dirshowitz.gif (62821 bytes)

To characterize Durshowitz's response to Alan Keyes in this debate as "childish" would be an insult to children.  It's hard to imagine that an adult in this country would hold such childish views.  If we accept this jew's words as truthful [a true oxymoron], then he must be the first man on the boat to Madagascar.

Take five minutes to complete the Poll on Exiling Blacks


Durtbag advocates torture.


See the original video of his LIES: http://video.c-span.org:8080/ramgen/odrive/ap112500.rm I


When asked the direct question: "what makes something right?", Dirshowitz gave a number of lame excuses for not answering, like "there are no simple answers", before he finally admitted "I don't know".  He went on to say that, not only does he not know what is right, but that he knows that WE don't know what's right.

Huh?  He believes that he is so much smarter than every single Christian in the country, that if he doesn't know what's right, then nobody else possibly could?  Dirshowitz is even smarter than God, and therefore nobody else in the world could possibly know what's right?  The supreme arrogance of such a statement is bad enough, but the implication is that, if Christians don't know what's right, then jews like Dirshowitz, who ADMIT that they don't even know what's right or wrong, should be the ones telling Christians what's right and wrong?!  This brilliant moral minor then followed up by calling the Holy Bible "homophobic", "racist", "sexist", and "anti-jewish".  This is blasphemy in every sense of the word, and it's the type of blasphemy which disqualifies him to practice, much less teach, law in this country.

Dirshowitz then LIED in such a convincing manner that his contribution to and continuation at Harvard MUST be SERIOUSLY questioned.    Alan Keyes was at his most brilliant when he called him on that LIE.  Dirshowitz said, and I quote:  "He [Keyes] simply has no right to tell  two adults who choose to gratify themselves in a certain way [sodomites] that they are wrong, and he has no basis for his conclusion.  What is he going to do--cite some Biblical verse?"  

Alan Keyes then challenged Dirshowitz that believing that Americans have no "right" to even speak out against ANYTHING is the very definition of totalitarianism.  If Dirshowitz had had false teeth, they would have flown across the auditorium as sputtered and LIED:   " I said no such thing", which of course was met with the first spontaneous "boos" of the entire debate.

"I said no such thing"!   For 5,000 years now, Jews have believed that they can say ANYTHING to Christians because they think they can merely deny that they ever said it.  And for 4,950 years they were just about right.  But now we have TV and radio and the internet which keep permanent RECORDS of their jew LIES.

This is EXACTLY what Dirshowitz said.  It's on video tape.  Nobody but Durtbag said it, nor could have said it!

From this point forward, what Dirshowitz says has utterly no credibility.  He doesn't know right from wrong but wishes to impose his ignorance on those who DO.  He can willy nilly say that they "simply have no right" and then claim that he never even said it.  He admitted that he knows that sodomy is a learned behavior, claimed that sodomy occurs only in private bedrooms, then ignored that sodomy is INEVITIBLE when sodomites are permitted to be around young Boy Scouts.  He misquoted George Washington, then when Keyes called him on it, he reversed himself by claiming that the New York Times misquoted Joseph LIEberman who misquoted George Washington.  He whined that the Boy Scouts is "too Christian" and "an established right wing" organization, after admitting that he was admitted to the Boy Scouts as a known JEW.   He attempted to hold Alan Keyes to the purportedly Constitutional principle of "separation of church and state" [which is not in the Constitution], criticized Thomas Jefferson as "just a man" [whose misquoted letter about separation of church and state was the issue], and then said that even if this wasn't in the Constitution that "I would add it" [read: jews can't be held to mere words, contracts, nor written statements in Constitutions and bibles because they're morally superior to the written word].  He condemned the Baptists for the statement: "women must submit gracefully" and claimed that Christians will be apologizing for that "travesty ... just as they apologized for the Inquisition and the Crusades".

It was the most supreme display of jewish arrogance this author has ever witnessed, and I've witnessd planty.  He invoked the holocaust in the name of his 40 dead relatives, to which Keyes, a black man, challenged Durtbag  to try to top slavery--a brilliant deep six to Durtbag which deflated his victimization baloon like a sharp pin.  Of course like all jews, he'll always ignore the 264 million dead WHITE Christians in Europe, many of whom are direct ancestors of the majority of the American population, who presumably gave their lives to protect the poor jews from the Nazis (another big jewish LIE). 

When booed, Dirshowitz screeched in a little girl's voice: "If you think your boos will scare me, you don't know me".  No, Durtbag, audiences don't boo people to "scare" them--they boo them to let you know how STUPID you look and sound when you get caught in a big fat LIE, right there on stage, before thousands of viewers, on VIDEO TAPE, by denying that which you just stated. 

How revealing that this little faggot expert on victimhood, who went to great lengths to make sodomy appear as nothing but a life style choice rather than the social pathology it is, would view a boo as an attack on his life or safety.  

Boo, Durtbag.  Boo, boo, boo. Sue me.

horizontal rule


----- Original Message -----

From: Prof. Yaccov Iram

To: Marvin Berlowitz

Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 1:07 AM


Alan M. Dershowitz 
National Post
 If a visitor from a far away galaxy were to land at an American or Canadian university and peruse some of the petitions that were circulating around the campus, he would probably come away with the conclusion that the Earth is a peaceful and fair planet with only one villainous nation determined to destroy the peace and to violate human rights. That nation would not be Iraq, Libya, Serbia, Russia or Iran. It would be Israel.


There are currently petitions circulating on most North American university campuses that would seek to have universities terminate all investments in companies that do business in or with Israel. There are also petitions asking individual faculty members to boycott scientists and scholars who happen to be Israeli Jews, regardless of their personal views on the Arab-Israeli conflict. There have been efforts, some successful, to prevent Israeli speakers from appearing on college campuses, as recently occurred at Concordia University. There are no comparable petitions seeking any action against other countries that enslave minorities, imprison dissidents, murder political opponents and torture suspected terrorists. Nor are there any comparable efforts to silence speakers from other countries.

The intergalactic visitor would wonder what this pariah nation, Israel, must have done to deserve this unique form of economic capital punishment. If he then went to the library and began to read books and articles about this planet, he would discover that Israel was a vibrant democracy, with freedom of speech, press and religion, that was surrounded by a group of tyrannical and undemocratic regimes, many of which are actively seeking its destruction. He would learn that in Egypt, homosexuals are routinely imprisoned and threatened with execution; that in Jordan suspected terrorists and other opponents of the government are tortured, and that if individualized torture does not work, their relatives are called in and threatened with torture as well; that in Saudi Arabia, women who engage in sex outside of marriage are beheaded; that in Iraq, political opponents are routinely murdered en masse and no dissent is permitted; that in Iran members of
religious minorities, such as Baha'is and Jews, are imprisoned and sometimes executed; that in all of these surrounding nations, anti-Semitic material is frequently broadcast on state-sponsored television and radio programs; in Saudi Arabia apartheid is practiced against non-Muslims, with signs indicating that Muslims must go to certain areas and non-Muslims to others; that China has occupied Tibet for half a century; that in several African countries women are stoned to death for violating sexual mores; that slavery still exists  in some parts of the world; and that genocide has been committed by a number of countries in recent memory.

Our curious visitor would wonder why there are no petitions circulating with regard to these human rights violators. Is Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza -- an occupation it has offered to end in exchange for peace -- worse than the Chinese occupation of Tibet?
Are the tactics used to combat terrorism by Israel worse than those used by the Russians against Chechen terrorists? Are Arab and Muslim states more democratic than Israel? Is there any comparable  institution in any Arab or Muslim state to the Israeli Supreme Court, which frequently rules in favor of Palestinian claims against the Israeli government and military? Does the absence of the death penalty in Israel alone, among Middle East nations, make it more barbaric than the countries which behead, hang and shoot political dissidents? Is Israel's settlement policy, which 78% of Israelis want to end in exchange for peace, worse than the Chinese attempt at cultural genocide in Tibet? Is Israel's policy of full equality for openly gay soldiers and members of the Knesset somehow worse than the policy of Muslim states to persecute those who have a different sexual orientation than the majority? Is Israel's commitment to equality for women worse than the gender apartheid practiced in Saudi Arabia?
Our visitor would be perplexed to hear the excuses made by university professors and students for why they are prepared to delegitimate Israel while remaining silent about the far worse abuses committed by other countries. If he were to ask a student about the abuses committed by other countries, he would be told (as I have been): "You're changing the subject. We're talking about Israel now." This reminds me of an incident from the 1920s involving then-Harvard president A. Lawrence Lowell. Lowell decided that the number of Jews admitted to Harvard should be reduced because "Jews cheat." When a distinguished alumnus, Judge Learned Hand, pointed out that Protestants also cheat,
Lowell responded, "You're changing the subject; we're talking about Jews."
It is not surprising, therefore, that as responsible and cautious a writer as Andrew Sullivan, formerly editor of The New Republic and now a writer for The New York Times Magazine, has concluded that "fanatical anti-Semitism, as bad or even worse than Hitler's, is now a cultural norm across much of the Middle East and beyond. It's the acrid glue that unites Saddam, Arafat, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran and the Saudis. They all hate the Jews and want to see them destroyed."
Our intergalactic traveller, after learning all of these facts, would wonder what kind of a planet he had landed on. Do we have everything backwards? Do we know the difference between right and wrong? Do our universities teach the truth?
 These are questions that need asking, lest we become the kind of world the visitor would have experienced had he arrived in Europe during the late 1930s and early 1940s.
 Dershowitz is Professor of Law at Harvard.