The prime way that anti-Semitism spreads — as in many other oppressions — is by word of mouth. That’s why maligning is not merely semantics.
“Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me” means: if you have enough a sense of your self-worth, insults don’t bother you. That does not mean that words can’t hurt or even kill.
Bullies use words especially against people who never were given a chance to build enough self-esteem. And they often don’t keep it at words. Mean words therefore generally hurt. Thus, Jewish Law outlawed the use of them.
Now, “decent” “educated” people learned how to be politically correct, avoid using wrong words. Prejudices and worse come out encrypted. So, some people use “Rothschild, Cohen” as dog whistles, codes for “Jews.” The Rothschilds have messed with our weather, news, money again.
Mel Gibson went from famous to infamous when he shot a movie on the last day of Jesus that was so gruesome that it was feared to ignite the anti-Semitic stereotype of Jews as “deicides,” killers of G^d [sic]. He dismissed the concern. He did nothing wrong, supposedly and wasn’t worried.
But, when the wine is in, the wit is out. So, when he was stopped for drunken driving, he started cursing one of the police with anti-Semitic slurs. He was shunned by many since but vowed to restore his reputation.
Minnesota attorney general finds that less than 1 percent of donations to Kars4Kids charity goes to Minnesota kids–most of the money promotes Orthodox Judaism among children on the east coast (startribune.com)
KANSAS CITY, United States (AFP) — Many of nearly 100 excited children running around a community center in Kansas City over the weekend had two things in common.
They were refugees, mostly from conflict-torn regions in Africa and the Middle East. And most were there to celebrate the same thing: a January 1 birth date. . . .
Jewish Vocational Services (JVS), a resettlement agency, joined with three synagogues to put on the party each January for the Christian and Muslim refugees resettled in the near-geographic center of the continental United States.
“The event says, ‘we are happy you are here, and we are happy you are part of our community,’” said Monica Kleinman, a rabbi at the Congregation Beth Torah synagogue in a Kansas City suburb.
‘These are our values’
The annual tradition is in contrast to the message many refugees in the US have received in the last two years.
Actually, from a “jewish standpoint”, they need to “welcome strangers” not into their own lands and own neighborhoods but rather into our White lands and formerly White and safe neighborhoods. Many Jews like to claim that it’s only the liberal or “secular” Jews who are pro-immigration, but this article makes it very clear that many religious Jews openly advocate for the flooding of our White Christian lands with Third World aliens who are hostile and inimical to our way of life.
And notice how these new African immigrants didn’t even have proper birth certificates, and yet somehow they managed to successfully make it through the “rigorous” screening by the U.S. Immigration Service. How is that even possible? If someone comes from a country that doesn’t even issue birth certificates, they certainly have no business ever setting foot in America, and yet they are here in the millions. And here they are in America’s heartland, where the jewish-controlled meat packaging industry is hiring them at lower wages than even the Mexican migrants make, a recipe for violence and social unrest.
In late 2001 Jewish Defense League leader Irv Rubin and JDL activist Earl Krugel were arrested and charged with conspiracy to bomb a southern California office of U.S. Congressman Darrell Issa, as well as a Mosque in Culver City, California. In November 2002, during the course of the legal proceedings in the case, it was revealed that Krugel had boasted of his group’s responsibility for the 1984 arson attack against the IHR during a secretly recorded conversation on Nov. 14, 2001, with a confidential police or FBI informant.
Later it was learned that the Torrance Police Department had determined after an investigation of the attack against the IHR that the Jewish Defense League was responsible for the crime. That was the conclusion of a ten-page 1984 report on the Department’s investigation. (A redacted copy of the report was obtained by the Institute in January 2003.)
Let’s all denounce our radicals.
Same story from two sources…
Ultra-Orthodox Jewish children enrolled in kindergartens run by the Satmar sect in London are taught that non-Jews (“goyim”) are evil, according to the British newspaper Independent.
The report cites worksheets handed out to children at the Beis Rochel boys’ school in north London. The Independent said that it obtained the instructional material through an anonymous whistle-blower.
According to the report, the students are taught that those who perpetrated the Holocaust were “goyim,” making no distinction between non-Jews and Nazis.
The students are also instructed to observe the 21st day of the Hebrew month of Kislev, which is the anniversary of the day in which Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum, the founder of the Satmar sect, evaded the Nazi threat.
“What have the evil goyim (non-Jews) done with the synagogues and cheders [Jewish primary schools]?” the worksheet reads. “Burned them” is the correct answer.
“What did the goyim want to do with all the Jews?” read another question. The answer was “Kill them.”
Three-year-old ultra-Orthodox Jewish children told ‘the non-Jews’ are ‘evil’ in worksheet produced by London school
One of more than 25 states to put anti-BDS legislation on the books, Arkansas is a battleground in a conflict that’s gone national.
When letters first showed up on Alan Leveritt’s desk saying the Arkansas Times was required to sign a pledge not to boycott Israel in order to continue to receive state contracts, he ignored them.
“I was frankly not aware there was a boycott of Israel when I started getting these notices,” Leveritt told NBC News.
As the publisher of the Arkansas Times, a monthly magazine based in Little Rock, he relies on advertisement revenue from state entities to keep his business afloat.
“Publishing a newspaper is not a lucrative business right now,” he said, adding that he’d hoped the letters would just “go away.”
But eventually, a purchasing manager at the University of Arkansas-Pulaski Technical College, who Leveritt pointed out was “just going by the letter of the law,” insisted that he sign the pledge to retain their ad revenue.
Alan Leveritt, publisher of the Arkansas Times.
Alan Leveritt, publisher of the Arkansas Times.Brian Chilson / Arkansas Times
The purchasing manager was following Act 710, a 2017 bill passed in the Arkansas Legislature “to prohibit public entities from contracting with and investing in companies that boycott Israel.”
This means that if a company wanted a state contract over $1,000, the public entity granting the contract had to certify that the company does not participate in a boycott of Israel. If a company doesn’t sign the pledge, Arkansas law allows it to still receive a contract if it offers its services at a reduction of at least 20 percent.
Act 710 was passed as a way for the Arkansas Legislature to affirm its support for Israel and respond to the BDS movement, a growing pro-Palestinian effort which calls for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel to secure Palestinian rights.
While Leveritt isn’t shy in saying the Arkansas Times leans “left of center,” neither he nor the publication has ever supported a boycott of Israel or the broader BDS movement.
“We don’t have a dog in that hunt,” Leveritt said. “We are a lot more interested in Medicaid expansion than we are Jerusalem.”
But now a geopolitical issue he felt like he had no stake in was affecting his already precarious small business.
Leveritt thought about signing the pledge. “To have something like this thrown on top of you is enough to capsize the boat,” he said. Ultimately, Leveritt said he couldn’t go through with it, though.
He believed being forced to sign a pledge like the one Act 710 mandated violated his constitutional rights and his journalistic ethics.
Although this evasion is predictable, it’s quite remarkable to see a more or less open admission from two allegedly masterful historians that they don’t possess facts sufficient to dispel the very “myth” they set out to challenge. To describe any such presentation of facts as a “futile attempt” seems intellectually flaccid; a concession of the weakness of one’s case.
But what is really presented here, of course, is the standard structure of Jewish historiography: avoid the facts, downplay them if concession is absolutely necessary, and move the discussion into abstractions and sophistry. Taking a page from the ADL playbook, Browning mewls coyly that “a small kernel of truth underpinned the stereotype of the Jewish Bolshevik,” but insists, regarding Communism, that “the Jew as “the face of the revolution” was a “culturally constructed” perception.” We therefore arrive at the familiar position where facts don’t matter and everything Jews don’t like is triumphantly declared a mere construct. . . .
Jewish economic competition in the modern period is caricatured as an irrational “image,” and Jewish war profiteering is simply an “accusation.” Epithets, images, accusations, and the passive and innocent Jew. In sociological-psychological terms this is classic Freud and Frankfurt School, and in historiography it is classic Langmuir.
As with Langmuir’s sophistry, such assertions require a significant amount of either duplicity or cognitive dissonance, or perhaps both. The number of texts covering historical Jewish black-market activity alone is astonishing. We know from one Stanford-published history, for example, that in France in 1941, 90% of black market traders in one province were Jews. Similarly, in Mark Roodhouse’s Oxford-published Black Market Britain: 1939–1955, it is remarked that Jews were massively over-represented in prosecutions for black-market activity in London during the 1940s. . . .
We’re again in very familiar territory: when you feel you can’t avoid a fact (“Jews were invariably disproportionately represented”), and you can’t downplay it, then explain it by way of prejudice (“they were not welcome”). The problem with snapshots of history like this, as I’ve explained many times before, is what I’ve come to term a “cropped timeline explanation” — something that is extremely common in all Jewish and philosemitic historiography concerning anti-Semitism. When faced with an uncomfortable and unavoidable fact involving Jewish behavior (Leftism, usury, financial crime, pornography, etc.) one starts with assumptions of anti-Jewish prejudice and works from there. Jews are on the Left? It must be because they were excluded from the Right. Problems begin to arise when the question is asked why Jews were excluded or viewed as socially or culturally oppositional in the first place. Here, “irrational prejudice” is the last resort, but beyond it, when faced with further interrogation of that idea and the even deeper historical context, nothing is there. One is confronted with blank stares, rhetorical dead ends, and a factual wasteland.
By now I was already getting the sense that Browning was drowning in his own review, under the sheer weight of his own evasions and contortions. The questions, for any reader, were surely multiplying. Were Jews over-represented in Communism or not? If yes, how is the idea of Jewish leftism a myth? If the ‘myth’ can’t be debunked with facts, how can it be debunked by a work of academic sophistry that labels it a cultural construct? The contortions only worsen. . . .
Thus, we are treated to a review of Gerrits by Eliezer Ben-Rafael of Tel-Aviv University, who asserts that Gerrits tackles “the myth of Jewish Communism” by presenting “the fascinating stories of Jewish Communism and Jewish Communists.” If debunking ideas with proof of their veracity wasn’t enough, it’s explained in one banal revelation that the myth combines “anti-Semitism and anti-Communism,” and has a link to reality in the fact that “in effect, many Jews were prominently involved in Communism not only in Russia, but also in the Hungarian and Bavarian revolutions of 1917 and, after the Second World War, in Czechoslovakia, Romania, Lithuania, Poland, and Bulgaria.” Jewish Communism is thus clearly a myth because Jews were prominently involved in Communist revolutions in several countries over several decades. Right. . . .
An excellent example of evasion along these lines is Hanebrink’s discussion of Béla Kun. Hanebrink argues [p.25] that there was “nothing meaningful at all” about Kun’s Jewish background while elsewhere [p.16] noting that of the 47 people’s commissars gathered by Kun for the 1919 Hungarian Soviet regime, 30 were fellow Jews. Clearly feeling that his own arguments are unconvincing, Hanebrink follows up his earlier surrender on the issue of facts with [p.25]: “Truly understanding the hopes, fears and motivations of any particular Jewish revolutionary in all their irreducible complexity is ultimately a task best undertaken by a biographer.” . . .
Paul Hanebrink’s A Specter Haunting Europe is, ultimately, an extremely strange book, but all too typical of contemporary writing on Jewish history. It is thick on promises and thin in substance. It is characterized by glaring omissions and a deeply insincere analysis accompanied by a cloying philosemitism. Interestingly, the text lacks any semblance of intellectual confidence, and one feels that Hanebrink, who is presumably not himself Jewish, is surely aware of what he is creating: a blatant pro-Jewish apologetic. The reasons why a White academic might want to produce something like this are not difficult to surmise. As with Christopher Browning, such endeavors are massively incentivized. Despite being unoriginal, low on facts, and poor in analysis, Hanebrink, associate professor of history at Rutgers, has written a book published by a prestigious academic publisher (perhaps the most prestigious) and has been lavishly praised in the major organs of the mainstream media. The message from our latter-day commissars is clear: “Sell out and we’ll make you a star.”
Important to note that this party forms a tiny minority:
The party ran in the 2013 election, but failed to pass the minimum 2% voting threshold by 9,000 votes, and did not receive any seats in the 19th Knesset. In the 2015 election, they ran on a joint list with Yachad; however, the list narrowly failed to pass the 3.25% threshold. Otzma Yehudit will form a technical bloc with the Jewish Home party in advance of the 2019 election.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made a formal electoral pact for the upcoming April election with the Otzma Yehudit (literally, “Jewish Power”) party which has as its policy the expulsion of all non-Jews from Israel, and whose leaders have said that “Christians are ‘blood sucking vampires’ who should be expelled from Israel.”
News of the alliance was carried in the media aimed directly at Jews, such as the Times of Israel, but has been completely suppressed in the Jewish lobby controlled media in Europe and America—because there, the Jewish lobby always pushes “non-racialism” as its official policy for non-Jews.
According to the Times of Israel, Netanyahu has reached a deal with the Jewish Home Party to grant that “national-religious party” a pair of ministerial posts after April’s elections in exchange for it merging with the Otzma Yehudit party, whose name in Hebrew literally translates as “Jewish Power.”
The ADL Can’t Stop Faking Hate Crime Statistics,” by Daniel Greenfield, FrontPage, February 12, 2019:
“Right-Wing Extremist Violence is Our Biggest Threat. The Numbers Don’t Lie,” Jonathan Greenblatt blared in a JTA editorial.
Numbers don’t lie. But people lie with numbers all the time.
Greenblatt’s ADL has become notorious for undermining its mission by putting out fake hate crime statistics. And these fake statistics were as surreally egregious as they were confusing.
The executive summary of the ADL’s annual report claimed that, “2018 was a particularly active year for right-wing extremist murders: Every single extremist killing — from Pittsburgh to Parkland — had a link to right-wing extremism.” This false claim was quickly picked up and repeated by the media.
Typically, the ADL report contradicts itself when it later claims that, “Almost all of the 2018 extremist-related murders were committed by right-wing extremists.”
Is it “every” or “almost all”?
The trick here is that the ADL report exploits any link, no matter how tenuous or dubious, to make its first claim, while its second claim essentially concedes that the shooters weren’t “right-wing extremists”.
How is it possible for a killer to have links to “right-wing extremism” without being a “right-wing extremist”? Why even try to link people who aren’t “right-wing extremists” to “right-wing extremism”?
The Parkland school shooting, whose 17 victims serve as a huge part of the report’s dubious statistics, illustrate how the ADL manufactures a link to “right-wing extremism”.
Attributing the Parkland school shooting to “right-wing extremism” is a conspiracy theory. The ADL began pushing this conspiracy theory after the shooting based on an interview with a white supremacist group. The ADL’s fake news was picked up by everyone from the Associated Press to Neo-Nazis, but the discredited social justice group got the material from alt-right trolls on 4chan. And even after the claims were disproven, the ADL refused to retract it and has chosen to double down on its fake news.
Cruz did appear to have etched swastikas on his ammo magazines, but he also told the authorities that he heard voices in his head. He had said racist and anti-Semitic things, but all but one of his victims were white. Five of his seventeen victims were Jewish, but Parkland has a sizable Jewish population. It’s possible that Cruz targeted Jewish students and faculty, but there’s no actual evidence of that.
And the ADL’s original assertion of a link to “right-wing extremism” long ago fell apart. But instead of retracting it, the ADL is exploiting the Parkland shooting to push fake hate crime statistics.
The ADL’s reports usually contradict themselves. And this one is no exception. It lists murders by Tierre Guthrie and Malachi Qaadir Dorns, African-American members of black nationalist Moorish groups. While Moorish groups do use terms like “sovereign citizen”, it’s highly misleading to define them as “right-wing”, especially considering the misleading impression that this description creates.
“Largely absent from this list of killers were extremists motivated by radical interpretations of Islam. Only one of the 50 murderers had any connection to Islamist extremism — and even he had ties to white supremacy,” Greenblatt claimed.
Most Islamic terror plots in the United States were unsuccessful in 2018. And the media quickly pounced with multiple pieces insisting that Islamic terrorism was no longer a claim, while overlooking many of the catastrophic terror plots that were broken up or proved unsuccessful.
State Attorney’s unit operates outside the law to censor Facebook & YouTube posts; 2017 saw 500% increase in posts censored as a result of Cyber Unit’s action.
Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel continues to demand that Israel’s state attorney’s office shutter its “Cyber Unit” which – in collaboration with major social media outlets such as Facebook and YouTube – is illegally censoring user content.
Adalah sent an initial letter on 2 August 2017 to Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, State Attorney Shai Nitzan, and Cyber Unit director Haim Vismonsky demanding that they immediately cease the illegal operations of the state attorney’s Cyber Unit.
. . . .
Israel’s dramatic increase in online censorship in 2017, without any legal authorization and in violation of a series of basic principles in constitutional and administrative law, raises the real concern of a potential spillover of state censorship of protected publications.
ADALAH DEMANDS THAT ISRAEL’S CYBER UNIT:
Immediately cease submitting requests for the removal of social media content, since doing so violates fundamental principles of constitutional and administrative law;
Immediately transmit for our review a copy of the work procedure according to which the Cyber Unit submits requests for removal of content based on the public’s right to know.
WHAT IS THE CYBER UNIT?
The Cyber Unit began operation during the second half of 2015 and is responsible for “dealing with cyberspace enforcement challenges” via censorship of social media posts. This censorship – conducted in collaboration and coordination with social media outlets, including U.S.-based giants Facebook and YouTube – entails the removal of content added by users, restriction of access to certain websites, and outright blocking of users’ access to these sites.
The number of Cyber Unit requests to remove content skyrocketed in 2017.
Data provided by the unit revealed that in 2016 it submitted 2,241 content removal requests; of these, 1,554 were removed, and 162 were partially removed. In 2017, however, the Cyber Unit submitted 12,351 content removal requests – an increase of more than 500% percent; 85% of the requests ultimately led to the full removal of the concerned posts and another three percent led to partial removal.
Cyber Unit clerks and administrative officials decide for themselves, within the framework of an alternative enforcement system, if a certain instance of expression “is incitement to violence and terror, and support of a terror organization” or is a “forbidden publication towards public servants in the framework of their jobs.” However, Israel’s state attorney is usurping authority – reserved for the judicial branch – illegally and without any legal authorization. The Cyber Unit cannot impose sanctions based solely on suspicion.
A black 26-year veteran traffic enforcement agent found himself the subject of a racially charged taunt after attempting to haul away an offending SUV in Brooklyn.
The tow truck driver, who hasn’t been named, had a car hooked up and ready to tow away on Thursday when an angry group of Brooklyn residents managed to set the vehicle loose and then started shouting abuse at the driver.
Video shows the truck driver being confronted by a group of Orthodox Jews at the corner of 44th St. and 15th Ave. in Borough Park, Brooklyn, as reported by the New York Daily News.