Neocon orgs seek to paint Wall St protests as anti-semitic

Israel/Palestine
on 90 Comments

The Occupy Wall Street movement is aimed at the American Establishment, so it is little wonder that it is having resonance in terms of the Jewish presence in the Establishment. Two neoconservative media orgs are trying to smear the movement as anti-Semitic.

First, Bill Kristol’s shop, the Emergency Committee for Israel, has published a scare video trying to paint the protest movement as anti-Semitic. The ad links Obama campaign aide David Plouffe’s support for the Wall Street protesters, and Nancy Pelosi’s and Obama’s too, to anti-semitic statements made on the street by knobjobs. Then says, “Tell President Obama and leader Pelosi to stand up to the mob.”

The Emergency Committee for Israel is funded by a hedge fund manager named Daniel Loeb, who has defected from Obama to Romney, Eli Clifton reports.

Second, here’s Alana Goodman at Commentary arguing that an organizer behind the protests, Adbusters editor Kalle Lasn, is antisemitic because he once did an article pointing out that many neoconservatives are Jewish.

At the heart of this argument is the degree to which the neoconservative establishment has been funded/lifted by Rockefeller Jews– conservative Jews who have made it. And as Clifton implies in his piece, Obama is unable to write these Jews off. They are a swing constituency with an enormous amount of money. Call them neoconservative or neoliberal– Israel is a giant issue for many of them.

Clifton:

The Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI), has joined the pack of conservative groups working to discredit the Occupy Wall Street Movement. The ECI — a Bill Kristol-Gary Bauer-Rachel Abrams-conceived organization — launched a YouTube ad this morning, seeking to paint the Wall Street protests as anti-Semitic.

The ad, which was faithfully promoted by ECI’s go-to media outlets — Politico’s Ben Smith, the Weekly Standard, and Commentary — alleges that Democratic party leaders are “turning a blind eye to anti-Semitic, anti-Israel attacks,” and urges President Obama and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to “stand up to the mob.” Watch it:

ThinkProgress reported in June that two-thirds of ECIPAC’s contributions in the past election cycle came from Daniel S. Loeb, CEO of Third Point Management, a New York based hedge fund.

Loeb’s $100,000 in support for ECI follows his track record of falling out of love with Obama after the White House pushed for financial regulatory reforms.

90 Responses

  1. Chu
    October 14, 2011, 11:12 am

    Read David Brooks as well:
    “Take the Occupy Wall Street movement. This uprising was sparked by the magazine Adbusters, previously best known for the 2004 essay, “Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?” — an investigative report that identified some of the most influential Jews in America and their nefarious grip on policy.

    If there is a core theme to the Occupy Wall Street movement, it is that the virtuous 99 percent of society is being cheated by the richest and greediest 1 percent.

    This is a theme that allows the people in the 99 percent to think very highly of themselves. All their problems are caused by the nefarious elite.”

    link to nytimes.com

    • iamuglow
      October 14, 2011, 12:40 pm

      What a hamfisted Op-Ed….

      ‘Adbusters, previously best known for the 2004 essay “Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?”

      is that what Adbusters known for?! In 20 plus years thats what they are known for? That one essay, that I’ve never heard of before. But he had to get that antisemitism smear out there I guess somehow…

      I say bring it. Start an OWS are antisemities meme, its so off base its only bring attention to how the smear is misused. The times commenters pick up on it and most are critical of the piece. It makes me (a little) hopefully.

      • jewishgoyim
        October 15, 2011, 2:11 am

        Obviously you’re not acquainted to El Senor Brooks’ worldview. He’s a little like Phil but on the other side of the fence: very concerned about the political impact of organized jewry in the US but whereas Phil is critical, Brooks is an apologist. Gloating occasionally about Jewish successes and influence but denying the goyim the right of simply noticing it.

        Formerly from the Weekly Standard, it is hard for me to think of someone who would be more a servant to power than Brooks.

      • Chu
        October 18, 2011, 9:57 am

        good point.

  2. Dan Crowther
    October 14, 2011, 11:16 am

    So a couple of repugnant people saying horrible things about “the jews” is anti-semitic. But Christian Zionists, who support Israel, and who Bill Kristol loves are not – even though in their ideal scenario, all the jews die. OK.

    What I have a hard time understanding is how guys like Lloyd Blankfein cease to be jewish when they destroy the economy – but are “leading jewish figures on wall street” during the boom times.

    It seems like jewish folks love the collective when sandy koufax was throwing no-hitters, or jonas salk was curing polio – how many times have we heard about “jewish nobel laureates?” – all the time. Part of taking credit for good things, is taking responsibility for bad things.

    And part of creating a all encompassing “jewishness” where everything one does is a direct reflection and result of the larger group, is also creating a system where the acts of individuals get blamed on the collective. So, both Salk and Madoff’s actions were “jewish.”

    In short, this is the bed zionism made for jews. you want to be a “separate people” viewed through a national lense – your going to have to deal with the generalizing. Thats just the way it is.

    • Lydda Four Eight
      October 14, 2011, 1:13 pm

      yep, “othering” works in both situations. you can’t sell the “othering” porn without suffering the consequences of that which sowing seeds of “othering” reaps.

    • DICKERSON3870
      October 14, 2011, 4:36 pm

      RE: “So a couple of repugnant people saying horrible things about ‘the jews’ is anti-semitic. But Christian Zionists, who support Israel, and who Bill Kristol loves are not – even though in their ideal scenario, all the jews die.” ~ Dan Crowther

      ALSO NOTE: Inside CUFI’s 2011 Washington “Summit”, Special to JewsOnFirst.org, 07/29/11
      Our eyewitness report on Christians United For Israel’s annual Washington conference

      (excerpt)……And this is the rub – Christian Zionists love the idea of Jews – not Jews as they actually are, but as representatives of God’s ongoing truth and impending Christian salvation. They love religious Jews who, through the conflation of American and Israeli identities, many seem to think of as sharing the exact same values as them, minus Jesus. Whether it is CUFI on Campus students excitedly Tweeting “there are so many Jews here!” or women fawning over their new Star of David necklaces and sharing stories of possible Jewish lineage, it seems that actual interaction with Jews of diverse opinions is significantly lacking. So while conversion attempts are waning (some attendees expressed the idea that God is creating “one new man” with Christians and Jews as they are) there is still a need for conversion to the political philosophy of Christian Zionists. And this is where those Jews who are strong supporters of CUFI come in handy. They can criticize Jews to a far greater degree than any Christian Zionists would be willing to do. They can criticize Jews to a far greater degree than any Christian Zionists would be willing to do. Conservative commentator Jennifer Rubin spent a great deal of her talk slamming her co-religionists for being naively liberal, and referencing her fellow panelist’s father’s book – Norman Podhoretz’s Why are Jews Liberal? – as a way to try and explain that they have fallen away from God and been captivated by the “religion of liberalism” to which the audience expressed considerable dismay.
      Rubin and others are useful for this kind of criticism because it allows them to express contempt for their fellow Jews, which coming out of the mouth of anyone else would, quite rightly, be considered anti-Semitism…

      ENTIRE REPORT – link to jewsonfirst.org

    • Keith
      October 15, 2011, 5:44 pm

      DANCROWTHER- “What I have a hard time understanding is how guys like Lloyd Blankfein cease to be jewish when they destroy the economy – but are “leading jewish figures on wall street” during the boom times.”

      In view of Jewish overrepresentation in the corridors of financial power, it is perhaps relevant to inquire as to what extent Jewishness and Zionism contributed to this phenomenon, and to what extent Jewishness and Zionism influence the current course of financial behavior. While I am in no position to comment on this, perhaps Jeffrey Blankfort has gathered some data. This whole question is likely to bring shrieks of “anti-Semitism” from those who have a vested interest in stoking Jewish paranoia. For a Zionist, anti-Semitism is a win-win situation. I might add that if it turns out that Lloyd Blankfein, Jamie Dimon, Larry Summers, etc are Zionists, it would impact our Middle East analysis enormously. Too much stuff goes on in the shadows.

  3. eee
    October 14, 2011, 11:22 am

    What is there to paint? The evidence is in the video. There are some anti-semitic elements in the OWS movement and the movement is doing nothing about them.

    Is this going to help you Phil in convincing American Jews that they don’t need Israel as an insurance policy? In fact, the OWS movement is hurting your cause.

    • Chu
      October 14, 2011, 11:47 am

      You haven’t even been there and you know all. The ‘movement’, as you say, doesn’t have a heirarchy yet (that ‘s how protests begin), so people show up and voice their anger. If there message is kill the Jews, the police will take care of them.
      But it’s ok when Pam Geller goes down to the ground Zero Mosque with her picket signs promoting her Muslim hate fest.

      The vast majority are frustrated with the power elite’s grip in america.
      A commercial like this only goes to prove a point to scare Jews that the entire world is anti-Semitic. It’s not true. This protest is much bigger than any hate fest. It’s stupid these pundits even suggest otherwise.

    • eGuard
      October 14, 2011, 11:53 am

      At 0.31 the video shows a sign: Gaza supports the occupation of “Wall Street””. Why is that included in a video which tries to show anti-semitism?

      How is the final claim “anti-Israel attacks” supported by the video?

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 11:59 am

        Why is that included in a video which tries to show anti-semitism?

        Because Hamas, which rules Gaza, is an antisemitic movement.

      • pabelmont
        October 14, 2011, 12:16 pm

        Maybe so, but the impetus for Gazans’ hatred for Israel is land theft and oppression (under occupation), not generalized anti-Jewish feeling. Do some research on the excellent communal relations between Christians, Muslims, and Jews in Palestine before 1900. The anti-Jewish stuff that erupts is really anti-Israel stuff and is (IMO) entirely justified. The idea that Jews (or any Jews, or some Jews) had a right to take over all or part of Palestine is not an idea which Palestinians should be expected to adopt whole-heartedly, and no surprise that they don’t. (If Israel would stop claiming to be THE COUNTRY OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE, the anti-Israel feeling would stop being confused and coming out as anti-Jewish feeling.)

      • iamuglow
        October 14, 2011, 12:23 pm

        “Hamas, which rules Gaza, is an antisemitic movement”

        lol.

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 12:34 pm

        what is this, kevin bacon logic?

        Because Hamas, which rules Gaza, is an antisemitic movement.

        iow, end the blockade now screams anti semitism? seriously, this is the kind of logic that’s baffling. do you think everyone is pavlov’s dog.

      • eGuard
        October 14, 2011, 4:35 pm

        Message to Mondoweiss commenters: eee’s weak point is logic. So, apart from denying a troll, this one is delogitimisable (coined?).

        All the commenters who pointed this out earlier: thanks & compliments. It was just nice to find it out myself.

      • yourstruly
        October 15, 2011, 9:19 am

        “if israel would stop claiming to be The COUNTRY OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE, the anti-israel feeling would stop being confused and coming out as anti-Jewish feeling”

        precisely, but when it comes to antisemitism israel has to fix the books, pad the numbers. otherwise how could it invoke the lie about the world hates us? and without its wielding antisemitism, whither the one about the necessity of a jewish sanctuary?

      • pjdude
        October 15, 2011, 7:21 pm

        how is a movement that simply wants the palestinians to have their legal rights in their own land as opposed to it being ruled by foriegners anti semitic?

    • strangefriend
      October 14, 2011, 3:26 pm

      And Reuters is saying OWS is funded by Soros link to blogs.reuters.com

    • yourstruly
      October 14, 2011, 9:05 pm

      since zionism is not judaism, anti-zionism/anti-zionist israel are not antisemitic.

  4. Bumblebye
    October 14, 2011, 11:38 am

    The ‘persecution’ theme goes beyond the Jewish element among the elites.
    Every time I’ve listened to programs about higher tax rates for the upper imcome bracket, I also hear voices that are not Jewish attempting to paint this whole group as a persecuted social minority. iow, tax the rich and we’re persecuting them.

    • RoHa
      October 15, 2011, 1:13 am

      “the upper imcome bracket, I also hear voices … attempting to paint this whole group as a persecuted social minority.”

      My heart bleeds for them. I’m so glad that I am not part of that minority, and, on present showing, never will be.

  5. Erasmus
    October 14, 2011, 11:38 am

    The video is cheapest propaganda.
    We all could see it coming……
    The video is such an obiously manipulated propaganda message – who would fall for it?
    Is it not interesting / noteworthy and telling that such “counter-argument-propaganda” is being let loose?
    And that with the well-tested AS – iron bar of first and last resort!
    Of course, the OWS-public slogans in the street can not be fine-tuned to the extent of doctoral thesis.
    However, via the intrument of international finance and banking system, who could deny factually that a distinct and powerful Jewish element is to be found there?
    The underlying reasons for the fundamental malaise of the international finance and banking system are too complex to reduce them to any single cause. And if some fringe group of the OWS-movement was to voice AS arguments that must be denounced w/o qualification.

    As far as i know, spokespeople of the OWS-movement have done exactly that.

    • eee
      October 14, 2011, 11:56 am

      “However, via the intrument of international finance and banking system, who could deny factually that a distinct and powerful Jewish element is to be found there?”

      What a bigot. Are the Jews in finance sent there by some Jewish organization? Yes, there are Jews in finance. So what? Their Jewishness has nothing to do with the fact they are in finance.

      Let’s try this argument:
      Who could deny factually that a distinct and powerful Muslim element is to be found in global terrorism?

      How do you like it?

      • Scott
        October 14, 2011, 12:10 pm

        “Nothing to do with the fact they are in finance” over simplifies an interesting and important phenomenon. Jerry Z. Muller’s “Capitalism and the Jews” is a good introduction. See also Sombart, Karl Marx, etc.

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 12:33 pm

        Yes, historically African Americans dominated the slave occupation. I hope I am not oversimplifying an “interesting and important phenomenon”. But these historical constraints don’t hold anymore. And neither do the ones about the Jews.

        Just so you don’t miss the sarcasm, history is not destiny, and the Jews are in finance in modern days for personal reasons not connected whatsoever to their Jewishness and not because their occupation was restricted to certain fields in previous centuries.

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 12:49 pm

        the Jews are in finance in modern days for personal reasons not connected whatsoever to their Jewishness

        true, and for personal reasons very much connected to their jewishness many of them are also strong supporters of israel and it just so happens many of those same people in the world of finance have lots of money and they spend that money securing their personal interests (israel) with that money whether it be thru direct support for settlements or via politicians and their coffers who support israel and thru those politicians it secures our tax dollars to support israel too, or israel’s agenda.

        btw, not to fly to OT but what do you think of this banking story:U.S. considers sanctions on Iran’s central bank

        David Cohen, the Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, told the Senate Banking Committee that officials were “looking very actively” at such a step and might carry it out if other nations could be persuaded to follow suit.

        …….

        Such sanctions would aim to isolate the Bank Markazi, or central bank, from the world economic system by barring any firm that deals with it from doing business with U.S. financial institutions. That would make it far more difficult for Iran to sell crude oil, which funds much of the government’s activities.

        i’m sure israel will be very happy about this. as i recall wasn’t this netanyahu’s primary goal on his very highly publicized first meeting w/obama at the WH? it appears both our justice department and the department of treasury is targetting iran. do you think this might please the israel lobby at a critical time for filling those election coffers. not that people would notice that..unless they do?

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 1:08 pm

        “and for personal reasons very much connected to their jewishness many of them are also strong supporters of israel and it just so happens many of those same people in the world of finance have lots of money”

        Jews have made a lot of money in the US, mostly NOT from finance. The richest Jew in the US is Larry Ellison the founder of Oracle. Sheldon Adelson from trade shows and casinos. So let’s agree first and foremost that connecting finance with Jews with Jewish money is antisemitic. Do you agree?

        Now, what exactly are you against?
        1) Jews making money?
        2) Jews donating money based on their views about what they think the relationship between Israel and the US should be?
        3) ?

        Just EXACTLY what are you against? Or do you want to hide behind some vague allegations about Jews and claim your argument is not antisemitic? I am not saying it is. I am saying you are not willing to be explicit about your argument.

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 1:10 pm

        As for Iran, what do you think this proves? What is your point. So what if supporters of Israel are pleased? You think Obama would invent evidence just to raise money?

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 1:47 pm

        first of all i agree with you “Jews are in finance in modern days for personal reasons not connected whatsoever to their Jewishness ”

        Jews have made a lot of money in the US, mostly NOT from finance.

        ok, obviously. and what does this have to do with the topic or anything i said? it is completely not related or i cannot see the relation if it is there.

        So let’s agree first and foremost that connecting finance with Jews with Jewish money is antisemitic.

        would you mind rephrasing that for me? and what is your definition of “jewish money”? i don’t generally use qualifiers to describe money itself.

        Now, what exactly are you against?

        3e, could you please copy and paste the segment of my post you are referencing. the ‘against’ part. or is this a strawman?

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 1:51 pm

        As for Iran, what do you think this proves? What is your point.

        could you answer my question first:

        do you think this might please the israel lobby at a critical time for filling those election coffers.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 14, 2011, 1:54 pm

        “As for Iran, what do you think this proves?”

        It provides an explaination for the indictment whcih is more believeable than the b.s. told about the Iranians trusting, if true, the most imporant thing ever done by that state to a mentally ill ne’er-do-well and a Mexican drug gang.

        “You think Obama would invent evidence just to raise money?”

        If the options are A) the Iranians tried to get a loser to hire a mexican drug gang to kill a Saudi in Washington or B) Obama and his administration are using a lie as a pretext to impose sanctions on Iran’s central bank in order to lick the Israeli boot, so that American Zionists who are loyal to Israel will give Obama re-election money, anyone who favors A is, at best, a moron.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 14, 2011, 1:56 pm

        “Yes, historically African Americans dominated the slave occupation.”

        Uh, dumbass, slavery was not an “occupation” any more than “dying in a death camp” was.

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 1:58 pm

        “do you think this might please the israel lobby at a critical time for filling those election coffers.”

        I already answered you question when I said supporters of Israel are pleased. Maybe some would contribute more, how would I know?

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 2:01 pm

        Annie,

        Maybe I am wrong. So you are not against Jews donating money to politicians that support their views about Israel?

        Obviously there is something you don’t like about the current situation. So what is it?

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 2:07 pm

        i don’t like anyone donating money to politicians for the purpose of supporting Israel, why would i? it has nothing to do w/whether they are jewish or not. like i said earlier i agreed w/you ““Jews are in finance in modern days for personal reasons not connected whatsoever to their Jewishness ” but to claim jewish donations to support israel has nothing to do w/their jewishness is patently false. that goes for whether they are shoemakers or wall street bankers. it just so happens wall street bankers have hella more access to funds and alot of that money comes at the expense of the american public and that is the case whether the bankers happen to be jewish or not.

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 2:13 pm

        Let me rephrase the question:
        So you are not against the laws and mechanisms that allow Jews donating money to politicians that support their views about Israel?

        If you are against them, how would you change them?

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 2:39 pm

        what? you are getting off on an entirely other tangent eee. obviously the laws and mechanisms that allow donating money to politicians is an entirely other topic whether they be american jews or any american.
        as a matter of fact i am very annoyed by the recent supreme court decision impacting campaign finance. this is the case whether they are jewish run corporation or any corporation.

        as for how i would change that supreme court decision i would advocate against corporate personhood, which i do. and i would advocate for a drastic overhaul of campaign finance laws for more reasons than just israel’s influence of course but because of the influence of all lobbiests.

        as a segue from your question about “Jews donating money to politicians” i think aipac should have to register under FARA but there is a difference between aipac, american jews, israeli jews, israel’s impact on the the lobby etc etc etc.

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 2:50 pm

        “If the options are A) the Iranians tried to get a loser to hire a mexican drug gang to kill a Saudi in Washington or B) Obama and his administration are using a lie as a pretext to impose sanctions on Iran’s central bank in order to lick the Israeli boot, so that American Zionists who are loyal to Israel will give Obama re-election money, anyone who favors A is, at best, a moron.”

        So I guess this is what differentiates you from most Americans that surely believe the first option. You are a radical extremist that believes Obama would falsify evidence to raise money rather than believe the obvious, that the Iranian government screws up occasionally. Is it any wonder that you have zero political influence?

      • MarkF
        October 14, 2011, 3:35 pm

        Let’s put it in context. The people who lied about Iraq and the WMD – the U.S. government – and people such as your current Prime Minister Bibi, helped get us into a war. Bibi met with the press and congress telling us Saddam was going to explode suitcase nukes in our cities. Arik, Peres and Barak did the same, as did Rice, Powell and Cheney. Remember how an Al Queda operative met with a high-level Iraqi in France??

        Any of this stuff sound far-fetched? Our governments lying to us? I can see you’re just as shocked as I am.

        The neocons are just using the window of opportunity to lobby for another war. Remember, once we’re broke, the aid stops.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 14, 2011, 3:54 pm

        So I guess this is what differentiates you from most Americans that surely believe the first option.

        LOL. First of all, I doubt that a”most Americans” have heard of this story, because it wasn’t discussed on “Dancing with the Stars.” Second, of those who have, fully half of them are Islamophobic GOPers who will believe anything that casts a Muslim in a bad light. Of the remaining, a bunch are Israel-firsters who will believe anything that casts Iranians in a bad light. Of the rest, there are many, many who see this story as blatent nonsense.

        “You are a radical extremist that believes Obama would falsify evidence to raise money”

        You are a dummy who can’t read. I never said that Obama would falsify evidence. I said that he use a lie as a pretext. It is readily believable that a lunatic with visions of grandeur would claim to be an Iranian agent. It is idiocy to believe it is actually true.

        “…rather than believe the obvious, that the Iranian government screws up occasionally.”

        One of two things is true. Either (1) this story is compete nonsense, or (2) Iran isn’t sophisticated enough to be a threat to anyone, as demonstrated by this supposed plan, and therefore the sabre-rattling by demons like Netanyahoo and Lieberman is criminal.

        “Is it any wonder that you have zero political influence?

        I have zero political influence because I don’t want polticial influence and because politics is a rich person’s game in the US. Which is precisely why people like Obama lick the boot of the Israelis, because there is money to be farmed from Americans who are loyal to Israel.

      • lyn117
        October 14, 2011, 4:05 pm

        I guess I disagree. Jews are disproportionally represented in finance in part having to do with outlawing the practice of usury by Christians, but not Jews (against Christians), in early European history. This gave them a boost in the finance industry that continues to today. I regard it as an accident of history, not something even rich Jews should be blamed for, but it does connect Jews with finance. That being said, to blame the greed of financiers solely on Jewish financiers, or blame their greed on being Jewish as the one sign in the you-tube video did, is of course, anti-semitic, and clearly wrong.

        On the other hand you, eee and virtually all supporters of Israel scream anti-semitism even when it doesn’t exist, yet support racism when Israeli Jews practice it. I’ve heard some of you support and excuse killing people whose sole differentiating characteristic from people you think shouldn’t be killed is that they’re Jewish. Could you please give me a good reason why I should care that much if you supporters of racism are the victims of some rather small amount of racist speech? I mean, I don’t want my movement tarred supporting any racism, but yours does, why should I care if you’re the victim of the kind of movement you support?

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 5:33 pm

        So using a lie as a pretext is not falsifying evidence? Of course it is. If the evidence shows that Iran was not behind the plot and you know that and are using a lie as a pretext, you are falsifying evidence to prove a false point. You take the lie, which is the evidence, and you assign to it a truth value even though you know it is a lie, hence falsifying the evidence.

        Israel probably has nuclear weapons and screwed up with the flotilla. Why can’t this be the case with Iran? Some parts of the government are better than others. That is the case will all governments.

        In short, both your arguments are kindergarten level.

      • tree
        October 14, 2011, 6:26 pm

        Israel probably has nuclear weapons and screwed up with the flotilla. Why can’t this be the case with Iran?

        I must have missed the part where the flotilla members were gunned down by an Israeli ex-pat car salesman and his Mexican drug cartel buddies.

        Israel also screwed up royally with the Dubai assassination. But it was Israeli Mossad agents that screwed up. They didn’t recruit amateurs to do their screwing up.

      • Woody Tanaka
        October 14, 2011, 6:55 pm

        “So using a lie as a pretext is not falsifying evidence?”

        LOL. No, that’s why we use different words to describe them. I understand that someone burdened with having Hebrew as a primarly language might have difficulty with this concept, like the whole “we think ‘lynch’ is a noun” issue, but anyone who knows what the words “using,” “lie,” “pretext,” “falsifying” and “evidence” mean in English can see that these are different things.

        “If the evidence shows that Iran was not behind the plot and you know that and are using a lie as a pretext, you are falsifying evidence to prove a false point.”

        LOL. Again, you really should learn what the word “falsifying” means. In English, “falsifying evidence” does not mean “lying about the evidence.” They’re two different things. Perhaps they mean the same thing in Hebrew.

        “You take the lie, which is the evidence, and you assign to it a truth value even though you know it is a lie, hence falsifying the evidence.”

        LMFAO. It’s like watching a chimp try to squeeze a grapefruit through a chain-link fence.

        “Israel probably has nuclear weapons…”

        Holy CRAP! You actually felt the need to add “probably”??? Damn, you are messed up beyond recovery. Twenty-five years after Vanunu — one of the few truely heroic Israelis — and you still use “probably”??!!! Too funny.

        “…and screwed up with the flotilla. Why can’t this be the case with Iran?”

        LMAO. This Mexican drug-gang story is about the equivalent of saying that Israel shouldn’t be blamed for the murder of the Turks in the flotilla because it wasn’t IDF militants who did the murders; they were actually committed by six strippers from the Spearmint Rhino in Las Vegas.

        “In short, both your arguments are kindergarten level.”

        LOL. This must be ESPECIALLY frustrating for you, then.

      • yourstruly
        October 14, 2011, 9:19 pm

        oh, past presidents haven’t invented evidence that got america into wars? The battleship Maine’s boiler room explosion, the Gulf of Tonkin incident that wasn’t, to name only the most notorious. anger at the neocons has to do with their israel-firstness, which has contributed significantly to two wars already, with a 3rd now looking more & more likely. and the disdain we have for zionists extends also to christain zionists. it’s not the religion of zionists, it’s putting america at risk with their israel-firstness.

      • RoHa
        October 15, 2011, 1:37 am

        “So let’s agree first and foremost that connecting finance with Jews with Jewish money is antisemitic. Do you agree?”

        I don’t understand. A lot of the top financiers in the US are Jews. A number of big finance companies have names which look like Jewish names. Connecting finance with Jews just seems to be recognising reality. There is no implication that the connection results from Jewishness. What is anti-Semitic about noting that fact?

        Saying “a bunch of rich Jews are ripping us off” is true, but comes a bit closer to being anti-Semitic because it might lead the logically-challenged (sadly, a very large social group) to assume that only Jews are involved. As far as I can make out, there were plenty of non-Jewish slime-balls involved. The suggestio falsi is not a logical implication of the suppressio veri, but the the unschooled might draw that conclusion.

        (Saying “the Jews are ripping us off” is false, since the lack of qualifiers or quantifiers implies (to logicians, at least) that all Jews are involved. And I bet Mooser isn’t. But no-one here is saying that.)

      • yourstruly
        October 15, 2011, 9:28 am

        against anyone of whatever religious persuasion using their resources and influence to support an entity whose actions endanger the u.s. of a.

      • LeaNder
        October 15, 2011, 1:02 pm

        Holy CRAP! You actually felt the need to add “probably”??? Damn, you are messed up beyond recovery. Twenty-five years after Vanunu — one of the few truely heroic Israelis — and you still use “probably”??!!! Too funny.

        Thanks, Woody, that was entertaining. Concerning RW, and maybe there is a pattern here, I have to return to my suspicion or hypothesis, if you will, there may be a reason that semantics and grammar disintegrate in very specific contexts.

      • Erasmus
        October 14, 2011, 1:23 pm

        Re: eee October 14, 2011 at 11:56 am

        I have never been addressed in my life a bigot. You better chose your words more carefully, sir.
        I do offer you the opportunity of an unqualified apology.

        As regards your “argument” – one must ask the right questions, and not construct questions unrelated to the statement made. This applies to both questions forwarded.
        With respect to the second question, i agree that it would amount to an equally blind denial not to acknowledge a major involvement of Muslim extremists in terror acts. That is just a matter of fact. In no way, such a statement replaces the need for an honest and thorough analysis of the underlying historical reasons for such deplorable development to have come about.

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 1:35 pm

        i agree that it would amount to an equally blind denial not to acknowledge a major involvement of Muslim extremists in terror acts.

        agreed

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 1:52 pm

        Erasmus,

        Well you are a bigot. Because both questions are populist when they are not brought up in a context that explains that apparent correlations that the questions allude to.

        You want an opportunity to explain why you aren’t a bigot? Just tell us what your conclusions are from the question you posed:
        “However, via the intrument of international finance and banking system, who could deny factually that a distinct and powerful Jewish element is to be found there?”

        Ok, what follows from not denying the above?

      • Erasmus
        October 14, 2011, 3:19 pm

        I realize, apologies are not your strenght.
        You are not the only one.
        I can assure you that i will not sue you for compensation if you did.

        You ask me “You want an opportunity to explain why you aren’t a bigot?
        No, i do not.

      • Scott
        October 14, 2011, 3:49 pm

        Triple e, by odd coincidence I’m reading about C Wright Mills now and his relationship to various other sociologists, all who made their careers discussing ethnicity, power, social relationships. Are we in America to hereby dispense with the subject of sociology (and perhaps burn some old books, lest they give us ideas) or what?

      • American
        October 14, 2011, 4:41 pm

        “However, via the intrument of international finance and banking system, who could deny factually that a distinct and powerful Jewish element is to be found there?””

        That’s a well established fact, not anti semitic.

      • eee
        October 14, 2011, 5:21 pm

        I am accepting for the sake of argument this “well established fact” and asking. So, what follows from this fact? What conclusions? What policies?
        Do you want to limit the number of Jews that can pursue a financial carrier? Obviously if the fact was a useless one it would not have been raised. It is raised to make some kind of argument. What is this argument?

        Supposedly it is of the form “because THE FACT therefore ….. “. What goes after the “therefor”?

        “A distinct and powerful Jewish element is to be found in international finance” therefore ………………………..? How about completing the argument?

      • kapok
        October 14, 2011, 8:15 pm

        completing the argument: therefore they should use their money wisely and not disburse it according to some sentimental attachment.

      • yourstruly
        October 14, 2011, 9:28 pm

        therefore when they spend their fortunes to buy our government’s support for the zionist entity israel, even though u.s. & israel’s interests are not one & the same, this israel-firstness puts america at risk, which makes them traitors.

      • eee
        October 15, 2011, 12:11 am

        Who are you to decide that you know better than them what the interests of the US are? Each American has a right to decide for himself what the interests of the US are. Calling these people traitors is trying to shut them up. Nobody is stopping you from making money and donating it to whomever you want. If you spent less time writing 7th grade level poetry, maybe you would have had more money to donate to politicians you like.

      • eee
        October 15, 2011, 12:13 am

        Kapok,

        I’ll answer for them: Thanks for the advice but we have every right to do with our money as we please. We are not stupid and we don’t need you to tell us what is good for us or not.

      • MRW
        October 15, 2011, 4:38 am

        eee October 14, 2011 at 5:21 pm,

        Put a sock on it, eee.

        Jews use their money to exercise what they want and get what they want. Jews use their money in politics proportionally more than the goyim to get what they want by threatening congressmen with withholding if the congressmen don’t do what they say. This is not anti-semitism. It is fact. If it’s true, it’s not anti-semitism.

        I cant remember whether it was Hostage or Blankfort (both of whom are Jewish) who pointed out that tribalism often trumps capitalism in the exercise of so-called capitalist spending, and that to believe otherwise is delusional.

        What’s your problem with Jewish Money?

        Because the place to complain is with the spenders, not here with the observers.

      • MRW
        October 15, 2011, 4:57 am

        Well, lookee here:

        eee October 15, 2011 at 12:13 am
        Kapok,

        I’ll answer for them: Thanks for the advice but we have every right to do with our money as we please. We are not stupid and we don’t need you to tell us what is good for us or not.

        Precisely. And we get to comment on it all we want without you casting aspersions on us. You do not get to accuse any of us of anything should we care to comment, and you don’t get to froth up anti-semitism when the objects of discussion involve Jews, Jewish Money, finance, or any other distinction you care to include.

      • yourstruly
        October 15, 2011, 8:27 am

        are u.s. and israel’s interests the same? if not, isn’t there the potential that israel-firstness puts america at risk? after all, only a few months ago, wasn’t it general david petreaus, among others, who stated that israel’s intransigence vis-a-vis peace negotiations endangers our troops in afghanistan/iraq? now that’s a serious charge. what’s more america’s unconditional support for israel is the reason “they” hate us, or so inferred the 9/11 commission. as for spending money on politicians, i prefer to spend it on movements such as ows, publications & websites such as mw, having given up on politicians long ago. it’s the system that has to be changed & what use politicians in accomplishing this?

      • yourstruly
        October 15, 2011, 8:41 am

        “calling them traitors is trying to shut them up”

        not shut them up but turn the public against them and the israel-firstness that puts us all at risk. whether or not they shut up, that’s their choice, but what the public thinks of them and for whom and what they advocate, that’s something that anti-zionists can effect.

      • eee
        October 15, 2011, 12:41 pm

        You know why what you are doing is bigoted and racist? Because everything the Jewish donors are doing is legal. Change the system instead of blaming Jews. If there is anyone to blame it is people like you who can’t be bothered with supporting politicians. If you leave an empty field for Zionist donors, what do you expect? Since Zionist donors are effective, why don’t you just use their methods? It is quite simple.

      • annie
        October 15, 2011, 1:00 pm

        You know why what you are doing is bigoted and racist? Because everything the Jewish donors are doing is legal.

        just because something is legal doesn’t mean it is moral or right, obviously. aipac should be required to register under FARA. that’s the direction things were going before the kennedy assassinations.

      • annie
        October 15, 2011, 1:03 pm

        Jews use their money to exercise what they want and get what they want. Jews use their money in politics proportionally more than the goyim to get what they want by threatening congressmen with withholding if the congressmen don’t do what they say. This is not anti-semitism. It is fact. If it’s true, it’s not anti-semitism.

        MRW, i don’t know if you are just being sloppy or willfully obtuse but obvious you are not accurately reflecting all jews. it kind of defeats the purpose of your point when you lasso all jews into your analysis. i wish you could make your point otherwise instead of requiring the reader to run your theory thru a cleansing process to make it applicable. what’s true for an elite wealthy portion of the jewish community or a portion of organized jewry simply doesn’t reflect all american jews who have no more access to pressure congress people than the rest of us nor the fund to do it and to assert they do is anti semitic. but people are very much catching on to the reality of israel lobby funding and how it works, so what you talk about is fact imho, it just doesn’t represent all jews, at all.

      • yourstruly
        October 15, 2011, 5:37 pm

        yes, & definitely so

      • MHughes976
        October 15, 2011, 6:08 pm

        I don’t think MRW needs to say, in order to make his factual point, that all Jewish people give strong and unreserved support, moral and financial, to Zionism – only that Jewish people are significantly more likely than others to offer that support. MRW must have noticed the Jewish leadership of Mondoweiss and I presume he’s noticed that support for Zionism among non-Jewish people is substantial, even if not equal to what it is on the Jewish side.
        Our moral response to this fact depends on what we think of Zionism. If I were a keen Zionist I would say that these facts offer no support to anti-Semitism but, quite to the contrary, show that, in this respect at least, Jewish people are doing the right thing and putting the rest of us to shame – putting oil in the lamp that gives light to the nations.
        As an anti-Zionist I find it very painful that the moral ideas – and the consequent frightening actions, such as massive political donations – that I oppose are ideas strongly associated with a racial group. It’s a pain that has to be borne. Nothing like the pain of mind and body inflicted on the Palestinians as these ideas are put into practice.

  6. Kathleen
    October 14, 2011, 12:29 pm

    That young man was clearly a nut job…going to find them in any crowd…teabaggers and OCW. He was cruel, anti Jewish and a serious creep. If they could show one demonstrater after the next like this crazy hateful dude they might have a point

    Kristol and this young man have a great deal in common. Although Kristol is worse. Kristol stirs up Islamophobia is a hater like this kid and promoted a war that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Muslims based on false intelligence
    All of the protesters that MSNBC has interviewed have been interviews articulate, focused protesters with a serious message. Justice and Accountability.

    The bit of coverage on the hundreds of thousands of us who protested the invasion (before the invasion)that the MSM provided the American public sitting at home on their sofas was the clip of the 20 people with hoods over their heads. Saw this clip over and over again. 20 people out of several hundred thousand in New York in Feb 2003. Seniors, truck drivers, students, teachers… Vets etc etc adn they kept showing the public the 20 people with hoods over their heads

  7. American
    October 14, 2011, 1:41 pm

    The Israel firsters effort to paint the OWS as anti semitic will backfire…just like all their other anti semitic smearing has backfired to the point where poeple sneer at the anti semite smear.
    All their activity is doing is linking the Jews to the WS problems…and some people will think about that and wonder why the Jews are trying to shut down the protestors and the Jewish question will become even bigger.
    Very stupid, very. Unless of course their goal is to create more anti semitism.

    • annie
      October 14, 2011, 1:54 pm

      All their activity is doing is linking the Jews to the WS problems

      i agree although i would rephrase it to say the jewish israel firsters. i don’t think most people are stupid enough to link ‘the jews’ to WS.

      • American
        October 14, 2011, 4:21 pm

        Yea they are….there are a lot of ‘less informed’ people who don’t even know what a zionist is and associate everything Israel or ‘Israel firsters’ with the Jews naturally because Israel bills itself as the Jewish state.

      • yourstruly
        October 14, 2011, 9:49 pm

        which is why, and this is a theme that reproduces itself quite often on mw, it’s important that jewish anti-zionists speak out for justice in palestine. “not in my/our name” educates people to the fact that israel doesn’t speak for all jews. As for the traitorous israel-firsters referring to those who criticise israel as antisemites or self-hating jews, history will show who the real self-haters are (hint, zionists*)

        *because israel’s belligerance towards the palestinian people is what’s stirring up anti-semitism. come justice for palestine and antisemitism will shrink to a size than could be contained in a toilet bowl

      • Charon
        October 14, 2011, 7:21 pm

        When Rick Perry (I think) criticized Ben Bernanke, the ADL decided to release a statement saying that Perry wasn’t being antisemitic. Why would they even release a statement? Because Bernanke is Jewish? Or because people associate the FED with Jews?

      • annie
        October 14, 2011, 7:26 pm

        Why would they even release a statement? Because Bernanke is Jewish? Or because people associate the FED with Jews?

        because the ADL and israel firsters generally scream anti semitism anytime someone they don’t like makes a criticism against a person who is jewish. so basically, they were making an exception of perry becasue they deem him to be on their team. had it been someone they didn’t like they wouldn’t have excused him.

      • AhVee
        October 15, 2011, 5:32 am

        ” i don’t think most people are stupid enough to link ‘the jews’ to WS.”

        Your optimism should be framed. :)

  8. biorabbi
    October 14, 2011, 3:34 pm

    The dude in the hat in the video who spouts out the anti-Jewish meme is, I believe, Jewish himself. This video shows a clip of the dude in the hat during part, but not all of the exchange with the Kippa – clad dude. In another video, he, the dude in the hat states he’s also Jewish. LOL. It can get confusing. I thought the dude in the hat looked a bit like the designer Galiano.

    The amount of anti-semitism in these crowds is nil. The amount of anti-semitism in the US is small. I see no distinction or overrepresentation of anything in these crowds but liberalism… not that there’s anything wrong with that. My beef against the protestors is they all look like upper-middle class white dudes and woman of the latte drinking varient… not that there’s anything wrong with them either.

  9. Proton Soup
    October 14, 2011, 3:50 pm

    “anti-semite” is now a racial slur.

  10. biorabbi
    October 14, 2011, 5:01 pm

    As a zionist, I also reject the idiocy the left is more anti-semitic than the right. It is fair to say the left is, by and large, more nuanced in general and critical of Israel. So what. I agree with the left on many things as well. The shift of the left away from Israel began after the six day war. Congresswoman Bella Abzug started talking against some of the military aid to Israel, pissing off Ed Koch! The right and far right started to become pro-Israel after the six day was as well, but, more so after ’76 when the US Christian right began to flex their muscle. The right wing has gone completely bonkers now whereas the Christian right is more pro-Israel that Likud. Literally. Oh well, at least our politics in the US must be good for the world’s funny bone. I know it is for mine.

  11. crone
    October 14, 2011, 5:06 pm

    “,,, My beef against the protestors is they all look like upper-middle class white dudes and woman of the latte drinking varient… not that there’s anything wrong with them either.”

    Perhaps that’s because they can afford to take off from work and protest? Folks holding down two jobs to make ends meet can’t afford to take time off for a protest.

  12. Talkback
    October 14, 2011, 6:56 pm

    More info about the guy in the video with the antisemitic comments:
    link to theblaze.com

    • Proton Soup
      October 16, 2011, 12:35 am

      only watched the first video. and about a minute of the second. Danny “Lotion Man” Cline tells the old guy “You’re a bum, jew, man. I’m a jew. Why are you fighting with us?”

      OK. so he likes to provoke people.

  13. Charon
    October 14, 2011, 7:25 pm

    The “A” word is becoming pretty meaningless these days. Nobody can even tell you exactly what it means. It seems that people in power who happen to be Jewish like to use it to smear anybody they don’t like, and that is the case here. Pulling out the “A” card is still a career killer in some businesses though.

    Just remember, some people will create antisemitism where antisemitism doesn’t exist. Especially in protests. There were a couple people in the Egypt and Syria protests shouting (or holding signs) in ENGLISH that said ‘kill the Jews’ which is a bit suspicious if you know what I mean.

    • American
      October 14, 2011, 9:25 pm

      “‘kill the Jews’ ..?????

      That is suspicous.
      Way to obvious to be for real.

    • yourstruly
      October 14, 2011, 11:15 pm

      i wonder how much the israeli embassy paid people to carry those hateful signs?

Leave a Reply