Holocaust History: Academics Go To War Over The Best Way To Study the Holocaust


Ahead of international conference in Jerusalem, two rival camps of genocide scholars are at each other’s throats, including accusations of anti-Semitism and debates over the Holocaust

Remember the Jew who was stranded on a deserted island and built two synagogues: the one in which he worships and one in which he will never step foot?

It is hard to not think of this old joke in light of the ongoing spat between two rival camps of genocide scholars. This feud, which focuses on the question of how to best to study the Holocaust, is likely to reach new heights (or lows) this week with an international conference held in Jerusalem, which is hosted by one group and denounced by the other.

If the issue at hand — people’s unabating tendency to systematically massacre each other — wasn’t so tragic, the current academic controversy over it would almost be comical.

Mixing scholarly debate with nasty ad hominem attacks, the latest episode in this saga revolves around an Israeli scholar named Israel Charny. A co-founder of the world’s first association for genocide scholars, Charny is now accusing the competitor organization of marginalizing the Holocaust, delegitimizing the State of Israel and overall latent anti-Semitism.

Charny even conducted research — including hiring a surveying company — to demonstrate the other genocide scholars group’s alleged bias. The accused academics retort that his study on their alleged biases doesn’t stand up to scientific standards, questioning Charny’s scholarly credentials.

Read the Remainder at Times of Israel

History of Terrorism: Bullet Scars as Uganda Remember Israeli Entebbe Raid in 1976


Four decades later, now-friendly countries to jointly mark daring IDF hostage rescue operation in sign of reconciliation

ENTEBBE, Uganda (AFP) — Skimming above the choppy waves through the dark the four planes swooped in low over Lake Victoria, packed with over 200 elite Israeli commandos on a daring raid to free hijacked hostages.

Landing soon after midnight at Uganda’s Entebbe airport on July 4, 1976, it took the paratroopers less than an hour to storm the base and free over 100 passengers aboard an Air France plane, an operation that has gone down in special forces legend. The plane had been hijacked a week earlier on June 27.

Four decades later, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to visit Uganda for the anniversary not only to mark the operation and boost now-friendly ties between Uganda and Israel, but also to pay a deeply personal tribute.

The commando leader, the only Israeli soldier killed in the raid, was his older brother, 30-year old Lieutenant-Colonel Yonatan Netanyahu.

As an operation, it was “a difficult one,” remembered Amir Ofer, then a sergeant major and now a businessman, visiting Uganda earlier this month as part of preparations to mark the anniversary.

Read the Remainder at Times of Israel


Holocaust History: Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone Gets Schooled by Jewish Historians After Claiming Hitler ‘Supported’ Zionism


In a lengthy J-TV interview, former London mayor again refuses to apologize for his ‘historical facts,’ which are refuted by leading Holocaust scholars.

LONDON — The former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, has again refused to apologize for his remarks about Hitler and Zionism, insisting he was “misquoted” after a radio show in the UK in April.

But Livingstone, in an hour-long interview late last week with the Jewish cable channel J-TV, was put on the spot by the interlocutor, historian Dr. Alan Mendoza, who systematically took the Labour politician’s thesis apart, forcing him to admit he had a hazy grasp of facts and that his source, the left-wing journalist Lenni Brenner, had been selective in his interpretation.

In April, Livingstone, a close ally of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and himself a former MP, was suspended from the Labour Party after going on a BBC radio station and declaring that Hitler had supported Zionism. Livingstone was asked on the show to defend the party after a number of Labour members were suspended for social media posts deemed anti-Semitic.

But Livingstone was ultimately suspended himself after declaring, “Let’s remember, when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism – this before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.”

The fall-out from Livingstone’s inflammatory remarks led to extraordinary scenes in Westminster as the Labour MP John Mann, who is the chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism, challenged Livingstone outside TV studios and called him “a Nazi apologist.”

Read the Remainder at Times of Israel

The Armed Citizen Corner: Why the 2nd Amendment is Worth Protecting


By Hammerhead

In a recent blog post in the Times of IsraelRon Kampeas, the Washington Bureau Chief for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, writes about how Israel stays so well armed and protected as a country but yet has no Second Amendment or gun violence to speak of. The reason? Only 4% of the weapons in Israel are owned by Civilians. That means 96% of the weapons in Israel are Issued to Military Personnel. Now at first this may seem like a disproportionate ratio of the population, but what the author neglects to tell you in this article is that Israel has MANDATORY 2 year Military Service period for ALL 18 year olds, thus you basically have a revolving door of young people constantly replenishing  the military ranks.

The author goes on to say that one of the reasons for such little gun violence in Israel is that all of the armed military personnel are answerable “to the Military Tribunal” for their actions while armed and that they have had training to know how to handle their weapons and respond to a crisis situation. He goes on to say that when 96% of the people who own weapons in your country fit in this category, it is a good thing and further expresses the pompous ideal that the United States would do well to copy this model because of our record with gun violence.

Oh Boy, where do I start on this one!

First off, The Second Amendment was created so that CIVILIANS, not MILITARY PERSONNEL could protect themselves from their OWN GOVERNMENT. Our forefathers were well aware that a tyrant most likely would take hold of the military very early on and thus use it as his “muscle” (much like Hitler did in Germany  beginning in 1933) so it is very important that the civilian population be as EQUALLY ARMED as the Military in the most practical respects, namely, small arms and training (the militia). This is one of the many unique “Checks and Balances” within the framework of the American Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Secondly, it seems the author wants to imply from the heavily biased and pompous Bloomberg article he cites that in Israel “necessity” drives the need for Israeli civilians to own firearms (because Israel is so dangerous due to terrorist attacks), while in America is appears that people just want to “exercise” their rights” when it comes to owning firearms (for the hell of it I suppose, not because we too have had some of the worst terrorist attacks in the world). This argument is actually self-defeating. If “necessity” is what truly drives firearm ownership in Israel and there have been to date over 150 stabbing attacks on Israel military and civilians by Palestinian Terrorist, some of them fatal, then why are not more civilians armed? Because the people applying for the licenses were not in the military and you cannot trust them not to shoot themselves or each other? I would argue that in America, necessity also drives firearm ownership. Why? Because people do NOT want to be Victims, just like In Israel I would Imagine. The difference being in America, owning a Firearm is a Right AND a Privilege and it was decided long ago that it was a Right the State could not take away because of some STATE defined “necessity”. Bottom line, in America, the Right to PROTECT ONESELF is INNATE and GOD GIVEN, NOT STATE GIVEN. 

The underlying problem here is a gross misunderstanding of True American Democracy versus the ideal of Socialism and a Military State in my opinion. To prove my point I pose this question.

If 96% of the weapons owned in Israel are owned by Military personnel, what is to stop some General in the Military from staging a coup and taking over your Country? The Civilians?  They only have 4% of the guns. The Government? Accordingly, any armed personnel within the govt would most likely fall within the framework of the Military, so that is also a big NO. As best as I can tell, Israel has had no real “checks and balances” to keep it from becoming a  Military State, which by all intensive purposes, it already is.

The problem is really two-fold in Israel:  Too Much Power has been put in the hands of one group (Military) And TOO MUCH FAITH has been placed in the Military and Police (which by percentage are the largest force that are armed) to “protect” Civilians. The author by and large is pushing the socialist, liberal ideal of “The State knows what is Best For ALL OF US  which is  exactly where AMERICA is headed with this current round of gun control “hysteria” that has emerged since the Orlando shooting.

So ultimately this is why the American Second Amendment is so precious to any FREEDOM Loving American and must be KEPT INTACT and PROTECTED, It guarantees that no one group, not the Government, Not the Military and Not the Police have too much POWER. It keep the phrase “A Government Of the People, By The People and For The People” Honest and True.

Lastly, I want to address the authors ridiculous implication that civilians who are armed in the United States with Concealed or Open Carry Permits do not have “enough” training. Here is a direct quote from the article that I take issue with the most:

“The training Israeli soldiers receive also helps keep gun violence down. When Gabby Giffords, the Jewish congresswoman from Arizona, was shot in 2011, an armed passerby recalled later to his own horror that he nearly opened fire on the folks who were restraining the gunman.”

Firstly, the author is deceptively using an incident that never PHYSICALLY Happened. Notice the word “nearly” in bold. So by the author’s rationale here, because some guy who was armed at the Gabby Gifford rally (where she was shot by a mentally ill man) “nearly” opened fire on a group of guys restraining the actual gunmen, that makes armed Americans “untrained” with firearms? Huh? Did we all fall down a rabbit hole here?

How about instead of dealing in “Nearly’s” we deal in some ABSOLUTES that show a civilian armed with a firearm more times than not will STOP the BAD GUY and SAVE INNOCENT LIVES. Like this incident that happened early this year, where a Concealed Carry Permit Holder stops the Robbery of a Barber Shop.

Why is the Second Amendment Worth protecting? Because it is a foundational cornerstone of American Democracy that ensures no ONE group has too much power. The Communist leader Mao said it best when he said “Political Power Grows out the BARREL of a gun.” An Armed People is a People that retains POWER to not be pushed around and to be self-sufficient when it comes to their own personal security.

To put it simply, the Second Amendment is a “guarantor” of ALL the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. When it falls, America and this Experiment called Democracy will most assuredly fall also.


Stay Alert, Stay Armed and Stay Dangerous!


Crusader Corner: Orlando Shooter at Gay Night Club of Afghan Descent

Still way too early to comment as I am in the middle of gathering intel, but this is from Times of Israel. -SF

Gay club

Omar Mateen, 30, of Port St-Lucie, dies in firefight with police; FBI says he may have had links to Islamic terror

The suspected shooter who killed approximately 20 people at a crowded Florida nightclub on Sunday was identified by police as Omar Mateen, a US-born citizen to Afghani parents, according to local news outlets.

Authorities were checking whether Mateen, 30, from Port Saint Lucie in Florida, had ties to Islamic terrorism.

The FBI said there were “suggestions” Mateen had “leanings” toward Islamic terror. Authorities said he had no criminal history.

Wielding an assault-type rifle and a handgun, Mateen is suspected of opening fire at club-goers in Orlando, about a two-hour drive from Port St. Lucie, killing approximately 20 people and wounding 42 others before dying in a gunfight with SWAT officers. Mateen also took hostages during the attack.

Police Chief John Mina also said the shooter had some sort of “suspicious device.” He said the suspect exchanged gunfire with an officer working at the club around 2 a.m., then went back inside and took hostages among more than 300 people inside.

Read the Remainder at Times of Israel