroad can take a stand against the EU, by voting leave.”

How much could that have cost? Eight bucks to register the URL, plus, say $50 to get a guy to put it up. Then they invested another hundred bucks or so in a video showing a Hamas traditionally masked press conference encouraging Britons to stay in the EU, because it would advance the Hamas cause. The bang they got for their buck was huge, because Ha’aretz reporter Uriel David leaped on the opportunity to slam the right, leaped without looking, we should add.

“Rightwing NGO Receiving Public Funds Calling on British to Leave the Union” was the headline, followed by, “The rightwing NGO Regavim supports the UK leaving the European Union as revenge for its support for the Palestinians. A January examination revealed that, according to the same NGO, it received about 11 million shekels ($2.85 million) from government entities.”

Then Ha’aretz added, without a shred of self awareness, apparently, after decades in which it has supported the vast flow of European money to fully fund anti-Israeli, leftwing NGOs: “Regavim is a non-profit active in favor of judaizing lands and against illegal Palestinian construction in Israel and the West Bank. The organization’s heads often criticize the European Union and other international entities for their alleged (sic) intervention in Israel’s internal affairs and their support for illegal construction programs.”

So now it’s been established, the goose really hates it when the gander is doing goosey things, and sees nothing funny about it.

 

Finally, the most rewarding reaction from the left came from Peace Now founder Yariv Oppenheimer, who regularly reminds you of the kid who gets picked last for games but hasn’t given up trying to look cool, who tweeted: “The Israeli government is funding an NGO that tries to meddle in the internal affairs of another country? Can it be?”

Hey, if the Brexit goes in favor of cutting away from the continent—a move endorsed by John Cleese of Monty Python fame, who really knows humor—it could be blamed on those pesky settlers.

JNi.Media

Advice to Clinton: Don’t Try to Placate Sanders’ Hard Left Voters

Thursday, June 9th, 2016

Even following Hillary Clinton’s historic victory in the primaries, there are some among the most radical Bernie Sanders supporters—let’s call them Sanderistas—who would actually like to see Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton in the general election. Their “logic” is as follows: If Clinton wins, Sanders becomes just another loser. The Sanderistas become marginalized. And their leader’s quest for a political revolution ends with the election of yet another centrist, “establishment” Democrat.

However, if Trump beats Clinton, Sanders will claim to become the titular leader of the Democrat party, pointing to early polls showing that he would have beaten Trump, though these polls signify little about how he would have done in an actual head to head contest. (In my opinion, he would have suffered a devastating defeat comparable to those suffered by other left-wing candidates such as Mondale and Dukakis, though nothing is predictable with Trump as the Republican nominee). Moreover, were Clinton to lose, Sanders’ influence would increase within the party—and around the country—because the Sanderistas will take credit for Clinton’s defeat and insist that without them the Democrats can’t win a general election.

Other Sanderistas have put forward a more destructive rationale. As one of Sanders’ most prominent surrogates, the actress Susan Sarandon explained “[S]ome people feel that Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately if he gets in, things will really explode.” Sarandon, who made the same case for Ralph Nader in the 2000 presidential election (and look how that turned out), is not the only Sanders supporter who feels that a Trump presidency could be the catalyst for the leftist political revolution promised by Sanders and his surrogates.

These hard left radicals, just like their anti-establishment counterparts on the extreme right, believe that the nomination system is rigged if they do not get their way. Ultimately, it’s unsurprising that Trump has seized on that sentiment and invited them to join forces in the quest for a revolution: “To all of those Bernie Sanders voters who have been left out in the cold by a rigged system of super delegates, we welcome you with open arms.”

As she struggles to unify the Democratic Party, however, Clinton should be wary: any effort to embrace the Sanderistas will backfire. They won’t vote for her anyway, unless she goes so far left as to fall off the political cliff. As CNN recently reported, “Sanders has inspired a movement, but it’s unclear whether he can control it. Or if he wants to… [M]any [of his supporters] insist they will not fall into line behind Hillary Clinton… They are taking seriously Sanders’ call for a political revolution, complicating any hope for quick unity with Clinton.” One such Sanderista is quoted as saying, “You can’t expose the corruption of the political system and then expect us to get behind that same political system.” Another threatens that “[i]f Bernie Sanders does not walk out of that thing as the nominee, we can guarantee you from that point on we’ll start the de-registration of the Democratic Party. They have a choice to make.”

Even if some Sanderistas were to rally to Clinton, their votes in swing states would not be enough to have a meaningful impact on the general election, especially in comparison to the support she would lose in the political center, which has little appetite for revolution. Moreover any appeasement of the far left will be welcomed by the Republican Party, who now fear that its centrist wing will defect in large numbers, and vote for Clinton, because they regard Trump as something of a kook. If Clinton embraces the Sanderistas, these voters will view the election as a contest between the kooky right and the equally kooky left. Given that choice, they will prefer their right wing kook to the left wing kook.

This is not to say that Clinton should not consider supporting reasonable programs just because they were advocated by Sanders. She already has, and should continue, to talk about reducing the gap between the rich and the poor, raising the minimum wage, rethinking trade agreements, holding Wall Street accountable, making college more affordable and other domestic economic fixes. She staked out that territory in her speech on Tuesday night and she should continue to try to appeal to reasonable Sanders voters, especially among the young.

However, there are two particular areas where the Sanders program would endanger Clinton’s electoral prospects. The first is domestic: she should not adopt Sanders economics of spending more that a reasonable budget would permit. Adopting some pie in the sky proposals that would add trillions of dollars to the budget and dramatically increase our national debt would be a gift to Trump. Americans don’t want to be debtors who mortgage their children’s future. We want reasonable spending that we can afford.

The second gift to Trump would be in the area of foreign policy, particularly with regard to the Middle East. Were Clinton to move away from support for Israel, it could hurt her electoral chances in several swing states. Americans in general admire and support Israel. They don’t want a president who would parrot the views of radical anti-Israel haters such as Cornel West and James Zogby, who falsely accuse Israel of being an apartheid state that sets up concentration camps and aims to annihilate Palestinians. Even many of Sanders’ young supporters, some of whom are critical of certain Israeli policies – especially with regard to the settlements – do not want the U.S. to adopt the West-Zogby anti-Israel approach. Sanders received his support from young people for his domestic policy, not his foreign policy (about which he knows little). He wandered into the morass of Mideast politics only to satisfy his hard left supporters who think in absurd packages: if you support the environment and higher minimum wages, then you must oppose Israel. That’s not the way centrist and independent voters think, and Clinton must reject that kind of radical “intersectional” thinking if she is to beat Trump in the fall.

So let Hillary be Hillary and not become Bernie. Let her look for guidance to the successful centrist politics of Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, rather than the failed revolutionary screeds of Bernie Sanders, Cornel West and Susan Sarandon. We are a centrist nation that has thrived without the turmoil that extremes– both left and right– bring to politics and governance. We don’t want to emulate Europe and South America, which often alternate between socialist and nationalist regimes– between the Red and the Brown. If she gets too close to the hard left politics of Sanders most extreme “Bernie or bust” zealots, she may get burned in the general election – and so will our nation.

Alan M. Dershowitz

Confronting the Left at the Jerusalem Day Parade [video]

Tuesday, June 7th, 2016

Before you watch the video below, please read! (From the Facebook post)

Yesterday was awesome! I mean really awesome!

There were tens of thousands of Jews who gathered in Jerusalem to sing, dance and celebrate the Jewish return to Zion. Something we dreamed about for 2,000 years. After you watch it, please share it. It is important for all to see!

While so many joined the festivities of Jerusalem Day, left wing organizations attempted to ruin the party. Many left wingers curse the day we liberated Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. They actually treat this day with disdain. It is heartbreaking to see Jews siding with our enemies instead of focusing on rejoicing with the gift we were given; Jerusalem. It is horrible to hear Jews accepting historical lies our enemies are using to justify the murder of Jews.

In past years, there have been incidents of vandalism as individuals used the celebration to vent their anger at the Islamic terror and they inexcusably took it out on random Arab people. This behavior has nothing to do with the tens of thousands of others who were there to celebrate, but facts like that do not have any importance to the left wing activists I met.

The first activist I met was Sarah Tuttle Singer. For those who don’t know Sarah, she is the head social media person at the The Times of Israel.

She did not come to march, she came to stand against the march and when I asked if she was here to celebrate, all she could do was let out a gag as if to say, “you must be kidding me!”

She was there to report on what she was hoping to see, the vandalizing minority that people like Sarah thrive on. The problem is, she did not find them! NOT ONE!

While she must have been disappointed that she was unable to justify her rabid anti Jerusalem Day parade attitude, she was unable to admit it as she wrote her status that evening and said that others were saying this was one of the most calmest Jerusalem Day Parades. What do you mean others said, YOU WERE THERE SARAH! Can’t you admit you were MISTAKEN!

I asked her several questions about her political views which she had a hard time explaining and then I shut off the phone per her request. We did continue talking and as she usually does, she began to use profanity and sexual innuendo. She proudly told me how the Muslims in the area are her friends and I explained to her that is because she shares the same views as they do. I challenged her to go into the market and ask the first Muslim why they built a mosque on our Temple Mount and see how friendly they react. I offered to join her in the market as we challenge any Arab shop owner to give a date when Israel occupied Palestine from them or when such a country called Palestine ever existed. At first she agreed and then she said that she does not want to cause incitement…

CASE CLOSED! She did promise we would do so in the future…ya never know.

Next I met people from an organization call Tag Meir. This is an organization that fights Jewish violence and says absolutely nothing about Islamic terror. This is not a charge I am making, this is their charter.

The problem is not that this organization is opposed to random acts of violence by Jews, the problem is the Muslims they were giving flowers to are the ones who believe they are justified in attempting to destroy Israel and murder Jews. The leftists claimed 4 Arabs have been murdered by “Tag Mechir” over the last 68 years. I do not know who those 4 are but even if the number is true and unfortunate, not sure 4 murders justifies an organization to give flowers out to those who encourage the murder of Jews or focus on Jewish acts of vandalism while ignoring the thousands of Jews murdered by radical Islamic terror.

The bonus round was the Young Arab lady who was there and who claimed we occupied Jerusalem from the Arabs in 1984!!! When asked when an Arab Palestine country existed pre-Israel, she really lost it. Unfortunately my phone shut off and I did not get the Israeli women who claimed that Israel was the one who refused the partition plan because we wanted war with the Arabs. I tried to get her name to have her repeat her ludicrous claims afterwards but she naturally refused.

I then met a guy with another left wing, self hating organization that was there specifically to catch any Jews who bangs on Arab doors. The problem is not that they wanted to catch these vandals, the problem was they were spreading libels against the tens of thousands of people there as if they were involved in a crime that simply did not happen yet! They were there not to cover the event but to cover the person who is misbehaving and they made it perfectly clear that they were indeed generalizing.

Why is this important to see?

It is important to see because today’s war is an information war and it must be known that we have people from within who are simply misinformed and causing tremendous harm to Israel. We must not be silent! We must stand up and shout the truth.

Talking about shouting, my blood was boiling! How could Jews act like this and side with our enemies?

HOW?

Ari Fuld

Before Jerusalem’s Reunification, Shmuel Matza Left Defiant Carvings On A Prison Wall

Wednesday, June 1st, 2016

In late fall 1947, Shmuel Matza, then a 20-year-old member of the Etzel (also known as Irgun) Jewish underground paramilitary organization, was detained in the Kishle prison by the British on suspicion of possessing illegal arms.

“I decided to show the British that I was not afraid of them, that I would continue to be a member of Etzel even after my prison term, that I would continue to challenge them,” Matza recalls.

So one morning, Matza slipped his breakfast fork into his pocket just before the guards accompanied him back to his quarters – a tiny cell infested by rats and lice with only a mat of woven cloth on which to sleep. When the lights went out and everyone else was sleeping, including the police officers, Matza quietly removed that fork from his pocket.

Slowly and determinedly, he carved the following deep into the prison wall: his name; the emblem of the Irgun, a map of the historical land of Israel; and the Hebrew phrases for “only thus,” which suggested the Jewish people would use force to achieve freedom in their land, and “long live the Hebrew state.”

A few days later, Matza was transferred to the Latrun detention camp, from which he was released in April 1948, just ahead of Israel’s War of Independence. He fought for the state until the war ended in 1949. Then Matza went to law school, married, had children and grandchildren, and thought he had closed the previous chapter of his life.

Yet that chapter was unexpectedly reopened more than 50 years later, when archaeologists discovered Matza’s carvings – still bold, confident, and defiant – on an interior wall of the Kishle.

Archaeologists began excavating around the area of the Kishle after Israel’s 1967 Six-Day War, during which the Jewish state reunified Jerusalem following 19 years of Jordanian control over the city’s eastern portion. The capital’s reunification is celebrated by Israelis each year on Yom Yerushalayim (Jerusalem Day), which falls on June 5 this year.

In the aftermath of the 1967 war, then-Jerusalem mayor Teddy Kollek agreed to let the Israeli government develop Jerusalem’s Tower of David into a museum. But the Kishle, a 1,476-square-foot structure, was left untouched while archaeologists focused on the Tower. At the time, the Kishle, hidden behind a metal door and situated atop a winding spiral staircase next to the ancient ramparts of the Old City walls, was believed to have been built in the 19th century.

In 2000, Eilat Lieber – at the time the Tower’s director of education and now its general director and chief curator, was looking for a site within the museum’s grounds to host children’s programming. She remembered the Kishle from when she was a student at the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design in the 1980s.

“I had seen the plans for the museum and that the Kishle was part of the grounds,” Lieber tells JNS. “It was something that no one even remembered.”

Lieber launched a search for the key to unlock the Kishle, and found it in its rusty state on the key ring of the museum’s caretaker. The caretaker opened the door “and we saw this amazing space,” recalls Rose Ginosar, the Tower of David’s director of development and external relations.

The $1 million originally raised to produce the children’s center was instead funneled toward excavations in the Kishle. A team of Israel Antiquities Authority archaeologists led by Amit Re’em took everything out by hand until they hit bedrock. Along the way, they discovered layers revealing 2,800 years of history – a far cry from the previous assumption that the Kishle was constructed in the 19th century.

Maayan Jaffe-Hoffman

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/interviews-and-profiles/before-jerusalems-reunification-shmuel-matza-left-defiant-carvings-on-a-prison-wall/2016/06/01/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: