John Chalcraft Part 3 (John Chalcraft disproved)

He replied;

This is turning into abuse again, so I’ll check out if you don’t mind.
To which I point out;
I wasn’t going to email you again but I feel I have to take you up on your statement that Israel’s is the only project of colonisation in the modern world (in their settlement of the West Bank by Israelis). Besides those I listed off the top of my head before, what about Turkey.

I literally cannot believe you cannot be aware of Turkey’s occupation of Northern Cyprus, stationing of 40,000 troops there to maintain it and colonisation of 200,000 Turkish settlers on the Island? It has been going on since 1974.

As mentioned before Turkey occupied Kurdistan too, in fact last year Turkey used poison gas against the Kurds;,1518,711536,00.htm

Do you really teach your students that «the only project of settler colonisation in the modern world» is Israels? Again, you are either ignorant, lying, or holding Muslims to a different standard than you do Jews?

Another example of a Muslim occupation and colonisation of a non-Muslim people is Irian Jaya where Indonesia has literally sent millions of settlers since it began its occupation after the Dutch left in 1945.

Are you really this ignorant? Again, I cannot believe it so I return to my original explanation that you hold Jews to a different standard as (you do) Muslims.

He replies;

Dear Steve,
I admit that you have provoked my academic curiosity as to how the analogy you draw between Northern Cyprus / Turkey on the one hand, and Israel on the other, can reasonably be made. I’m also intrigued by the fact that you do not dispute the idea that Israel is carrying on a project of settler colonisation. Alas, however, prudence and experience insists that I must cease this correspondence because of the doubt that now hovers over your good faith and your motives as you took the decision to place the contents of a private discussion in the public domain without consulting me first. 
And I conclude;
I’ll happily admit there is a policy to settle Jews in the West Bank, or Judea as the land was known before Europeans kicked us out originally.

You said that it was the only case of colonisation in the modern world and I easily proved you wrong. Its not even the only case in the region. Period (as Americans say).

I know notice my blog is now one of the first references if one «google’s» your name. I will let the public decide as to the validity of your arguments, or mine, but I have exposed your ignorance and predudice very easily. You have failed to disprove my contention that you hold Arabs and Muslims to a different standard than you do Jews/Israel.

Once again you will notice he doesn’t actually address the fact I’ve proved many of his contentions to be worthless. He doesn’t mangage to disprove my contention that he holds Arabs/Muslims to a lower standard of rules than he applies to Jews/Israel. I lost all respect for someone that, based only upon the initial LSE debate, I actually thought may be a man of principle however misguided. Many of the alleged crimes he blames Israel for eg White Phoshorus use being some sort of warcrime, I disproved very easily. More troubling is that he just cannot seem to accept that there are many similar instances of territorial disputes in the world, most of which result in a far greater rate of casulties than the Israel-Palestinian dispute. I didn’t even mention Sri Lanka but the fact he ignores Indonesia’s colonisation of the Papuan people in Irian Jaya means he is living in a fantasy land. Remember that this man is teaching students. It’s pure propaganda.

Another point is that this man, and his ilk, have never protested the Arab economic boycott of Israel but he protests Israel’s (far more justified) boycott of Gaza all the while ignoring Egypt is doing the same thing. I simply cannot take his views seriously if he cannot admit that there are equal or greater disputes taking place elsewhere eg Kashmir, Irian Jaya, Cyprus, Kosovo, Chechnya, Tibet, Western Sahara and many other places. Chalcroft loses all credibility because he proves not to be impartial. For him the only crime in the world is commited by Jews against helpless Palestinians. If a boycott against Israel is justified then why not against his own country (the UK) for their occupation of the Fawklands and  Gibraltar and the British colonisation of Australia, New Zealand and North America, and far less justified wars (than any of Israel’s self-defense against neighbouring States) in Iraq and Afganistan. Why not Turkey which occupies at least 2 countries (Kurdistan and Cyprus), why not Russia for it’s attack on Georgia and brutal occupation of Chechyna. Why not Morocco for it’s colonisation of Western Sahara where 50% of people are now literally slaves. Why not Ethiopia for it’s attacks on Somalia? The list is endless. Simply put only Israel deserves to be boycotted according to Chalcraft’s twisted logic. He fails to answer my question of why Israel should be held to a higher standard than others? He is just an ideologue with an axe to grind against Israel. Why? I say it’s a form of reverse-racism whereby Jews must be some-how more civilised than Muslims and others, but his complete ignorance or unacceptance  of any of the Israeli perspective (Anti-Jewish laws in the PA and Jordan) leads me to conclude he is not even interested in impartiality he is only interested in Israel-bashing for the sake of bashing the Jewish-State. It reminds me of the argument of lefties that they are against Israel because it is a «Jewish» state and therefore cannot be a state for all it’s people while ignoring the fact almost every single Arab and Muslim country is officially «The Islamic republic of….» or «The Islamic Arab Kingdom of….». Hypocrisy. The same argument was used by the Red Cross movement to deny entry to the Israeli Ambulance service because it’s emblem is a Star of David and they said can’t be used because it’s a religious symbol while both the Red Cross themselves and the Red Cresent use the Christian cross and the Muslim cresent as their emblems replectively. Typical leftist doubletalk.

John Chalcraft part 2

He must have slept on it because he wrote a more detailed response (I do appreciate the bloke’s time even if he is very ill-informed and misguided and his arguments have more holes than swiss cheese);


You sound like you really want to know, so I’ll tell you. I’m greatly exercised by violations of human rights and international law in any context, and I add to that a kind of postcolonial social democratic outlook. I try to apply these standards universally. This applies to the UK and the US. And to every Arab regime. (E.g. if Jews can’t own property in Jordan, of course that’s discrimination). It applies to my relations to LSE, and any other institution I’ve worked for. I’m celebrating the collapse of the corrupt, kleptocratic, violent dictatorship in Tunisia. I’m wishing for a revolution in Egypt. If you attended my lectures, you’d hear far more criticism of the Arab regimes than of Israel. I would love for activists to have made a stink about certain military programmes that were established at the University of Edinburgh when I was there — a boycott might have been interesting indeed. I am an activist on a great variety of issues — from the living wage campaign at LSE, to unionisation at NYU (in the US) to issues of freedom and democracy in the Arab world and beyond (e.g. I work with Amnesty on Syria and Lebanon — and this includes the issue of Kurdistan). I was married into a family who suffered terribly from the Islamic Republic of Iran, and so I have a view on that too, and what’s effective there. Although one cannot fight every battle. The trouble is, when you do go to bat in regards to Israel-Palestine, it takes up a lot of time. So if you decide to keep going, and not give up, you have to make choices about what causes to pursue. But the real question re the boycott is largely (but not exclusively) one of tactics. Which tactics are appropriate in which situation? You will have noticed I devoted much of my proposition to explaining the rationale / effectiveness of the tactic. That emphasis is no accident. I happen to believe that a boycott is effective in this case. But I don’t believe so whatsoever in regard to, say, Egypt or Syria. Boycotting Syrian universities will not move things forward one whit. It might even encourage the US or Israel to start bombing there. The model is BDS re South Africa. Imagine you supported BDS re South Africa, and then ask yourself, honestly, if you would have been impressed by white South Africans who said, why don’t you talk about Chile or China or Russia? This is special pleading and it won’t wash. It’s not OK to say, because others commit atrocities, we can commit atrocities. That’s the double-standard — special pleading for one country, in the belief that all criticism is motivated by a largely defunct European anti-Semitism. Israel — this army with a state attached — does commit atrocities — the disproportionate use of force, the indiscriminate use of violence, the use of banned weapons (such as white phosphorous) — and it almost thinks its normal that its running the longest occupation of modern times, is pursuing the only project of settler colonisation in the modern world, is building a wall to pen people in that violates international law, and is banning children’s toys from entering Gaza in a crippling siege which has created the largest open-air prison in the contemporary world — a siege imposed following democratic elections in which Palestinians chose the ‘wrong people’. I’m very comfortable with those who want to say the tactic of boycott is counter-productive and so on and respect their views. But don’t try to tell me that there’s no reason to be active — no reason to worry — and no atrocities going on. 
All good wishes,


To which I responded;

Thanks, I appreciate your time. The fact that you didn’t even know Jews can’t own property in Jordan or be citizens (there)  is troubling if you claim to be an scholar of the Near East.

The first half of this explanation seems reasonable until you start either lying or making factual inaccuracies;

Israel’s use of White Phosphorus in the Gaza war was completely legal. America and your own country routinely use it as in the battle of Fallujah in Iraq.

The Palestinians possibly even fired White Phosphorus bombs at Israel;,7340,L-3955296,00.html

Can you really compare a country that is «free» according to Freedom House with Syria and Iran and Aparteid South Africa?

An Arab Judge only last month convicted the former Israeli president of rape (in a trial in the Israeli High Court. The fact there are Arab judges at all especially preciding over a case involving the former President of Israel shows exactly how calling Israel an Aparteid state is inaccurate). Until I pointed it out you didn’t even know Jews are banned from living or owning land in Jordan (whereas) in Israel Arabs/Muslims may of course live and work and own land (even if some elements of the ultra-religious don’t like it).

You brush off anti-semitism in Europe as «largely defunct» when in fact anti-semitic incidents are at their highest since the war though mainly because of Muslim attacks on Jews and Jewish properties. Again you are either ignorant or holding Muslims to a different standard than non-Muslim European citizens.

During no other war in (modern) history has the proportion of civilian deaths to soldiers been so low as in (Israel’s war with Hamas in) Gaza at 1 to 1 (Civilian casulty to militant death). Hamas recently admitted that the Israels’ figures of about 700 Hamas fighters killed were true (which they denied during the Goldstone investigation and Goldstone believed without proper investigation);

(This represents) About half of those killed (during the war) despite their (Hamas’) earlier lies to Goldstone etc. I believe the figure for civilians compared to combatants killed in Afganistan is about 10:1 (10 times the civilians killed proportionally than by Israel in Gaza) so I’m not sure how this is disproportional (in the case of Israel).

Israel left Gaza and was met with 8,000 missiles in return. Gaza is 71kms away from Tel Aviv. This isn’t some abstract case on the other side of the world.

(Israel) «is pursuing the only project of settler colonisation in the modern world»

This is such a stupid statement it beggars believe. China has turned  the Tibetans (and Uighurs) into ethnic minorities. Kosovo achieved independence because of illegal Albanian settlement since the war. Kurdish areas of Northern Iraq were (eg Mosul) were colonised by ethnic Arabs to reduce Kurdish power. Ethnic Russians colonised the Baltic states leaving 50% ethnic russian populations (and Kazakstan). Not to mention the Arab colonisations of Berber areas and ban on Berber language. Arab speakers are colonising southern Sudan as we speak.

(Israel is) «building a wall to pen people in that violates international law»
Other countries building similar walls; S’audi Arabia on its border with Yemen (which is also disputed if you don’t already know), The EU with Russia and Turkey.

You describe the Israeli seige of Gaza as creating a prison. Are you not aware Egypt enforces the same seige with Gaza? Again a double standard. The Arabs have had a similar economic boycott of Israel since 1948 why is this not also a «seige»? Again, a double standard. (Surely it is only because of Israeli «ingenuity, endurance and passion» that Israel is not the «biggest prison in the world» because of the Arab economic boycott?)

You’re really just showing your ignorance and that according to you one rule applies to Arabs and another to Israel.

John Chalcraft might be a racist?

I don’t use this term «racist» lightly. The term «racist» in this case is a misnomer as generally ethnic Arabs, Jews, Iranians etc are all of the same «race» as Europeans e.g. Caucasians. Chalcraft, like the British Press often does, accuses Israel of war crimes which although often later proved false nevertheless do damage to Israel because in a culture of soundbites the public only hears the accusations and never the corrections to incorrect news stories. Likewise althought my accusation of racist is designed to offend Chalcraft this case is different from cheap accusations because I prove that Chalcraft really is guilty of a form of discrimination against Arabs and Muslims if he doesn’t expect them to be as civilised as he does Jews (or by extension «Europeans)». Are Muslims and Arabs less capable of living up to decent expectations of human rights? Is the fact that every Muslim country in the world is deemed «less-than-free» or «not-free» by Freedom House an indication that they are incapable of modernity? I think not, but Chalcraft seems to think so. John Chalcraft is very typical of the British elite. It is not entirely that Brit’s like Chalcraft don’t hold Muslims to the same standards as they hold Jews because they expect less from Muslims; it is also often because of cynical reasons involving self-promotion and for Real Politik gain. The pro-Arab lobby with their billions of Arab oil dollars is very effective with (according to the Guardian); «Edinburgh and Cambridge received £8m each from Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia last year to set up Islamic studies centres,» contrasting with tiny Israel, despite the infamous accusations of a «Jewish-lobby,» unable to compete. Various Academics make their living (Norman Finklestein, Anthony Loewanstein etc) from Israel-bashing, bashing Arabs simply doesn’t pay in the same way. The proponents of boycott’s against Israel admit themselves that this would not be effective against bigger and more powerful countries, thus, unwittingly acknowledging how small and vulnerable Israel really is. Pick on the little guy; that’s right and in doing so expose the greatest myth of the entire conflict «that an Israeli Goliath is up against a Palestinian David» when the opposite is true with tiny Israel (7 million people and geographically very very small) is surrounded by 300 million Arabs and 1 billion Muslims mainly dedicated to Israel’s destruction.

John Chalcraft does not come from a cultural vacuum he come’s from a British political, academic and media elite infamous for a pro-Arab slant. The British Ambassador’s to both Egypt and Lebanon have both recently used their personal blogs to bash Israel with no repercussions to their careers. Imagine the controversy if the British Amabassdor to Germany were to bash Poland, how long would he remain a diplomat?

Israel-bashing has become not only acceptable but de rigueur within the British media and academic establishment whch is systematically anti-Israel. Much has been written about the BBC’s anti-Israel bias (with the BBC refusing to release the Balen report into this topic) the same is true for British universities, trade unions and political elites. The infamous Arabist Foreign Office is so anti-Israel that the British historian Andrew Roberts believes that the Foreign Office has placed a ban on royal visits to Israel, he says;

«As an act of delegitimization of Israel, this effective boycott is quite as serious as other similar acts, such as the academic boycott, and is the direct fault of the FO Arabists.”

«Her Majesty the Queen has been on the throne for 57 years and in that time has undertaken 250 official visits to 129 countries, yet has not yet set foot in Israel. She has visited 14 Arab countries, so it cannot have been that she wasn’t in the region.»

«The tragic truth is that it suits Arab states very well to have the Palestinians endure permanent refugee status; whenever Israel puts forward workable solutions they are stymied by those whose interests put the destruction of Israel before the genuine well-being of the Palestinians. Both King Abdullah I of Jordan and Anwar Sadat of Egypt were assassinated when they attempted to come to some kind of accommodation with a country that most sane people now accept is not going away.»

Shimon Peres recently caused controversy by describing the English (with good reason given the policies of the UK towards Israel as, “anti-semites”, saying

«There are several million Muslim voters, and for many members of parliament, that’s the difference between getting elected and not getting elected, and in England there has always been something deeply pro-Arab, of course, not among all Englishmen, and anti-Israeli, in the establishment.

They abstained in the [pro-Zionist] 1947 UN partition resolution … They maintained an arms embargo against us in the 1950s … They always worked against us. They think the Arabs are the underdogs.»

John Chalcraft recently lost a debate with Daniel Hochhauser arguing his belief that there should be a British boycott of Israeli academia. The debate can be seen here. I took issue with one of his comments and the following email exchange took place;


I listened to your debate regarding boycotting Universities in Israel and noticed one very glaring error in your evidence amongst many double standards. Your very last comment you say that Palestinian Universities had been «crushed» by Israel. 

This is factually incorrect. Every single Palestinian University has been founded or achieved University status since 1967;

Allowing and encouraging education in the Palestinian communities has actually been an Israeli policy because Israel, falsly, believed a more educated Palestinian population would lead to peace and prosperity.

If Israel is crushing Palestinian Universities please name which Palestinian Universities were founded prior to 1967 Israel has closed?
The only thing stopping peace between Palestine and Israel is the Palestinian’s rejection of Israel as a Jewish State (even within the 1967 borders) and their rejection (like Jordan) of Jews having citizenship in Palestine. Only a few months ago the Palestinian Ambassador to the US said no Jew can be a Palestinian citizen in a future Palestinian state and they should all be transfered. ;

The Palestinians have rejected a 2 state solution in 1947, 1970, 2001, 2010.  

Your whole logic is flipped upside down. It should be you proposing boycotting Arab Universities considering not only their almost universal hostility to Israel but their governments repression of their own people, gays, women etc. The only growing Christian community in the Middle East is Israels. Freedom House lists Israel as the only «free» country in the Middle East;

It seems strange that the only country you consider boycotting is Israel? What about the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara or the Arab-Iranian occupation of Kurdistan? Two wrongs don’t make a right but 25 wrongs to 1 certainly do say something about your particular bias.

S. Bronfman.


Thank you for your email. I believe I gave a strong rationale for the boycott and why it is appropriate and legitimate in this case. Allow me to recommend that you take a look at Gabi Baramki’s book Peaceful Resistance (Pluto 2010) which offers plenty of compelling evidence about the many ways in which Israel tries to strangle Palestinian universities. This book is only one example of a mountain of citable evidence in this regard. That the Palestinians have managed to found and run these universities in spite of the brutal, choking and illegal occupation they face is a real testament to their ingenuity, endurance and passion for education. It is this that I salute — and it motivates me to listen and respond when they call en masse for my academic solidarity. I’m afraid the way that your side of the debate ignores or dismisses the evidence on violations of international law, grave human rights abuses, and the complicity of Israeli academic institutions only increases my conviction that boycott is the way to go.
All good wishes,


Prior to 1967 there were precisely 0 Palestinian universities today there are at least 20. This means every single Palestinian University was founded with Israel’s blessing no matter how you spin it. When Jordan and Egypt ruled the West Bank and Gaza they founded precisely 0 Univeristies.

Thanks for the reply. Could you answer the following questions? Yes or No is fine where appropriate eg question 2, 3;

1. If Israel is crushing Palestinian Universities please name which Palestinian Universities were closed by Israel? Since Israel left Gaza which Universities has Hamas founded (surely, according to your thesis the Palestinians should have embarked on a University building spree)
2. Should Jews be allowed citizenship of Palestine?

3. Is the fact that no Jew may be a citizen of Jordan (79% of the mandate of Palestine 1917-21) discrimination?

3a. Is the fact Jews can’t own land in Jordan (or the PA) discrimination?

3b. If Israel simiarly banned the sale of land to Arabs how would this differ from the present ban of land ownership by Jews in Jordan/Palestine?

4. Why do you ignore the occupations by Arabs, Turks, and Iranians of Kurdistan, Western Sahara (and the Berbers and Northern Cyprus)? If you don’t ignore them what have you done to protest them?
5. Is your view of «peace» a Palestine within the 1967 boundaries?
6. Does Israel have a right to exist?
7. How does the case of Israel differ from, say, Pakistan which was also carved out of a British mandated territory at the same time as Israel to be a religious homeland (for Muslims) and in which there were population exchanges (with India), at least 2 wars and the similar ongoing territorial dispute over Kashmir that has lead to the deaths of 10 times as many people as the Israel-Arab dispute?



P.S. No one ignores Israeli human rights abuses. Infact, something like 70% of all UN human rights council resolutions and enquiries concern Israel as do a disproportionate amount of NGO (eg HRW, Amnesty) writings. The point that Israelis and their supporters make is that Israel is focused on at the expense of far more pressing human rights concerns in, for instance, Congo (5 million dead in the last 20 years), Sudan (2 million dead in the last 10), Algeria (150,000 dead in the 1990s), Yemen (civil war with 150,000 refugees in 2010 alone) as well as the plight of minorities throughout the Muslim world eg Kurds, Berbers etc. There is a double standard when Israel is held to the highest human rights standards in the world but the Arabs (and others) are allowed free reign to abuse their own and other citizens. I believe ultimately people like you subconsciously don’t hold Arabs and Muslims to the same standard because you’re racist and don’t expect them to be «civilised,» but that’s my opinion.


You’re welcome for my reply! I could reply to all your points but the accusation of racism leads me to think it’s more appropriate to request that this correspondence ceases.




I finally replied;

Then please provide me with another reason for your double standard. Why do you not require the Arabs to have the same respect for human rights you expect from Israel. If you say that you do please prove it by demonstrating why you have not called for a boycott of Arab, Turkish or Iranian Universities because of their various «occupations» (Western Sahara, Kurdistan, Northern Cyprus).


Notice how Chalcraft refused to answer my simple questions twice. If you can think of an better reason for his double standards than «racism» (in this case a belief that Arabs/Muslims can’t be held to civilised standards) please feel free to comment.

9 answers to Muslim propaganda (Part 1)

A friend of mine emailed me this today «»9 Questions Muslims Should Ask the World»  and it is just such pure propaganda I thought I’d need to address it. I’ll critique each question;

This is a silly comparison for a number of reasons. One commentor on the website points out that nuns choose to enter a convent and dress this way whereas many Muslim women are compelled upon punishments (In Iran, S’audi etc) to wear a hijab. This though misses the essential point. Westerners do not object to any Muslim covering their hair. Muslims intentionally confuse the truth. There are no laws, such as the one in France banning the veil (burka) in any Western country against Muslim women covering their hair. Westerners object to muslim women covering their FACE. This is for both cultual and security reasons. Already there have been cases in many Western countries in which Muslim women have been asked to remove face coverings for the purposes of identification at airports, giving evidence in courts and for driving offences.

This is complete bullshit and ignores the whole feminist movement that allowed women the RIGHT to work. No one claims every Muslim stay at home mother is oppressed but if she isnt ALLOWED to work by her husband because of SHARIA law against her wishes then she is oppressed.


Again, the Muslim propaganist deliberately confuses the Hijab with the Burka and implies its a Western issue when infact Muslim countries like Tunisia and Turkey ban the Hijab is universities and goverment offices because they try to exercise a seperation between «church» and state. Similarly, secular France bans all religious symbols from government schools not just Muslim ones. The «Burka ban» debated in Holland and many other western countries right now is about banning FACE coverings not HAIR coverings.

I’m just not sure there’s any evidence (and the propagandist doesn’t supply it) that Westerners? think Muslim children are hopeless for learning the Koran. What they do object to are Madrasses teaching hatred of Jews and Christians both in countries like Pakistan and in S’audi Wahabi schools in countries like the UK as described in this recent documentary;


Firstly, an interest but often overlooked feature of the Arab-Israel dispute is when compared to any other conflict in human history there are almost no cases of RAPE by Jews against Arabs. The almost total absence of rape (unlike say Iran and Sudan where rape is used by Muslims against their enemies as a form of torture at the behest of religious authories such as when «highly influential Shi’a religious leader, with whom Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regularly consults, apparently told followers last month that coercion by means of rape, torture and drugs is acceptable against all opponents of the Islamic regime«) has lead some of Israel’s critiques to accuse Jews of racism for not raping Palestinian women.  To suggest otherwise is simply an unfounded lie.

Also, the moral equivalence of someone protecting their family from an attacker to a person walking into a restaurant and blowing himself and those around him up is unjustified. Palestinians routinely use both Mosques and Ambulances to store and transport arms (in violation of Geneva conventions).




Islamist Terrorism Map in USA

The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) is a non-profit research group founded by Steven Emerson in 1995. It is recognized as the world’s most comprehensive data center on radical Islamic terrorist groups. For more than a decade, the IPT has investigated the operations, funding, activities and front groups of Islamic terrorist and extremist groups in the United States and around the world. It has become a principal source of critical evidence to a wide variety of government offices and law enforcement agencies, as well as the U.S. Congress and numerous public policy forums. Research carried out by the IPT team has formed the basis for thousands of articles and television specials on the subject of radical Islamic involvement in terrorism, and has even led to successful government action against terrorists and financiers based in the United States.



St. Pancake and other expressions

Yesterday JoeSettler referred to Rachel Corrie as St. Pancake.

It can’t be stressed enough she was a terrorist enabler who hated Israel and America and died trying to protect Hamas smuggling tunnels (and protect Hamas’s weapons smuggling operations). She was the definition of a useful idiot (Not a LGF term but coined by Lenin).


I assumed it was his term (I’ve heard her referred as «Pancake girl» before) I «googled» it and discovered it was coined on the Little Green Footballs blog (back when it was great and hadn’t fallen out with other conservative bloggers). In the early days of the blogosphere though LGF was the best, most popular and most interesting pro-USA pro-Israel website. It was truly amazing at its height and Charles Johnson and his readers can be credited with coining a glossery of Right-wing terms popular today. Here is the Little Green Foodballs Dictionary highlights;


Terms that Originated on LGF

anti-idiotarian — Someone who has his or her head screwed on straight politically; generally used to refer to anyone who grasps the significance of and does his or her best to combat the post-9/11 political alliance between the «Old Left» and militant Islam. [First documented use: Charles 1/5/2002 5:21 PM ]
Arafish — Disparaging reference to Yasser Arafat, based on his resemblance to a fish in some pictures. When Arafat was alive, Charles frequently posted photoshopped images of Arafat as a fish spouting inanities and lies.
bigelate / anything bigel-derived — 1. To drop nuclear bombs on; 2. To disrupt a calm thread with an extreme post. Based on the nickname of former LGF poster bigel, who was well known for advocating the «Samson Option,» in which Israel, after having been decimated by nukes delivered by Muslims (either Iran, Pakistan or stateless terrorists), retaliates with its own nuclear arsenal against Europe, as punishment for facilitating and helping to create the Islamic Bomb. The term also referred to the disruption of a thread by bigel in which he expresses unforgiving hatred of European culture and its history of anti-Semitism. (His opinions were apparent even in his very first LGF comment.) Bigel has since been banned from LGF (apparently for malfeasances unrelated to his nuke-themed comments), but his name and reputation linger on nonetheless.
Bwahahaha/Muwhahaha! — An onomatopeiac evil laugh as said by members of the lizardoid Zionist conspiracy (satirically) acknowledging their global power. (The generic term «Bwahahahaha» obviously predates LGF by many decades [possibly originating in early comic books or pulp novels], but its use in this specific setting is more closely LGF-based.) [First documented use of Bwahahaha: Jeff B. 4/16/2002 06:21PM PST] [First documented use of Muwhahaha: Charles 8/27/2002 07:49AM PST]
car swarm — A peculiar Palestinian custom of swarming around a car which had recently held Palestinian extremists but which was then blown up by Israel in a targeted killing of the terrorists inside. Often, thousands of Palestinian men will swarm around the destroyed vehicle, looking to retreive bits of flesh from the incinerated «martyrs.» The bodily remains are then paraded around in triumph. Charles generally posts any new car swarm photos as soon as they appear.
Fiskie — An award originated by Charles, designating the single person in any calendar year who most clearly exhibited the personality traits of BBC reporter Robert Fisk (who, after being kidnapped by Afghan extremists, expressed sympathy for them and their cause and famously declared, «If I were them, I’d have beaten me too.»); or, more generally, who was the year’s most unrepentant idiotarian. Voting on the Fiskie takes place every year in January. Previous winners have included Jimmy Carter and Rachel Corrie. (See also the LGF FAQ.) [The award was originated by Charles in this post on 12/19/2002; originally it was merely called «LGF Idiotarian of the Year Award»; after complaints from LGFers that nominee Robert Fisk was in a league by himself and was sure to win, Charles updated his post, dropping Fisk from the nomination yet changing the name to «The Robert Fisk Award for Idiotarian of the Year»; but neither of these titles made use of the term «Fiskie.» On that same thread, Susan first used the word «Fiskie,» though she was not referring to the award but rather to the man himself; it was actually Bill Whittle near the end of the thread who first used the term «Fiskie» to refer to the award.]
FNDT — Friday Night Drinking Thread. A thread posted by Charles late in the day on a Friday, hopefully on a light-hearted topic, where minions gather to swap gossip, jokes, commiserate (if necessary), and occasionally indulge in drinking games. [First documented use: really grumpy big dog Johnson 6/4/2004 06:43PM]
GAZE — To glare with silent disapproval at a troll who has intentionally attempted to derail a topic. A sign of non-acknowledgment of a particularly offensive or inflammatory post, and a sign to other commenters not to «feed the troll» (pay attention to a disruptive commenter). Usually written all capitals. [First documented use: sub_version 4/17/2003 03:04PM]
JfnK — John «fuckin'» Kerry. A reference to his propensity for swearing at and blaming his underlings when he embarrasses himself in public.
L3ogic — The type of logic used by the LLL; in other words, illogic. [First documented use: 12/16/2003 09:24AM PST]
LFG — An inversion of the acronym LGF, mistakenly first used by a deranged commenter who was speculating on LGF’s sinister powers. It was immortalized in a cartoon by Cox & Forkum (notice the shoulder patches), and is now used mockingly by lizardoids when sarcastically play-acting as moonbats.
lizardette — a female lizardoid (see below). Used infrequently. [First documented use: Smit 8/22/2003 06:59AM PST]
lizardoid — a lizardoid is a devoted follower of and commenter on Little Green Footballs; it can refer to either gender. Further exploration of the «lizard» references can be found on the LGF FAQ. The first use of «lizardoid» on LGF was by Throbert McGee, 1/31/2003 11:01AM PST, though it did not refer to LGFers. The term acquired its current meaning from this classic posting [Charles, 11:02 AM PST].
minion — (as applied to blog-followers) Essentially the same thing as a lizardoid; perhaps with an extra emphasis on the commenters’ devotion to pro-LGF and anti-idiotarian online activism. [First documented use: Spiny Norman 5/15/2003 07:03PM PST]
Morlocks — Originally borrowed from H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine, «Morlocks» in an LGF-sense refers to idiotarians and other ill-informed anti-LGFers. One of Charles’ rotating headers says «to Morlocks, as Morlocks are to Eloi,» a further reference to The Time Machine implying that lizardoids are on the food chain on the level above Morlocks — hence, we feast on their gamy buttocks. The term was popularized by this LGF thread.
Nazimedia — Disparaging appellation for Indymedia, an extreme leftist activist site that often drifts into fascistic thinking. [First documented use: Damian Penny 4/10/2002 11:47AM PST]
Oil Ticks — The Saudi royal family, and other Saudi aristocrats who, like ticks, drain their country’s oil wealth.
PIMF — Preview Is My Friend. Offered by way of apology for posting a misspelling or typo, and failing to use the «preview» function provided by Charles in the comments field. Usually used in self-deprecation. [First documented use: Right Wing Conspirator 12/2/2003 02:47PM, referring to an earlier post in which it was spelled RIMF]. A little-used variant, employed when a poster is proud of his or her typo, is PIFW — Preview Is For Wimps.
PIYF — Preview Is Your Friend. The inverse of PIMF, used (jokingly) to point out someone else’s typo. [First documented use: Right Wing Conspirator 3/16/2004 06:43PM]
Religion of Pieces — Mocking reformulation of President Bush’s absurd declaration that Islam is a «Religion of Peace.»
St. Pancake — Disparaging nickname for Rachel Corrie, a American activist who voluteered to help Palestinian militants in their attacks on Israel; she was killed after being crushed by a Israeli bulldozer while «defending» Palestinian smuggling tunnels. She was subsequently beatified by the extreme left, and in mockery of her new holy status, LGFers dubbed her «St. Pancake,» in reference to the manner of her death.
splodydopes — Suicide bombers, particularly Palestinian suicide bombers. A contraction of «exploding dopes.» Coined by LGFer Jim Treacher in a posting on April 15, 2002.

Palestinian official policy is for future State to be a Jew-free zone. The world yawns.

Q. “How do you know when a Palestinian Spokesperson is lying?”

A. “His mouth’s moving.”

In an interesting interview with Palestinian «Ambassador» to the USA (I’m pretty sure thats thanks to an upgrading of the Palestinian Mission by Obama [America’s next worst ex-President]) in Tablet here. Some criticise the Tablet in the comments section for allowing the interview but I think its wonderful to see exactly just how bad the Palestinian official positions really are. The are literally Judeophobic; denying a Jewish historical link to the land and calling for a «Judenrein» Palestine.

It is amazing what the Palestinians can get away with. Liberman calls for a logical border change from the 1948 «green line» so that the maximum number of Arabs are in Palestine and the maximum number of Jews are in Israel and is called a Nazi for it and persona non grata in much of Europe. Meanwhile Palestinians call for much worse and are embraced by Euro-Dhimis.  The Western world’s elites basically expect Palestinians to be barbaric and so except this kind of anti-semitism from them therefore our media, academics, politicians say nothing when the Palestinians openly call for a Jew-free Palestine or actually put these words into action such as in Jordan where Jews are not allowed to own land or be citizens and obviously in Gaza where no Jew may live openly alive. Maen Areikat must be related to Saeb «Jenin Massacre» Erakat because he is also a born liar. I bet he’s a cousin, the Palestinians like all good mafia gangs are controlled by only a couple of clans (Al Barghouti, Al Husseini etc). Amongst the lies and dishonesties he promotes;

He refuses to say that there was a Jewish Temple.

Fundamentally he refuses to agree to recognising Israel as a Jewish State.

He says Israel stared the 1948 War when in fact it was the Arabs that invaded the fledgling Jewish State.  He also ignores that the Arabs were already given 78% of the Palestine Mandate in 1921 called “Transjordan.”

Crucially he calls for the explosion of all Jews from  “Palestine” when asked;

“Any Jew who is inside the borders of Palestine will have to leave?”


He also lies about the Palestinians living up to their obligations eg to Stop incitement in their school textbooks etc.

He admits he plays both sides of the Israeli political spectrum against the other.

I’m not condoning the firing of rockets. All that I’m saying is, these rockets hurt the Palestinians more than they hurt Israel. And we as a Palestinian leadership have adopted a strategic option of non-violent resistance.”

The Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades appears not to have gotten the Fatah Memo here’s a Murder by them in 2010. You can bet if there was no Security Fence impeding Suicide Bombers they would revert right back to violence. Read the interview yourselves!!