…by Jonas E. Alexis
What if you were told that deep racism and virulent hatred against Arabs and other people are alive and well in Israel and the Jewish establishment in America and elsewhere has done virtually nothing to stop it? How about segregated buses in Israel?
Let us do some thought experiments here: what if President Barack Obama were born in the “wrong” family and in the “wrong” country? Is it possible that he could have ended up like one of those migrant workers who have been treated like animals in Israel? Is it possible that he could have ended up working “at 25% below the minimum wage, without medical or social benefits, and without any work permit whatsoever”?
Furthermore, what if you suddenly discover that the ADL is actually a fifth column in the United States and applies double standards when it comes to Israel? Would that change your political hermeneutics?
When was the last time you heard a representative from the ADL or AJC or any other Jewish organization that pretentiously seeks to fight racism talking about Israel’s pervasive racism in schools and governments?
Listen to a 10th-grade girl in Israel:
“For me, personally, Arabs are something I can’t look at and can’t stand, I am tremendously racist. I come from a racist home. If I get the chance in the army to shoot one of them, I won’t think twice. I’m ready to kill someone with my hands, and it’s an Arab.
“In my education I learned that … their education is to be terrorists, and there is no belief in them. I live in an area of Arabs, and every day I see these Ishmaelites, who pass by the [bus] station and whistle. I wish them death.”
You may think that this is a disgruntled and deranged high school kid and her abiding hatred toward the Palestinians does not represent a significant number of schools in the country. But you will be wrong. In an article entitled “Israeli Teens Gripped by Virulent Racism,” the Jewish Daily Forward reported last month:
“The book is based on anthropological observations made by Dr. Yaron, a sociologist, over the course of three years in a six-year, secular high school in the Israeli heartland – ‘the most average school we could find,’ says Harpaz, a professor of education.
“The book is nothing short of a page-turner, especially now, following the overt displays of racism and hatred of the Other that have been revealed in the country in the past month or so. Maybe ‘revealed’ isn’t the right word, as it suggests surprise at the intensity of the phenomenon.
“But Yaron’s descriptions of what he saw at the school show that such hatred is a basic everyday element among youth, and a key component of their identity. Yaron portrays the hatred without rose-colored glasses or any attempt to present it as a sign of social ‘unity.’ What he observed is unfiltered hatred.
“One conclusion that arises from the text is how little the education system is able – or wants – to deal with the racism problem.
“Not all educators are indifferent or ineffective. There are, of course, teachers and others in the realm of education who adopt a different approach, who dare to try and take on the system. But they are a minority. The system’s internal logic operates differently.
“Much of the chapter on racism revolves around the Bible lessons in a ninth-grade class, whose theme was revenge. ‘The class starts, and the students’ suggestions of examples of revenge are written on the blackboard,’ the teacher told Yaron. A student named Yoav ‘insists that revenge is an important emotion.
“He utilizes the material being studied to hammer home his semi-covert message: All the Arabs should be killed. The class goes into an uproar. Five students agree with Yoav and say openly: The Arabs should be killed.’
“One student relates that he heard in the synagogue on Shabbat that ‘Aravim zeh erev rav’ [‘Arabs are a rabble,’ in a play on words], and also Amalek, and there is a commandment to kill them all,’ a reference to the prototypical biblical enemy of the Children of Israel. Another student says he would take revenge on anyone who murdered his family, but would not kill them all.”
It gets worse. Bob Dreyfuss of The Nation reported last December that
“fully one-third of Israelis say that unlawful, vigilante violence against non-Jewish African immigrants is fine with them.
“Equally, 86 percent of Israelis who voted for the right-wing Shas party and 66 percent of Likud voters agree with the statements of far-right Israeli politician Miri Regev that African immigrants, mostly from Sudan and Eritrea, are a “cancer” in the Israeli body politic…
“Israel is building refugee camps—let’s not use the loaded term ‘concentration camps’—for many of the estimated 55,000 Eritrean, Sudanese and other African refugees from civil wars and conflicts who’ve entered Israel, mostly undocumented, over the last decade or so.”
Israeli Minister Gideon Sa’ar was quite blunt when he stated,
“There are currently around 30 million people moving around Africa, people who have left their home countries and are looking for a place to be.
“We can all understand that pressure, but if we are too liberal, then we will lose the country. We will lose the only Jewish country that exists.”
The Israeli journalist Gideon Levy has been reported on these issues since 2009. And these are not just words and mere rhetoric with little consequences. Consider this.
An incident—that even shocked former CIA operative Philip Giraldi—was the May 2012 riots in Tel Aviv, where African immigrants were targeted. The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc., all stayed silent.
On May 28, five young Israelis smashed the door of an internet café owned by Yorusalem Mestun, a 22 year-old. They “pulled a knife on her, while her Jewish neighbours looked on. The police came, checked her visa and left, without, she said, offering help or sympathy.”
Also in May, some Israeli settlers set fire to a West Bank village and shot some unarmed Palestinians. It was later discovered that during the incident, Israeli youth tied up and beat one Palestinian who was already wounded.
On May 24, 2012, Amnesty International released a report, declaring that Israel
“frequently uses excessive, sometimes lethal, force against demonstrators in the West Bank and civilians in Gaza…
“Israel has engaged in the demolition of Palestinian homes and other facilities in the West Bank, as well is inside Israel itself, where homes of Palestinian citizens are destroyed in ‘unrecognized’ villages in the Negev desert.”
So, the Zionists were eager to propagate the colossal lie that Ahmadinejad wanted to “wipe Israel off the map,” but much of the same people stay silent about Israel’s continued racism and crimes against the “unfit.”
Last month, I couldn’t help but laugh a bit when I turned to the the New York Times and saw that they were more interested in talking about the politically dead movement, the Ku Klux Klan, than addressing the perennial racism that exists in Israel.
What was even more interesting was that the New York Times never told us about the “Ku Klux Klan” in Israel:
“In mid-March, during Purim, 15 students from the suburban community of Mevaseret Zion dressed up as members of the Ku Klux Klan, and three of their friends wore blackface. A principal of the school defended the actions, according to a report; “the costume was designed to create interesting and important discussions…. This act essentially created a platform where discussion can exist.”
In other words, Ku Klux Klan in America is bad, but Ku Klux Klan in Israel is good. Seth J. Frantzman of the Jewish Daily Forward declares,
“What we see in Israel when it comes to issues of stereotyping in society is generally a collective shrug of the shoulders. Discriminatory actions are regarded primarily as a problem of the victims, who are deemed ‘incensed’ but not taken seriously. And not as a societywide issue.
“Deeply offensive actions, such as dressing up like the KKK in a community where there are numerous Ethiopians, is poked fun at, with one paper calling it an ‘epic fail.’
“Surveys show that Israelis tend to be insular in their views of diversity; a 2013 Israel Democracy Institute survey found that 47% of Jews did not want to live next to an Arab family, while 41% of Arabs didn’t want to live next to Jews.
“Commentators tend to see this as evidence of a society that is increasingly fraught with racism. But an examination of a history of ethnic and race relations in Israel, focusing particularly on mass media, tends to show that the problem is deeply rooted in the past.
“Contemporary society has never confronted this history, and it cannot begin the process of learning from it.
“A little noticed 2011 book by academic Etan Bloom revealed that the father of Israeli sociology and a leading Zionist of the British Mandate named Arthur Ruppin, was a believer in eugenics.
“In 1919 he argued that the Jewish race should be ‘purified’ and that it was ‘desirable that only the racially pure come to the land.’
“As head of the Palestine Office of the Zionist Executive (later the Jewish Agency for Israel), he put his purity schemes into practice, arguing that Ethiopian Jews should not be permitted to immigrate, because ‘they have no blood connection,’ and arguing that Yemenite Jews should be brought only for menial labor.”
This racist ideology goes all the way back to the 1950s and is still prevalent in Israel. The Jewish Daily Forward calls it “Israel’s everyday racism—and how American Jews turn a blind eye to it.”
“Stereotyping against citizens who are not considered European-origin ‘sabras’ has been an integral part of the left and right, but ironically in Israel, it has been particularly virulent on the left.
“Ari Shavit states without compunction in his 2013 book ‘My Promised Land’ that ‘many Oriental Jews are not aware of what Israel saved them from, a life of misery and backwardness in an Arab Middle East.’”
What is more interesting is that some Jewish celebrities can indirectly portray the same type of racism and hatred openly and they will never for one second lose their daily job.
For example, the late Joan Rivers explicitly declared that the Palestinians who happened to die during the Gaza conflict are “stupid” and “deserve to be dead” because “they started the conflict.” Rivers also said that those Palestinian civilians who ended up dead had “low IQs.”
What if some neo-Nazis build a similar case for many of the Jews who lived in Nazi Germany, particularly the Jewish revolutionaries who literally looked down on the Germans, ridiculed their traditional values and mores, and ended up producing pornography to destroy the social and moral cohesion of the country?
Suppose we take the Holocaust establishment seriously and agree that their narratives are just brute facts. Isn’t Rivers making a serious case for Hitler here?
Furthermore, Hamas is wrong because it seeks to destroy the Dreadful Few, but producing pornography to destroy the Goyim is right? Rivers cannot have her cake and eat it too.
The New York Times and other Zionist outlets certainly do not want the vast majority of blacks and others to know about Israel’s racism precisely because that would create a serious uproar both in the U.S. and elsewhere.
Perhaps those blacks would discover that Jewish organizations have been using them like puppets to fight what those organizations perceived to be “anti-Semitism” or “racism.”
Even to this very day, Jewish organizations like the ADL continue to do just that. For example, the ADL has already been mobilized to use the Ferguson debacle to teach impressionable and ignorant blacks about how to respond to the event “through the lens of race, privilege and power.”
Since hate is an essentially Talmudic virtue, Jewish organizations like the ADL seem to realize that in order to spice up the culture war, they need to teach the Goyim to hate one another and to fight until they kill each other.
Remember how they produced the war in Syria? Remember how Daniel Pipes argued that America needed to support both the Syrian government and the Syrian rebels until they kill each other?
Well, the ADL seems to realize that if you can distract the vast majority of the population and lead them to think about other issues—such as “race”—then Israel, the Zionist regime, and the Dreadful Few will get a free pass. Let us hear again from the ADL about the Ferguson event:
“Students will learn more about unearned privilege, examine the various levels of racial disparities in the criminal justice system and explore the role white privilege plays in the different interactions white and people of color have with law enforcement.”
In short, the ADL seems to give credence to the idea that blacks ought to see whites as their enemy and vice versa. Jewish organizations like the ADL want to manipulate people so that they cannot discover the true enemy.
This was precisely what Harold Cruse had discovered. This also goes back to Fyodor Dostoyevsky, who wrote that
“The Jews…have already leaped en mass upon the millions of liberated Negroes and have already taken a grip upon them in their, the Jews’ own way, by means of their sempiternal ‘gold pursuit’…
“The Negroes have been liberated from the slave owners, but that will not last because the Jews, of who there are so many in the world, will jump at this new little victim.”
To be quite blunt, this was precisely what Jewish organizations, activities and writers did during the civil rights movement. In fact, the NAACP was founded, funded and coached by Jewish luminaries and organizations from its inception.
The Dreadful Few ended up using Martin Luther King as a puppet, and, when all is said and done, the civil rights movement turned out to be another tacitly Jewish wave which largely destroyed the cohesive harmony of the black family, which previously had a powerful sense of community, respect for the law and order, and a high respect for Christianity.
Historian Brenda E. Stevenson points out that in the South, a place where it was the least expected,
“Community value and directives defined southern life in ways that would be difficult for contemporary readers to reconcile given the lack of importance many ascribe to ‘a’ or ‘any’ community today….”
The moral values of the community “had a tremendous worth and a defining presence for everyone, whether free or slave, man or woman, planter or pauper.”
These communities include skilled black slaves (and sometimes free slaves). These “family and community values” were “at the center of their moral strivings and personal ambitions.”
In the same vein, “Free blacks and slaves also were determined to maintain the integrity of their families and communities despite often overwhelming pressures to the otherwise.”
The civil rights movement largely changed things around. This has been implicitly and indirectly conceded by neoconservative shills such as Thomas Sowell. Sowell writes that
“in the late nineteenth century, when blacks were just one generation out of slavery, there was nothing like today’s levels of unwed births or failure to participate in the labor force. It has been from the 1960s onward that these social pathologies have escalated. Whatever the cause, it has arisen long after slavery had ended.”
Dunbar High School for example used to produce highly skilled and highly trained individuals who didn’t have to take an entrance exam precisely because they were well versed in academic affairs:
“Over the entire 85-year history of academic success in [Dunbar High School], from 1870 to 1955, most of its graduates went on to higher education.
“This was very unusual for either black or white high-school graduates during that era. Because these were usually low-income students, most went to a local free teachers’ college or to relatively inexpensive Howard University, but significant numbers won scholarships to leading colleges and universities elsewhere…
“At one time, the reputation of Dunbar graduates was such that they did not have to take [an] entrance examination to be admitted to Dartmouth, Harvard, and some other selective colleges.
“When Robert N. Mattingly graduated from the M Street School in 1902, he entered Amherst College, receiving credit for freshman mathematics and first-year college physics—and he graduated in three years, Phi Beta Kappa.
“Yet, far from being one of the elite, Mattingly was, in his own words, ‘At Amherst on a shoestring.’”
Sowell continues to write,
“As early as 1899, Dunbar scored higher in city-wide tests than any of the white high schools in the District of Columbia. Down through the years its attendance records were generally better than those of the white high schools, and its rate of tardiness was lower. Dunbar meant business.”
During these flourishing years, “Latin was taught throughout the period from 1870-1955, and in the early decades, Greek was taught as well. In the 1940s, Dunbar fought a losing battle with the superintendent of schools to have calculus added.”
Yet as the years went by, Dunbar’s excellent performance crumbled:
“Now, as inadequately educated, inadequately motivated, and disruptive students flooded into the school, teachers began retiring, some as early as 55 years of age.
“Dunbar quickly became just another failing ghetto school, with all the problems that such schools have, all across the country. Eighty-five years of achievement simply vanished into thin air…During the years of Dunbar’s success, it was starved for funds and some of its classes had more than 40 students.
“As a failing ghetto school today, Dunbar has a finer physical plant than it ever had when it was an academic success.
“The school was in operation more than 40 years before it had a lunchroom, which then was so small that many children had to eat lunch out on the street. Blackboards were ‘cracked with confusing lines resembling a map.’ It was 1950 before the school had a public address system.”
Never forget that during the “golden age” of Dunbar High School, “Everything from religious principles to corporal punishment has been used to maintain order.”
Sowell, in a cunning and unintended way, produced some evidence which leads one to conclude that the forces behind those movements were largely revolutionary in their orientation. One has to go beyond political words and ideological façade to examine those deep forces.
If Benjamin Disraeli was right—that you cannot have a serious revolutionary movement without the presence of the Dreadful Few—then a serious case could be shown that the civil rights movement would have been impossible without the Dreadful Few.
We will discuss this more fully next year, but let us say in passing that even in the 1940s and 50s, black crimes were quite low. But when the black marriage began to decline immediately in 1960 (what a coincidence), the moral pendulum turned on the opposite direction. First, the moral decline started in the colleges and universities.
Harry G. Lefever, who was a professor of sociology at Spelman during that era, declares,
“In spring 1960, many of Spelman’s students literally broke free from their parochial and conservative past. With their statements and actions they turned the campus and the city in a radical direction.”
Many of those students got inspired by the teachings of Jewish revolutionary Howard Zinn, who “played a significant role” in the revolution at Spellman College. These actions led to the arrest of seventy students, “including fourteen from Spelman.”
Yet the student body continued to follow Zinn’s revolutionary ideas:
“The class of 1960 dedicated the 1960 volume of Reflections (the student yearbook) to Howard Zinn, professor of history and chair of the Social Science Department. Along with his picture, the students published words of appreciation for his friendship and guidance.”
The tribute stated that Zinn “has been an inspiration to the whole Spelman family since his arrival.”
By the time Zinn had established himself as a revolutionary influence in the lives of the students at Spelman, the moral pendulum in the life of black students began to change for the worst, sharply contrasting with the largely moral behavior of black youth during the time of slavery.
In the article entitled “Finishing School for Pickets,” Zinn discussed the changed attitude he had helped to inspire in the students.
“In the article, Zinn discussed how Spelman students had rejected the ‘generations-old advice’ of their elders—‘be nice, be well-mannered and ladylike, don’t speak loudly, and don’t get into trouble.’
“He continued by saying that Spelman girls are still nice, but ‘not enough to keep them from walking up and down, carrying picket signs in front of the supermarkets in the heart of Atlanta.’”
Zinn explained to an interviewer that one of his goals in writing his popular textbook A People’s History of the United States was to create a
“quiet revolution. Not a revolution in the classical sense of a seizure of power, but rather from people beginning to take power from within the institutions. In the workplace, the workers would take power to control the conditions of their lives. It would be a democratic socialism.”
The far-reaching influence of the book is shown by references to it in popular culture. In the 1997 movie Good Will Hunting, Matt Damon’s charac-ter tells his psychologist, played by the late Robin Williams,
“If you want to read a real history book, read Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. That book will knock you on your ass off.”
Both Damon and Ben Affleck, costars and co-authors of the movie, were good buddies of Zinn. Damon and Affleck some years ago
“reportedly were producing a miniseries based on their neighbor’s magnum opus. Zinn returned the favor by including them in an inconsequential paragraph in the book’s 2003 edition.”
To sum up, Zinn destroyed the moral fabric of many students largely because he had the academic advantage. At the same time, a large section of public schools began to implement “new” ideas such as sex education, which is supported and propagated by Hollywood movies. In the end, the average family was certainly outnumbered.
“All across this country, the school curriculum has been invaded by psychological-conditioning programs which not only take up time sorely needed for intellectual development, but also promote an emotionalized and anti-intellectual way of responding to the challenges facing every individual and every society.
“Worst of all, the psychotherapeutic curriculum systematically undermines the parent-child relationship and the shared values which make a society possible.”
Finally, Sowell declares,
“A variety of courses and programs, under an even wider variety of names, have been set up in schools across the country to change the values, behavior, and beliefs of American youngsters from what they have been taught by their families, their churches, or the social groups in which they have grown up.
“These ambitious attempts to re-shape the attitudes and consciousness of a generation are as pervasive as they are little known, partly because they have kept a low profile, but more often because they are called by other, high-sounding names—‘values clarification,’ ‘decision-making,’ ‘affective education,’ ‘Quest,’ ‘drug prevention,’ ‘sex education,’ ‘gifted and talented’ programs, and many other imaginative titles.
“The particular door through which such programs enter the school curriculum is far less important than what they do after they have gained entrance.”
My problem with Sowell on this particular issue is that he never goes beyond the surface. He could never bring himself to the fact that it was Jewish organizations which actually destroyed things like prayers in public school.
Jewish historian Murray Friedman frankly tells us that “Jewish groups had come to play a critical role in the ‘de-Christianization’ of American culture.” They
“had successfully challenged Bible reading in the public schools and any form of state aid to parochial schools. So dominant had the ‘separatist’ view become that even a nonsectarian prayer prepared by the New York Regents Board in 1962 was ruled by the Supreme Court in Engel v. Vitale to be a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.”
Jewish scholar Benjamin Ginsberg added,
“Religious symbols and forms of expression that Jews find threatening have been almost completely eliminated from schools and other public institutions.
“Suits brought by the ACLU, an organization whose leadership and membership are predominantly Jewish, secured federal court decisions banning officially sanctioned prayer in the public schools and crèches and other religious displays in parks and public buildings.”
Jewish scholar Stephen M. Feldman says something very similar, as does J. J. Goldberg, who noted,
“Jews were overwhelmingly against permitting public-school prayer or allowing religious symbols—any religious symbols—on government property. Other Americans were strongly in favor of both.”
The seeds for this movement were apparent even during the Civil War era. When the state of Illinois
“issued a resolution calling on the president to declare a day of ‘fast and prayer,’ to ensure ‘[God’s] appointed way through Jesus Christ,’ Lincoln acquiesced, yet employed more general references to ‘the sublime truth announced in the Holy Scriptures.’”
Yet the de-Christianization aspect reached full steam after the world wars. Jewish historian Howard M. Sachar declares that it was a “postwar danger” for Jews. J. J. Goldberg likewise states that “Jewish advocacy in the postwar era worked hard to expand the church-state separation.”
Goldberg goes further to say that there is a general consensus among liberal Jews to dominate “immigration and refugee policy, civil rights and affirmative action, abortion rights, church-state separation issues, and much more.”
Within a few decades, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) would take up arms in a different form, releasing a report entitled The Religious Right: The Assault on Tolerance and Pluralism in America, which attacked people like Donald W. Wildmon of the American Family Association.
Finally, Sowell would have done well if he had the intellectual backbone to say that Jewish intellectuals were proud to see America as a “secular” society. Irving Kristol was proud to say that secular humanism had been “good for the Jews,” giving them an “unparalleled degree of comfort and security.”
“Jews are at heart secular humanists, he wrote, which may be ‘why American Jews are so vigilant about removing all the signs and symbols of traditional religions from ‘the public square,’ so insistent that religion be merely a ‘private affair,’ so determined that separation of church and state be interpreted to mean the separation of all institutions from any signs of a connection with traditional religions.’”
Kristol proved to be right. Who has been called “the father of the secular humanist movement” in America?
It is none other than Jewish philosopher Paul Kurtz, author of numerous books, including The Humanist Manifesto, In Defense of Secular Humanism, and A Secular Humanist Declaration.
Another Jewish ideologue behind the secular state was none other than Leo Pfeffer, who hated the Catholic Church. Pfeffer put it well when he said,
“Whenever I felt that my daughter should not have something she wanted, she threatened to marry a Catholic army officer from Alabama.
“The truth of the matter was that I did not like the Catholic Church as I did not like the military and the South and for pretty much the same reasons. In the first place, it stood for what I opposed, and opposed . . . what I stood for.”
When Jewish ideology finally took over the culture, Pfeffer expounded on his belief this way,
“I did not like [The Catholic Church] because it was monolithic and authoritarian and could claim infallibility in any area, much less in the universe of faith and morals, and repelled even more by the arrogance of condemning to eternal damnation those who did not believe it.”
Pfeffer repudiated Catholic infallibility but indirectly supplanted it with Jewish infallibility. Isn’t it infallible that Pfeffer hated the Catholic Church? Isn’t it infallible that he did not want his daughter to marry a Catholic? Isn’t it infallible that he was happy when “secularism” eventually triumphed over the culture?
If we extrapolate this a little, isn’t Jewish infallibility the proper locus of academic and political assessment? Hasn’t it become the cannon of intellectual inquiry?
Isn’t it now infallible that six million Jews died in Nazi Germany? Isn’t it infallible that Germany should continue to pay a large sum of money to the Dreadful Few for what happened in World War II?
Isn’t it infallible that “Germany and Claims Conference are establishing a $250 million fund for child survivors of the Holocaust”? Isn’t it infallible that the Dreadful Few impose this draconian law only on the Goyim and not on Jewish movements such as Bolshevism, which ended up slicing its indefensible victims like bags of meat?
Isn’t it infallible that if you even question the six-million figure in Europe, you will be jailed for your “crime”?
Isn’t it infallible that if you criticize the Dreadful Few, you are by definition an anti-Semite? Isn’t it infallible that “anti-Semitism is part of Europe’s DNA”? Isn’t it an infallible truth that, as late Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin told us, “every German is a Nazi” and that “every German is a murderer”?
Didn’t Daniel Jonah Goldhagen tell us that it is an infallible truth that nearly all Germans had Anti-Semitism ingrained in their DNA and that they aspired to slaughter Jews since the time of Martin Luther? Didn’t Goldhagen try to sue those who criticize that infallible truth?
Didn’t George Galloway get beaten up pretty bad by a thug named Neil Masterson for criticizing Israel (he was a former BBC manager!)? Didn’t Galloway himself declare that the man attacked him because he believes that Galloway is an “enemy of Judaism”?
Didn’t Masterson tell the police “I didn’t want him to think I’m scared, Galloway is Anti-semitic and I am Jewishm,” even though Galloway said that “I don’t have a racist bone in my body”?
Hasn’t Galloway made it clear that “The Zionist apartheid state of Israel is a political construct” and that “It has nothing to do with hating people, still less hating a religion”?
Isn’t it infallible that you will be fired from your position if you question the powers that be? Isn’t it infallible that Israel can demolish Palestinian homes and continue to grab Palestinian lands while many political figures in the West stay silent and watch?
Norman Finkelstein questioned Jewish infallibility and was fired. So did noted scholar and Professor Steven Salaita. And remember how they slandered Kevin Barrett with epithets such as “nutty,” “despicable,” “Nazi,” and worst of all, “klansman.”
Salaita has actually lost his job just because he twitted that “Only Israel can murder around 300 children in the span of a few weeks and insist it is the victim.”
Salaita has written scholarly works on the Israel/Palestine conflict and certainly the Dreadful Few were keeping an eye on him. And Phyllis Wise, the powerful Chancellor of the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, ended up doing the dirty work. The Jewish Voice tells us,
“The Simon Wiesenthal Center protested the recent appointment of Professor Steven Salaita to the University of Illinois’ Native American Studies department…
“In a letter to Robert Easter, President of the University of Illinois, Rabbi Meyer H. May, Executive Director of the Wiesenthal Center and Aron Hier, who heads the Center’s Campus Outreach program, questioned the qualifications of a professor who would liken Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, to ‘a radical extremist group who crucifies civilians and then posts the videos, like trophies, on YouTube.’
“May and Hier noted that such outrageous statements present a real danger to the entire campus community, especially to its Jewish students:
“What possible prestige can Salaita add to the UI faculty when in truth, he is a misguided ‘academic’ who spews such venomous and mendacious analogies? How is the Jewish campus community to be assured that UI cares for its safety and responsibly vets incoming faculty when the university now hires a professor who recently tweeted:
“’At this point, if Netanyahu appeared on TV with a necklace made from the teeth of Palestinian children, would anybody be surprised? and ‘Why would Hamas even try to use children as human shields? Israel has proved for decades that it has no problem shooting them.’”
Philip Weiss reported that Wise “was more concerned about a donor who is on the board of the Jewish Federation and Hillel, two Zionist organizations, than she was about the views of academic officials who report to her.”
Things do not seem to go well for the university, since the incident clearly shows that some forces other than academic and intellectual powers are in control of the school.
The past president of the American Historical Association quickly figured this out, writing a letter to Wise and urging her that “unless she reverses her decision, her school will gain a reputation for ‘arbitrary administrative practice.’”
Hundreds upon hundreds of academics and former students from the university (both Jewish and non-Jewish) have written letters to Wise saying that they have been really disappointed about how the university is handling the situation.
And here again we see the perennial Jewish contradiction: the Dreadful Few push for free speech whenever they are not in power. But when they take over, they fire you whenever you ask for a little free speech by criticizing them!
Moreover, they will give you great accolades if you support them, but they will slander you or drag your name through the mud if you challenge them on an academic and intellectual level.
They do not have a serious moral and intellectual argument, so their only recourse is name-calling. Furthermore, if they can make it hard for you to get an academic job, they will do so.
 Or Kashti, “Israeli Teens Gripped by Virulent Racism,” Jewish Daily Forward, August 23, 2014.
 Bob Dreyfuss, “Racism in Israel,” The Nation, December 23, 2013.
 Gideon Levy, “Ethiopian Student Affair Shows Prevalent Racism in Israel,” Haaretz, September 3, 2009.
 Philip Giraldi, “Rioting in Tel Aviv,” American Conservative, May 28, 2012.
 “Keep Out: Racial Tension is Rising as Black Asylum-Seekers Pour In,” Economist, June 2, 2012.
 Ibid; also Jason Glaser, “Israeli Settlers Set Fire to West Bank Village, Shoot Guns at Unarmed Palestinians,” Antiwar.com, May 21, 2012; “Settler Shoots Palestinian in Clash Near Nablus,” Jerusalem Post, May 26, 2012.
 Gili Cohen, “IDF Inquiry Finds Israeli Youth Tied and Beat Palestinian After Shot by Settlers,” Haaretz, June 3, 2012.
 “Amnesty International: Israel Frequently Uses Excessive Force Against Palestinians,” Haaretz, May 24, 2012.
 Al Baker, “At Gateway to Hamptons, Ku Klux Klan Advertises for New Members,” NY Times, August 29, 2014.
 Seth J. Frantzman, “Israel’s Uncomfortable History of Racist Engineering,” Jewish Daily Forward, April 25, 2014.
 Larry Derfner, “Israel’s Everyday Racism—and How American Jews Turn a Blind Eye to It,” Jewish Daily Forward, August 12, 2013.
 Frantzman, “Israel’s Uncomfortable History of Racist Engineering,” Jewish Daily Forward, April 25, 2014.
 Sara Malm, “’You’re dead, you deserve to be dead – you started it’: Joan Rivers in astonishing attack on ‘stupid’ Palestinians,” Daily Mail, August 8, 2014.
 Quoted in E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008), 691.
 Even neoconservative shills such as Thomas Sowell implicitly argues that the civil rights movement, though it seems to open doors on certain issues, is largely a disaster. Thomas Sowell, Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality? (New York: William Morrow & Company, 1984).
 We will discuss this issue more fully next year.
 Brenda E. Stevenson, Life in Black and White: Family and Community in the Slave South (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 322.
 Ibid., 323.
 Ibid., 324.
 Thomas Sowell, Black Rednecks and White Liberals (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2005), 160-161.
 Ibid., 207-208.
 Thomas Sowell, Education: Assumptions Versus History (San Francisco: Hoover Institution Press, 1986), 30.
 Ibid., 31.
 Sowell, Black Rednecks, 209-210.
 Sowell, Education, 31.
 Thomas Sowell, Black Rednecks and White Liberals (CA: Encounter Books, 2005), 161.
 Harry G. Lefever, Undaunted by the Fight: Spellman College and the Civil Rights Movement, 1957-1967 (Macon: Mercer University Press, 2005), 23.
 Ibid., 34.
 Ibid., 52.
 Ibid., 56.
 Catherine Parayre, “The Conscience of the Past: An Interview with Historian Howard Zinn,” Flagpole Magazine Online, February 18, 1998.
 Daniel J. Flynn, Intellectual Morons: How Ideology Makes Smart People Fall for Stupid Ideas (New York: Crown Forum, 2004), 99-100.
 Thomas Sowell, Inside American Education: The Decline, the Deception, the Dogmas (New York: The Free Press, 1993), 34.
 Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 41.
 Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993), 2.
 See Stephen M. Feldman, Please Don’t Wish Me a Merry Christmas: A Critical History of the Separation of Church and State (New York: New York University Press, 1998).
 J. J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment (New York: Basic Books, 1997), 26.
 Howard M. Sachar, A History of Jews in America (New York: Vintage, 1993), 81.
 Ibid., 81-82.
 Goldberg, Jewish Power, 314.
 Ibid., 5.
 Friedman, Neoconservative Revolution, 215-216.
 Ibid., 219.
 “Paul Kurtz—The New Atheism and Secular Humanism,” Point of Inquiry, Sept. 14, 2007.
 Quoted in E. Michael Jones, “Francis’s Legacy,” Culture Wars, March 2007.
 Quoted in Jones, Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, 838.
 Yossi Lempkowicz, “‘Anti-Semitism is Part of Europe’s DNA,’ Brussels Conference is Told,” European Jewish Press, September 5, 2012.
 Quoted in Tom Segev, The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust (New York: Henry Hold, 2000), 216.
 Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust (New York: Vintage, 1997).
 Norman G. Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (New York: Verso, 2000), 64-66.
 “George Galloway Breaks Silence Over ‘Unprecedented’ Attack,” Huffington Post, September 2, 2014.
 See for example Steven Salaita, The Holy Land in Transit: Colonialism and the Quest for Canaan (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2006); Israel’s Dead Soul (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2011); Modern Arab American Fiction: A Reader’s Guide (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2011).
 Hannah Hayes, “Wiesenthal Center Calls UI Professor’s Controversial Twitter Post Anti-Semitic,” Jewish Voice, August 6, 2014.