Jewish charity blacklists and the Israel question

on 61 Comments

What do Jewish Voice for Peace, Madre, Amnesty International, New Israel Fund, American Friends Service Committee, Media Matters and Institute for Policy Studies all have in common?

There has been a growing backlash since the San Francisco Jewish Community Federation first announced the most restrictive funding guidelines in the country. The guidelines essentially ban recipients from giving voice to anyone who doesn’t toe the line (which the Federation ultimately determines) on Israel. No wonder the Bay Area Jewish intellectual class is in an uproar. As UC Hebrew and Comparative Literature professor Chana Kronfeld says, “All the major Israeli writers would probably be banned.”

The Open Letter to Jewish Communities in the Forward signed by Bay Area Jewish academics, rabbis  and other leaders, as well as coverage in Tablet, the Chronicle of Philanthropy and the New York Times reveals the extent to which concern about ideological policing is now a concern not just for the left but for the Jewish center.

However, what is not generally known is that the Fed’s Jewish Community Endowment Fund has also quietly pulled a number of nonprofit organizations from their acceptable charities list in an apparent attempt to ensure ideological purity.

What are those groups? Using a bit of technical sleuthing (and a tip-off from a donor), we’ve been able to pinpoint thus far 6 nonprofits that have been pulled from the list: Jewish Voice for Peace, American Friends Service Committee, the Institute for Policy Studies, Madre, Global Exchange, and the National Lawyers Guild. There is no reason to think there aren’t more – we will publicize those names as they become available. This means supporters of these groups who keep funds in the Endowment Fund can no longer designate them as recipients.

Even more interesting, one can still designate money to the Hebron Fund, FLAME, and extremist settler militia funder, the Central Fund of Israel.

The implications of this new battle that mirrors the war on human rights groups in Israel haven’t been lost on Boston activists who, within weeks of the announcement of the SF guidelines, launched their own Boston Combined Jewish Philanthropies witch hunt. (See embedded PDF file/link below-all articles from Boston’s Jewish paper, the Jewish Advocate.) Even The David Project founder Charles Jacobs weighs in on these so-called enemies of Israel: The American Friends Service Committee • Democracy Now! • The Unitarian Universalist Service Committee (UUSC) • The Tides Foundation • Media Matters • The New Israel Fund • Brit Tzedek v’Shalom • Physicians for Social Responsibility • The Workmen’s Circle • Amnesty International

Meanwhile NGO Monitor’s Prof. Gerald Steinberg, a man who never met a human rights organization he didn’t hate, is speaking this week at the Annual Conference of the Association for Israel Studies, at the University of Toronto on “Delegitimizing Israel: Can Jewish Philanthropy Change the Tide?”

Proposed Jewish Charity Blacklist in Boston: Not Pro-Israel Enough?

Cecilie Surasky is the Deputy Director of Jewish Voice for Peace. This post originally appeared on their blog Muzzlewatch.

61 Responses

  1. Chaos4700
    May 7, 2010, 11:20 pm

    If this doesn’t damage the standing of Zionism in the Jewish community, nothing will.

  2. annie
    May 7, 2010, 11:48 pm

    this may seem petty but i think it is funny reading about jewish money and jewish dimes. why don’t they just print their own currency for heaven sake. tikkunistas? it’s not every day we read “social justice” instead of good ol social justice.

    • annie
      May 7, 2010, 11:49 pm

      oh, i laughed a lot reading this. sad as it was a laughed a lot.

  3. VR
    May 8, 2010, 12:57 am

    Did you notice that J Street is still on the acceptable funding list? I can remember a conversation about this very subject a while back on this blog, about developing separate funding because many with the money in the community do not want to “breach” this supposed alliance. Well, now you have the sacred alliance breached by the official announcement, and the list of “outliers” will do nothing but grow. Here is what I initially said before this became a reality on this site, I will not claim prescience but let you be the judge –

    “You know Sunyata, in our communities (because the subject here is the impact that these groups that say they are against occupation have, understandably Jewish for the most part), we seem to end at one of two dire straits – either we have the apparatus like J Street without the right message or goals, or we have the right message and goals without the proper apparatus. It makes you wonder at times whether this occurs by design or just is a natural scenario. Why can’t the design have the impact of both apparatus and message with goals?

    So I have come to a specific conclusion, that those who are able to create the apparatus have the money to do so, and they decidedly pine for an Israel which will never materialize – or, they have a wrong or stilted view of what Israel is and does. Than you have the other which has the right message and goals, but the rest of the community (with the wherewithal) sits shiva on them because they call them extreme, not believing their assessment of Israel and its designs is reality (or, they are so beholden to the community, and think they have so much to loose, that they do not want to move).

    Therefore, you have this endless stalemate, and no one wants to step into the breach and bridge the two (those with apparatus and no effective message or goals, and those with no apparatus and the correct message and goals). Which brings me to a third way, that a sort of “hit team” (for lack of a better term) be devised. It certainly cannot reduce down to a single individual addressing all of these issues and activities which try to promote the undesirable status quo in Israel, even if he/she had the ability to be Sherlock Holmes and go to each meeting with many disguises – a single person cannot be in all place at once to address all of these assaults. So I propose a hit team that all can defer to, an adequate group which has the right message and goals with an adequate apparatus that both sides of this divide can invest in.

    It might just be a dream, but one thing is for sure – it does not matter in the community if this divide is created by design or occurs naturally, the result we be the same – a failure to address this vital issue, the eventual demise of the Palestinian people, and the worsening of Israel as it devolves into a total genocidal machine. I think we are at a crossroads and it is time to put up or shut up, so if those with apparatus just want to be a useless appendage that accomplishes nothing, so be it. If those with the right message and goals want to be a mutual admiration society, splintered and ineffective, than more power to you. For those that want to address this in earnest I suggest you consider what I am saying, and that we put it into action.

    I believe we can do this, all we need is a little help; there is one part in the song where Joe screams at the top of his lungs, that is where I am at” –


    Now the issue is being forced on us, you can always rely in the lockstep dead ideology to deliver the goods, now what will we do cry and moan or create alternatives that should have been there in the first place?

  4. Avi
    May 8, 2010, 12:58 am

    Contrast this:

    Even more interesting, one can still designate money to the Hebron Fund, FLAME, and extremist settler militia funder, the Central Fund of Israel.

    With this:

    2 Muslim charity founders get 65 years [in prison]


    The Holy Land leaders were convicted on charges ranging from supporting a terrorist organization to money laundering and tax fraud. The group wasn’t accused of violence, but of bankrolling schools and social welfare programs the government says are controlled by Hamas. Holy Land itself was convicted of 32 counts.


    • Citizen
      May 8, 2010, 2:32 am

      Thanks, Avi. Here’s a bit more for the rest of us, from you source:

      Holy Land’s supporters say the prosecution was a politically motivated product of Bush’s “war on terror” and a prime example of post-Sept. 11, 2001, anti-Islam fervor. Across the street from the courthouse, a handful of people held a banner that read “Feeding Children Is Not A Crime.”

      ‘There’s hysteria’
      Abu Baker’s daughter, 25-year-old Zira Abu Baker, said outside the courtroom that the group was a legitimate charity.

      “I’ve been with my dad 100 percent of the way,” she said. “I saw the work he did. He devoted his life to helping needy children. But after 9/11, I guess, there’s hysteria. They pick and choose people, and unfortunately it’s us.”

      Defense attorneys also protested an Israel official allowed to testify anonymously that Hamas members were among the leaders of Holy Land’s benefactors. The Israeli agent, who testified under the pseudonym “Avi,” also appeared in the 2007 trial.

      What would it take to jail NGOs in the USA which support the settlers, who are engaged in an illegal activity according to US offiicial policy and international law? Where is information on those who’ve decided the settler movement in Israel is not a terrorist organization?

      • annie
        May 8, 2010, 10:07 am

        Remember the ‘suicide’ of Riad Hamad directing coordinator of the Palestine Children’s Welfare Fund ? Hamad explained in an email to Hajja Romi. “The special agent said that they have a probable cause for money laundering, wire fraud, bank fraud, etc and I think that all of it stems from more than 35 years of watching me.”

        After investigations turned up nothing Riad wrapped himself up in duct tape and threw himself in Lady Bird Lake in Texas.

      • Chaos4700
        May 8, 2010, 10:13 am

        I didn’t actually know about that one specifically, but I’ve been following the Holy Land case.

        Sometimes I’m staggered by what a monstrous place the US has become. I like to imagine that if the founding fathers could see what we were doing now, they’d be reading us the riot act for becoming the same sort of imperialist persecutor they originally fought when they founded the US.

  5. Richard Witty
    May 8, 2010, 3:30 am

    I don’t understand why you’re surprised.

    Left foundations don’t fund their political opponents.

    Funding from the Jewish Federation isn’t an entitlement, especially with Jewish Voice for Peace advocating for boycott of Israeli cultural institutions, supporting the academic boycott.

    • VR
      May 8, 2010, 3:33 am

      Yes RW, and we know why you are not surprised and actually satisfied and pleased with the development.

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 3:36 am

        Its not a new development at all.

        And, to observe something is not the same as being pleased with it.

        Did “Jewish Voice for Peace” ever get money from the Bay Area fund?

        This is on Phil’s theme of “dividing families”. Things fall apart.

      • VR
        May 8, 2010, 3:47 am

        Do I look like I am surprised RW (see 12:57AM post)? The reason I mentioned this many months ago is because I saw that this was what things were coming to. However, on the contrary, what is occurring is not a division and demise of any of these opposing groups (to the status quo), it is merely people like you and similar persuasions going further into isolation. Quite frankly we have the entire world on our side, and on the other side you have a shrinking alliance, it is obvious what is going to give in the end. Let me give you a hint, it is not going to be the world.

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 3:51 am

        This is they way things have always been when dealing with funding sources.

        They define what they are giving money to, no matter how good and conforming to your understanding of what the charity’s mission is.

        They still decide.

        If they detect that their name is going to be associated with some communication that conflicts with their mission, or offends their primary donors, it is their choice who they give money to.

        Money will always be important. The left is adept at more ruthless litmus testing than what you are objecting to, to the point of intentionally killing institutions that break from political correctness.

        Its a real problem, that ruthlessness.

      • VR
        May 8, 2010, 4:02 am

        I do not need a lesson in the vicissitudes of charities, because this is not the subject. This fund has decided to dance on the head of a pin for one subject, and the result of that undivided support for Israel no matter what it does is ruthless – not merely a process endemic to charities. It results in the propagation of Apartheid, murderous settler colonial rule, and multiple atrocities which have assaulted the sensibilities of anyone with a humanitarian bone in their body. It is a subject which has received the multiple rhetorical censures of the world body (UN), and Israel has become a rogue and pariah state in its current course. This is the subject, those who are being cut off are the last vestiges of diversity and conscience in the community, and will result in the continued and ultimately complete isolation of those who want to continue this disgusting course.

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 4:18 am

        It doesn’t see BDS is the same way that you do.

        It sees advocacy for BDS as radical, off their scale.

        Have fun. Make your rhetorical point. The effect of it would be to throw the baby out with the bathwater, attempting to isolate all Jewish institutions because they identify some concern for Israel, and include some concern in their funding guidelines.

      • VR
        May 8, 2010, 4:26 am

        I am afraid that throwing the “baby out with the bathwater” is the funds forte RW, not mine. Their isolation is their own choice, it has nothing to do with the victims who are the target. I see you want to continue the conversation on the basis of blaming the victim, it is merely par for the course – you get a lot of practice doing so with the Palestinians, now you can do so with fellow Jews.

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 7:34 am

        The funds aren’t isolating is the reality though. The Jewish federation (I assume also in San Francisco) supports a gamut of services for Jewish community, and BY Jewish community to other communities.

        They simply concluded that they cannot in good conscience fund support of Jewish community and Israel (some) and bash it at the same time.

        A more productive effort would be reform, to attempt to influence the use of service-oriented funds, say to help Palestinian communities as an effort of establishing good neighbor relations.

      • jimby
        May 8, 2010, 8:03 am

        I think the point is that this behavior of the American Jewish Zionist is being exposed. It is knowledge that will change the situation. I guess the Quakers are troubling to Zionists in much the same way as someone like Idi Amin was troubled. Please shine the lights bright so we can see and judge for ourselves. Of course I am pessimistic since I consider the general American populace quite smug and ignorant. That ignorance is Israel’s best hope.

      • Shingo
        May 8, 2010, 8:16 am

        “That ignorance is Israel’s best hope”

        And Witty’s of course.

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 8:17 am

        Lame and utterly innaccurate response Shingo.

      • Shingo
        May 8, 2010, 8:20 am

        “Lame and utterly innaccurate response Shingo. ”

        That wold describe every one of your posts. You fear justice and scruitiny of Israel and woudl love the world, the American public in particular, to remain oblivious to Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity.

      • Shingo
        May 8, 2010, 8:22 am

        “It doesn’t see BDS is the same way that you do.”

        That’s to be expected Witty. We don’t see Zionisms and Israeli war crimes the way way you do.

        “It sees advocacy for BDS as radical, off their scale.”

        You see it becasue you want to, not because there’s any evidence of it.

        “The effect of it would be to throw the baby out with the bathwater, attempting to isolate all Jewish institutions because they identify some concern for Israel,”

        Wrong. There are Jewish instititions who support BDS.

      • Shingo
        May 8, 2010, 8:23 am

        Of course, let’s be reminded Witty, that Israel has every power to stop BDS in it’s tracks if it chooses to. The reason you fear BDS is becasue you know that Israel has become so radical and right wing that it has lost any sense of being rantional. It’s a pathological society.

        You know it. We all know it.

      • Citizen
        May 8, 2010, 10:53 am

        And, also to keep Goldstone from his grandson’s bar mitzveh, as it turned out–by of all people, fellow zionist jews why stayed around in metro S Africa after BDS took down the apartheid regime.

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 12:18 pm

        “The reason you fear BDS is becasue you know that Israel has become so radical and right wing that it has lost any sense of being rantional.”

        I don’t fear BDS because Israel is right wing. I fear BDS because it is part of a long flow of very angry and violent dissent, and connected with some of the people that have been violent historically. And, further, that it contains prominently advocacy for a single-state imposed.

        I agree with you that Israel is right-wing and currently governed by individuals and parties that I consider radical right and ideologically so, and more importantly actually suppressive to Palestinian legitimate individual and community rights.

      • Chaos4700
        May 8, 2010, 12:26 pm

        So again, it’s perfectly OK for Zionist organizations to engage in BDS practices detailed above, but when anyone else does it, it supposedly becomes a hateful and violent action.

        Is this kind of like how Israel can murder six Palestinians DURING A CEASEFIRE and that’s still considered no sort of breach of ceasefire whatsoever?

        Do you realize what a mockery you are making with your blatant double standards?

    • Chaos4700
      May 8, 2010, 10:23 am

      Oh, so it’s not “fascistic” when a Zionist organization is doing the boycotting, huh?

      The double standard continues to become painful in its unavoidability.

    • Surasky
      May 8, 2010, 11:55 am

      Not true.JVP campaigns all focus on divestment from companies that profit from the occupation- like the UC Berkeley initiative . We don’t categorically condemn other forms of boycott, but we don’t actively promote them either.clearly, we are proud to be a part of the larger BDS movement which takes various forms. We have been calling for a suspension of military aid to Israel until it abides by international law for years. But more to the point, as boycotting
      settlement goods becomes a mainstream liberal Zionist position, we will all, by these definitions, be banned from funded Jewish spaces.

  6. pabelmont
    May 8, 2010, 6:43 am

    For the moment, these horrible Jewish (we know who our friends are and you are no friend) groups are helping the rest of us to know which groups WE should support. I was surprised to see MADRE on the list. Goes to show.

    But we will laugh at them until they stop this nonsense and then we will be on our own again.

    The problem of getting Obama and IRS to list settler groups as terrorists is, of course, at the heart of this. I regard Israel as a supporter of terrorism and Israel as a “rogue state”, but fat chance department. The USA has always known who its fiends (sorry, friends) are.

  7. Julian
    May 8, 2010, 7:16 am

    It is BDS. This time it’s you being boycotted. Tough luck.
    You can always fund raise in Saudi Arabia like Human Rights Watch. Simply get on your knees, tell the Saudis how you love their open and free society and how much you hate Israel. The cash will flow in.

    • Chaos4700
      May 8, 2010, 10:15 am

      How come for Zionist Jews, it always boils down to money? Why do Zionist Jews reject the value of Jewish morality and humanism in favor of embracing the nasty stereotype of Jews as cynical money handlers?

      • jimby
        May 8, 2010, 10:32 am

        Hey Chaos, I don’t think that American Jewry is thinking clearly. It reminds me of old R.M. Nixon and Watergate. Before he left office in disgrace the general population refused to consider that a POTUS would lie to us. It was a huge paradigm shift coming on the coattails of the Vietnam War. It didn’t happen overnight and was tumultuous and difficult. Any sane reasoning person could tell that the War was built on lies, but there weren’t many of us. Once again a paradigm shift is happening and it will take time but will be.

      • Chaos4700
        May 8, 2010, 10:42 am

        It’s that the majority of American Jews aren’t thinking clearly, jimby, I think what’s happening is most of them are being cowed into silence by Zionists.

        Look at what happened to Goldstone — he’s not even anti-Zionist, but for the crime of telling the truth Zionist Jews tried to deprive his grandson of his bar mitzvah as retaliation.

        Zionist Jews are basically like abusive spouses. The smack around other Jews and say, “If you cross me, you don’t really love me! You have to choose between me, and the rest of the world outside!” And in spite of the abuse, Jews still love the abusive Zionists (they’re family after all, literally, if not literally spouses in some cases) so they fall silent.

        Zionist Jews force a false choice on the rest of Judaism — “We might be bad, but without us you’d all be soap and lampshades!” It’s emotional blackmail at its most institutionalized.

      • Citizen
        May 8, 2010, 11:16 am

        Nixon is on taped record (his own tapes) as being wary of the collective power of the Jews, and distrusting it as unAmerican; it’s clear he believed (Kissinger’s telling) that if the US would not save Israel in 1973 there’d have been Israeli use of nuclear force, the very force JFK was trying to stop when he was murdered.

      • Polly
        May 8, 2010, 2:11 pm

        “We might be bad, but without us you’d all be soap and lampshades!”

        LOL!!! I bet there’s a few Israeli generals who would LOVE to have that quote on their headstones!

        But I agree about the abusive spouse bit. I also think there’s a degree of “looking the other way” while the “tough Jews” go out and do whatever they gotta do to make that homeland a done deal.
        And that’s also where the denial kicks in because, as Joel Kovel points out in “Overcoming Zionism” Israel is all alone in the middle east surrounded by hatred on all sides, propped up by american bucks and spilled blood, with an increasingly suspicious US population slowly awakening from its 60 year slumber.
        Because of this Israel is only going to get one shot at becoming a country in its own right and the second the momentum slows toward that end, it’s really all over.
        This doesn’t justify anything the lobby does obviously but it’s my way of understanding the unwavering zealotry and the SPECTACULAR denial (examples would be superfluous) surrounding this topic.
        And it IS important to understand it because as VR pointed out the other day (I think it was VR) we are all the same underneath and I think that fact gets lost on this site sometimes.

      • Julian
        May 8, 2010, 3:31 pm

        The amount of time you spend on this blog shows money is not too important to you. To the rest of us that have families, it is a priority.
        Surasky is complaining about being cut off from the cash. I am amused how she favors doing it to others, but freaks out when it happens to her.
        Typical left winger.

      • Chaos4700
        May 8, 2010, 3:48 pm

        The amount of time you spend on this blog shows money is not too important to you.

        I know you didn’t intend it that way, but I’ll take that as a compliment. :)

    • Citizen
      May 8, 2010, 11:11 am

      Julian, I am sure the people who frequent this blog all are keenly aware of the fact the US supports arab dictatorships that exploit there own people, not the least of the Saud clan regime; it’s the same in S America. What has been the problem with Iran except that it succeeded in making Iranians, and not the tin pot Shah, the prime beneficiaries of Iran’s national oil? The Lobby’s interest in zionist land grabbing, and the US-Israeli military-industrial complex, plus US-Brit control of the oil spigot affecting the whole world, are really not new subjects on this web site.
      It does not matter to you Julian that Humans Rights Watch attempt to restrain these PTB; it only matters to you when Israel’s activities are focused on. I’ve never met a single American in nearly 6 decades of American life who thinks that the Sauds, for example, are an inspiration for humane values.

      • Julian
        May 8, 2010, 3:59 pm

        What has been the problem with Iran except that it succeeded in making Iranians, and not the tin pot Shah, the prime beneficiaries of Iran’s national oil?
        Could it be that the Mullah’s killed thousands of people including a good friend of mine?
        HRW is a phony organization. Everything they do is based on their left wing ideology. Every single member of their middle east bureau(or whatever they call it) is a long time Palestinian activist. Whitson went to Saudi Arabia covered from head to toe to beg the Saudi Government for money to fight Israel. This supposedly open organization refuses to release the minutes of the Saudi meeting. They refuse to release the investigation into Galasco. They seem to have a lot of secrets.

      • Chaos4700
        May 8, 2010, 4:36 pm

        The United States has killed over a million in the Middle East in less than a decade, with our wars. Millions of Palestinians are left without their homeland because of your Zionist right wing state.

        Neocon imperialists — like the people you vote for — stripped Iran of its democracy and installed that tin pot Shah.

        Who was this friend of yours, exactly?

      • Julian
        May 9, 2010, 7:44 am

        When I was in college, there were many Persians attending school with me. The government paid their education in the U.S. yet surprisingly they were all against the Shah, though I didn’t find that out until I got to know them very well. I became friends with Hamid who was in I think 2 of my classes. His brother was a Doctor. His father was a University Prof. He was Muslim but I don’t believe he was religious.
        What else do you want to know?

  8. Before you boycott Israel! linked to this.
  9. Red
    May 8, 2010, 10:38 am

    Julian, as HRW notes they do not accept funding from ANY government, let alone the Saudi Arabian one.

    Instead as HRW notes “Human Rights Watch staffers made presentations on our work to two private audiences in Saudi Arabia in May 2009 (as well as to audiences in Amman and Beirut). These were receptions in private homes, hosted by people who were interested in Human Rights Watch and who invited other guests to learn more about us. Among the guests at one of those receptions were the deputy head of the Human Rights Commission of Saudi Arabia and a member of the Shura Council, a government-appointed consultative body. Neither of these individuals was solicited for funds, nor would Human Rights Watch ever accept funds from such officials, in any country. Government officials are, of course, important interlocutors for our advocacy on Saudi human rights” policy. see: link to

    If HRW does not accept government funding from any country, including Saudi Arabia, what then is your problem Julian?

    Are you saying that just because someone is a born in Saudi Arabia or holds Saudi citizenship or is Muslim, that by virtue of this alone they can not be an advocate for human rights, either in their own country or other countries? In case you weren’t aware, Julian, an attitude such as this is called racism.

    This would be the same as saying that all individual Israelis or individual Jews are all human rights abuses because of the human rights abuses carried out by the Israeli state. This would be an outrageous and inaccurate thing to say about Jews and its no less inaccurate, racist and bigotted to say it about any other ethnic grouping, nationality or religion.

    In relation to the pro-Zionist groups in the US trying to implement a ban on Jewish donations to groups they have deemed to be anti-Israel, personally, I think its great. It will work to expose the intolerance, arrogance and McCarthyism of these Zionists groups. It will drive a wedge between them and more liberal Jews and it will add to the campaign to delink Zionism from Judaism. All of these things can only be a good thing.

    In addition, rather than strengthening support for Israel, it will backfire in their faces. I am always constantly amused by the arrogance of Zionists, who caught up in their own Zionist hasbara, fail to see how their arrogance and intolerance is one of the greatest assets the Palestinians have in the struggle for justice and self-determination. Just as the arrogant and intolerant attempt by Zionists to ban Goldstone from his grandson’s Bar Mitzvah backfired in their faces, so will this.

    Finally, the difference between the witchhunt being carried out by these Zionist groups in the US (and in Israel) and the Palestinian initiated BDS campaign is that BDS is solidly based on the upholding of human rights and international standards of law. This McCarthyite witchhunt being carried out by Zionist groups, however, is not. Instead, this is a campaign which seeks to defend Israel’s so-called “right” to be racist and to continue carrying out human right abuses and to stand above international law and not be held accountable for its warcrimes, human rights abuses and apartheid policies.

    People are not stupid, Julian, they can tell the difference between political basis for the two campaigns!

    • Citizen
      May 8, 2010, 11:33 am

      Red, I don’t disagree with what you say, I just want to point out that
      1950, ten leading movie producers were convicted of contempt against congress. They 
were called the Hollywood Ten, and nine of them were Jews. All had been asked 
to attend a hearing held by the committee for un-American activities in 
1948, and they had refused to testify. A major campaign started in Hollywood 
on behalf of the Ten, with several influential Jews fighting tooth and nail 
for their case. Major Jewish-owned newspapers denied that the Ten were 
communists; however, six of the Ten were members of the communist party, and 
the other four were found with well-documented communist activities in their baggage.
      On July 26, 1951, the FBI arrested fifteen of the American Communist Party’s 
leaders, all from the west coast. They were only second-tier leaders, the top 
leaders having already been sentenced to jail. Six of them were Jews; a 
seventh, Carl Rude Lambert, was probably Jewish, and the ethnicities of the 
other five were not established. Five more arrests were later made on the east 
coast; four of them were Jews. All were prosecuted for having conspired 
against the government of the United States.

      In 1953 
Jews Ethel and Julius Rosenberg were executed for giving atomic secrets to 
Soviets (they were actually at the center of a jewish spy ring). The 
Rosenbergs were and will continue for half a century to be a cause celebre 
among jewish leftist intellectuals who believe they were victims of an 
”anti-semitic withchhunt.” (Cf. Their replacement, guess who? )In 1995 the VENONA decrypts were declassified and 
released by the NSA proving that these and other jews were guilty.

The McCarthy Senate anti-Communist hearings begin, and continued for a total 
of 199 days. Jews attack Senator McCarthy mercilessly, since Communism in 
America was heavily Jewish in leadership. They even accused McCarthy of “anti-Semitism,” 
even though McCarthy has a Jewish sidekick (Roy Cohn).

      • Citizen
        May 8, 2010, 11:35 am

        Yes, after the Rosenbergs came this great man from the same tribe:
        link to

      • Avi
        May 8, 2010, 1:29 pm


        The entire Communist persecution in the United States is a questionable affair at best, certainly the McCarthyite era.

    • VR
      May 8, 2010, 12:17 pm

      .”Instead, this is a campaign which seeks to defend Israel’s so-called “right” to be racist and to continue carrying out human right abuses and to stand above international law and not be held accountable for its warcrimes, human rights abuses and apartheid policies”

      That was spot on Red, perhaps it is time to look at an older piece written by Joseph Massad –


      As for Citizens diatribe, apparently he has not learned the lesson that the “Red Scare,” that is, anti-communism was just a lame excuse to spread imperial destruction all over the world – just like the so-called “war on terror.” These lessons are hard learned, along with the “proofs” used by the NSA which have repeatedly been debunked.

      • VR
        May 8, 2010, 12:29 pm

        Here is an excerpt from Massad’s article linked above –

        “As for those among us who insist that no resolution will ever be possible before Israel revokes all its racist laws and does away with all its racist symbols, thus opening the way for a non-racist future for Palestinians and Jews in a decolonized bi-national state, Israel and its apologists have a ready-made response that has redefined the meaning of anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is no longer the hatred of and discrimination against Jews as a religious or ethnic group; in the age of Zionism, we are told, anti-Semitism has metamorphosed into something that is more insidious. Today, Israel and its Western defenders insist, genocidal anti-Semitism consists mainly of any attempt to take away and to refuse to uphold the absolute right of Israel to be a racist Jewish state.”

      • Chaos4700
        May 8, 2010, 12:32 pm

        That puts it rather aptly, I agree. We already see how Witty grills people who find the one state solution as acceptable as if they were advocating for a Second Holocaust.

      • Donald
        May 8, 2010, 12:35 pm

        There’s also a prominent article in the NYT Book Review by well known literary critic Harold Bloom that equates anti-Zionism with anti-semitism–he goes on to say that over half the countries in the world treat people worse than Israel treats the Palestinians.

        link to

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 12:52 pm

        What do you think of his thesis regarding anti-semitism in general, that it is alive not long gone and forgotten?

      • Richard Witty
        May 8, 2010, 12:53 pm

        The contrast between Shakepeare and Marlowe was interesting.

      • Donald
        May 8, 2010, 12:54 pm

        Anti-semitism is alive, but is often lumped in opportunistically with criticism of Zionism, both by Zionists and also by some anti-semites.

    • Julian
      May 8, 2010, 4:07 pm

      Nice quote from Human Rights Watch. I don’t believe it for a second. Where are the minutes from the Saudi trip? What are they hiding Red?

      • Chaos4700
        May 8, 2010, 4:37 pm

        Find those WMDs yet, huh?

      • Red
        May 9, 2010, 3:19 am

        LOL, you are funny Julian! :D Your argument is proven to be incorrect, so you resort to throwing mud and innuendo. Always the last resort of those who can’t make hard cold concrete facts suit their arguments! But please do keep it up, Zionist arrogance is such a great boon to the Palestine solidarity movement. As I said, people are not stupid, they can see through it and can tell the difference between mud throwing and actual facts.

        Oh and nice side step of my question by the way! Never one to let sleeping dog’s lie, so I will ask again … are you saying, Julian, that just because someone is a born in Saudi Arabia or holds Saudi citizenship or is Muslim, that by virtue of this alone they can not be an advocate for human rights, either in their own country or other countries? Yes or No? If your answer is no, then you should have absolutely no problem with HRW. But if your answer is yes, well then as I pointed out Julian, such an attitude is called racism.

      • Julian
        May 9, 2010, 8:19 am

        Unfortunately we are not talking about a Saudi off the street, but government representatives and the Saudi elite.
        Members of the Shura Council were at the meeting. Do you believe they are champions of human rights?
        If your answer is yes you are a fool. These are the people who pass laws killing homosexuals. Keeping woman from driving a car. Not allowing woman from leaving their homes without a chaperon etc.
        If your answer is no you admit HRW needs to reform and fire their whole middle east division.

  10. VR
    May 8, 2010, 12:21 pm

    In fact, I think you can find these sentiments amply displayed here, in regard to the “spirit” of the time –


  11. VR
    May 8, 2010, 1:17 pm

    I think a distinction has to be made between real antisemitism that drove much of the McCarthyism earlier (you will notice in the link “Natural Born Spies”) how “the Jews” are lumped together by Nixon, and he lumps together the Rosenberg’s with Ellsberg’s exposure of the Vietnam war. This is a far cry from Zionism’s enthronement in the heart of power in Washington today, and spying for the purpose of exploitation done for Israel. The bludgeon of “all Jews” was used in the McCarthy era evoking classic antisemitism, as opposed to this Zionist contingency among us today.

Leave a Reply