community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Anti-Semitism and Racism are Alive and Well in the American Political Left
by Yassar Datsmibebe
Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2003 at 12:14 PM
Anti-Semitism and racism have become an accepted part of the political philosophy of the American Left. Left leaning media, reporters adn commentators are regularly given to insidious anti-semitic adn racist remarks without ever being called to account for their offensive conduct. A Republican Senator will be forced from a position of power for an off-handed gesture to a retiring senior politician. But the Left will never hold their own to a similarly high and strict standard. The recent message of Gregg Easterbrook of the New Republic is just the most recent in a continuing saga of Leftist Elitism and Racism.
Last Monday, Gregg Easterbrook, a senior editor of The New Republic, posted an essay on TNR's Web site panning the Quentin Tarantino film "Kill Bill" for excessive violence. Easterbrook concludes:
�Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice. But history is hardly the only concern. Films made in Hollywood are now shown all over the world, to audiences that may not understand the dialogue or even look at the subtitles, but can't possibly miss the message--now Disney's message--that hearing the screams of the innocent is a really fun way to express yourself.� http://www.tnr.com/easterbrook.mhtml?pid=844
So Gregg Eaterbrook reiterates, in the New Republic, the offensive historical prejudice and demeaning stereotype that Jews are greedy, money-grubbing selfish louts. Easterbrook goes on to blame Jewish Hollywood executives as being partly responsible for today's real-life violence. And what is Easterbrook�s nonsense that because of the Holocaust, Jews should know better than to allow films that depict mindless violence to be made on their watch? And is he actually implying in that last sentence that Jewish film executives are partly responsible for Muslim terrorism?
Soon the New york Times -- http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/17/national/17REPU.html?ex=1066968000&en=7944cab1103887f3&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE -- was on the case, as was the Los Angeles Times which carried an opinion piece by media writer Tim Rutten, titled "If It Sounds Like Anti-Semitism, Maybe It Is." -- http://www.latimes.com/features/lifestyle/la-et-rutten18oct18,1,4041661.story --
The critcal attention brought upon Easterbrook by his comments, and the denunciations from the ADL and the L.A. Times, came after he posted an apology:
�Nothing's worse, as a writer, than so mangling your own use of words that you are heard to have said something radically different than what you wished to express. Of mangling words, I am guilty. . . . I'm ready to defend all the thoughts in that paragraph. But how could I have done such a poor job of expressing them? . . . Looking back I did a terrible job through poor wording. It was terrible that I implied that the Jewishness of studio executives has anything whatsoever to do with awful movies like Kill Bill. . . . What I wrote here was simply wrong, and for being wrong, I apologize.� http://www.tnr.com/easterbrook.mhtml?pid=868
Nice try Mr. Easterbrook, but this mea culpa is far from sufficient. Instead of making a clear apology and a rejection of anti-Semitic stereotypes, Mr. Easterbrook says he 'wrote poorly' and was misunderstood. Mr. Easterbrook's remarks reflect either absolute ignorance or total bigotry. It may be difficult to discern bigotry from the far more popular and acceptable leser form of liberal prejudice, though still insidious, which is more accurately described as �liberal condescension.� This sentence from Easterbrook�s apology reveals all: "How, I wondered, could anyone Jewish--members of a group who suffered the worst act of violence in all history, and who suffer today, in Israel, intolerable violence--seek profit from a movie that glamorizes violence as cool fun?"
"Members of a group": This is the language of liberal identity politics. And note that this is a philo-Semitic prejudice, not an anti-Semitic one. Easterbrook's premise is that the suffering of the Jewish people ennobles Jewish individuals--or should--even if those individuals have not themselves suffered. Thus he presumes to hold Jews to a higher moral standard by virtue of their Jewishness--though in fact all he's doing is asking them to agree with his highly debatable opinion (does it really make any sense to liken stylized Hollywood violence to the Holocaust?).
Ideologically, Easterbrook's earnest criticism of Jewish studio executives is of a piece with Maureen Dowd�s racist rant against Clarence Thomas. Because Thomas is black, Dowd, like other liberals, expects him to conform to liberal orthodoxy and thus treats his conservatism as a far greater offense than that of, say, Antonin Scalia. -- http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00F15F9385F0C768EDDAF0894DB404482 --
This kind of prejudice may not lead to pogroms and lynchings, but it's divisive and often ugly all the same. And it is commonplace among the American Left who so willingly accept this conduct.
The "Left"?
by Yassar
Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2003 at 2:25 PM
"TheZionist premise is that the suffering of the Jewish people ennobles the rest of humankind--or should--even if those individuals themselves were not responsible. Thus he presumes to hold non-Jews to a higher moral standard by virtue of their non-Jewishness--though in fact all he's doing is forcing them to bankroll and uncondionally accept their increasingly violent genocidal land grab policies (does it really make any sense to liken stylized Hollywood violence to the Occupation?). "
No wonder you're so miserable and whiny, Yassar D. You've been wearing your shoes on the wrong feet and are quite uncomfortable, since you appear to be unable to distinguish between left and right.
The New Republic is a right-wing, corporate Democrat organ.
If Easterbrook had a point, sideline genocide cheerleaders such as yourself give his arguments weight.
The atrocities financed by the Bushies and carried out by "people" such as Arnie's dad 50+ years ago are used to justify ethnic cleansing today.
A caveat, the fundementalist nutcases are merely using the mythological state of Israel to bring back "Jaaay-sus" at which time 144,000 Jews will convert and the rest will go to the lake of fire or whatever silly hell shit Christo-facists are using now. Something to keep in mind when dumbya is yammering 'bout the glory of israel.
"The Left?"
by Adam Retchless
Monday, Oct. 27, 2003 at 1:18 PM
For the most part, the terms "Left" and "Right" are just tools of demagauges who want to divide us against our neighbors or dismiss reasoned arguments without making any real rebuttal ("drug decriminalization is a leftist reform, leftists are anti-semites, therefore, drug decrimilazation is equivalent to anti-semitism and is bad" or "gun rights is a right-wing concern, and is equivalent to everything you dislike about the right-wing agenda")
If you want to criticize some societal force, criticize a particular institution or a particular attitude, rather than some catch-all that includes half of the country. Left and Right, and even the Democratic and Republican parties, are very loose and constantly shifting coallitions.
Adam, you ignorant slut.
by Wanda Wretch
Monday, Oct. 27, 2003 at 2:25 PM
No, they are what they are. IMC and the other Marxist Dem tools (apparently like yourself) are in fact politically left. Quit trying to play three card monte semantics to avoid addressing the issues and import of the comments. The left loves anti-semitism and hate. The left (especially the IMC types) loves to hate anything that they perceive as American flag waving mildly conservative or lbertarian.
A Multi-Level Marketing Scheme
by mutton
Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003 at 3:36 AM
Not that you can get there from here, but . . .
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8699#c0146
Plagairism are Alive and Well
by James Taranto
Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003 at 3:55 AM
The original opinion piece which Yassar has so bravely and skillfully edited is available here.
Yeah, so what.
by Yassar Datsmibebe
Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003 at 4:03 AM
yassardatsmibebe@ummah.com
Glad you found it. And so quickly. Frankly, I had bet that you would have found it quicker, but that was still pretty fast. But you stil do not addresss the fundametal issue that my postings have been accurate. The reclaiming of IndyMedia for a more sensible readership is a secondary concern, but fast becoming a primary concern.
IMC is a failure at its stated purpose. It does not address news, or present news in any reasonable fashion. It is a refuge for anti-semitism, socialist propaganda, yellow leftist "journalism", and hate for all those not of the same cloth as the loud minority of the IMC faithful.
Thank you for acknowledging my skillful editing, but taranto doesn't mind so I don't think it is plagiarism.
But it is still the truth. And that is what gets you so worked up.
Stereotypes
by Adam Retchless
Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003 at 5:42 AM
For the record, I believe that Marx was completely misguided (as were Lenin, Mao, Castro, and that whole statist tradition)
While I am a registered Democrat, that is only so that I can vote in local elections. My political attitudes tend towards the Libertarian Party.
And I have an American flag on my bike.
The point of this...
by Adam Retchless
Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003 at 6:52 AM
Yassar,
I know that IndyMedia is dominated by the Left (an assortment of groups who have experience working together and have minimally-conflicting agendas). I wonder what your goal was in writing the initial post. Was it to alert these leftists of this problem and prod them to start confronting it? Was it to warn impressionable youngsters that sometimes this coallition supports persons and actions that don't live up to the ideals that are often associated with it? Was it to argue that Anti-semitism is promoted by political tactics often used by the left, such as identity politics? Or was it to argue that some attitude that is commonly found on the left (though not universally nor exclusively found on the left) inevitibly leads to anti-semitism and related attitudes.
For any of those goals, I think that there are more constructive ways of achieving them than simply trying to damn the left for the presence of anti-semitism among them. I think a better tactic would be to point out the problems that any movement has with fringe groups and individuals, and point out how this has been delt with in the past. Perhaps the Republicans have some good examples of how minimize the influence of racists. This wouldn't be nearly as insulting or divisive as the original post, but would still be able to present the left as the coallition with the problem and the right as the coallition that has solved this problem within itself.
Yes, to all Adam, except your tactic of acceptance by tolerance
by Yassar Datsmibebe
Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003 at 10:56 AM
Adam,
It was intended to point out that the Left accepts, and gives credibility to, anti-Semitic and racist ideologies when it permits these attitudes to find a welcoming home in the group. The Left does not confront these deplorable factions. The Left usually reacts by ignoring the existence of the racist element, rationalizes, or as you have suggested attempts to look past it and hope for a time when the deplorable faction will be brought up by the greater grander minds of the group. It is more likely that the larger group is brought down to the level of the deplorable racist factions.
And to alert anyone to the situation (not just the youngsters) is important. I don't know that my presentation was at all "unconstructive." It reports a fact. And a not anecdotal occurrence, at that. The Left has got to quit saying "Well we are not all like that and the real problem is your use of labels to try to make us all sound the same." BS. Get rid of the red-herring defenses to try to placate the Leftist self-righteous image. W doesn't the Left confront Al Sharpton, a demonstrated anti-Semite, opportunist and racist? Why doesn't someone ask Al Sharpton if he intends to pay John Pagano the slander/libel judgment he owes from the Tawana Brawly fraud and fiasco? Because the Left finds Al Sharpton's brand of white/Jewish racism useful and unfortunately all to acceptable.
The Left needs to quit behaving like that mob of loosely affiliated mildly overlapping interest groups if it wants to articulate a coherent social/political agenda that anyone can take seriously. Granted, this would require the Left to cast off that cozy security blanket of "one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch, babe", but that sort of political/intellectual responsibility is just part of maturity. Unless, of course, the Left is comfortable serving at the knee of the hateful deceitful element within its ranks
Racism-Yassar D Style
by footballkicker
Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2003 at 9:14 AM
if you don't hate the people that he does, you are a racist.
Racism - Footballkicker style
by Yassar Datsmibebe
Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2003 at 1:02 PM
The hate is only from you and your Arab terrorist friends. I do not preach hate against anyone. I do however speak contempt for anyone who fosters, foments, promotes, teaches or acts out hate, such as the people that I identify in my postings. I have no patience or tolerance for hate. If these groups were at all serious about peace, serious about living side by side with the Isrealis, or serious that they can set aside millenia of ignorance to embrace those different from them, then they would stop preaching and teaching hatred. Where are the hateful Isreali suicide bombers?
You are projecting your world view that there must be someone who hates and someone who is hated. All I am saying is that there are those that hate, and those that want the hatred to stop.
Oh, maybe you would rather hate ....
by 2Beers
Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2003 at 6:09 PM
The people that these kids hate. Or maybe you should hate the people who taught these kids to hate the people that they do. Or maybe, JUST F'ING MAYBE, you should be outraged at the hate that these kids have been taught to embrace. Nah, let's just hate the Jew guy 'cause it's easier than trying to justify the hate that has been bred in these kids. Okay, that's it, lets hate the Jew, besides he is probably some peace loving pacifist type anyway so we can kick his ass. Oh right, that's it, you can hate the Jew because you are a complete F'ing imbecile and it is the fault of some Jew. That's it, some Jew stole your brain. Jews got all the brains, and you got the short end of the brain stick. Jews took all of the water out of the genetic pool before you got finished your little high dive in the shallow end. That's it, Jews stole the jam off your bagel. Bagel? What were you doing eating a bagel? You must be a ... JEW. Oh you poor bastard, how you must hate yourself for betraying your own hate.
the Left are the true racists
by truthteller
Monday, Nov. 03, 2003 at 10:00 PM
Mychal Massie
They're counting on your silence
November 4, 2003
Last week, I was a guest on a midday show in Chicago. The show's host proffered the question: "Why should / would blacks be conservative?" I responded by saying:
I would on its face accept your interrogative as no less despicable than the thick-lipped watermelon eating caricatures [of the past] and the racist thought that all blacks eat fried chicken. Because the etymology of your question presumes such should not be the case.
I concluded with:
I would allow that all people whether black or white should arrive at said decision based on intelligent, well-thought, cogent reasoning as it pertains to them.
The host (who happened to be black) had no response to my answer, because I had pointed out the hypocrisy of her question.
In her America and the America of those like her, any black who dares think outside of their box is to be scorned.
Recently, I guest co-hosted a four-hour syndicated talk show in Manhattan. For over three hours, I was called everything but come late to dinner by the show's largely black listening audience.
Don't get me wrong � I could honestly care less, because their vitriol proved my point. They proved they are the bigots-racists, led through the nose by groups like the "People for the American Way" (whose white president once tried to tell me what it was like to be black � and then proceeded to tell me how much I reminded him of his Jewish father-in-law, who sickened him because of his viewpoints.)
It is a sin and a disgrace that in 2003 so many blacks live in a time-place continuum of hatred, bitterness and resentment of whites in general � and of any black who does not subscribe to their mind-numbing imprisonment.
Pitting blacks against blacks, however, was the sport of plantation owners centuries ago. As La Shawn Barber points out � fear, distrust and envy are replenishable tools when it comes to controlling a people ("Life on the Old Plantation" � Oct. 28, 2003). Let there be no doubt, control is what the fueling of this racial animus is all about.
Social liberal extremists (insert racists) and liberal Democrats understand their only hope of controlling society is by indoctrinating � while under-educating � school children, and through the courts. Voters would never suffer the elected to legislate our privileges away. But the same can be done through the courts. Judicial appointees do not answer to voters.
That is why the battles rage whenever school choice is mentioned. That is why at this very moment we are witnessing the incredible acrimony directed at Associate Justice Janice Rogers Brown, President Bush's most recent nominee to the federal appellate court.
The NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus are the willingly useful idiots of the groups previously mentioned here within. The Black Commentator had a cartoon depiction of Brown more contemptible than the collective blathering of Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., Diane Feinstein, D-Calif. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Maxine Waters, D-Calif. and Eleanor Holmes-Norton, D-D.C. combined.
Where are the groups that purport to be for women's rights? Why have none stepped forward to defend this eminently qualified jurist in the face of these vicious ad hominem attacks?
That leaves it up to us the public. I urge you to consider the court rulings that have limited or taken away our individual rights since 1992. Rulings on curriculum, the foods we eat, cell phones, ranching in the Midwest and West, water rights, where we can build, what type of home we can build, where we can display the flag, the rights of animals and fish over the welfare of entire communities, the cars we drive, the rights of criminals and pedophiles over the citizenry and appalling lawsuit awards ... this is the short list.
Brown and constructionist jurists like her � i.e., those who would uphold the Constitution, not subvert it through radical ideological rulings � are a threat to the power craven who lust for control.
The Brown battle should not be about race, gender or ideology. It should be about qualifications. She has a constitutional right to fairness. The founding fathers provided for a judicial hearing in committee and the right to an up or down vote on the Senate floor. They determined a simple vote of 51 sufficient to confirm.
If you believe in fairness and the Constitution, then it is time to put an end to the renegade filibustering of eminently qualified jurists, because they uphold the Constitution.
If, on the other hand, being blamed for a past chapter of injustice that you and your families had no part in, and if the continued erosion of our rights and freedoms mean nothing, then sit back and do nothing. Because as the saying goes, all that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good men and women to do nothing. We have a choice. You decide.
the LEFT always drags civilization down
by Meredith
Wednesday, Nov. 05, 2003 at 5:15 PM
The multicultural thought police ('Racism' as psychiatric disorder/crime)
The Spectator ^ | November 1, 2003 | Leo McKinstry
The BBC report on the racist police recruits has given new ammunition to those who are curbing our legitimate freedoms, says Leo McKinstry
In our modern secular society, we pride ourselves on our supposed tolerance. We sneer at the bigotry of the past, wondering how the monstrous cruelty of events such as the Spanish Inquisition could ever have occurred. But we should not be so smug. For in Britain today we have our own powerful creed � multiculturalism � which is imposed on the public by a political establishment that is brimming with self-righteous fervour. And anyone refusing to accept this dogma is likely to be branded a heretic, bullied and brainwashed until they change their opinions.
Only two decades ago, the central principle of anti-racism was that all individuals in our society should be treated equally, regardless of ethnic origin or religion. Yet through multiculturalism, the malign ideological spawn of anti-discrimination, we have moved far away from that stance. We are now told that, in the name of �celebrating diversity�, we must respect every aspect of every culture in our midst. Not only must we act correctly in word and deed, but, more importantly, we must also be trained to harbour no negative thoughts about the behaviour of any other ethnic group.
This outlook is utterly inimical to personal freedom and equality before the law, the very pillars of our civilisation. Far from ignoring racial differences in the search for harmony, it actually seeks to emphasise them. Such an attitude was summed up by the 1999 report of Sir William Macpherson into the death of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence: �Colour-blind policing must be outlawed. The police must deliver a service which recognises the different experiences, perceptions and needs of a diverse society.�
The hysterical guilt-tripping that Macpherson inspired was matched last week by the furore over the BBC programme about a handful of racist police recruits in Manchester and North Wales. Once more we heard the accusations that the British police was riddled with �institutionalised racism�. Adopting the quasi-religious tone that is characteristic of the multicultural brigade, the Observer described racism as an �endemic evil� within the police.
The foul-mouthed, ignorant recruits exposed by the BBC have, of course, no place in any police force. Apart from the offensiveness of their views, several of them were caught condoning serious crimes such as murder and assault against ethnic minorities. The idea that such thugs could have any role in upholding the law is grotesque.
But rather than dealing with these cases on an individual basis, the establishment has used the BBC footage as the cue for another Macpherson-like orgy of breast-beating, followed by demands for sweeping reforms so that every officer complies with the mindset of multiculturalism. Police chiefs promise ever more intensive diversity training, ever more rigorous assessment of recruits. The Metropolitan Police plans to have a network of secret informers in every class at its college in Hendon, who will check for incorrect opinions, while some have even suggested that permanent hidden cameras be installed. The Greater Manchester force is to use undercover black and Asian investigators, posing as members of the public, to see if officers have the proper levels of racial awareness.
Civil liberties campaigners would be howling with outrage if such intrusive measures were adopted in any other circumstances. But the creed of multiculturalism is so powerful that almost any form of repression and thought-control is justified in the name of �rooting out prejudice�. What I find nauseating are the double standards at work. Brutish conduct in private by a few officers is hailed by the media and the government as chillingly representative of the entire police force � hence the need for a wholesale change in attitudes. At the same time, we are constantly warned against applying any generalisations to the Islamic or black communities. We must not think that Muslim clerics, pouring out their murderous hatred of the West and Judaism, have anything to do with the overwhelming majority of moderate Muslims. Similarly, we must not be trapped into the dangerous fallacy that gun violence, drug-dealing and serial fatherhood are somehow prevalent among young African-Caribbean men.
Yet this terror of stereotyping of anyone � except white police officers � ignores the reality of modern British society. Islamic fundamentalism and black criminality are not figments of a twisted imagination. They are an integral part of the cultural diversity we are all meant to celebrate. In 1941 George Orwell wrote that �the gentleness of English civilisation is perhaps its most marked characteristic�. It would be absurd to make such a remark today. After decades of advancing multiculturalism, Britain is the most violent country in Europe, with the highest rates of gun crime, drug-taking and street robbery.
In such a context, it is hardly a surprise if some white police officers, working in crime-ridden urban areas, have a suspicious view of certain ethnic minorities. That is not prejudice. It is just experience. I know several university-educated, decent, churchgoing police constables based in south London, who joined the force with an open mind and a good heart. They are the very opposite of the bigots captured on film by the BBC. But over the years they have been worn down by continually having to deal with the aggressive, dangerous, vicious behaviour of too many blacks. And it is not just white police officers who feel that way. In a remark that should cause embarrassment to even the most fervent multiculturalist, the black American radical Jesse Jackson said in 1994, �There is nothing more painful to me than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about street robbery, then to look around and see someone white and feel relieved.�
Instead of facing up to reality, the multiculturalists are becoming more authoritarian in their suppression of negative thinking. In their eagerness to impose the ideology of diversity, they are like the old Soviet Politburo, which pretended that communism had created an earthly paradise and that anyone who claimed otherwise was either a crank or a criminal. Over the last three years, there has been a raft of new regulations designed to crack down on dissent. So the Race Relations Act of 2000 imposes a statutory duty on all public bodies to �promote� racial equality, which requires every one of them to introduce race action plans. Moreover, the Commission for Racial Equality has been given wide-ranging powers of investigation to check on compliance. Under new rules introduced this year, any job candidates who feel that they have been victims of discrimination have the right to demand that an employer organise a questionnaire of the entire workforce to find out if there is a pattern of hiring. Moreover, internal promotion within a company can now be interpreted as a form of discrimination. The fixation with racism has also over-turned one of the essential principles of justice, that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. The race regulations of 2003 have shifted the burden of proof in employment-tribunal cases from the accuser to the alleged discriminator. In sinister, bureaucratic language, the Commission for Racial Equality warns that �for the discriminator, the consequences of the new burden of proof will be significant. Any failure to provide a satisfactory or adequate explanation may be determinative since the courts and tribunals must find in favour of the complainant.�
Freedom of speech and rights of association are also disappearing. At this year�s Labour party conference, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Patricia Hewitt, promised, to resounding cheers, that a new law will soon be passed allowing trade unions to expel members of the BNP. Ironically, the police, so widely condemned for their supposed racism, are now being turned into instruments of social control. Gloucestershire Police, for instance, have employed undercover plain-clothes officers to observe the behaviour of diners in Indian and Chinese restaurants, in an exercise called �Operation Napkin�. In the wake of 9/11, the government created a new offence of �religiously aggravated threatening behaviour�, which can be used against anyone who challenges the anti-Western outbursts of Muslims. Indeed, an Exeter man, Alistair Scott, was sentenced to 200 hours� community service in October 2002 on just such a charge, after he had rowed with a Muslim neighbour who called bin Laden a great man, 9/11 a �glorious day� and Mr Scott a �Zionist pig�. Inevitably the Muslim, Mohammed Hudaib, was not prosecuted. A month later, the television presenter Robin Page was arrested � though never charged �for opening a speech at a countryside rally with the words �If there is a black, vegetarian, Muslim, asylum-seeking, one-legged lesbian lorry-driver present, then you may be offended at what I am going to say, as I want the same rights that you have got already.�
But perhaps most worrying of all is the attempt to reclassify racism as a mental illness. In the United States there is now a serious debate over whether those accused of being racists are actually suffering from delusions which require treatment by the state, including the use of anti-psychotic medication. Dr Alvin Poussaint of the American Psychiatric Association has said, �If we want to do any kind of prevention, psychiatrists have to know and believe themselves that this is a serious mental disorder.� Another psychologist, Dr William von Hippel, even claims to have located the part of the frontal lobes in the brain that makes people racist. Von Hippel has argued that, especially among older people, changes to the brain�s structure result in loss of �cognitive ability� to be tolerant.
Psychiatry has often been used to silence those who refuse to accept the official doctrines of the state. The Soviet Union was notorious for branding political dissidents as �mentally ill�, incarcerating them in psychiatric institutions. In communist China it has been estimated that 15 per cent of psychiatric inmates may be in custody for political reasons, many of them suffering from what the gruesome Ministry for Public Security calls �political abnormality illness�.
We should remember that, even in our own country�s past, single parenthood and promiscuity in women were sometimes treated as signs of insanity. And today, tens of thousands of children who would once have been seen as boisterous are said to be suffering from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and are treated with the chemical cosh of the drug Ritalin.
In some ways, multiculturalism is a reaction to the barbarity of Hitler�s Nazi regime. The sorry paradox is that, in its myopia over race and its hysterical intolerance of dissent, this doctrine is dragging us along the road towards tyranny.
are you a NAZI?
by Brave NAZI-Leftist Detector
Monday, Nov. 10, 2003 at 9:35 AM
Never forget that Nazis were SOCIALISTS....
---------------
Are you a Nazi?
1) Do you agree with the 59 percent of the European Union that believes Israel is the country that presents the greatest threat to world peace?
A) No; B) Yes; C) Only 59 percent? Damn Jewish pollsters!
2) Do you believe it is important for the government to fund newspapers, radio stations and television channels in order to counteract the influence of the independent media?
A) No; B) Yes; C) Yes, because everyone knows that Jews run the media. Didn't you see that poll?
3) Is the federal government's primary responsibility to promote the industry and livelihood of its citizens?
A) No; B) Yes; C) Yes, as long as they are pure-blooded Aryans.
4) Should the federal government be permitted to confiscate private property in order to convert the land to communal purposes?
A) No; B) Yes; C) Yes, especially if it belongs to Jews.
5) Does the federal government have the responsibility to execute individuals whose activities are injurious to the common interest?
A) No; B) Yes; C) Yes, especially if they're Jewish.
6) Should the education of poor children be provided by the government?
A) No; B) Yes; C) All education should be provided by the government.
7) Should the federal government apply itself to raising the standard of health in the nation?
A) No; B) Yes; C) Yes, except for the health of Jews, Catholic priests, homosexuals and enemies of the state.
8) Is it the responsibility of the federal government to provide generously for the elderly?
A) No; B) Yes; C) Yes, unless they're Jewish.
9) Should the federal government require the registration of all privately owned firearms?
A) No; B) Yes; C) No Jew should be permitted to own firearms.
10) National sovereignty is:
A) A right to be defended; B) An outmoded relic hindering progress; C) An affront to the right of the Aryan race to lebensraum.
11) Euthanasia is:
A) State-sanctioned murder; B) Sometimes in the best interest of the individual being euthanized; C) An excellent way to punish enemies of the state.
12) Christianity is:
A) The truth; B) A dangerous myth that threatens progress and the social order; C) A Judeo-Bolshevist pathology of decadence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Give yourself zero points for every (A), two points for every (B) and five points for every (C). A score of 24 means that you are in perfect, 100 percent accordance with the policies and positions of the National Socialist German Worker's Party, or NASDAP, known colloquially as the Nazi Party.
A score of 40 or more suggests that you made it to Argentina before that traitor Doenitz betrayed the F�hrer's memory and the honor of the Volk by surrendering the Reich.
This could be you Irv
by USS Liberty
Monday, Nov. 10, 2003 at 12:27 PM
This could be you if you'd leave the sidelines, but who would mommy take care of?
oh God
by USS Borg
Monday, Nov. 10, 2003 at 12:44 PM
Oh god. oh freakin' God.
You're kidding, right?
LaTuff's shit is the most lame and generic and unfunny and uninspired Leftist shit ever. It's like Fisher Price for liberals. Surely you could do better than that. Even that advertisement for funeral homes Al Franken is funnier.
DAMN! The quality of Leftists is non existent....
Why is it ...
by BraveNewArabWorldOrderFighter
Monday, Nov. 10, 2003 at 2:02 PM
is it that the Arab nations, for all other their wealth, have been unable to contribute one damn thing to the good of the world for the last century? Oh, I forgot, they have been living under the thumb of the Jew. Sorry, how stupid of me.
But where are the Arab contributions to literartre? Art? Science? All that wealth there must be tons of cash going into venture capital and new business development. Or are all fo the intelligent Arabs sending their money to Europe and America for investmetn (probably in companies managed by Jews, with Jewish lawyers adn accountants).
Where are the great Arab transplant hospitals? All that money could fund a lot of medical research (and even research that isn't carried out on prisoners). Or are they spending all of their money and time trying to develop some biological agent rather than cure some horrid disease.
Where are the Arab manufacturing facilities turning out products taht the world wants, desires and must have? Even the CHinese produce a damn fine circuit board.
Where are the Arab universities that attract students adn scholars from all walks of life and from around the world? Where are the Arab charities (that are not funding Islamist extremism and murders) that are out aiding all citizens of the world?
All that wealth. All that time. All that repression. All those flagrant human rights abuses that are integral parts of teh culture. All the misogony.
Where are the scholars, the scholarships, the researchers. The Arab world has given us the McGyvers of the improvised bomb making school, but not one Microsoft or even and Apple computer.
Where are the productive entrepreneurs fo the Arab world, working all night long in their garages to develop the next generation of nanotechnology or robotics, or even a half decent website based business model? And don't tell me that they are living in Europe and attending Oxford. So why exactly are they not at the Free University of Jordan?
Where are the Muslim clerics of hte Arab world who can preach peace adn respect for life? How can it be that every mosque seems to foment anger, hostility and hate, but never peace, love and understanding? How is that.
Oh, right, that is just my own intolerant wester/Judao-Christian Neo-Crusader metnatily that does not let me see that the Arab world is a worldful place of free peace loving people who do not kill their own for sport and fashion. ANd kills all of those unlike like the Islamist for "religious purity." Why is that not ethnic cleansing of the non-Arab world? Why?
Oh right, it is ALL because the Palestinians have been driven from their homeland, are humiliated, and have to live next door to Jews, and until the Jews are gone form the face ofhte Earth the Arab world is far too consumed by anger, hatred and humiliation to think straight enough to get their own act together, so until you the western world work that out we are going to have to keep killing all of you non-Arab bastards, so US ofA you better drop your Isreali friends and Sauid Arabia you better drop your US of A friends (but their greenbacks are good so keep doing business with them) and you French bastards better just watch closely because you and your German pals are next if you get out of line becasue we are insane with rage and just can't help ourselves and rather kind of enjoy this killing and mayhem.
Leftist hypocrisy
by I hate Leftists
Thursday, Nov. 13, 2003 at 11:12 AM
Alleged hate crime reported at Cornell
Attack occurred Sunday after concert at Barton
By DIANA LaMATTINA
Journal Staff
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITHACA -- An alleged assault that occurred as more than 3,000 people exited a hip-hop concert Sunday night at Cornell University's Barton Hall is being investigating by the school as a hate crime.
"The victim certainly feels it is," said Linda Grace-Kobas, director of Cornell News Service. "We are investigating it as a hate crime."
At 11:47 p.m. Sunday, following a concert featuring Nappy Roots and Ludacris, a Cornell Police officer came to the aid of a white female student being punched outside of Barton Hall, across from the Statler Hotel, Grace-Kobas said. After being pulled out of the crowd, the victim was treated by Emergency Medical Services in Barton, then transported to Cayuga Medical Center, said Simeon Moss, deputy director of Cornell News Service. The alleged victim told police she was treated for a ruptured ear drum, received 13 stitches on her lower lip and had other cuts and bruises, Moss said.
According to the victim's statement, Grace-Kobas said, the victim identified five or six African-Americans as having attacked her. Moss said it was not clear how many alleged attackers were involved. By the time the Cornell Police were able to return, the alleged attackers had disappeared into the crowd, Grace-Kobas said.
The victim claims that her attackers made statements referring to her "white hair" and "white face" as they were beating her, The Cornell Sun reported Tuesday.
Arrests had not been made as of Wednesday afternoon. The attackers haven't been identified, Moss said.
According to Grace-Kobas and Moss, the victim and her attackers had had a minor altercation during the concert.
"The victim has been contacted by and advised of counseling services at the university," Moss said.
Reports regarding the incident were withheld by Cornell Police and by Cornell News Service. Grace-Kobas said Cornell is a private institution and not subject to Freedom of Information requests.
Robert Freeman, executive director of state Committee on Open Government, said since Cornell University's Police have the government appointed power to arrest and perform other government functions, police reports and other similar reports are subject to Freedom of Information requests.
The Journal has filed Freedom of Information requests with Cornell for the documents related to the alleged assault.
Robert Harris, Cornell's vice president for diversity and faculty development, said he was surprised -- to a point -- that such an incident would occur on Cornell's campus.
"Because we have a fairly open campus, we've been working very hard to make sure we have good relations between students across a variety of differences," Harris said. "But at the same time, we don't exist in a vacuum."
Stephen Hamilton, Associate Provost for Outreach, said the primary concern regarding the incident should be concern for the victim.
"It seems to me the most important aspect of what happened is the physical trauma and psychological damage," Hamilton said. "The possibility the attackers were from Ithaca is secondary."
Many of the students on campus Wednesday remained unaware of the attack.
Junior Sarah Jacobs said she was surprised -- and a little nervous -- about the university's lack of notification. Jacobs said she had not yet received a crime alert e-mail, which Cornell usually distributes for significant crimes on campus.
"It's kind of scary, especially since it was a group attack," Jacobs said.
Grace-Kobas said the crime alert e-mail was not used because the alleged assault did appear to be random.
"In this particular case, this attack resulted from a previous confrontation between two groups," Grace-Kobas said. "It was not a random crime where someone was attacking people."
Regardless, said junior Annie Chen, the "unfortunate" incident has been made even more so by the university response. Chen said she usually walks with friends when she's out at night, and has never really worried about her safety.
"It's always a fear in the back of my mind, but hearing about this doesn't necessarily make me more worried," Chen said.
Senior Nik Pavlov said it was hard to imagine such an attack occurring on campus.
"We have a good atmosphere," Pavlov said. "I really see no reason for racial hatred to even exist here."
Anyone with information regarding the alleged assault is asked to call Cornell Police at 255-1111.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Journal staff writer Kelli Grant contributed to this report.
Contact: dlamattina@ithaca.gannett.com.
Nothing better to cut and paste?
by ?????
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 5:03 AM
What does a fight at a misogynistic, corporate rap concert aimed at frat-boys have to do with leftists?
why?
by Fred
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 6:02 AM
Because it was black against white, Cornell wanted to cover it up.
Notice because the white girl "feels" it's a hate crime....
Nice try
by ?????
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 6:39 AM
I guess O'Really or one of the other great minds of tabloid commentary on FAUX declared this a leftist issue. The Defense Department gives Cornell a helluva lotta money, so once again the racebaiting, McCarthyite crap falls short of the mark.
racebaiting
by Fred
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 6:45 AM
Don't speak of McCarthyism and race baiting with Jesse Jackson in your camp.
If this had been whites against a black, the investigation would have been automatic and front page news for weels in the Leftist mainslime media. It would have been like Mathew Shapperd. You wanted to make him a saint.
But it happened to a white, so Cornell even tries to block information. What's the FOIA got to do with it? Why are they saying they don't have to comply?
Sometimes you cry McCarthyism exactly because you people act like Communitss.
Listen, Mr. Phelps
by #
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 6:51 AM
What does Matthew Sheppard have to do with this?
Go back to your hole in the ground where you belong.
Leftist Media?
by ?????
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 7:05 AM
Westinghouse CBS-Leftists?
FAUX-Leftists?
Disney ABC-Leftists?
AOL Time Warner CNN-Leftists?
Clear Channel-Leftists?
You know all these Commie CEO's with their media conglomerates.
Please show me this leftist media, indymedia and photocopied 'zines aside. You can't. There is no such thing.
It's ironic, too, since you right-wingnuts used to complain about the Jew-controlled leftist media, until a Christian Zionist was propped up in the White House, now it's just declared leftist. Don't wanna upset the lobbyists.
behind the times
by Fred
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 7:27 AM
Viacommie owns CBS. You know Ted Turner created CNN, don't you? He married Hanoi Jane. Dizzy-ABC tried to push Ellen Degenerate on everyone. The MRC documents liberal bias most every weekday. Why does the SPJ and the ASNE have "diversity" guidelines? What happened to the 5 W's? Why did the ABC news president same as threaten employees that their performance review would be based in part on how they followed the leftist Political Correctness thought police Appeasement "diversity" guidelines?
Shapperd was to illustrate a point about how the liberal media talked about him almost every day, yet Jesse Dirkhising was barely mentioned, and that fact is well documented.
I should've brought up James Bird, and ignored that bitch who left a dying man in her windshield. Like the liberal media did. if a white had left a black in a windshield, it would have displaced Kobe Bryant. We'd never have heard the end of it.
behind the times
by for fred
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 2:36 PM
Um, CNN hasn't been owned by Ted Turnner for a while now, get with the program.
oh really?
by Brave New USS Dipshit Detector
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 2:50 PM
You mean to tell me that the day good old Collaboratin' Ted sold out his part of the Clinton News Network that everything changed? Almost 20 years of ingrained United Nations shilling went away?Just like that, at the snap of a finger?
Perhaps YOU need to get with the program. Or your shrink....
oh yeah
by you are right
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 2:59 PM
Oh yeah, I keep forgetting that CNN totally ignored the whole Clinton impeachment and that blow job that totally risked national security. And they've just been so rough on Bush too.
And don't forget boys and girls, if you don't agree with the US 100%, you are evil. You'er either with us or with the terrorists.
Fisher Price material
by USS Inferior
Friday, Nov. 14, 2003 at 3:09 PM
Fred never said that Turner owned CNN anymore, only that he created it. And from all the other points he made, all you could point out was a mistake Fred never made.
You really are of inferior quality, zilch, nada. You wouldn't even last a day at the Democratic Underground.
race baiters
by Mickey
Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2003 at 1:28 AM
Northwestern Student Charged With Faking Racist Attacks
Suspect Says He Wanted To 'Motivate' Minorities On Campus
CHICAGO -- A 19-year-old Northwestern University student was charged with felony disorderly conduct for allegedly faking two racist incidents earlier this month because "he wanted to do something to motivate minority students," police said Tuesday.
Jaime A. Saide , 19, of Des Moines, was charged late Monday with two counts of felony disorderly conduct for filing separate false police reports claiming he was the victim of a hate crime, Evanston Police Commander Michael Perry said.
In the first report, filed Nov. 4, Saide said someone hung a sign on the door of his dormitory room that read, "Die Spic," Perry said.
Northwestern had offered a $2,500 reward for the arrest of anyone involved in the incident, university spokesman Alan Cubbage said at the time. University police found racial slurs and the word "die" written on a wall near the student's room in Chapin Residential College, as well as a piece of paper hanging outside the door with the similar messages, Cubbage said.
On Nov. 8, Saide filed a report stating he was attacked as he walked north on Sherman Avenue near University Place in Evanston, Perry said. Saide said a man walked up behind him, put a knife to the side of his neck and said, "Spic, we didn't run away this time," according to Perry.
Police were skeptical of Saide's account, and he later admitted he concocted both incidents because he was concerned about racism on campus, Perry said.
"He said he wanted to do something to motivate minority students," Perry said.
Saide was charged late Monday and held overnight before attending a bond hearing Tuesday morning at the Skokie Courthouse, Perry said. Perry did not know the bond set in the case.
Perry said Evanston and Northwestern University police continued to investigate a series of bona fide hate-crime incidents that have occurred recently on or near the campus.
An anti-Semitic phrase was found Nov. 9 written on an outside wall of the Norris University Center, near where a 3-foot-tall swastika scrawled in blue marker also was found that day, Kimberly Carter, office administrator at the Fiedler Hillel Center, 629 Foster St. in Evanston, had said.
Carter would not specify what the phrase said.
The first in the latest incidents of vandalism occurred Oct. 30, when police found a swastika written in pencil in the hallway of Willard Hall. No forced entry was involved in that incident, so the university believed the vandal to be a student, Cubbage said.
During the spring of 2003, at least four incidents were reported in which racial slurs and a picture of lynching were drawn on doors of three African-American students' dorms, Cubbage said.
Police have yet to arrest anyone for the crimes, which do not appear to "have a pattern," Cubbage said.
During the fall, the university took measures to prevent further hate-related vandalism from happening, including meeting with student leaders and revising freshman orientation materials, "but apparently not successfully," Cubbage said.
Students protested the crimes last week by wearing black as a show of solidarity and holding several rallies and candlelight vigils.
Saide was scheduled to appear for a preliminary hearing at 9 a.m. Dec. 1 in Skokie Court, Perry said.
Leftist media bias
by USS Liberty
Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2003 at 5:53 PM
Nah, ain't no liberal terrorist aiding and abetting media bias. Anyone can plainly see that the headline conveys the fact that the fleeing PaliNazis were terrorists.
Nov 26, 2003
Israeli Troops Kill Two Fleeing Palestinians
The Associated Press
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israeli troops in the Gaza Strip Wednesday killed two Palestinians who were apparently planned to set up an ambush on a road used by Jewish settlers, Israeli military said.
Israeli soldiers spotted four men, at least two of them armed, heading after nightfall toward the Kissufim road, leading to the Gush Katif group of settlements in the southern Gaza Strip, the military said.
When the men spotted the soldiers they split up and two tried to flee in a waiting car. The soldiers fired, killing the two and wounding a third. The military initially said three had been killed.
A search was launched for the remaining man.
AP-ES-11-26-03 2136EST
This story can be found at: http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAQ2H57IND.html
The New Slavery: Al Gore and Howard Dean Believe They Own Black America
by Irv The Nirv
Wednesday, Dec. 10, 2003 at 9:35 AM
"Then I would spank Condi on that tight little black ass and tell her to go get me another drink."
keep 'em down
by Irving
Wednesday, Dec. 10, 2003 at 10:23 AM
Democraps want to keep blacks on the Plantation. I understand the meaning of "Uncle Tom". What do you call that guy ssidled up to Dean?
Rice would give Dean or any other candidate a run for their money, I personally feel.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)