Alan Dershowitz says that Jews are all over the media, but you can't generalize about their views (emphasis mine):
Yes, there are many individual Jews in positions of influence in Hollywood, in network television, in sports and entertainment, and in many other areas of American public life. These individuals, who happen to be Jewish, do not act together in any kind of conspiratorial manner. There is no "Jewish control" of any of these areas -- or of the many other areas, such as medicine, law, academia, finance -- where there are large numbers of individual Jews in high positions. Many of these individuals are Jewish only in the sense that their parents or grandparents happen to be Jews. They do not live Jewish lives or support Jewish causes. They certainly do not conspire to exercise any sort of "Jewish control" over the areas in which they work. Indeed, many individual Jews who are in positions of authority are anti-Israel and critical of Jewish values.
But Dershowitz himself generalizes, fervently, about Jewish views in The Vanishing American Jew [emphasis mine]:
My generation of Jews saw important reasons for remaining Jewish, even if we did not always practice the ritual or completely believe in the theology. As actual or vicarious survivors of the Holocaust, of Israel's defense against sworn enemies, and of the numerous assaults on Judaism and Zionism, we saw ourselves as having a vital-- indeed, a sacred-- mission: to protect embattled Jews against our external enemies. We were part of a long traditon of defending the Jewish barricades, which were always on the verge of being overrun by... the pogromists, the Nazis, the Arabs, the religiously inspired Jew-haters... and the assorted bigots and crazies who have persecuted us from the beginning of Jewish history.
P.S. I believe
that Dershowitz's second statement actually reflects the "sacred" charge felt by Jews in powerful positions. Former CNN correspondent Linda Scherzer has said, "We, as Jews, must understand that we come with a certain bias…We believe in the Israeli narrative of history. We support the values that we as Americans, Westerners, and Jews espouse. Thus, we see news reporting through our own prism." This blog was cut off at the New York Observer because its owner is a Zionist. The NYT's former executive editor Max Frankel wrote, "I was much more deeply devoted to Israel than I dared to assert … Fortified by my knowledge of Israel and my friendships there, I myself wrote most of our Middle East commentaries. As more Arab than Jewish readers recognized, I wrote them from a pro-Israel perspective." NBC's Jeff Zucker said he didn't want news of "jihadists raging about Palestine." I'd sure like to meet some of those anti-Israel editors.
Can one imagine any other influential ethnic group even trying to make the argument that Dershowitz does?
When white male WASP dominance came under attack decades ago, the response — after some foot-dragging — was: well, you’ve got a point there. Affirmative action followed.
By contrast, when Jewish dominance is critiqued, the response is simply to deny, deny, deny, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Intellectual honesty is cast out the window in favor of tendentious sophistry.
Here’s a parody on the Dersh:
‘Yes, there are many individual Koreans in positions of influence in greengrocery. These individuals, who happen to be Korean, do not act together in any kind of conspiratorial manner. There is no “Korean control” of greengrocery — or of the many other areas, such as fresh fish, kimchi, and Korean restaurants — where there are large numbers of individual Koreans in high positions. Many of these individuals are Korean only in the sense that their parents or grandparents happen to be Korean. They do not live Korean lives or support Korean causes. They certainly do not conspire to exercise any sort of “Korean control” over the areas in which they work. Indeed, many individual Koreans who are in positions of authority are anti-Korea and critical of Korean values.’
Sounds ludicrous, don’t it — both the original and the parody. Only an impaired, unoriginal mind could spew such nonsense.
Here’s another parody by Hitchens:
“I wasted a little time before writing this article, to see if I could produce a satire or a parody. This would have consisted of a fundraising letter from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee to a potential donor. “Dear Leo,” it might begin. “We are asking you, even in these straitened times, to make the largest contribution you can afford. The security of the state of Israel is threatened as never before, and your help is urgently required. Alas, we can offer you nothing in return for your donation. Our representatives are still treated with scorn and contempt in the halls of Congress and by the White House. The news media remain deaf to our entreaties. If you choose to attend our annual conference, we can offer you nothing by way of ‘access.’ As usual, the secretaries of state and defence and the leadership of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will find plausible reasons to be absent. So will the speaker of the House and the Senate majority leader. Try to think of your contribution as a mitzvah: a private good deed that may not even go unpunished.”
quite a good article:
Read more: link to nationalpost.com
Ah another “nice list”:
the pogromists, the Nazis, the Arabs, the religiously inspired Jew-haters
Ah, another interesting list:
the progromists = active antisemites, killing antisemites, “the Arabs” = the collective antisemite, the Nazis = hyperactive antisemites, killing antisemites, the religiously antisemites = non-active antisemites but on the verge of turning into one of the former.
Ok, another one of my rash actions, a horse for a preview option.
So let’s look again at the point of the last item in the list:
the religiously inspired Jew-haters = how it all started, symbolizing that antisemitism won’t go away ever, since there will always be the necessary causal religious difference. At any time this type can turn into one of to two first on the list, the As Christian antisemitism gave birth to the progromists and Nazis now it’s simply the “backward” Arab society’s turn.
But it’s simply outrageous to put the Arabs collectively into this list.
What does our list’s Dershowitz defender think about this list?
Richard?
LeaNder; I notice too D put ALL Arabs on the otherwise more specific sh** list of eternal oppressors of Jews. Who can not notice this and pretend D is not a rascist by the common accepted meaning? Obviously D does not feel he even needs to anticipate defense of this inclusion of a whole ethnic group of humans–how many billion? By vice of their birth per se. D is so crazed with ziocaine he does this in his parsed defense of Jews, which boils down to they are not not simply a single focused collective of people; essentially, Western individualism is liberally applied to all Jews to protect them while simultaneously Arabs are a collective, born anti-semites without any exceptions.
Yes, ‘the Arabs’ is the odd one out. My eyes hooked, but dershes writing hand did not.
Even if we allow Dersh his newer view, recall what happened to Rick Sanchez: all these people, Jews of whatever stripe (w.r.t. Israel), if they work in Hollywood, the media, etc., they work FOR big-money, very-powerful, evidently-ruthless people (many of them Jews, some perhaps Episcopalians, who knows?, for whatever that’s worth) who support the right-wing Israeli lines. [Imagine anyone working for Marty Peretz on TNR.] What the Jews in media (with conspicuous exceptions, e.g. PW) do NOT do is make a statement like this:
The news from Israel/Palestine is really bad this morning. Let me say, up front,
that I am a Jew and was brought up to revere Israel and to support Israel in
every way. I no longer can. I am heart-sick about all the recent news, from
the 2009 Israeli slaughter of Gazans to the murderous boarding of the ship
Mavi Marmara which was attempting to break the illegal Israeli blockade
of Gaza, to XXX XXX XXX which happened today. I cannot be silent
any longer.
THAT’S WHAT WE DON’T HEAR FROM JEWS (or anyone else) IN (mainstream) MEDIA.
Should we hear such things from Jews in media? Well, yes, and from all other human beings as well, but especially from Jews, because such a message would “give permission” to others (other Jews, and non-Jews) to follow suit. And the Sanchez-treatment would be particularly noticeable if it happened following such a statement.
PABELMONT- In fairness, can you imagine any main stream commentator honestly describing the Empire’s murderous thugery in AfPak and elsewhere?
As actual or vicarious survivors of the Holocaust, of Israel’s defense against sworn enemies, and of the numerous assaults on Judaism and Zionism, we saw ourselves as having a vital– indeed, a sacred– mission: to protect embattled Jews against our external enemies.
what exactly is a ‘vicarious survivor of the Holocaust’? are these the same people vicariously avenging the horrors of the Holocaust from the safety of their tenured seats in Cambridge and elsewhere?
“Vicarious survivors of the holocaust”
Normally I wouldn’t even attempt to try to measure degrees of suffering but it suddenly occurred to me that however much anyone suffers from the memory of the holocaust I doubt if they were offered a choice between that and the individual suffering EVERYBODY is capable of feeling over losing a loved one or say, watching a parent disappear through alzheimers, they would take the latter.
I think “vicarious survivors” are like “vicarious zionists” or “vicarious kibbutzim”, or “vicarious IDF soldiers”: transparent attempts to garner sympathy or respect.
Dersh identifies the primary motivator of his generation for “remaining Jewish” – the very same one the State of Israel and diaspora Zionists have been trying to duplicate by creating more and more generations of “vicarious survivors of the Holocaust”.
Exactly, and young American Jews are sent over to get their dose of ziocaine (kudos to Mooser) on their aptly named “Birthright” tour.
SHMUEL- You got that right! Birthright tours of Auschwitz. Wrapping Jewish kids in Israeli flags. Indoctrination pure and simple.
You know, he’s got a good point. It’s silly to think that Jews want to impose ‘Jewish control’ or run things ‘in a Jewish way’. Theology is certainly very far from the interests of those who are in America’s elite.
I agree with him that these people just happen to be Jewish. The problem is that they preach to the rest of us about diversity, inclusion, representation of minorities, etc. They just don’t practice it themselves. On any given day more than half the NYT editorial page is taken us by a very, very unrepresentative slice of the U.S.A.
So I think people are more frustrated by the hypocrisy and want a bite at the apple, too.
Phil’s word ‘clubby’ is much more on the mark.
Well, yes they do just happen to be Jewish, in the same way in the same way any ethnic group happens to be what it is. Birth and family upbringing. But all of them do not just happen to be in the slots they are.
Jim Haygood says take a look at the WASPs. At one time they heavily influenced/were the power/key culture. They are not so anymore, despite remaining a part of the largest single demography (whites) and still form part of the largest Religion in the USA, (Christians). For the last 40 plus
years WASPs have been the butt of negative satire, ridicule etc in our popular culture–the exact reverse of the hold they had during the reign of Brooks Brothers. Yet now, with so many MOTs in charge in positions affecting the lives of all Americans, though they are hardly 2% of the population, it’s a joke among stand-up comedians you can make fun of anyone “just don’t fuck with the jews.” And so it goes, as Kurt V said.
GELLIAN “…of Israel’s defense against sworn enemies, and of the numerous assaults on Judaism and Zionism, we saw ourselves as having a vital– indeed, a sacred– mission: to protect embattled Jews against our external enemies.”
You don’t detect a unifying ideology/outlook here? This is a description of individuals who just happen to be Jewish?
Who has “sworn enemies”? The very notion is silly. There is a fundamental inability to stop obsessing over the past and instead look to the future. If one goes around thinking some other ethnic or religious group is your sworn enemy, then they will be in perpetuity, and one can only blame one’s own stupidity.
Do Zionists NEED a sworn enemy? Can one be a Zionist without one? I suggest that this dynamic may extend far back into the past. Josephus, in his The Jewish War describes the bitter hatred between Syrians and Jews back when the former worshiped Baal, far before Islam. IIRC, Vespasian saved some Syrian cohorts from the 8?th Legion as reserve shock troops in his assault on the first major city he took (I forget the name; the one where Josephus himself was commander and at which he was captured) because they were full of hatred and thirsty for vengeance for many of their number had been massacred by Jews earlier in the revolt. IIRC, at the end of siege of Jerusalem, these same Syrians were the first to start cutting Jews fleeing the city open to search their entrails for valuables they might have ‘eaten’ to avoid being seized. This was too barbarous, even for Romans, and Vespasian IIRC had to execute some soldiers to put a clamp on it.
How much of this “sworn enemy” nonsense is about holding a grudge and passing it down through the generations?
Speaking of sworn enemies, Netanyahu has repeatedly described the Iranians as Amalek.
May 2009:
‘Netanyahu Sees Iran as Amalek, Advisor Says’
link to israelnationalnews.com
January 2010:
”A new Amalek is appearing,’ Netanyahu warns at Auschwitz’
link to jpost.com
The first of those articles (by the settler rag Israel National News – Arutz Sheva) doesn’t mince words of how jews are supposed to deal with Amalek:
Though no identifiable Amalekites remain in the world, the Torah commands the Jews to wipe out every last vestige of the evil that Amalek represents. Every year, when the Torah passage known as Zachor is read, Jews stream to their synagogues to hear the verse, ” ‘Remember what Amalek did to you on the way, upon your departure from Egypt’… ‘You shall erase the memory of Amalek from beneath the heavens, you shall not forget.’.”
As always Israel is rich with irony, while endlessly repeating Ahmadinejad’s badly translated quote about Israel disappearing from the pages of history, Netanyahu is inciting the genocide of the Iranian people. Talk about religious extremists.
Sumud, thanks for the reminder; it remains astute.
Everytime Dershowitz opens his mouth, we get a different history, a different narrative and a different rationale. I would really like to hear Dershowitz explain HOW THE JEWISH PEOPLE COULD EVEN EXIST IF NOT FOR DEEP FEELINGS OF TRIBALISM????
I mean, if it weren’t for that, I think a lot of jews, a long time ago, would have said, “hey man, this being jewish thing is really really hard- let’s go bowling…” Jews would have been assimilated “into history” and that would have been that. There are many examples of such things taking place in history, peoples go “poof” – the fact that Jews are still around– and thriving– should be a point of pride, and it is, just Dershowitz can’t be caught talking about it…… hush hush. Not to be a jerk, but when Kennedy said that he “wasn’t the Catholic nominee for President, he was the Democratic party’s candidate for president, who happened also to be a Catholic” – I think he meant it; Dershowitz’ assertion of the same dynamic, on behalf of “his generation of Jews” seems, well, laughable.
” I would really like to hear Dershowitz explain HOW THE JEWISH PEOPLE COULD EVEN EXIST IF NOT FOR DEEP FEELINGS OF TRIBALISM????”
Good point Dan, especially seeing as so many Israeli supporters insist on referring to themselves as “the Jews”, while railing against any suggestion there is tribalism at work.
Yeah, I agree. And this isn’t good for anyone–further, when JFK so identified himself the Vatican was armed with a few Swiss in old-fashioned dress and show battle axes–Israel is nuclear armed, and is in at least fourth place both as to military power (thanks USA taxpayers) and
as a world weapons seller.
I saw the Dersh interviewed by Max Blumenthal recently. The Dersh looks very old. Who will replace him and his Weltanschauung ? That is Israel’s biggest problem. The Dersh and his generation are sewn up but are the next 2 generations as solid? Did Cast Lead turn off another few percentage points?
When two or more suspects are arrested, they are usually separated from one another so as to prevent them from being able to coordinate their stories of the crime.
In his perverse but ironically acurate (in this case) manner, Dershowitz understands that over the past 60 years, Jews have become white and privileged, uber-white and uber-priveleged. They became completely assimilated, but unlike other white ethnic groups had something to offer the the WASP establishment that has allowed them to retain an ersatz ethnic/moral/religious identity: Israel, the Holocaust, “Judeo-Christian” civilization (necessary to re-invent after the end of the Cold War). Jewish identity also was generated as a contrast to Black Power in the 1960s-70s, demonizing the “anti-Semitism” of blacks who named Jewish hypocrisy.
This form of Jewish identity, not at all challenging U.S. elite interests but instead providing those crass economic interests with timely and convenient moral justifications, sailed along pretty well until the beginning of the 2nd intifada ten years ago this month. Dershowitz understands at some level what is happening, and of course he’s upset and flailing around, evoking the historical virtuous Jew while (accurately) admitting that that Jew has been nothing more than a typical American climber-grabber.
What was seen as the ultimate in Jewish high-mindedness has taken a huge fall–see, for example, the front page NYT story on Hevesi, who Norman Finkelstein marked as a Holocaust Industry hoodlum years ago.
But Dershowitz is right–there’s no point in seeing Jewish Power, in relation to the media or anything else, as anything more than White Power and capitalist power. Otherwise his critics play right into his hands. Let’s not do things that allow him to feel morally superior, which is what we do when we emphasize “Jewish control” rather than “elite, corporate control.” Let’s call him on his support for White Power, capitalist power, global hegemonic power.
And don’t forget, Rich Sanchez had a problem with his own status, not with Israel.
But Dershowitz is right–there’s no point in seeing Jewish Power, in relation to the media or anything else, as anything more than White Power and capitalist power.
no, he’s wrong, as are you. jewish, or more accurately zionist, power has multiple interests that are not compatible with the interests of american consumer capitalism, the constant bleating for war with Iran being but one recent example. also many, including dershowitz, promote the preservation of a distinct ethnic/religious identity that in no way promotes or benefits american consumer capitalism. and although many WASPs of the waspish elite had an affinity for britain that played out in some instances in a policy of favoritism for Britain, the interests of america and britain were never understood to be so synonymous as the interests of america and israel, as to undermine american interests.
Further, for example, the WASPs accepted their guilt and have been paying pop cultural reparations for a long time now, and the present SCOTUS is Catholic and Jewish–not a WASP in the bunch. There’s not much left of them as anything but a virtual aberration–dufus Bush Jr
was their last bad joke on us all. Where’s Debbie Boone?
Yeah. Let’s do that. Right. And while WE are at it, let’s also pretend as though the Israel Lobby is nothing but a lobby that works to further America’s interests in the Middle East.
Exactly who do you think you’re fooling, Green?
His name is Rick, not Rich. You would have known that had you been paying attention.
A quick online search for “Rich Sanchez”, tells me which websites you frequent. I’m not impressed.
By the way, it’s nice of you to drop by once in every 6 months whenever topics revolving around “Jewish power” in America come up.
Of course, you know that White Power, elite corporate control, lessens by demography by the day, and multi-cultural power, is not in the least color blind; rather it is severely color-sensitive. One small example is Acorn, the affirmative action side of the bailout; which is stronger overall (Obamacare adds to Medicaid rolls) under Obama, and, of course, Goldman Sachs et al are too. I guess the substantial majority of whites in the lower and lower middle to middle-middle class see no sign of White Power helping them. As to our foreign policy in the middle east, there’s no benefit for them there either–unless they join their brethren in the volunteer military cannonfodder ranks.
As much as Alan Dershowitz professes to be on the side of embattled Jewry, it’s his conflation of Zionism with Judaism that’s the Jew’s biggest threat. Here in America, for example, with their incessant equating of U.S. interests with those of Israel, Zionists are setting up Jewish Americans for the inevitable backlash that will come once the public realizes that it’s been duped. Inevitable, that is, unless us Jewish Americans in ever greater numbers come to our senses and support justice for Palestine.
yourstruly,
The problem is not so much that equation about which you speak, but more importantly the process through which Jewish identity in the United States is immersed, in both direct and indirect, attachment to Israel as the home of the Jewish people.
That attachment is changing, as evidenced by polls which show that younger Jews have little if any attachment to Israel.
yourstruly,
I agree. But, it will take at least another 20 years or so before that generation of younger Jews becomes influential in any politically meaningful way. At the moment the center of political and financial power rests in the hands of the baby boomer generation.
The zionists’ core premise is the next pogrom is always right around the corner; it would be helpful for them to review historically what might have contributed to the power of anti-semitic demagoguery in those prior corners other than “they killed Jesus” or “its in the goyishe DNA”. Even little children have eyes and ears. And, further, if I’m not mistaken, that includes little Arab and Persian children.
Exactly what was it in those other corners that led to antisemitism other than different beliefs or custom. Whenever you get a chance you hint that there’s something else, so come on, what was or is it?
Read up on Weimar Germany in between the world wars. On Russia/Urkraine, read 200 Years Together. You might also try Karl Marx. Socio-economic-monetary history actually does have some relation to modern history then and now. The Spanish Inquisition happened a long time ago.
BTW, all the subjects I mentioned have been discussed in detail on this blog–perhaps you just missed them all over the last couple of years? Different beliefs and customs hardly touches the surface.
“Even little children have eyes and ears. And, further, if I’m not mistaken, that includes little Arab and Persian children. ”
But Israel has ways of adjusting that situation.
Part of this i put forward on another topic, just for flip flop terms a’la Dersho ( more like zionist overall, see similarity ):
1930 Simpson report League Of Nations :
“” The Jewish Labour Movement considers the Arab population as an integral element in this country. It is not to be thought of that Jewish settlers should displace this population, nor establish themselves at its expense. This would not only be impossible both from the political and economic standpoint, but it would run counter to the moral conception lying at the root of the Zionist movement. Jewish immigrants who come to this country to live by their own labour regard the Arab working man as their compatriot and fellow worker, whose needs are their needs and whose future is their future.”"
link to unispal.un.org
Back to year 1919 and King-Crane commission report :
“”(3) The Commission recognised also that definite encouragement had been given to the Zionists by the Allies in Mr. Balfour’s often quoted statement, in its approval by other representatives of the Allies. If, however, the strict terms of the Balfour Statement are adhered to-favouring “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,” “it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” – it can hardly be doubted that the extreme Zionist programme must be greatly modified. For a national home for the Jewish people is not equivalent to making Palestine into a Jewish State; nor can the erection of such a Jewish State be accomplished without the gravest trespass upon the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission’s conferences with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete disposition of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase.”"
“” The Peace Conference should not shut its eyes to the fact that the anti-Zionist feeling in Palestine and Syria is intense and not lightly to be flouted. No British officer, consulted by the Commissioners, believed that the Zionist programme could be carried out except by force of arms. The officers generally thought that a force of not less than 50,000 soldiers would be required even to initiate the programme. That of itself is evidence of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist programme, on the part of the non-Jewish populations of Palestine and Syria. Decisions requiring armies to carry out are sometimes necessary, but they are surely not gratuitously to be taken in the interests of serious injustices. For the initial claim, often submitted by Zionist representatives, that they have a “right” to Palestine based on an occupation of 2,000 years ago, can hardly be seriously considered. “”
link to unispal.un.org
According to Hitchens:
“I ask myself if the world in which I have worked for so many decades–the intersecting and overlapping world of the news media, publishing, the academy, and the think-tank industry–is even imaginable without the presence of liberal American Jews. The answer is plainly no,” Hitchens writes. “Moreover, I can’t think of any other ‘minority’ of which this is remotely true, unless it were to be the other minority from which I can claim descent: people of British or Anglophile provenance.”
link to huffingtonpost.com
It’s always someone with a personal slight. What’s that poem? Oh yes. Those to whom evil is done do evil in return. Phil was fired from the Observer by a Jew, so now Phil makes it his mission in life to rip on Jews.
Let’s see. Phil, who is Jewish, runs a blog with Adam, who is also Jewish. The blog is supported by the Nation Institute. The new President of the Nation Institute is Andrew Breslau, who is Jewish. The publisher of the Nation is Jewish.
Hmm. So Jews hold varying opinions. Like everyone else does.
So which is it, Weiss?
In your very tortured attempt to make Alan Dershowitz look inconsistent, you destroy your own case. You’re just another guy with a personal beef that you’re taking up with a whole people. That you’re a Jew and you do this makes you more sad, not more credible.
Nobody expects the Israeli Inquisition! Among their methods are…
Tortured attempt? Hardly. Easy as pie.
“Two Jews, three opinions.” With lawyer Dershowitz, its, one Jew, nine opinions (more, if necessary to make any given point).
Remember the video of Dersh debating some J Street guy at the AIPAC conference. His main point was that all Jews had to stand together on this issue, and J Street was dangerous precisely because it was putting forth a different view.
E Pluribus Unum (whatever)–gives new meaning huh? Both Israel and the USA are especially struggling with that, yes?
Dershowitz is so full of it. I challenge him to go and ask Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Ed and the rest why they never touch the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Why Rachel is all over gay human rights issues (her owners allow this) and the protest in Iran (her owners allow this) but will not touch Palestinian human rights issues. Have you ever seen any footage on any of those talking heads programs that show Palestinians going through check points, illegal Israeli settlers ripping out Palestinian olive trees or being ousted from their homes? Did you hear any of these talking heads even whisper about the Goldstone Report. Not a whisper.
Who the hell does Dershowitz think he is kidding. His bullshit was called out on the carpet by Walt and Mearsheimer. And before that Carter.
Of course the Jewish lobby and money has a disproportionate amount of influence about what makes it on these news programs. The genie is out of the bottle and there is no way to stuff it back in.
I want to see Dershowitz have a conference with the focus being his claims about the media and the news or absence of coverage on the conflict on our MSM networks. Want to hear him ask the host of those shows if they feel the freedom to cover this issue honestly without suffering repercussions.
In publishing this article Philip Weiss slightly opens the door to what has been the most taboo of subjects in blogs that deal with the I/P situation – does disproportionate Jewish ownership and influence in the US media restrict criticism of Israeli actions and policies and demonize the Palestinians?
However, having opened that door, by “moderation”, Mr. Weiss does not permit the linkage to articles that examine the extent of that ownership and influence.
Google it for yourselves.
Wasn’t it you, Kathleen, who directly asked Chris Matthews why he doesn’t cover said subjects? And didn’t he tell you he doesn’t have any control over the programming? This of course, if followed, raises the question who does?
Yep. When he said that we both looked at one another with acknowledgment. What else would be the reason for these critical issues not being on the so called progressive MSNBC.
Has Rachel ever spoken about Haredi and Orthodox rejection of homosexuals? Has she spoken of Israeli opposition to gay marriage? The stabbing of a homosexual marchers by the Haredim? The lynchings of homosexuals in Muslim lands? The “death to homosexuals” preaching in “moderate” American mosques? No?
Good point. With her owners permission Rachel has clearly taken on this issue dear to her heart. But only takes it so far. One human rights issue for her. Well she will cover protest in Iran aud nauseum also with her owners permission of course. Palestinian human rights. Forget about it.
She did not even whisper about the Goldstone Report or the UN report on the Gaza Flotilla. You know the report where they describe the executions of the 9 activist.
Norm Finkelstein/Alan Dershowitz
Part 1
link to youtube.com
Part 2
link to youtube.com
link to democracynow.org
This video has become my feel-good video, whenever I’m down.
Just bring out the pop-corn bowl and watch :D.
Dershowitz in the debate with Finkelstein
“Because I argue in the book that no country in history faced with comparable threats both external and internal has ever tried to hard to comply with the rule of law.”
Have never seen this
Goldstone Facts
link to normanfinkelstein.com
Listened to this debate when it happened. Listening again. You have to listen to this.
link to democracynow.org
Dershowitz
“These individuals, who happen to be Jewish, do not act together in any kind of conspiratorial manner. There is no “Jewish control” of any of these areas — or of the many other areas, such as medicine, law, academia, finance — where there are large numbers of individual Jews in high positions.”
At Democracy Now
Alan Dershowitz Admits Lobbying Against Tenure For Norman Finkelstein
Meanwhile here in this country, one of academia’s most prominent critics of Israel—Norman Finkelstein—is facing an uphill battle to receive tenure at Depaul University where he has taught for six years. His tenure has been approved at the departmental and college level but the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences has opposed it. A final decision is expected to be made by May. Finkelstein has accused Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz of being responsible for leading the effort to deny him tenure. In an interview with the Harvard Crimson, Dershowitz admitted that he had sent a letter to DePaul faculty members lobbying against Finkelstein’s tenure.
link to democracynow.org
Noam Chomsky Accuses Alan Dershowitz of Launching a “Jihad” to Block Norman Finkelstein From Getting Tenure at Depaul University
Chomsky20070417
We play Part II of our conversation with two of the country’s leading dissidents, Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn. In the interview, we ask Chomsky about Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz who is lobbying DePaul faculty members to oppose Norman Finkelstein’s bid to receive tenure. Chomsky says, “Dershowitz] launched a jihad against Norman Finkelstein simply to try and vilify and defame in the hope that maybe what he is writing will disappear.” [includes rush transcript]
Remember Charles Freeman? No Jewish group effort to get rid of Charles Freeman (choke) Dershowitz is a liar. Period
Defeating Freeman: A Patriotic Duty
link to huffingtonpost.com
Those who successfully challenged the nomination of Charles W. Freeman, Jr. to become chairman of the National Intelligence Council should be praised for an act of high patriotism. It would have been disastrous for the United States to have, as the person responsible for overseeing “policy-neutral intelligence assessments” for the president, a zealot who is anything but policy-neutral when it comes to two of the most important areas of international conflict.
Charles Freeman fails the loyalty test
link to salon.com
UPDATE III: Chuck Schumer — who supported Bush’s nomination of Michael Hayden for CIA Director despite his key role in implementing Bush’s illegal eavesdropping program, and supported Bush’s nomination of Michael Mukasey as Attorney General despite his refusal to say that waterboarding was torture — is now boasting about the role he played in blocking Freeman’s appointment, all based on Freeman’s crimes in speaking ill of the U.S. Israel:
Charles Freeman was the wrong guy for this position. His statements against Israel were way over the top and severely out of step with the administration. I repeatedly urged the White House to reject him, and I am glad they did the right thing.
UPDATE IV: Lynch mob leader Jonathan Chait of Marty Peretz’s magazine, who spent the last week denying that Israel was the driving force behind the attacks on Freeman, brings himself to acknowledge the truth now that Freeman has been vanquished for his blasphemy:
Of course I recognize that the Israel lobby is powerful, and was a key element in the pushback against Freeman, and that it is not always a force for good.
Don’t forget to give deserved credit to the ZOA for its hand in dumping the courageous, earnest and patriotic Free_man.
If memory serves, ZOA operatives worked hard ferreting out statements by Freeman and especially ripping them from their judicious contexts, to smear the man.
To me, Dersh’s second statement is clear – many Jews of his generation rejected the religious creed yet adopted the ideological creed of Zionism. And are just as irrationally devoted to that as any fanatical cultist. Our frustration with that is the level of control that they’ve gained of the political machinery and the discourse, making positive change all but impossible.
Yep. Zionism is a secular religion; more harmful than the equally crazy and equally single-minded Christian Zionists–but at least the Hagee clones don’t hide.
“These individuals, who happen to be Jewish, do not act together in any kind of conspiratorial manner.”
link to camera.org
link to campus-watch.org
link to aipac.org
link to jinsa.org
Camera going after Carter
link to camera.org
Dershowitz and others of his ilk have no problems using the collective when it suits him
• Self hating Jews – and the need to come in to the collective fold
• Various detailed enemies that are of the ethnic other are collectivized
• Self defense tropes use Jews as a collective.. against often a collectivized enemy
However, he hates it when it is used back at him, in a critical sense.
Dershi and ilk speak for all “the Jews” and “Jewish community” while their critics are simply each insane, speak only for themselves, are self-haters –or goy anti-semites, which is redundant. See how easy it is?
In terms of the contradiction between the two passages I think the key is generational. Dershowitz was born in 1938 and thus when he describes himself as a type of vicarious Holocaust survivor this feeling is based on the fact that had he been born a Jew in Europe his odds of surviving from 1938 until 1945 would have been extremely poor. I think Jerome Slater spoke for his and Dershowitz’s generations when he spoke of his support for Zionism in 1948. I think Dershowitz is also speaking for his classmates from Brooklyn, who like him shared skepticism about the sacredness of the texts that they were taught, but because of the history of the years of their youths they had an almost automatic understanding of Jewish vulnerability and the need to fight those who would target Jews.
Those who do not belong to his generation and certainly those who did not grow up in Brooklyn in those years, were not formed by the same circumstances and thus their commitment to Jewish causes of any sort are certainly not nearly as automatic.
Obviously the attitude of this blog and the commentators views the defense of Israel as something evil rather than sacred. And certainly nepotism is not something that deserves to be defended. But the breakup of the quotas that were erected in the face of Jewish applicants to schools and corporations was an accomplishment that should be acknowledged. And on the foreign policy front, the struggle to free Soviet Jews from the oppressive system that imprisoned them was also a fight that deserves acknowledgement, although I understand that this blog opposes the fact that some of them wanted to migrate to Israel and many of them were inspired by Zionist victories, nonetheless the struggle for their freedom was a worthy battle fought by Dershowitz’s generation.
Many Jews from the same generation as Dershewitz opposed Zionism and still do. What’s more Zionism hasn’t been as much about saving Jews from antisemitism as about establishing a Jewish state*. That’s why Zionist leaders nixed plans for sending tens of thousands of Jews to safe refuge in the West. For these Zionist leaders it was either get thee to Palestine or perish. Same goes for the indifference (or even resistance) of American Zionists to pushing FDR and the Democratic congress to opening our doors to Jewish immigrants from Europe. Noteworthy in this regard were the mea culpas from Zionist organizations a couple decades ago, in which they acknowledge that they could have done more to save Europe’s Jews from Hitlers ovens. Yet even today as far as Zionists are concerned it’s Zionist Israel uber Jews. How else to explain Zionist Israel’s unrelenting expansionism? It’s as if it couldn’t care less how much antisemitism its aggression stirs up. Indeed, Zionist Israel’s indifference to the risk to world Jewry caused by its mistreatment of Palestinians was strikingly evident a few years ago when, in response to a flare-up of Muslim-Jewish tension in France (brought about by an IDF action against Palestinians), the Israeli PM said something to the effect of, “what the heck, French Jews belong in Israel.” To which French Jews responded both negatively and angrily.
*”Zionism in the Age of the Dictators”, Lenni Brenner
“The attitude of this blog and the commentors views” the defense of Israel right or wrong as an evil. No nuclear armed state is sacred. Who worships the state? We can all think of historical examples and what was done in the name of the state. Try reading Hannah Arendt. One evil does not justify another. This blog has acknowledged and praised the breakup of said quotas against Jewish Americans (and other minorities). It has also acknowledged it does not hurt to be Jewish (or black, Latino, etc), and in fact is an extra credit (especially for Jews)
in gaining employment in all areas of significant political power in the USA. And on the foreign policy front, the American taxpayer paid to free those Soviet Jews, and American foreign policy viz a viz the Soviet Union was crippled. Nobody on this blog has opposed the choice of Soviet Jews to go to Israel; rather, what has been noted here is the
operating attitude of those now influential former Soviet Jews which often differs from native Jewish Israelis to the extent some Israelis look on the former Soviet Jews as basically Russian goys masquerading as Jews.
Jon Stewart’s surprisingly good humored and wise response to the Rick Sanchez firing.
link to huffingtonpost.com
While I celebrate the Daily Shows effort to start covering the issues that have been off limits on that program for years. Yes Stewart would not touch the Israeli Palestinian conflict for years. Still has yet to directly criticize Netanyahu. But has regularly demonized the Iranian President by repeating the “wants to wipe Israel off the map” hogwash and other unsubstantiated claims about Iran (as Rachel Maddow and Terri Gross do all of the time) Stewart has shed a bit of light on the settlements but never ever refers to them as illegal or ongoing. Has never ever been a freeze.
He showed a map the other day of Israel showing Palestinian lands still contiguous which we know is far far from the truth.
Stewart has also had Bill Kristol on many times and basically kisses his ass, seldom challenging him. You know Bill “bloody” Kristol one of the warmongers responsible for pushing for the invasion of Iraq hard. Yet Stewart reamed Chris Matthews (clearly a personal issue) when Matthews was on about some line in his book. What is up with that?
Don’t challenge a hypocritical warmonger partially responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths in Iraq but go after some talking head who was clearly against the invasion for some line in his book.
Chris Matthews invited Jon Stewart on his program so the shoe could be on the other foot and Stewart is such a chicken shit he did not take him up on it.
“Let’s not do things that allow him to feel morally superior, which is what we do when we emphasize “Jewish control” rather than “elite, corporate control.” Let’s call him on his support for White Power, capitalist power, global hegemonic power.”
This is really what is going on, the rest is just the cloak – the cover for the activity. There is also no difference between what is taking place in the colonial realm from what has always transpired. The colonial call is one to impunity, the way to make it rich swiftly for an elite – the same activity occurred with colonial enterprise and its adherents, just different industries. There are always those who are there on the colonial plantation to assist the rich elites in the quest to exploit to the fullest extent – many were given land, let me give you an example from what I have written before –
“Where the present contention lies is in Mugabe taking back land that was stolen by the Rhodes gang in the 1890′s, it was taken by force and each soldier that was a participant was given 9 square miles of territory. Of course, this land is the present bone of contention (but not the only one) in Zimbabwe.
For the stupid multitudes that believe that there is starvation in this country because of the land grab, you need to go back to the drawing board, because these farms produced “cash crops” like tobacco, and had nothing at all to do with food that sustained the people. So over 70% of the arable land belonged to 4,500 white farmers who were descendant’s of the British settlers. ”
NEOCOLONIALISM 101, EXAMPLE ZIMBABWE
Now the resources of the land are not really needed in Palestine, but just the mere fact of taking what you want, all there for your taking – to be able to form the laws all to the benefit of the few and their chosen minions (in this case easily malleable people – to build industries to feed the imperial war machine, that is the current colonial “calling.” There is a little known fact about Israel, and that is that the gap between the rich and the poor is even greater than it is in the USA. All of this packaged into the “promised land,” that is “redeemed” with impunity.
For those of us who do not understand and do not want to acknowledge what I have posted above –
THE CONDITION
Yeah, that’s right
Israel wants to assure its current quest to join the rich countries in the OECD, which says Israel has to make some progress to lessen the wealth gap. In Israel, some 50% of Israeli Arabs live in poverty, as do 60% of ultra-orthodox Jews, compared to 20% of all Israelis – which itself is significantly higher than the OECD average of 11%. link to news.bbc.co.uk
(PS: If Israel is so rich, why does Uncle Sam toss it so many of its diminishing value tax dollars?) Is there an OECD nation that gets such welfare from Uncle Sam? An unconditional welfare at that. )
From 1990 thru 2005, the top 20% of Israel increased its share of salaries from 40% to 44%. (Ashkenazim earned 136% of the Israeli national average in 2005). link to highbeam.com
The trend suggests it’s probably 50% now.
In comparison, the top 20% of Americans (making over $100,000 per year) receive 49.4 % of all income generated in the USA. St Petersberg Times, Oct 3, 2010, at 1P.
In terms of wealth, in the USA, the top 20% own very close to 84% of the wealth of the country. (According to the recent survey results, the subject of the St Petersberg Times already referenced, most Americans believe its 58%.)
Interesting numbers
Knew I had seen Alan Dershowitz’s name tied in with the Urban Moving Systems (alleged Israeli spies) issue
link to informationclearinghouse.info
Before such issues had been fully explored, however, the investigation was shut down. Following what ABC News reported were “high-level negotiations between Israeli and U.S. government officials”, a settlement was reached in the case of the five Urban Moving Systems suspects. Intense political pressure apparently had been brought to bear. The reputable Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported that by the last week of October 2001, some six weeks after the men had been detained, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and two unidentified “prominent New York congressmen” were lobbying heavily for their release. According to a source at ABC News close to the 20/20 report, high-profile criminal lawyer ALAN DERSHOWITZ also stepped in as a negotiator on behalf of the men to smooth out differences with the U.S. government. (Dershowitz declined to comment for this article.) And so, at the end of November 2001, for reasons that only noted they had been working in the country illegally as movers, in violation of their visas, the men were flown home to Israel.
Today, the crucial questions raised by this matter remain unanswered. There is sufficient reason - from news reports, statements by former intelligence officials, an array of circumstantial evidence, and the reported acknowledgment by the Israeli government - to believe that in the months before 9/11, Israel was running an active spy network inside the United States, with Muslim extremists as the target. Given Israel’s concerns about Islamic terrorism as well as its long history of spying on U.S. soil, this does not come entirely as a shock. What’s incendiary is the idea - supported, though not proven, by several pieces of evidence - that the Israelis did learn something about 9/11 in advance but failed to share all of what they knew with American officials. The questions are disturbing enough to warrant a Congressional investigation.
Dershowitz “These individuals, who happen to be Jewish, do not act together in any kind of conspiratorial manner. There is no “Jewish control” of any of these areas”
“The experience of Carl Cameron, chief Washington correspondent at Fox News Channel and the first mainstream U.S. reporter to present the allegations of Israeli surveillance of the 9/11 hijackers, was perhaps more typical, both in its particulars and aftermath. The attack against Cameron and Fox News was spearheaded by a pro-Israel lobby group called the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), which operated in tandem with the two most highly visible powerhouse Israel lobbyists, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (itself currently embroiled in a spy scandal connected to the Defense Department and Israeli Embassy). “CAMERA pep- pered the shit out of us”, Carl Cameron told me in 2002, referring to an e-mail bombardment that eventually crashed the Fox News.com servers. Cameron himself received 700 pages of almost identical e-mail messages from hundreds of citizens (though he suspected these were spam identities). CAMERA spokesman Alex Safian later told me that Cameron’s upbringing in Iran, where his father traveled as an archeologist, had rendered the reporter “very sympathetic to the Arab side”. Safian added, “I think Cameron, personally, has a thing about Israel”–coded language implying that Cameron was an anti-Semite. Cameron was outraged at the accusation.
According to a source at Fox News Channel, the president of the ADL, Abraham Foxman, telephoned executives at Fox News’ parent, News Corp., to demand a sit-down in the wake of the Cameron reportage. The source said that Foxman told the News Corp. executives, “Look, you guys have generally been pretty fair to Israel. What are you doing putting this stuff out there? You’re killing us”. The Fox News source continued, “As good old boys will do over coffee in Manhattan, it was like, well, what can we do about this? Finally, Fox News said, ‘Stop the e-mailing. Stop slamming us. Stop being in our face, and we’ll stop being in your face–by way of taking our story down off the web. We will not retract it; we will not disavow it; we stand by it. But we will at least take it off the web.’” Following this meeting, within four days of the posting of Cameron’s series on Fox News.com, the transcripts disappeared, replaced by the message, “This story no longer exists”.
link to informationclearinghouse.info