L.A. Freedom Socialist Party: 'For a Socialist Secular Palestine!'

Stupid communists, once again proving just how really stupid they are.

Hamas is perhaps the most fanatically Islamist terrorist organization in the Middle East. Even ISIS has nothing on Hamas' genocidal religious hatred of the Jews, and Gaza is a cauldron of religious hatred from cradle to grave.

But give it up for this special Freedom Socialist Party activist at the clip. The Freedom Socialists are feminist lesbian revolutionaries. She'd probably be strung up by a crane if she spent more than just a few hours in any of the totalitarian Islamist regimes in the Arab world.

Gobsmacking stupidity:



More at Fouse Squawk, "Sunday in LA-Pro Hamas Rally," and "Videos of August 10 Pro-Hamas Rally in LA."

Obama's Craven Political Fear of 'Another Benghazi' Drove Decision for #ISIS Airstrikes

Everything is political for Obama. He never makes a decision simply out of concern for the well-being of the American people.

At Director Blue, "NYT: Fear of "Another Benghazi" Political Debacle, Not Genocide, Drove Obama to Call For ISIS Airstrikes."

Stop hatin' all the time! http://t.co/cuy34OokEh #TCOT pic.twitter.com/59ob9U7ViB

— The People's Cube (@ThePeoplesCube) July 31, 2014

#Hamas Solidarity Gang Terrorizes School Bus in Australia, Shouts 'Kill the Jews'

More on the global outbreak of annihilitionist Jew-hatred.

At Australia News.com, "Bondi racist bus attack: Jewish schools on alert after eight males threaten to cut schoolchildren’s throats, five teenagers arrested."

And Arutz Sheva, "Australia: Anti-Semites Attack School Bus, Shout 'Kill the Jews': Drunken anti-Semites threaten Jewish girls: 'we're going to cut your throats!' Children, parents left traumatized."

This is very, very bad, not only because it happened, but for what it says about where things are moving. http://t.co/R0uHdc8SPx

— Caroline Glick (@CarolineGlick) August 7, 2014

Jewish schools on high alert after eight drunken men stormed a school bus in Bondi this afternoon. http://t.co/XdZQNMCjtN

— The Daily Telegraph (@dailytelegraph) August 6, 2014

Jihad Black Flag, Communist Hammer & Sickle at #Hamas Anti-Israel Terror March in London (VIDEO)

Story at the Time of Israel, "Third London mass protest for Gaza in one month."

Also at Twitchy, "‘Farewell, Western Civilization': London overtaken by pro-Gaza demonstrators [photos]."

Third London mass protest for Gaza in one month http://t.co/zWCr0TcbYQ

— The Times of Israel (@TimesofIsrael) August 9, 2014

ICYMI 'Farewell, Western Civilization': London overtaken by pro-Gaza demonstrators http://t.co/jlU3P8GAwd Ignorant anti-Semites #tcot #pjnet

— CFLancop (@CFLancop) August 10, 2014

Seriously, London Gaza protesters, this can't happen. This is off message. So, so off message. http://t.co/raJYiW2jNl pic.twitter.com/LBB8UoGkIK

— Tom Gara (@tomgara) August 9, 2014

London Gaza rally: lots of Palestinian flags. Hezbollah flag. Gooners Against Apartheid banner. A black jihad flag. http://t.co/kzEsdEcoqW

— Tom Gara (@tomgara) August 9, 2014

London Gaza Pre-March 09082014 http://t.co/FaEoUdhC6S via @OccupyDemocracy #olsx

— Occupy News Network (@OccupyNN) August 9, 2014

Thousands march through London in protest at Israeli military action in #Gaza http://t.co/4OXTgCFQEW

— Louise Mezzina (@mezzDubai) August 10, 2014

FLASHBACK: From William Jacobson, on Thursday, "Anti-Semitism Erupts Globally."

VIDEO: New York City 'Day of Rage' — #Hamas Solidarity March for Extermination of Israel

A Day of Rage, sponsored by ANSWER Syracuse.



And at Arutz Sheva, "New York: Hundreds Protest Against Israel":

The protesters called for an end to U.S. aid to Israel.

Many demonstrators told 1010 WINS it’s no longer just about the firing across the border, it’s about Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

Some protesters said they don’t believe Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state.

“Israel has the power, Israel has political power, Israel has the money, Israel has everything, everything is at their resource. But the only option they think they have is to kill,” one protester said, according to 1010 WINS.

“Our tax dollars are going to Israel in support of this genocide,” Rula Yousef said. “Innocent children in Gaza have been slaughtered, bombs are being thrown at their houses as we speak and American stands by Israel.”

Some of the demonstrators chanted: "Free, free Palestine! Occupation is a crime!", according to The Associated Press (AP).

Mostafa Asadi, an engineer from Philadelphia who came to New York for the protest, said the current violence in the Middle East started more than six decades ago.

"The Zionists took Palestinian land and expelled them in 1948, and now Israel is trying to control the area," said Asadi, an Iran native who hoisted a sign that said: "Stop the U.S.-Israeli blockade of Gaza."

"The Israelis are racist," he told AP.

Pro-Terror #ANSWERLA Organizers: 'We Stand with Hamas!"

It turns out that Waylette Thomas, a 22-year-old organizer for Los Angeles ANSWER, was arrested at the August 2 protest on Wilshire. Her bail was set at $20,000 and the group sent out an appeal for donations.

Outrageous $20,000 bail for unjust arrest of young ANSWER LA organizer at #Gaza demonstration: http://t.co/g0g49z1uGo
— ANSWER Los Angeles (@AnswerLA) August 5, 2014

Well, according the Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, Ms. Thomas is on record of enthusiastically supporting Hamas and its goals of the extermination of Israel. She stands with Hamas terrorism against the Jewish state.

See, "Supporting Palestinians should not mean supporting Hamas":

Banner from @AnswerLA march for #Gaza in Los Angeles RIGHT NOW! Let Gaza live! #FreePalestine! pic.twitter.com/xSqwJv80NI

— Peta Lindsay (@petalindsay) August 2, 2014

Last Saturday, our reporter Ryan Torok covered a massive anti-Israel rally in front of the Federal Building in Westwood. The crowd swelled to an estimated 1,500 to 3,000 people, outgrew the plaza, then spontaneously spilled onto the street, shutting down Wilshire Boulevard as it made its way east toward the Israel Consulate. The protesters chanted “Free Palestine!” and waved posters reading “Zionists, Get Out of Gaza Now!” and “Israel Is Mass Murdering Children.”

That was the message they wanted to send to Zionists. So, naturally, Ryan asked them: What message do they want to send to Hamas?
This is what they told him:

“They have to fire more rockets, and they have to fire stronger. They have to be more aggressive,” Darka Raicevic, a Serbian woman, said.

Jami King, 41, who lives in San Diego and drove to Saturday’s rally with her boyfriend, Ammar Khan, said: “I don’t have a direct message for Hamas. ... I just want the [Israeli] siege to stop and for people to sit down and figure out a solution. It’s not for me to say what Hamas’ part in that is.”

Khan, 36, a Pakistani and engineer: “Hamas, their biggest problem is not having a vision for the future and not having a long-term view. ... what we [the United States and Israel] do in response doesn’t justify that. ... Who are we to lecture them? The U.S. has lost its moral high ground.”

Waylette Thomas, 22, a member of the pro-Palestinian group ANSWER and a student at Cerritos College, to Hamas: “We stand with you.”

It’s not for me to say what Hamas’ part in that is. ... Who are we to lecture them? ... We stand with you. ... Fire more rockets.
Of all the hypocrisies in the Gaza conflict, this has got to be the most galling: There is no pro-Palestinian outcry against Hamas. No messages on Facebook or slogans on protest posters addressing its leaders. No pro-Gazan street protests calling on Hamas to stop firing rockets and stop digging tunnels.

Hamas is proud of the fact that its military wing, the Qassam Brigades, uses suicide bombers, rockets and hidden tunnels to kill or threaten Israeli civilians, including women and children. If people at a “peace” rally can’t stand in moral judgment of child murderers — well, we can forget peace.

Here’s the issue: If you want to scream at Israel for inflicting civilian casualties, fine. And if you want to protest President Barack Obama for supporting Israel, OK. But if you really care about the fate of the Palestinians, if you would prefer innocent Palestinians live rather than die, you should also send a simple, two-word message to Hamas: “Stop shooting.”

Hamas needs to get the message from the worldwide pro-Palestinian movement: Resistance to Israeli control and occupation is legitimate. Violent resistance is not. Pick your reason: because violence against Israeli civilians is immoral, or because it will never, ever work. Either reason will do, but just stop.

If Hamas had stopped shooting rockets, and the Palestinians instead had used all the tools of mass nonviolent protests to draw attention to their plight, is there any question that thousands of innocent Palestinians would be alive today, living in homes untouched by bombs?

Why is the pro-Palestinian movement not marching for justice and against violence? Why does it conflate support for the doomed tactics of Hamas with support for Palestinians?

That well-meaning souls on the streets of Los Angeles misguidedly support Hamas’ violence is especially mystifying because so much of the Muslim world opposes it. When the conflict began, Palestinian Authority officials lambasted Hamas. They know violence and unrelenting terror won’t bring about a lasting solution. How do they know? Because they’ve already tried it.

In the early 1960s, Yasser Arafat, influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood, proclaimed, “Liberating Palestine can only come through the barrel of a gun.” Arafat’s Fatah movement set off on a course of terror, which grabbed headlines, left thousands dead and pushed a just solution further and further away.

More.

Hateful Anti-Zionists Demand Academic Freedom while Violating the Academic Freedom of Israel Academics

Another awesome entry from William Jacobson, at Legal Insurrection, "Steven Salaita controversy points to the hypocrisy of anti-Israel academic boycotters."





Also at the Illinois AAUP, "Illinois AAUP Committee A Statement on Steven Salaita and UIUC."

And from Professor Michael Bérubé, "The following is the text of a letter sent to University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) Chancellor Phyllis Wise by Michael Bérubé regarding the university’s apparent decision to revoke a job offer to Professor Steven Salaita."

Outrageous! Almost 90 Percent of Uninsured Won't Pay Tax as White House #ObamaCare Waivers Surge

The entire law has been a complete clusterf-k. And polls still show a majority of Americans disapproving of it.

The law's becoming another welfare dependency giveaway program that socks it to the middle class. Voters are already pissed about the economy and fearful for their children's future. This just piles on the anxiety when it hits your wallet but not those getting these waivers. Indeed, middle class taxpayers are subsidizing the Obama waiver scofflaws, who were supposed to pay a tax penalty as the law was originally designed.

And now this, at the Wall Street Journal, "Fewer Uninsured Face Fines as Health Law's Exemptions Swell: Almost 90% of Uninsured Won't Pay Penalty Under the Affordable Care Act in 2016" (via Google):

Why nearly 90% of America's uninsured won't have to pay the health-law penalty http://t.co/jHTMo4UwDq via @WSJ
— Alex Martin (@AlexMartinWSJ) August 7, 2014

Almost 90% of the nation's 30 million uninsured won't pay a penalty under the Affordable Care Act in 2016 because of a growing batch of exemptions to the health-coverage requirement.

The architects of the health law wanted most Americans to carry insurance or pay a penalty. But an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation said most of the uninsured will qualify for one or more exemptions.

Daphne Gaines expects to be one of them. She said recently she got an electricity shut-off notice, which is one way Americans can get out of paying a fine. "I don't think I should have to pay any penalty," said Ms. Gaines, 52 years old, of Jasper, Ala., who works part time at a church preschool and a drug-recovery clinic.

The Obama administration has provided 14 ways people can avoid the fine based on hardships, including suffering domestic violence, experiencing substantial property damage from a fire or flood, and having a canceled insurance plan. Those come on top of exemptions carved out under the 2010 law for groups including illegal immigrants, members of Native American tribes and certain religious sects.

Factoring in the new exemptions, the congressional report in June lowered the number of people it expects to pay the fine in 2016 to four million, from its previous projection of six million. Also bringing down the total: At least 21 states have opted not to expand the Medicaid insurance program for lower earners under the health law, and those residents may be exempt from the penalty.

A legal battle over subsidies provided through the federally run insurance exchange could increase the number of Americans entitled to exemptions. In July, a Washington, D.C., appeals court struck down the federal exchange's authority to issue insurance tax credits on the grounds that the health law limits them to state-run exchanges. A Virginia appeals court upheld the subsidies, setting up a legal fight that is likely to go before the Supreme Court.

More than 4 million Americans get subsidies on the federal exchange used by up to 36 states. If the subsidies ultimately are struck down, more people could qualify for hardship exemptions based on their inability to afford coverage.

The exemptions are worrying insurers. The penalties were intended as a cudgel to increase the number of people signing up, thereby maximizing the pool of insured. Insurers are concerned that the exemptions could make it easier for younger, healthier people to forgo coverage, leaving the pools overly filled with old people or those with health problems. That, in turn, could cause premiums to rise.

Patrick Getzen, vice president and chief actuary at Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, said he saw more "older and sicker people" enrolled in 2014 than projected. He attributed some of that to the weakened mandate. "With a stronger penalty and less broad exemptions, that would be better for the risk pool."

The Obama administration argued before the Supreme Court in 2012 that the individual mandate was an essential component of the law's insurance-market changes, and the court narrowly upheld it on the grounds it is a tax. Now, Republicans who oppose the law say the administration has undermined that requirement with the exemptions and should waive the mandate entirely.

"If your pajamas don't fit well, you don't need health insurance," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office and president of the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank. "It basically waives the individual mandate."

The White House referred questions about the exemptions to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, which oversees implementation of the health law. CMS spokesman Aaron Albright said the legislation allows those facing a hardship to apply for an exemption, and their applications are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. "The Affordable Care Act requires people who can afford insurance to buy it, so that their medical bills are not passed onto the rest of us, which drives up health care costs for everyone," he said.

The idea that Americans carry insurance or pay a penalty has been contentious since its inception. In an early version of the legislation, former Sen. Max Baucus (D., Mont.), then chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, floated a penalty of up to $3,800 a year for families who went without insurance. Republicans were turning against the requirement as the tea party gained momentum, and Mr. Baucus began whittling the penalty in hopes of gaining their votes.

That didn't happen, but lower penalties stayed in place in the final legislation. The fine for not carrying insurance in 2014 is $95 per adult, or 1% of family income, whichever is greater. That increases to $695 per adult, or 2.5% of family income, by 2016. The total family penalty is capped at 300% of $695—$2,085 in 2016.

While the health law was being written, President Barack Obama had pledged that Americans who liked their insurance plans would be able to keep them. But last year millions of people were informed their plans would be discontinued because their policies didn't comply with minimum-benefit requirements.

The resulting furor caused the administration to allow insurers who had planned to discontinue policies to extend them by a year. Some insurers and states, however, decided not to do so.

In an effort to address the problem without disrupting the roll out, the administration said consumers with canceled plans could qualify for a hardship waiver, then could buy minimal coverage initially intended only for individuals under age 30.

That sparked objections from an insurance industry long concerned the mandate was already too weak. "To make these new reforms work, there needs to be broad participation in the system," said Karen Ignagni, president and CEO of American's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's largest trade group.

The exemption was initially for one year. The administration has since extended it for two more years through October 2016.

In December, a hardship application form was released that laid out the 14 exemptions. Among other things, people could avoid the penalty if a close family member had died recently, if they were facing eviction or if they had medical expenses that couldn't be paid in the last 24 months and resulted in substantial debt.

Critics have assailed one exemption for people who "experienced another hardship obtaining health insurance" as too broad. That exemption asks for documentation if possible but doesn't require it.

Anti-Semitism Erupts Globally

From Professor William Jacobson, at the Hill, "Anti-Semitism flares up with Gaza crisis."

William recounts the wave a vicious Jew-hatred erupting around the world over the last month, and seen in the U.S. as well. These are not isolated incidents but a new phenomenon of global anti-Zionism manifesting itself as eliminationist hatred of the Jews.

William concludes:

The boycott, divest and sanctions (BDS) movement is the modern mother’s milk of anti-Semitism.

BDS was founded at the 2001 Durban conference, which was so anti-Semitic that the U.S. walked out.  The extreme anti-Zionism of BDS fuels the hatred of Israeli Jews as colonial occupiers, even in Tel Aviv, and seeks to dehumanize the right of the Jewish people to a homeland in the Jewish homeland.

It’s no surprise that BDS banners and shirts were seen at some of the anti-Semitic protests listed above.

Certainly, in theory, one can be anti-Zionist but not anti-Semitic.

There are ultra-religious Jews who do not believe in Zionism for religious reasons. And there are some left-wing Jews who side against Israel.

There also are those who truly just want Israel to leave Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”), although the Israeli departure almost a decade ago from Gaza calls such a strategy into question.

But the exceptions prove the rule. Intellectually one can distinguish anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism. But in the real world, on the streets of Paris, Berlin, London, Boston, Miami and elsewhere, they are one and the same.

It’s time we stopped pretending otherwise.

RTWT.

Professor Steven Salaita Loses Job Over Anti-Israel Tweets

It's mostly anti-Israel tweets, but this Professor Salaita ranges widely in far-left derangement and obscenity.

At Legal Insurrection, "Anti-Israel Prof. Steve Salaita loses job offer at U. Illinois over hateful tweets."

And at Blazing Cat Fur, "Professor Reportedly Loses Position over Anti-Israel Tweets":





More at Inside Higher Ed, "Out of a Job." (Via Memeorandum.)

The Electronic Intifada rebuts the account of Professor Salaita's termination, saying he was "fired" rather than having his position "revoked."

Plus, from Professor Corey Robin, at Crooked Timber, "Another Anti-Zionist Professor Punished for His Views (Updated)." Professor Robin goes after Cary Nelson, the former president of the American Association of University Professors:

Once upon a time I wrote an essay for an anthology Nelson edited on unions in academia. When I was the leader of the grad union drive at Yale, he came to campus and spoke out on our behalf. I thought of him as not only a champion of academic freedom but as an especially acerbic—some might even say uncivil—commentator willing to throw a few elbows at his fellow academics. One time, he even compared a fellow English professor to a vampire bat, and proceeded to make fun of his bodily movements and facial gestures. In an academic publication subject to peer review.

But in recent years Nelson has become an outspoken defender of the State of Israel and a critic of the BDS movement. A man who once called for the boycott of a university now thinks boycotts of universities are a grave threat to academic freedom. A man who serially violates the norms of academic civility—urging fellow academics to “give key administrators no peace. Place chanting pickets outside their homes. Disrupt every meeting they attend with sardonic or inspiring public theater”—now invokes those same norms against a critic of Israel. A man who once wrote that “claims about collegiality are being used to stifle campus debate, to punish faculty, and to silence the free exchange of opinion by the imposition of corporate-style conformity,” now complains about an anti-Zionist professor’s “foul-mouthed presence in social media.” A man who once called the movement against hostile environments and in favor of sensitive speech on campus “Orwellian,” now frets over a student of Salaita’s fearing she “would be academically at risk in expressing pro-Israeli views in class.”

I bring this up not to pick on Nelson, but to ask him, and all of you, a simple question: Should Nelson be deemed ineligible for another job at a university simply because of these statements he has written? Should l be deemed ineligible for another job at a university simply because of some “foul-mouthed,” perhaps even intemperate, tweets that I’m sure I have written?

But I bring up Nelson’s case for another reason. And that is that his hypocrisy is not merely his own. It is a symptom of the effects of Zionism on academic freedom, how pro-Israel forces have consistently attempted to shut down debate on this issue, how they “distort all that is right.” Nelson’s U-Turn demonstrates that we’re heading down a very dangerous road. I strongly urge all of you to put on the brakes.

As you can see from the highlighted section, it's not just academic freedom that concerns Professor Robin, but "the effects of Zionism."

Seems to me that Professor Salaita made a big mistake thinking that he could expound his noxious views without any consequence to his employment. My personal recommendation is for academics not to engage in partisan politics until they have the protections of tenure, and even then you'll want to be careful. But as you can see, it's the larger issue at stake, especially for the left, which is apparently that eliminationist radical anti-Israel advocacy should have free rein in higher education. And that is "a very dangerous road" leftists are travelling, academic freedom or not.

Hamas Activities Understood on the Basis of Law

From Professor Michael Curtis, at American Thinker:

To paraphrase the line in a Richard Rodgers ballad, I do not know a day when I did not behold Hamas rockets attacking Israeli civilians. Calculations suggest that more than 13,000 missiles have been fired by Hamas in Gaza against those civilians. During July 2014, Hamas fired more than 800 rockets before Israel responded by Operation Protective Edge seeking to eliminate or reduce the aggression. According to international law, the concept of military necessity justifies Israeli attacks on legitimate military targets. Regrettably, those attacks may have adverse consequences for civilians.

Well-meaning people like the President of the European Council and President of the European Commission in a joint official statement of August 3, 2014 on the Gaza situation spoke of the need to move beyond “these cycles of violence.” But there is no “cycle of violence.” Hamas’ position is unequivocal: it denies the legitimacy of Israel; it demonizes Israel; it wants to eliminate the State of Israel.

Unexpected parties have made clear who is responsible for the conflict in Gaza. On August 1, 2014, Abdullah, the King of Saudi Arabia, called the Gaza War “a collective massacre” caused by Hamas. He denounced the Hamas violence that had led to various forms of terrorism. He omitted to say that the war has led to a virtual alliance, for differing reasons, between Israel and Arabs including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and the Palestinian Authority, weak though the latter is.

Even those living in the fantasy world where Hamas is blameless for the current conflict, such as the Spanish celebrity actors, Penelope Cruz and Javier Barden, have qualified their partisanship. In a public letter of July 27, 2014 they, together with other show business celebrities, unilaterally condemned Israel for “its attacks in the Gaza Strip,” and spoke of Israeli genocide, a war of occupation and extermination against a whole people. No one had thought of Cruz as having a perfect, or even an imperfect, understanding of Middle East politics. However, two days after the letter, Cruz and Barden, or their publicists, “clarified” their position. Cruz explained with undue modesty, “I do not want to be misunderstood on this important subject. I’m not an expert on the situation.” Her husband Barden similarly explained, “My signature (on the letter) was solely meant as a plea for peace… I have great respect for the people of Israel and deep compassion for their losses.”

Cruz and Barden, and various critics of Israel, such as other celebrities, the mainstream media and churches, and all those who have been concerned about the loss of life, especially of children, in the fighting might now examine in the context of international law the extent of the responsibility of Hamas in committing war crimes and violations of international law. Hamas leaders, Muhammad Deif, Chief of Staff, and Ismail Haniyeh, the leader, have taunted Israelis, “We desire death like you desire life.” The best way to examine Hamas’ accountability is by analyzing a number of the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949...

More.

The Palestinian people vs. the Israelis

"HELPFUL COMPARISON CHART FOR JOURNALISTS," via Director Blue.

Westwood Demonstrators Call for Peace in #Gaza

Here's KTLA's report on the "phony" ANSWER protest from last Saturday: "Pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli demonstrators gathered outside the federal building in Westwood on Saturday and called for an end to the bloodshed in Gaza."

PREVIOUSLY: "Communists, Hamas Solidarity Protesters Demand Israel's Extermination in Los Angeles — #ANSWERLA."

Sick Anti-Zionist Repsac3: 'The Fact Is' I've Got 'No Tweets Supporting' Racist BDS Movement

I thought I'd better screencap this one, since once again racist, smarmy Repsac3 is cornered like a greasy polecat, dishonestly --- no, wickedly --- attempting to weasel out of his own words.

The fact is, not only has Walter James Casper III tweeted his racist support of BDS, he's allied himself with the most disgusting anti-Zionist racists I've ever seen.

Here's a Google link to more lies from racist anti-Zionist Walter James Casper III: "Donald Douglas Beclowns Himself (again), and Insults His Friend."

And he writes:

The fact is there are no tweets supporting BDS--in fact I don't support that movement, and never have--and while I did once post a tweet saying "Occupy Wherever You Are," it's quite the implausible stretch for Donald to imply that that tweet is in any way racist...not that the implausibility of his...well, "conspiracy theories" regarding me have ever stopped him before...

Screencapped here, since lying skunk-wad Reppy will probably pull the post, the racist pig:



As I noted earlier today, Repsac3's health is failing him --- he's literally at death's door --- and he's obviously lost his cognitive capacities. Heart bypass patients often suffer reduced blood flow --- and oxygen --- to the brain, restricting mental function. I've suggested that sick racist Reppy just call off his hateful jihad against American Power. He's been stalking me for over 6 years. He tried to get me fired by sponsoring attacks at American Nihilist, posting my work contact information, and he's continued to ally himself with all the hateful trolls who've libeled me time and again throughout the years of workplace harassment.

Repsac3's a racist, a stalker, and a liar.

Here's my post from April 2013, where Repsac3 attacked Pamela Geller, posting an endorsement of the eliminationist BDS movement: "Hateful Anti-Semitic Ghoul Walter James Casper III Tweets Jew-Bashing Attack on Pamela Geller — and Israel!" Screencapped here, since Reppy might pull that tweet, just as his racist BFF "Cassandra Rules" has been doing all weekend:



Walter James Casper tweeted his support for censoring Pamela Geller --- my friend in liberty, and a true crusader for human rights. His same tweet says that BDS hatred "should be allowed."

BDS is the premiere organization of contemporary global anti-Zionism. Judea Pearl, father of slain Wall Street Journal Reporter Daniel Pearl, has written that BDS should be understood for precisely what it is: a racist movement whose sole purpose is the destruction of Israel and the Jews. See: "Anti-Zionism is Racism."

So again, if Repsac3 doesn't like being called out for his racism then he should stop his racism. Simple as that.

Oh, and my wonderful friend the Mad Jewess Woman wrote that the ANSWER LA protest last weekend was "phoney," as in composed of a bunch of bullshit losers. She was writing facetiously.

Repsac3, on the other hand, was writing literally, not only correcting his spelling to the non-facetious "phony," but further elaborating with some conspiracy about how I "make a point" showing up at these protests" looking for these women."

Again, not enough circulation to Reppy's de-oxygenated brain. I wouldn't have even known who "these women" were until the disgusting Reppy starting reaching out to "Cassandra Rules" on Twitter in mid-July.

So, I renew my plea for Walter James Casper III to retire from this madness. He's getting worse. He's been bad a long time, since he started trolling me at Biobrain's blog. But he's gotten worse, more sinister and racist, and more intent to inflict harm on me and my friends. It's not good for him. It's obviously been bad for his health. He needs to just come clean and say, simply, "I'm sorry. Enough. No more of the hate. I'll leave you alone."

Heh: Ben Shapiro, Appearing on CNN, Blasts CNN for Its Anti-Israel Bias Live, On the Air

At Truth Revolt, "Ben Shapiro Blasts CNN's Gaza Coverage Live On Air":

“If Hamas could have come up with any sort of outlet that would have created a will to kill more Jewish babies and Palestinian babies, CNN would be it. CNN is a key factor in drawing the same sort of equivalency.”

Watch: "Ben Shapiro Blasts CNN for Anti-Israel Bias."

Social Media: The New Propaganda War Tool

Ain't it the truth:

The Moral Divide: #Hamas Violence Breeds Violence

Video channel hat tip, the Daley Gator.

'Cassandra' 'Wanted to Scratch the Eyeballs Out of One of the Pro-Israeli Women' at Hamas Solidarity Protest in Los Angeles

From commenter Gary on my coverage of the protest last Saturday:

Don,

I observed "Cassandra" when she crossed the street to go after the pro-Israelis. A few minutes later, when I crossed back across to Wilshire to the pro-Hamas side, she was there telling some other girls how much she wanted to scratch the eyeballs out of one of the pro-Israeli women. I don't remember the exact words, but she was using her hands to describe scratching the eyes out of someone. She was some piece of work, a poster child for our side to demonstrate the misfits among the Americans who have aligned with the pro-Hamas forces.

She's a nasty bitch, that's for sure.

A mean racist Jew-hating anti-Zionist. Just nasty all around.

PREVIOUSLY: "'Cassandra Rules' Tweets Racist Slur Against Pro-Israel Demonstrator: 'Zionist piece of shit...'"

Mark Levin Slams White House, Valerie Jarrett: 'It's Easy to Jew-Bash...'

At Breitbart.

What Would Hamas Do If It Could Do Whatever It Wanted?

From Jeffrey Goldberg, at the Atlantic:

It is, in my opinion, a dereliction of responsibility on the part of progressives not to try to understand the goals and beliefs of Islamist totalitarian movements.

RTWT.