|
|
|
News Archives
Psychology department to issue statement on professor's controversial literatureStaff and faculty are worried that psychology professor Kevin MacDonald's work has anti-Semitic and racist overtones.Daily 49er (California State University-Long Beach) Feb. 7, 2008
The Cal State Long Beach Psychology
Department has recently initiated new plans to disassociate itself from
controversial psychology professor Kevin MacDonald. American Renaissance’s 2008 Conference: Thank You, Loonies!
vdare.com Jan. 22, 2008
Excerpt: Every two years since 1994, the magazine I edit, American Renaissance, has held a conference. Every two years, assorted loonies do us the favor of trying to shut it down. Which is to say that every two years, they both ensure splendid press coverage and reveal the true goal of the tolerance-and-diversity crowd: utter intolerance of diverse views. American Renaissance takes the position that racial differences are real, that racial solidarity is part of human nature, and that multi-racial societies will always have racial conflict. All this is obviously true, which is why the lefties fly into such a rage when someone says so. Since the people at AR conferences are among the most thoughtful, persuasive people who have ever said so, their rage is intense. This year the raging started earlier than usual. Last November, no less than three months before the 2008 conference, a group of living-dead who call themselves Students for a Democratic Society put out the word that "neo-nazis and racist bigots will be planning more racist terror at the American Renaissance Conference," where they would "vent their hatred and spew their racist venom towards communities of color." (This isn’t satire; those were their words.) They called for "a day full of actions (in many forms)" to "shut these racists down by any means necessary." (NY Protest Calendar (Beta) » white supremacist conference, D.C., February) This is the sort of thing we hear every two years. So what can we expect from their "day full of actions"? Perhaps a dozen shaggy, braying, throwbacks to the 1960s, who will divert conference-goers and passing motorists alike with quaint slogans and eccentric attire. Nothing could be more edifying than the contrast between the detritus on the sidewalk and the crisp, good manners in the conference hall. The braying also ensures excellent media coverage, which promotes our message and brings more people to the next conference. I am therefore deeply grateful to the loonies for three reasons: They entertain, they show the other side up for what it really is, and they are the best PR agency I ever worked with. I wish 200 would show up rather than only a dozen. The loonies, you see, have the magic touch with the media. This year, we are particularly indebted to a web page and an answering machine known as the Jewish Defense Organization. . This obscure offshoot of the Jewish Defense League phoned up the newspapers in Northern Virginia, where we will hold the conference, to announce "Operation Nazi-Kicker," the silly name for their plan to shut us up. Sure enough, the Washington Post Washington Jewish Week , the Herndon Observer , the Fairfax Times , and the Herndon Connection all sprang into action and wrote up the conference. We couldn’t have gotten that kind of advance publicity if we had sent out press releases promising a Storm Trooper rally, a cross-burning, a lynching, and free beer. Thank you, JDO! [White Nationalist Group's Meeting Prompts Protest | Jewish Defense Organization Urges Herndon Hotel to Halt 'Neo-Nazi' Conference in February, By Fredrick Kunkle Washington Post, December 13, 2007] U.S. diplomat calls violence in Kenya ethnic cleansing'It is a plan to push people out,' not genocide, he saysSan Francisco Chronicle Jan. 31, 2008 The top U.S. diplomat for Africa said Wednesday that some of the violence that has swept across Kenya in the past month has been ethnic cleansing, but that it was not genocide. "The aim was originally to kill, cleanse," said Jendayi Frazer, the assistant secretary of state for African affairs, who visited some of Kenya's conflict-torn areas earlier this month. "We are now getting into a dangerous environment in which the killings are now revenge attacks. This is not about genocide. It is a very backward notion of how Kenyans should live. It is a plan to push people out of the area in the Rift Valley." [more] Grassroots ethnic reporting a perilous callingSan Francisco Chronicle Jan. 31, 2008
Reporting for ethnic media has been the most dangerous journalism job in the United States for at least three decades.
Since 1976, 11 of the 13 journalists slain in the United States in apparent retaliation for their reporting worked for the ethnic press, according to the New York nonprofit Committee to Protect Journalists, which tracks threats to news-gathering worldwide. Three killings during that period occurred in the Bay Area:
-- Lam Trong Duong, who had written stories in a Vietnamese language newsletter supportive of the communist government of Vietnam, was shot in 1981 near his apartment in San Francisco's Tenderloin neighborhood. A group of anti-communist Vietnamese claimed responsibility for the slaying.
-- Henry Liu, author of a Chinese-language book accusing Taiwanese officials of corruption, was killed in 1984 in his Daly City home by hit men hired by the Taiwanese government.
-- Oakland Post Editor Chauncey Bailey, who was reporting on financial problems and infighting at Your Black Muslim Bakery, a black-owned business and self-empowerment group, was slain in downtown Oakland in August. The bakery's CEO told police that Bailey had slandered the bakery's late founder, Yusuf Bey, and a bakery employee was arrested in the crime.
Killings of journalists around the world follow a similar pattern, according to a study by the Committee to Protect Journalists. [more]
Israeli Democracy: Arabs Need Not Apply The Indypendent
Israel is frequently cited as “the only democracy in the Middle East.” The 1.2 million Palestinians living inside Israel’s borders, would beg to differ.
Beginning with the founding of Israel as a Jewish state in 1948, Palestinians have been treated as second-class citizens and enemies from within. Each of the “Basic Laws,” the foundation of the Israeli legal system, begins with a statement that Israel is a Jewish state. For example, the purpose of the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom is “to establish the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.” From 1948 until 1966, Palestinians inside Israel were subject to military law, while Jews lived under civilian law. During that time, 66 percent of Arab-owned land was confiscated. In 1947, Jews owned 6.7 percent while Palestinians held the rest. Today, Israeli Palestinians, 20 percent of the population, own 2.5 percent of the land. Discrimination inside Israel falls broadly into four categories, according to Mohammad Zeidan, general director of the Nazareth- based Arab Association for Human Rights (AHR): laws that give different privileges and rights to Jews and non-Jews; indirect discrimination not specifically linked to religion; institutional discrimination, such as allocation of municipal funds; and racism in public life, including cultural discrimination. [more]
Two Jewish Jokes (and a Hain in the Middle)
Gilad Atzmon, PeacepalestineJan. 25, 2008
The Jewish press in Britain is panicking lately and they have good reason, too. While the British papers are filling their mouths with water hiding the real story behind the huge Labour donation sleaze, the UK Jewish press is overwhelmingly concerned with the unveiling saga. We have already learned about Lord ‘cash machine’ Levy who acted as ‘No 1 Labour fund raiser’. We have learned recently about David Abrahams who donated his money to the party by proxy. Both Levy and Abrahams were overwhelmingly active at the time Britain was taken into an illegal war by the Labour government. David Abrahams already admitted in an interview to the Jewish Chronicle that he donated money by proxy to “to quell conspiracy fears”. ... Interestingly enough, the Tories here do not do much to expose the identity of the Labour proxy donators. The reason is simple, they are backed by the very same people. We have read about Mr Nagel swinging between the two parties. Recently Parliament's sleaze watchdog has launched an inquiry into complaints made against shadow chancellor George Osborne. Mr Osborne allegedly received money from some of the wealthiest people in Britain, including banking heiress Lady Serena Rothschild, believed to have donated £190,000 to Mr Osborne. [more] Benefits of Diversity DepartmentEthnic tension surfaces in Germany: Immigrant crime is a central issue in the Hesse state election, stirring a backlash among younger votersLos Angeles Times Jan. 27, 2008
A retired school principal is attacked by two young toughs, an
awful beating captured on surveillance cameras and aired on
television for days in what has become Germany's equivalent of
the Rodney King tape. Foreign Thought Police Target US Candidates Caroline Glick cracks the whip: Paul, Obama, and Huckabee smeared as "bigots"
Justin Raimondo Antiwar.com Jan. 23, 2008
One such case [of the foreign thought police] is that of Caroline Glick, a well-known Israeli rightist whose column for the Jerusalem Post is a veritable bellwether of Likudnik opinion, and who takes occasional jabs at America for what she views as slights or even betrayals. In this instance, she's miffed that we've even allowed the race to get this far without a front-runner, while including "candidates and policies that would have previously never made it out of the starting gate." Those candidates deemed substandard by Glick all have one thing in common: the perception, on her part, that Israel woud be worse off if they ever made it to the White House. What's more, it isn't good for Israel that they're even being allowed to discuss their foreign policy views in a public forum, such as the presidential debates.
Number one on Glick's list of undesirables is, of course, Ron Paul, the Texas country doctor and 10-term Republican congressman whose anti-interventionist views have made him the War Party's favored target – and a hero to a growing constituency on the Right as well as the Left, as Glick sourly acknowledges. [more]
Most
Diversity Training Ineffective, Study Finds
Washington Post
Most diversity training efforts at American companies are ineffective and even counterproductive in increasing the number of women and minorities in managerial positions, according to an analysis that turns decades of conventional wisdom, government policy and court rulings on their head. A comprehensive review of 31 years of data from 830 mid-size to large U.S. workplaces found that the kind of diversity training exercises offered at most firms were followed by a 7.5 percent drop in the number of women in management. The number of black, female managers fell by 10 percent, and the number of black men in top positions fell by 12 percent. Similar effects were seen for Latinos and Asians. The analysis did not find that all diversity training is useless. Rather, it showed that mandatory programs -- often undertaken mainly with an eye to avoiding liability in discrimination lawsuits -- were the problem. When diversity training is voluntary and undertaken to advance a company's business goals, it was associated with increased diversity in management. The origins of diversity training trace back to the civil rights movement and the belief that education, sensitivity and awareness are key to reducing discrimination. While many companies have embraced such training as a way to make workplaces more inclusive and to cater to an increasingly diverse customer base, trainers and researchers note that other companies use "sensitivity training" superficially -- as a cosmetic response to complaints from internal and external critics. Today, U.S. businesses spend from $200 million to $300 million a year on diversity training, but the new study is one of the first attempts to systematically analyze its impact. What it found is that programs work best when they are voluntary and focus on specific organizational skills, such as establishing mentoring relationships and giving women and minorities a chance to prove their worth in high-profile roles. [more] A Stimulus to What? Delusions Prevail in Washington Farewell to Supply-Side Economics
Paul Craig Roberts Information Clearing House Jan. 21, 2008
The Keynesian policy of driving the economy through consumer demand was applied to a different economy than the one we have today. In those days the goods Americans purchased, such as cars and appliances, were mainly made in America. Construction workers were not illegals sending their wages back to Mexico. The US had a robust manufacturing workforce. When consumer demand weakened, companies would reduce their output and lay off workers. Government policymakers would respond to the decline in employment and output with monetary and fiscal policies that boosted consumer demand. As consumer spending picked up, companies would call back the laid off workers in order to increase output to meet the rising demand. Today Americans are losing jobs for reasons that have nothing to do with recession. They are losing their jobs to offshoring and to foreigners brought in on work visas. Today many American brands are produced offshore in whole or part with foreign labor and imported to the US for sale in the American market. In 2007, prior to the onset of the 2008 recession, 217,000 manufacturing jobs were lost. The US now has fewer manufacturing jobs than it had in 1950 when the population was half the current size. US job growth in the 21st century has been confined to low-pay domestic services. During 2007, waitresses and bartenders, health care and social assistance, and wholesale and retail trade, transportation and utilities accounted for 91% of new private sector jobs. When a population drowning in debt is hit with unemployment from recession on top of unemployment from offshoring, will the people spend their rebates in eating places and bars, thus boosting employment among waitresses and bartenders? Will they spend their rebates in shopping malls, thus boosting employment for retail clerks? If they become ill, the lack of medical insurance will direct their rebates to doctors’ bills. Economists and other shills for globalism told Americans not to worry about the loss of manufacturing jobs. Good riddance, they said, to these “old economy” jobs. The “new economy” would bring better and higher paying jobs in technical and professional services that would free Americans from the drudgery of factory work. So far, these jobs haven’t shown up, and if they do, most will be susceptible to offshoring, just like the manufacturing jobs. [more] Notes from Canada
It's all very odd, 'that's for sure'
Why should
Richard Warman be the only citizen to have his own personal
inquisition?
Mark Steyn
Macleans.ca
Jan. 17, 2008
Excerpt: Because I've always been opposed to "human rights" commissions in theory (I like proper courts with things like "due process"), I failed to appreciate until Maclean's present predicament how much worse they are in practice. These commissions were supposedly intended to investigate discrimination in housing and the like, but then came the very poorly drafted Section XIII, which makes it a crime to communicate anything electronically "likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt." "Likely," eh? What does that mean? Well, according to the key determination, subsequently endorsed by the Supreme Court, in Canadian legalese "likely" now means "highly unlikely." That's to say, notwithstanding the absence of any evidence by the plaintiffs of anyone at all ever having been exposed to actual hatred or contempt, nor even any coherent argument as to why there is a hypothetical possibility of someone unspecified being exposed to theoretical hatred or contempt in the decades ahead, a commission can still deem such hatred or contempt "likely." In the three decades of the Canadian "Human Rights" Tribunal's existence, not a single "defendant" has been "acquitted." Would you bet on Maclean's bucking this spectacular 100 per cent conviction rate? "Sentence first, verdict afterwards," declares the queen in Alice In Wonderland. Canada's not quite there yet, but at the Human Rights Commission, it's "Verdict first, trial afterwards." So I'm guilty and Ken Whyte's guilty and Maclean's is guilty because that's the only verdict there is. [more]
Eds: The following is on James Kirchick's "exposé" of Ron Paul appearing in Martin Peretz's The New Republic.
Marty Peretz vs. Ron Paul. Kids (And “Mentor”) vs. Grown-Ups Steve Sailer vdare.com Jan. 13, 2008 [James] Kirchick implies that Congressman Paul is an anti-Semite who nurses "deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays". After all, as Kirchick thoroughly documents, Dr. Paul has close ties to the paleolibertarian Ludwig von Mises Institute, founded by his former aide Lew Rockwell, who was profoundly inspired by the late Murray Rothbard.
And we all know that von Mises and Rothbard were notorious anti-Sem—… Oh, wait! It appears that von Mises and Rothbard were Jewish.
Never mind.
The New Republic is also alarmed that: "The newsletters display an obsession with Israel; no other country is mentioned more often in the editions I saw …"
That's in complete contrast to Marty Peretz's magazine, where Israel, being a small, distant foreign country, is almost never mentioned, and the only test applied to our foreign policy is whether it advances the general welfare of the American people.
Oh, sorry…that's the Bizarro World version of The New Republic. In our space-time continuum, Israel is the most important country in the galaxy, at least according to Peretz's priorities.
In the liberal American Prospect, Eric Alterman mused in his article My Marty Peretz Problem—And Ours, [June 19, 2007] on the 34 years of Peretz's stewardship of The New Republic: "It would be theoretically possible, I imagine, to overstate the centrality of Peretz's obsession with the Arab-Israeli conflict to the magazine's politics and to its editorial voice. But … it is really not too much to say that almost all of Peretz's political beliefs are subordinate to his commitment to Israel's best interests, and these interests as Peretz defines them almost always involve more war."
Kirchick, enraged by what he has dug up in the antiwar candidate's newsletters, concludes that the libertarian surgeon is "a man filled with hate".
In sharp contrast, Kirchick's boss, Marty Peretz, is the reincarnation of St. Francis of Assisi.
Oh, oops, check that … As Alterman points out, Peretz is in thrall to an "obsessive and unapologetic hatred of Arabs". Alterman quotes Peretz as recently saying about Arabs: “They are ‘violent, fratricidal, unreliable, primitive and crazed … barbarian’; they have created a ‘wretched society’ and are ‘cruel, belligerent, intolerant, fearing’; they are ‘murderous and grotesque’ and ‘can't even run a post office’; their societies ‘have gone bonkers over jihad’ and they are ‘feigning outrage when they protest what they call American (or Israeli) atrocities’; they ‘behave like lemmings’, and ‘are not shocked at all by what in truth must seem to them not atrocious at all’; and to top it all off, their rugs are not as ‘subtle’ and are more ‘glimmery’ than those of the Berbers." [more]
Nukes,
Spooks, Justin Raimondo Jan. 7, 2008
Excerpt: As a translator for the FBI, [Sibel] Edmonds had the task of translating many hours of intercepted phone conversations between Turkish officials and Pakistanis, Israelis, and Americans who were targets of the FBI's counterintelligence unit. Thousands of hours of intercepted calls revealed a network of moles placed in various military installations and academic venues dealing with nuclear technology. Edmonds gives us the details, via the Times: "Edmonds says there were several transactions of nuclear material every month, with the Pakistanis being among the eventual buyers. 'The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,' she said. "They were helped, she says, by the high-ranking State Department official [Marc Grossman] who provided some of their moles – mainly Ph.D. students – with security clearance to work in sensitive nuclear research facilities. These included the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico, which is responsible for the security of the U.S. nuclear deterrent." And "while the FBI was investigating," says Edmonds, "several arms of the government were shielding what was going on." An entire wing of the national security bureaucracy, associated with the neoconservatives, has long profited from representing Turkish interests in Washington: this group includes not only Grossman, but also Paul Wolfowitz, chief intellectual architect of the Iraq war and ex-World Bank president; former deputy defense secretary for policy Douglas J. Feith; Feith's successor, Eric Edelman; and Richard Perle, the notorious uber-neocon whose unique ability to mix profiteering and warmongering forced him to resign his official capacity as a key administration adviser. [more] Eds.: A bit belated perhaps, but definitely worth reading.The Jewish grinch who stole Christmas
Burt Prelutsky WorldnetDaily Dec. 17, 2007
Excerpts: Although it seems a long time ago, it really wasn't, that people who came here from other places made every attempt to fit in. Assimilation wasn't a threat to anyone – it was what the Statue of Liberty represented. E pluribus unum, one out of many, was our motto. The world's melting pot was our nickname. It didn't mean that any group of people had to check their customs, culture or cuisine, at the door. It did mean that they, and especially their children, learned English, and that they learned to live and let live.
That has changed, you may have noticed. And I blame my fellow Jews. When it comes to pushing the multicultural, anti-Christian agenda, you find Jewish judges, Jewish journalists, and the American Civil Liberties Union, at the forefront. ...
It is the ACLU, which is overwhelmingly Jewish in terms of membership and funding, that is leading the attack against Christianity in America. It is they who have conned far too many people into believing that the phrase "separation of church and state" actually exists somewhere in the Constitution.
You may have noticed, though, that the ACLU is highly selective when it comes to religious intolerance. The same group of self-righteous shysters who, at the drop of a "Merry Christmas" will slap you with an injunction, will fight for the right of an American Indian to ingest peyote and a devout Islamic woman to be veiled on her driver's license.
I happen to despise bullies and bigots. I hate them when they represent the majority, but no less when, like Jews in America, they represent an infinitesimal minority. I am getting the idea that too many Jews won't be happy until they pull off their own version of the Spanish Inquisition, forcing Christians to either deny their faith and convert to agnosticism or suffer the consequences. [more] Bishop Henry says human laws slay rather than shield; Prelate says process like 'kangaroo courts'Canadian Catholic News Jan. 14, 2008
Calgary Bishop Fred Henry is calling for an overhaul of legislation governing human rights commissions (HRCs). "Human rights laws, designed as a shield, are now being used as a sword," Henry wrote in a Dec. 31 email from Calgary, in what he described as an increasingly "bizarre" series of events. The recent filing of human rights complaints against Maclean's Magazine for an excerpt of Mark Steyn's bestselling book America Alone [see TOO article on this topic], and against Catholic Insight Magazine for articles outlining Catholic teaching on homosexuality, are only the latest in a series of cases that have targeted freedom of speech and religious freedom. ...Henry [comments]: "The issue is rarely true discrimination but rather censorship and enshrinement of a particular ideology through threats, sanctions and punitive measures." [more] Eds: We reprint below an excerpt from the Daily Mail, one of Britain’s mass circulation papers, to show what now can appear in the mainstream press there. Mr. Littlejohn does not seem to understand the obvious truth that diversity is our greatest strength.
Britain's 'no go' zones? Don't even go there
Richard Littlejohn Daily Mail (London) Jan. 7, 2008
Bishop Nazir-Ali is bang on the money when he talks about 'no-go' areas for Christians in fundamentalist Muslim ghettoes in Britain. But he could have gone further still.
This country is littered with 'no-go' areas, not just physically, but culturally, spiritually, intellectually and academically, too. Our very liberties are being torched in the name of 'diversity'.
The pernicious doctrine of multiculturalism has turned us into a society where people are frightened to speak their minds and justice has been flipped on its head.
To express an opinion contrary to the ruthlessly enforced, politically motivated conformity of the Fascist Left is to risk a vicious campaign of character assassination which, if you work in the public sector, will almost certainly cost you your job.
The private sector isn't immune, either.
Only last week, we learned of a banker who was sacked for making a harmless, lame joke about Shi'ites.
Bishop Nazir-Ali: All he did was state the obvious but there have been demands for his resignation
We have reached the ludicrous position where a Pakistani clergyman is facing demands for his resignation and is being accused of stirring up racial and religious hatred simply for speaking the truth.
All Bishop Nazir-Ali did was state the bleedin' obvious. Yet even William Hague has attacked him, saying the idea that Christians are made to feel uncomfortable by Muslim extremists is not a Britain he recognises.
In which case, I suggest Hague heads a few stops east of Westminster, along the Mile End and Whitechapel Roads, where Muslim monoculturalism holds sway. Or visits Leicester, Bradford, Burnley, Oldham or parts of Birmingham.
It is beyond dispute that there is a concerted campaign by Islamic extremists to force sharia law on to significant areas of Christian Britain. And there is no doubt that in predominantly Muslim areas, they are winning.
It's ludicrous to accuse the Bishop of inciting hatred. The real hatred is coming not from Church of England pulpits but from inside those mosques controlled by fanatics.
Yet when Channel 4's Dispatches programme exposed the sermons of hate and violence against 'kaffirs' and ' infidels', the West Midlands police not only refused to act, they launched an investigation into the programme-makers.
That's about par for the course in what passes for law enforcement these days. [more]
The last testament of Flashman's creator: How Britain has destroyed itself
Excerpt: I know that some things are wonderfully better than they used to be... But much has deteriorated. The United Kingdom has begun to look more like a Third World country, shabby, littered, ugly, run down, without purpose or direction, misruled by a typical Third World government, corrupt, incompetent and undemocratic.
My generation has seen the decay of ordinary morality, standards of decency, sportsmanship, politeness, respect for the law, family values, politics and education and religion, the very character of the British. ...They regard themselves as a completely liberated society when in fact they are less free than any generation since the Middle Ages. ... We still had liberty beyond modern understanding because we had other freedoms, the really important ones, that are denied to the youth of today.
We could say what we liked; they can't. We were not subject to the aggressive pressure of special interest minority groups; they are. We had no worries about race or sexual orientation; they have. We could, and did, differ from fashionable opinion with impunity, and would have laughed PC to scorn, had our society been weak and stupid enough to let it exist. ... We did not know the stifling tyranny of a liberal establishment, determined to impose its views, and beginning to resemble George Orwell's Ministry of Truth. ...
We have had the two worst Prime Ministers in our history - Edward Heath (who dragooned us into the Common Market) and Tony Blair. The harm these two have done to Britain is incalculable and almost certainly irreparable. ...
We are yesterday's people, the over-the-hill gang. (Yes, the old people - not the senior citizens or the time-challenged, but the old people.) Those of ultra-liberal views may take consolation from this - that my kind won't be around much longer, and then they can get on with wrecking civilisation in peace.
But they should beware. There may well be more who think like me than the liberal Left establishment likes to think. When my views were first published in book form in 2002, I was not surprised that almost all the reviewers were unfavourable. I had expected that my old-fashioned views would get a fairly hostile reception, but the bitterness did astonish me.
I had not realised how offensive the plain truth can be to the politically correct, how enraged they can be by its mere expression, and how deeply they detest the values and standards respected 50 years ago and which dinosaurs like me still believe in, God help us. [more] Chris Matthews's Coyness About Jewish Money in Politics Is Downright Irresponsible and IrritatingPhilip Weiss Mondoweiss Jan. 4, 2008
Excerpt: [Chris Matthews] said that Obama's victory could send a chill thru Hillary's "donor-base," which Matthews said is in Manhattan and the west side of Los Angeles. ... He went on to talk about Hillary's support from New Yorkers who have moved to Florida. Florida, Hollywood, Manhattan. This is coy and irresponsible. Matthews never talks about Jews in politics directly. He talks about blacks, about Irish-Americans, not Jews. He obviously believes Jews are important in our politics ... but as a guy who anatomizes the id of American political life, he owes it to his viewers to take on the Israel lobby head on. As it is, he confines himself to hinting, as he did last night. ... Matthews's coyness is evidence of the great problem here. A fearless guy is afraid to even discuss the lobby. Why doesn't he have Walt and Mearsheimer on air to talk about their ideas? I believe that Matthews knows he would pay a significant price for doing so, let alone talking about Jewish money in the Democratic party. [more]
Throughout his career, Obama has reached for Jewish support Jewish Telegrahic Agency Jan. 4, 2008
Exceprt: In [Obama's] first run for the Illinois Senate in 1996, he sought the backing of Alan Solow, a top Chicago lawyer. Eight years later, running for the U.S. Senate -- long before he became the shoo-in, when he was running in a Democratic field packed with a dozen candidates, including some Jews — one of his first meetings was with Robert Schrayer, a top Jewish philanthropist in Chicago. When he launched his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination in late 2006, he named as his fund-raising chief Alan Solomont, the Boston Jewish philanthropist who helped shepherd Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) to the Democratic candidacy in 2004. And he chose a gathering of the pro-Israel lobby, the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee, last March to deliver his
presidential candidacy's
first foreign policy speech. Activist fails to rally blacks on illegal-immigration issue Los Angeles Times, Dec. 31, 2007
Excerpt: Since last year, [Ted Hayes] the 56-year-old lean and
lanky activist has tried to rouse blacks against illegal
immigration with fiery appearances on national TV, protest
marches, civil disobedience and leadership of Choose Black
America, an anti-illegal immigration organization launched and
financially supported by the Federation for American Immigration
Reform.
A huge misstep, said commentator Earl Ofari Hutchinson, was
Hayes' decision to align himself with the Minuteman Project, an
anti-illegal immigration group viewed as extremist by many
people, including blacks. Founder Jim Gilchrist, who calls Hayes
"spectacular," sharply disputes the charge and said Minutemen
are patriots of all races who do not engage in violence. Turkey: Another Ally Lost Philip Giraldi Dec. 18, 2007
Over the past six years the Bush administration, aided and abetted by Congress, has trashed what used to be described as American foreign policy. Foreign policy once was shaped around the U.S. national interest, but no longer. Vulnerable key allies such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt are now struggling to deal with the consequences of a U.S.-inspired rush to democracy that has advanced a flawed, ideologically driven agenda. Russia was nearly a friend and is now again an enemy. Afghanistan is a corrupt narco-state where the Taliban is making a comeback and President Hamid Karzai is referred to as the King of Kabul because his writ runs no farther. The less said about Iraq the better. But amid all of the missteps and poor policy choices, the loss of Turkey stands apart because Turkey was a close friend and loyal ally of the United States when 9/11 took place... Wolfowitz and Grossman returned to Turkey to negotiate with the new government. Erdogan was definitely interested, if only to convince his critics within the Turkish establishment and army that he was supportive of the Western alliance, but polls taken in Turkey indicated that fully 87 percent of the public opposed war against Iraq. Many recalled the 1991 Gulf War, in which Turkey had to absorb more than half a million refugees and suffered severe economic dislocation, including a currency collapse. The Turks also believed that the U.S. was seeking to guarantee the security of Israel by stopping a Muslim country from having either weapons of mass destruction or the means to deliver them. It was noted with some concern in the Turkish media that the spokesmen for the war policy were all neoconservatives closely tied to Tel Aviv, notably Wolfowitz, Grossman, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, and Harold Rhode, and that the Israel lobby in Washington had promoted the plans to attack Iraq. [bold-face added; more] Bad for the Jews Eric Alterman International Herald Trib. Dec. 21, 2007
Excerpts: According to the American Jewish Committee's 2007 survey of American Jewry, released Dec. 11, a majority of Jews in the United States oppose virtually every aspect of the Bush administration/neocon agenda. ... Jews are also impressively sensible when it comes to Israel/Palestine, all things considered. Though barely more than a third think peace is likely anytime soon, and more than 80 percent believe the goal of the Muslim states is to destroy Israel, a 46-to-43 percent plurality continues to support the creation of a Palestinian state. ... Jews are more liberal than conservative (43-25 percent) and far more Democratic than Republican (58-15 percent). This preference, significantly, extends to national security issues, often considered a Republican trump card. By a massive 61-to-21 percent margin, Jews say Democrats, not Republicans, are "more likely to make the right decision about the war in Iraq." Regarding terrorism, Democrats win 53-to-30 percent. ... These views, however, have been obscured in our political discourse by an unholy alliance between conservative-dominated professional Jewish organizations and neoconservative Jewish pundits, aided by pliant and frequently clueless mainstream media that empower these right-wingers to speak for a people with values diametrically opposed to theirs. Take a look at the agendas of some of the most influential Jewish organizations, like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League, the Zionist Organization of America and the American Jewish Committee itself: Each has historically associated itself with the hawkish side of the debate - and some have done so even when Israel took the more dovish side (the Jewish equivalent of being holier than the Pope). Forget for a moment the argument over whether what some call "the Lobby" is good or bad for America. My point is that it's bad for the Jews. ... In large part the trouble lies with the antidemocratic structures of these organizations and the apathy of most Jews with regard to organized Jewish life. Major Jewish groups respond to the demands of their top funders and best-organized constituencies. Most American Jews, however, have little or nothing to do with these groups. [more]
Joe-Bashing and the
Jews Dec. 21, 2007
Antisemitism on the Internet is nothing new. Neither are liberal attacks on Senator Joseph Lieberman, the hawkish former Democrat from Connecticut. It’s tempting, therefore, to pooh-pooh as same-old-same-old the odious Jew-bashing that popped up amid the mass Joe-bashing flooding the Web this week in the wake of Lieberman’s endorsement of Republican John McCain for president.
It’s tempting, but wrong. This isn’t the familiar fringe bigotry that we’re accustomed to tut-tutting and then ignoring. This is something newer and more alarming.
It is true that antisemitic conspiracy-mongering has been a feature of the Internet since the Web’s inception, both in fringe chat rooms and in individual postings to mainstream news sites. What is new in this week’s fireworks is the seeming normality, even respectability, of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.
In other times, charges of Israeli plotting, Jewish disloyalty and Zionist control of Washington crept lamely into public discourse, only to be ignored or ridiculed by the mainstream. This week, claims of Jewish treachery were a mainstream thread in nearly every online discussion of the Lieberman-McCain brouhaha.
The claims appeared repeatedly, insistently, in the talkback sections of the most respectable news and opinion Web sites, from The Huffington Post and Think Progress to CNN, The Atlantic and AOL News. Saner discussants challenged them, for the most part, not contemptuously but respectfully, as though these were unremarkable, unobjectionable views
The Jew-bashers answered their critics not by slinking away but by defending themselves confidently and even throwing back the challenge. Other participants sprang to their defense. They behaved and were received, it seemed, not as solitary crackpots but as a serious faction in the general debate. [more]
Gov't official: No 'smoking gun' on Iran Jerusalem Post Dec. 18, 2007
Israel does not have "smoking gun" intelligence that will force an American reassessment of its National Intelligence Estimate that Iran halted its nuclear weapons plan in 2003, [an Israeli] government official told The Jerusalem Post Monday.... Another diplomatic official labeled as either "very arrogant" or "naive" the idea that all Israel had to do was reveal one piece of information to get the US intelligence community to say it erred and will "take it all back and follow Israel's line." The official said it was clear that the Americans pretty much know what Israel knows about the Iranian nuclear program and that the difference is not over the facts but rather over their interpretation. [more]
Center for Immigration Studies December 28, 2007
1. Backgrounder: “Immigration, Mainstream Media, and the 2008 Election” 2. Op-ed: “The Case Against Immigration: Amy Chua gets a lot of things right but a few big things wrong” 3. Op-ed: “Immigration, both legal and illegal, puts huge strain on the country” 4. Testimony: “State Immigration Law Training and Enforcement Programs Enhance Homeland Security and Public Safety” 5. Backgrounder: “Immigrants in the United States, 2007: A Profile of America’s Foreign-Born Population” 6. Transcript: “Farm Labor Shortages: How Real? What Response?” 7. Op-ed: “Farmworker Farce: The shortage simply doesn’t exist”
1. Immigration, Mainstream Media, and the 2008 Election By Stephen Steinlight Center for Immigration Studies, December 2007 http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/back1107.html EXCERPT: This strategy of reticence or evasion is predicated on a misconception by mainstream media that its coverage has been an enabler of or outlet for this movement. The truth is otherwise: alternative media – talk radio, the web, and blogosphere – have fired, fueled and reported the uprising. Mainstream media cannot control or compete with these rivals, which have come to command far larger audiences over the past few years. Hence the ongoing flap over the "Fairness Doctrine," an attempt to silence talk radio that helped defeat "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" once more. Talk radio more than evened the odds in an historically lopsided battle in which the pro-open border’s elite – a club comprised of corporate interests primarily in agribusiness, construction and the service sector; ethnic lobbying groups; liberal clerics from all religious backgrounds and the Roman Catholic Church especially; and their media allies – held all the cards. Mainstream media’s bemoaning the absence of "fairness" is risible not only because of its wall-to-wall solidarity on immigration, but its reflexive, unbalanced endorsement of left-of-center views.
2. The Case Against Immigration Amy Chua gets a lot of things right but a few big things wrong By Mark Krikorian The Washington Post, December 19, 2007 http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/mskoped121907.html EXCERPT: . . . But Chua's useful note of caution is almost lost in a mountain of nonsense. First, to imply that Huntington, this nation's preeminent social scientist, is capable of 'scapegoating vitriol' is absurd. In his book, 'Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity' Huntington argues not that only WASPs can be Americans. He simply says that our institutions and culture were permanently shaped by British low-church Protestantism -- and that diluting that inheritance would undermine much of what has made America such a successful multi-ethnic society. . . . The other restrictionist 'mistake' Chua points to is neglecting 'the indispensable role that immigrants have played in building American wealth and power.' The present-day examples she cites have nothing to do with 'a fierce global competition to attract the world's best high-tech scientists and engineers.' Intel cofounder Andy Grove, for instance, is a manager, not a technician, and Google cofounder Sergey Brin came here as a child as part of a refugee family. The push by high-tech firms to import more talent from abroad is simply a 21st century version of the eternal search for cheap labor. And Chua's examples from the past are just that. Although today's immigrants are very similar to those of a century ago, we are a completely changed society. As I argue in my forthcoming book, 'The New Case Against Immigration,' immigration is simply incompatible with modern society. Our economy places a much higher premium than ever before on education. The United States already spends too much on an extensive welfare state. And advances in communications and transportation make immigration, even of the educated, deeply problematic for assimilation and security and sovereignty. In other words, the immigrants are the same, but we are different. 3. Immigration, both legal and illegal, puts huge strain on the country By Steven A. Camarota The North County (Calif.) Times, December 15, 2007 http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/sacoped121507.html EXCERPT: The debate over immigration has become one of America's most heated. In a new report published by the Center for Immigration Studies, we provide a detailed picture of the nation's immigrant population. Our conclusions will probably not surprise most Californians: First, legal and illegal immigration is at record levels. Second, immigrants are generally hardworking, yet they create enormous strains on social services. Why? Put simply, many are uneducated. 4. State Immigration Law Training and Enforcement Programs Enhance Homeland Security and Public Safety Presentation by Jessica M. Vaughan Nevada Commission on Homeland Security, Las Vegas, Nevada, December 5, 2007 http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/jmvtestimony120507.html EXCERPT: Nevada’s adoption of a carefully thought out program of immigration law training and enforcement for state law enforcement agencies will contribute significantly to homeland security and enhance public safety for all its residents. Due to geography, the presence of a number of high-profile sites, and a history of significant crime problems with a nexus to illegal immigration, Nevada is an ideal candidate for participation in the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s 287(g) program. This program provides advanced training in immigration law for selected state law enforcement officers, and enables trained officers, under the supervision of ICE, to identify, detain and begin the removal process for certain illegal aliens who come into contact with law enforcement. While a total of 34 jurisdictions have implemented 287(g) programs, there are three state programs in particular (Alabama, Colorado, and Florida) that seem best suited to Nevada’s situation and homeland security objectives. In addition, the state should take further steps to achieve these objectives, such as adoption of state anti-smuggling and document/identity fraud laws; establishment of document verification protocols for licensing and other state benefits; mandatory screening for status of incarcerated foreign-born individuals; uniform state-wide policies on handling foreign-born encountered by police; universal immigration law training for law enforcement agencies; and deterrence of illegal employment.
5. Immigrants in the United States, 2007: A Profile of America’s Foreign-Born Population By Steven A. Camarota Center for Immigration Studies, November 2007 http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/back1007.html EXCERPT: Among the report’s findings: * The nation’s immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached a record of 37.9 million in 2007. * Immigrants account for one in eight U.S. residents, the highest level in 80 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. * Overall, nearly one in three immigrants is an illegal alien. Half of Mexican and Central American immigrants and one-third of South American immigrants are illegal. * Of adult immigrants, 31 percent have not completed high school, compared to 8 percent of natives. Since 2000, immigration increased the number of workers without a high school diploma by 14 percent, and all other workers by 3 percent.
6. Farm Labor Shortages: How Real? What Response? Teleconference Transcript Center for Immigration Studies, November 2007 http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/farmtranscript.html Speakers: Philip Martin, Professor of California Resource Economics, University of California, Davis Mark Krikorian, Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies Dr. Philip Martin’s Backgrounder, entitled “Farm Labor Shortages: How Real? What Response?,” is on line at: http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/back907.html
7. Farmworker Farce: The shortage simply doesn’t exist By Mark Krikorian National Review Online, November 6, 2007 http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/mskoped110607.html EXCERPT: The lobbyists’ “crops are rotting in the fields” story line has been repeated often and with little to back it up. This is one of those stories into which reporters buy so wholeheartedly, that they find no reason to actually check it out — like church burnings, or “Jeningrad.” The New York Times, of course, is the gold standard for this sort of thing, though it’s quite widespread . . . Since only two percent of Americans still work in agriculture, many of the rest of us fall for this baloney. The research in this area, however, paints a very different picture. In a new paper, published by my Center for Immigration Studies, agricultural economist Philip Martin of the University of California, Davis, finds “little evidence” to support claims of a labor shortage on America’s farms.
Center for Immigration Studies 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076 center@cis.org www.cis.org
A Southern accent on day laborersLos Angeles Times, Dec. 28, 2007.Editors' note: The first to be hurt by immigration are the less skilled. Excerpt: In the Deep South, like the rest of the nation, undocumented Latinos have come to dominate many of the corners and parking lots where day laborers gather. But this region is different because of the high percentage of Americans who still compete with Latino immigrants for such jobs. Although U.S.-born workers make up 7% of the day-labor pool nationwide, they account for nearly 20% in the South, according to a 2006 UCLA study.American Jews on War and Peace: What Do the Polls Tell Us and Not Tell Us?James Petras Dec. 15, 2007
Excerpt: Given the high salience of being pro-Israel for the majority
of American Jews and the fact that the source of their identity stems more from
their loyalty to Israel than to the Talmud or religious myths and rituals, then
it is clear that both the ‘progressive, majority of Jews and the reactionary
minority who head up all the major American Jewish organizations have a
fundamental point of agreement and convergence: Support and
identity with Israel and its anti-Arab prejudices, its expansion and the
dispossession of Palestine. This overriding convergence allows the reactionary
Presidents of the Major Jewish Organizations in America to speak for the Jewish
community with virtually no opposition from the progressive majority
either within or without their organizations. By raising the Israeli flag,
repeating clichés about the ‘existential threat’ to Israel at each and every
convenient moment, the majority of Jews have bowed their heads and acquiesced
or, worst, subordinated their other ‘progressive’ opinions to actively
backing the leaders ‘identity’ with Israel. Their franchise on being the
recognized Jewish spokespeople intimidates and/or forces progressive Jews to
publicly abide to the line that ‘Israel (sic) knows what is best for Israel’ and
by extension for all American Jews who identify with Israel. Crackdown has illegal immigrants leaving Arizona
It's a common scene this time of year: streams of overloaded cars, pickups and vans with U.S. license plates crossing into Mexico for the holidays.
Most are filled with Hispanic families from Arizona and other states on their way to visit relatives south of the border for a few weeks before heading back to the U.S. But this year, the holiday travelers are being joined by scores of families such as Jorge and Liliana Franco, who are driving to Mexico not to visit but to stay — permanently.
Congress' failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, immigration crackdowns, Arizona's new employer-sanctions law and a sluggish economy have combined to create a climate families such as the Francos no longer find hospitable.
The number returning to Mexico is difficult to calculate, but there is no question that many families are leaving, according to Mexican government officials, local community leaders and immigrants themselves.
"The situation in Arizona has become very tough," Jorge said minutes after driving into a Mexican immigration and customs checkpoint south of the border on Mexico 15. Dozens of immigrants are leaving the U.S. daily, and even more are expected to leave once the sanctions law takes effect in January, provided the law survives a last-minute legal challenge, said Rosendo Hernandez, president of the advocacy group Immigrants Without Borders. [more]
Can diversity destroy us?
Pat Buchanan Dec. 4, 2007
Excerpts: It has lately become fashionable to say that America is great not because she is united, but because she is diverse. It is because America is a multicultural, multiracial, multiethnic, multilingual nation that she is a great nation. A corollary is that the more diverse America becomes, the better and greater she becomes. ... Our rulers, marinated in the myths that we "are a nation of immigrants" and "our diversity is our strength," continue to embrace mass immigration – the more the better. But are the myths true? ... America was settled by colonists from the British Isles. In 1789, two centuries after Jamestown and Plymouth Rock, we were 99 percent Protestant. Until the Irish came in 1845, there was almost no immigration. Even during the Great Wave of 1890-1920, the number of immigrants was a fraction of the 38 million here today. And all had come from Europe. By 1960, we were almost 90 percent European and more than 90 percent Christian – of one nationality, American, one language, English, and one culture. That America is gone forever. Last week, we learned that in the last seven years 10.3 million people, almost all from the Third World, entered the United States, more than half illegally. The nation that was one-tenth minority in 1960 is now one-third minority. European-Americans will soon be a minority in the nation, as they are today in California, Texas and most large American cities. And when that day comes, what then will unite us as a people? [more]
Black inroads, white exodus
St. Louis Post-Dispatch,
Dec. 10, 2007;
Excerpt: The problem is that whites are leaving the district in droves as blacks are moving into it. They are leaving despite schools that are meeting most state performance standards, despite that the blacks moving in are mostly middle- and upper-middle-class, and despite attempts by Clark-Jackson and other administrators to talk them into staying.And historically in this region, when white flight has occurred, school districts have failed. It happened in the St. Louis, Riverview Gardens and Wellston districts. And Hazelwood School District residents like Kelly Sullivan are afraid it will happen to her community, too. ... A homecoming celebration was canceled after rumors of gang violence. A gun was seized at one high school. Outside another, two students fired shots into the air as a joke. And multiple bomb threats, fueled by news media coverage, led to recent evacuations and canceled classes. School district Superintendent Chris Wright worries that the negative reports will hasten white flight. [more] Many young black men in Oakland are killing and dying for respect |