Do we laugh, or do we cry? Events keep moving so fast that we hardly have time to digest the humorous side of the news – except that it’s not so funny.

For example –

Israel’s minister of defense, Amir Peretz, is shown admiring a military drill through binoculars that are still covered up with the lens cap. He can’t see a thing, blind like most of Israel’s leadership -- and how about that for symbolism. But wait. That’s not the real funny part. He is still Israel’s minister of defense. Now that’s a riot!

Not funny enough? Try this. This one’s about your tax dollars at work – for the Palestinian Authority. The PA, as we know, is famous for a mantra that goes like this: SHOW ME THE MONEY. But what happens to the money? All gone. Yes, even the PA’s treasurer, Salam Fayyad, admits that there’s a hole in his pocket.

Here’s what he confided to the London Telegraph: “PA spending is out of control. Salaries are being paid to workers who never turn up, and nobody can track where the money is going.” We’re talking about some $700 million. Well, here’s my two cents, so to speak. Psst. Has anybody checked up on Suha Arafat lately?

Her husband, Yasser the terrorist, died a multi-millionaire. He left her a big part of his fortune, most of which was intended to feed his people.

Well, he did feed his wife.

(Like the Godfather, Yasser made his money from the olive oil business. Nickel here, nickel there, it adds up.)

By the way, I just did a Google check on Suha and the first pix that shows up is a loving kiss and embrace between Suha and – AND, Hillary Clinton.

Let’s remember that next time we vote.

Again by the way – the PA employs something like 140,000 civil servants. I’m not good at math, but WOW! Does everybody there work for the government?

Still not funny? Okay, here’s a real knee-slapper. Mort Zuckerman is a famed philanthropist, along with his title as publisher of the New York Daily News. He is Jewish and a friend of Israel. But is he smart? You mean he didn’t know what would happen in Gaza once Gaza was vacated of Jews to make room for Palestinian Arabs? I knew what would happen, and so did you.

But Mort, so gullible, raised more than $10 million to help Palestinian Arabs set up shop in Gaza, when instead these same people burned everything to the ground. They burned the homes. They burned the greenhouses. They burned the synagogues. They burned and looted everything, and said, Thank you, Mort.

Not all of that money came from Mort. Donations poured in from other Jewish “philanthropists.”

What happened to all that money? Don’t ask me. Ask Salam Fayad. He doesn’t know, either.

Look. We Jews may not be as smart as we’re cracked up to be. But we sure are funny. (If only it weren’t so sad.)

'Tanya Reinhart, Chomsky in drag: no collection of predictions gone wrong would be complete without her.'
Tanya Reinhart, the worst Israeli academic traitor from Tel Aviv University, has gone to the great Gulag of the Sky.   Look at talkback number 8 on this page, which sums up Tanya's career brilliantly.

Reinhart was a fanatic anti-Semite. She was raised as a Stalinist and never rebelled against her communist home values.   She was later a linguistics student of Noam Chomsky, the Khmer Rouge's favorite academic, and she followed his lead not only regarding his long-ago-debunked linguistics "theories", but also in his hatred of Jews and of America.  She spent most of her time promoting the jihad against Israel and called openly for Israel to be destroyed.

She took early retirement from Tel Aviv University when her bosses there ordered her to choose between her gig there and her other gig in Holland. But she then invented a Big Lie, Ilan-Pappe-style, and claimed she had been driven out of Tel Aviv University because of her extremist anti-Israel politics.  That was a lie. 

Had she really been so driven away by Tel Aviv University, it would have been a badge of honor for TAU.  But alas it was not one that TAU actually earned.   She simply left to collect some pension wampum. 

She died just as she had begun a visiting job at New York University.  I guess she hated America but not enough to give up its nice salaries.  In any case, her passing means there is one less fanatic anti-Semitic faculty member running about New York City.

Reinhart was a regular Israel-basher on the leftwing Neo-Nazi web magazine Counterpunch.  Counterpunch is run by the neo-Stalinist Alexander Cockburn who says dem Joos was behind the 911 attacks on America.  Counterpunch regularly calls for Israel to be exterminated.  Reinhart collaborated with the world's worst anti-Semites.

The moonbat Left, led by Haaretz (the main Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew), is now singing her praises as a "peace activist". If she was a peace activist, then so is bin Laden.
Here is Tanya with a fan:

You can watch this modern day Jezebel spout off her hatred here, explaining why Israel is far worse than apartheid South Africa.

Perhaps the best item on her was by Martin Kramer:

'Cut through Reinhart's fact-free analyses and self-justificatory monologues, and you've got a plain case of bias run amuck. Blinding bias drove her to make a 180-degree error in estimating the course of Israeli policy; the only "Israeli deceit" was Reinhart's deceit of herself, and of anyone naive or foolish enough to believe her....Which makes this professor's bum prediction and moonbat analysis all the more valuable. Tanya Reinhart, Chomsky in drag: no collection of predictions gone wrong would be complete without her.'

Kramer also deals with Reinhart’s common assertion that Israel is commiting genocide against Palestinians and has made the Palestinians a "dying society":

‘For a "dying society," subjected to "slow and steady genocide," Palestinians have enjoyed an astonishingly robust population growth. In the West Bank, the net population growth rate is 3.13%, and in Gaza it’s 3.77%, compared to Israel’s 1.2%. That’s also much higher than the net growth rates of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt (CIA estimates for 2005). Life expectancy at birth is 72.3—at least five years above the Arab average, and higher than the same figure for Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia (Arab Human Development Report III, 2002 figures).’

See also this.

Update:  Noam Chomsky, professor of the Cambodian genocide, just published an article singing Reinhart's praise on Counterpunch.   Anti-Semites of a feather stick together even after death.   See Jezebel embracing Ahab here. 

The paper had “no scientific standing.” Did he rule out the possibility of fraud? “No.”'
The Lancet is a British medical journal, considered the leading such journal in Britain.  Unfortunately, instead of pursuing serious research in medicine, in recent years the Lancet has become one of the main organs of anti-Israel and anti-American leftism in the UK.  Dr Richard Horton, editor of the The Lancet, is a leftist moonbat. Some other British medical journals are little better.

The Lancet has run at least 130 articles bewailing the health conditions of the poor Palestinians, yet never has denounced Palestinian terrorism as being the cause of those woes.  It regularly denounces Israel for checking Palestinian ambulances, naturally never mentioning how often those ambulances carry bombs and murderers.  CAMERA has exposed the anti-Israel bias prevalent in The Lancet.  It regularly makes moral equivalence judgments about Palestinian mass murder of Jews and Israel defending its civilians.  It falsely claims that Israel intentionally targets "innocent civilians" and makes countless political assertions that have nothing to do with health.  The Israel Hasbara Committee has also attacked bias in The Lancet and other British medicial journals.  

Perhaps the most outrageous example of the Lancet junking its scholarly standards and research agenda in the name of promoting politically correct wackiness was its decision to publish an article claiming that 650,000 Iraqis, or 2.5% of the entire Iraqi population, died as a result of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the toppling of Saddam Hussein.   That article was "Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster sample survey", by Burnham G, Lafta R, Doocy S, Roberts L. The Lancet - Vol. 368, Issue 9545, 21 October 2006, Pages 1421-1428.  It immediately drew enormous criticism and was denounced as fraud and quackery all over the globe.  The 650,000 number was pure "advocacy statistics", meaning advocacy lying with fraudulent statistics.  Such advocacy statistic lies are familiar, from the 10% of the population being gay to the 600 billion Africans who died in the slave trade.

Even leftist antiwar activist grouns, like "Iraqi Body Count", put the real number of dead Iraqis as no more than 50,000.   Others have also come up with estimates nowhere near that in The Lancet, and some put them below 20,000.  Michael Fumento, the leading science journalist in teh US, dismissed The Lancet piece as naked propaganda.  And naturally, The Lancet had no interest in the number of Iraqi lives that the war SAVED!   I counted 138,000 web pages that refer to fraud in The Lancet's article on Iraq.  Now even the distinguished Times of London has joined the fray and denounced The Lancet's fraudulent claims.  While the entire article is worth reading, here are some of the best points:

'Several academics have tried to find out how the Lancet study was conducted; none regards their queries as having been addressed satisfactorily. Researchers contacted by The Times talk of unreturned e-mails or phone calls, or of being sent information that raises fresh doubts.

'One critic is Professor Michael Spagat, an economist from Royal Holloway College, University of London...

'Professor Spagat says the Lancet paper contains misrepresentations of mortality figures suggested by other organisations, an inaccurate graph, the use of the word “casualties” to mean deaths rather than deaths plus injuries, and the perplexing finding that child deaths have fallen...

'“The authors ignore contrary evidence, cherry-pick and manipulate supporting evidence and evade inconvenient questions,” contends Professor Spagat, who believes the paper was poorly reviewed. “They published a sampling methodology that can overestimate deaths by a wide margin but respond to criticism by claiming that they did not actually follow the procedures that they stated.” The paper had “no scientific standing.” Did he rule out the possibility of fraud? “No.”'