Do fascism and philo-Semitism go hand-in-hand? It is an interesting question, and one could point to plenty of evidence in support of the affirmative side of the question. Take for instance Janet Napolitano. According to Wikipedia, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security is a Methodist, and is also “of half Italian ancestry.” The article doesn’t specify what the other half is, but does give us the following:
Janet Napolitano was born on November 29, 1957, in New York City, the daughter of Jane Marie (née Winer) and Leonard Michael Napolitano, who was the dean of the University of New Mexico School of Medicine. She is of half Italian ancestry and is a Methodist. She was the eldest of three children; she has a younger brother and sister.
Some have speculated (here for example) that Napolitano’s mother was Jewish, but regardless of her origins or any religious beliefs she may or may not hold, Napolitano seems to have a deep love for Jewish people and holds their concerns rather dear to her heart. She has even diverted considerable resources from her departmental budget to ensuring their welfare and security. Of special interest is a DHS initiative called the Nonprofit Security Grant Program—designed to provide “target hardening” and “security enhancements” to American nonprofit organizations that are deemed “at high risk of a terrorist attack.”
Ironically, perhaps, it was a Jewish news organization, The Forward, that uncovered what appears to be striking preference given to Jewish organizations in doling out NSGP grant monies.
“The grants have been of tremendous value to this community. It is really unprecedented,” said Paul Goldenberg, national director of Secure Community Network, an umbrella organization devoted to addressing security needs of Jewish communities, an organization whose board of directors includes representatives from major Jewish organizations, including the American Jewish Committee and the ADL.
Goldenberg’s remarks were quoted in a Forward report published September 29, 2011 which found that a whopping 73.7 percent of NSGP grants between the years 2007-2010 went to Jewish organizations. Or to put it in round numbers, out of a total of 995 grants distributed, 734 went to Jewish groups. In August of 2011, just before the article came out, the DHS announced its grant recipients for the year 2011, and this time around Jewish nonprofits emerged even bigger winners—with 81 percent of the awards.
Acknowledging that the grant awards amount to “disproportionate distribution,” The Forward gives us a small sampling of what the money was used for:
The Akiba-Schechter Jewish Day School, in Chicago, put in new lights around its building and parking lot and now has a state-of-the-art video surveillance system with 12 cameras. Congregation Brith Shalom, in Bellaire, Texas, now has blast-proof doors and windows. In Baltimore, the Bais Hamedrash & Mesivta school installed a new gate to the parking lot and placed cameras throughout the building. Earlier this month, Congregation B’nai Israel of Staten Island put new shatterproof windows into its 40-year-old building.
State of the art surveillance systems, blast-proof windows, and gated parking lots—while increasing numbers of Americans find themselves living in the streets. It would suggest—would it not?—that postmodern America is now being run in the interest of one ethnic group, to the exclusion of all others. Goldenberg is correct. It is unprecedented.
If you think Napolitano might hold any grudges against The Forward for making this information about her grant program public, you’d be wrong. On June 4, 2012, the DHS secretary met with The Forward’s editorial staff and did a podcast interview that can be accessed here in which she affirmed her belief that Jews face special risks the rest of us don’t have to worry about.
“Unfortunately there are risks attendant on the Jewish community that are not attendant on all other communities,” she said. She did acknowledge she knows of no “specific, credible threat” against American Jews at present, but then she added:
But I would also say that this is a world where we always need to be leaning forward, and we need to be thinking proactively, not just reactively, and that applies particularly strongly to Jewish institutions.
And, as if to demonstrate her proactive thinking, Napolitano mentioned her department’s If You See Something, Say Something campaign—a DHS program that encourages Americans to report “suspicious activity” to their local authorities—and she took pains to note for The Forward staff that the program’s promotional materials have been translated into…yes…Yiddish.
ISIS and Irises: Big Brother Approaching FAST
But what of non-Jewish Americans? What perchance does the Department of Homeland Security have in store for us? Hi-tech surveillance is one thing. DHS is presently testing a new video surveillance system called ISIS (Imaging System for Immersive Surveillance) that will give government authorities 360o crowd monitoring capabilities with instant, high-resolution video capture.
The system employs “image stitching” technology, bringing together images from multiple video lenses, making it possible for Big Brother to zoom in on individual objects or faces in a crowd but without losing clarity in the remaining field of view. The controllers of ISIS will have at their fingertips a resolution capability of 100 megapixels, described as the equivalent of “50 full-HDTV movies playing at once, with optical detail to spare.” A software system called “video analytics” will provide additional surveillance capabilities, including the setting up of “exclusion zones”—with alerts being flashed the moment such zones are breached—while yet another app will make it possible for operators to:
pick…a target—a person, a package, or a pickup truck—and the detailed viewing window will tag it and follow it, automatically panning and tilting as needed. Video analytics at high resolution across a 360-degree field of view, coupled with the ability to follow objects against a cluttered background, would provide enhanced situational awareness as an incident unfolds.
A second generation model of ISIS will feature custom sensors and video boards, longer range cameras, and higher resolutions, while future plans call for equipping it with infrared capabilities for recording events at night. “We’ve seen that terrorists are determined to do us harm, and ISIS is a great example of one way we can improve our security by leveraging our strengths,” says Dr. John Fortune, of the Infrastructure and Geophysical Division of DHS’s Science and Technology Directorate.
DHS is currently testing ISIS at airports but has plans for expanding it to “other critical venues.”
But ISIS only barely scratches the surface. DHS employs more than 240,000 people, and its budget for the year 2012 was $57 billion. With that much money and manpower, a government agency headed by a raving philo-Semite can go a long way toward trampling the remnant of privacy and freedoms in America.
In 2010, DHS began testing iris scanners, and the devices are now used in certain situations at some border point entries. 2010 of course was the same year the introduction of invasive pat downs and naked body scanners at airports began causing an uproar amongst the US public—but now the DHS is treading into areas that once might have been thought of purely as the domain of science fiction. Imagine having the ability to detect “malintent,” i.e. whether or not a person may perhaps intend to commit a crime or terrorist act at some point in the future. This is what DHS is working toward with its new Future Attribute Screening Technology, FAST. The matter has been discussed at the website End The Lie, where writer Madison Ruppert describes it as follows:
This program collects and stores “physiological and behavioral signals” for analysis, which are then used to determine if an individual could possibly commit a crime in the future or if they harbor malicious intent.
Like the rest of the DHS programs, this requires no probable cause, let alone suspicion of criminal activity.
The data is collected secretly and according to documents obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), includes, “video images, audio recordings, cardiovascular signals, pheromones, electrodermal activity, and respiratory measurements.”
CNET reports that, “blink rate and pupil variation are measured too”, according to an unnamed government source.
FAST reportedly will also measure changes in voice pitch, as well as eye movements, including pupil dilation and blink rate, and changes in speech rhythm and intonation.
Worth noting is a scientist quoted by Ruppert who expresses doubt the technology can actually work. Yet the technological advances the general public knows about are usually ten or twenty years behind those the government works on in secret. Moreover, it’s not hard to imagine a future in which FAST, or technology like it, could be combined with civilian drones, some of which are no larger than insects, as well as a future in which “malintent” could be defined as something as facile as planning to attend an Occupy Wall Street protest or harboring the belief that Israel commits war crimes. Such possibilities tell of a future in which vast populations are controlled by a small number of people… and they also form the making of a totalitarian state such as has never before existed.
And should worse come to worse, DHS is fully prepared to use deadly force. Earlier this year, the department contracted for delivery of 450 million hollow point bullets for .40 caliber weapons. More recent disclosures show it soliciting contracts for “personal defense weapons”—designed for maximum concealment and close-quarters combat—that will be capable of both automatic and semi-automatic fire and will come equipped with flash suppressors and/or muzzle brakes. Requested are a total of 7,000 such weapons, which in turn are to be field tested with at least 4,000 rounds of ammunition each, and if the guns pass the field tests, presumably additional contracts will be awarded.
From Israel to the ADL:
Travels with Janet
In 2011, the NSGP grant initiative was funded to the tune of $19 million. The following year things changed a bit. The budget was cut to $10 million and the guidelines were adjusted in such a manner that would, at least in theory, reduce the built-in favoritism enjoyed by Jewish organizations. Previously in the guidelines, preference was accorded to “nonprofit organizations with religious affiliation,” giving Jewish groups a rather significant advantage over other nonprofit organizations. This, as well as a change in the definition of “terror threat,” perhaps resulted in some leveling of the playing field, however, as The Forward noted, “Even with the new guidelines, Jewish activists contend that the program will still provide funding for the community’s security needs because of the increase in threats against Jewish institutions mainly from groups close to Iran.”
Moreover, it seems Napolitano is just as steadfast in her devotion to Jewish interests as ever, indicating in her June 4 interview with The Forward that she was quite unperturbed over the fact that the lion’s share of the NSGP grant money had been awarded to nonprofits serving those interests.
“The fact that it ends up going to many Jewish organizations doesn’t in itself bother me,” she said. She also informed her interlocutors she had seen no indications the money had been misspent, and that she felt the program has been a success.
Like most powerful Washington officials, Janet Napolitano is ever eager to meet with Israeli leaders and spend time in the Jewish state. During her tenure as Homeland Security director, Napolitano has made at least two trips to Israel—in January of 2011, and again in May of this year. In her most recent visit she signed an agreement with Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman expanding the Global Entry program to include Israel. Under that program, travelers from a small number of select countries are given expedited passage through US Customs ports upon their arrival in the US. In the past, a reciprocity condition was placed upon countries seeking to join the program, however, in the case of Israel that requirement was waived.
While in Israel, Napolitano also met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, issuing the standard and by now rather hackneyed line about “unshakeable bonds” between the two countries—a talking point that seems to be especially in fashion with the Obama administration this election year.
“The United States remains steadfastly committed to Israel’s security. The bonds between our two nations are unshakeable, lasting and critical to both our peoples,” she said.
In a video, here, former Jew, Brother Nathanael Kapner, alleges that the actual power behind DHS is not Janet Napolitano herself, and that the real license remains in the hands of former DHS director Michael Chertoff, along with Joseph Lieberman, who heads the US Senate’s Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. To this there may be some truth. Wikipedia’s article on Napolitano records several verbal gaffes and inconsistencies that would not seem indicative of a strong leader. But be that as it may, Napolitano seems to have earned her stripes as far as the ADL is concerned. On April 29th this year the Jewish organization awarded her its William and Naomi Gorowitz Institute Service Award. Previous recipients of the award—designed to recognize “outstanding achievements in combatting terrorism, extremism, and injustice”—include Chertoff and former CIA Director George Tenet. In her acceptance speech, Napolitano stated that the ADL has “helped to train senior leaders at DHS” as well as “thousands of law enforcement officers in communities around the country,” and she vowed to continue her patronage of Jewish organizations:
And all of our work to collaborate with the public and non-profits is clear in DHS’ relationship with the American Jewish community.
It’s a partnership that didn’t necessarily begin with this Administration, but I’m proud that we have built upon and expanded it under President Obama’s leadership.
We have depended on this partnership recently as we’ve witnessed a number of high profile domestic and international events that have directly impacted the Jewish community, both here and abroad.
It’s also a partnership we have leveraged to make communities across the country better prepared to deal with threats that may originate within this country or abroad…
I met with Jewish community leaders at the White House last week, and we’ve stayed in close contact over the past several months to address the issues I just mentioned.
And we are working closely with the FBI to hold coordinated outreach and briefings to the Jewish community; and to identify potential targets and address any vulnerabilities.
She also gushed about the “particularly strong partnership with our friend and steadfast ally Israel,” and talked of how she has increased cooperation with the Jewish state to “unprecedented levels.” A video of the speech is available here and includes opening remarks by ADL Director Abe Foxman, who praises the “paramount concern” Napolitano and DHS have shown for “the issues at the heart of ADL’s agenda.” Moreover, this wasn’t the first award bestowed upon its great friend by the cuddly Jewish organization. Foxman informs us that in 1998 Napolitano, while serving as Arizona Attorney General, was recognized as the ADL’s “Leader of Distinction”, and in 2007, as governor of the state, she was given the ADL’s “Torch of Liberty” award.
And maybe one day they’ll hand her even yet another, for Napolitano does very much seem to stay busy on behalf of Jews as she attends to her daily duties. As recently as June 11, just one week after her meeting with The Forward’s staff, she met with community leaders of the Jewish Federations of North America, vowing—much as she did in her April speech at the ADL—to continue her indulgences of Jewish organizations.
“Homeland security begins with hometown security, and our nation’s faith-based organizations play a critical role in keeping our communities safe,” she said, apparently disregarding the prior removal of the words “nonprofit organizations with religious affiliation” from the NSGP guidelines. “DHS works closely with communities all across the country so they are better prepared to deal with threats that may originate within this country or abroad.”
Where Does it End?
It’s very much worth noting that these symptoms of philo-Semitism exhibited by Napolitano are not limited to her alone, but can be found throughout much of the Obama administration—from the endless pandering to Israel by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, to the Justice Department’s arrests and subpoenas of pro-Palestinian activists. And if we go to Whitehouse.gov we can even find a special website section entitled Blog Posts Related to the American Jewish Community.
All of this would suggest that America is becoming more Jewish by the day, by the hour even, and the more Jewish it becomes, the more fascist it becomes. If fascism and philo-Semitism go hand-in-hand, does that lead us to conclude that most Jews are by nature fascist? One thing I’ve observed over the course of a lifetime is that Jews change their colors like a chameleon. When I was a kid growing up in the sixties, Jews played key roles in both the civil rights and anti-war movements. But then as Jewish power in America expanded and solidified, Jews, practically en masse, crossed from the left to the right side of the political divide. Like a chameleon, the colors changed. Such questions as war or racism, and whether these are evils that must be opposed, are of hardly any matter. They are trivial considerations. For chameleons the key question is and will always be, “Is it good for the chameleons?”. This simply is how the reptilian mind operates. The fact that the reptilian mindset has taken over the chain of command in the USA should not surprise us.
Does Napolitano care about the security concerns of all Americans, or only Jews? Is she the Homeland Security director of America or Israel? Is she concerned that America’s wars and atrocities in one Muslim country after another, whatever these may do to advance the interests of the Jewish state, pose a security threat to every single person in the US? These are questions that all Americans, even the Shabbes Goyim among us, would do well to consider before the technology to control us advances any further.
Since I finished writing the above story, the recipients of NSGP grants for 2012 were announced. Recall that above I mentioned that NSGP funding had been cut this year—from $19 million down to $10 million. So what to do when a program like this undergoes a budget cut? The answer DHS seems to have come up with is to give an even higher percentage of the money to Jewish organizations. In a July 2 story, Haaretz reports that this year 97 percent of the grant monies, or $9.7 million, will be awarded to Jewish organizations. “The Department of Homeland Security has demonstrated a great commitment to protecting at-risk communities,” said Kathy Manning, chair of the Board of Trustees of The Jewish Federations of North America. “These effective security grants are vital to the ongoing protection of deserving institutions, enabling us to work, worship, gather and learn without fear.”
The mainstream media do not seem to be covering this story (not surprising), but here is more at the JTA.
If it is true that the Jewish community in America faces so many alleged threats, then perhaps the Obama administration would care to address the question of why this is. Does President Obama dismiss all this as mere “irrational anti-Semitism”?
A well-known proverb states that the enemy of your enemy is your friend; yet, sometimes, the enemy of your enemy is also your enemy. In the Middle East, your enemy may even be your best friend. A less-known, but more accurate, Bedouin adage claims “I against my brother, my brothers and me against my cousins, then my cousins and me against strangers,” stating a clear hierarchy of loyalties. On paper, there is nothing easier than to prove the open hostility between the UK and Israel, to the extent that Israel’s President Shimon Peres seriously claimed in a recent interview “England is anti-Semitic.” Supporting this claim is an impressive list of quasi-arrests of Israeli generals and politicians. General Doron Almog escaped arrest in 2005 after being indicted for war crimes in a British court. In 2009 former military chief Moshe Yaalon—current Vice Prime Minister—called off a visit to Britain because of a similar concerns. In December 2009, an arrest warrant was issued by a British court for then leader of the opposition Tzipi Livni, due to war crimes committed by Israel in Gaza when Livni was Foreign Minister. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak faced a similar fate, but the British court ruled that as a sitting minister he enjoyed diplomatic immunity. Yet, claiming that Ehud Barak is a war criminal is not enough to define one as anti-Semite; in fact Ehud Barak cannot defend himself due to the very clear indictment issued by the United Nations on Operation Cast Lead.
Israel didn’t behave better. In February 2010, Israel used forged British passports which were used by Mossad agents in the Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh assassination in Dubai. This was so well proven that an Israeli diplomat was expelled from the UK in March 2010.
A closer look reveals a different reality. London and Tel Aviv are surprisingly close on financial issues. The London Stock Exchange was the first to sign a memorandum of understanding with Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (TASE). The document formalized the ties between the two organizations, establishing regular meetings between senior executives, and mutual access to information in order to facilitate trading of the shares of companies admitted to both markets. At the time, fifty Israeli companies were listed on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market and Alternative Investment Market. Moreover, one of the main TASE members—its board—is a London-based bank, HSBC. TASE plays such a key role in the Israeli economy that Ester Levanon, its Chief Executive Officer, was a senior Shin Beth officer before joining TASE. At the Shin Beth, she ran the secret police’s computer department. In other words, the mutual access to inner information by TASE and the London Stock Exchange gives a solid testimony of a cozy relation, even if these cousins—following the abovementioned Bedouin proverb—like to throw stones at each other during their weekend games. This is true even before mentioning that prominent international bankers have substantial interests in both countries.
This friendship is even more evident if looking at the political arena. The existence of the State of Israel is in great part the result the Balfour Declaration from November 2, 1917. This was a letter from the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Walter Rothschild promising the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people. The formal declaration was never abolished by subsequent British governments. As said, close cousins. A funny note on this topic is the logo of the upcoming London 2012 Olympic Games; Iran formally complained that the logo forms a funky Zion” Below is an graphic explanation of the issue; I found it convincing.
London 2012 Logo | Iran formally complained on its resemblance to “Zion”
Britain is not an empire anymore. Militarily speaking it is difficult to even consider it a leading power, despite its nuclear capabilities. Turkey’s navy is larger than the British one. Israel’s army is larger than the British one. Even commercially, Britain is receding. The London Stock Exchange, once the most important in the world is nowadays just the fourth largest. Assets are leaving London; the most prominent example in this category is the recent repatriation—as it was called in Caracas—of Venezuelan gold. Until last year, much of that country’s gold was stored in London. The former empire is so oppressive, that Venezuela paid for the storage and got no interests. The protective wings of China over Venezuela, assured a smooth withdrawal of the goods. Yet, the obvious richness of London is a solid testimony that the city maintains certain powers, though they are of the subtle kind. London is the leading international hub for bank transactions; its lords—their withered moustaches reminding us of their empire past glory—live mainly on transactions fees. In their magnificent mercy, they let others dirt their hands.
In 2010, London performed 20% of global cross-border bank transactions. In April that year, 36.7% of foreign exchange trading and 45.8% of financial derivative trading went through banks in London. The UK may not have a significant fleet anymore, but it still leads marine insurance and related fields to the extent that it is the only city where all twenty of the world’s largest insurers and reinsurers are represented. Lloyd’s of London is still the world’s biggest insurance market.
Ruling banks and insurance companies which are essential to international trade give the British government the power to carry financial attacks on practically every other country. Despite its apparent hostility towards Israel, the UK is economically friendly. The abovementioned links between the countries stock exchange companies proves that. This friendliness is not the result of the UK being shy of using its blackmailing power. These days, Britain is conducting an economic war for the sake of its Zionist cousin.
In October 2009, the British government announced unilateral sanctions on Iran, by forbidding all British financial institutions to cease doing business with The Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) and Bank Mellat. These sanctions were wild; unapproved either by the European Union or the UN Security Council, which joined the party only much later. This hostile act had not been provoked by Iran, which is a clear target of Western nuclear programs, including the Israeli one. The refusal of British companies to insure Iranian ships is causing problems to the marine activities of the latter. Moreover, Lloyd’s List, which records sales of marine vessels, and the UN’s International Maritime Organization, which tracks shipping and records the unique hull-numbers of ships, are both located in London. This is causing difficulties to ownership transactions that include Iran. Though the British banking system likes to portray itself as liberal and openly opposes restrictive legislation by the British government, when one of its banks gets a specific request from the government, it will comply and obviously keep quiet about that. No British bank will confront its government for the sake of protecting the rights of a customer.
Britain exerts pressure also across its borders. In March, SWIFT, a Belgium-based company that handles international financial transactions cut Iran off its network. Much of its transactions go through London’s banking systems; apparently the British government forced the company to do so. A few days ago, on July 1, new sanctions banning EU members from buying Iranian oil became mandatory; oddly enough this affects deeply Japan and South Korea. These two countries are major importers of Iranian oil and insure their tankers in London. Their frantic attempts to allow the operation of their tankers was met with a firm denial by the British government.
This is war. In essence, the UK is repeating the European oppression that Germany faced after WWI. We are watching an undeclared war in which one side is denied its right to defend itself. The western powers are provoking another unnecessary war. Nothing has changed from colonial times. Netanyahu is playing the role of Baron Rothschild, while David Cameron would like to portray himself as a young Winston Churchill. Their lackey Obama supplies the troops. The West cannot claim it has the right to threat the rest of the world with nuclear weapons without the latter having the right of self-defense. The West cannot logically claim it should have a monopoly on monetary transactions; on this topic we are seeing fast changes mainly in Asia which is dropping the dollar as an international currency. This tactic may still seem sound to Western leaders blinded by their centuries-old arrogance of power; yet, the era of barons and lords is over. In the near future, high-tea will be served with sushi and shish-kebab.
The following paper was submitted to The Journal of Hate Studies at Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA, on March 14, 2012. It was rejected without explanation. My paper criticizes the approach the discipline of Hate Studies had taken hitherto. It argues that Hate Studies has over-estimated the extent of white racism in the USA, and neglected Zionism as a source of hate. It backs up these criticisms with evidence, and a rigorous approach to evaluating it.
The Journal of Hate Studies asks for “cutting-edge essays, theory, and research that deepens the understanding of the development and expression of hate”. The following submission for the 2012 issue of the journal (Call for Papers, Tsai, R.L., 2012) is all of the above. It argues that Zionism generates hate, and that hate studies writers have neglected it. Further, it produces evidence that hate studies researchers have exaggerated the amount of racism in white gentile America. In the process, it examines the methodologies which have led to this miscalculation, and suggests a more balanced approach.
In his paper Hate, Oppression, Repression, and the Apocalyptic Style, (2004), one of the founders of hate studies, Chip Berlet, defines the field as “inquiries into the human capacity to define, and then dehumanize or demonize, an ‘other,’ and the processes which inform and give expression to, or can curtail or combat, that capacity”. The current paper argues that Zionism includes examples of the above “human capacity”, but that no contributor to hate studies, until now, has noticed them.
Noel Ignatiev’s contribution to the Encyclopedia of Race and Racism, (2007, pp. 240–244), describes the Zionist state of Israel as a “racial state, where rights are assigned on the basis of ascribed descent or the approval of the superior race”. Ilan Pappe’s The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, (2006), shows how Israel was initiated by the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people from their homeland, because they were not Jewish. I therefore argue that Zionism is a valid subject of hate studies.
However, a survey of the current publications of hate studies reveals a lack of concern with Zionism, in contrast to an emphasis on anti-Semitism and white racism. I illustrate this below with citations from the major works of hate studies, analyzing examples of alleged hate incidents to suggest a more scientific approach to the evaluation of hate. I cite the recommended works which allege there is an “epidemic” of hate crimes, and the one book currently in print which directly falsifies this hypothesis, Hate Crimes – Criminal Law & Identity Politics (Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., 1998). I make use of Steven Pinker’s recent work on the decline of violence, including hate crimes, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined (Pinker, S., 2011), and a number of newspaper and online reports of alleged hate crimes.
II. Inadequate attention to Zionism
The Zionist justification for expelling Palestinians has included expressions of “the human capacity to define, and then dehumanize or demonize, an ‘other,’” (Berlet, C., 2004). When Zionist leaders recognize the Palestinians’ existence, they sometimes refer to them as “devil’s spawn” (Rachel Abrams’ weblog; 2011). Other representative epithets include “drugged cockroaches”, “two-legged animals” and “Arab scum” (according to the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, 14 January 2002, citing The New Statesman, June 25, 1982). Some Zionists go so far as to say it would be justified to kill gentile babies “if they would grow up to harm us” – Rabbi Shapira, reported by Roi Sharon in Maariv, 2009. The evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers, in a book about self-deception, The Folly of Fools, the logic of deceit and self-deception in human life, (2011), in a section entitled “False Historical Narratives”, contrasts the Zionist myth with the reality:
a racialist (and then racist) country was shoehorned into the Middle East, so that Jewish people (half and quarter also) from around the world can immediately claim citizenship to this land but none of those who were so recently expelled could do so. (p. 236).
Nevertheless, only one of the papers for hate studies’ most recent conference mentions Zionism, and not to criticize it for racism, but to ask at what point criticism of it becomes racist – “Not every criticism of Israel and Zionism was viewed as antisemitic, but on many occasions such comment served to mask antisemitism” – Michael Whine, The Community Security Trust – Best Practice in Combating Antisemitic Hate, (2011), Journal of Hate Studies (vol. 9, p. 114).
Kenneth Stern, a founder of the discipline of hate studies, vigorously defends Zionism against the “racism” charge. In his first pamphlet on anti-Semitism for the American Jewish Committee, Anti-Zionism, the Sophisticated Anti-Semitism, (1990), Stern wrote: “This anti-Semitic slander – that Zionism was racism – first appeared at the United Nations in the early 1960s” (p. 6). Even the Jewish Agency for Israel says, of the right of return for Jews, “It has been suggested that an immigration policy which explicitly gives priority to one ethnic or religious group cannot be justified in liberal democratic terms” (2004). But Stern has consistently argued that describing the Law of Return as racist, is itself racist (Stern 2006). In an extensive survey of the literature, I have been unable to find anything recommended by the hate studies department at Gonzaga University’s Bibliography of Hate Studies Materials (Thweatt, E., 2002), which agrees with the United Nations that Zionism as a form of racism.
As well as the United Nations, Stern’s complaints about “anti-Semitism” are directed at rural political movements, known as “militias”, in the USA. In 1996, Stern wrote an article for USA Today entitled Militia Mania, a Growing Danger, and published a book called A Force Upon the Plain, subtitled The American Militia Movement and the Politics of Hate, claiming that anti-Jewish attitudes are central to these movements’ ideologies (p. 246). Concern about militias is a recurrent theme in the hate studies literature (Dees, M., 1997; Berlet, C. & Lyons, M, 2000; Thweatt, E., 2002).
An example is Public Eye journal – “Researching the Right for Progressive Changemakers” – edited by hate studies pundit Chip Berlet. In her article for the journal, The Montana Human Rights Network, (2005), Abby Scher claims the following statement, from a leaflet produced by a militia in Montana, is an example of an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory: “George Bush… cynically used the tragedy of September 11th to silence dissent and to launch the war for Israel his Zionist neocon handlers wanted.” Arguments for the claims that the neoconservative movement is overwhelming Zionist, and that it was instrumental in persuading the US government to attack Iraq in 2003, include scholarly ones such as those of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt (The Israel Lobby; 2007). Deciding how much truth there is in this view is beyond the scope of the present essay – my point is simply that classifying this analysis as “anti-Semitic” may tend to discourage us from asking legitimate questions.
III. The influence of pseudo-science
The field of hate studies has made use of the evolutionary approach in understanding ethnic conflict, for example in publishing Harold Fishbein’s The Genetic/Evolutionary Basis of Prejudice and Hatred (2004), and James Waller’s Our Ancestral Shadow: Hate and Human Nature in Evolutionary Psychology (2004). However, less scientific ideas have also been given credit. For example Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt’s Hate Crimes, (1993), which is recommended in hate studies’ bibliography (Thweatt, E., 2002), and referenced in several papers in the field, relied on a 1950 treatise on hate and prejudice, The Authoritarian Personality (Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J., & Stanford, R.N., 1950): “Decades ago, the authors of The Authoritarian Personality recognized that prejudice satisfies a deep-rooted psychological need to protect or enhance self-esteem” (p. 48).
In The Authoritarian Personality, Theodor Adorno and his colleagues claimed to have found “quantifiable relations” between conservatism and anti-Semitism via the “Politico-Economic Conservatism” scale, the “Ethnocentrism” scale and the “Anti-Semitism” scale (p. 49).
The above diagram illustrates the general principle. If person A believes P and Q, and person B believes P, the likelihood that person B also believes Q is greater than the occurrence of belief Q in the general population. This is as true of any one class of beliefs as of any other. Yet the Frankfurt School believed it could derive “the determination of the potential fascist in childhood” (Adorno et al. 1950, p. 56) from this statistical banality.
The authors claimed that a German who joined the Nazis “can apparently never quite establish his personal and masculine identity; he thus has to look for it in a collective system where there is opportunity both for submission to the powerful and for retaliation against the powerless” (page 370); they did not apply this psychological explanation to Communist Party recruits of the same period.
The Frankfurt School’s approach still has influence. As a contemporary example of the use of psychoanalysis to reinforce political, and possibly racial, bias, consider Naomi Klein’s recent article about climate change for The Nation, Capitalism vs. the Climate (2011). She argued that “conservative white men” tend to disbelieve the theory of unprecedented anthropogenic global warming “because it threatens to upend their dominance-based worldview”.
Though work such as The Authoritarian Personality is taken seriously by some contributors, hate studies has also made some use of a truly scientific approach, such as the papers by Harold Fishbein and James Waller in The Journal of Hate Studies, (2004), which rely on evolutionary psychology. But no contributor so far has referenced Professor Kevin MacDonald, whose Separation and its Discontents – toward an evolutionary theory of anti-Semitism, (2004) locates the genesis of anti-Semitism in genetic interests:
An evolutionary perspective is also highly compatible with the falsity and contradictory nature of many anti-Semitic beliefs. Evolution is only concerned with ensuring accuracy of beliefs and attitudes when the truth is in the interests of those having those beliefs and attitudes. (pp. 18-19).
Steven Jacobs may be right to say, in The Last Uncomfortable “Religious Question”? in The Journal of Hate Studies, (2008), that MacDonald’s work has “been almost universally condemned”, but, since science is not a democracy, this is hardly relevant to a scholarly evaluation of his work.
IV. An unscientific approach to hate crime claims
At the hate studies founding conference, in his paper Hate, Oppression, Repression, and the Apocalyptic Style, (2004), Chip Berlet claimed there was “chronic underreporting” of hate crimes. There is evidence for this hypothesis. As The Leadership Conference states in the introduction to its Confronting the New Faces of Hate: Hate Crimes in America, (2009), some victims fail to report hate crimes. For example, illegal immigrants are concerned about deportation. People of color may not trust the police. Lesbian and gay victims may not want to “come out” to family members and co-workers by publicizing a homophobic hate crime.
But the scientific approach looks for refutation as well as confirmation. There is also over-reporting of hate crimes, which, if uncritically accepted, exaggerates the amount of hate in our society. I identify five variants of this phenomenon, and give examples below:
1. protected speech is sometimes listed with violent crimes under the broad label “hate incidents”;
2. the degree of hate involved in some actual crimes is exaggerated;
3. there are claims of hate crimes which didn’t happen;
4. there are “hate crimes” committed by the alleged victims themselves;
5. there are unsubstantiated assertions that hate crimes are on the increase.
As an illustration of type 1. above, consider Oregon’s Coalition Against Hate Crimes. This organization claims, on its website, to support the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, which declares that “everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression”. But the Coalition contradicts itself immediately; its list of “hate incidents” equates real crimes like the murder of an Ethiopian immigrant, with a talk by a “holocaust denier” (2010). In Hate Crimes (chapter 4; 1998), James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter found that the term “hate incidents” has been used by a number of organizations interchangeably with “hate crimes” to exaggerate the incidence of the latter.
Hate crimes happen. For example, in Texas in 1998, African-American James Byrd was dragged behind a truck by three white men, motivated by racial hatred, until his head came off.
Other notorious cases, such as the murder of Ethiopian Mulugeta Seraw by neo-Nazi skinheads in Portland, Oregon in 1988, and of gay student Matthew Shepard in Wyoming in 1998, were not quite what subsequent political campaigns made of them. According to Elinor Langer’s book, A Hundred Little Hitlers, (2003), the Seraw case was not a premeditated lynching. Had the skinheads murdered Seraw in Florida rather than Oregon, it would not have been a hate crime: the Florida Supreme Court explicitly excluded from that category “arguments over a parking space, which escalate into fist fights accompanied by racial or other slurs” – which is exactly what the Portland case was, except a baseball bat was used (Hate Crimes, Jacobs, J.B., & Potter, K., 1998; p. 32). An investigation by Elizabeth Vargas for the ABC News program “20/20″ on December 3, 2004, described by Virginia Heffernan in the New York Times, found the assumption that the murder of Matthew Shepard was homophobic to be unsubstantiated.
Another illustration of type 2., exaggerating the amount of hate in real crimes, is the 1996 panic about “black churches” being set on fire. President Clinton said “racial hostility” was behind the crimes. But according to statistical analysis in an article about the scare by Michael Fumento in Commentary magazine, (1996), confirmed in Hate Crimes (Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., chapter 4; 1998),
1. the number of torched churches nationally was below average,
2. the ethnicity of the buildings had no effect on their risk of arson, and
3. there was no inverse correlation between convicted arsonists’ race and that of the churchgoers.
Type 2 is also illustrated by the one alleged anti-Semitic lynching in US history, which occurred in Georgia in 1915. It resulted in a boost in membership for the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which had been founded two years earlier. The victim, Leo Frank, had been convicted of child-murder, but his death sentence had been commuted to life imprisonment; a mob abducted him from prison and hanged him from a tree. His conviction allowed the other suspect, who was black, to walk. The Anti-Defamation League’s evidence for the theory that it was an anti-Semitic lynching, in its People v. Leo Frank Teacher’s Guide, (2009), such as shouts of “Hang the Jew” from the mob, is necessary, but insufficient, to prove it. If a convicted child-killer who was not Jewish would also have been murdered, anti-Semitism had no part to play.
The Anti-Defamation League is consulted by the federal Departments of Education and Justice, the California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association, and other government bodies, according to Hate Crimes (Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., chapter 4; 1998). An example can be found on the Department of Justice’s web page about the Sacramento “Hate Crimes Task Force” (2010). Some years ago, the ADL was found by the San Francisco DA to have spied illegally on dozens of people and organizations, fed information about South African dissidents to the apartheid regime, and committed numerous other violations of trust (Blankfort, J., 2002).
A comprehensive survey of examples of type 3. above, completely invented hate crimes, would be beyond the scope of this paper. A small sample can be found in the appendix, Hate Crime Hoaxes, along with some examples of type 4., fake hate crimes committed by pseudo-victims.
Type 4. was discussed by Gabriel Winant in an article for Salon.com, Fake hate crimes: not just for liberals anymore, (2008). She argued that the majority of fake hate crimes consist of minority persons manipulating sympathy for personal and political gain. She suggests this is why there is an epidemic on college campuses – in this milieu, a fake hate crime victim may find sympathy even after her hoax is exposed. In San Diego, a program was announced to “address diversity issues” after a “minority student” admitted hanging up a noose and a white hood in the library at the University of California in February 2010, an example of type 4. The program, entitled Racism – Not In Our Community, includes statements like “hurtful incidents” and “ensuring diversity”. The hypothesis that racism is a problem was so strongly entrenched that evidence known to be fabricated was used to attempt to confirm it (University of California at San Diego, 2010).
Some hate studies research falls into type 5. above, the allegation that hate crimes are increasing. Mari Matsuda wrote that “a marked rise of racial harassment, hate speech, and racially-motivated violence marks the beginning of the 1990′s” in Words That Wound (1993; page 44). Jack Levin and Jack McDevitt’s Hate Crimes complained of “a rising tide of bigotry and bloodshed” at that time (1993; p. xi). Morris Dees, co-founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote a book entitled Gathering Storm: America’s Militia Threat, in 1997. Kenneth Stern’s article Militia Mania, a Growing Danger, (1996), claimed that local officials in rural America were being intimidated by right-wing terrorists – “According to the Rural Organizing Committee, elected officials on the local level have been forced by armed militia members who pack their meetings to enact ordinances they know are illegal, under threat of death”. The National Institute Against Prejudice and Violence alleges there is an epidemic of “ethnoviolence” in higher education facilities, but its definition of the term includes any “perceived expression of insensitivity”, including denial of tenure to an Asian-American academic, and a piece critical of affirmative action in a campus newsletter (Hate Crimes, Jacobs, J.B. & Potter, K., 1998; p. 49).
In fact, the incidence of hate crimes in the USA declined during the 1990s, continuing a century-long trend. Steven Pinker’s history of violence, The Better Angels of Our Nature, (2011; p. 385) used a chart from James Payne’s A history of force, (2004), which shows how racist lynchings declined steadily from 150 per annum in the 1880s to close to zero by the end of the 1960s. Another graph in his book covers racist murders, 1996-2008 (p. 386), using statistics from the FBI. Most of these murders were of African-Americans. The chart shows a decline from five victims per annum in 1996, to one in 2008. One is less than 0.006 percent of the total number of murders in the country per annum, approximately 17,000. James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter, in Hate Crimes – Criminal Law & Identity Politics, (chapter 4, Social Construction of a Hate Crime Epidemic; 1998) also studied the evidence, and analyzed the politics, of the “rising tide” hypothesis:
This chapter explains how the hate crime epidemic has been socially constructed. We identify the leading proponents of the epidemic claim – advocacy groups, the media, politicians, and academic commentators – and show that this claim lacks any empirical basis. (p. 46).
The alarmist claims of Levin, McDevitt, Stern, Matsuda, et. al. (Levin, J. & McDevitt, J., 1993; Stern, K., 1996; Matsuda, M., et. al., 1993), cannot survive the gauntlet of attempted falsification by scientific methods. Examining why they are part of the hate studies canon is beyond the scope of the current paper, but I intend to return to that question in further research.
An opportunity to subject the beliefs of some hate studies writers to scientific scrutiny occurred at Duke University in North Carolina in 2006. When a black woman accused three white students of rape, the DA said it was a “hate crime”. Stuart Taylor Jr. and K.C. Johnson’s Until Proven Innocent: political correctness and the shameful injustices of the Duke lacrosse rape case, (2007), explains the political assumptions behind the credulity which greeted the woman’s claim. As the article Duke’s Reign of Terror by local journalist Arch T. Allen, in Metro magazine, (2007), explains, with few exceptions, the local and national media were biased against the accused. The rush to judgement of some of the faculty, students and outside activists, based on nothing more than the accused students’ sex, race, and alleged class, is a valid subject of hate studies research.
Angela J. Hattery and Earl Smith, in African American Families, (2007), said the case was about how “the class and race dynamics of the individuals involved (affluent white men and a low-income African American woman) shaped this incident differently from how it would have been shaped had they been absent”. The case does reinforce that view, but in the opposite direction to the one these theorists believe. Instead of doing empirical research into the difference between how the Duke three, and black students accused of similar crimes, were treated, they assumed that “members of the team are almost perfect offenders in the sense that Kimberlé Crenshaw writes about – the exemplars of the upper end of the class hierarchy, the politically dominant race and ethnicity, the dominant gender, the dominant sexuality, and the dominant social group on campus”. Inspired by these words, and similar analyses (Matsuda et. al. 1993; Fish, S., 1994; Crenshaw et. al. 1996; Berlet C., & Lyons, M., 2000), eighty-eight academics signed a statement implying the students’ guilt by saying something “happened to this young woman”, but carefully avoiding saying what it was. The document in which they made this allegation subsequently disappeared, without explanation, from the African and African-American Studies website.
After the students’ lawyers uncovered the truth, the DA was dismissed, and his replacement said the students were “innocent”, rather than just “not guilty”, their academic accusers had an opportunity to reflect on the flaws in their methodology which led to their mistake. Instead, after the case, “I am less interested in trafficking through declarations of guilt and innocence in the case”, wrote one of the eighty-eight professors who had “trafficked” in the declaration of guilt (Taylor & Johnson, 2007).
I argue that hate studies should insist that a theory’s claims are subject to testing and reevaluation, and changing its predictions when they are falsified ought not to be acceptable.
V. Conclusion: a consistent and rigorous approach to understanding hate
“Whenever an ideology justifies baby-killing – even at the fringes of the fringes – that is an especially strong danger signal” – Kenneth Stern, A Force Upon the Plain. (1996, p. 249).
“There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us” – “The complete guide to killing non-Jews” – Yitzhak Shapira and Yossi Elitzur, rabbis in the Od Yosef Hai yeshiva, Yitzhar, near Nablus, reported by Roi Sharon in Maariv (2009).
The influence of Zionism extends beyond Israel. Consider Rachel Abrams, who is married to Elliot Abrams, an influential advisor to the US government, who served under presidents George Bush Senior and Ronald Reagan, describing, in her weblog, the release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from captivity by Hamas in October 2011:
Celebrate, Israel, with all the joyous gratitude that fills your hearts, as we all do along with you. Then round up his captors, the slaughtering, death-worshipping, innocent-butchering, child-sacrificing savages who dip their hands in blood and use women — those who aren’t strapping bombs to their own devils’ spawn and sending them out to meet their seventy-two virgins by taking the lives of the school-bus-riding, heart-drawing, Transformer-doodling, homework-losing children of Others — and their offspring — those who haven’t already been pimped out by their mothers to the murder god — as shields, hiding behind their burkas and cradles like the unmanned animals they are, and throw them not into your prisons, where they can bide until they’re traded by the thousands for another child of Israel, but into the sea, to float there, food for sharks, stargazers, and whatever other oceanic carnivores God has put there for the purpose. (2011).
Hate studies would be enriched by studying how the influence of Zionism can produce this kind of hate. It would have more credibility if claims of the prevalence of white racism were evaluated more scientifically. It would also benefit by examining examples of hoaxes by which resentful members of minorities, encouraged by academic exaggerations of the extent of white privilege, contributed to a positive feedback loop, which appeared to confirm the hypothesis that the USA is suffering from a rising tide of bigotry and hate.
Appendix – Hate Crime Hoaxes
Associated Press (1998, November 22). Conviction in Phony Hate Mail Case. Sunday Star-News. NC: Wilmington.
Associated Press. (2004, April 20). Colleges perfect milieu for hate crime hoaxes. San Diego Union Tribune. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20040420-0247-ca-hatecrimehoaxes.html
Bensen, Jackie. (2010). Jewish student caught painting swastikas on her own door then claiming anti-Semitic attack. NBC News4. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLt5U7VcHw8
Boyd, C. (2001, June 12). Woman Who Claimed to be Victim of Hate Crime Accused of Stealing Van. MN: St. Paul Pioneer Press.
Delgado, R. (1999, May 8). Man Admits Inventing Racist Assault in San Francisco. San Francisco Examiner.
Eskenazi, J. (2004, May 21). Arson at Chabad House. Jewish Weekly. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/22706/arson-at-chabad-house
Kansas City Star. (2001, December 12). Linda Man, Woman Pleads Guilty to Harassing Other Black School Bus Drivers.
Leinwand, D. & Alexander, A. (1993, December 30). Swastika scrawling thieves staged insurance scam, police allege. Highbeam Business News. Retrieved March 12, 2012. http://business.highbeam.com/4331/article-1G1-14690014/crime-swastikascrawling-thieves-staged-insurance-scam
Perez, M. (2003, November 20). Fake hate crimes not new: colleges experience recent rash of bogus hate incidents. Golden Gate Express. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://xpress.sfsu.edu/archives/news/000424.html
Register-Guard. (2003, May 27). Coast Guardsman Admits False Report of Racism. OR: Eugene.
WBAL. (2008, October 7). Police ID 3 Charged in Synagogue Vandalism. WBAL TV. MD: Baltimore. http://www.wbaltv.com/news/17646190/detail.html
Abrams, Rachel. (2011). Rachel Abram’s webblog. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://badrachel.blogspot.com/2011/10/gilad.html
Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J., and Stanford, R.N., (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Allen, Arch T. (2007). Duke’s Reign of Terror. Metro magazine, Raleigh, NC, 2007, November. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.metronc.com/article/?id=1448
Anti-Defamation League. (2009). People v. Leo Frank Teacher’s Guide. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.adl.org/leofrank/The-People-v-Leo-Frank-Teachers-Guide_ADL.pdf
Berlet, C. & Lyons, M. (2000). Right-wing populism in America: too close for comfort. New York: Guilford Press, 2000
Berlet, C. (2004, March). Hate, Oppression, Repression, and the Apocalyptic Style. Chip Berlet. Paper presented at the Conference to Establish the Field of Hate Studies. Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.
Blankfort, J., Poirier, A. & Zeltzer, S. (2002, February 25). The ADL Spying Case Is Over, But The Struggle Continues. Counterpunch. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.counterpunch.org/2002/02/25/the-adl-spying-case-is-over-but-the-struggle-continues
Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies. (2002, January 14). Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and all Forms of Discrimination, citing The New Statesman, London. (1982, June 25). Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/d96d50d790ad4a47c1256b760047dac7
Crenshaw, K., (Author), Gotanda, N. (Author), Peller, G. (Author), Thomas, K. (Editor) (1996). Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement. New York: The New Press.
Dees, M. (1997). Gathering Storm: America’s Militia Threat. New York: Harper Perennial
Department of Justice. (2010). Hate Crimes Task Force. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.justice.gov/usao/cae/hate_crimes/index.html
Fish. S. (1994). There’s No Such Thing As Free Speech: And It’s a Good Thing, Too. Oxford University Press.
Fishbein, H. (2004, March). The Genetic/Evolutionary Basis of Prejudice and Hatred. Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.
Fumento, M. (1996, October). Politics and Church Burnings. Commentary magazine.
Group of 88. (2006). The “Listening” Statement. Duke University, Department of African and African-American Studies. Retrieved 2006, November 10, but no longer available: http://www.duke.edu/web/africanameric/listening.pdf
Hattery, A.J., and Smith, E.. (2007). African American Families. Sage Publications.
Heffernan, V. (2004, November 27). ‘20/20′ investigation challenges Shepard murder’s hate-crime label. New York Times, reprinted in the San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/27/DDGUEA1PVL1.DTL
Ignatiev, N. (2007). Zionism. The Encyclopedia of Race and Racism. Macmillan Press.
Jacobs, James B., and Potter, Kimberly. (1998). Hate Crimes – Criminal Law & Identity Politics. NY: Oxford University Press.
Jacobs, S. (2004). The Last Uncomfortable “Religious Question”? Monotheistic Exclusivism and Textual Superiority in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as Sources of Hate and Genocide. The Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.
Journal of Hate Studies. (2011). Table of Contents. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://journals.gonzaga.edu/index.php/johs/issue/view/18/showToc
Klein, N. (2011, November). Capitalism vs. the Climate. Naomi Klein. The Nation. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate?page=full
Langer, E. (2003). A Hundred Little Hitlers. Elinor Langer. St Martins Press.
Leadership Conference. (2009). Confronting the New Faces of Hate: Hate Crimes in America, 2009. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes
Levin. J. & McDevitt. J. (1993). Hate Crimes. De Capo Press.
MacDonald, K. (2004). Separation and its Discontents: toward an evolutionary theory of anti-Semitism. Praeger Publishers.
Matsuda, M.J., Lawrence III, C.R., Delgado, R., Crenshaw K. (1993, June 4). Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment. Westview Press
Mearsheimer, J. & Walt, S. (2007). The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Oregon Coalition Against Hate Crimes. (2010). Portland State University. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.againsthate.pdx.edu
Pappe, I. (2006). The ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Oneworld publishing.
Payne, J.L. (2004). A history of force: Exploring the worldwide movement against habits of coercion, bloodshed, and mayhem. ID: Sandpoint. Lytton publishers.
Pinker, S. (2011). The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Viking Publishers.
Scher, A. (2005). The Montana Human Rights Network. Public Eye Magazine. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v19n2/scher_montana.html
Sharon, R. (2009, November 9). Israel: Maariv.
Stern, K. (1990). Anti-Zionism, the Sophisticated Anti-Semitism. American Jewish Committee
Stern, K. (1996). A Force Upon the Plain. OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
Stern, K. (1996, January). Militia Mania, a Growing Danger. USA Today.
Stern, K. (2006). Antisemitism Today. American Jewish Committee.
The Jewish Agency for Israel. (2004). The Law of Return. The Constitution for Israel Project. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.cfisrael.org/a608.html
Taylor, S. Jr. & Johnson, K.C. (2007). Until Proven Innocent: political correctness and the shameful injustices of the Duke lacrosse rape case. St. Martins Press.
Thweatt, E. (2002). Bibliography of Hate Studies Materials. Gonzaga University Institute for Action Against Hate.
Trivers, R. (2011). The Folly of Fools. the Logic of Deceit and Self-Deception in Human Life. Basic Books, 2011
Tsai, R.L. (2012). Call for Papers “Hate and Political Discourse”. Robert L. Tsai, J.D. (guest editor). Journal of Hate Studies. WA: Spokane. Retrieved March 6, 2012. http://guweb2.gonzaga.edu/againsthate/journal.html
University of California at San Diego. (2010). Join The Battle Against Hate. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://battlehate.ucsd.edu
Waller, J. (2004, December). Our Ancestral Shadow: Hate and Human Nature in Evolutionary Psychology. Journal of Hate Studies, 3. WA: Spokane.
Whine, M. (2011). The Community Security Trust. Best Practice in Combating Antisemitic Hate. WA: Spokane. Journal of Hate Studies, 9.
Winant, G. (2008, October 24). Fake hate crimes: not just for liberals anymore. Salon.com. Retrieved 2012, January 29. http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2008/10/24/crime_hoax
“Too big to fail” turned out to be as much of a lie as “I stole enough, I’ll stop here.” Too dirty to be allowed to exist, too dangerous for the welfare of the community, too irresponsible to be permitted to “self-regulate” is more like it. The collapse of the banks in the UK in 2008 did not bring an inquiry, instead a “reform” was recommended to be implemented by 2019. If you come home and find your house empty of your possessions, don’t you call the police? Don’t you want to apprehend the perpetrators? You just propose to study the locks over the next 11 years?!
Fines That Are Just Fine
The LIBOR scandal has only added another dimension to the depth of deceitfulness to which the banks have sunk. To the uninitiated the LIBOR is the interbank lending rate upon which much credit is based. The fact that they have been shown to have manipulated a trillion dollar market and are getting fined a few hundred millions is laughable. It is not even a rap on the knuckles. In fact it is a joke: the fine goes back into the bank system, into the same pockets.
Fine me, Your Honor! Fine me more, I’ve been bad!
You can’t make this stuff up. Think bank hold-up. Now reverse it: the bank is holding you up. All of you. Every day, again and again and again. It is like a nightmare that will not stop. Now we are getting an inquiry because the natives are restless. Still no one is being seriously charged for blatantly widespread criminality. Although today Bob Diamond, Chief Executive of Barclays Bank in the UK (a.k.a. Bob the Banker) has resigned from his £6-million a year job. Still no arrests. What is wrong with the British Police? Have they forgotten what their role is? Admittedly after the Leveson inquiry it seems like the police are more interested in making some money on the side selling stories to journalist hacks than arresting serious criminals like Bob Diamond.
The chairman of Barclays phoned me last night to let me know that this was the decision of the board and of Mr. Diamond, and I think Mr. Diamond made the right decision,
Bob Diamond will get a paltry £30 million for doing the right thing and leaving – he should get 30 years without parole. Barclays said it submitted fraudulently low figures because it thought other banks were doing the same and higher submissions would have made it appear to be struggling. How would it sound in a real court of law:
Your Honor, we cooked the books because we thought everyone else was doing it and we didn’t want to look like we couldn’t keep up with the Joneses.
Too Big to Fail
Following the banking collapse of 2008 we were all told by our politicians that the banks were too important and too big to fail. They then promptly printed money to give to the banks, supposedly to get the global economy going again. But what did they banks do with all their freshly printed billions? They kept it, recapitalised themselves so as to offset any unexpected (or perhaps already planned) future liabilities.
Trading With Themselves
Another nasty and costly (to us) habit of the banksters is trading with themselves –a form of financial masturbation. The Bank of England has even been involved in this process several times: The Bank of England recently issued Government Bonds for UK debt for sale, but no one was interested. In the end the Bank of England bought back the Bonds with more money it had freshly printed in order to boost its own stimulus.
Bankers — The Real Terrorists
How much did the September 11 terrorist attack cost? According to the market (IF they are to be believed!) approaching 2 trillion. And how much has the banking crisis cost? The U.S. alone has over $228.72 Trillion in derivatives (credit default swaps) yet to be accounted for. A conservative estimate assesses a $40.83 Trillion Global debt. Total: 268 trillion minimum. To put that into perspective the banking crisis is over 100 times more expensive than 9/11, including the cost of operations in Afghanistan.
If you cannot trust the bankers, the mass media, the elected politicians or the police to do their jobs with some degree of integrity, then is there any rule of law left at all? The police, however, seem to be vigorously active in oddly selected cases. As reported elsewhere on deliberation, British Constitution Group Chairman Roger Hayeshe has withheld his Council tax because, along with other state taxes, a proportion of the tax revenue gathered is being sent to the European Union, used to fund unlawful wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, and promote terrorism right around the world. To pay tax under these circumstances is, at the very least, unlawful under Section 15(3) of the Terrorism Act 2000. In addition to his stance on taxes for unlawful purposes, Roger has also been campaigning for the Lawful Bank – a monetary initiative in which money can be issued to the public as credit, rather than as crippling debt under the existing corrupt and fraudulent International Monetary System. The police arrested Hayeshe in the middle of the night, bursting into his home as if they were the IDF and London were the West Bank.
Perhaps the police had the wrong address. They should be busy arresting the bankers and politicians. It should not be in the middle of the night. In fact full daylight is needed for the much needed operation of cleaning up the swamp in which we are drowning due to the corruption and criminality of mind-numbing proportions of the banking establishment, aided and abetted by the politicians and the ruling elite.
What Is to Be Done?
Central banking does not seem to be the answer. The banking system and the military-industrial system are one entity with the mass media as its handmaiden. We have allowed the money-monsters in banking and politics to rob us and our children blind again and again, giving them time to “reform.” Time to bury us deeper into unconscionable debt slavery. Where do we turn? Whom can we trust to chase the lenders of fake money out of the temples of our daily lives? Nobody but ourselves, wherever we are, awake, outraged and seeking justice.
And finally to conclude this piece - Max Keiser & Stacy Herbert for a little light relief. The end… is coming right back after this commercial break.
Keiser Report: Big guy ‘scandals’ vs small fry ‘crimes’ (E309)
Roger Hayes Arrested, Tried In Secret Court, Imprisoned.
At 0930 this morning, in scenes reminiscent of Stasi East Germany, 2 police cars and 4 policemen from Merseyside Police arrested British Constitution Group Chairman Roger Hayes at his Wirral home and drove away.
The first his family heard of him was at 18:30 this evening via a telephone call from a Warder in Liverpool prison, to say that Roger had been tried and sentenced to prison.
At no time were the family or any other members of the public informed of his arrest, and it is understood that he was tried in a secret court without a Jury.
Denied the right to argue his case, denied the right to a Jury, denied the right for the public to see justice being done, Roger was imprisoned in the secretive gulag system that Britain has become in 2012.
Roger’s “crime” is that he has withheld his Council tax, because along with other state taxes, a proportion of the tax revenue gathered is being sent to the European Union, used to fund unlawful wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, and promote terrorism right around the world. To pay tax under these circumstances is, at the very least, unlawful under Section 15(3) of the Terrorism Act 2000.
As such the present government of UK in Westminster is complicit to terrorist action and war crimes and therefore the payment of taxes to an unlawful, criminal regime is itself a criminal act – one in which Roger refused to participate.
In addition to his stance on taxes for unlawful purposes, Roger has also been campaigning for the Lawful Bank – a monetary initiative in which money can be issued to the public as credit, rather than as crippling debt under the existing corrupt and fraudulent International Monetary System.
As Chairman of the British Constitution Group, Roger Hayes has been an outspoken public speaker warning the British public that their rights and freedoms under Common Law and the Constitution are being stripped away and replaced by a dictatorship of secret courts operating under Administrative and Statute Law.
There is no doubt that his success in alerting ever more people to the dangers of the British / EU dictatorship being built by a criminal element now masquerading as British politicians, has caused the State to imprison Roger. His challenge to the fraudulent banking system, as evidenced by the criminal acts of Barclays bank and today’s resignation by arch Bilderberger and BBC advisor Marcus Agius, will also have made Roger enemies within Britain’s wide criminal banking cabal.
Roger’s family are shocked both at his arrest, and at the realisation that Britain is now sliding into a police state, where husbands, fathers and other good people can be lifted off the streets and imprisoned. There is now no doubt that Britain is further under the control of domestic terrorists in Westminster.
We ask that all those who value their freedoms and liberty call Merseyside Police for further information and an explanation of their actions, and also call Liverpool prison to establish Roger’s physical safety and well-being.
Two weeks ago, while Beit Zatoun hosted “A Child’s View from Gaza,” a series of drawings made by Palestinian school children in Gaza, I spoke to a small audience about the lives of Palestinians, particularly children, in occupied Palestine, occupied Gaza under siege.
Anyone who knows of Gaza under the Israeli-led siege and closures since 2006 (or as Amira Hass argues, a steadily worsening closure since the ’90s) knows that Palestinians in Gaza have been rendered destitute, 80% of whom are food aid-dependent.
In brief, the various factors contributing to this manufactured poverty are:
–“Israel’s” closing of Palestinian borders to exports (formerly Gaza’s Palestinians exported fruits to European markets, clothes, furniture and edible goods to occupied West Bank, “Israeli” and neighbouring Arab countries’ markets, to name some of the exports now halted)
–“Israel’s” closing of Palestinian borders to workers who formerly worked in Israel doing construction, agricultural labour and other menial jobs (“Israel” now imports Thai and other Asian workers to do these tasks). When I interviewed the Ministry of Agriculture in Gaza, a representative made it clear that in the ’80s and ’90s, “Israeli” authorities had encouraged and given permits to Palestinians from Gaza to work in “Israel” as labourers, rendering a significant portion of Gaza’s Palestinians dependent on this outside work.
–“Israel’s” repeated bombing of Gaza’s infrastructure, including the destruction of hundreds of businesses, farms, factories
–“Israel’s” long-time ban on importing parts and goods needed to repair or replace said bombed businesses, factories, farms. Israeli authorities even ban the import of fertilizers, livestock and most goods needed by farmers, fishers and factory owners. (see Amira Hass’ article from 2009)
–the daily “Israeli” army attacks (shooting, shelling, murdering, injuring, and abducting) of Palestinian fishers, farmers, labourers and residents on and near the sea and in border regions even up to and over 2km from the Green Line border between Gaza and “Israel”. Not allowing Palestinian farmers and fishers to work as they have for generations obviously impacts on their ability to produce vegetables and grains for consumption or sale, or catch fish for consumption or sale. This obviously impacts on the farmers’ and fishers’ destitution themselves and that of greater Gaza, the 80% or more who cannot afford to buy imported foods and meats. (see the Guardian’s interview with Palestinian fishers and see Defence for Children International’s report on IOF attacks on Gaza children working in border areas http://www.dci-palestine.org/sites/default/files/ua_4_10_children_of_the_gravel_update_17_jan__2012.pdf ).
–“Israel’s” abduction of fishers, workers, even medics near Green Line borders. Without bread-winners, families fall into further destitution.
These are just some of the factors that contribute to the gross manufactured, preventable poverty existing in Gaza.
These are not merely my observations but facts backed by reports from the UN, from numerous international NGOs, from respected observers like Richard Falk, from people with hands-on experience like Dr. Mads Gilbert who was present in Gaza during the 2008-2009 Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip. He noted in April 2012: “I’m sad to say from my visit to Gaza earlier this year, the situation is now more dire than ever. The Israeli siege effectively prohibits the rebuilding of Gaza — the import of concrete, of window panes, the availability of travel for medical care for the population.” And in a June 2012 interview, Dr. Gilbert said:
“As a result of the Israeli siege, there has been widespread development of anemia among children and women due to malnutrition as a result of siege and poverty. Stunting, where a child is more than two standard deviations shorter than what it should be, is sharply on the rise. In 2006, around 13.5 percent of children were stunted. In 2009, 31.4 percent under age two were stunted.
In other words, every third child is less developed than he or she should be. And stunting does not only affect growth. It also affects brain development and the ability to learn. This is a direct consequence of malnutrition. Remember, this is not caused by drought or natural disasters, but a deliberate, man-made lack of food and water, imposed, planned, and executed in the most detailed way by the Israeli government. They even calculate how many calories to let in to Gaza to avoid outright starvation but to “just” cause malnutrition since that goes under the radar of human rights abuses.”
Save the Children, in June 2012, noted: “Innocent children are living in inhumane conditions after five years under a blockade. They are now forced to drink dirty and dangerous water that will make them weak and sick. Diarrhoea which is easily treated here in the UK can be a killer in these conditions. Gaza children are living in prison-like conditions, trapped and unable to dream of a better future. We must end the blockade and ramp up immediate projects to provide clean, safe drinking water and sanitation.”
In the same June report, Medical Aid for Palestine noted: “Since the blockade started, the number of children under three being treated for watery diarrhoea has doubled. High levels of nitrate – found in faeces and fertiliser – is also linked to some cancers and is a massive risk to pregnant women.
Gaza’s sewage system is also completely broken, much of it destroyed during Operation Cast Lead and treatment plants are overloaded or lack fuel. Open cesspits sit right next to family homes and in just the first two months of this year, three children drowned in open sewers.”
The UN in June 2012 reported: “The blockade of Gaza, now entering its sixth year, has had a devastating impact on the lives and livelihoods of the 1.6 million Palestinians who reside there. More than 80 per cent of families are dependent on humanitarian aid, and Gaza remains subject to severe restrictions on imports, exports and the movement of people, by land, air and sea.
This amounts to a collective punishment of all those living in Gaza and is a denial of basic human rights in contravention of international law.
While some steps have been taken to ease its impact, it is vital that the blockade be lifted immediately, so that essential services and infrastructure can be maintained. The opportunity to develop a sustainable economy would also reduce dependence on humanitarian assistance.”
Yet, a Zionist antagonist who attended my presentation chose, not surprisingly, to not only twist the facts and ignore reality, but also to slander myself and anyone who spoke out on Palestine at the event, not only slandering our words but also belittling our appearances.
While the latter means absolutely nothing to me –and I would not stoop to articulate his own appearance –it just goes to show that, as so often happens with Zionists who try to detract from what a pro-justice speaker or writer says, they have nothing to cling to except dirty tricks, tabloidesque comments, and bigotry.
The Zionist spectator inferred that the Palestinian tendency towards large families was the cause of the manufactured destitution in Gaza, overlooking the historical truth that large families fared just fine before being occupied, expelled, brutalized, murdered, maimed and oppressed by the Zionists. Under a fair and functioning economy, the large families actually pitched in and contributed to the livelihood of the family, brothers living under one roof and helping one another out. In Gaza today, while the family unit continues to be tight and supportive, the lack of work is the real factor in the manufactured poverty.
Author and senior Harvard research scholar Sara Roy wrote:
Gaza is an example of a society that has been deliberately reduced to a state of abject destitution, its once productive population transformed into one of aid-dependent paupers.
Gaza’s subjection began long before Israel’s recent war against it. The Israeli occupation — now largely forgotten or denied by the international community — has devastated Gaza’s economy and people, especially since 2006. Although economic restrictions actually increased before Hamas’ electoral victory in January 2006, the deepened sanction regime and siege subsequently imposed by Israel and the international community, and later intensified in June 2007 when Hamas seized control of Gaza, has all but destroyed the local economy.
In Gaza today, there is no private sector to speak of and no industry. Eighty percent of Gaza’s agricultural crops were destroyed and Israel continues to snipe at farmers attempting to plant and tend fields near the well-fenced and patrolled border. Most productive activity has been extinguished.
In contrast to his attempt to portray Palestinians as hating Jews more than loving children, what I talked about was the great love Palestinians have for their children, foreigners, and life, and the surprising lack of hatred towards Jews despite all that Palestinians have been put through at the hands of Zionist oppressors.
It is interesting that he did not broach the subject of the 2008-2009 massacre of Gaza, of which there is ample evidence of “Israeli” war crimes (see, for example, the Guardian’s documentary on “Israeli” attacks on medical workers and rescuers). Again, when confronted with undeniable facts, Zionists tend to avoid these facts and hit below the belt.
He referred to Palestinian rockets as many Zionists will, not actually addressing the near lull in rocket fire from Gaza (see Ben White’s January 2012 article), nor the root cause of such home-made rocket fire, nor the continuous “Israeli” bombings of Gaza which before and since the 2008-2009 massacre of Gaza have continued to kill Palestinian civilians including children. (see: UN: Israeli Forces Killed 2,300 in Gaza Under Blockade and 16 Palestinians, Including 4 Children, Killed In One Week)
He accused me of promoting violent resistance, when in fact I stated that Palestinians have the right to armed resistance against the occupation, under international law. On a side note, it is interesting how some will criticize armed resistance (Palestinian or Lebanese) against Zionist oppressors, but applaud Western-backed and funded “resistance” against the Syrian regime. Contradictions in standards, hypocrisy. (see Michel Chossudovsky’s online interactive I-Book Reader, SYRIA: NATO’s Next “Humanitarian” War?)
Nor did he speak of the children who had drawn the drawings exhibited and their very real traumas from the many “Israeli” attacks on Gaza, drone warfare, and sonic booms. (see Samouni Street, an animated video produced largely by the very children attacked and whose drawings are on display). He did not dispute the issues of gross malnutrition and stunting in Gaza’s children, a result of years of manufactured poverty, nor the catastrophic demise of the water and sanitation system in Gaza, also products of “Israeli” bombings and the siege which bans parts and materials needed for repair and maintenance of the infrastructure.
An Electronic Intifada report, nearly one year after the winter 2008-2009 massacre of Gaza, laid out the various causes of trauma in Gaza, including before the massacre from other “Israeli” army assaults and violence:
Dr. Evan Kanter, a UW School of Medicine professor and the current president of Physicians for Social Responsibility, delivered a somber talk describing the mental health situation among Gaza’s population. The numbers he cited described a staggering level of psychological trauma.
Dr. Kanter described studies that revealed 62 percent of Gaza’s inhabitants reported having a family member injured or killed, 67 percent saw injured or dead strangers and 83 percent had witnessed shootings.
According to Dr. Kanter, in a study of high school-aged children from southern refugee camps in Rafah and Khan Younis, 69 percent of the children showed symptoms of PTSD, 40 percent showed signs of moderate or severe depression, and a staggering 95 percent exhibited severe anxiety. Meanwhile, 75 percent showed limited or no ability to cope with their trauma. All of this was before the last Israeli invasion.
Dr. Eyad El-Sarraj, head of the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme, and whom Dr. Kanter described as a “medical hero” working under seemingly impossible conditions, has produced “some of the best research in the world on the impact of war on civilian populations.” In a 2002 interview he said that 54 percent of children in Gaza had symptoms of PTSD, along with 30 percent of adults. The hardest hit were young ones who had their homes bulldozed or who lost loved ones like their mothers, he said. Again, these figures were obtained well before conditions dramatically deteriorated.
Gaza’s population is overwhelmingly young. About 45 percent of the population are 14 years old or younger and roughly 60 percent are 19 years and younger. The long-term effects of constant violence and PTSD on such a young population are incalculable.
A recent study by international researchers and the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme entitled “War on Gaza survey study” reveals more worrying figures. Of a representative sample of children in Gaza, more than 95 percent experienced artillery shelling in their area or sonic booms of low-flying jets. Moreover, 94 percent recalled seeing mutilated corpses on TV and 93 percent witnessed the effects of aerial bombardments on the ground. More than 70 percent of children in Gaza said they lacked water, food and electricity during the most recent attacks, and a similar percentage said they had to flee to safety during the recent attacks.
In addition, 98.7 percent of the traumatized children reported that they did not feel safe in their homes. More than 95 percent of the children felt that they were unable to protect themselves or their family members, causing a feeling of utter powerlessness that is compounded by a sense of loss over unfulfilled lives.
The outlook for children in Gaza suffering from these symptoms is not optimistic. Whereas soldiers who experience traumatic events in a war zone can return home to relative calm and seek treatment, the people of Gaza continue to be held in what one Israeli human rights group labeled the “largest prison on Earth”— a methodically “de-developed” island isolated from the rest of the world.
His comments and name really bear little mention, and likely get little readership, but because he does outright lie about Palestinian reality, I’m addressing it. As always, I say: Go to Palestine and witness for yourself; draw your own conclusions on what you see in occupied Palestine, not what you read in Zionist tabloid media.