Guttersnipe Antisemitism Masquerading as Political Commentary

Candace Owens

Max Blumenthal

Nick Fuentes

Tucker Carlson to be uploaded soon.

Why do mainstream/legacy media outlets ignore the content of their remarks, what they portend in a socio-political sense as hate speech?

^

UPDATE

"Now that Trump has allied with Israel in a war for Iranian regime change, there’s no made-up story wild enough for the anti-neocon gang to pretend that either Trump is “with them” or neocons are in despair. They feel boxed out, and they’re enraged.

Tucker Carlson has called Operation Epic Fury “absolutely disgusting and evil.” Marjorie Taylor Greene responded by saying that the Trump administration was packed with a “bunch of sick f--king liars.” Nick Fuentes instructed his simian audience to vote for Democrats in the midterms. Blackwater founder Erik Prince said, “I don’t see how this is in keeping with the president’s MAGA commitment.” And on and on it goes...they’re lost in their own fantasy roleplay game where motives are disguised or inverted, double agents are showing their faces, and state-backed cabals wield wizardly powers of influence—you know, it’s the Jews’ fault. Megyn Kelly simply confessed, “This feels very much to me like it is clearly Israel’s war.”...Vance, after all, once assured a groyper at a live event that “Israel doesn’t control this president.” And in downplaying the rise of the right-wing Jew-haters he was courting, he claimed that the whole issue of anti-Semitism on the right was made up by pro-Israel conservatives to distract Americans from discussing the supposedly problematic U.S.-Israel relationship.

Three days ago, that relationship showed the world the most successful single day of warfighting in history...the real question is how Vance tries to explain to the hate-peddling right his own involvement in the most ambitious U.S.-Israel military effort we’ve ever seen. Another is how he tries to justify his association with the hate-peddlers to the rest of us. This is a dilemma of his own making. Vance thought he could court the right’s Tucker wing without losing conservatives. And he thought he could distance himself sufficiently from Trump’s pro-Israel stance to keep the Tucker wing happy. 

The war in Iran could turn in any number of directions. At the moment, it looks far more promising than Vance’s battle for the future of the right.

Abe Greenwald,  the executive editor of COMMENTARY.

Marking the Centenary of Berlin's Scheunenviertel Pogrom

 It was, as claimed, the first pogrom in Berlin.

It took place in the Scheunenviertel (Barn) quarter in the first week of November 1923. It was termed the "Ostjudenpogrom". The area is today, less than one-half square mile, is now Berlin's Mitte district, not far from the historic city center, north of the city wall between Hackescher Markt and today's Rosa-Luxemburg-Platz.

Earlier in 1923:

the Berlin police chief Wilhelm Richter ordered a large-scale raid against the Jewish population in the Scheunenviertel, during which around 300 Jewish men [eventually to reach some 1500], women and children were picked up by the police and interned in a “Jewish camp” near Zossen, a chilling precursor to what would happen over the next 20 years.

That referred to

popular violence against Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe during the Weimar Republic, their incarceration in camps in Pomerania and Bavaria during the early 1920s

Specifically,  the so-called Bavarian “Ostjuden Deportation” of October 1923 when Gustav Ritter von Kahr was appointed by Bavarian President Eugen von Knilling (BVP) as state commissioner general (Generalstaatskommissar) with dictatorial powers under Article 64 of the Bamberg (Bavarian) Constitution. Kahr refused to ban the Nazi Party newspaper Völkischer Beobachter, on 29 September he suspended the enforcement in Bavaria of the Law for the Protection of the Republic and in mid-October, Kahr had several hundred Jewish families who had immigrated from Eastern Europe decades earlier expelled from Bavaria (See: "The Expulsion of Jews with Polish Citizenship from Bavaria in 1923, Józef Adelson, POLIN, 2008). 

As reported in the JTA on Ocotober 29, 

Two hundred Jewish families have already been expelled from Bavaria and as many are awaiting deportation... including Jews who, while not subjects of the Bavarian State, are citizens of the Reich...A number of East-European Jews from Austria are also among the evicted. The houses owned by the deportees have been requisitioned for the alleged purpose of housing the refugees from the Ruhr district...The Voelkishe Beabachter, organ of Adolph Hitler, disregarding the Jews’ plea, continues the publication of the names of Jews not yet expelled, demanding the confiscation of their property as well as of those already deported.

Moreover, "an order has been issued by Dictator von Kahr to the Jews expelled from Bavaria, that their property must not be removed from the country. Jewish business men and manufacturers have received orders from the police authorities that the machinery and equipment of their factories as well as their products must remain in Bavaria, and their factories must be conducted in their absence by managers appointed for the purpose." 

The event went international at the end of November when

Foreign Minister Roman Dmowski of Poland has addressed a new note to Bavaria protesting the expulsions from Bavaria of Jews who are Polish citizens...the deportations are contrary to international law as well as the common principles of humanity. In conclusion, M. Dmowski threatens to order the deportation of German citizens on Polish soil if the expulsions of Polish citizens are continued.

Austria and Spain became involved.

To return to the events of the Berlin pogrom:

Jews of Berlin Attacked by Mob of 30,000  November 6, 1923

"...a mob of 30,000 stronge invaded the Jewish sections of the city and carried out the first pogrom in the history of Berlin. Anti-Jewish riots commencing in the afternoon in Grenadierstrasse, and Dragonerstrasse, inhabited largely by East-European Jews, 

Source

spread by the evening to all quarters of the city housing Jewish residents...No Jew was safe on Berlin streets yesterday and it is too early to say that greater security prevails today. Jewish passers by were stopped at every turn, were searched, maltreated, robbed of their possessions and stripped of their clothes, some being left only in their undergarments. Homes of Jews were searched for food and money, owners offering the least resistance being severely beaten.

Shops owned by Jews were plundered of their contents which were hurled through the windows smashed by the hooligans in order to gain entrance. Jewish tenement dwellers were dragged from their beds and driven to the streets in their night clothes.

...That the anti-Jewish riots were premeditated and well-organized is shown by the fact that on a given signal the plundering and mobbing would begin, and at a sign from a specially organized corp the anti-Jewish excesses would end.

...The Tageblatt and the Local Anzeiger remark it is significant that the mob attack was not sporadic, but broke out simultaneously in the Muezastrasse, Gormmanstrasse, Linienstrasse, Grenadierstrasse, Dragonerstrasse. Lilienstrasse, where many residences and practically all shops were systematically plundered, the wares being distributed among the waiting crowd. Especially in the clothing and piece-goods district were the wares seized and cut up to be carried away by the rioters...Herr Kopf, manager of the “Central Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith” received several blows from a black-jack as he was caught in a crowd swarming towards the Boerse and shouting “Death to Jews”.

Reports {as referenced in Dunker, Der Reichsbund judischer Frontsoldaten 1919-1938: Geschichte eines judischen Abwehrvereins, 53; "Der Bund judischer Frontsoldaten vor Gericht," Judische Rundschau, no. 40 (1924)}  noted

While the police had not arrived members of the Reichsbund Judischer Frontsoldaten (Jewish Veteran Association) assembled at the Jewish community centre on the nearby Rosenstrasse. Cadres of members, some of which were armed with pistols and rubber truncheons were formed and began patrolling the area, guarding synagogues and defending local Jews against the looters. On Bulowplatz, the Reichsbund cadres clashed with a group of some hundred rioters. In this situation, the veterans seek support from a passing by police patrol that refuses and leaves the area. In the following melee, a shot rang out fatally wounding a rioter.

The failure of the Munich Beer Hall Putsch in Bavaria did not deter the authorities there from halting the earlier deportations.

A precursor to the atmosphere which allowed Hitler to commence the Holocaust.

^

'You Do to Us What the Nazis Did to You'

One of the central propaganda lines of the pro-Arab Palestine school of misleading misinformation is that the establishment of the state of Israel was made, and ageed to by Europe and America, as a form of an assuaging of their guilt for their responsibility for the Holocaust.

The line continues that the Arabs are being forced to pay for the sins of Europe which is unfair. Europe wants to placate their consciousness over the year 1939-1945, do it somewhere else.

Of course, that ignores 3000 years of Jewish national identity bound up with the Land of Israel - which the Arabs turned into 'Palestine" after conquering it and then occupying it.

But I have now found a pre-war claim on that theme in the Palestine Post's review on January 26, 1939 of Arnold Toynbee's volume Survey of nternational Affairs, 1937 in which he asserts the Mandate of Palestine "pays for Europe's sins".

Nothing new under the sun. Toynbee, of course, is infamous for this observation:

"There remains the case where victims of religious discrimination represent an extinct society which only survives as a fossil. .... by far the most notable is one of the fossil remnants of the Syriac Society, the Jews."

In fact, he continued this line and in 1955, Commentary Magazine published this in a review:

Under title of “The Modern West and the Jews,” A. J. Toynbee devotes a subsection of Volume VIII of the last four books of his Study of History to the fate of Jewry under the Nazis and to subsequent developments in Israel. His remarks therein about Zionism and Israel have, quite rightly, outraged Jews and other people. Mr. Toynbee equates the monstrous crimes perpetrated upon the Jews of Europe by the Germans with what the Israelis did to the Arabs of Palestine, and seems to find the Israelis as much at fault as the Nazis were! 

That year, he had a letter published which read, in part:

I do believe that, in the issue between the Palestinian Arabs and the Zionists, the Palestinian Arabs are in the right and the Zionists in the wrong...But the tragedy, as I see it, goes back far further than the date of the Balfour Declaration. I see earlier stages of it in the conversion of both the Zionists and the Arabs to a Western secular ideology, Nationalism. The fanatical spirit in Nationalism comes, as I see it, from Christianity; and Christian and Muslim fanaticism, as well as Christian and Muslim charity, comes, I believe, from Judaism...

...The tragedy of recent Jewish history is that, instead of learning through suffering, the Jews should have done to others, the Arabs, what had been done to them by others, the Nazis.

Though I was careful to bring out the Zionists’ innocence of the Nazis’ cold-blooded, systematic ‘genocide,’ and the disparity in numbers between the Jewish victims of the Nazis and the Arab victims of the Zionists, I am sure I am right in holding that degrees of sin and tragedy are not determined by the numbers of the souls concerned. Sin and tragedy are done and suffered by each of us individually; they are not, and cannot be, collective. Nor is the tragedy of the Palestinian Arabs’ sufferings at the hands of the Israelis a peculiarly Jewish tragedy; it is a common human tragedy, like the Jews’ own sufferings at the hands of the Nazis...

In 1961, JTA reported:

Arnold J. Toynbee, the British historian, in an address here last night, equated Zionism and anti-Semitism as representing “an identical point of view” and said that anti-Semitism will end and Judaism become “one of the great spiritual possessions of the whole human race” when Jews and non-Jews “abandon” their ethnic or national reservations” about Jews. Jewish leaders immediately took issue with his views charging him with making “distorted statements. “

Dr. Toynbee made-his statements as the principal speaker at the dinner of the 17th annual conference of the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism. Both Zionism and anti-Semitism, he declared, assume “that it is impossible for Jews and non-Jews to grow together into a single community and that, therefore, a physical separation is the only way out. “

“The watchword of anti-Semitism,” Dr. Toynbee continued, “is back to medieval apartheid; the watchword of Zionism is back to the medieval ghetto. All the far-flung ghettos of the world are to be gathered into one patch of soil in Palestine, to create a single, consolidated ghetto.”

Asserting that Zionism “was born of a pessimism” about the prospects of Jewish emancipation, Dr. Toynbee held that “if the Jewish community in the West were to continue to be an ethnic–even if only a partly ethnic and partly religious–community, co-existing with the present State of Israel, it could hardly avoid falling, sooner or later, into the position of being a political dependency of Israel."

He manages to squeeze in a parallel to apartheid as well.

^

Unmasked Screening

And my week ended off with attending the screening of Unmasked: Judeophobia.

And listening to the panel discussion led by director Gloria Greenfield with Yisrael Newman, Manfred Gerstenfeld, Robert Wistrich, Andrea Levin, Daniel Diker and Ben-Dror Yemini:-

The [panelists were quite critical of the Israel governments (most of its members over the years lacking any Western-style advanced education and background needed in the socio-political fields), the academia (too ignoring of antisemtism), the media (downplaying or ignoring it) and more as regards not only the traditional antisemtism but especially that emanating from the liberal/progressive circles as well as the Islamic variety.  Noted, too, was the 'support' antisemites abroad obtained from within Israeli society with Haaretz and Israeli film makers taking the most hits.


^

A Story on Settlement, Roadblocks - But Where?

Not Israel.

From CHARLESTON, W.Va.

The story:-

A massive settlement in the wake of the mortgage meltdown could impact thousands of people in West Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio. The Obama administration announced a $26 billion settlement Thursday with five of the country's biggest home lenders. They were accused of foreclosing homes based on something called robo-signing. That means they'd speed up taking the homes without proper paperwork.

The banks were also putting up too many roadblocks, keeping people from modifying their loans and putting them further behind on their payments. The settlement is with: J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America/Countrywide, Wells Fargo, Citibank and GMAC/Ally.

The Washington Post has a 'better' headline:-

Settlement launches foreclosure reckoning

At least now there'll be a situation wherby there "begins a long-promised reckoning" - which I understand as the recognition of Jewish rights - historic, religious, cultural and legal - to our Land of Israel as the Jeiwsh national home and Jewish nationalism. That's the reckoning promised, the truth.

And that "foreclosure"? We'll be foreclosing on Judeaphobia, Arab propaganda, radical progressive anti-Zionism and all their activites, from BDS to outright antisemitism.



^

Now, This Is A True Jewish College Student

Watch this video of Sarah Grunfeld's story.

Admire her courage.

^

Isn't This Just...Grand?

First, there was Palestine Media Watch

Mufti denies applying Hadith about Muslims killing Jews to today's conflict

PMW report shows that Mufti did apply call to kill Jews to current conflict  ||  Following PMW report, PM Netanyahu calls for criminal investigation of PA Mufti

The PA Mufti Muhammad Hussein repeatedly denied yesterday that he intended to teach Palestinians that their destiny is to kill Jews when he spoke at a Fatah celebration that was broadcast on PA TV earlier this month. His denial follows Palestinian Media Watch's exposure of the PA Mufti's speech in which he cited the Islamic tradition attributed to Muhammad, saying:

"The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jew will hide behind stones or trees. Then the stones or trees will call: 'Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."

However, the Mufti explained to AP, Reuters and Israeli radio and TV that he simply quoted Islamic tradition and therefore he is not responsible for its content. When interviewed on Israeli radio Reshet Bet, the PA Mufti claimed:

"We are not calling to kill Jews and we did not call to kill Jews, we never said 'kill Jews.' The Hadith says [it]. I am not responsible for the Hadith. The Hadith is in the book. The Hadith is a noble Hadith, it is not my Hadith."
[Reshet Bet (Israeli radio), Jan. 22, 2012]

The PA Minister of Religious Affairs, Mahmoud Al-Habbash, also defended the Mufti, saying on the same radio program:
"This is not incitement to kill Jews. We cannot change the historical religious writings and we don't want to change them. However, we are talking now about the reality. The reality is that we want to achieve a just peace."

PMW rejects PA Mufti's and Minister of Religion's claims:

The statements of the two highest religious authorities in the Palestinian Authority are misrepresentations of what the Mufti said. In fact, the words he chose to provide a context for the Hadith show that he quoted this Hadith that anticipates Muslims killing Jews, to make it relevant for the current Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

The Mufti introduced the Hadith by referring to the "47 years" of Fatah's and the Palestinian "revolution," thus placing the Hadith in today's context. He then added that this is a "reliable Hadith" from the reliable collections and part of accepted Islamic law and belief. After citing the Hadith, the Mufti claimed that Israelis are planting the "Gharqad tree surrounding the [Israeli] settlements and colonies," thus suggesting that Israel is preparing for when the Muslims fulfill this Hadith and come to kill them. According to the Islamic tradition the Gharqad tree will be the only tree that will not call out to Muslims to kill the Jews hiding behind them. By saying Israelis are already planting Gharqad trees around their cities, the Mufti was explicitly relating the Hadith about the killing of Jews to the current time. He was not merely citing "historical religious writings," as claimed...none of the media quoted the context in which the Mufti cited the Hadith, which shows his denial to be a misrepresentation and that he did relate it to today's conflict.

In addition, the Mufti claimed to MENA [Middle East News Agency] that "possibly some sentences or phrases were cut from his speech, which were interpreted incorrectly." PMW affirms that we have the entire 5-minute speech as was broadcast on PA TV and that this is the authentic context.

The following is the Mufti's words at the Fatah event that show the context in which he cited the Hadith, followed by excerpts from AP and Reuters' reports:

Moderator at Fatah ceremony:
"Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs (i.e., Jews) is a war of religion and faith. Long Live Fatah! [I invite you,] our honorable Sheikh."

PA Mufti Muhammad Hussein comes to the podium and says:
"47 years ago the [Fatah] revolution started. Which revolution? The modern revolution of the Palestinian people's history. In fact, Palestine in its entirety is a revolution, since [Caliph] Umar came [to conquer Jerusalem, 637 CE], and continuing today, and until the End of Days. The reliable Hadith (tradition attributed to Muhammad), [found] in the two reliable collections, Bukhari and Muslim, says:
"The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews.
The Jew will hide behind stones or trees.
Then the stones or trees will call:
'Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'
Except the Gharqad tree [which will keep silent]."
Therefore it is no wonder that you see Gharqad [trees] surrounding the [Israeli] settlements and colonies. This is Palestine, when we talk about it, from the beginning of the Jihad, with the continuation of the Jihad, with the struggle, and with the way of the Martyrs."

and now, MEMRI

MEMRI January 9, 2012 Clip No. 3275

PA Mufti of Jerusalem Muhammad Hussein: The Muslims Will Kill the Jews
before Judgment Day

Following are excerpts from a statement by PA Mufti of Jerusalem Sheik
Muhammad Hussein, which aired on Palestinian Authority TV, on January 9,
2012:

Announcer: [I invite] the honorable sheik, Sheik Muhammad Hussein, the Mufti
of Jerusalem and the Islamic lands. His words are necessary because our war
with the descendents of apes and pigs is a religious war of faith.

Long live Fatah.

Go ahead, sheik.

[…]

Muhammad Hussein: In both collections of the hadith, Al-Bukhari and Muslim
say to us: "Judgment Day will not come before you fight the Jews, and the
Jews will hide behind a stone or a tree, and the stone or the tree will say:
Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him,
with the exception of the gharqad tree" – and this is why it is not uncommon
to see gharqad trees around the settlements and so on.

[…]

[MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with
proper attribution.]

And check previous posts:
here; and here; and also here, among many.
^

Can You Follow Goldberg's "Logic"?

Jeffrey Goldberg wants to know:-

...is "Israel-firster" antisemitic?

And here's his logic:-

Its origins are certainly antisemitic, and the idea that Jews are incapable of being loyal to the country of their citizenship and are only loyal to world Jewry, or the Jewish state, is an age-old antisemitic trope. This doesn't mean that those who use it are antisemitic.

It doesn't?

Well, he continues:

They just might be ignorant, like J Street's Jeremy Ben-Ami, who to my surprise buys into the trope. Obviously, "Israel-firster" is a term deployed by opponents of Israel...

Did you follow that?

(k/t=BW)

Here's background:

“The language is corrosive and unacceptable,” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. He added that the blog posts and tweets from CAP staffers “are the responsibility of the adults who run the place, not only the kids who play.”

Cooper conveyed his concerns about CAP during a private White House meeting last week with Obama’s newly hired Jewish community liaison.

The White House official, Jarrod Bernstein, told Cooper that the situation at CAP was “troubling,” adding “that is not this administration.”

A White House spokesman, Matt Lehrich, declined to comment on CAP. He said Obama “has repeatedly reiterated America’s unshakable commitment to Israel’s security and stood up against attempts to single out Israel in international forums.” He added that the administration has “ratcheted up unprecedented pressure on Iran.”

Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said some of the statements from CAP staffers “are anti-Semitic and borderline anti-Semitic.”

^

'Yes, Virginia, There Is A Hitler...'

Found here:

(k/t=CopyRanter)

^

And As Long As We're Discussing Anti-semitism...

From an exchange of letters in the New York Review of Books:-

...I stand by my reading. Although I am of course willing to entertain Professor Strawson’s implication that generations of British authors have been the victims of a dire “prejudice” on the part of Jewish readers such as myself, I am emboldened to suggest that the burden of sensitivity lies on the other side. It is true that Hollinghurst’s work contains a “huge cast of characters”; indeed very few of them have recognizably Jewish surnames (even fewer than I’d thought, if Professor Strawson is right). For that very reason, I wished that the arriviste duchess in The Line of Beauty (who, when we first meet her, is the object of another character’s mimicry—a “thoughtless social dynamo” who is the heiress to a “vinegar fortune”) hadn’t been a Feingold; that the money behind the morally bankrupt Thatcherite politician at the center of that same book hadn’t been the Rothschild-like Kessler heiress (she seems “distantly foreign” to the protagonist); that the pushy intruder into the Valances’ marmoreally aristocratic existence hadn’t been Jerry Goldblatt. I cannot accept Professor Strawson’s startling claim that an author’s presentation of his characters—especially in a work of biting social and political satire such as The Line of Beauty—does not ask its readers to “conclude anything.”

To be sure, “principles of realism” must guide a novelist’s pen, but after rereading all of Hollinghurst’s work in preparation for my review, I was (as I wrote) dismayed to find what struck me as an unrealistic lopsidedness: the only recognizably Jewish Englishmen I encountered in it were either vulgar, filthy rich, or vaguely foreign—those age-old clichés of the Jew in British literature. (With one exception: one learns that Simon, the long-dead lover of the protagonist in The Spell, had a very nice bum.) My regret, in any event, was not a weary pose, it was genuine, and I framed my observation as an aside precisely because I didn’t want it to dominate my otherwise admiring and, I think, nuanced assessment of this worthy writer. You would think from Professor Strawson’s indignant references to insults and slurs and apologies that I had made an ad hominem attack on Alan Hollinghurst. I did not. I am a critic, and what I did was to offer a critical observation about a (small) aspect of the author’s oeuvre. My readers may judge the validity of this interpretation for themselves...

That exchange was about

“an old British literary habit”—that habit being the use of Jews as exotics and symbols of un-Britishness.

^

The Antisemitism at Occupy Wall Street

Here:



Today the Emergency Committee for Israel released a new ad challenging leading Democrats to speak out against the Occupy Wall Street protests, which have featured a disturbing level of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric.

“It’s not surprising that elements of the modern left are anti-Semitic," said ECI chairman William Kristol. "It is surprising that respectable liberals have praised the protesters while ignoring the anti-Semitism. Liberals have pretended to see nothing hateful and hear nothing hateful, and therefore have said nothing to rebuke their allies. Will they now speak up?”

^

Anti-semitism at Wall Street Occupation?

Well, it didn't take long for antisemitism to appear, did it?

And the Jews prayed Kol Nidre so...so...religiously, too.

(k/t=BW)

^

Free Speech Should Not Be Hate Speech

Despite the opinion of many of those who commented on this NYTimes report, in France, cradle of modern democracy, they know to differentiate between free and unlimited and unrestricted speech and speech which is hateful and intending to cause eventual crimes and stems from hostility which has corrupted one's moral fibre -

Court Convicts Galliano in Anti-Semitism 

John Galliano, the British fashion designer whose career imploded after a videotaped anti-Semitic rant, was found guilty and given a suspended fine of 6,000 euros on Thursday by a French tribunal in connection with two separate bar clashes in Paris with people who accused him of hate crimes.

...The tribunal issued a fine and then suspended it, Mr. Galliano, who was fired six months ago as the creative director of the fashion house Dior, had told the French court that he remembered nothing about the incidents and at the time was debilitated by job stress and addiction to Valium and alcohol. He condemned racism and anti-Semitism and apologized to the victims...the prosecutor had accused him of indulging in an ugly variety of “racism and anti-Semitism of the parking lot and the supermarket.”

Mr. Galliano’s apology and humility, expressed during his trial in a low voice...resonated with the judges, who convicted him of the hate crime but reduced his sentence...His lawyer, Aurélien Hamelle, told reporters that the court’s ruling was a strong gesture and a “wise judgment” and that he did not plan to appeal...

Maybe There Was a Hole in the BBC's Bucket?

The BBC is so, so...idiotic and anti-Jewish from this report (k/t=EOZ):

The remains of 17 bodies found at the bottom of a medieval well in England could have been victims of persecution, new evidence has suggested.  The most likely explanation is that those down the well were Jewish and were probably murdered or forced to commit suicide, according to scientists who used a combination of DNA analysis, carbon dating and bone chemical studies in their investigation.  The skeletons date back to the 12th or 13th Centuries at a time when Jewish people were facing persecution throughout Europe...

Does the BBC think it natural that 17 people are at the bottom of a well?

Was there an undiscovered hole in the bucket?

Is there a hole in the brain processes of the brains of BBC editors?

Consider this:

Eleven of the 17 skeletons were those of children aged between two and 15. The remaining six were adult men and women. Pictures taken at the time of excavation suggested the bodies were thrown down the well together, head first. A close examination of the adult bones showed fractures caused by the impact of hitting the bottom of the well. But the same damage was not seen on the children's bones, suggesting they were thrown in after the adults who cushioned the fall of their bodies.

Or is it plain bias and antis....?

^

Lars Von Trier, Albert Speer, Aesthetism and Talent

In reconsidering my post on the stupid, provocative Nazi remarks of the Dannish director, Lars Von Trier, which were described as

his fascination with the Nazi aesthetic

(the question he responded to was:

asked by a journalist to comment on the film’s “Gothic aspect,” his “interest in the Nazi aesthetic” and on his German roots...)

And yes, he has had a painful personal biography:

He did not discover until he was 33 that his non-religious Jewish father was not his biological father, who was in fact an artistic German – a revelation he learnt from his mother on her death bed. In a 2005 interview with signandsight.com, he revealed that his mother slept with the man because her husband had such ordinary genes. “If I'd known that my mother had this plan, I would have become something else,” he said. “I would have shown her. The slut!”

and Swedish actor Stellan Skarsgard thinks there was an overreaction:

Everybody knows he is not a Nazi so what are they punishing him for? Lying, saying he was a Nazi? Joking? Or what is it? It's a storm in a tea cup.

And someone else thinks

 it was a lousy attempt at humour that he tried to wriggle out of inelegantly

who proceeds to 'explain':

Given that the Nazi comment was a clumsy way of alluding to Germanic ancestry, and the “Israel is a pain in the ass” remark is a ham-fisted attempt of signalling an objection (that many others share) to a country’s foreign policy, then the bone of contention is Von Trier saying that he could sympathise with Hitler a bit.  But why wouldn’t we want him to? If we can’t make sense out of atrocious situations such as World War II then we’re highly unlikely to learn anything from them. In that regard there’s few people in the modern age better placed to shine a light on the scum-ridden underbelly of such proceedings than film-makers, drawing our attention to truths that we ought to know, even when we don’t immediately realise it ourselves.

But, of course, his "Israel is a pain in the ass" would seem to indicate a less-than-artisitic character, whether his opinion is shared or not. 

His attempt to worm his way out was almost 'heroic':

"I lived most of my life as a Jew. I wore a skullcap when I had to and laid stones on tombstones in cemeteries. My mother wasn't Jewish, but my father, or the man I thought was my father, was. But then I found out that my father wasn't my father and my real father was German."  He added, "And instead of saying I was actually German at the news conference on Wednesday, in my characteristic haste and because I couldn't stand the man who turned out to be my biological father, despite my mother's telling me he was charming, I said with a kind of typical Danish humor that most people don't understand that I was a Nazi. But I'm not."

Von Trier continued, "It was a stupid joke. But that's the kind of humor I use when I talk to my friends, who know me and know I'm not a Nazi. I apologize profoundly for offending people. It was not my intention. I've also offended Germans, when instead of saying 'German' I used the word 'Nazi,' as though every German is a Nazi."

However, we need acknowledge that his fascination lies somewhere very non-artistic:

I found out that I was really a Nazi which also gave me some pleasure.

Pleasure?

Lars, there are some things even an artistic gentleman cannot be permitted to joke about (and his porn remark was simple vulgar).  And lets not forget, the moderator attempted to save him, to stop his verbal vomit and call on another questioner but Lars continued because he really is a pervert.  His politics are really more important than his art.  Instead of having his art express his ideas, his ideas fulfill themselves in his art.

Yet, for him to say

I just want to say, about the art, I’m very much for Speer. Speer I liked, Albert Speer I liked. He wasn’t also maybe one of God’s best children, but he had some talent that it was possible for him to us

That he could promote an idea that Albert Speer was one of God's best children for his talent is what is really perverts.  For him to enable his mind to accept one 'good' value that negates an 'evil' value is what is wrong becuase there is no relatavism.  For sure no moral relativism and that is the curse of post-modernism which influences the hatred not only of Jews but Zionism as well.

Just like he can think Israel is a pain in the ass, so he is for me.

Richard Brody alternatively slams and praises while actually pinpointing a major problem:

Clearly, von Trier was actually trying to say something substantial and very personal...[his frivolity] should not be troubling to anyone that he claims to understand Hitler; it’s the job of artists to attempt to understand and enter into imaginative sympathy even with monsters...as for his taste for Speer, well, there are serious people who consider Leni Riefenstahl a major artist, too.

and finally gets to the issue:

What is offensive about von Trier’s remarks is his setting of Jews and Nazis in a binary opposition, as if they were two sides to an argument...and about disliking Jews for disliking Israel (I suppose he meant that he dislikes the policies of Israel). He approaches such traditional anti-Semitic tropes as if they were utterly normal, familiar, and funny, and he does so in a way that would be more or less unthinkable regarding other ethnic groups.

When von Trier says he’s “not Mel Gibson,” I suppose he means that he’s not in any way anti-Semitic, and there’s no reason to disbelieve him. The problem is that he treated anti-Semitism, the anti-Semitism of others, lightly. He spoke with grotesque insensitivity; he acted like a jerk.

Not a jerk but as someone who has osmossed what has become, in elitist cricles, normative subliminated anti-semitism. That's the danger.

Danger?

Worse. The empathy he provides as an entertainment icon who espouses an artistic approach to life, his joking was unforgivable.

The clip is here.

^

Antisemites Have Something Else To Get Concerned About

JINSA points out that we should not ignore the fact that Obama, in his speech, pledged assistance to Egypt even before knowing what will transpire there. This is the most dangerous element of Obama's talk.

Here:-

...to the extent that the United States is willing to help Egypt without knowing the extent of the Muslim Brotherhood's reach, we may be offering billions of dollars in aid to a government that will, by its nature, be at odds with us. To the extent that the United States has provided military assistance to Libya's "rebels" without knowing who they are (beyond knowing that some of them at least have been al Qaeda affiliated), we may be bombing a country on behalf of people who are, by nature, at odds with us. To the extent that the United States is offering a terrorist-controlled Hamas-Fatah partnership a country that makes our ally Israel indefensible, we may be creating a country that is, by nature, at odds with us.

We thought we could buy Pakistan into our orbit, but we may simply have provided the funds to build nuclear weapons that may fall into hands distinctly at odds with us.

It is a reckless approach to the Middle East to be throwing bombs, money and political support at countries that may end up well-armed and hostile to America's long-term interests while making life harder for our one solid, democratic friend - Israel.

So, all the antisemities, anti-zionists and all the other antis who visit here and complain about the US throwing money 'away' on Israel, well, now you have someone else to hate for purely financial reasons which have nothing to do with race, religion or culture.  Right?

^

So, Is Von Trier A Nazi? Do You Believe Him?

Announced:

The Festival de Cannes was disturbed about the statements made by Lars von Trier in his press conference this morning in Cannes. Therefore the Festival asked him to provide an explanation for his comments.


The director states that he let himself be egged on by a provocation. He presents his apology.

The direction of the Festival acknowledges this and is passing on Lars von Trier’s apology. The Festival is adamant that it would never allow the event to become the forum for such pronouncements on such subjects.

And here’s von Trier’s apology:

”If I have hurt someone this morning by the words I said at the press conference, I sincerely apologize.

I am not antisemitic or racially prejudiced in any way, nor am I a nazi.” Lars von Trier

There's always that "if", as if he hopes no one was offended, or worse, shouldn't have but if so, here's an apology.

^

From A Hat To Antisemitism

A hat worn at the Royal Wedding by Princess Beatrice seems not to sit too comfortably with me.

No, not because it loooked silly and too outlandish, as many commented.

It is because the creature some were reminded of is similar to one who is antisemitic, tearing down synagogues. It is "evil and hateful".

The creature is a "Cthulhu" and the video attached to the story shows it tearing down a synagogue.

Really, see for yourselves:

As my friend JN notes:

Is this 'monster'...destroying the Jews?

Of course, if this is true:

Cthulhu is depicted as having a worldwide doomsday cult centered in Arabia

all is understood.

^

Is There Really A Virginia?

This has been circulating:

From: Thomson-Baldwin Virginia
Date: Sun, Mar 20, 2011
Subject: Fogel family massacre

How do you know for sure that the murder wasn't done by Mossad and then pinned on Palestinians by leaving a trail??

How do you know for sure that you are a Jew? According to the Bible, only the tribe of Judah was called Jews. Most of the people calling themselves Jews today aren't really Jews at all.

The Zionist have used dialectical language to deceive the masses. Their god is Satan.

Did you know that the Israelites from the 6 - 8th century BC Diaspora emigrated to Europe? Hmmm, guess that means I might even be a Hebrew.

Always two sides to every story.

Shalom

According to this, Virginia is (was?) an elected official within the US political system, a Precinct Committee Officer and from an old settler colonial family.

If this is real, how do we know that Virginia is actually descended from a colonial family? Or if she actually is a ... Hebrew?

If this represents the thinking of this purported lady, as perverse, silly, hateful and weird as it is, woe is the Republic and for which it stands.

^

Helen Thomas Strips

Reported:-

Helen Thomas to Playboy: White House in pockets of the Israeli lobbies

It's here.

Contributing Editor David Hochman got the idea to call Thomas to see if she wanted to talk...They also broke bread at her favorite Palestinian restaurant. “I was curious whether I’d find the ranting woman from the YouTube video,” Hochman says. “She turned out to be a person in full possession of her faculties and impressively articulate. Mostly she was the Thomas the public has known forever: feisty, passionate and not afraid to speak up.” Does Hochman, who is Jewish, believe Thomas is an anti-Semite? “I’ll let the reader decide. But I did think it was amusing when she presented a plate of ham sandwiches and then said, ‘Oh, I hope I haven’t served the wrong thing.’ ”

PLAYBOY: Take us back to the White House courtyard on May 27 when Rabbi David Nesenoff pointed his camera at you and asked for your comments on Israel.

THOMAS: He pulled that thing out like a jackknife...I said, “They should get the hell out of Palestine.”

PLAYBOY: Did you realize how controversial those words were as you spoke them?

THOMAS: I knew I’d hit the third rail. You cannot say anything about Israel in this country. But I’ve lived with this cause for many years. Everybody knows my feelings that the Palestinians have been shortchanged in every way. Sure, the Israelis have a right to exist—but where they were born, not to come and take someone else’s home...—I was going for broke. I had reached the point of no return. You finally get fed up...I understand they formed Jews for Helen Thomas at one point...I also heard from Jimmy Carter. He called a few weeks later...It was very nice of him to call, but I don’t want to get him into trouble.

...there’s no understanding of the Palestinians at all. I mean, they’re living there and these people want to come and take their homes and land and water and kill their children and kill them...Our government bribes the Israelis by saying, “Please come to the [negotiating] table and we’ll give you this and we’ll give you that.” Obama’s last offer to the Israelis was $22 billion in new fighter planes [Editor’s note: The offer was actually just under $3 billion], a veto at the UN for anything pro-Arab or pro-Palestinian and a three-month freeze on the colonization and settlers. I mean, what is this? They gave away the store...Stop all this aid to Israel when they’re killing people!

PLAYBOY: It was your follow-up comment, when you said the Jews should go back to Poland, Germany and America, that really infuriated people.

THOMAS: ...What I meant was they should stay where they are because they’re not being persecuted—not since World War II, not since 1945. If they were, we sure would hear about it. Instead, they initiated the Jackson-Vanik law, which said the U.S. would not trade with Russia unless it allowed unlimited Jewish emigration. But it was not immigration to the United States, which would have been fine with me. It was to go to Palestine and uproot these people, throw them out of their homes, which they have done through several wars. That’s not fair...What is this? How can anybody accept it? I mean, Jewish-only roads? Would anyone tolerate something like that in America? White-only roads?

PLAYBOY: You mean Israeli-only roads, not Jewish only, right? [Editor’s note: Israel closes certain roads to Palestinians, but roads are open to all Israeli citizens and to other nationals, regardless of religious background.]

THOMAS: Israeli-only roads, okay. But it’s more than semantics because the Palestinians are deprived of owning these roads. This is their land. I’m sorry, but we’re talking about foreigners who came and said, “God gave this land to us.”...
PLAYBOY: Do you acknowledge that some Palestinian behavior over the years, including hijacking and the use of suicide bombers, has been wrong and has added to the problem?

THOMAS: In an ideal world passive resistance and world disarmament would be great. Unfortunately we don’t live in that world. Of course I don’t condone any violence against anyone. But who wouldn’t fight for their country?...The Palestinian violence is to protect what little remains of Palestine. The suicide bombers act out of despair and desperation...Remember, Menachem Begin invented terrorism as his MO—and bragged about it in his first book...

PLAYBOY: Do you have a personal antipathy toward Jews themselves?

THOMAS: No. I think they’re wonderful people. They had to have the most depth. They were leaders in civil rights. They’ve always had the heart for others but not for Arabs, for some reason. I’m not anti-Jewish; I’m anti-Zionist. I am anti Israel taking what doesn’t belong to it. ...who are these people? Why do they think they’re so deserving? The slaughter of Jews stopped with World War II...they carry on the victimization. American people do not know that the Israeli lobbyists have intimidated them into believing every Jew is a persecuted victim forever—while they are victimizing Palestinians.

PLAYBOY: Let’s get to something else you said more recently. In a speech in Detroit last December, you told an Arab group, “We are owned by the propagandists against the Arabs. There’s no question about that. Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists. No question, in my opinion. They put their money where their mouth is. We’re being pushed into a wrong direction in every way.” Do you stand by that statement?

THOMAS: Yes, I do. I know it was horrendous, but I know it’s true. Tell me it’s not true and I’ll be happy to be contradicted. I’m just saying they’re using their power, and they have power in every direction.

PLAYBOY: That stereotype of Jewish control has been around for more than a century. Do you actually think there’s a secret Jewish conspiracy at work in this country?

THOMAS: Not a secret. It’s very open. What do you mean secret?...Everybody is in the pocket of the Israeli lobbies, which are funded by wealthy supporters, including those from Hollywood. Same thing with the financial markets. There’s total control.

...Why do we have to keep paying the price and why do they keep oppressing the Palestinians? Do the Jews ever look at themselves? Why are they always right? Because they have been oppressed throughout history, I know. And they have this persecution. That’s true, but they shouldn’t use that to dominate...You know damn well the power they have. It isn’t the two percent. It’s real power when you own the White House, when you own these other places in terms of your political persuasion. Of course they have power. You don’t deny that. You’re Jewish, aren’t you?

PLAYBOY: Yes.

THOMAS: That’s what I thought. Well, you know damn well they have power...I want to tell the truth. I want everyone to accept the truth. It’s horrible to say some of my best friends are Jews, but they are and they have been.

PLAYBOY: Don’t take this the wrong way, but the question many people have is, Has Helen Thomas lost her mind? You’re 90, after all. Do you still have all your faculties?

THOMAS: I resent that question! I thoroughly resent it. Why are you interviewing me if I’m crazy? It wouldn’t be worth it to you, would it?

PLAYBOY: It’s not an unreasonable question.

THOMAS: I resent it. You should apologize.

PLAYBOY: But it’s the question everyone wants answered—and you’re the one who always tells journalists to ask the hard questions.

THOMAS: They want to know if I’m crazy? You have to be crazy to criticize Israel?...

Don't you just like your enemies to be so clear?

____________

Found this:

Do not blame me for any gurgitation events.

(k/t: DL)

^