“Written to enlighten, guaranteed to offend”
A Publication of Seth J. Frantzman
September 1st, 2008
1) Of Humans and Human Rights: When Jeff Halper, an American-born Israeli, went to Gaza as part of the ‘Free Gaza boat’ movement he enjoyed tea with the Hamas leadership and received awards from them. Meanwhile, just miles from his location, the Israeli-born Gilad Schalit was marking his third birthday in captivity. The life stories of these two people could not be more different. One served his country and the other serves only himself. One is a human and the other is a human rights activist.
2) The future of our way of life: A recent Lonely Planet guide to Tunisia included a loving description of its ‘progressive’ way of life where “foreign women exist as a separate and enticing species. Sexual harassment is par for the course.” Although the western female author perhaps missed some things about the actual way of life in Tunisia
she gives us a glimpse into the future, the future that every western leftist woman would like to bring upon us, of a world of male irresponsibility, of Islam, and of the complete degradation of women. It is an irony that the west and all its ‘freedom’ has produced this self hatred and need to degradation among its people, particularly its women.
3) The multiplication of rights: When people speak of the ‘universal’ right to an education or the ‘fundamental right to freedom of movement’, what are they speaking about? Does anyone pause and wonder where these rights came from? Were they one of John Locke’s ‘natural rights’? Where do people in the world get these notions that all sorts of imaginary rights apply to them? Why does the pretentious European ‘Court of Human Rights’ attempt through its ‘International Tribunal’ at the Hague to prosecute ‘war criminals’ such as Charles Taylor and Radovan Karadzic when actual war criminals, aging Nazis, live free in Europe and have for 60 years? Until the world has enshrined in its constitutions these fanciful rights they should stop telling us about them because in reality they do not exist and never have.
Of Humans and Human Rights
August 30th, 2008
Seth J. Frantzman
On August 27th, 2008 as Gilad Schalit spent marked his third birthday in the captivity of Hamas, Jeff Halper, a human rights activist from the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, was touring the Gaza strip, walking just miles away from the dank cellar of a prison cell where Schalit is held. Halper received Palestinian citizenship from Hamas and received a gold medal from them. He laughed and celebrated his time in Gaza, having come there as part of the ‘Free Gaza boat’ activist group oh wealthy leftist Europeans that had sailed to Gaza from Cyprus to ‘break the Israeli blockade.’ The juxtaposition of Halper and Schalit illustrates the degree to which ‘human rights’ and those who believe in it have no connection to actual humans. Take the letter recently signed by another wealthy Jewish intellectual, Yossi Sarid, calling for ‘freedom of movement’ for Arab Muslims from Gaza and declaring that denying three of them the ‘right’ to study as Fulbright scholars in the U.S was denying them a ‘fundamental human right’. There was, in that letter, no mention of a similar ‘fundamental human right’ for Schalit, because human rights has nothing to do with the actual rights and lives of humans. When the ‘human rights activist’ Jane Fonda visited North Vietnam during the Vietnam war she helped man anti-aircraft guns used to shoot down American pilots, like John McCain. When an American prisoner tried to pass her a note describing his tortures and telling his family he was alive she reported on him to the Vietnamese authorities. He was subsequently murdered by them. The ‘Human Rights Activist’ actually caused the death of a human. But because of democracy and our cherished ‘western’ way of life Jane Fonda and Jeff Halper and Yossi Sarid are all allowed to continue their lives, enjoying their wine and their villas and their vacations in Europe without any recompense for their obliviousness to the suffering of their fellow man. It is because out world is divided between those who are human and those who profess to fight on behalf of humans. The very notion that one would fight for ‘human rights’ represents the notion that a person is above humanity, after all when someone fight for animal rights they are not an animal. The person who fights for ‘human rights’ believes him or herself above humanity, playing god with it.
When one considers the biography of the ‘human rights activist’ and the biography of an actual human one becomes even more aware of the difference. Let us take the juxtaposition of Jeff Halper and Gilad Schalit. Jeff Halper was raised in a wealthy American Jewish home in Hibbing, Minnesota in the 1950s. He never worked any jobs as a young man and never did any menial labour or any other type of job. He lived a wealthy life, becoming an activist in the anti-vietnam war movement and the civil rights movement, as only a wealthy person can become because those who are not wealthy do not have the resources to live their entire lives as part of ‘activist’ groups. He immigrated to Israel in 1973 and became a visiting lecturer in Anthropology at various Israeli universities. In Israel he continued his activist, first fighting for the rights of Mizrachi Jews and then as part of ‘Ohel’ a group fighting for the rights of Ethiopian Jews. In 1997 he founded ICAHD, the Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions. Through this committee he devoted his time to aiding Palestinian Muslim families of terrorists whose homes were being demolished by the Israeli government. His organization, ICAHD, received funding from the Spanish Embassy in Tel Aviv, The European Commission, the European Union and the Ford Foundation. Thus Jeff Halper, a wealthy American Jew, became wealthy in Israel off of money given by wealthy Europeans who themselves had built their homes on the demolished homes of Jews who died in the Holocaust and on funding from the Ford Foundation, whose founder wrote the famous anti-semitic tractate The International Jew. Thus the primary funding for Halper and his organization, which helps only Muslim Arabs, came from those who benefited from the deaths of European Jewry or those who supported the genocide of European Jewry. Thus the funding for ‘human rights’ came from the greatest destroyers of human rights in history.
Gilad Schalit was born in 1986 in Nahariya, in Israel to an upper middle class family, a descendant of French Jews. He graduated with distinction from his high school and began his military service in the Israeli army in 2005. On June 26th, 2006 he was abducted by Hamas terrorists on the border with the Gaza strip. In September the first letter was released by Hamas showing that Schalit was alive. While ‘Human rights activists’ such as the former American president Jimmy Carter and others have enjoyed tea with the Hamas leadership no human rights organizations have ever protested on behalf of Schalit.
Schalit and Halper were born in similar economic circumstances. One was born in his country and choose to do his duty in that country and serve in its army. The other was born in the United States and spent his youth protesting the actions of his country’s army. One was abducted and has been held in a cell for more than two years. The other enjoys vacationing where he pleases, lives off the money of others and has never done any sort of ‘duty’ in his life. One lived in his own country and was responsible to that country. The other grew up in one country, the U.S, and subsequently moved to another country and adopted the cuases of those who have nothing to do with him, the Palestinians. One obeyed the rules and worked hard in his short life. The other lived the wealthy life with no rules, moving from place to place and founding NGOs so as to fund his lifestyle. One celebrated three birthdays in a dark cellar. The other celebrates his birthdays in his villa with his friends. One is a human. The other is a ‘human rights activist’.
Humans deserve rights. But the human is forever at the mercy of the human rights activist who oppresses him. The human goes about his life and respects the law and does his duty to his country. The human rights activist goes from country to country receiving money from others and harming the lives of humans so that he may enjoy his wealthy bourgeoisie existence. One works at a job and the other lives off the blood of others. The world cannot exist with human rights activists. Humans deserve better. While we live in a world in which humans are guaranteed rights under the law we must ask whether human rights activists are guaranteed those same rights. Since they have positioned themselves above humanity one must wonder if it is not humanity’s role to throw off the shackles imposed upon it by the human rights activist and his NGO and his wealthy do-nothing life-style? Must humanity fight a war of liberation against those who do not work, those activists who live off the sweat of our brow? Do human rights activists deserve rights after they have trampled so blatantly on the rights of our fellow man? When Jeff Halper very likely stepped on the very ground beneath which the human, Gilad Schalit, was imprisoned, did he not trample on the lives of us all and on the conscience of us all? Did he not press his foot upon our necks as if we were but pawns in his enjoyment of life while we suffer beneath his regime? Man must raise his arm against human rights activist. Man must return rights to humanity so that it is us, the humans, who have the rights and not only the NGO worker and his European friends? We, humans, are the ones who toil and live for the state and we obey the laws. Yet we are punished for doing so. Our lives are meaningless. We are imprisoned and murdered and raped and abused. Yet all the while the ‘human rights activist’ lives without borders, he goes where he pleases and he is venerated by terrorists and loved by those who murder humanity. Thus Jane Fonda won awards from those who tortured John McCain and Jeff Halper won an award from those who hold Schalit. And yet Halper and Fonda are free and wealthy while the humans such as those POWs murdered by the Vietnamese and Schalit remain dead or imprisoned. Should it not be the other way around? Should not the lazy people who do not work and go from place to place and live off the blood of others and shake hands with the devil, should not they be the ones denied their freedom of movement? Humans deserve better. Humans deserve to be free. They deserve most of all to be free from the chains of the NGO worker and his nefarious wealthy arrogant attitude and his belief that he is above us.
The Greek author and soldier Xenophon after fighting his way through Anatolia remarked that the slavery of the Persians was primarily due to the fact that they could not bring themselves to say the word ‘no’. We, in our own time, have become slaves as the Persians soldiers were. We do not possess the word ‘no’. We cannot say ‘no’ to the NGO and the human rights activist and the European and the Ford Foundation. We cannot raise up our hands against them and say ‘no’. No, we will not have you in our country. No, you may not travel where you please and protest where you please. No, you may not go to Gaza and stand on the cell of one of our citizens. No, you may not go to Vietnam and condemn our soldiers to their deaths. No, you may not violate the rights of humanity. No, your UN vehicle may not drive on our roads. No, your Red Cross vehicle may not drive unimpeded and above the law on our landscape. No, you may not be above the law. No, you will no longer have your wealth and your funding sources. The Russians have learned to say no to the NGO. Other peoples in the world have learned to say no. But most of us are blind to the tyranny of this International Class of activists who seek to live above us and yet receive their financing from our own society and those societies who, in times of old, have oppressed us.
The future of our way of life
August 5th, 2008
Seth J. Frantzman
The Lonely Planet Guidebook for Tunisia dishes up the usual propaganda laden pages that might well have been written by the tourism ministry of Tunisia. Under ‘Culture’ we learn; “ethnic and religious uniformity allows for social ease [oddly enough in the West when the KKK and the Nazis wanted ethnic-uniformity, people were none too happy]…Islam is pervasive…life revolves around the family, the mosque and hospitality…with typical Arabian-African generosity…Tunisians are not so interested in the trappings of wealth…prefer not to take things seriously…strong economy…level of education is high…men sit and chat in the cafes whereas women visit each other at home…thanks to Habib Bourguiba, this is a proudly forward looking nation with an egalitarian squint.” Part of this ‘egalitarianism’ is evident from the portion of the guide entitled ‘women travelers’; “Tunisian men have little opportunity to hang out with women prior to marriage…foreign women exist as a separate and enticing species. Sexual harassment is par for the course…harassment usually takes the form of being stared at, subjected to slimy chat-ups and very occasional physical harassment…you can try a few things to reduce the hassle…modest dressing…a headscarf can be useful to indicate modesty. The best policy is to ignore sexist remarks and sound affects. Sunglasses are good for avoiding eye contact. Its advisable to sit next to others women on buses…however, try not to let your desire to fend off unwanted attention get in the way of genuine friendliness.”
Who wrote this? One shouldn’t have to ask. In this day in age such propaganda could only come from one source: a western women. Loe and behold it is a western women named Abigail Hole. The irony of her propaganda is that it reflects less about Tunisia than about the hopes, loves and desires of Western liberalism. Abigail has given us a view of the future. This is the liberal future. It is the future of every western state. It is the future that every leftist western woman desires and wants. It is the future that freedom and democracy guarantee. Why? Why is it this way? Why is it that when society is given freedom that it inevitably embraces oppression? Why is it that a free secular society full of women who are given equal rights produces women who only want a society of Islam where “life revolves around the family, the mosque” and where “women visit eachother at home” because if they go out in public they will be “stared at, subjected to slimy chat-ups and very occasional physical harassment” to the degree that they are an “enticing species” and where “sexual harassment is par for the course” for men. Why would leftist-feminist-liberal women embrace such a culture and describe it as “egalitarian” and “forward looking”? We know why. Behind every door of liberalism and feminism and leftism is oppression and tyranny. Behind everything that liberalism preaches is the most conservative reactionary contradictory ethos. Behind Liberalism is Islamism. They are partners in the quest to subjugate our society and imprison us in a world of immorality where man lacks personal responsibility and the woman is encased in full length black cloths, her headscarf wrapped tightly around her face and where she resides at home.
I hate liberalism because it betrays our society. Islam cannot be blamed, for Islam is what it is. Just as one cannot blame Orthodox Judaism for its embrace of modesty. That is what it is. One can only blame the feminist and the liberal for preaching equality for women in our own society and yet excusing sexual harassment in other societies. Why is it that the Abigail Holes of the world forced our society to do away with the headscarf and the male who enjoys his pipe, his beer and his grab-assing? Why? I was in high school when we all had to learn about Anita Hill and how Clarence Thomas had made suggestive advances at her. I was of the generation where we were indoctrinated about sexual harassment. But what we have learned, having legislated against sexual harassment in our own society is that our women approve of it and call it exotic in another society. We have learned that our women in our western society would never don a headscarf out of respect for their own modesty or morality or religion in their own country but they will readily don one and live as a home-stay in a foreign land and then issue forth propoganda about that land and call it ‘egalitarian’ and ‘forward looking’.
We deserve Islam. It is the religion that our greatest intellectuals and freest individuals embrace. It is the religion that our most open minded feminists love. It is the religion of modernity. It is the religion that offers the westerner exactly what he needs: irresponsibility for men and the complete and utter submission of women. Liberals say things like “I purchased a headscarf and black Hijab as a joke for my wife and she puts it on and says ‘its so liberating.’” This is the western female perspective. “It is liberating.” Only the west can turn a prison into liberation. But this is the same western civilization that has turned ‘justice’ into genocide and ‘peace’ into ethnic-cleansing and ‘terror’ into ‘resistance’. What did Obama’s reverend say? ‘Godamn America’? He was wrong there. Its not America. Its Western Civilization. Its this whole idea of a progressive democratic free civil society. It’s the entire idea that is bunk. Who could have guessed that it would turn out this way? Who could have guessed that the society that grants freedom to its members produce people at the highest levels of that society who hate freedom. They don’t hate freedom the way the Nazi intellectuals hated freedom. This is the opposite. It is hatred of freedom and the desire for foreign oppression.
Liberalism must be opposed everywhere it exists. The battle against it is as important as the battle against Islamism and other forms of tyranny. One cannot defeat the ‘Other’ unless he has already succeeded in fighting his own inner Jihad against his own society that would betray him and make his countenance weaker, his judgment unsure and his aim faulty. Liberalism shackles the mind, numbs the spirit and murders the soul. And we have to strive to have sharp minds, full spirits and vibrant souls.
The multiplication of rights
Seth J. Frantzman
August 28th, 2008
On August 27th 2008 a prominent Israel ‘human rights activist’ signed a letter on behalf of Gisha, the legal center for the Freedom of Movement, in which he described the ‘right to an education’ as ‘one of the must fundamental human rights.’ The next day a western European ‘activist’ claimed that Palestinians have a “right to exit Gaza.” We often hear these days about some ‘fundamental’ and ‘basic’ human rights that people have. These include the right to ‘privacy’ and the right to ‘land’ and all sorts of extensions of the ‘right’ to free speech, including the ‘right’ to be published and the ‘right’ to speak at Columbia University. Everything these days seems to be a ‘basic’ human right’. Where did all these rights come from? When did people receive these ‘rights’? What responsibilities are people intended to give in order to receive these ‘rights’?
The American constitution was the first one in the world to guarantee any rights to the common people. Prior to it other documents had enshrined the idea that certain landed gentry were guaranteed some rights. Roman citizens had some rights. So did the people of Athens. So did the British aristocracy after the Magna Carta. But that most reviled and hated nation, the United States, is actually the first one to guarantee the average person numerous rights including the right to freedom of religion, speech, assembly, freedom from search and seizure, freedom from being forced to have government troops quartered in your house and the right to have weapons. The U.S constitution guaranteed these rights in the aptly named ‘Bill of Rights’. This spelled out, in some detail, individual rights that the founders believed the U.S must protect, usually rights the British colonial power had infringed, such as the right to a speedy trial and the right not to be subjected to ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment. Most importantly the U.S constitution included the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
These rights remained dormant for a long period. Eventually some nations enshrined these American rights in their own constitutions. By the 1960s there developed ‘human rights activists’ in the U.S and Europe who, although preaching hatred against the U.S, began to speak often about these ‘rights’ and claim that they extended to all people in the world through the idea of the ‘universal’ nature of ‘human rights’. Leftists, many of whome were Jewish, became obsessed with this idea of ‘human rights’ and invented numerous new ‘rights’ that supposedly applied to people throughout the world. Organizations and NGOs such as Amnesty International and ‘Human Rights Watch’ sprang up to guarantee these ‘human rights’.
But along the way no one ever asked where these rights came from. Were leftist-liberals in Europe under the impression that the U.S constitution, the same country they compare to nazism and claim is run by an incarnation of Hitler, applies to them and the world? ‘Human rights activists’ never bothered to enshrine any of these American rights in their own constitutions and yet they often mention them. British people often mention the ‘right to free speech’ but they forget that no such right exists in the U.K. Israelis like Yossi Sarid preach about ‘the right to an education’ but there is no such right, not in Israel or anywhere in the world. There is no such right. Let us recall that most of the revered holier-than-thou Europeans who preach about such ‘fundamental rights’ do not grant them to people in their own countries. In Europe Gypsy children have never been given the right to an education and only in 2008 after a law suit by a Gypsy woman in Czech republic whose daughter was placed in a school for the mentally disabled even though she was not disabled but simply because she was a Gypsy, did the European ‘court of human rights’ note that Gypsys also have a ‘right’ to be educated alongside their wealthy liberal leftist neighbors. But that hasn’t stopped wealthy European ‘activists’ from tramping around the world telling people that they have all sorts of ‘rights’.
People in the world should read their constitutions. These ‘human rights’ they mention all the time do not exist anywhere in the world. Some of them exist in the U.S but they do not exist anywhere else. The right to free speech for instance guarantees Americans the right to deny the Holocaust. That right does not exist in Europe where one can be imprisoned for denying the Holocaust. That’s right. Those wealthy rich Europeans who preach so often about the ‘right to free speech’ seem to forget that they do not have this right. Canadians who preach about the right to free speech seem to forget that, like in England they are denied the right to hate speech. In the U.K a person is denied the right to slander someone else. So lets recall the rights people have in the U.S. These people in the rest of the world who speak about ‘human rights’ and the ‘right to an education’ forget that not only do these rights not exist but they don’t even have the basic rights guaranteed in the U.S constitution despite pretentious ridiculous things such as the European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Europeans have decided that they can grant all sorts of freedoms and rights to people throughout the world, ‘rights’ that they do not even grant to their own people which is the height of arrogance, the typical European double standard. One finds that while the Europeans have put Radovan Karadzic on trial at the Hague, alongside Charles Taylor, they have neglected to prosecute dozens of actual Nazis living in their midst. These Nazis, some of whome worked at the most notorious death camps lived free in Europe for sixty years. Yet the European would have us believe he is fighting for ‘human rights’ by attempting to prosecute for ‘war crimes’ Israeli and Serbian generals and maybe even Donald Rumsfeld. Europe should first take out its own trash before complaining of the stench of others.
Leftist-liberals have created all sorts of fake rights that never existed and they use this claim as a rhetorical device and all sorts of their leftist wealthy friends join them in preaching about things such as a ‘right to an education’. There was never any such right and there never will be.
So get with it all you ‘human rights activists’ in the world. You will continue your pathetic quest to create imaginary rights for people that have never existed and will never exist because the world will never have a constitution like the American one. These ‘rights’ have never existed in the world and will never exist. But its just a pathetic way of not realizing that all these rights such as the ‘fundamental right to an education’ has never existed in the world and will never exist. In most places in the world, including the hallowed nations of Europe, even the right to free speech is denied under the auspices that it is ‘slander’, ‘incitement’, ‘hate speech’, ‘Holocaust denial’, ‘blasphemy’ or ‘insulting the state’. In those places one can be sued and put in prison for such things. But people in those places seem to believe there is a right to an ‘education’. And a ‘right to freedom of movement’. But they aren’t even educated about the rights guaranteed them in their own constitutions. Perhaps that’s because in some places, such as England and Israel, they don’t even have a constitution. They seem to preach about rights so much, and yet they don’t even have a constitution. What rights could they possibly have? The right to be a liberal-leftist and preach apparently.