Here’s some of what you’re implying is Nazi-like rhetoric:
To associate this with the atrocities of the Nazis is a horrid disservice to mankind.
It is political agitprop of the lowest kind.
It’s heart-wrenchingly revolting that the neocons are so callow and callous as try to use the suffering of millions to further their cause.
Or do you have some compelling case to make as why the charge of anti-semitism in this instance actually is warranted, and not just villainous, amoral, bullshit?
That’s not true. Buchanan repeatedly connects neo-Conservativism with Jews and neo-Conservativism with Israel.
I read the article. Is this some kind of left-wing white-supremacist hate-group site you linked to? It ceratinly sounds like it. I fully expected the magazine to start going off on “ZOG” and quoting from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
May I have a cite on this please?
It’s one thing to say that some Jews are neocons and that some neocons are Jews, (each are true statements), and an entirely different thing to say that neocon=Jew.
I’ve never seen Buchanan say that neocon=Jew.
The only place where I’ve seen this idea presented is in pro-neocon opinion pieces that are ostensibly written to discredit the notion that neocon=Jew.
Of course, Buchanan discusses the relationship bewteen Israel and the neocons. Support for Israel is seen as a “key tenet” of neoconservatism by neoconservatives. It would be odd to discuss neocons and neoconservatism and yet exclude discussion of one of their key tenets.
Is this sarcasm that’s whooshed over my head?
Please note that *Anti-Defamation League national director Abraham Foxman * said to accept as legitimate questions concerning the pro-Israel leanings of administration officials.
Or do you have some compelling case to make as why the charge of anti-semitism in this instance actually is warranted, and not just villainous, amoral, bullshit?
Uh Giant …
I certainly have no doubt that there a few out there who make a few wink-winks about Jewish Neocons as evidence of undue Jewish control of this country … it is unavoidable that whenever someone who is Jewish is in a public view that they will be seen as being “a Jew in control of the rest of us operating for a Jewish agenda.” And it is hard to hear that without cringing a little.
But.
Given that this play apparently just criticizes Neocons who happen to be Jewish, do you think that the charge of antisemitism might just possibly be a bit premature? I tend to think that the charge should be reserved for pretty rock-solid cases and not diluted with soft calls. And at most this is a soft call.
Now onto the charge that the Jewishness of some Neocons unduly influences American foreign policy visavis the ME - I personally think that it is more consistent with the long standing policy of standing by those who you trust to stand by you. And attacking Iraq really did not well serve Israel’s interests either way. Not that anyone in Israel mourned Sadaam’s loss of power, but it does little for Israel either way in any practical sense. Unless really believes that a US instilled democracy will spread as a role model across the ME bringing secular values and acceptance of all across the region. Yeah.
Maybe Iraq was attacked because those in power really did believe that there waas enough evidence of WMD that presented enough of a threat to act upon. Maybe because Bush just hated Sadaam. Maybe to free the region from a baddie. Maybe under a belief that it would secure oil suppplies and thus the Imperial era of the US. Any are possible in my mind, some more than others. But it certainly was not done to accomplish anything for Israel’s sake.
SimonX
I don’t necessarily disagree with you. I think that the (small) group of neocons who define themselves as Likudniks are motivated by clear pro-Israel goals. I do think this is damaging to US policy. But a few points – not all neocons are Jewish, obviously the head of the bunch Rumsfeld comes to mind. It is also quite possible (I don’t know) that Fundamentalist Christians associated with the movement could be as pro-Israel if not more than any Jew associated. I do think it is weird that these 5-10 guys have so much influence over US policy right now. I do think it is weird that at least half of them are Jewish, and have followed a very similar ideology shift. I don’t think it is a coincidence that they are pro-Israel, but I don’t think that there is any evidence that they would somehow favor Israel over the US, or guide the US into a foreign policy that is bad for the US and good for Israel. I don’t necessarily see anything that the neocons have touted that has helped out Israel more than it has helped out the US, or even anything that has that potential. That is a judgement call in the long run, though.
I think that if you look at the situation in the US and in Israel, they are necessarily intertwined, and the neocon movement has done both a disservice through their ideology. The terrorists win every day in both the US and Israel; we just don’t care to see it. The US has capitulated to a major demand of al Qaeda, and nobody seems to notice – we have disengaged and withdrawn from Saudi Arabia and Saudi politics. Much of the Iraq war seems to have been justified by looking to facilitate this withdrawal, kind of like it was acknowledged that Saudi Arabia was sinking into the sea of Islamic fundamentalism and the US needed to get off (instead of trying to promote reforms to repair the ship). The neocons have basically ceded Saudi Arabia to al Qaeda, and this is a huge disservice to both Israel and the US in the long run. Similarly, Bush’s “hands off” approach to Israel/Palestine negotiations has created an atmosphere by which a terrorist bombing in Ashdod is seen as legitimate reason to pull out of forthcoming negotiations and for Sharon to delay these painful concessions that he has been talking about for 4 years. Again, neither Israeli nor American long term interests are served.
IMHO, there are direct repercussions of the neocon ideology which have hurt both Israel and America and will form long-term roadblocks in the war on terror. Even if the world was as simple as their ideology portrays it, the repercussions of Iraq, unilateralism, preemption, and the like wouldn’t have helped Israel any more than the US. The failures of their ideology and their implementations of it has created an unstable region and increased the potential for more terror. In the long run, it will be far more easy for the US to weather this storm than Israel.
If Israel vanishes within the next 50 years (I think this is unfortunately quite likely), I think we will be able to trace it to seeds sown in 2000-2004.
Jews pride themselves on being part of a tribe that sticks together no matter what.
Jews point with pride to their ability to stick together culturally due to the historical genealogy text that they wrote while in captivity in Babylon called the Torah. In otherwords on their ability to create “propaganda”
Jewish mysticism (Qabbalah) is based upon the idea that the world is actually made up of the words that we use to describe it, specifically Hebrew words.
Many American jews are wealthy.
There are many wealthy jews in Washington, Hollywood and New York, the three main power centers of this country.
So I guess the word legal is what defines whether they are acting as a tribe or as a conspiracy. You say Tomato I say Tomahtoe.
I don’t see what’s so hard to understand, and I don’t think accusing them of a jewish conspiracy is off base in the slightest. They are acting in their interests just as anyone else does, they are united behind a common theme, and they are successful at it.
Prior to World War I and II the ZNC had a great deal of influence in the League of Nations. Conspiracy? Yes or No?
And on to my point on Qabbalah, I think the use of the word anti-semitism is propaganda to keep people from ever criticizing anything that jews do.
So yes I do think a group of jews are working together to perform a certain self-serving goal using their influence in Washington to further gain influence and detract from the power of their enemy. This is different from any other tribe in what way?
So Tim Robbins may very well be making that point/accusation, and no I don’t think it makes him anti-semitic.
I personally am tired of hearing the word. The little boy who cried wolf is going to regret it shortly I believe.
And I wouldn’t mourn the loss of the state of Israel, the jewish people wouldn’t cease to be, I wouldn’t mind to see all of Jerusalem reduced to rubble in fact. The biggest false idol in the world being smashed would be very aesthetically pleasing to me. Let everyone have it or let no one have it, either way it’s all the same to me. I don’t care how special it is or how much history it has, it’s not worth all the bullshit. In fact if America loves the jews so much, let’s offer open visas to every Israeli citizen. I’m all for that, but let’s stop giving them money and support, they ARE oppressing the Palestinians and I don’t feel like supporting that. Then again I don’t support our oppression of Iraq either. And I don’t think that Israel is any holier than New Jersey.
I think that in all likelihood any major mechanized genocide that will be carried out will probably be perpetrated by America and Israel against the Arabs. And I think that comparing the current American regime to the nazis is appropriate, I don’t think Bush would have a problem instigating some kind of ethnic cleansing if he could get away with it.
I think that the stakes at this point are too high to coddle a couple overly sensitive jews from upper middle class suburbs of New York by not mentioning that there actually IS a jewish conspiracy in Washington, and that admitting that doesn’t mean we’re going to start rounding them up and putting them in Ghettos. Though I suppose we COULD just fence off Manhattan. 
Jews in power positions act like everyone else in power positions news at eleven!
Then again if Israel is THAT important that fulfilling biblical doomsday prophecy is worth that little strip of land, then fuck it, CNN will be entertaining. It’s only going to get worse, and trying to keep people from criticizing those in power only legitimizes what they are doing.
I am not part of the Jew tribe, I am not part of the neo-con tribe, so why on Earth should I support their agenda in any way? All my jewish friends are welcome in my life, I love them all, and they ARE part of my tribe and I would fight for them as my kin, but not because they are jewish, but because they are my friends.
Erek
And? There is a VAST DIFFERENCE between questioning a political stance and going through and “outing the Jews”. The first is legitimate, the second is racist. Of course, the left and antisemitism have been quite cozy for a while, now.
“Outing the Jews” huh?
They’ve been hiding, keping their Jewishness “in the closet” have they?
Why is it so bad to mention that certain people happen to be Jewish?
It’s just a fact. Some peple in the world are Jewish. There’s nothing wrong with noting that, obviously.
So, you must be making the case that something other than noting that some people are Jewish is going on. What that is, I’m not quite sure.
The point of the article is clearly laid out:
“The point is simply that the neocons seem to have a special affinity for Israel that influences their political thinking and consequently American foreign policy in the Middle East.”
What’s the problem with this?
You have some excellent and solid means of backing up this blanket accusation of hundreds of millions, (at least), of diverse people from all walks of life, living all over the globe whom you’ve never met, correct?
I’d like to see it.
You’re not just slinging empty rhetorical accusations at swaths of the planet’s population are you?
mswas,
If you are going to spout off on the case for Jewish conspiricy theories at least get your facts straight. Otherwise your use of ignorance to promulgate conspiricy myths just embarasses you.
Jews do not pride themselves on sticking together no matter what. We are quite contentious and bicker quite a bit. We include conservatives and liberals, capitalists and communists, traditionalists and secularists. Nah, we fight amongst ourselves all the time and have very different POVs.
The text that might be called a “historical geneology” is indeed the Torah, but was not written in Babylon; it is the same text that Christians refer to as The Old Testament and use as well, written long before the Babylonioan exile. The Babylonian Talmud is the written version of the Oral interpretation of the Law (… what is really meant by the Biblical phrase? It doesn’t mean take out an eye, it means the value of an eye and this is how you determine it. And so on.) What this has to do with propaganda and mysticism is beyond me.
Many Jews are wealthy? Eh. We seem to do okay by and by. And many are struggling too. I’m not complaining myself. Many Christians are wealthy (did you hear how much Mel has netted from "The Passion!?), many live near the centers of power in this country, is this evidence of a Christian conspiricy to control this country? “An agreement perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act”? I don’t think so for Christians and it is as insulting to claim so for Jews. Unless it is subversive because it is being done by Jews.
Giant,
Unfortunately drawing attention to the soft calls gives people like mswas ammunition. They point to the soft calls and say that Jews “always cry antisemitism for no reason” and then feel free to claim that therefore no claim of antisemitism is valid or just. Obviously a logic impaired POV but one that is a common theme oft repeated by those who love to make the kinds of hateful and ignorant statements mswas just made. Why help them along? Save your fire for the worse offenses anyway.
Dseid, well the point you seem to have missed is I was pointing out that jews are tribal people with a strong sense of identity, and as thus are acting like a tribal people with a strong sense of identity, you can claim all you want that Jews don’t stick together but I live in New York and see the nepotism all the time. I don’t disagree with it, but it’s there right out in the open, there’s no big secret. So of course there is a jewish conspiracy, and that only matters because of how one views the word conspiracy. A conspiracy is a group of people who perform a certain action. Now this depends upon one’s definition of legal. If you are on the right side of my law you are acting in the tribal interests. If you are on the other side of my law then you are acting in a conspiratorial interest.
What people are saying is that these people from the same tribe are benefitting one another, and to tell me that I don’t have my history accurate enough to make statements like that, it doesn’t matter because I have seen how tribal the jews around me act with my own eyes. I was quoting a history channel documentary about when the Torah was written, so I got the wrong info. However, all history is propaganda because the writer is showing it from his/her own perspective.
The mysticism comes in because it defines the makeup of a culture, and a big part of jewish mysticism is the power of words to create reality. I had a rabbi over the summer give a lecture about how the jews start the sabbath on a Friday because they believe time is analogous to 1000 years equals a day of creation, so they celebrate the sabbath starting Friday night in order to bring it around earlier by shifting it with their devotion. So it is a culture of intention.
Now you can argue with me that jews aren’t quite as much of a tight knit culture if you want, but jewish celebrations are about military victories and surviving persecution intact as a people and I’ve had many jews fiercely defend their culture if I criticized it in any way.
However, as much as I like the jewish tradition, I myself am not born a jew, therefore I do not get treated as part of the tribe. Therefore I am on the outside looking in, and I don’t agree with everything that jews do in their own interests. I can recognize this fully as my conflicting interests playing a part. But to say there is not a jewish conspiracy in Washington is being somewhat dishonest because it only takes a small group to make a conspiracy, and there are more then five jews involved in this, and the policy is DECIDEDLY pro-Israel as they are the linchpin of our foreign policy in the Middle East, so there IS a jewish conspiracy, and to deny it is merely lying. That does not mean it applies to every single jew, it doesn’t mean that I hate jews for it, but I know who jews are, I know who Israelis are and I know the meaning of the word Conspiracy. So there are more than 5 jews with a similar agenda and working toward that agenda. In fact there are more than 5 million working toward that agenda.
Now to avoid some undue confusion, let me point out that I do not believe in Good and Evil, I am merely stating the facts as I see them, having studied Jewish mysticism, and the History of Modern Israel, not to mention that I have read much of the Old Testament, as that’s what I’d do when the Baptist minister was giving his boring sermons.
And I do recognize that many jews, in fact a lot of them disapprove of the Neo-Conservatives and Sharon’s hawkish stance. However, I think that the agenda of keeping Israel in place is approved of, and it’s not a matter of the end goal, but the methods to achieve that end goal that people disagree on in this case.
Personally, I think America is the holy land, it’s got lots of fertile land, many resources, and if we’d all just calm down here it would be pretty much paradise. So let people fight over the middle east, I don’t care, but I just wish I weren’t being dragged into it all the time. I understand the interconnectivity of the whole thing, and individuals over here will identify with what they identify with, but I don’t think sending the American military over there benefits either us or them. The only way to promote peace is to be peaceful. You cannot promote peace with war so I don’t think the jewish neo-con conspiracy will have the desired effect of helping Israel achieve peace with it’s neighbors, what will create peace is when Israel suddenly recognizes that a peaceful agenda is probably a good idea or they’re going to have to get more hostile than they might want to unaided. I think we’re almost to the point where things are going to get really hostile for both America AND Israel personally, and I do think it will be caused by this jewish “agenda/conspiracy” to flex all that muscle about keeping Israel.
I think a perception that is dishonest is the idea that the jews never did anything to deserve their persecutions. Every effect has a cause, and every relationship requires two players, and I don’t think that the relations are quite so simple as jews constantly being oppressed. I’ve read about the Balfour Declaration and such, and I see how much influence the jews had over the League of Nations at the time that Hitler was developing his politics. This is not justifying genocide, it is just recognizing the causes that lead to the effects. So Hitler’s perception of European politics at the time and probably a certain amount of impact on what he identified as the political situation of the time.
I think jews people are too overly sensitive when they say that anyone saying anything that might implicate jews in the wrong moral light is anti-semitic. Jews did play a part in killing Jesus, Jews did have a Zionist agenda and were furthering it quite successfully in European politics in the early half of the century. And they are now playing a major role in the war in the middle east. And that’s just the way that it is, not some anti-semitic commentary because I hate jews, because I really don’t. I treat individuals on an individual level regardless of their religion or their race. If they approach me peacefully, I am not going to approach them with hostility.
Erek
Erek, may I ask for some expansion on the notion that the Jews had a successful Zionist agenda in the early 20th century? And I was under the impression that the Balfour Declaration had everything to do with the British, with little input from either the Jews or Arabs living in Palestine at the time. I’m also of the opinion that the Balfour Declaration was more of the same play-both-ends-against-the-middle that the British were so good at (cf. South Africa, Ireland, and India), and that they probably would have gotten away with it again, had it not been for the rise of Hitler. I always thought Hitler was the power card in this scenario, not the Jews.
Then again, I can’t claim to be a historian. Maybe you can fill in some of the blanks?
I’m not one of the people saying that.
Since I haven’t seen nor read the transcripts of Embedded, I can’t make my own judgement about the play.
However, since the case made for Embedded being antisemitic depends on innuendo about a publication other than the play itself, (“pointed references” etc), I have yet to see any reason to think that Embedded is antisemitic.
Frankly, I’ve yet to see any reason to believe that the secondary sources, (Kitty Clark and Kalle Lasn’s articles) and are anti-semitic.
agiantdwarf even went so far as to point out that the criteria used to judge Kitty Clark and Kalle Lasn’s articles on Strauss as antisemitic also brand Ari Shavit of Ha’aretz, Israel’s leading daily newspaper, as antisemitic.
(Why agiantdwarf didn’t see the inherent absurdity of this and discard or modify the criteria used I have no idea.)
If discussion of the place of Israel in the ideologies of the neocon persuasion is proof of antisemitism, then the neocons themselves are antisemites.
Since antisemitical neocons would contradict the overwhelming evidence that neocons are, in fact, not antisemitic, it is more probable that discussion of the place of Israel in the ideologies of the neocon persuasion is not even evidence of antisemitism, (let alone proof).
It’s patently obvious that it’s not “a shadowy Jewish conspiracy that controls American foreign policy.”
Neither the Kitty Clark piece nor the Kalle Lasn piece attempt to make the case that the neocons are “a shadowy Jewish conspiracy that controls American foreign policy.”
The Lasn piece even goes so far as to explicitly state:
Please find me a quote that even implies this. If you can’t find one, I’d like an apology please.
I did not call Ari Shavit an anti-semite. I haven’t read the full article that he wrote. It may have been relevant in his article.
Context is key.
Kitty’s article was about Leo Strauss and his effects on neo-conservatism. He chose to stick in a quote about how almost all neo-cons are Jewish.
And why do you keep on bringing up what Foxman said? I don’t care if they challenge the pro-Israeli leanings of the government. Let me make this clear for you, in big bold letters:
I find it appalling that Kitty Clark, Tim Robbins, and whoever else believe that an elite group of Jews started the war in Iraq because of some kind of Jewish conspiracy.
And let me use an analogy to show why I don’t think Ari Shavit is an anti-semite.
The government publishes statistics on crime broken down by race. If someone wrote “Why is it that [x race] commits more crime than [y race]?” in an essay about a person of x race that commited mass murder, I would sense a bit of racism. I would not suspect the government of racism.
I haven’t seen anything about this movie, and haven’t even heard of it until this thread. However, based upon what I have read in this thread, I don’t think that even if Tim Robbins is making a statement about Shadowy Jewish conspiracies in the highest levels of power, that it is in any way anti-semitic, it is merely pointing out the obvious, that lot’s of jews are in high levels of power and tend to stick together at all levels of power.
McJohn:
I was referring to some of the people that pushed the Balfour declaration. Unfortunately the info I got was from a book I checked out from the library and no longer have. Let me see if I can look anything up on google, but the Zionist National Congress was a fairly wealthy and politically significant organization at the time in Europe.
http://www.wzo.org.il/home/movement/first.htm
http://www.wzo.org.il/home/movement/first.htm
I am not that knowledgeable on the subject, and yes I think it’s a matter of the British playing both sides against the middle as well. I can’t give you exact names as to what I was speaking of, I can’t find good sites and it’s been a few years since I studied up on the situation. I am merely suggesting that the idea that the jews are persecuted for no reason, is about as ludicrous as the idea that they deserve genocide for their actions. Jews aren’t evil, but they are self-serving, just like everyone else, and in the current geo-political climate, they are at the top levels of power.
Erek
The way you paraphrased what I wrote altered its meaning, so find you own quote to support it.
I wrote :
“agiantdwarf… [pointed out] …that the criteria …brand Ari Shavit…as antisemitic.”
I didn’t say that you branded Ari Shavit as anything.
What you wrote was:
“Israeli author or not, this basically supports the view that Kitty Clark and Tim Robbins believe in some sort of Jewish cabal that caused the war in Iraq.”
Either you meant it as you wrote it, (which would mean that Mr. Shavit was presciently, (and very obliquely), addressing issues related to a play and an article which had yet to be written), or your punctuation was a little off like so:
“Israeli author or not, this basically supports the view that Kitty Clark and Tim Robbins believe in- some sort of Jewish cabal that caused the war in Iraq.”
Which is a very direct way of saying that Mr. Shavit’s paragraph supports what Mr. Robbins, Ms. Clark believe in.
If what Mr. Robbins and Ms. Cark believe in is antisemitic then Mr. Shavit’s paragraph supports antisemitic beliefs.
First, she never says “almost all neo-cons are Jewish.”
Second, mentioning that someone is Jewish is not evidence of antisemitism.
There’s been no evidence presented that Ms. Clark and Mr. Robbins believe “that an elite group of Jews started the war in Iraq because of some kind of Jewish conspiracy.”
The evidence shows that Mr. Robbins and Ms. Kitty thought that an elite group, (some of whom are Jewish), started a war. There’s no mention of "some kind of Jewish conspiracy."
That’s the missing ingredient you ain’t got.
Both Mr. Robbins nor Ms. Clark “recognize that the hawkish camp includes significant Jewish and non-Jewish players,” as per Foxman, and neither is portraying “a shadowy Jewish conspiracy that controls American foreign policy,” also as per Foxman.
I checked the ADL site for
the play Embedded- nada
Tim Robbins- nada.
Kitty Clark- nada
Adbusters- nada
Apparently, either the ADL hasn’t found Embedded to be antisemitic either, or maybe they have not yet heard of the play.
Maybe you should send them a copy of Mr. Kaplan’s article to help keep them informed of current events.
For the record Mr.Shavit is the one who used the phrase “almost all of them
Jewish,” not Ms. Clark.
Oh Erek, where do we even begin with you? So much ignorance, so little time.
I’ll begin with the trivial. The Kaballah. Given that you don’t know the difference between the Torah and the Talmud, let alone the Zohar, I think that you might be on thin ice delving into the Kaballah. The Cliff notes vesion of Kaballah is that it is involved less with the study of what God wants us to do (as is Torah and Talmud) and more involved with trying to understand God’s essence. To do this you study God’s earthy aspects: creation, acts of lovingkindeness, etc. You study the Torah looking for clues and therein some mystics believe in the hidden meanings within words and numerical values. Not exactly Jewish mainstream. Many call it nonsense. And your point about Kaballah again? That Jews understand the power of the word? Well yes. But you don’t need Kaballah to make that point. We are “The People of the Book” afterall.
Now then onto your aspersion of “conspiricy” … please tell me precisely what this cabal of Jews working on this claimed agenda is doing that is illegal by your use of the term.
And then please tell me which of the following is or is not a conspiricy by your use of the term:
Is there an Irish-American conspiricy to get people drunk today? (There are many Irish-Americans working with the common goal of making alcohol widely avaiable for consuption today afterall)
Is there a Black conspiricy to unseat Bush? Many Blacks in America have that common goal.
Is there a White conspiricy to oppress Blacks? There are many Whites (see various threads here for your examples) who desire that and some are willing to use clearly illegal means … certainly “more than 5”.
Is there an native American conspiricy to promote gambling?
A Chinese conspiricy for gang war? (There are gangs in California made up of Chinese American engaged in illegal activities … therefore there is a Chinese conspiricy.)
A Catholic conspiricy to molest children?
I trust the absurdity becomes clear.
Next, the Neocons. Their Jewishness is not really fair game. It is an ad hominem attack: rather than debate the logic or illogic of their recommendations as being in America’s (or the world’s) best interest, attack who they are and thus attempt to make their assessments suspect. If you disagree with the POV that they espouse, debate that.
Next the claims that there are so many Jews in high power and that they stick together that is so obvious to you because you live in New York and see Jews sticking together and … Oy. So what percentage of Senators are Jewish? What percentage of Presidents have been? What percentage of the House? How do they stick together other than having similar positions in support of strong US Israel relations (like most of the rest of Congress)?
Finally as to your statement that the Jews brought antisemitism upon themselves, did “something to deserve their persecutions”. You said it well your self when you said
Obviously true. Total agreement. Your recognizing that is a start. Now try learning a little before you spout off again.