Jewish Influence

Express Group now openly promoting the English Defence League

/30 Comments/in , /by

The promotion which the billionaire Zionist Jew Richard Desmond is giving to the English Defence League via the Express Group component of his ever-growing media empire would seem to challenge the ‘official’ position of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and its Community Security Trust that Zionist-Jewry in Britain is firmly opposed to the EDL and its ‘Islamophobic’ policies. An article in Desmond’s Daily Star (“EDL to go political“), touts the electoral prospects of the EDL and reports results of a phone poll finding that 98% of Daily Star readers agree with EDL policies.

Desmond has always been a bit of a maverick. He built his fortune on pornography before selling up to raise the capital to buy the Express Group, which includes the Daily Express, the Sunday Express and the Daily Star. Last year he bought Channel 5 TV. Recently he withdrew his publications from the Press Complaints Commission, to which all major national and small local newspaper groups belong.

But his backing of the EDL should not be seen a genuine split within the Jewry.

Throughout history, wherever they have settled, the Jews have notbeen bothered by the concept of a principled, unified and consistent approach to any issue — except one: the survival and advancement of the Jews. In all other matters they are are entirely morally pragmatic and often deliberately contradictory. Read more

Bernard Lewis as an Academic Ethnic Activist

/46 Comments/in , , , /by

In doing some research on Geert Wilders, I came across a recent article by Andrew G. Bostrom favorably describing Bernard Lewis’s views of Islam (“Geert Wilders and the Rise of Islamic Political Correctness,” Dec. 8, 2010). Bernard Lewis is the best known academic expert on the Muslim world, so his views carry quite a bit of weight. Bostrom quotes a 1954 essay of Lewis as follows:

I turn now from the accidental to the essential factors, to those deriving from the very nature of Islamic society, tradition, and thought. The first of these is the authoritarianism, perhaps we may even say the totalitarianism, of the Islamic political tradition… There are no parliaments or representative assemblies of any kind, no councils or communes, no chambers of nobility or estates, no municipalities in the history of Islam; nothing but the sovereign power, to which the subject owed complete and unwavering obedience as a religious duty imposed by the Holy Law…For the last thousand years, the political thinking of Islam has been dominated by such maxims as “tyranny is better than anarchy,” and “whose power is established, obedience to him is incumbent.” Read more

Derrida’s (Crypto-) Jewish Identity

/35 Comments/in , , , /by

In Culture of Critique I had a brief section on philosopher Jacques Derrida’s strong Jewish identity and how that informed his writing. (See here, p. 198ff.) It emphasizes the point that Derrida thought of himself as a crypto-Jew. Despite his pose as “a leftist Parisian intellectual, a secularist and an atheist,” Derrida descended from a long line of crypto-Jews, and at one point he explicitly identifies himself as a crypto-Jew: “Marranos that we are, Marranos in any case whether we want to be or not, whether we know it or not.” Derrida changed his first name to the French Christian sounding ‘Jacques’ in order better blend into the  French scene.

Indeed, one might say that Derrida’s crypsis is typical of Jews on the left:

[Leftist] universalism may thus be viewed as a mechanism for Jewish continuity via crypsis or semi-crypsis. The Jewish radical is invisible to the [non-Jew] as a Jew and thereby avoids anti-Semitism while at the same time covertly retains his or her Jewish identity. Lyons (1982, 73) finds that “most Jewish Communists wear their Jewishness very casually but experience it deeply. It is not a religious or even an institutional Jewishness for most; nevertheless, it is rooted in a subculture of identity, style, language, and social network. . . . In fact, this second-generation Jewishness was antiethnic and yet the height of ethnicity. The emperor believed that he was clothed in transethnic, American garb, but [non-Jews] saw the nuances and details of his naked ethnicity.” (Chapter 3 of CofC, p. 91)

The Forward has an article on a recent biography of Derrida that adds to the portrait. It notes that Derrida was “acutely aware of his ethnic identity” and as a result much of his early writing was on “fellow Jews.” He took his crypto-Judaism to the grave:

Abundant details provided by Peeters prove Derrida’s lasting devotion toYiddishkeit … When Derrida was buried, his elder brother, René, wore a tallit at the suburban French cemetery and recited the Kaddish to himself inwardly, since Jacques had asked for no public prayers. This discreet, highly personal, yet emotionally and spiritually meaningful approach to recognizing Derrida’s Judaism seems emblematic of this complex, imperfect, yet valuably nuanced thinker.

In other words, Derrida was a crypto-Jew until the end and instructed his family to participate in the charade.  Read more

Charles Dodgson replies to comments

/110 Comments/in , , , /by

I want to thank commentators for pointing out errors in my review of Band of Brothers. Watching the sequence again I can see that it was Webster who shouted out at the surrendering German troops. And sure enough there are the different types of uniforms on the camp inmates, as John Orloff notes. Also I did not realize that Liebgott was in fact Catholic or that Tom Hanks is partly Jewish (actually I still don’t realize that Hanks is Jewish). One part of the camp scene in which an error occurs is especially important because a prisoner explains what the camp is and who the prisoners are. The exchange is as follows:

(Liebgott interprets.)

Winters: “Will you ask him what kind of camp this is? Why are they here?”

Prisoner: “It is a work camp for Unerwuenscht.”

Liebgott cannot translate the final word.

Winters: “Criminals?”

Prisoner: “No. Doctors, clerks, musicians, taylors, farmers, intellectuals, . . . Jews, Jews, Jews . . . Poles, Gypsies.”

My review correctly quoted the prisoner as identifying the camp as a work camp. However, where the prisoner comes to describe ethnicity and nationality my review omits his mention of Poles, though I do include Gypsies in quoting him. The omission does not affect my argument because Jews are clearly emphasized, more so in the literal transcript above than in my review. Nevertheless this and other errors are embarrassing. Read more

Steven Spielberg: Body Snatcher–A Review of the Miniseries “Band of Brothers”

/125 Comments/in , , , , /by

Band of Brothers, the 2001 TV miniseries, was produced  by Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks.

Episode 9 was directed by David Frankel and written by John Orloff.

Based on the 1992 book by Stephen E. Ambrose, Band of Brothers. E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler’s Eagle Nest, Simon and Schuster (reviewed edition by Pocket Books, 2001).

In ten episodes, Band of Brothers depicts how E (“Easy”) Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, trained in America and England and then fought from D-Day through to the end of the European phase of WWII. It is a technically strong and gripping production. The battle scenes are among the most realistic I have seen, though one must allow for the demands of the cinematic medium — emphasis of a few individuals and spatial compression of combat groups. I am reminded of the grim and gritty street battle sequences in Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan. This review looks at the ninth episode, which does not depict military conflict but is itself something of a black operation in the culture wars.

As our own Edmund Connelly has repeatedly demonstrated, Jewish interests have frequently been pushed by American television and Hollywood films in various ways, often as a backdrop to stories unrelated to ethnicity, like the omnipresent upper class Anglo twit and the Black genius technical expert. The 9th episode of Band of Brothers, titled “Why We Fight”, represents an unprecedented level of ambition — to claim America’s WWII sacrifices as motivated by the desire to save Jews from Nazi persecution, to make America’s sacrifice in WWII all about the Jews, not about Americans doing their duty in a tragic internecine conflict. Read more

Christopher Donovan: The USS LIberty: True Tales of the Jewish Memory Hole

/25 Comments/in /by

The USS Liberty was an American ship attacked by Israel during the Six-Day War. The Israelis killed 34 Americans and wounded many more. The attack was either designed to hide Israel’s designs on the Golan Heights or some other territorial target (the Liberty was a spy ship) or draw the U.S. into the war by making it look like Egypt or another Arab country had attacked the ship. It was clearly not a “mistake”, as Israel has maintained, because American flags were visible. (And the “mistake” excuse is amusing in light of Israel-firsters’ usual gushing about the superiority of the Israeli military — they’re an undefeatable collection of geniuses, but they just happened to slip up this once?)

A newly released book, What I Saw That Day, is a fantastic first-hand account by survivor Phillip Tourney.  Tourney is not a White activist, but he’s clearly wise to the ways of Jewish message control. In the book, he speculates that beyond the defeaning silence surrounding the attack, someone’s gotten inside the group of survivors themselves and attempted to hush things up.

Tourney himself is having none of it. Hats off to him for continuing to publicize an episode that everyone should know about. If you get a chance to buy his book, I encourage you to do so. The attack on the Liberty and subsequent silence is an undeniable example of Jewish power — and Jews’ disregard for the White non-Jews who serve them.

Alan Dershowitz on Jewish Media Influence

/102 Comments/in , , , /by

A sure sign that Jews control the media is that someone like Alan Dershowitz can get away with trotting out totally lame arguments in the mainstream media against the idea that Jews control the media. (Do Jews Control the Media?)  It’s an example of Orwell’s idea of blackwhite: “a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary.”

Dershowitz’s basic point is that yes, there are “individual Jews” with influence in the media, as well as the law, finance, and academia. His phrase “individual Jews” is meant to indicate that they are people “who happen to be Jewish.” They do not “act together in a conspiratorial manner.”

If he means that Jews in the media do a Protocols-of-the-Elders-of-Zion thing where they get their marching orders from Abe Foxman, I would have to agree with him. But the fact is that in general Jews do not act simply as individuals. There is a shared vision that influences the attitudes and behavior of individual Jews. As I note in summarizing J. J. Goldberg, “There is a great deal of consensus on broad Jewish issues, particularly in the areas of Israel and the welfare of other foreign Jewries, immigration and refugee policy, church-state separation, abortion rights, and civil liberties” (see Jewish Power, p. 5). Indeed, the consensus on these issues among Jewish activist organizations and the Jewish intellectual movements reviewed here despite a great deal of disagreement on other issues is striking.These attitudes typify the entire Jewish political spectrum, from the mainstream Jewish left to the neoconservative Jewish right, and in general, the Jewish profile on these issues is quite different from other Americans. Massive changes in public policy on these issues coincide with the period of increasing Jewish power and influence in the United States.

Philip Weiss points out that Dershowitz himself has emphasized general Jewish goals, particularly the defense of Israel. And he presents examples of Jews in the media who see themselves as promoting Israel or who actively exclude points of view critical of Israel. To which I would add the comment by Eric Alterman about Martin Peretz, publisher of The New Republic: “It is not enough to say that TNR’s owner is merely obsessed with Israel; he says so himself. But more importantly, Peretz is obsessed with Israel’s critics, Israel’s would-be critics, and people who never heard of Israel, but might one day know someone who might someday become a critic.”

Dershowitz gives the New York Times as an example of a Jewish-owned media, noting that is critical of Israel. But in general, the Times’ coverage has been highly skewed toward Israel, as documented by Alison Weir’s If Americans Knew. Weiss gives the well-known quote from former editor Max Frankel: The NYT’s former executive editor Max Frankel wrote, “I was much more deeply devoted to Israel than I dared to assert … Fortified by my knowledge of Israel and my friendships there, I myself wrote most of our Middle East commentaries. As more Arab than Jewish readers recognized, I wrote them from a pro-Israel perspective.”

A recent Forward article recounts the firings of Rick Sanchez, Octavia Nasr, and Helen Thomas for their comments on Jewish issues. It points out that “Jews have done more than other groups to make it clear that they will not suffer lightly the public slights like those made by Sanchez — let alone by those with even bigger mouths, like Mel Gibson. As Foxman put it, ‘We are a community that is sensitive, and — have no doubt — we’ll respond.’ ‘

Right. But at least we know what the game is. The truth will be suppressed with all the power that the Jewish community can bring to bear. The message is out that anyone who wishes to have a career in the media must play by these rules or look for another line of work.