The “Objective Truth” in the Strange Case of Migron

April 1, 2012

hmmm… no truth hmmm? I had a problem with a certain Chicago academic (updated because the story was never consistent for those without truth) alumni who was a teacher of mine. She claimed her husband was at University of Chicago (though that could be BS). I  pulled out a gun in an art video to describe why there was most certainly a reality of the situation. the video was not live… it was a hypothetical related to a debate about truth on a blog. She got the silly feminist authorities in Seattle to extradite me without ever having a felony. There was no understanding of prior restraint. She got the media to believe she was being cyberbullied and broadcast it on the news.,… all to cover the fact that she felt there was no truth. I’m not even allowed to say her name legally now… all because the law thinks people with these views have a privileged status to abuse those who try to explain why there most certainly is a truth. Being against the truth allowed her to deny sympathies for Palestine, but maybe she was telling the truth about that too. Her belief in no objective truth allowed her to scoff at anyone who had any convictions at all…. even though there were University records that have her screaming about Nazi Jews. Of course the moment she accused the entire campus of sexual harassment there most certainly was a truth for her… and some of the information released about her from two different colleges saved my ass. The authorities in Seattle still put me in a cage with skin heads with swatstikas all over their bodies. But they will probably deny that. The skin heads name was Chris Preteen. But there it is… when someone seems crazy… don’t explain it to them. They probably are. It doesn’t matter to our liberal courts however. These academic liberal fascists receive a privileged status… and you can’t question them without being accused and even convicted of misdemeanor stalking. This story is in Israel so the good guys won this one, but academics in America are rotting America from within.

The “Objective Truth” in the Strange Case of Migron

By: Yedidya Atlas (h/t Daled Amos) Sara Hirschorn, in her recent op-ed in The Times of Israel, “Who Has the Monopoly on Truth at Migron?”, challenged my article “Something is Rotten in the State of Israel: The Strange Case of Migron” criticizing Israel’s Supreme Court’s decisions regarding Migron. While she is certainly entitled to disagree with me, her article missed the point.
Sara’s main contention follows the argument of the late history Professor Peter Novick of the University of Chicago that there is no objective truth. However, whether or not, objectively or subjectively, this is true or even makes sense – it is not relevant.
By definition, in a court of law the truth is determined by accepted procedures applying to evidence. In the case of Migron, the Peace Now lawyers represented Palestinian Arabs who were purported to be the registered owners of the land upon which Migron is built. The court of law that dealt with validating or rejecting the plaintiffs claim was the Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court.
In that case, the Arab plaintiffs who claimed to be the owners of what is actually only one quarter of the land upon which Migron was built were unable to produce evidence to prove their claim. In fact, Migron’s lawyer at the time, now Supreme Court Justice Hanan Melcer, proved that their claims were false, and in fact, the Peace Now lawyers of said plaintiffs subsequently withdrew their case.
Again, this did not stop Peace Now from pursuing their legally baseless petition in the Supreme Court. Justice Melcer, then Migron’s attorney, in his written response to the Peace Now petition to the Supreme Court wrote:
Read the whole thing

The author is a veteran journalist specializing in geo-political and geo-strategic affairs in the Middle East. His articles have appeared in such publications as The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, Insight Magazine, Nativ, The Jerusalem Post and Makor Rishon. His articles have been reprinted by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in the US Congressional Record.


University of Chicago law professor stops blogging after outcry

September 23, 2010

Todd Henderson. (University of Chicago photo)

A law professor at the University of Chicago, where President Barack Obama once taught, is sorry he ever complained about the president’s tax policies.
Todd Henderson last week wrote on a blog about the effect the expiring Bush tax cuts would have on his family. He said his family, whose household income is north of $250,000, could not afford higher taxes. His wife is a doctor at the University of Chicago Hospitals.
“A quick look at our family budget, which I will happily share with the White House, will show him that like many Americans, we are just getting by despite seeming to be rich. We aren’t,” Henderson wrote on the blog “Truth on the Market.”
He then went on to disclose some personal details about his family’s finances. He paid $100,000 in federal and state taxes last year and $15,000 property taxes. He has a big mortgage, more than $250,000 in student loans, two cars, a nanny and a lawn service.
He concluded by inviting the president to his house, which is two blocks from the Obamas, and to “judge for himself whether the Hendersons are as rich as he thinks.”
His complaints caused quite a stir in the blogosphere, as commenters attacked Henderson as whiny rich guy who doesn’t know how he good he has it in today’s economy. His blog post went viral, inviting commentary from a California professor who called Henderson’s position on taxes an “amazing pasticcio of mendacity, ignorance, and small-minded cupidity.”
The subject of the rich angry about the expiring tax cuts even spurred an essay by Paul Krugman, a Nobel prize winner and New York Times columnist, published on Sunday.
But the hostility came as a shock to Henderson, who on Monday deleted his original post. In apologizing for removing the post, he wrote, “The electronic lynch mob that has attacked and harassed me — you should see the emails sent to me personally! — has made my family feel threatened and insecure.”  He revealed that his wife did not approve of his post and disagrees “vehemently” with his opinion.
His original post still lives on the Internet. Other bloggers quickly found a Google cache of Henderson’s original post and wrote up their own items about it. On Tuesday, Henderson wrote that he will no longer be posting on the blog.

Henderson declined to talk to the Tribune about the controversy.


Crocodiles eat fish, birds, mammals and occasionally smaller crocodiles. via 

pitch fork mob against a man who comes from the same educational community as Obama. I caught this post being spread by a well known Palestinian activist. 

Lol. This guy was in my college class. Had no idea he was here: “U. of C. law professor stops blogging after outcry”- avinunu aka Ali Abunimah via

Illinois Reptiles get around too easily