Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman were right when they blamed the noxious anti-Israel incitement rampant in Europe for Saturday’s murderous shooting attack at the Jewish Museum in Brussels and the assault and battery of two Jewish brothers outside their synagogue in a Paris suburb later that day.
Anti-Israel incitement is ubiquitous in Europe and is appearing in ever-widening circles of the Western world as a whole.
Until this week, the Catholic Church stayed out of the campaign to dehumanize Jews and malign the Jewish state.
Pope Benedict XVI was perceived as a friend of Israel, despite his childhood membership in the Hitler Youth. His opposition to Islam’s rejection of reason, eloquently expressed at his speech at the University of Regensburg in 2006, positioned him as a religious champion of reason, individual responsibility and law – Judaism’s primary contributions to humanity.
His predecessor Pope John Paul II was less willing to confront Islamic violence. But his opposition to Communism made him respect Israel as freedom’s outpost in the Middle East. John Paul’s visit to Israel in 2000 was in some ways an historic gesture of friendship to the Jewish people of Israel.
Both Benedict and John Paul II were outspoken champions of the Second Vatican Council and maintained doctrinal allegiance to the Church’s rejection of anti-Judaism, including the charge of deicide, and its denunciation of replacement theology.
Alas, the Golden Age of Catholic-Jewish relations seems to have come to an end during Francis’s visit to the Promised Land this week.
In one of his blander pronouncements during the papal visit, Netanyahu mentioned on Monday that Jesus spoke Hebrew. There was nothing incorrect about Netanyahu’s statement. Jesus was after all, an Israeli Jew.
But Francis couldn’t take the truth. So he indelicately interrupted his host, interjecting, “Aramaic.”
Netanyahu was probably flustered. True, at the time, educated Jews spoke and wrote in Aramaic. And Jesus was educated. But the language of the people was Hebrew. And Jesus preached to the people, in Hebrew.
Netanyahu responded, “He spoke Aramaic, but he knew Hebrew.”
Reuters’ write-up of the incident tried to explain away the pope’s rudeness and historical revisionism, asserting, “Modern-day discourse about Jesus is complicated and often political.” The report went on to delicately mention, “Palestinians sometimes describe Jesus as a Palestinian. Israelis object to that.”
Israelis “object to that” because it is a lie.
The Palestinians – and their Islamic and Western supporters – de-Judaize Jesus and proclaim him Palestinian in order to libel the Jews and criminalize the Jewish state. It seems like it would be the job of the Bishop of Rome to set the record straight. But instead, Francis’s discourtesy indicated that at a minimum, he doesn’t think the fact of Jesus’s Judaism should be mentioned in polite company.
Francis’s behavior during his public meeting with Netanyahu could have been brushed off as much ado about nothing if it hadn’t occurred the day after his symbolic embrace of some of the worst anti-Jewish calumnies of our times, and his seeming adoption of replacement theology during his homily in Bethlehem.
Read more at Front Page
By Lee Kaplan:
Anna Baltzer has described the terrorist group Al Aksa Martyr’s Brigade as “noble,” the same terror group in the West Bank that murdered a Jewish mother’s entire family and slit the throat of her newborn. Anna said nothing against those murders, but objected instead on her website to the “judaization” of Jerusalem. Now Anna distributes photos of her own newborn sporting a handmade “Palestine” shirt reminiscent of Rosemary’s Baby.
Her real name is Anna Piller but she used the alias of Anna Baltzer while her Jewish grandmother was alive so her Jewish grandma, a supporter of Israel who survived Nazi-occupied Europe, wouldn’t know what disgusting things her granddaughter was doing. Anna wrote that although she was born to a Jewish mother, she wasn’t raised in the religion and knew nothing about it. This didn’t stop her though taping videos such as one during attempts to divest UC San Diego from Israel where she told viewers that as an “American Jewish woman” of conscience she urged the students to attack the Jewish state by starving the Jews out of the Middle East. The Arabs found in Anna Piller a “Jew” who could claim she was opposed to the existence of a Jewish state and hopefully convince college students worldwide that even if they are Jewish they should favor Israel’s demise. As such, she tours all over the world with a seminar calling for support for terrorists and boycotting the Jews. She has “lectured” at over 500 venues including law schools and even Oxford University in the UK. Her presentations are usually lies about Israeli atrocities against innocent Arabs with a final message to understand the violence the Arab terrorists do. She lied about her background, falsely claiming she is a Fulbright scholar (a PhD candidate) when all she did was get some money from Fulbright to be an assistant English teacher in Turkey.
Anna even wrote in the Electronic Intifada, a propaganda organ for the Arabs, of her admiration for the Al Aksa Martyr’s Brigade and she did an interview in Canada on radio where she concluded shouting, “Inshallah! One day we will bring down Zionism [the Jews]!”
Her activities have netted her a sinecure as the head of the NGO the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation (the renamed ISM for lobbying purposes in Washington D.C.) and on the Board of Directors of the former neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic NGO The Council for the National Interest, founded by virulently anti-Semitic Paul Findley and James Aborezek.
Anna, just had a baby and is back from “maternity leave” to her job smearing Israel and promoting boycotts and divestment from the Jewish state. Her baby girl, Eleanor, was also christened with an Arab name, Noura. Most Jewish women give their newborns Jewish names, but not the “American Jewish woman with a conscience” Anna Baltzer who wants to bring down the Jewish state. Anna published a photo of her newborn with a Palestine flag t-shirt on, sort of reminiscent of Rosemary’s Baby.
Below is a photo of Anna with Eleanor in the hospital. Below that is a photo of Ruth Fogel, a Jewish woman from the community of Itamar in Judea and Samaria. Ruth Fogel was a proud mother too, the same age as Anna, but some Arabs from the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade that Anna so admires broke into Ruth’s home and butchered her and her three children and husband. They also slashed the throat of Ruth’s infant daughter, Hadas. Hadas was an afterthought, the killers at first overlooked her when they killed the family, one of them going back afterward and slitting the infant’s throat. They were bringing down Zionism (the Jews) like Anna called for in Canada. Anna never condemned these murders. In fact, at the end of each of her lectures at law schools and churches in the U.S. she ends by asking “If someone came uninvited into your house and they wouldn’t leave, wouldn’t you pick up a lamp or something and attack them?” The Arab killers who killed Ruth Fogel and Hadas were doing exactly what Anna condones as she praises and makes excuses for the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade.
Below are the two Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade terrorists who murdered the Fogel family and slashed the throat of the Fogel’s infant daughter, Hadas. Meanwhile, the image below was lifted from a Palestinian TV show praising the two killers for their “noble” act just like Anna Baltzer does. The image below that shows the Fogel family father (a rabbi) and 3 month old Hadas after the Al Aksa terrorists murdered them. The baby’s throat was slit.
Anna Baltzer seems to connect with babies a lot lately. In her speech she presents at colleges, churches and law schools tells a lie about an Arab woman who lost two fetuses at a checkpoint because Israeli soldiers would not let the woman through a checkpoint. The woman originally in her speeches was supposed to a Palestinian ISM leader named Lamis Deek, but the name and identity changed to Hessa in Der Balut. Those who attend her presentation do not know that there are hospitals in Ramallah accessible from Der Balut, so why she would even need to go to an Israeli hospital isn’t answered.
Anna will soon be back on the travel stump promoting the boycott of the Jews in America and Israel and telling her lies about Israel committing atrocities as before and no doubt extolling the virtues of the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade and their noble acts of “resistance.” But before she does, people opposed to the likes of Anna can and should do something about it:
There is a list below of the over 500 venues where she spoke before. She will no doubt repeat her lectures at many of them. The SJP venues and mosques will not care if she tells the truth. However, the colleges and law schools need to read this article and the others where she has been exposed so she won’t be invited back. Individuals can take action and write to these venues and send them this article so hopefully she will not be returning now that the truth is known.
Lee Kaplan is an investigative journalist and head of the non-profit DAFKA.org website and its StoptheISM.com subsidiary. He is a contributing writer at Frontpagemag.com and a regular columnist at the educational watchdog Israelcampus.com and the IsraelNationalNews.com. He is a Fellow with the American Center for Democracy and exposes frequently indoctrination on college campuses and activities of the International Solidarity Movement. He can be reached at email@example.com.
The Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) considers itself to be peace loving and fair. Today’s “progressive” churches, including the PCUSA, believe that taking the Bible seriously means it cannot be taken literally. This “progressive” outlook has largely given up on biblical prophecy and biblical truth, and taken on a multi-culturalist, moral relativist, and politically correct (PC) worldview. God’s love therefore, embraces all persons equally; no matter their gender, race, or sexual identity. They believe in diversity, tolerance, and inclusivity, except when it comes to Israel. This lingering strain of anti-Semitism has crept in among a determined group of activists within the church, who issued last January a monograph titled “Zionism Unsettled – A Congregational Study Guide.”
The Congregational Study Guide was released in January, 2014 ahead of the PCUSA biennial General Assembly (GA), taking place this June in Detroit. The gathering will once again consider recommendations that it divest from companies that deal with Israel’s military. Similar resolutions have been narrowly defeated in the past. The Israel Palestine Mission Network (IPMN) 68-page guide accompanied by a DVD is meant to influence the GA delegates.
The IPMN, which is responsible for the study guide, is made up of “progressive” Christians influenced by “Liberation Theology” and tainted by a Marxist worldview.
They have mobilized on behalf of the Palestinians (no word from them about the mass killings in Syria or the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt and the rest of the Muslim world) and against “Zionist” Israel, a code-word for Jews. Failing in their BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction) efforts against Israel in recent General Assemblies of the PCUSA, these BDS activists raised the ante a notch by publishing “Zionism Unsettled,” which argues that Zionism, or the Jewish State of Israel is inherently discriminatory toward the Palestinians, and that the very idea of a homeland for the Jewish People is illegitimate. The authors (IPMN) have no problem with the reality of 22 Muslim states, which are governed by Sharia Islamic law. The Congregational Study Guide states that “the fundamental assumption of this study is that no exceptionalist claims can be justified in our interconnected, pluralistic world.”
According to the authors of the IPMN study guide, national-particularism cannot be justified in the case of Zionism. Yet, Palestinian Arabs who considered themselves part of the Arab nation until 1964, and speak Arabic like the rest of the Arab world, profess the same religion as the rest of the Sunni-Islam Arab states, and share the same cultural milieu as the rest of the Arab world, are acceptable in an “interconnected, pluralistic world” of the IPMN. Their malevolence is as transparent as their hypocrisy!
Read more at Front Page
On Tuesday night, the UCLA undergraduate student government heard public testimonies for nearly 9 hours — from 7 p.m. until 4 a.m. — on whether or not the university should go forward with a resolution to boycott and divest from businesses that allegedly “profit from the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.”
The meeting, attended by over 500 people, began at 7 p.m. Tuesday night and ended 6:30 a.m. Wednesday morning. Ben Shapiro, TruthRevolt.org Editor-in-Chief and UCLA alum, crashed the divestment hearing to blast both the student sponsors and those considering the anti-Semitic measure. Here’s the transcript:
My name is Ben Shapiro. I’m an alumnus of this university. I’m also a local talk show host on 870 [AM] in the morning, and I got out of bed and left my one month old baby there when I saw what was going on here tonight. I’ve never been more ashamed to be a Bruin. I’ve never been more ashamed to be an alumnus of this university than to see this divestment petition being considered at this level.
To pretend this is about occupation, to pretend this is about peace, to pretend that this anything other than vile, spiteful Jew hatred is a lie!
There is only one reason we are discussing Israel and not discussing Saudi Arabia. There is only one reason we are discussing Israel and not discussing Iran. There is only one reason we are discussing Israel and not discussing Palestine. There is only one reason we are discussing Israel and not discussing the vast bevy of human rights violations that happen every day in the Middle East, exponentially worse that what happens in Israel.
Any gay or lesbian that is targeting Israel in this room seems to have forgotten how high they hang gays from cranes in Iran. Every person of liberal bent who suggests that Israel is the problem in the Middle East seems to have forgotten that there is only one country in the Middle East that actually has any sort of religious diversity in it. The countries that are apartheid countries are those that are Judenrein — like, for example, Palestine.
So, for us to sit here and pretend that Israel is somehow on a lower moral plane is a direct manifestation of anti-Semitism. And to hold Jews to a different moral standard than any other country or group on the face of the earth represents nothing but an age-old and historic hatred for the Jewish people. All the folks here who are pretending that the B.D.S is about anything other than that, I would like to see a poll of those folks, and see how many of them actually believe in the existence of a Jewish state, qua-Jewish state, not as a state like any other, but as a Jewish state. They don’t. They don’t acknowledge that existence. They don’t believe in that existence. They don’t believe in peace. All this is about, pure and simple, is a desire to target the Jewish people.
“Judenrein” was a Nazi term to mean “clean of Jews.”
According to the Daily Bruin, the Undergraduate Students Association Council (USAC) shot down the resolution by an anonymous vote of 7-5. Despite protestation, the USAC decided the ballots would be secret when some members voiced concern for their safety.
Students in favor of the resolution offered no comment, saying they were “too disappointed.” Video of one particular protester has circulated:
- USAC rejects resolution on divestment after long meeting (dailybruin.com)
- LOCK & LOAD! Make sure you are fully armed for ‘Israeli Apartheid Week’ (barenakedislam.com)
Shapiro: Jew Hatred The Last Politically Correct Hatred In America (truthrevolt.org)
UCLA Student: Shapiro Speech Shifted Divestment Vote (truthrevolt.org)
Ben Shapiro Crashes UCLA Divestment from Israel Hearing — On The Glazov Gang (frontpagemag.com)
by CHARLES JACOBS:
Lessons whitewash Hamas, promote the destruction of the Jewish state as a legitimate solution to the Arab-Israel conflict.
Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT) has placed a two-page ad in the Jewish Advocate rebuking Boston’s Jewish leaders for assuring parents and tax-payers that there is no problem with anti-Semitism and anti-Israel bias in the Newton high school curriculum. To see the full sized ad, click here or see attached.
The first page of the ad rebuts a controversial undated report by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) intended to exonerate the Newton school system from allowing bias against Israel into the classrooms. In the ad, APT charges ADL with making factually false statements and calls on ADL’s donors to demand that they use the organization’s resources to fight anti-Semitism instead of ignoring it.
The second ad described two clearly biased anti-Israel lessons used in Newton classrooms. In one case, Newton students are given what they are told is the text of the Hamas founding charter. Yet the text they receive is a whitewashed edit of the Hamas charter, with the parts expressing the terror group’s religiously motivated genocidal hatred of Jews edited out. The Newton version of the Hamas Charter replaces the word “Jews,” whom Hamas identifies as its sworn enemies, with “Zionism.” A Newton teacher’s class notes obtained by APT shed light on why the schools might be using the censored Hamas Charter.
The teacher writes: “I would assert this is not inherently a religious conflict. This is a conflict over land.”
(Emphasis in the original.)
The uncensored Hamas charter directly contradicts this dubious claim. “In defending their curriculum, Newton schools have claimed that they expose students to anti-Israel falsehoods to encourage critical thinking,” said Charles Jacobs, president of Americans for Peace and Tolerance. “But when actual facts contradict the favored narrative, the facts disappear. This is not education or critical thinking. This is propaganda. ”
The Newton curriculum also falsely depicts fringe anti-Israel activists as experts. In another lesson noted in the APT ad, Newton students receive an assignment called “Prominent Voices on the One State/Two State Solution.” The exercise claims to expose students to a range of opinions on solutions for the Arab-Israeli Conflict.
The “One State Solution” is a code word for the destruction of Israel. The premise of the exercise – that it is legitimate to debate whether the Jewish have a right to self-determination – is a travesty. Newton would never have its students debate whether any other people deserve to have their state abolished. Yet five out of the nine “prominent voices” presented in this handout support the destruction of the Jewish state.
Read more: Family Security Matters
by Joseph Puder:
The speech given by Secretary of State John Kerry at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, February 1, 2014, created quite a stir in Israel. The media debated Kerry’s intent and politicians from across the political spectrum reacted to what they perceived as threats of boycotts against Israel. It is clear that Kerry’s statements were intended to intimidate the Israeli leadership into falling in line with the framework for peace he will be delivering in the near future.
In Munich, Kerry stated, “Everywhere I go in the world, wherever I go – I promise you, no exaggeration, the Far East, Africa, Latin America – one of the first questions out of the mouths of a foreign minister or a prime minister or a president is, ‘Can’t you guys do something to help bring an end to this conflict between Palestinians and Israelis?’ Indonesia – people care about it because it’s become either in some places an excuse or in other places an organizing principle for efforts that can be very troubling in certain places. I believe that – and you see for Israel there’s an increasing de-legitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it. There is talk of boycotts and other kind of things. Are we all going to be better with all of that?”
Secretary of State Kerry spoke of consequences for Israel should the current peace talks fail. He warned that “Today’s status quo absolutely, to a certainty, I promise you 100 percent, cannot be maintained. It’s not sustainable. It’s illusionary…”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded on Sunday, February 2, 2014 to Kerry’s speech. He said, “Boycott attempts are immoral, unjust, and will not achieve their goal.” Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz argued that “Israel can’t conduct negotiations with a gun pointed to its head.” He went on to say that Kerry’s comments were “offensive.” Naftali Bennett, the Economics Minister, charged that Kerry’s statements show him as siding with Israel’s foes. “We expect our friends around the world to stand beside us, against anti-Semitic efforts targeting Israel, and not for them to be their amplifier.” Ethiopian-born Member of Knesset Pnina Tamano-Shata, of the centrist Yesh Atid party, observed that Kerry’s statements at the Munich Conference “are irresponsible in my view and harm the State of Israel.”
Israeli voices on the political left including Justice Minister Tzipi Livni defended Kerry saying, “When the leader says to us friends, the reality is going to change in the event of a political deal, this does not constitute a threat to the State of Israel, but rather defines reality as it is.”
What Livni neglected to explain however, is why Kerry failed to mention what consequences the Palestinians would suffer if the talks failed. It is the Palestinians under Mahmoud Abbas (not to mention the Palestinians of Hamas in Gaza) who have been the rejectionist party in these negotiations (scheduled to end on April 29, 2014, unless extended). In an interview with the New York Times on Sunday, February 2, 2014, Abbas was asked by a reporter about recognition of Israel as a Jewish State. He replied, “This is out of the question,” noting that “Jordan and Egypt were not asked to do so when they signed peace treaties with Israel.”
Read more at Front Page
- Israel in 1968 & 2014: The Jews Are Alone (frontpagemag.com)
AIPAC and Iran’s War Against America (frontpagemag.com)
Spotlight: Are Palestinians the Indigenous People of Palestine? (chersonandmolschky.com)
- The U.S. Should Cut a Deal with Israel and End the Conflict (familysecuritymatters.com)
- Palestinian Authority Human Rights Violations Ignored by Media, West (gatestoneinstitute.org)
– Martin Luther King, Jr., Harvard University 1968.
By David James:
In 2013, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) announced its status as an official student organization at UT-Knoxville. With about 100 chapters at last count, SJP organizes extreme hate-filled anti-Israel activity on college campuses around the country, including:
- Israel Apartheid Week – typically held between February – March and involves:
- Staging mock checkpoints where they stop students and yell “Are you Jewish?”
- Erecting “Apartheid Walls” with “Hamas posters describing Jews as baby-killers and maps showing the Jewish state erased and replaced with ‘Palestine.’”
- Posting eviction notices on dorm room doors to simulate housing demolition in Israel.
- BDS resolutions (boycott, divestment and sanctions against the State of Israel), calling for economic warfare agains the Jewish state. (The first divestment campaign was launched at UC Berkley on Holocaust Remembrance Day.)
- Hosting extremist/radical anti-Israel speakers who support terrorism against the State of Israel.
- Protesting pro-Israel groups, events and speakers. (SJP members at University of California, Irvine heckled Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren throughout his speech until they were removed by campus security.)
- Disrupting campus Holocaust memorial events and even worse, their perversion of the famous Holocaust quote “never again.”
Reports about vandalism of campus Jewish facilities, harassment of Jewish professors and students and even physical attacks by members of SJP have been reported at some schools.
If this is what SJP is reported to do, is this what UT-Knoxville can expect?
UT-Knoxville SJP’s Faculty Sponsor is Dr. Brian K. Barber, a 1996-97 grant recipient from the Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine (CPAP), renamed the Palestine Center, which is the educational arm of the Jerusalem Fund.
The chairman of the Jerusalem Fund is Samar Ali’s father, Subhi Ali. The Jerusalem Fund’s Executive Director openly advocates BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) against the State of Israel. (See, “Samar Ali: Her Father’s Organization Wants to Destroy Israel.”)
SJP was founded in 2001 by co-founders Hatem Bazian, the Islamist, and Snehal Shingavi, the socialist — a “leftist-Islamist” alliance (also referred to as a “red-green” alliance). This joinder has allowed the SJP to appeal to a broader coalition, which includes left-wing activists and religio-cultural political groups like the Muslim Students Association.
Hatem Bazian Brought His Middle East Hate to School
- Virulently anti-Semitic Jew-hater who came as a college student to the U.S. from the Hamas stronghold of Nablus in the West Bank.
- Served as President of the General Union of Palestinian Students, the student arm of the PLO and an organization that was banned in Germany after the Munich Olympics massacre.
- Served as Muslim Students Association (MSA) president at Berkley
- Was a fundraising speaker for Kindhearts, a Hamas front closed by the US government after being considered for designation as a terrorist organization
- Co-founded Zaytuna College with Zaid Shakir, a repeat visitor to Nashville who tells his college audiences that, “under Islamic law the kafir won’t be equal with the Muslim. The Christian or the Jew will be a dhimmi. They won’t be equal with the Muslim.” He was quoted in the New York Times as saying that “he still hoped that one day the United States would be a Muslim country ruled by Islamic law.”
- Founded and chairs the national extremist anti-Israel organization American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) which helps train and support SJP activists. SJP’s 2002 national convention was sponsored by the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), with guest speaker Sami al-Arian.
The IAP was created by a Hamas leader to be its U.S. propaganda arm and raise money for Hamas. IAP was listed as one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s likeminded organizations in the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic plan for North America. IAP’s leadership founded CAIR – the Council on American Islamic Relations.
Sami al-Arian was the head of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) in the U.S. In 2006 when he was sentenced to 57 months in prison in connection with PIJ activities, the judge described him as a “master manipulator.” This past December, he was on Capitol Hill advocating for the restoration of Morsi’s ousted Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Al-Arian also founded WISE (World and Islam Studies Enterprise). Hisham Sharabi, founder of the Jerusalem Fund, was a WISE Board member. Subhi Ali, Samar’s father, served alongside Sharabi until taking over as Chairman of the Jerusalem Fund. WISE was named in a federal indictment as part of a “criminal organization whose members and associates engaged in acts of violence including murder, extortion, money laundering, fraud and issue of visas, and operated worldwide,” including in Florida.
Read more at Front Page
Also see: Discover The Networks profile on Hatem Bazian
In the spirit of interfaith dialogue and “building bridges” perhaps Bazian should entertain Andrew Klavan’s proposal:
American Secretary of State John Kerry continued the Obama Administration’s record of bullying, saying on Saturday, “for Israel there is an increasing de-legitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it, there is talk of boycott and other kinds of things. Are we all going to be better with all of that?” Kerry is pressuring Israel to make very difficult compromises, claiming if not there will be a “high risk” of increased boycotts, and a higher likelihood of international isolation for Israel. This, in English would be called blackmail.
This administration has repeatedly pushed through controversial, executive action policies that the majority of Americans oppose – and the Middle East is no different. Instead of standing with America’s closest ally, Kerry spent the weekend threatening violence and boycotts against Israel if the Jewish State doesn’t make sacrifices to placate the Palestinian Arabs. Despicable incitement which provides moral encouragement to those who seek to kill Jews and are also enemies of the West.
Why haven’t the Palestinians been threatened if peace talks break down? As a fellow Front Page Mag columnist previously noted, Palestinians cheer while America mourns. In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing, Palestinians in Gaza cheered, “danced in the streets and handed out candy and sweets to motorists and pedestrians alike.” “Similarly, after the 9-11 attacks that killed 3,000 people, the Palestinian response was quite similar. Old women were seen shrieking in jubilation while children passed out sweets and men cheered approvingly.” And these are the people American officials support?
Lest one forget, there were mass protests against America amongst Palestinian Arabs during President Barack Obama’s visit to the region. Palestinians are no friends of the Christians, and stand as allies of Arab fundamentalists who are also anti-American. Israel remains the only place in the Middle East where American flags aren’t burnt.
In November, John Kerry encouraged the Arabs to commit violence against Israel when he asked, “I mean, does Israel want a third intifada?” Kerry said Israel’s “isolation” would be their own fault if a peace deal with the Palestinians falls through. Kerry further warned the Israelis that “the alternative to getting back to the talks is the potential of chaos.” Tantamount to incitement by saying either give in or accept attacks. Despicable.
Simply, John Kerry is telling Israel that if it does not sacrifice land to the Palestinian Arabs, then they can deal with Arab violence. What Kerry neglects is that if Israel does sacrifice, it will also deal with Arab violence, and the Arabs won’t stop attacking as long as there is a Jewish State. The Palestinian Arabs have massacred Jewish men, women and children before there was a state of Israel, and don’t need John Kerry to encourage them to continue to do so.
These are Israel’s so-called “peace partners.” These are the people who are demanding that Kerry and Obama forget that America and Israel share common Christian-Judeo values, and Israel is a staunch ally of America. It is time for Kerry to wake up and realize that Israel is not the problem in the Middle East – the Palestinian Arabs are.
As Israel’s Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon noted, the county “will not negotiate with a gun put to our head,” and “We will make decisions that protect the interests of the state of Israel – If we had made decisions according to every boycott threat, we would not be here today.” Zionist prophet Ze’ev Jabotinsky said many years ago: “At the root of our 2000 years of suffering is our refusal to surrender. The history of the Jewish people in the exile is not the history of what they did, but the history of what was done to them.”
John Kerry: Leave Israel Alone and stand with Israel, not with those who celebrate the Boston Massacre and 9/11.
- Why the Palestinians Refuse to Recognize Israel as a Jewish State (gatestoneinstitute.org)
Selling Out Israel: The Obama-Kerry Plan (americanthinker.com)
Trying to Scare Israel (frontpagemag.com)
Iran FM: We may recognize Israel after Palestinian deal (warsclerotic.worpress.com)
by Salim Mansur:
“It [the new face of anti-Semitism] targets the Jewish people by targeting Israel…. What else can we call criticism that selectively concerns only the Jewish state and effectively denies its right to exist, to defend itself, while systematically ignoring or excusing the violence and oppression all around it?” — Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
Invited to address the Knesset, the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem, Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister of Canada, did not hold back in expressing his government’s support for the Jewish state as the lonely and beleaguered democracy in the region. As Harper told members of the Knesset, “Israel is the only country in the Middle East which has long anchored itself in the ideals of freedom, democracy and the rule of law. And these are not mere notions. They are the things that, over time and against all odds, have proven to be, over and over again, the only ground in which human rights, political stability and economic prosperity may flourish…. through fire and water, Canada will stand with you.”
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu (left) introduces Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper (center) at the Knesset podium, on Jan. 20, 2014. (Image source: Canada PM’s Office)
Harper’s address was a window into his heart and mind, and the clearest expression without any equivocation of how Canada, under his leadership, sees the bleak situation in the Middle East. It was also a message from leader of one of the G8 countries to member states of the UN, and especially to other Western democracies, that Canada’s embrace of Israel transcends politics and is ethically grounded on moral principles. As Harper stated, “Canada supports Israel fundamentally because it is right to do so,” because “the special relationship between Canada and Israel is rooted in shared values.”
Harper’s recent visit to Israel was his first since being elected prime minister in 2006 at the head of a minority Conservative Party government. His minority government was returned in the 2008 election, and then in May 2011 Harper’s Conservatives finally won a majority in the Canadian parliament. Throughout this period Harper demonstrated an unflinchingly consistent, even politically courageous, support for Israel at home and abroad when such support has been seen by many as unwisely compromising Canada’s even-handed approach in dealing with the problems of the region.
Canada has seen itself for a long time now as a “middle power”, its influence in the world carefully harnessed through its role as a helpful fixer in the UN and other multilateral bodies. This role and the accompanying self-image over the past several decades assumed a default position for Canadian foreign policy when dealing with the developing countries of what until lately was described as the third world. It helped position Canada to be seen as an honest broker between the rich North and the poor South, and in this role Canada’s political leaders through the Cold War years and after found they were regularly praised and courted by a majority of the UN member states. This meant, in time, that Canada’s views on issues that garnered the support of a UN majority were also carefully crafted in part to maintain this position and image, and the diplomacy at work to effect such a result was also domestically resonant with a segment of the public that cared about Canada’s image abroad.
The effectively quasi-permanent majority of the UN is comprised of developing countries of Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and South America. Within this majority stands the Islamic bloc of 57 Arab and Muslim states – all are members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) – that, in voting together, can either make or break a majority vote at the UN. It is this influence of the OIC and the votes it can deliver that regularly isolates and reprimands Israel at the UN. It was the machinations of the Islamic bloc that led to the notorious passage of the UN General Assembly resolution in November 1975 declaring “Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.” And though this resolution was revoked in 1991 after the end of the Cold War, the Islamic bloc in the UN yet pulls enough weight in voting numbers for member states to be careful not to alienate it.
Read more at Gatestone Institute
Originally published by the Jerusalem Post.
During a press conference with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Tuesday, an Israeli reporter asked Prime Minister Stephen Harper, “Is Canada paying a price for being so supportive of Israel? Is it possible to support Israel and still have ties to the Arab world?”
This question goes to the heart of what is generally perceived as Israel’s greatest weakness. The Arab boycott of Israel and of countries doing business with Israel has served as one of the most potent weapons in the anti-Israel arsenal for over a generation. Indeed, since the OPEC oil embargo in 1974, it has been the Arabs’ single most powerful weapon in their unceasing campaign for the destruction of the Jewish state.
It was Arab economic bullying that forced African nations to cut their ties with the Jewish state.
It was the Arab use of the oil weapon after the 1973 Yom Kippur War that convinced Western Europe to end its diplomatic support for Israel and throw in with the PLO.
More than anything else, it is the Arab economic boycott of companies that do business with Israel that has eroded Israel’s diplomatic standing over the past two generations and transformed the only human rights respecting democracy in the Middle East into an international pariah.
And yet, under Stephen Harper, as the noose of international isolation is drawn around Israel’s neck more tightly every day, Canada has emerged as an outspoken supporter and defender of the Jewish state.
So in essence, the Israeli reporter’s question to Harper could easily be rephrased as, “Are you crazy?” Harper responded to the question by rejecting its premises – that the Arab world behaves as a bloc, and that standing up for your convictions is a losing proposition when those convictions involve taking unpopular stands.
As he put it, “I wouldn’t want to say there is no price, but my general view of the world is that people respect your view, if you express it appropriately and they understand it’s genuine….The fact of the matter is, Canada has deep relations with many Arab countries…. And frankly [there are] many matters where we probably far more often agree than disagree. So look, I don’t think it’s automatically the view that if you have a particular issue where you disagree, that this needs to rupture relationships irrevocably.”
In other words, what Harper acknowledged was that yes, Canada has lost contracts in some Arab countries due to its support for Israel. But by and large, it hasn’t taken a serious hit.
The obvious follow-up question would have been to ask if Canada gains anything from its support for Israel that can compensate for the economic hits it takes for it.
The answer to that question is yes, Canada, and other countries that support Israel now, when such support is more notable than it was in the past, do gain significantly from their actions. This is true on two levels.
First, economically, Israel is in a far different position than it was 20 years ago. During Harper’s visit, Canada and Israel updated their free trade agreement and signed a number of other agreements enhancing cooperation in multiple fields.
As Netanyahu said, “I think that cooperation makes us both stronger and more prosperous and more secure countries.”
Canada isn’t alone in recognizing the economic potential of good ties with Israel. Consider Norway.
For the past 15 years, Norway has distinguished itself as a trailblazer in the European bid to isolate Israel politically and wage economic warfare against it. Norway was among the first European countries to divest from Israeli companies.
Its trade unions have been leading purveyors of anti-Israel propaganda and economic warfare.
Last fall Norway elected a new conservative government. And under the leadership of Prime Minister Erna Solberg, Norway is seeking to rebuild its ties with Israel. Just after the election, the Israeli embassy in Oslo hosted a meeting of Norwegian and Israeli businessmen. Norway’s new finance minister is interested in cooperation between Norway’s oil industry and Israel’s new natural gas sector.
Norway’s new minister of culture, Thorhild Widvey, held a workshop for 160 Norwegian television producers with Israeli producers who successfully sold Israeli series to the US market.
Disowning the boycott Israel movement, Widvey said, “We don’t see the boycott as an effective tool to promote positive change.”
Today, the economies of the Arab world are collapsing. Fracking technologies are lowering demand for Middle Eastern oil. Political instability is drying up foreign investment and tourism.
And local universities are incapable of producing graduates able to function in the global economy.
As a consequence, the Arabs’ capacity to intimidate governments into rejecting the economic benefits Israel has to offer is steadily decreasing.
Read more at Front Page
The Lawrence of Arabia syndrome Western politicians suffer from illustrates the limitations of people like Barack Obama, John Kerry and Catherine Ashton. Raised on Western values of pluralism and integration and influenced by British intellectual orientation, they have absolutely no ability to even imagine let alone appreciate or understand the manipulations of which Shi’ite Iranian Ayatollahs and Sunni Arab sheikhs and leaders are capable.
by Reuven Berko
Special to IPT News
January 6, 2014
Peter O’Toole, who was marvelous in “Lawrence of Arabia,” died recently. Many commentators and critics feel that Lawrence’s story and the movie about him influenced the actions of many European statesmen, politicians, and members of Western foreign ministries and security services. However, there is considerable argument as to whether and what, as a matter of historical fact, T. E. Lawrence contributed to the British war effort by collaborating with the Bedouin tribes of the Arabian Peninsula against the Ottoman Turks during the First World War. Not all historians agree to the truth of the glowing reports of his personality, moral stature and personal behavior.
Nevertheless, the enigmatic figure of Lawrence, an intelligence officer, became a role model for Western diplomats and statesmen, and he is revered as a master of mediating with the leaders of the Arab world. He seemed secretive and manipulative, with the rare ability and knowledge to exploit Arab ideology to achieve victory and foster the interests of the West, and to build inter-cultural cooperation and coexistence in a way that was both noble and romantic.
The Arabs with whom Lawrence collaborated were romanticized and made to appear exotic and other-worldly. The murder, grudges, blood feuds, treachery, deception, destruction, violence, theft, robbery and looting, all deeply ingrained in the psyches of the Arab tribes, were wrapped in romanticism and existentialist concepts explained and justified as necessary, forced upon the Bedouins by their daily struggle to subsist in the hard conditions imposed on them by the desert.
That was the foundation for utterly false and baseless concepts such as “Arab honor” and “his word is his bond,” from which the image of the noble, almost feral, desert Bedouin Arab was constructed. Tales worthy of the Thousand and One Nights were told about the loyalty of the Arabs, their honor, trustworthiness and other imaginary transcendental qualities, turning the Arab in to a paradigm on which generations of Western intellectuals were reared, especially those who eventually went to work for the British Foreign Office. Critics of the blind worship of Lawrence have always claimed that the image of the British officer and his Arab partners was constructed through an emotional idealization resulting from a general lack of expertise regarding the Middle East, a region veiled in mystery, wonder and enchantment.
Few people have bothered to read the Muqaddimah, or Introduction, written by Arab historian Ibn Khaldun in the 14th century, in which he describes the Bedouins as destructive, lacking any sense of morality or values, and working only to destroy culture and world order. Even fewer have read Fouad Ajami’s 1998 book, The Dream Palace of the Arabs: A Generation’s Odyssey, with its painful criticism of the pitiful Arab, whose inherent culture left him no shred of sincerity, creativity or courage. Worse, even fewer members of Arab society itself have dared to honestly criticize its faults for fear of reprisals.
In the West, however, there were scholars who did objectively study the weaknesses and faults of the Arab Middle East, but the lack of openness, jealousy and the dark, ancient tribal pride made the Arabs sneer at such scholars as “Orientalists,” unqualified pretenders who had the audacity to claim knowledge of the East. Those industrious, forthright scholars were accused by Arab “intellectuals” like Professor Edward Said of arrogantly patronizing the Arabs. The claim of Said, and others like him, was that they were not scholars but were in reality ignorant, stigmatizing the Arabs because of their imperialist-colonialist mindset and fanatical Christian hatred for the Arabs and Muslims, as well as their unjustified feelings of superiority.
Peter O’Toole was a great actor, but the movie “Lawrence of Arabia” was nothing more than a Hollywood fantasy which, like the imaginary story of Lawrence, swept away many romantics and for decades had a negative impact on the decisions made by influential Western officials and statesmen dealing with policy in the Middle East. The problem is that today as well, Western leaders and policy-makers view and discuss the problems of the Middle East through the prism of Lawrence of Arabia, romantic, distorted and nostalgic as it is, seeing only the unilateral Arab position of every conflict, and adopting paradigms, symbols and historical deceptions as the gospel truth.
Lies told repeatedly, as the past has shown, become historical truths. Actually, Hollywood’s world of dreams and fantasy did not penetrate the wandering sand dunes of the evil and unjust acts perpetrated by the Arabs and Bedouins throughout the years of the jahiliyya (the era of ignorance before Islam) which left their indelible imprint of murder and theft. Those crimes accompanied the Arabs and Muslims from the rise of Islam and accompany them to this day. All the evil storms of history visited upon humanity did not expose to the people of Europe (who today host well-established enclaves of radical Islam in their midst) even the surface of the slaughter and injustice carried out by Muslims in the name of Islam, “the religion of peace,” against Jews and Christians. Europe is still influenced by the fantasies of Lawrence of Arabia, captivated by the specious charms of the Arabs and Islam and unaware of the catastrophe that will be visited on the world as soon as the Islamist genie is let out of the bottle, making the World Trade Center look like three minutes of “coming attractions.”
Fortunately for the West, what was mistakenly called the Arab Spring quickly turned into the Arab Winter, and the storms of internecine Sunni-Shi’ite terrorism and slaughter exposed the convenient lapses of memory for what they were and tore away the myths concealing the true face of the Arab-Muslim world. It is now a recognizable fact that all over the globe, wherever there are Arabs and Muslims there is slaughter, terrorism, mass murder of both brother Muslims and “infidels,’ pedophilia, the oppression of women, rape, the murder and persecution of Jews and Christians, the burning of houses of worship, and the use of weapons of mass destruction to kill civilians, none of which has the slightest relevance to the so-called “issue of Palestine.”
Dr. Reuven Berko has a PhD in Middle Eastern studies, is a commentator on Israeli Arabic TV, writes for the Israeli daily newspaper Israel Hayom and is considered one of Israel’s top experts on Arab affairs.
By Lee Kaplan:
The title of a recent panel discussion at the University of California, Berkeley was ominous: “SHHHH! Don’t Talk About Palestine: Chuck Hagel, Judith Butler, and the Israel Lobby’s Threat to Free Speech on Our Campus.” Taking place in Boalt Hall at UC Berkeley’s School of Law and sponsored by Students for Justice in Palestine, the event drew what appeared to be sixty hardcore anti-Israel activists—most in their early twenties—eager to embrace the notion that UC Berkeley is under siege by “pro-Israel advocates seek[ing] to silence debate about Palestinian human rights and divestment from Israel’s occupation.”
Although the event was billed as a discussion about the (nonexistent) efforts by the “Israel Lobby” to delay the appointment of Chuck Hagel as secretary of defense and its criticism of the political science department at Brooklyn College for co-sponsoring a recent talk on Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) by UC Berkeley rhetoric professor and anti-Israel activist Judith Butler, neither subject arose. Instead, the panel engaged in paranoid fantasies about being “silenced,” which, given that this was a well-publicized event at a prestigious law school on a campus where the Palestinian narrative is constantly promoted both inside and outside the classroom, were patently and even hilariously false.
Hatem Bazian, a senior lecturer in the departments of Near Eastern and ethnic studies, was introduced as the main speaker, one the “500 most influential Muslims in the world,” and, in a false claim, the originator of the term “Islamophobia.” While the latter is untrue, Bazian does have the dubious distinction of directing UC Berkeley’s Islamophobia Research & Documentation Project.
Announcing that, “I come first to discuss this subject as a Palestinian and a Muslim,” Bazian launched into the usual accolades surrounding the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley during the 1960s. Far from being a free speech advocate facing censorship, Bazian is an activist who uses his academic position to advance an anti-Israel agenda. A promoter of the BDS movement and executive director of the Holy Land Foundation-linked American Muslims for Palestine, he is infamous for having called for an “Intifada in this country!” at a San Francisco anti-war rally in 2004.
Read more at Front Page
Contact information for the office of UC-Berkeley’s chancellor, Robert J. Birgeneau:
Lee Kaplan is an investigative journalist and columnist who writes forIsracampus.org.il, Israel National News, and the Northeast Intelligence Network. He is a Fellow at the American Center for Democracy and the founder of DAFKA.org and StoptheISM.com. He wrote this article for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.
[Editor’s note: The graphic accompanying this article was designed by Frontpage’s illustrator, Bosch Fawstin]
“Israel Apartheid Week” is a common blood libel on college campuses, hosted every year by hate groups such as the Muslim Students Association and Students for Justice in Palestine. These hate weeks are designed to de-legitimize Israel and soften it up for the kill, claiming that it is an apartheid state and should be isolated. The declared goal of Hamas and the PLO is to “liberate” Palestine “from the river to the sea” – in other words, to destroy the Jewish state and push its inhabitants into the sea.
The growing BDS movement on campus (BDS stands for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions, which are the steps the movement advocates taking against Israel for its purported policies of “apartheid”) is another element in the jihadist assault. The accusations of apartheid levied on Israel are not simply lies; the truth of the true apartheid and discrimination in the Middle East has been obscured. Israel is actually the only apartheid-free state in the Middle East. Countries such as Lebanon and Jordan do in fact have apartheid-style laws on their books, and Islamic supremacy can be seen all over the world with the subjugation of women, the persecution of gays, and the persecution of religious and racial minorities. Despite the fact that these atrocities are par for the course in countries ruled by Islamic law, the Left (and especially the Women’s Studies departments and LGBT groups) on campus has remained silent.
Until now, there has been no national campaign to expose the brutal discrimination that occurs under Islamic Sharia law. But this spring, the David Horowitz Freedom Center is sponsoring “Islamic Apartheid Weeks” on over 50 campuses. These weeks will elaborate on the many forms of Muslim apartheid that have been integral to the Middle East for over a millennium and can now be seen in other regions of the world such as Africa: religious intolerance, ethnic inequality, racism, gender discrimination, denial of citizenship, political oppression and slavery, among others.
The centerpiece of each week will be panel discussions and keynote speeches featuring former victims of Sharia law and Islamic supremacism, including dissidents such as Nonie Darwish and Simon Deng, and experts on political Islam, such as Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Andrew C. McCarthy. We will also be providing students with a full compliment of resources, such as pamphlets, flyers, and films highlighting the various human rights abuses sanctioned under Sharia law. Groups like Students for Justice in Palestine are in fact partially right: there is apartheid in the Middle East. It’s just that it’s being practiced by the Arab Muslim nations, and the David Horowitz Freedom Center is setting out to make that abundantly clear.
Islamic Apartheid Week events have already occurred or have been planned at these campuses so far:
Bob Jones University
Cal Poly – San Luis Obispo
Missouri Western State University
Murray State University
UC San Diego
University of Missouri
University of San Diego
Valdosta State University
Wisconsin – River Falls
By Lee Kaplan:
The individual known as Anna Baltzer, whose name remains questionable in terms of legal legitimacy, leads the US Campaign Against the Israeli Occupation and the Boycott and Divestment Movement (BDS) against Israel. Under that name, she has developed a sinecure traveling to churches and colleges worldwide regaling false tales of atrocities by Israel’s Jews against innocent Palestinians with slick presentations, somehow even grabbing a television appearance at Oxford University.
What’s in a Name?
Using the identity of Anna Baltzer, she claims to have appeared at over 500 venues spreading her revisionist history. Billing herself as the “grandchild of Polish-born Holocaust survivors” and a “Fulbright Scholar” to lend her legitimacy in college venues, Baltzer would appear to be the perfect foil to the Jewish state. But what appears to be emerging now is that the woman known as Anna Baltzer is not who she claims to bet While in the’ West Bank’, she routinely rubs elbows with known terrorists while citing her very questionable background.
Based on my investigation, it would appear that she is enough of an embarrassment to some of her family that she allegedly fabricated the name Anna Baltzer – or otherwise associated herself with that name without undergoing any obvious legal means allowing her to do so, to conceal her true identity. Research found that she has at least three aliases, including the identity as Anna Baltzer under which she personally collects money while rewriting history and spreading disinformation about the Jews
Fulbright Exaggerations & Damage Control
As a journalist I first ran afoul of reporting about Anna Baltzer, when I wrote a series of articles for the Gatestone Institute about her. In those articles I reported that there was no Anna Baltzer on record as being a Fulbright Scholar; that no one with the name Baltzer was on record as a Holocaust survivor from the death camps of Poland, and that no record existed of an Anna Baltzer ever going on a Birthright Tour to Israel. The Birthright Tour is of critical importance to her saga as it is during this event that Baltzer claimed she had been falsely indoctrinated into a pro-Israel position and that it inspired her to research the truth about the Palestinian plight.
When my first investigative article was published, a self-described Jewish anarchist named Daniel Sieradski began tweeting about her at Oxford.. Sieradski, having the same objectives to eliminate Israel, writes all manner of cynical “Jewish” materials, and continually defends anti-Semites and blames Jews for anti-Semitism.
He then contacted Gatestone with false accusations of sloppy journalism, contending the inaccuracy of my information about Baltzer despite the authenticated data contained in my report. For his evidence, Sieradski merely sent a computer screenshot from the Fulbright website that listed Baltzer’s real name, Anna J. Piller, suggesting that my initial information was incorrect.
Inspection of his “evidence” determined that the page he proclaimed as evidence that Baltzer, known as Anna Piller, was indeed a Fulbright Scholar was quickly dismissed. The “evidence” Sieradski offered was nothing more than a page devoted to students hired as teaching assistants by Fulbright, and not a list of actual Fulbright scholars. That page merely proved that Baltzer, under the surname Piller, was hired as a teaching assistant to teach English at an English language program in Turkey – an Islamic country. A separate list of legitimate Fulbright scholars dating back to 1990 showed no entries or listings under her legal name or alias. At best, she exaggerated her academic qualifications to gain entry to the university speaking circuit. Yet, Sieradski suggested that as a Jew, he felt I owed Anna Baltzer an apology.
Fellow activists from the ISM and Sieradski, who also encourages boycotting of Israel like Anna Baltzer does, flew into action and changed biographical data on the Wikipedia site to reflect now that her real name was Piller, explaining that this surname was the reason that Baltzer did not appear on the Fulbright Scholarshipwebsite. Such revisions were done after and in likely response to the findings from my initial investigative report.
Roseanne Barr bakes and more names for Baltzer appear
It is important to note that Sieradski is a Jew who is part of the in-house staff and writes for the anarchist magazine, Heeb. The word Heeb is considered a racial slur for Jews. The cover of that magazine once featured the notoriously anti-Israel Roseanne Barr, sporting a Hitler moustache and placing cookies shaped as Jewish people into an oven.
Gatestone removed my articles. Undeterred, I moved my investigative report to to a more heavily trafficked site. I decided to increase the scope of my investigation of the individual using the name Anna Baltzer. There was indeed more to be found.
Most important was her claim of being the grandchild of “Polish-born holocaust survivors”. Today, she is against the existence of Israel as the Jewish national homeland and not only a vindicator of the Palestinian goal to replace the Jewish state with an Arab one, but even of the violence that is practiced by Palestinian terrorists against Jews and other Israelis.
Read more at Arutz Sheva
Allen West interviews investigative journalist and Israeli activist Lee Kaplan about anti-Semitism at American universities. Why is this happening? What can be done about it? And is the political left uniting with the Islamists on campus? Find out in this interesting conversation.