Showing posts with label American antisemitism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American antisemitism. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 08, 2025


Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

Black lives matter. Of course they do. Everyone’s lives matter. But you don’t just go and support a group with an agreeable name without some due diligence. Or do you?

My progressive Jewish friends don’t seem to think any due diligence is necessary when it comes to being gung-ho for organizations like Black Lives Matter, or the Women’s March. If Black Lives Matter says it’s against racism then gulldarnit, my progressive Jewish friends are going to put a clenched fist BLM badge on their Facebook profile pic. If they think the Women’s March is for women, they’re going to put on a pink hat with a name that inwardly makes them feel thrillingly naughty as they outwardly express their righteous indignation.

These same progressive friends at some point take down the badges from their profile pics as the truth outs, as truth so inconveniently tends to do. Now they know: BLM is inherently antisemitic and anti-Israel—really the same thing. Were they sheepish when the Women’s March and the Chicago Dyke March excluded women and dykes if they happened to be Jews or Zionists? Or did they just quietly take down the badges on their profile pics and find something hopefully innocuous to support—something that doesn’t hate Jews or Zionists? (Good luck with that.)

But why didn’t they give these groups a thorough vetting before throwing their support behind them? The answer is pathetic: they didn’t believe that someone protesting racism could hate Jews. They didn’t believe that someone speaking up for women’s rights didn’t believe in Jewish women’s rights.

Even very, very intelligent Jewish women—women like Bari Weiss—were surprised when all the groups fighting against sexual violence, looked the other way when the victims of sexual violence were Jews. In her introduction to a podcast with Sheryl Sandberg to discuss the documentary Screams Before Silence, Weiss said, “Sheryl Sandberg watched the horrors of October 7th unfold and assumed that everyone she knew would rally against these unspeakable atrocities—particularly after reports of sexual violence and rape committed by Hamas started pouring in. But when she saw that many people didn't, or worse, that they denied it was even happening, she was stunned. She was particularly shocked that many of her would-be allies—prominent feminists and progressives in this country and around the world—stayed silent.”

During that same podcast, Sandberg described when drove her to make the documentary. “I never thought I would do this, and I wish this didn't have to be made. When October 7th happened, I was shocked. I think everyone was shocked. I was even more shocked afterward. The single most surprising thing I found was that in the weeks following, people started coming out with what I thought was clear evidence that this wasn't just mass murder; there was rape. Women were found naked and bloodied. Over and over, the stories were coming out, and what I then expected to happen is for people to say, ‘Oh my God, rape is never supposed to be used as part of war. No sexual violence is part of conflict.’ But that just wasn't happening.”

Sandberg made the video to convince the rape deniers who only deny rape when Jews are involved. But it didn’t much help. People who hate Jews hate them whether or not they are gang raped, tortured, kidnapped, and abused. They hate Jews whether or not they are Zionists, hate them whether or not they live in Israel.

“We made a video,” said Sandberg, “and that video went very viral. I tried to make that video really carefully. I mean, I have strong views on what's going on, but there were no views in this video. This video said, ‘No matter what flag you're flying,’ carefully including half Palestinian flags and half Israeli flags, ‘No matter what you believe, we have to stand united against the clear use of sexual violence.’

“Yet people were still not believing it. So, I helped organize a conference at the UN where we brought witnesses who stood there and cried and said, ‘Here's what I saw with my own eyes.’ Then I took those same witnesses to parliaments in Europe, where I felt they needed to speak out, but we still encountered some denial and significant silence.”

Bari Weiss details the various denials of October 7 rape even in the face of the rape videos that the terrorists proudly shared. “Max Blumenthal, a commentator and journalist, said that a woman’s body found naked from the waist down was simply because women at festivals like to dress in skimpy attire. Another example is the prominent British commentator Owen Jones, who said there's no evidence of rape. This is a guy with a million Twitter followers.

“Then there’s Briahna Joy Gray, who was Bernie Sanders’s press secretary in 2020. She said Zionists are asking that we believe the uncorroborated eyewitness accounts of men who describe alleged rape victims in odd fetishistic terms. She said, ‘Shame on Israel for not seriously investigating claims of rape and collecting rape kits.’ How do you understand the logic or the worldview that leads people to say things like that?

“Before this conversation,” said Weiss, “I checked in with some of the top feminist organizations in the country. Since October 7th, the National Organization for Women made a statement two months after the fact, which didn’t mention Hamas. UN Women, a group whose mission is to create an environment where all women can exercise their human rights, waited 55 days before saying anything. The International Committee of the Red Cross has issued nothing. I could go on for hours detailing the silence—or worse, weaselly statements where they fail to mention the perpetrators of evil actions.”

So much for “Believe all women.” (Perhaps they should change that to “Believe all shiksas.”)

As for Black Lives Matter, their adherents thought they were invincible. Probably because they saw how all my progressive Jewish friends were using that clenched fist badge on their Facebook pics. They saw how easy it was to pull the wool over our eyes under the guise of a fight against racism. But now we all know about the corruption of those at the top of the BLM food chain.

Take Black Lives Matter cofounder Patrisse Cullors, for example. Cullors resigned from the “charity” in 2021 after getting caught with her hand in the proverbial cookie jar. Back in June, the Washington Free Beacon reported that BLM is still reeling from Cullors’ abuse of power:

Black Lives Matter cofounder Patrisse Cullors resigned from the embattled charity in 2021, but the charity suffered from the excesses of her tenure well into 2023, according to a copy of its latest tax return obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

Under Cullors’s leadership, Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation doled out massive contracts to her friends and family, purchased a $6 million mansion in Los Angeles in 2020, and financed the purchase of an $8 million mansion in Canada in 2021. By the end of its 2023 fiscal year, the tax forms show, Black Lives Matter saw the $80 million windfall it raked in during the George Floyd riots of 2020 diminish to under $29 million as it hemorrhaged cash fulfilling lingering contractual obligations to Cullors’s associates.

Those individuals include Damon Turner, the father of Cullors’s only child, whose art firm Trap Heals received $778,000 from Black Lives Matter in 2023 despite performing no work for the charity that year.

But hey, Black Lives Matter, gulldurnit, so all those progressive Jewish women rushed to put up that clenched fist badge on their Facebooks. It made them feel good, like they were making a statement about their own goodness, I suppose. Because those badges certainly didn’t do a THING for black people or against racism. And neither did Black Lives Matter.

The Movement for Black Lives (M4BL), under whose umbrella Black Lives Matter falls (or at least did, originally), is drenched in Jew hatred. In its original 2016 platform, M4BL stated that “[the] US justifies and advances the global war on terror via its alliance with Israel and is complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people,” that “Israel is an apartheid state,” and that “[the] US [has funded an] apartheid wall.”

The US justifies and advances the global war on terror via its alliance with Israel and is complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people. The US requires Israel to use 75 percent of all the military aid it receives to buy US-made arms. Consequently, every year billions of dollars are funneled from US taxpayers to hundreds of arms corporations, who then wage lobbying campaigns pushing for even more foreign military aid. The results of this policy are twofold: it not only diverts much needed funding from domestic education and social programs, but it makes US citizens complicit in the abuses committed by the Israeli government. Israel is an apartheid state with over 50 laws on the books that sanction discrimination against the Palestinian people. Palestinian homes and land are routinely bulldozed to make way for illegal Israeli settlements. Israeli soldiers also regularly arrest and detain Palestinians as young as 4 years old without due process. Everyday [sic], Palestinians are forced to walk through military checkpoints along the US-funded apartheid wall.

Cullors, back in 2015, while speaking as a guest lecturer at Harvard Law School's 'Globalizing Ferguson: Radicalized Policing and International Violence' forum, opined that people must "end the imperialist project that's called Israel." “Palestine is our generation's South Africa. If we don't step up boldly and courageously to end the imperialist project that's called Israel, we're doomed.”

Is this really what my progressive Jewish friends, relatives, and acquaintances wanted to support as they watched BLM gain momentum? Did my fellow Jews support an end to Israel? Probably not. But they hadn’t bothered to check what BLM actually stands for. Black Lives Matter was a sentiment that brooked no criticisms or doubts about the respectability of the group going under the mantle of that oh-so-progressive-sounding name.

That same year, Cullors and her friends organized a solidarity trip to Nazareth called “Ferguson to Palestine.” To liven things up, they did a flash mob “specifically calling for the boycott, divestment, and sanctions of the state of Israel. We who believe in freedom cannot rest until it’s won.”

Here’s some of the other Jew-hating bullpucky they spouted:

We came here to Palestine to stand in love and revolutionary struggle with our brothers and sisters. We come to a land that has been stolen by greed and destroyed by hate. We learn of laws that have been co-signed in ink but written in the blood of the innocent. We stand next to people who continue to courageously struggle and resist the occupation. People continue to dream and fight for freedom. From Ferguson to Palestine, the struggle for freedom continues.

We who believe in freedom cannot rest. We who believe in freedom cannot rest until it’s won. We who believe in freedom cannot rest.

We sit in a sea of settlements while the sound of suffering is lost in the listening, as the voices of heartache hail the power of presence. People are portals, passports to heaven. Here is a protest in the form of a prayer. God is in the holy water lining the lower lids of a child’s eyes, a tear running against a cheek in Old Jerusalem. The lonely storyteller sits on a leaning chair in the market.

God is a woman holding a crying baby in her arms at a checkpoint, waiting at the gates like cattle. God is in the rubble, with gnarled hands rinsing in an open fire. A journey of dreamers sings through empty streets in Bethlehem. We survive in the telling, unafraid. We survive in the telling.

What if the occupations drain the Palestinians who had thrills underneath their teeth, and they suddenly awoke to see the ships at the Bay of the West Bank shore, discovering that the occupation existed no more? What if Zionism is the second coming of Christ? Destruction is the matriarch of sight, for if we are the Messiah, then God is not white. What if life is the afterlife, and we are already dead? The footage of the moment loops in your head, replaying until you die for the second time.

What a power influence your intelligence and mind, and those with lesser means—the oppressors. Would you still steal this land under that pressure?

Free Palestine! Palestine and Ferguson in the occupation. Ferguson and Palestine, we fight to free our nations.

Black lives matter! Black lives matter!

I believe! I believe!

They know that we know. They know that we win. We are all right.

Group hug! Come on!

Black lives matter! Black lives matter!


See? As long as you say it under the rubric of “Black Lives Matter!” you can say any gulldurned hateful lie you can think of. It’s all good. Good enough for my progressive Jewish friends to not bother to even do a rudimentary check of what these people are plugging—and they ain’t plugging DEI—they’re plugging antisemitism.

There really was such a wealth of material out there, attesting to the disingenuousness and horrifically hateful views of BLM. If only my progressive Jewish friends had been interested in examining even a modicum of the evidence. In 2016, for example, several horrible people made a film comparing anti-black racism, to “Palestinian” suffering under the supposed thumb of Israel.

From Moment Magazine:

Stragglers arrive; extra seats are formed into rows, and even more latecomers will be forced to stand. The lights dim, and a video recently released on YouTube begins to play on the projection screen. Entitled When I See Them, I See Us, it features activist-scholars Angela Davis and Cornel West, musician Lauryn Hill, actor Danny Glover, writer Alice Walker and dozens of other prominent activists, Palestinian and black. Narrators recite the title in rhythmic repetition as the activists hold up a series of slogan-bearing signs: “Racism is systemic. Its outbursts are not isolated incidents.” “Your walls will never cage our freedom.” “End state racism.” “Gaza stands with Baltimore.” Photos of dead Palestinian children alternate with photos of black victims of police shootings and scenes of Gaza rubble.

When the three-minute video ends—directing viewers to the website blackpalestiniansolidarity.com—the room bursts into applause. Dajani introduces the guest speaker for the evening, Reverend Graylan Scott Hagler, the senior minister of the Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ in Washington, DC. From his temporary pulpit, Hagler weaves a web of parallels—the walls of a maximum-security prison in Massachusetts to Israel’s separation barrier in the West Bank; property destruction in Baltimore in the wake of the death of Freddie Gray to the first and second intifadas. His voice frequently reaches sermon pitch, his audience full of nodding heads, murmurs of approval, snapping fingers, and calls of “Yes.”

For all my progressive Jewish friends who so proudly displayed BLM FB badges until they didn’t, here’s a taste of that film script:

When I see them, I see us.

Every 28 hours, a Black life is stolen by police or vigilantes in the U.S. Every two hours, a Palestinian child is killed in Israel's attacks on Gaza.

Eric Garner, 43 years old, father of six, grandfather, friend. Seven-year-old killed when an Israeli missile struck her home. Hashem Abu Maria, 45 years old, father of four, human rights worker. Ayanna Jones, seven years old, killed in her sleep by Detroit police.

I see us—harassed, beaten, tortured, dehumanized, stopped and frisked, searched at checkpoints, victims of administrative detention, youth incarceration. When I see them, I see us—from Rikers Island to Ophir Prison, from Raeford to Chicago, lives are being stolen.

Remember them. We are not statistics. We are not collateral damage. We have names and faces: Sakia Nadeem Kimani, Renisha Muhammad. They burned me alive in Jerusalem. They gunned me down in Chicago. They shot out our water tanks in Hebron. They cut off our water in Detroit. They demolished our homes in New Orleans. When I see them, I see us.

They see our rooms as dangerous, label us as demographic threats. They sterilize us without our knowledge and mark our children as criminals. We say no to all forms of oppression in U.S. cities and on the streets of Palestine. We respect the uniqueness of our struggles and our varied histories. When I see them, I see us—resilient, steadfast, determined.

I see who we were meant to be: alive, free, liberated, mapping out our destiny. I see hope, strength, love—a place where our children can dream. I see a road, a partner, a family, a world where we can rise and be seen.


Now, with Cullors out of the picture, it has become clear that the BLM people need a new Jew-hater in charge. Which is why they just hired Yonasda Lonewolf!

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

Black Lives Matter Grassroots announced in a New Year's message to its supporters on Thursday that it hired Yonasda Lonewolf, a rapper and activist with close ties to Farrakhan, as a "special projects specialist" to help the group as it works to "claim victory over the white-supremacist systems designed to kill our people." Black Lives Matter Grassroots said in the message it would enter 2025 with "the revolutionary spirit of our Haitian forebears" and featured an image of Haitian revolutionaries in the early 1800s lynching French military officers.

Lonewolf doesn’t shy from her devotion to Farrakhan, who has praised Adolf Hitler as a "very great man" and casts Jews as "termites" and "enemies" who control black people. She professed her love for Farrakhan in a 2016 Facebook post and later, in a 2020 Instagram post, described the minister as "my grandfather Min. Farrakhan who also eased my spirit." In 2023, Lonewolf attended Farrakhan’s annual keynote address, where she told the ministry’s propaganda website that she felt "rejuvenated" by his message.

"We are all under attack right now, and it’s the fight against good and evil, at the end of the day," Lonewolf told the Final Call, the Nation of Islam's official publication. "The fact that we still have a great leader amongst us is a testament that he’s standing, that we need to be able to continue." Other Farrakhan devotees interviewed in that article praised the Nation of Islam leader's stand against "the Satanic Jews" and "the Jewish powers that be."

As to the pink pussy hats, they were all the rage with progressive Jewish women. But that didn’t go very well, either.

From Barbara Kay in the National Post:

It should be obvious to progressive Jewish women by now that the Women’s March, an allegedly feminist movement, which allegedly supports the rights of all women, just isn’t into Jewish women. To progressive ideologues, Jews are burdened by the original sin of Zionism, whether they are pro-Israel or not.

This was made very clear in June 2017, at the Chicago Dyke March, when three Jewish LGBT Pride marchers carrying flags adorned with a Star of David (similar to, but not the flag of Israel) were ousted from the parade. This was an act of pure anti-Semitism by radical feminists. 

In fact, at the event in question, the 21st annual Chicago Dyke March, a member of the group said that the women were told to leave because the flags “made people feel unsafe” and that the March was both “anti-Zionist” and “pro-Palestinian.”

Two years later, things had not much (read “not at all”) improved. But at least the rules of the 2019 DC Dyke March were clear.

From JNS (emphasis added):

The DC Dyke March, returning to Washington, D.C. on Friday after a 12-year absence, will prohibit Jewish and pro-Israel pride symbols, including flags.

“Jewish stars and other identifications and celebrations of Jewishness (yarmulkes, talit, other expressions of Judaism or Jewishness) are welcome and encouraged. We do ask that participants not bring pro-Israel paraphernalia in solidarity with our queer Palestinian friends,” Yael Horowitz, a Jewish organizer of the D.C. march, told A.J. Campbell, who wanted to bring a Jewish Pride flag to the march, in a Facebook messagereported The Washington Post.

The progressive Jews I know are on the whole, accomplished professionals with Ivy League educations. Why then, do they completely lack the ability to see when they’re being taken for a ride? How is it that they’re so quick to support what isn’t? BLM isn’t about equal rights for black people. It’s about misusing funds and hating Jews. The Women’s March and Dyke Marches aren’t about women or dykes. If it were, Jews and their symbols showing up in solidarity would be welcomed. After all, what does Israel have to do with the women’s rights movement in the United States?

Answer: not a thing. It’s not even intersectional. The marches are a pretext to hate whatever floats their hate boat. Straights, whites, Jews, Donald J. Trump . . . whatever they hate most at the moment. None of it hangs together in any cohesive form whatsoever.

In the run up to the election, a friend explained to me that she could not vote for Trump because she feared her elementary school-aged granddaughter would someday not be able to get an abortion as a result. But Trump didn’t do anything with abortion in his first term, and has no intention of having much to do with it now. It’s not even a thing. He’s leaving it up to the states to decide these things for themselves.

And guess what, they already have. There is no place in America where a woman cannot get an abortion where there is a risk to the life of the mother. In fact, there are very few places in America where the usual exceptions are not in place. 


But you know, Kamala Harris told them otherwise, so they believe her. And voted for her. Because they are Jewish progressives, so they embrace whatever cause they are told is progressive without even the smallest effort made at verifying the facts. 

Are they aware that Kamala Harris supports student protests against “Israel’s genocide in Gaza” and tells them they have a right to “their truth?”

 

Probably not. Again, because they don’t care. What they care about is the appearance of being consonant with progressive values. They want to belong, so when others scream BLACK LIVES MATTER, they put those badges up on their Facebook pages. And when Kamala tells them that Donald J. Trump wants to control their bodies, they vote for her, despite her hatred of their homeland and the people who live there. They comfort themselves by saying, there's no way she hates Jews. Her husband is Jewish!

Will Jewish progressives wake up in time to save themselves? Probably not. They are too intellectually lazy to perpetuate their own species. That expensive education their Yiddisher parents paid for is basically a framed diploma on a wall. They graduated a long time ago, and no longer have to use their brain cells to dig deep and critically think about anything much at all.



Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

   
 

 

Wednesday, September 13, 2023


So let me see if I’ve got this straight. Vivek Ramaswamy gave an interview to an antisemite and then got angry when the Washington Free Beacon reported that fact. No, wait. That’s not quite right. Ramaswamy didn’t know that Albert Faleski, aka An0maly, was an antisemite at the time of the interview, so it wasn’t nice that the Washington Free Beacon made it look like he did it on purpose. But actually, even if he HAD known Faleski was an antisemite, Ramaswamy might have still done the interview because of his amazing tolerance for all views and because of this presidential hopeful’s belief in free speech.

But no. That can’t be right either. Because if Ramaswamy really cared about freedom of speech, he wouldn’t have blocked the Washington Free Beacon’s access to his campaign for bringing up Faleski’s very public and virulent antisemitism in the context of the Ramaswamy interview.

Why isn’t the Washington Free Beacon free to talk about this? Why isn’t Ramaswamy tolerant of the media outlet’s sensitivity to and dedication to raising the issue of antisemitism—especially when the topic, by association, concerns a presidential candidate—I mean, first Ramaswamy goes on Russell Brand’s show and now this. In light of these facts, why does Ramaswamy’s campaign describe the Washington Free Beacon as acting in “bad faith?” 

Here’s what happened:

On September 5, the Washington Free Beacon published a report by Alana Goodman on the aforementioned Faleski-Ramaswamy podcast. One day later, on September 6, Goodman reported that the Ramaswamy campaign had cut off free access to the Free Beacon, as a result:

Vivek Ramaswamy’s campaign said it would no longer facilitate access between the Washington Free Beacon and the candidate after the Free Beacon reported that Ramaswamy appeared on a podcast hosted by an anti-Semitic YouTuber on Tuesday.

The campaign’s decision comes after the Free Beacon reported on anti-Semitic comments, including the assertion that both the left and right push for "speech censorship on behalf of big Jewish power," made by social media influencer Albert Faleski, also known as "An0maly," who interviewed Ramaswamy this week. 

In other words, despite his declared commitment to the concept of freedom of speech Ramaswamy, did not at all like the Free Beacon mentioning Faleski’s extensive history of Jew-hating comments and tweets in its report of the podcast. The 38-year-old presidential candidate thinks that Goodman added unnecessary context designed to smear his reputation. But isn’t that also free speech? Instead, this is described by the Ramaswamy campaign as acting in “bad faith” (emphasis added):

Ramaswamy spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said on Tuesday that the Free Beacon acted in "bad faith" by highlighting Faleski’s comments in the context of Ramaswamy’s appearance on the show, adding that the campaign plans to cut off the Free Beacon’s access.

Are we all getting this? Because I’m finding it hard to take it in. Vivek goes on an antisemite’s youtube show in the name of free speech and tolerance, then denies all media access to the outlet that writes it up. 

If ever there were an exemplar of free speech for me and not for thee, this is it.

Which begs the question: If doing an interview with a virulent and quite public antisemite is acceptable in the name of free speech, why isn’t a factual report of the event acceptable as free speech?

Now, I’m not a Harvard graduate, or a 38-year-old, wet-behind-the-ears presidential candidate, but if I were, I sure as shooting would have my people research the background of those asking for interviews. If my people were to then find something suspicious, like the fact that the guy’s an antisemite, they would either turn down the interview, or pass that information along to me. This leaves us with a number of possibilities to consider regarding Vivek Ramaswamy’s appearance on the show of a known antisemite:

1.      Vivek Ramaswamy or his staff failed to do basic research before accepting the interview, then lied about it

2.      Ramaswamy didn’t care that Faleski is an antisemite, or agrees with and chose to amplify Faleski’s antisemitic conspiracy theories, and then lied about it

3.      Ramaswamy thought he could get away with appearing on an antisemite’s youtube show and got angry when he got caught

4.      Ramaswamy doesn’t really believe in free speech. He doesn’t even know what it is. When he says he is tolerant of other views, he is LYING. He punishes the media when they publish unpleasant truths about him. 

In piecing together the facts, we must also consider the timeline. First Ramaswamy told antisemite Russell Brand he’d cut aid to Israel, and then he did a show with antisemitic conspiracy theorist. When he is subsequently criticized for communing with Jew-haters, Vivek Ramaswamy lets it be known that he believes in free speech for all. All, that is, except for the Washington Free Beacon.

McLaughlin’s statement goes on to speak of Ramaswamy’s open media policy—his willingness to speak with even hostile media outlets (emphasis added):

Ramaswamy appeared on Faleski’s show because he will talk to any media outlet, even controversial ones, she said, adding that Ramaswamy wasn’t aware of Faleski’s anti-Semitic comments before the interview, but might have appeared on the show even if he was aware because of the campaign’s open media policy.

Once more, I have to ask, especially to those who say I have no proof that Ramaswamy is an antisemite--are you getting all this? This wet-behind-the-ears presidential candidate is saying he didn’t know Faleski was an antisemite, but even if he had, he still might have gone on the show. Vivek Ramaswamy doesn’t rule out talking to antisemites, only to those who point it out.

Not that it much matters. At this point, no one serious believes that Vivek Ramaswamy has a snowball’s chance in hell of becoming president. Definitely not this time around, and almost certainly not ever.

Wishing all my readers שָׁנָה טוֹבָה תִּכָּתֵבוּ וְתֵחָתֵמוּ!

*Updated for accuracy



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, September 06, 2023



Back in April, I asked a question: Is Tucker Carlson a Covert Antisemite? To my mind, there is no question that he is, but people understand things in different ways. Some want proof rather than this author’s interpretation of Carlson’s words and deeds.

In a way, that is the point. There likely will never be proof. This is why I refer to Carlson’s brand of antisemitism as “covert.” It’s slippery and slimy. It’s about pushing the boundaries as far as he can go without going over the line. Carlson goes just far enough in what he says, the words just shy of, “I hate Jews.”

Some Jews are unfortunately too nice. They are not interested in believing the worst of a person. So, short of Carlson shouting into a megaphone, “I hate Jews,” the benefit-of-the doubter Jews will doggedly insist on proof. “Can you prove it?” and since Carlson never leaves much of a trail, you’ve got no way to do so. Not that I make much effort to persuade them. Either they do or don’t believe that Tucker Carlson is an antisemite.

Aside from requiring proof of Tucker’s antisemitism, there’s another factor in play for those who just don’t buy it. Some Jews don’t want to believe that Tucker is an antisemite because they otherwise agree with his Conservative politics. Since they agree with Tucker on so many other things, they pooh-pooh any suggestion that Carlson, at heart, hates Jews.

I noted the same phenomenon when I wrote about RFK Jr.’s antisemitism. Some readers were upset. They said to me, “Can you prove it?” and they aren’t even Democrats.

There is irony in the sudden request for proof of antisemitism in the case of RFK Jr. The same readers challenging me to bring them cold, hard evidence that Tucker is a Jew-hater, are like me, generally hypersensitive to antisemitic undertones and nuances. What made them look the other way from the empirical evidence this time, and hold their nose at the stench, was RFK Jr.’s stance on vaccination, with which they agree.

To all of these naysayers, I will, unlike Tucker Carlson, declare myself out and out: Of course I can’t prove it. But that doesn’t mean I don’t know it.

Tucker Carlson will not be coming out of the Jew-hate closet any time soon, at least not on purpose. He’ll never say the words out loud. And some Jews will always insist on his innocence. Even after much proof, such as a recent Tucker Carlson interview with Douglas Macgregor, a retired US colonel, about the war in Ukraine, as captured by the Israel Advocacy Movement.

Macgregor, like Tucker Carlson, understands how to say just enough to escape any overt accusations of antisemitism. His words hint at hatred without actually saying the J word out loud. Like here, where all the people Macgregor references are Jewish:

Tucker Carlson: How would you characterize Zelenskyy?

Douglas Macgregor: He was picked and then blessed by Victoria Nuland and the State Department as their man. Now, when he originally ran for office, he ran on a peace platform. Ukrainians didn't want to go to war with Russia. Of course, once he was in there, he took a different road, and I can't help but think that that road was defined for him by us.

Tucker Carlson: Who is Victoria Nuland?

Douglas Macgregor: Ah, goodness gracious, all these hard questions, Tucker! I do not know Victoria Nuland, personally. I know Fred Kagan, and his brother Bob is married to her and she's a long-term committed neocon. No, I don't think she understands the gravity of the situation. These are the same people. Tony Blinken is in this.

These are people with this agenda and the agenda says until the entire world is garrisoned by US forces and is converted forcibly to some form of democracy that we approve of, uh, the world will not be safe, and we must continue to fight, and I think in in the case of Russia, Russia has special appeal, because I think these people have ancestors who come from that region in the world, and have a permanent ax to grind with the Russians. Now of course, which I don't, and I don't think most Americans do, and nor do I think anybody in the government should shape policy based on whatever unhappiness their ancestors, you know, experienced in a place like Russia.

Tucker then asks Macgregor why both Democrats and Republicans support Ukraine.

Douglas Macgregor: Well, first of all you've got to go through and identify the donors. What's their background; where did they come from; and why do they feel the way they do? I think there're more personal issues there than we realize with many of them.

Macgregor, this whole time, is talking about Jews. And Tucker never once calls him out for airing antisemitic conspiracy theories. Tucker Carlson is quite happy to interview this man and air his views for his listeners. Why? Is it about freedom of speech?

No. It’s about antisemitism. And no I don’t have proof. You either see it and believe it or you don’t.

We shouldn’t mind the people who don’t want to admit Carlson is an antisemite because they like his politics. They’re just fooling themselves. It’s the benefit-of-the-doubter Jews who are worrisome. They are like the Jews who waited too long to leave Europe, because Hitler and his goose-stepping fans were not to be taken seriously. They thought that Hitler and his Nazis were just a flash in the pan. Germany wouldn’t let a Holocaust happen.  

By the time these Jews understood that Hitler was not some temporary nuisance but manifestly evil, the gates had already closed and they could not leave. Which is a common theme in Jewish history. Jews don’t want to believe someone can be evil. They won’t believe it until it is absolutely proven—like when they see smoke coming out of an Auschwitz crematorium, or watch people walk into a shower and never come out.

That is far too late. 

For Jews, in particular, it is crucial to recognize that some people really are bad. And the last thing you want from them is proof.  



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 



Monday, September 04, 2023

The New York Times has an op-ed by Ilan Stavans about the resilience of Yiddish, supposedly by an expert in the field. It includes some antisemitic tropes, oversimplifications, self-contradictions, outright falsehoods and ultimately reflects anti-Zionist politics more than it represents the state of Yiddish today.

For a language without a physical address that has come frighteningly close to extinction, Yiddish’s will to live seems inexhaustible. The lesson is simple and straightforward: Survival is an act of stubbornness.

Yiddish has been experiencing something of a revival. Online courses mean that anyone from Buenos Aires to Melbourne might learn to speak it. There are new translations of long-forgotten works and literary classics. A Broadway staging of “Fiddler on the Roof” was performed in Yiddish. And streaming platforms like Netflix have released series, including “Shtisel,” “Unorthodox” and “Rough Diamonds,” fully or partially in Yiddish.

Before World War II, approximately 13 million Jews, both secular and religious, spoke Yiddish. Today it is estimated that there are about a quarter of a million speakers in the United States, about the same number in Israel and roughly another 100,000 in the rest of the world. Nowadays the vast majority of those who speak the language are ultra-Orthodox. They aren’t multilingual, as secular Yiddish speakers always were.
Here is the problem with this article in a nutshell: it is written from the perspective of the relatively tiny number of secular Yiddish speakers today, and it all but ignores the real use of the language among religious Jews, which is the core of how the language is used - and more importantly, how it is evolving.

The Yiddish of the secular Jew today is an adaptation of the Yiddish of the heyday of socialist secular Yiddish newspapers in America in the early 20th century. But the vast majority of Yiddish speakers today use it in their everyday speech and as such the language continues to evolve as needed to accommodate modern life. The religious Jews speaking Yiddish are the ones who are not only keeping it alive but they are the ones who are the ones who change it. As a result, Yiddish speakers who learn the language in university courses in the US have a difficult time understanding the many dialects of Yiddish spoken in Boro Park, Mea Shearim or Bnei Brak, which includes healthy amounts of modern English or Hebrew just as local Yiddish dialects have always assimilated elements of the majority population's language. 

To the secular Jew studying Yiddish, the language is a romantic throwback to the good old days of unionization of sweatshops in the Lower East Side. To the actual speakers of the language today, it is what is used in everyday life. That is where the dynamism of the language comes from - but the current class of secular Yiddishists tend to be anti-religious, and it shows.

Here are two religious Yiddish magazines published today. This is where the "interesant" things are happening to the language, not in academia or with today's secular Yiddish speakers. 


The writer dismisses the "ultra-Orthodox" (itself a demeaning term) as not being multilingual as the secular Yiddish speakers were. Where does he get that from? How many American haredi or chassidic Jews do not speak English? How many Israeli chassidim cannot speak Hebrew? They might not be as fluent in their national languages as they are in Yiddish, but the vast majority can speak and understand more than one language; they couldn't survive in society otherwise. This is just one example of how Stavans subtly disparages the people who are the ones that really keep the language alive - not as a museum piece but as a living language.

It’s worth noting that Yiddish has been maligned by gentiles and Jews alike. Antisemites considered it the parlance of vermin, while the rabbinical elite deemed it unworthy of serious Talmudic discussion. 
Really? The "rabbinical elite" were anti-Yiddish? What planet does he live on?  Yiddish was the lingua franca of all the major European yeshivas, even after they were transplanted to America or Israel after the Holocaust. The roshei Yeshiva (yeshiva heads) from Europe gave their lessons in Yiddish as long as their students understood it, well into the 1960s and 1970s. Today's American "yeshivish" language includes biblical Hebrew, Aramaic and plenty of Yiddish along with English. And some of the "yeshivish" Yiddish has become part of modern Israeli Hebrew - such as "shkoyach" meaning "good job, itself a Yiddishization of a Hebrew term. 

But the article really descends into modern antisemitism/anti-Zionism here:
Another enemy of Yiddish was Zionism. In the late 19th century, as the hope for a Jewish state found its ground, it was portrayed as jargon spoken by the diaspora — the language of homelessness, without a true national voice. To combat this deficit, Hebrew needed to be revived. Soon the myth sprung of the Hebrew pioneer, in sharp contrast with the large-nosed, hunchbacked Jew that Zionists themselves vilified.
Hebrew, which officially became the national language of the state of Israel in 1948, is spoken by about nine million people around the world. For some, the language symbolizes far-right Israeli militarism.
So according to Stavans, Zionists are antisemites who regard diaspora Jews the same way that neo-Nazis do, while modern Hebrew is the language of oppression. 

This is a sick slander.

In fact, the people who initially embraced Hebrew as a modern language outside the religious context, and who rejected Yiddish, were the exact type of people that have embraced Yiddish today: the anti-religious, supposedly enlightened Jews. 

Before Eliezer Ben Yehuda revived Hebrew as a modern language in Israel, there were lots of Hebrew language secular newspapers in eastern Europe. They were created by the Maskilim, the self-described "enlightened" ones, who considered Yiddish vulgar and common and tried to make Hebrew a secular language. Here's a list from the National Library of Israel of the Hebrew periodicals in their collection that existed before 1885, nearly all of them from Eastern Europe and nearly all of them secular:


And the first cover of one famous Haskalah newspaper from 1860, trying to attract the Yiddish speaking public to Hebrew:


These secular European Jews abandoned Hebrew for Yiddish at the same time that Zionists embraced and modernized Hebrew, around the 1890s. As described by the American Israelite in a requiem for Hebrew secular literature in 1906:


And while the current secular Yiddishists are often anti-Israel, the Israeli government is doing more to preserve Yiddish than they are, having created a National Authority on Yiddish Culture in 1996.

Another point about at least some of the secular Jews in Israel at the turn of the 20th century. Many of them opposed the idea of Hebrew being the official language of a Jewish state, and instead lobbied for the official language to be - German
In contrast, Yiddish represents exile — a longing for home. 

This is the problem of the modern, anti-Zionist Yiddishists in a nutshell. Stavans cannot even understand how this sentence is self-contradictory. Exile is by definition being away from home.  To people like Stavans, Yiddish is Jewishness - but it is as transient as symbol of Jewishness as cuisine or dance. Yiddish is something that should be studied and remembered. but it is a tiny slice of the richness of Judaism throughout the millennia and throughout the world. 

In Israel, the choice to standardize Hebrew as the language of the state was partially prompted, and later vindicated, by the Mizrahi Jews in the land who did not know Yiddish and who eventually became the majority. The only thing that Jews throughout the world have in common is Hebrew, not Yiddish. 

The history of Yiddish among secular Jews is much more complex and ambivalent than is described here. This article promotes a myth of secular Jews having always used Yiddish as their preferred language when in fact they used it for political purposes - as they continue to do today. It is the despised religious Jews who keep the language relevant, alive and vibrant today, while the author of this article keeps Yiddish in a romanticized amber of a century ago. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, August 11, 2023

Rev. Charles Owen Rice



This article from JTA, published in September 1939, sounds like it could have been written today in regard to "anti-Zionists."

DISCUSSES ANTI-JEWISH ATTITUDE 
Priest Assails Those Who Say They Are Not. Opposed to "Good Jews." 

PITTSBURGH—Those who mask their anti-Semitism with the assertion that they are not opposed to "good Jews" were assailed by the Rev. Charles Owen Rice in an address he delivered yesterday at St. Joseph House of Hospitality here. 

"One of the features connected with the present wave of anti-Semitism that is being stirred up is that some of the leading purveyors of anti-Semitism hotly deny that they are anti-Semites," he said. "They employ a clever sophistry in their attempts to escape the stigma. They define anti-Semitism in a certain restricted sense and then they claim that their teachings and utterances -do not bring them under the term. "

"For instance, these enemies of the Jew will define anti-Semitism as persecution of the Jew because he is a Jew. They will hold that because, to their anti-Jewish attacks, they affix a rider saying that they exempt good Jews, therefore, they are automatically absolved of anti-Semitism. "

"As a matter of fact the unctuous employment of the 'good Jews' qualifier generally intensifies that anti-Semitism of the statements as whole. Also we can have attacks upon Jews, as Jews, without direct statements. The brutal crude, direct anti-Semitic utterances, are far less harmful than the subtle ones. 

"Off hand I can give a partial list of some of the more commonly used anti-Semitic statements and inferences.

 "It is anti-Semitism to exaggerate the power of Jews, whether it be power in finance, in industry, in newspaper publishing, in radio or anything else. 

"It is anti-Semitism to say or hint there is a mysterious central controlling Jewish, national or international. leadership. 

"It is anti-Semitism to exaggerate the clannishness of Jews. 

"It is anti-Semitism to speak of deliberate controlled Jewish campaigns against Christianity. 

"It is anti-Semitic to exaggerate Jewish participation in Communism and similar movements. 

"It is anti-Semitism to hint at, or charge, a tie-up between 'International Jewry' and International Masonry. The very term 'International Jewry' has definite ant-Semitic implications. 

"You will note that these effective types of anti-Semitism consist of lies. and exaggerations. Their harmfulness consists in their engendering a feeling of mixed fear and anger in the breasts of non-Jews. All of them have been proved false. They are damnably un-American, un -Christian and anti-social." 

Then, like now, antisemites denied being antisemitic.

Then, like now, antisemites attempt to re-define "antisemitism" to exclude themselves.

Then, like now, antisemites defend themselves by saying that there are some "good Jews" who agree with them.

Then, like now, the subtle antisemitism that hides as social justice is often more dangerous than the explicit kind.





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, August 08, 2023

Jordan's Al Ghad has an op-ed by  Youssef Abdullah Mahmoud that quotes a variant of a Nazi-era libel claiming that "president" Benjamin Franklin gave a speech to the American people warning them about the dangers of Jews.

There is a great danger for the United States of America. This great danger is the Jew. Gentlemen, in every land the Jews have settled, they have depressed the moral level and lowered the degree of commercial honesty. They have remained apart and unassimilated; oppressed, they attempt to strangle the nation financially, as in the case of Portugal and Spain.

If they are not expelled from the United States by the Constitution, they will stream into this country in such numbers that they will rule and destroy us and change our form of Government for which we Americans shed our blood and sacrificed our life, property and personal freedom. If the Jews are not excluded within two hundred years, our children will be working in the field to feed Jews while they remain in the counting houses, gleefully rubbing their hands.

I warn you, gentlemen, if you do not exclude the Jews forever, your children and your children’s children will curse you in their graves. Their ideas are not those of Americans, even when they lived among us for ten generations. The leopard cannot change his spots. The Jews are a danger to this land, and if they are allowed to enter, they will imperil our institutions. They should be excluded by the Constitution.
This lie was first published in 1934 by an American fascist publication and quickly reproduced in Nazi Germany. Here's a Nazi poster with the lie, complete with a picture of someone who is definitely not Franklin.




The supposed speech was debunked fairly quickly - there is no record of any such speech, it uses language that was not used in the 18th century, and Franklin was a philosemite.

But that hasn't stopped this supposed "Franklin prophecy" from being resurrected every couple of years in Arab media. Usually, the articles claim Franklin was the President.

Mahmoud expands on the forgery, claiming that "Zionists" stopped early Americans from implementing Franklin's plan of ethnic cleansing Jews from the United States.

Why recycle old, provable lies? Because most people don't know they are lies, and it is easier to re-use old ones than to make up new ones. 

Interestingly, as I was writing this, I found articles that give a strong indication that a 19th century Mussar work, Sefer Cheshbon ha-Nefesh based its self-improvement program on Benjamin Franklin's own program described in his autobiography. The author, Menachem Mendel Lefin, didn't credit Franklin but he didn't claim to have created the method either, and other writings of his show he was familiar with Franklin's writings. So in a way, Benjamin Franklin has influenced modern Jewish thought. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, August 02, 2023

Here is a chart showing the categories of hate crimes in New York City for the first half of the year.


Out of 235 incidents, 108 were anti-Jewish. This is a little less than half but still much, much more than any other kind of bias.

In 2022, 43% of all hate crimes in New York City were against Jews.

I am sure that the NYPD takes antisemitic incidents seriously, but - this is a lot. And it indicates that the usual ways of fighting hate need to be customized for anti-Jewish hate. For example, the NYPD keeps track of the race of the offenders and the districts the crimes occur in  - if there is a clear pattern, that could indicate a more specific plan for combating anti-Jewish hate rather than just using the same methods as for all other hate crimes. After all, Jews are often targeted for the perception of being privileged, unlike most other bias crimes.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, July 28, 2023


I came across this story from JTA in 1930:


This would be the Standing Liberty quarter.

Doris Doscher had played the biblical Eve in a 1918 silent film, "Birth of a Race."


After she died in 1970, there were claims that another actress named Irene MacDowell was the model for the quarter and her role was hidden because her husband disapproved. Doscher's husband, who survived her, insisted that his wife was the real model. 

No one disputes that Doscher was the model for the sculpture at a fountain outside the Plaza Hotel in New York.



So now the antisemites can spin new conspiracy theories about Jews controlling the US money supply. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 


Tuesday, July 25, 2023




From the San Diego Union-Tribune:

The meeting was supposed to focus on recent controversial remarks on Israel by one member of San Diego County’s Human Relations Commission. Instead, they were overshadowed when another commissioner made new, inflammatory false comments about Jews.

Now, local Jewish leaders are calling for dramatic changes to the commission they believe are needed to ensure it improves human relations, and doesn’t incite hate.

While coming to the defense of a fellow commissioner who had drawn outrage for earlier comments on Israel, Khaliq Raufi made offensive remarks of his own, falsely asserting that Judaism teaches Jews to kill. 
Raufi said he’d read a few verses in Deuteronomy, the fifth book of both the Torah and Christian Old Testament. “It states ‘Go kill Palestinians. Wipe them all out,’” Raufi said Tuesday. “So it’s a teaching that they, on a daily basis, teach their followers in their synagogues.”

Audible surprise came from those in the audience. Among them was Sara Brown, regional director of the American Jewish Committee of San Diego, who could be heard saying, “Are you serious right now?”

He then went on to supposedly quote Deuteronomy, where he said that God commanded the Israelites to wipe out all of the residents of Canaan. 

You can see the meeting here.

The meeting was discussing an earlier statement by  another commission member, George Khoury, who in May described Israel as a "racist, fascist state." 

The purpose of the human relations commission is "to promote positive human relations, respect, and the integrity of every individual regardless of gender, religion, culture, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, or citizenship status." 

But Jews are fair game - even for those whose very job is to promote tolerance.

The official response from the local ADL, AJC and Federation said, "This statement is representative of the historical and false accusation of modern blood libel/antisemitic tropes, which have led to horrific violence, destruction, persecution, and massacres of Jewish people and communities."

There were some Jewish representatives there. I bet that none of them could effectively answer either the "racist, fascist" state slur nor the slander from the Torah. 

Jews need to educate our own leaders so they con confidently and quickly demolish these slanders. 

(h/t Michelle)



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive