Dissident Veteran For Peace

An automated release of documents this week by the FBI has stirred up a minor Twitter storm. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports the release announcement "spark[ed] anger and confusion".

According to an FBI apology posted on August 19, 2020:

Earlier today FOIA materials were posted to the FBI's Vault and FOIA Twitter account via an automated process without further outlining the context of the documents. We regret that this release may have inadvertently caused distress among the communities we serve.

The apology doesn't say what the "materials" in question were nor does it mention that the offending tweet was deleted. As it turns out the FBI released its file on the "Protocols of Learned Elders of Zion", which you can, for now, still access in the FBI's "Vault". The deleted tweet can be viewed here.

It appears someone decided to try to put a lid on the whole matter because people were starting to pay attention and it wasn't all in support of the 'angry and confused' folks. Thus, three of the four non-FBI tweets quoted in the JTA article have now disappeared too.

They probably needn't have worried as—except for high-profile stories that simply cannot be ignored such as Jonathan Pollard, Jack Abramoff, Jeffrey Epstein, and Harvey Weinstein—the mainstream media seldom reports on matters that may offend Jews or cast them in a negative light. Examples of buried stories that warrant greater coverage are the ongoing nefarious activities of Chabad, including the $40 million in federal funds allegedly defrauded by the Michigan Jewish Institute. The Trump DoJ put an end to this particular inquiry early this year.

In any case, one of the more pointed replies to the FBI's now deleted tweet quoted from a 2015 article by Yossi Sarid in Haaretz on Republican Jewish operatives waging a "campaign of intimidation ... to stop Democratic lawmakers from skipping Netanyahu's upcoming Congress speech". Here's the excerpt:

In these very moments, the protocols are being rewritten. Rich Jews are writing them in their own handwriting. They, in their wealth, are confirming with their own signatures what anti-Semites used to slander them with in days gone by: We, the elders of Zion, pull the strings of Congress, and the congressmen are nothing but marionettes who do our will. If they don’t understand our words, they’ll understand our threats. And if in the past, we ran the show from behind the scenes, now we’re doing it openly, from center stage. And if you forget our donations, the wellspring will run dry.

Labels: Chabad, conspiracy, crime, fraud, government, Israel, Jews, media, quotations, Rothschild, Trump, Zionism

Rabbi Nachtner: How does God speak to us? A good question. You know Lee Sussman?

Larry Gopnik: Doctor Sussman? I think I - yeah.

Rabbi Nachtner: Did he ever tell you about the goy's teeth?

Larry Gopnik: No, ah ... what goy?

Rabbi Nachtner: So, Lee is at work one day, you know he has the orthodontic practice there at Great Bear. He's making a plaster mold - it's for corrective bridge work - in the mouth of one of his patients, Russell Kraus. The mold dries and Lee is examining it one day before fabricating an appliance. He notices something unusual. There appears to be something engraved on the inside of the patient's lower incisors. He vav shin yud 'ayin nun yud. "Hwshy 'ny". "Help me, save me". This in a goy's mouth, Larry. He calls the goy back on the pretense of needing additional measurements for the appliance. "How are you? Noticed any other problems with your teeth?" No. There it is. "Hwshy 'ny". "Help me". Son of a gun. Sussman goes home. Can Sussman eat? Sussman can't eat. Can Sussman sleep? Sussman can't sleep. Sussman looks at the molds of his other patients, goy and Jew alike, seeking other messages. He finds none. He looks in his own mouth. Nothing. He looks in his wife's mouth. Nothing. But Sussman is an educated man. Not the world's greatest sage, maybe, no rabbi Marshak, but he knows a thing or two about the Zohar and the Caballah. He knows that every Hebrew letter has its numeric equivalent. 8-4-5-4-4-7-3. Seven digits ... a phone number, maybe? "Hello? Do you know a goy named Kraus, Russell Kraus?" "Who?" "Where have I called? The Red Owl in Bloomington. Thanks so much." He goes. It's a Red Owl. Groceries, what have you. Sussman goes home. What does it mean? He has to find out if he is ever to sleep again. He goes to see ... the rabbi Nachtner. He comes in, he sits right where you're sitting right now. "What does it mean, rabbi? Is it a sign from Hashem, 'Help me'? I, Sussman, should be doing something to help this goy? Doing what? The teeth don't say. Or maybe I'm supposed to help people generally, lead a more righteous life? Is the answer in Caballah? In Torah? Or is there even a question? Tell me, rabbi, what can such a sign mean?"

Larry Gopnik: So what did you tell him?   

Rabbi Nachtner: Sussman?

Larry Gopnik: Yes!

Rabbi Nachtner: Is it ... relevant?

Larry Gopnik: Well, isn't that why you're telling me?

Rabbi Nachtner: Okay. Nachtner says, look. The teeth, we don't know. A sign from Hashem? Don't know. Helping others ... couldn't hurt.

Larry Gopnik: No, no, but ... who put it there? Was it for him, Sussman, or for whoever found it, or for just, for, for ...

Rabbi Nachtner: We can't know everything.

Larry Gopnik: It sounds like you don't know anything! Why even tell me the story?

Rabbi Nachtner: [chuckling] First I should tell you, then I shouldn't.

Larry Gopnik: What happened to Sussman?

Rabbi Nachtner: What would happen? Not much. He went back to work. For a while he checked every patient's teeth for new messages. He didn't find any. In time, he found he'd stopped checking. He returned to life. These questions that are bothering you, Larry - maybe they're like a toothache. We feel them for a while, then they go away.

Larry Gopnik: I don't want it to just go away! I want an answer!

Rabbi Nachtner: Sure! We all want the answer! But Hashem doesn't owe us the answer, Larry. Hashem doesn't owe us anything. The obligation runs the other way.

Larry Gopnik: Why does he make us feel the questions if he's not gonna give us any answers?

Rabbi Nachtner: He hasn't told me.

[Larry puts his face in his hands in despair]

Larry Gopnik: And ... what happened to the goy?

Rabbi Nachtner: The goy? Who cares? 

Source: A Serious Man (2009), written and directed by Joel and Ethan Coen

Labels: film & television, Jews, Judaism

Freddie Glusman, owner of Piero's: Want me to tell you a story?

Eugene Jarecki, director-writer of The King: Please.

FG: Casino. They filmed it here [in Piero's]. True Story. I know where the bodies are buried, some of them anyway.

EJ: How come?

FG: Because I'm Jewish. I move in the right circles. I kiss the right ass.

Source: At about 1:29:50 in The King, Jarecki's documentary/op-ed on Elvis Presley and America.

Labels: crime, film & television, Jews

Roughly translated the text on the image above says: "100 Years" and "Fight with the Comintern for the rebuilding of the Bavarian Soviet! Long live the 100th anniversary of the Bavarian Soviet Republic April 13, 1919 - April 13, 2019". The sign identifies the marchers as members of the Neuhausen—a borough of Munich—section of the Communist Party of Germany (KPD).

One of the best books on the American labor movement I've ever read is the late Robert Fitch's 2006 Solidarity for Sale: How Corruption Destroyed the Labor Movement and Undermined America's Promise. Following Fitch's lead, a reviewer for The Nation aptly compared the book to Martin Luther's Ninety-Five Theses.

Unfortunately, Fitch's constructive criticism of American unions was not generally well-received. It was mostly ignored.

However, the impetus for this post was not Solidarity for Sale but, rather, a bit in a fascinating 2006 book review by Fitch of separate works by Michael Lerner and Jim Wallis. I won't comment on those books or Fitch's review except to say I am on the same side of the fence as Fitch (but for somewhat different reasons) and he was out of his hermeneutical depth.

What I want to focus on here is his striking reference to the 1919 Bavarian Soviet Republic. In "Vetting God's Politics" Fitch writes:

Lerner's account of the Nazi rise to power leaves out some critical material and political factors — like the Great Depression and the suicidal division of the Left between Social Democrats and Communists. But even more significantly, Lerner blots out the not inconsiderable role of the communitarian Jewish Left in producing the convulsive reaction that Hitler exploited.

At a certain point in the upheaval that followed the German defeat by the Allies, members of [Martin] Buber's Neue Gemeinschaft group — like Gustav Landauer and Erich Mühsam — were high-level participants in the regime which seized power in Bavaria.  To understand the terrible repercussion of the 1919 anarchist coup, imagine if Vietnam not only won the war but invaded the U.S. in the 60s and, in the chaos that followed, a handful of long-bearded Jewish radicals from Berkeley seized power in California and declared the state a Republic.  Then, although a tiny anarchist minority of a left revolutionary minority, the government proceeded to decree a new social order; handing out a worthless currency as free money; establishing agrarian communes; and declaring war on Mexico.  (Bavaria declared war on Switzerland after its refusal to lend the new government 60 locomotives.)  It's likely that California would have experienced a reaction far worse than the election of Ronald Reagan.

In speaking this not-so-speakable (see note below) history Fitch exhibits the kind of intellectual integrity that helped unfairly doom him to a relative obscurity in academic and activist circles. There's a reason why Lerner's account left this information out and it is directly related to why Lerner's star rose much higher than Fitch's in elite circles.

That said, Fitch's characterization of the Bavarian Soviet Republic (BSR) as an "anarchist coup" is a bit puzzling. Apparently, some of the leading figures in the BSR, such as Landauer and Mühsam were self-described anarchists. However, the seizure of state power in a coup is inimical to anarchism as I understand it.

Moreover, in The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (UChicago Pr., 1993) Benjamin Ginsberg more aptly writes:

Jews were also among the leaders of the Communist government that the KPD briefly established in Bavaria after the murder of Kurt Eisner. Eugene Levine was head of the short-lived Bavarian Soviet Republic, Gustav Landauer was its commissar for propaganda and cultural affairs, and Ernst Toller commanded its "red army."

Kurt Eisner and Ernst Toller were members of the Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany (USPD). Founded in 1917, the USPD joined the Communist International in 1920, leading to a split with the majority of party members going into the KPD. (The USPD is not to be confused with the Majority Social Democratic Party of Germany (MSPD) but often referred to simply as the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD). The USPD was the result of a split within the SPD/MSPD, a self-proclaimed Marxist party. Many founders of the Spartacist League-KPD, such as the Jewish revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg, also started out in the SPD.)

This is a complicated period in Bavarian history. As best I can tell, the sequence of events is as follows:

November 8, 1918: Eisner (a USPD communist) proclaims the People's State of Bavaria (Volksstaat Bayern; VSB) in Munich. Johannes Hoffmann, a Social Democrat (MSPD) and not a Jew, becomes the VSB's minister of education or culture (sources vary). Some sources say Landauer and Mühsam had formal positions in Eisner's government, most say their positions were supportive but informal.

November 21: 29-year-old Adolph Hitler arrives at an army garrison in Munich after being discharged from the hospital where he was recovering from war injuries. The following month he is transferred to Traunstein (about 100 km/62 mi from Munich) only to return to Munich in January or February (In Mein Kampf Hitler says it was March).

January 5, 1919: A general strike, led by the Spartacist League (renamed as/absorbed into the KPD in the preceding month) and the Independent Socialists, begins in Berlin. It will last about one week and in the ensuing violence 150 - 200 people will die before it is violently suppressed by Freikorps.

January 12: In parliamentary elections Eisner's party, the USPD, gets only 2.5% of the vote, entitling them to 3 seats. By contrast, the MSPD wins 31 seats.

February 21: Eisner is assassinated by a 22-year-old army officer, Count Arco-Valley (described as "a young Jew" by British historian Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke in his book, The Occult Roots of Nazism). Some sources claim Hitler is photographed in uniform at Eisner's funeral five days later. The VSB falls into disarray and Toller soon takes over Eisner's position as leader of the Bavarian branch of the USPD.

March 17:  Hoffmann is elected by the VSB's parliament as the VSB's new minister-president.

April 3: Hitler is elected liaison of his demobilization battalion to the Hoffmann government.

April 6-7: A coup is undertaken following which the establishment of the Bavarian Soviet Republic (Räterepublik Baiern; RRB) is proclaimed under the leadership of Toller, along with Landauer and Mühsam as cabinet ministers. Hoffmann and others flee Munich to Bamberg. It was during this period that the RRB, under Toller, declared war on Switzerland. Hitler stays put.

April 13: Hoffmann's forces attempt to forcibly re-establish control in Munich but fail. That same day a Jewish KPD member, Eugen Leviné stages a coup against Toller and seizes power. According to Richard J. Evans in The Coming of the Third Reich, the Russian-born Leviné is acting on his own, not the KPD's, initiative. He takes directions from V. I. Lenin (also of Jewish ancestry) to, among other things, arrest large numbers of so-called class enemies, seize privately owned weapons under penalty of death, and organize a 20,000 strong "Red Army" to "spearhead the Bolshevization of Europe". The ousted Toller, an avowed pacifist, takes a position in the new regime as commander of the Red Army. Landauer is also prepared to stay in the new regime but when his cultural program is rejected he quits.

April 15: Hitler is elected liaison of his demobilization battalion to the Leviné government. Leviné's repressive policies and inept leadership along with outside pressure quickly bring about chaos in Munich.

May 1: The siege of Munich is broken by an alliance between Hoffmann's forces and Freikorps under Lt. General Burghard von Oven. Shortly afterwards, Hitler comes out in open opposition to the recently deposed revolutionary government(s) and in what he will describe in Mein Kampf as his "first more or less purely political activity" Hitler joins a commission "investigating the behaviour of his regiment's soldiers during the two soviet republics."

Note
As another example of the not-so-speakable consider that on the popular, if generally unreliable, web site Wikipedia there is a category of articles on "Christian communists" (not to mention "Christian communism") and a category of "African-American communists‎". There are also 151 categories of "Communists by nationality". There's a category of "Jewish socialists" but you will not find a category of articles on Jewish communists. That category was repeatedly created and deleted in the span of about two weeks in 2007.

Thus, for instance, Karl Marx is not categorized in Wikipedia as a "Jewish communist". Bear in mind that the Communist Manifesto's primary author had maternal and paternal grandfathers who were rabbis and his mother converted from Judaism to Christianity years after Karl's birth. FWIW, Marx is also not categorized with "Christian communists", "German Christians", or "German Lutherans" (although his father is). 

To the extent that Jews constitute an ethnicity or nationality, Karl Marx was Jewish. Although he was baptized as a child (so was the execrable Abe Foxman), Marx was nevertheless Jewish under Judaic religious law, i.e. halakha. As one Orthodox rabbi notes: "... in Jewish law there is no true notion of converting out of the faith. Once a person is born Jewish, that is his lifelong status, whether he is observant or not ... past baptism and conversion never [change] that."

There is also no apparent evidence that Marx ever participated in the Lutheran rite of confirmation or that he ever professed faith in Christ as a child or an adult. Marx did profess atheism but that is not necessarily a halakhic disqualifier.

Now consider the case of Benedict Spinoza. Amsterdam's rabbis formally branded Spinoza a heretic and expelled him from the community in 1656. In 2012, the chief rabbi of Amsterdam's Sephardic Jews was asked to rescind the writ of cherem; he refused. Yet, Spinoza's biographical article is included in the following Wikipedia categories: 17th-century Jewish theologians, 17th-century Sephardi Jews, Dutch Jews, Jewish biblical scholars, Jewish philosophers, Jewish skeptics, Jewish translators of the Bible, and 17th-century Jewish biblical scholars.

The single, Wikipedia categorical reference to Marx's Jewishness is "German people of Dutch-Jewish descent". The point is not that Karl Marx was an observant, professing adherent of Judaism; he, apparently, was not. The point is that, unlike virtually every other group of communists, Jewish communists such as Eisner, Toller, Luxemburg, and Leviné are not allowed to be seen and considered in their collective in Wikipedia. Why is that?

Labels: Abraham Foxman, anarchism, communism, history, Jews, labor, Lenin, Lerner, Ronald Reagan, Wikipedia

Below is a selection from "When Jews Praised Mussolini and Supported Nazis: Meet Israel's First Fascists" by Dan Tamir and published by Haaretz on July 20, 2019. Tamir is the author of Hebrew Fascism in Palestine, 1922-1942 (Palgrave Macmillan, 2018).

Eighty years later, what remains of Hebrew fascism in present-day Israeli politics? A number of the attributes of fascism noted above are clearly discernible in the rhetoric of today's right wing. Many Israelis believe in the supremacy of the nation's needs over every right of the individual and in the individual's subordination to the nation: from worshipping the totem of military service and the rabbinical establishment's responsibility for dealing with marital matters, to contempt for those who choose to emigrate. Similarly, it is not difficult to detect the unwavering belief that "the Jews" are a victim of other groups: from the instrumental use of the murder of the millions in Europe in World War II, to the "few vs. many" paradigm here in Israel (with respect, for instance, to the wars it's fought over the years and the two intifadas) – if to note only two widespread excuses made for the State of Israel's inordinate use of military force.

Fear that the "nation's values" will be eroded by universal liberal tenets or by "foreign" influences is also part and parcel of the approach of many on the Israeli right, whether in the passive form of apprehension of groups like the New Israel Fund, "foreign governments" and "international organizations," or actively, in projects to "strengthen Jewish identity" among the population.

The belief in the need for creation of a "purer" community is also very familiar: from the thugs of the anti-assimilationist Lehava organization and open enmity toward asylum seekers, to the branding of the "leftist" not as a political rival, but as an alien element to be uprooted. And finally, the belief in the right of the Chosen People to rule others indefinitely has been evident every day for more than half a century in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Tamir begins the article by discussing an actual, non-satirical political campaign advertisement from last spring for and featuring Israel's then-Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked. The ad is so bizarre (or is it telling?) that I've decided to append it to the bottom of this post.

Labels: history, Israel, Jews, politics, Zionism

This isn't going to be one of my more fully-developed posts—I may rework it later—but here goes. I didn't vote for Donald Trump (or the evil monster who got the Dem's 2016 presidential nomination). Trump has long struck me as dishonest, greedy, manipulative, opportunistic, and unguided by few, if any, principles except his own perceived self-interest.

As I wrote to some friends in April 2016, Trump: "strikes me as a clever businessman-showman who is adeptly exploiting the well-founded grievances and misplaced hopes of many Americans ..." Days after the 2016 election, I wrote: 'Trump, like Obama, embodies the worthy hopes and dreams of a lot of people. I just don't see a lot of reason to believe that those dreams will be realized."

I think it is no coincidence then that, for decades, he has surrounded himself in his business, family, and political life with a reprehensible collection of Jewish Israel partisans. One wit managed to turn even this against Trump, writing: "I noted recently that virtually all the lawyers working for Trump are Jews, which I consider to be part of his soft anti-Semitism ..."

It is no coincidence either that Trump's only real, known solid ties to Vladimir Putin are via the hardline Zionist Chabad Jewish orthodox movement. In 2017, Politico described the Chabad as "The Happy-Go-Lucky Jewish Group That Connects Trump and Putin". Slate reported on the Putin-Chabad connection in 2014. Chabad has proven influential inside and outside of the Jewish community.

First daughter Ivanka and her family attend a Chabad synagogue in DC. Not coincidentally, Sholom Rubashkin, a Chabad rabbi, was the first recipient of a presidential commutation from Donald Trump.

So, now Michael Cohen (who does not seem to be a member of Chabad himself)—Trump's "Political 'Pit Bull' "and "Jewish Wingman"—has turned against Trump after being convicted, by his own admission, of lying to Congress and committing tax evasion (but not being charged or convicted of anything involving alleged Trump campaign collusion with Russia). Now, this admitted liar is a credible witness to give Congressional testimony which, in truly shameless partisan form, KUOW and National Public Radio preempted regular programming to broadcast.

I read Cohen's written statement and listened to some of the Q & A during the hearings today. What a sad, sad state of affairs Democrats and their ilk have descended to. I generally have a low regard for politicians of all stripes but today I witnessed a new low in the ongoing destruction of the Republic and civil society. It also worthy of note that, again, Cohen's testimony today like his criminal convictions had little or nothing to support allegations about Trump collusion with Russia.

At one point, one of the Dems questioning Cohen today kept hammering on about Trump's association with a known Russian mafioso, Felix Sater (an Israeli citizen, according to Ha'aretz). That Dem was Rep. Harley Rouda, who twice referred to him as "Mobster Felix Sater".
 
Curiously, I did not hear it mentioned that Sater was a boyhood friend of Cohen's who maintained his relationship with Sater long after Sater's convictions in US courts for violence and fraud. Sater is also a Chabadnik and appears to be a key player in any connection between Trump and Russia. The Russian-Jewish-Israel nexus to Trump has been largely buried in the US media.

I don't claim to know if Trump illegally colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election. I very much doubt it but I don't completely deny the possibility. It does seem clear Trump has a lot of other skeletons in his closet he wants to hide, including his apparent relationship with Felix Sater.

In any case, I think what we saw with the election of Trump is a reflection of the well-earned distrust and contempt many Americans have for the Democratic and Republican elites who have continuously betrayed them and the country for decades. These elites have declared war on Trump (and the everyday people who naively elected him).

Democrats are especially incensed that Trump is in the White House for a whole host of reasons I won't belabor here except to say it's not because he's crooked. Many, if not most, establishment Republicans are anti-Trump, too, although, his role as the Republican POTUS constrains them more than the Dems. However, in all but a tiny handful of cases opposition to Trump is not driven by any loyalty to the people of this country and any high principles; rather, it is driven by pique and ambition and none of them oppose him for his pro-Israel policies (except tactically).

Now, I want to bring this back to the alleged Russian collusion and simply say that most while most of the reporting on the matter has been driven by Trump Derangement Syndrome there has been a tiny bit of worthy reporting on it from the Left. Most notably it has come from Aaron Maté, writing for the The Nation and The Intercept.* Maté has written: "Trump didn't get to the White House via Russia, but by falsely portraying himself as a populist champion. The only con he will be undone by is his own." Aside from the glaring omission of the role of Trump's pro-Israel Jewish associates in his rise, I think this is about right.

It bears saying that Trump is not unique among politicians in his alliance with the Jewish elite (and don't forget the $$$). Obama was beholden to and, after diligently comporting himself to them, was eventually lionized by Jews but he generally aligned himself with less openly reactionary elements of the Jewish elite. What makes Trump unique is his high-profile, undisguised, longstanding, and tight association with the smaller (in the US) population of the most openly reactionary elements of the Jewish elite.

* Glenn Greenwald has also had a couple of decent pieces in The Intercept ("The FBI’s Investigation of Trump as a 'National Security Threat' is Itself a Serious Danger. But J. Edgar Hoover Pioneered the Tactic" and "Beyond BuzzFeed: The 10 Worst, Most Embarrassing U.S. Media Failures on the Trump-Russia Story")

What follows are links on Chabad, Russia, & Felix Sater and, below that, on Trump's Jewish/Israeli ties and positions. Links embedded in the text above are not generally also listed below (I have flagged the three that do appear in both places with a (☀)).

Chabad, Russia, & Felix Sater

• "Former Mafia-linked figure describes association with Trump" (May 2016; Washington Post)☀
• "The Original Russia Connection" (Aug. 2017: The New Yorker)☀
• "Who Is Felix Sater, and Why Is Donald Trump So Afraid of Him?" (Sep. 2017; The Nation)
• "The Odd Chabad Connection Between Putin and Trump" (Nov. 2017; Washington Monthly)
• "A Brief History of Michael Cohen's Criminal Ties" (Apr. 2018; Rolling Stone)
• "Michael Cohen Gets a Special Visit" (Apr. 2018; Washington Monthly)☀
• "The Countless Israeli Connections to Mueller's Probe of Trump and Russia" (May 2018; Ha'aretz)
• "Active Measures director says Trump's Russian mob ties are his biggest legal vulnerability" (May 2018; CBC)
• "Mueller Finally Starts to Target Trump's Israel Ties" (Jun. 2018; Observer)

Trump's Jewish/Israeli Ties and Positions

• "Trump Has Strongest Jewish Ties of all GOP Candidates" (Aug. 2015; The Forward)
• "Donald Trump meets with billionaire Sheldon Adelson" (Dec. 2015: Business Insider) 
• "Read Donald Trump's Full Speech to AIPAC" (Mar. 2016; Time)
• "In meeting with Orthodox, Trump reveals Israel advisers: His Jewish lawyers" (Apr. 2016; Jewish Telegraphic Agency)
• "Donald Trump insists Israel should keep building West Bank settlements" (May 2016; Daily Mail Online)
• "Trump Names Jewish Financier, Fixer to Major Campaign Positions" (May 2016; The Forward)
• "Trump vs. Clinton: Battle of the Jewish sons-in-law" (May 2016; Jewish Telegraphic Agency)
• "Trump's Jews" (Jul. 2016; Tablet Magazine)
• "Meet the Jews in Donald Trump's inner circle" (Nov. 2016; The Times of Israel)
• "Trump is headed to the White House. Did we just elect our first Jewish president?" (Nov. 2016; Fox News)
• "Trump's Jews and Obama's Jews" (Jan. 2017; Frontpage Mag)
• "Know your oligarch: A guide to the Jewish billionaires in the Trump-Russia probe" (May 2018: Ha'aretz)
• "Robert Mueller's Israel problem" (Jun. 2018; Conservative Review)
• "Trump's Jews" (Dec. 2018; Forward)

Labels: Chabad, Israel, Jews, Judaism, media, National Public Radio, politics, Robert S. Mueller, Russia, Trump, Zionism

(U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Matthew Plew)

Less than a year ago Lt Gen Richard M. Clark, an American Air Force officer, spoke with a reporter from the Jerusalem Post during Juniper Cobra, a joint military exercise with Israeli forces. Clark's Israeli counterpart, Brig Gen Zvika Haimovitch, told the Post: "While 'the exercise demonstrates the close and strategic cooperation between the IDF and the US armed forces,' Haimovitch continued, Israel has the capabilities to protect the country from threats posed by its enemies."

To reiterate, according to Haimovitch, Israel can take care of its own military needs. Nevertheless, later in the article, the remarks of Clark, the ostensibly American military officer, are reported as follows:

According to Clark, the US and Israeli troops will work side-by-side under each other’s relevant chain of command.

“As far as decision-making, it is a partnership,” he continued, stressing nonetheless that “at the end of the day it is about the protection of Israel – and if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to Zvika [Haimovitch].”

Washington and Israel have signed an agreement which would see the US come to assist Israel with missile defense in times of war and, according to Haimovitch, “I am sure once the order comes we will find here US troops on the ground to be part of our deployment and team to defend the State of Israel.”

And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish state, Clark said. [emphasis added][1]

This is amazing for two reasons. First, the command authority for the American military forces is invested in the President of the United States, who is designated in Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution as the "Commander in Chief". Transferring operational control of US troops to a foreign commander is a controversial matter and not a decision for Air Force officers, not even generals. Here is what current US military doctrine says on the matter:

Operational Control. While the President cannot relinquish command authority, in some multinational environments it might be prudent or advantageous to place appropriate US forces under the OPCON [operational control] of an MNFC [multinational force commander] to achieve specified military objectives. In making this decision, the President carefully considers such factors as mission, size of the proposed US force, risks involved, anticipated duration, and ROE [rules of engagement]. Normally, OPCON of US forces is assigned only for a specific timeframe or mission and includes the authority to assign tasks to US forces already deployed by the President and to US units led by US officers. US commanders will maintain the capability to report to higher US military authorities in addition to MNFCs. For matters perceived as illegal under US or international law, or outside the mandate of the mission to which the President has agreed, US commanders will first attempt resolution with the appropriate foreign MNFC. If issues remain unresolved, the US commanders refer the matters to higher US authorities.[emphasis added][2]

One wonders if Lt Gen Clark was speaking out-of-turn or on the basis of knowledge that the existing agreement he referenced proactively relinquishes the operational control of US forces to Israel.

Second, I took the US military oath of enlistment twice and I just don't remember the part about being willing to die for Israel or any other foreign country. Of course, every member of the US military, hopefully, understands that they may be required to put their life at risk while abroad in fulfilling their oath "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". But they would be putting their lives at risk, at least ostensibly, to defend the United States and its vital interests. I wonder what the troops would say if they knew the commander of the US 3rd Air Force was telling Israelis that they—US troops—were willing "to die for the Jewish state". I think I know what the survivors of the USS Liberty would say.

In writing this I was momentarily tempted to say that it is surprising that Clark's comments were not more widely reported in the US media. In fact, I am unaware that they were reported by even a single US mainstream media outlet. However, over the years I have come to realize that, for the most part, the US media is a propaganda mill that actively and/or passively works to keep the American public misled or uninformed about many or most important aspects of the US-Israel relationship.

Notes
1. Anna Ahronheim, "U.S. and IDF troops, in major joint drill, simulating battle on 3 fronts", Jerusalem Post, March 8, 2018.
2. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Publication 1, Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States (PDF), March 25, 2013 (incorporating Change 1 of 12 July 2017).

Labels: Israel, Jews, media, military, United States, US Constitution, USS Liberty

This is the time of year where, in certain quarters, one hears about a "War on Christmas" (WoC). In fact, a recent poll found that "39% of people believe that "There is a 'War on Christmas' happening in the US." There is, indeed, good reason to believe that Christmas is under attack.

Marc Daalder, writing in the Jewish Forward in December 2016, situates the WoC within "the zone of the culture wars" and asserts that "saying Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas" is "one of the preeminent issues" that "must be pressed". In Daalder's view: "The War on Christmas is really a War for Inclusivity, and it is essential as we look towards remaking and repairing American culture going forward from this divisive election. To abandon multiculturalism or identity politics because Middle America rejected them is to simply surrender after years of hard work. No, the work must continue and the war must be fought."

Adam Kirsch (whom Daalder quotes), writing in another Jewish publication, Tablet Magazine, claims "Talk of a war on Christmas is, then, at least implicitly anti-Jewish ..." As evidence he cites a 2009 op-ed by Garrison Keillor entitled: "NONBELIEVERS, PLEASE LEAVE CHRISTMAS ALONE". Keillor had the temerity to write:

Unitarians listen to the Inner Voice and so they have no creed that they all stand up and recite in unison, and that's their perfect right, but it is wrong, wrong, wrong to rewrite "Silent Night." If you don't believe Jesus was God, OK, go write your own damn "Silent Night" and leave ours alone. This is spiritual piracy and cultural elitism, and we Christians have stood for it long enough. And all those lousy holiday songs by Jewish guys that trash up the malls every year, Rudolph and the chestnuts and the rest of that dreck. Did one of our guys write "Grab your loafers, come along if you wanna, and we'll blow that shofar for Rosh Hashanah"? No, we didn't.

Christmas is a Christian holiday - if you're not in the club, then buzz off. Celebrate Yule instead or dance around in druid robes for the solstice. Go light a big log, go wassailing and falalaing until you fall down, eat figgy pudding until you puke, but don't mess with the Messiah.

Kirsch wasn't the only one to take umbrage to Keillor's remarks.

Also in 2009, Slate published an article by Benyamin Cohen noting:

The Jewish community has long had a tense relationship with Christmas ... As a public service announcement, I'm here to let you in on what the rabbis thought about Christmas Eve. Gather round, little ones. This is a scary tale.

The Talmud, with its share of rabbinic repudiations against Jesus, was never a big fan of Christmas. Call it the Grinch. Indeed, the rabbis looked at it as a day of mourning ...

And so the rabbis decreed that the public study hall be closed and that no Torah learning take place on this night [i.e. Christmas eve] ... the leaders were also concerned about the popularly held belief in Judaism that studying the Torah brings spiritual benefit to the world at large. Many didn't want to make this positive contribution on what they considered a "pagan" night.

In a similar vein Daniel J. Solomon writes about his "Hannukah bush" in the Forward: ".. to me, the bush isn't a sign of assimilation, a 'neither Jew nor Gentile' copout, a helping of potato love with bacon and cheese spread. It's a subversive act, claiming and reinterpreting an item historically representative of exclusion, and sometimes violence directed against us." Solomon concludes his piece:

... religious pluralism is now the norm. But there's still a need to create a more inclusive December. Some might call that fighting a "war on Christmas." Why not? There should be a "war on Christmas." We should de-center Christianity as the "reason for the season" in a diverse America.

American Jews have been doing that for a while. Irving Berlin helped transform Christmas into a celebration of snow, not Jesus. Jewish comedians have created "Reuben, the Red-Nosed Reindeer" and "Hanukkah Harry." The Hanukkah bush does something akin to this, both claiming and satirizing the Christmas tree.

My impetus for this post was reading, some time ago, Rabbi Joshua Eli Plaut's book A Kosher Christmas: 'Tis the Season to be Jewish (Rutgers UP, 2012). Early on Plaut affirmatively quotes "Jonathan Sarna, a preeminent historian of American Jewry". According to Plaut, Sarna argued that: "... American Jews have a 'Christmas problem.' Although American civil religion calls upon all Americans to join in the Christmas spirit, on the actual holiday of Christmas the religious overtones of Christianity are apparent throughout American society ..."

Plaut's book, then, is about how Jews have responded to this "Christmas problem". He claims:

Jews in the United States have, in fact, made great progress in resolving December dilemmas. Such an ongoing resolution is evolving out of the creative efforts of American Jewry to coopt the Christmas season by reshaping it to reflect uniquely Jewish ideas, concerns, and practices and by developing a variety of strategies directed toward neutralizing Christmas in America. American Jewry's success in challenging Christmas's vaunted status rests upon forging an identity that is at once separate from the religious and historical dimensions of Christmas, yet convergent with its underlying spirit. Jews in America, particularly during the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, employ a multitude of strategies to face the particular challenges of Christmas and to overcome feelings of exclusion and isolation. Jews have played a crucial role in popularizing Christmas. They have enhanced the national observance of Christmas by composing many of the Christmas songs beloved by all Americans. More secular than religious, these songs, among them Irving Berlin's "White Christmas," Walter Rollins and Steve Fletcher's "Frosty the Snowman," and, most recently, Paul Simon's "Getting Ready for Christmas Day," remind celebrants that Christmas belongs to all Americans who share in the spirit of patriotism, generosity, peace, and goodwill. It is ironic, however, that other Jews in the United States have developed strategies to downplay the significance of Christmas by composing poems and songs—in print, performance, and the media—that satirize and neutralize the religious nature of the holiday ...

Responding to the resurgence of Jewish identity in the United States, partially occasioned by support for the State of lsrael, Jews in America have reinvented the celebration of Hanukkah as an alternative to Christmas. This strategy has made it easier for Jewish parents to influence their children to avoid Christmas in favor of celebrating Hanukkah. [emphasis added]

On this note, the aforementioned Kirsch references "... how American Jews could develop Hanukkah, previously a fairly minor winter holiday, into such a successful counterpart to Christmas. Religiously and ideologically, Hanukkah is just about the worst holiday possible for such a purpose—it is, after all, a story about Jews resisting assimilation by violence." It would be more accurate to say that Hanukkah commemorates a bloody civil war where assimilationists were defeated by traditionalists.

However, even self-described "assimilated Jews" who believe "the story of Hanukkah" has "at its heart ... an eight-night-long celebration of religious fundamentalism and violence" will still celebrate it "Because at the end of the day, it's all about beating Santa." (On Hanukkah as a Zionist holiday see "Reinventing Hanukkah: The Israeli Politics of the Maccabean Holiday".)

Plaut also writes:

With a constitutional bravado emanating from a growing religious segment within the American Jewish community, the Hasidic Chabad-Lubavitch organization ... has waged war against strict separation of religion and state and has won from the courts the right to display menorahs in public venues. Members of the Chabad-Lubavitch group have been supported by Christian religious fundamentalists who want crèches allowed in these same municipally governed spaces. These religious groups, Jewish and Christian alike, have come up against the American Civil Liberties Union and Jewish organizations with a long history of winning court injunctions against any encroachment of religion on state.

Curiously, in his Introduction at least, Plaut fails to mention that while Jews were successful in 1989 in getting Supreme Court approval (6-3) for menorahs to be displayed on public property in County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 492 U.S. 573 (1989) in the very same decision the Court ruled 5-4 that crèches or nativity scenes on public property were generally forbidden. I believe that County of Allegheny is still considered a valid precedent.

To sum up, I have presented a variety of mostly Jewish perspectives acknowledging and even applauding that Jews qua Jews are waging a War on Christmas. This is, apparently, okay for Jews to write about but not okay for folks like Garrison Keillor, however tepidly or tangentially they may address the subject. Perhaps, this is why the people at Fox News, the outlet that, arguably, did the most to popularize the idea of a WoC are too cowardly to say that—even as they are not the only ones waging the fight—Jews are front and center in the War on Christmas.

For an interesting review of A Kosher Christmas see " 'Twas the Day After Christmas ..." by Ethan Schwartz on Jewish Ideas Daily. Among other things Schwartz worries:

There is something disconcerting about [Plaut's] thesis, summoning up classic anti-Semitic images of conspiracy and sabotage. Without a trace of irony, Plaut recounts incidents in which fundamentalist Christian groups complained that "certain Americans, particularly Jews, were trying to take the 'Christ' out of Christmas." He adds that "anti-Semitic comments often ensued." Those Christian fundamentalists might well feel vindicated by Plaut's argument ...

Labels: Chabad, Christmas, conspiracy, culture, Jews, religion, United States

According to Wikipedia, the passage appearing below is Isaac Deutscher's "most famous statement regarding Israel".

A man once jumped from the top floor of a burning house in which many members of his family had already perished. He managed to save his life; but as he was falling he hit a person standing down below and broke that person's legs and arms. The jumping man had no choice; yet to the man with the broken limbs he was the cause of his misfortune. If both behaved rationally, they would not become enemies. The man who escaped from the blazing house, having recovered, would have tried to help and console the other sufferer; and the latter might have realized that he was the victim of circumstances over which neither of them had control. But look what happens when these people behave irrationally. The injured man blames the other for his misery and swears to make him pay for it. The other, afraid of the crippled man’s revenge, insults him, kicks him, and beats him up whenever they meet. The kicked man again swears revenge and is again punched and punished. The bitter enmity, so fortuitous at first, hardens and comes to overshadow the whole existence of both men and to poison their minds.

Anyone involved for very long in the Palestinian solidarity/American liberation movement will most likely have encountered some form of this tale. It is an allusion to Jews fleeing the Holocaust and supposedly escaping to Palestine.

The tale is profoundly dishonest for at least three reasons. First, Zionist designs on Palestine long predate the rise of the Nazis in Germany—the man was planning to jump way before there was any fire. Second, the Zionists knew that Palestine was already occupied—the man knew he would land on and hurt someone else.Third, the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis to save the German economy from an international boycott—the man started the fire himself or, at least, actively kept it from being extinguished.

Labels: holocaust, Jews, Palestine, Wikipedia, Zionism

See also: "Of Sabras & Rappers: Cultural Appropriation & Orientalism in Invincible's 'People Not Places' " on the Deir Yassin Remembered blog

Labels: humor, Jews, music, race, video

... Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America. Some porn stars viewed themselves as frontline fighters in the spiritual battle between Christian America and secular humanism. According to [Luke] Ford*, Jewish X-rated actors often brag about their 'joy in being anarchic, sexual gadflies to the puritanical beast'. Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion. ... Al Goldstein, the publisher of Screw, said (on lukeford.net), 'The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don't believe in authoritarianism.' Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged. ...

It is a case of the traditional revolutionary/radical drive of immigrant Jews in America being channelled into sexual rather than leftist politics. Just as Jews have been disproportionately represented in radical movements over the years, so they are also disproportionately represented in the porn industry.

* Elsewhere in the article Ford is referred to by the author as an "Orthodox Jew and porn gossipmonger".

Source: Nathan Abrams. "Triple-exthnics". Jewish Quarterly (Winter 2004). No. 196, p. 30.

Ron Jeremy as Jesus in the 2012 film Bloody Bloody Bible Camp. Nathan Abrams calls Jeremy "The doyen of the Hebrew studs ... one of America's biggest porn stars." Note: I have not seen the film and cannot confirm this image appears in it.

Labels: Christianity, Hollywood, Jews, media, prostitution, quotations

In 2004, concerning the neoconservatives who agressively shill for Israel and pushed for the illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq on false pretenses, Adbusters magazine asked "Why won't anyone say they are Jewish?. I recently learned of one prominent Jew who did—well, sort of.

In 2005, Murray Friednman's The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge UP) was published. According to Friedman, the book was, in actuality, "an examination of American Jewish conservatism" (p. 10; see also p. 1). Friedman was an historian and founding director of the Feinstein Center for American Jewish History at Temple University.

See also: "The Machiavelian Threefold Game of the Neoconservatives" by Laurent Guyénoton on voltairenet.org

Labels: Jews, Neoconservatives, War, Zionism

Last December, in Puppets & Money I cited a Bloomberg report that said former Israeli central bankster Stanley Fischer (pictured at right) was the favorite to be Barack Obama's nominee for the No. 2 position in the US Federal Reserve System. And it came to pass that on January 10, 2014, Fischer was so nominated.

Also in December, Grant Smith published an exposé on Fischer identifying him as an ardent Israel-firster, the co-author, along with AIPAC, "of harmful U.S. economic policies on behalf of Israel". Below is an excerpt from Smith's "AIPAC's Fed Candidate Stanley Fischer on a Warpath Against Iran".

As Bank of Israel governor, Stanley Fischer played a central role in coordinating the implementation of AIPAC-generated sanctions against Iran – ostensibly over its nuclear program. Stuart Levey, the head of the U.S. Treasury Department's division for "Terrorism and Financial Intelligence," an office created after heavy AIPAC lobbying, met often with Fischer in Israel alongside the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and chiefs of both the Mossad and Shin Bet to explore how to "supplement" UN sanctions and end-run Russian and Chinese opposition. The Levey-Fischer strategy was "to work outside the context of the Security Council to engage the private sector and let it know about the risks of doing business with Tehran" particularly against European banks that had only partially drawn back their business dealings with Iran. In 2010, Israel dispatched Fischer to meet with Chinese and Russian "counterparts" in order to financially isolate Iran.

See also: "Should dual citizen of US/Israel be vice chair of our Federal Reserve Bank?" on Mondoweiss

Labels: banking, Iran, Israel, Israel Lobby, Jews

Last October, the Jewish Daily Forward reported: "[Janet] Yellen, whose nomination to head America's central bank was reported Tuesday, will follow her immediate predecessor Ben Bernanke who was Jewish, and Bernanke's immediate predecessor, Alan Greenspan, who was Jewish, too. There have been two other Jewish fed chairs in the past century. In fact, the other frontrunner for the position, Lawrence Summers, was Jewish too." This month Bloomberg reported: "Former Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer is President Barack Obama's leading candidate to become vice chairman of the Federal Reserve ..."

In light of these developments, Tablet magazine wistfully asked: "Janet Yellen Is Poised To Be the Third Jewish Fed Chair in a Row. Where Are the Anti-Semites?"  Author Weiss observes: "despite this historic Jewish run, anti-Semitic conspiracies about Jewish control of the world banking system seem, if anything, less common than they once were—all the more surprising because the degree of influence American central bankers have in the global financial system today surpasses anything the Rothschild tycoons were able to maintain at the height of their influence."

While contemplating the curious Jewish dominance of the US Federal Reserve Bank, I was reminded of these words attributed to Baron Nathaniel Mayer Rothschild: "I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply".

See also:

• "Diversity" Means No Protestant Christians on US Supreme Court
• Jews Could Decide Dems Presidential Nominee
• Jewish Grip on Washington Tightens
• Quotable: Free to Choose a Pro-Israel Candidate
• Waxman, AIPAC on US Elections: No Sweat for Israel

Update: Puppets, Money, & Iran

Labels: banking, government, Jews, money, quotations, Rothschild, United States

For if the Vikings were the pioneers, the princes of Europe, or some of them, were the middlemen in the new slave-trade. They licensed it and they profited by it, though they left the direct traffic in it to the Jews, who could move most easily across the frontiers of the two societies. We have plenty of evidence of this trade and its routes ... Liutprand of Cremona, the ambassador of the West who, in the tenth century, stood agog before the kaleidoscope pageantry of the Byzantine court, tells us that it was the merchants of Verdun who, for the immense profit of the trade, made boys into eunuchs and sold them through Moorish Spain to the rich Moslem world ... The trade has left its mark in the languages of both Christendom and Islam. Sclavi, 'Slavs', has formed, in every European language, the word for slaves; and the same word, Sakaliba, has provided the Arabic word for eunuchs.

Source: Hugh Trevor-Roper. The Rise of Christian Europe. (Harcourt, Brace & World, 1965) p. 92.

Labels: history, Islam, Jews, slavery, White folks

Back in the early '90s Ofra Haza's Desert Wind was one of my favorite albums. Here's a track from it:

Labels: Jews, music, video

... prior to modern times Jews had seen their sufferings as imposed by a righteous god in response to their own failings. Now it became the perverse Gentiles who were oppressing wholly innocent Jews - and those Other Nations were no longer seen as mere tools of God.

Such modern ideologies as socialism, (both Marxist and anarchist), Zionism, and various forms of the psychiatric worldview (Freudian psychoanalysis and related schools) all emphasize the tainted or sick qualities of Gentile existence, be it in exploitative capitalism, aggressive nationalism, or repressive Victorian prudery. Jewish frustration, anxiety, and rage at being considered inferior, and in some partial and tormented sense agreeing with that evaluation, found an alluring outlet in these ideologies - and a hope for eventual redemption.

Obviously, these ideologies cannot be described as simply or explicitly Jewish condemnations of the Gentile world; non-Jews in great numbers were also attracted to them. ... But by the end of the nineteenth century Jews were attracted to socialism and, after 1917, communism in significantly greater proportions than were non-Jews. It is instructive that it was Jewish intellectuals, Marx and Freud are the most obvious examples, who became the most brilliant and preeminent exponents of these modern theories.

... Study of the sufferings of Jews [i.e. Leidensgeschichte - "suffering-history, or the tendency to write Jewish history largely in terms of the suffering endured by the Jews at the hands of Gentiles"] is now advocated mostly as a way of preventing suffering in the future, largely by exposing the sinful or corrupt nature of Gentile society and its responsibility for Jewish suffering and almost never as a means by which Jews could become aware of their own sins, except insofar as an error in judgment, a naive misperception of Gentile malevolence, is considered a sin. Anything else, again, would be blaming the victim.

Source: Albert S. Lindemann. Esau's Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews. (Cambridge UP, 1997) pp. 14-15.

See also: Esau's Tears reviewed by Kevin MacDonald

Labels: history, Jews, quotations

In "The Magic Jew in the Village" I wrote about how author David J. Smith apparently cooked-the-books to ensure there would be at least one Jew in If The World Were A Village. Recently, I watched the 1970 film Patton and a similar occurrence caught my eye. At about 36:53 into the film General George S. Patton, played by George C. Scott, is shown visiting an American military cemetery in North Africa. As the camera pans right, Scott walks left and pauses just behind a Star of David grave marker. In the entire cemetery scene I counted three Stars of David and sixteen crosses. That would indicate that 15.8% of the graves belonged to Jewish soldiers. How plausible is such a percentage?

Well, Patton led US troops in 1942 and 1943. So, the closest US census data is from 1940. In 1940, the low estimate for the US Jewish population was 4,770,000 and the overall US population was 134,146,298. Thus, the low estimate for the percentage of the US population that was Jewish in 1940 was 3.6%. According to the Jewish Virtual Library, 550,000 Jews "served in every branch of the armed forces of the United States" during World War II and "11,000 Jews were killed, 7,000 in combat." According to a 2010 report prepared by the Congressional Research Service, "American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics," 16,112,566 US military personnel served in WW II with 405,399 total deaths, including 291,557 battle deaths.

Therefore, Jews comprised 3.4% of US military personnel in WW II and suffered just 2.7% of total deaths and 2.4% of combat deaths. The data indicate then that Jews served in the US military in WW II in numbers roughly proportionate to their share of the US population but they died in disproportionately lower numbers compared to non-Jews. Thus, we conclude that there are good grounds for believing there are magic—i.e. contrived, fabricated—Jews in that cemetery scene in Patton. This conclusion is further bolstered when we look at actual photos from the only American military cemetery in North Africa (see images below) where you see nothing like 15.8% of the graves being marked with Stars of David. What else would you expect from Hollywood?

Labels: Hollywood, Jews, military, statistics, War

Rabbi Marvin Hier, Allen Falk, and Mikey Weinstein (he of the misnamed Military Religious Freedom Foundation) are all screeching about the photo above--Heads must roll! No, they're not howling because the Marine scout snipers pictured in 2010 in Afghanistan were part of the +10-year-long US occupation of that country. No, they're not incensed over the death toll of Afghan civilians since the US invaded in 2001 or the Marines who apparently desecrated Taliban corpses. No, the real outrage is that these Marines posed with an "SS" flag. Oy, the humanity! These Marines are not Jewish-compliant and the Corps must be whipped into shape.

When I first read about this episode, to their credit, the Corps was saying that "disciplinary action was not warranted" against the Marines in the photo. Today, however, the Jewish onslaught seems to be bearing fruit and the Marine Corps Times reports that Commandant Jim Amos is "sorry" and "has ordered an investigation". Abe Foxman and the ADL are "pleased".

Don't hold your breath waiting for Hier, Falk, Weinstein, Foxman and their minions to condemn the band KISS and its Jewish Israeli front man Gene Simmons for their use of the "SS" symbol (see below). Likewise, don't look for ejaculations of outrage over the symbol that appears on the blade near the hilt of US Navy swords (photo at bottom; click to enlarge). The symbol bears a disturbing resemblance to a well-known hate symbol appearing on the flag and military equipment of the violent racist and apartheid state, Israel.

Labels: Abraham Foxman, Afghanistan, Jews, military

Yesterday, the US Senate confirmed Barack Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court. The Voice of America's story on the confirmation includes this paragraph:

Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland said, "And when Elena Kagan is confirmed, she will, for the first time in America's history, be the third woman out of nine on the Supreme Court of the United States. I think that is going to give us more common sense justice in this nation, and certainly one that reflects the diversity of our country."

What Cardin neglected to mention is that there are now no Protestant Christian Justices on the Court and when Kagan is sworn-in tomorrow there will be six Roman Catholics and three Jews on the Court. How is that for "diversity"? As ABC News reported last May, "At least one Protestant justice has served at all times since the Supreme Court was established in 1789." But not any more.

Although about 50% of Americans identify as Protestant Christians, they will not be represented on the US Supreme Court. Roman Catholics, who comprise about 25% of the US population, will be over-represented by a factor of 2.7, while Jews, who comprise about 1.2% of the US population, will be overrepresented by a factor of 27.8. (All percentages in this paragraph are from the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey, which is a data source for the Census Bureau's Statistical Abstract of the United States).

In light of the apparent historical over-representation of Protestants on the Court, perhaps, a fair case could be made that they should be now under-represented for a while. However, there's a big difference between having half of the country's population under-represented and not having it represented at all. If one upholds the principle of representative government then you can't be indifferent to a complete lack of representation for the largest population segment.

The fields of critical race, class, and gender theory all tell us that personal identity and cultural background matter in influencing how we view the world and function in institutional settings. Diversity was supposed to help address and counteract biases created by minority exclusion and under-representation but somewhere along the way it seems that it was decided that representing majorities or pluralities didn't matter so much.

In April, before Kagan was nominated retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, an Episcopalian, said "I think that religion should not be the basis for an appointment, but if that were the case, one would expect somewhere in the nine to see a Protestant or two." But that expectation has been dashed. Why is that? Could it have something to do with the fact that Barack Obama was hailed in some quarters as the "first Jewish president"? What about the fact that Jews, such as Ben Cardin quoted above, are over-represented in the US Senate by a factor of at least 11?

See also:

• "Elena Kagan and the Supreme Court: A Barnyard Smell in Chicago, Harvard and Washington" by James Petras
• "Elena Kagan: Jewish Ethnic Networking Eases the Path of a Liberal/Leftist to the Supreme Court" by Kevin MacDonald
• "Ambition and orthodoxy (Kagan's hero is also Dershowitz's)" by Philip Weiss

Labels: Christianity, diversity, identity, Jews, law, Obama, Supreme Court, United States