View Single Post
Old September 22nd, 2005 #10
Antiochus Epiphanes
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
 
Antiochus Epiphanes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
Default

continued, article by Jew libeled by adL


Quote:
Even now, after I've adduced overwhelming evidence that the
Zionist movement failed European Jewry in its fatal hour, and that
therefore the ADL has libeled me, readers may ask a bewildered
question: Why is the ADL doing this? That is because the public is
so appalled at what the Nazis did to the Jews that it usually
doesn't think to ask what the ADL did for the Jews. Additionally,
most people identify the ADL with its contemporary reports on
anti-Semitism. It appears to be a bone fide civil rights watchdog.
But it did nothing for the Jews in the Nazi era and it has always
been an ultra-rightist nest.


The ADL is an autonomous branch of the B'nai B'rith (The Sons
of the Covenant), an international fraternal order, established on
October 13, 1843, with the declared "mission of uniting Israelites
in the work of promoting their highest interests and those of
humanity." [33] The first challenge confronting the group was the
slavery question, which it evaded in the interest of maintaining
unity between northern and southern Jews. The ADL itself was set up
in 1913, the year that a Jew, Leo Frank, was lynched in Georgia.
Its role in fighting anti-Semitism in the years before Hitler came
to power was pathetic. Deborah Moore's B'nai B'rith and the
Challenge of Ethnic Leadership says that

"(T)he ADL's internal-education section (was) devoted to
changing the behavior of Jews perceived to be unethical in the eyes
of Americans... In 1928, commenting on a lynching in Illinois, the
(B'nai B'rith) Magazine had admitted that 'when another kind of a
man gets hanged, we feel those revulsions that are natural at the
sight of a fellow-being going to his doom in the flush of life. But
when we read of a Jew being hanged, we discover ourselves feeling
resentful, not towards the hanging but towards the erring Jew.'"

The Magazine had concluded that "the sinning of the Jew is
counted by men not alone against himself but against his people
likewise." [34]

A booklet, This is B'nai B'rith, published in 1943 by the
organization, listed very few activities for those years, with the
main ADL accomplishment being to effect

"a profound change in the treatment of Jews in vaudeville.
Jewish comedians were loath in some instances to correct their
caricature of their fellow Jews, but earnest efforts on the part of
the League in presenting the social aspects of the problem resulted
in pronounced modification of the objectionable "humor." [35]

This is B'nai B'rith talking vaguely about the ADL's anti-Nazi
career in the years between Hitler's taking power and the war:

"In the years of persecution and propaganda that followed in
the wake of 1933, the A.D.L., through its program of research,
widespread fact dissemination, neutralization of libels and a
systematic campaign of education for democracy to counteract the
effects of un-American movements, was able to make a major
contribution to the common struggle against anti-Semitism." [36]

The booklet couldn't say more because the ADL and B'nai B'rith
role was disgraceful. The spontaneous reaction of American Jews to
the Nazis' ascendency to power was to boycott German goods. But
there were those who opposed a boycott. These worthies confined
themselves to charity efforts for German Jewry and its refugees.
Not least of these do-nothings was the B'nai B'rith. The B'nai
B'rith Magazine ran an editorial in its May, 1933 issue. Be sure
you are sitting down when you read this:

"Criticism is heard: B'nai B'rith did not join the public
protests against the German-Jewish tragedy!... The members of this
organization have cause to be proud of their affiliation with a
Jewish body that obscured its own prestige in order to serve its
German brethren the better... With the Hitler government
threatening reprisals against Jews, should B'nai B'rith have rushed
forward with loud protests?... Even those who were at first hot for
public protest have come to see that discretion is the better part
of valor in an hour when lives are in the balance... As for B'nai
B'rith, it feels that its action in this crisis will make a worthy
chapter in its history. [37]

Samuel Untermeyer, leader of the boycott movement, explained
the stance of elements like B'nai B'rith and the American Jewish
Committee (the parent of today's Commentary magazine, which the
B'nai B'rith always bracketed itself with, and which also opposed
boycotting Hitler). Boycott, he said, in 1933,

"conjures up to them images of force and illegality, such as
have on o ccasions in the past characterized struggles between
labor unions and their employers. As these timid souls are
capitalists and employers, the word and all that it implies is
hateful to their ears." [38]

The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust article on the B'nai B'rith
reports that even after the Nazis closed down the organization in
Germany, in 1937, the president of the order "remained opposed to
public protest and boycott, and still believed that 'quiet
diplomacy' could help the Jews of Germany." The Encyclopedia goes
on:

"B'nai B'rith, fearful of arousing antisemitism in the United
States -- like most American Jews at the time -- did not challenge
the quota system of the 1924 Immigration Act and did not try to
arouse public opinion against the administration's policy of not
fully utilizing even the quotas provided by that act." [39]

Nor did the ADL do anything of any significance in the fight
against the German-American Bund and its home-grown allies, the
followers of the Catholic clerical-fascist, Father Coughlan, or the
KKK. Nathan Belth's A Promise to Keep, published in 1979 by the
ADL, mentions a pamphlet on Coughlin, published in 1939 by a
coalition of Jewish groups, including the ADL. It then relates that
"The League and the (American Jewish) Committee... had as a matter
of policy and tactics been inclined to maintain low profiles in
public." [40] When the Bund staged a rally in New York's Madison
Square Garden on February 20, 1939, the Trotskyist Socialist
Workers Party called a counter-demonstration. Fifty-thousand Jews
and others fought a five hour street battle with the cops, who
protected the Jew-haters. But the night belonged to the
demonstrators. The 20,000 Nazis and Coughlanites would have been
mauled if the police weren't present. The ADL did absolutely
nothing to fight the Nazis that night. Indeed it was never prepared
to fight the enemies of the Jews. IV - The ADL and McCarthyism

.......

In fact the ADL even boasts that it spies on leftists. In
their 1974 book, The New Anti-Semitism, Forster and Benjamin
Epstein brazenly announced that ADL agents attended conventions
closed to the general public:

"The ADL has traditionally viewed close monitoring of
extremist activities as part of its obligation to the Jewish and
American communities. Therefore, its representatives often attend
open meetings, conventions, and conferences of extremist groups
(left wing and right wing) to keep abreast of what the groups are
doing." [45]

The two authors rationalized ADL infiltration of the Socialist
Workers Party:

"The SWP... take(s) umbrage when its anti-Israel, anti-Zionist
extremism is called anti-Semitism. Its domestic political course
has been clearly anti-Jewish... Although its spokesmen have been
careful to avoid the use of crude anti-Semitic phraseology, the
SWP's program and activities... have been totally hostile...
whenever Jews have been under attack from anti-Semites who happen
to be black, the SWP has consistently joined the fray against the
Jews." [46]

As we know from the Bund episode, the SWP believes in busting
up Nazi rallies. It is careful not to utilize anti-Semitic phrases.
It welcomes Jews into its leadership. Therefore, isn't it plain
that "its domestic course has been clearly anti-Jewish." That
charge from an organization which did next door to nothing vs.
Hitler, wins the all-time chutzpah prize.

The magnitude of ADL spying on progressive movements became
public knowledge in 1993 when the San Francisco papers revealed
that Tom Gerard, a local cop (and ex-CIA man) illegally gave police
information to Roy Bullock, Suall's man in SF. Further police
sleuthing revealed that they spied on a mass of groups, from Nazis
clear thru Armenian nationalists, the American Friends Service
Committee, the Mobilization for Peace, Jobs and Justice, the Bay
Area's broad-spectrum peace marchers, and the ANC and the
anti-apartheid movement. The two also spied directly on these last
for BOSS, South Africa's s ecret police.

As things stand, Gerard has pled no contest to a charge of
illegal access to police computers. He got three years probation,
a $2,500 fine and 45 days on the sheriff's work crew. The ADL made
a 'we didn't do it, but we won't do it again' deal with the DA. It
agreed to an injunction not to use illegal methods in its
'monitoring' of the entire political universe. Foxman said that,
rather than go to trial, where they would certainly be found
innocent, of course, ADL settled because "continuing with an
investigation over your head for months and years leads some to
believe there is something wrong." [47] The arrangement prevents
prosecution of Bullock.

In spite of the DA's slap-on-the-wrist deal, the documentation
of Bullock's activities provided by the police when they sought a
warrant to search the ADL offices in SF and Los Angeles, was
extensive. The ADL claims that Bullock was a free-lance informer
and that his activities for the apartheid regime were unknown to
them. But an FBI report on a January 26, 1993 interview with
Bullock takes up a letter found in his computer files, "prepared
for transmission to the South Africans." It read "during an
extended conversation with two FBI agents" in March 1990, they
asked "why do you think South African agents are coming to the West
Coast?"

"'Did I know any agents,' they finally asked?... I replied
that a meeting had been arranged, in confidence, by the ADL which
wanted information on radical right activities in SA and their
American connections. To that end I met an agent at Rockefeller
Center cafeteria."

The FBI report says that "Bullock commented that the TRIP.DBX
letter was a very 'damning' piece of evidence.' He said he had
forgotten it was in his computer." Of course he hastened to tell
the FBI that "his statements to the FBI that the ADL had set up his
relationship with the South Africans were untrue." [48]

It is far more likely that Bullock was telling the truth in
March 1990 and lying in January 1993. Apparently the FBI came to
him on another matter in 1990 and surprised him with their
questions about the South Africans. In 1993, Bullock met the feds
in his lawyers' office. It is reasonable to presume that they had
told him what to say, and what not to say. Certainly he knew that
if he wanted ADL assistance in his troubles with the FBI concerning
the South Africans, he would have to claim that they had nothing to
do with his South African ties.

We must also look at this situation from the ADL's
perspective. In 1993 it had the same access to these FBI reports as
anyone else. It then knew that he had implicated them with
Pretoria. Why didn't they repudiate him then for daring to lie
about them in such a grave affair? And, for that matter, why didn't
they repudiate him for trafficking with the apartheid regime, which
they claimed to oppose? Could it be that they didn't dare do so? If
they dumped him, he would have an incentive to tell the FBI
everything he knew about their illegal activities, regarding the
South Africans, and/or any ADL involvement in Israeli spying and
other criminal activities there.

Robert Friedman, known for his factual reliability when
writing on Jewish matters, reported that "Suall later told the FBI
that 'he didn't think dealing with South African intelligence was
different than dealing with any other police agency,' according to
a law enforcement source." [49] At any rate, the November 17, 1993
Daily News Bulletin, an organ of the Zionist movement's Jewish
Telegraphic Agency, reported that, after the settlement with the
SFDA, "the ADL continues to work with Bullock, according to Abraham
Foxman." [50]

Israel was South Africa's intimate military ally, selling
weaponry to the masters of apartheid in the face of a UN arms
embargo. And the ADL's own public stance was so opposed to the
African National Congress that it stretches credulity to the
breaking point for anyone to think that they didn't know that
Bullock was working with the South Africans. When he told the FBI
that the ADL put him in contact with the South Africans, he
expected them to believe him, because the world knew that Israel,
the ADL's political holy land, was Pretoria's ally.

The ADL Bulletin for May 1986 ran an article by Nathan
Perlmutter and David Evanier, "The African National Congress: A
Closer Look," which revealed the organization's intense hatred of
the movement leading the struggle in South Africa. The piece
started off with a pious "self-evident stipulation that apartheid
is racist and dehumanizing." But, it then went on,

"(T)his is not to suggest closing our eyes to what may emerge
once apartheid is gone.... We must distinguish between those who
will work for a humane, democratic, pro-western South Africa and
those who are totalitarian, anti-humane, anti-democratic,
anti-Israeli and anti-American."

The article went on to document what everyone already knew.
The Soviet Union supported the ANC. The ANC backed the PLO as
fellow colonized people. Then came the moral to the story:

"The fall of South Africa to such a Soviet oriented and
Communist influenced force would be a severe setback to the United
States, whose defense industry relies heavily on South Africa's
wealth of strategic minerals.... The survival of freedom in South
Africa will be possible only if the forces of violence on the far
left and of racial violence on the far right are defeated by the
democratic forces of moderation."

Those forces of moderation were -- didn't you know? -- the
apartheid regime itself: "The US State Department," i.e., Reagan,
said that "more positive changes have taken place in South Africa
in the last five years than in the previous 300." [51]

For propagandistic reasons, Israel had to make it look like it
was against apartheid and supported responsible opposition to it.
So it openly patronized Mangosuthu Gatsha Buthelezi, head of the
Inkatha Freedom Party and its death squads. When he toured here in
1992, Israel got the Conference of Presidents of Major American
Jewish Organizations to host him at their New York office.. They
knew that, according to the June 12, 1992 DNB, "many
observers....say the violence among blacks reflects collusion
between the South African security forces and Inkatha aimed at
disabling the ANC." Yet, according to Kenneth Jacobson, the ADL's
director of international affairs, there was "nothing for us to
feel guilty about. He's a man with a point of view, and that should
be heard." The Mr. Nice Guy of South African politics declared
himself a free-market freedom-fightin' kind of fella and "not a
friend of Gadhafi or Yasir Arafat. All these are friends of the
ANC." [52]

The ADL thought so highly of their 1986 anti-ANC tirade that
they sent it to every member of the US Congress! And even after
Bullock was exposed as specifically reporting to the South Africans
on an LA meeting for Chris Hani of the ANC, Foxman fanatically
defended their venomous hatred of South Africa's liberators. The
Northern California Jewish Bulletin for May 7, 1993 described how

"Foxman, seeming like a general dressing down his troops,
marched into the Jewish Bulletin office...where he lambasted
critics of the ADL, speaking angrily of a conspiracy and at times
fuming as he turned several shades of red... 'People are very upset
about the (files on the) ANC,' he agrees. 'At the time we exposed
the ANC, they were Communist. They were violent, they were
anti-Semitic, they were pro-PLO and they were anti-Israel. You're
going to tell me I don't have the legitimacy to find out who they
were consorting with.'" [53]

Time hasn't been kind to Foxman. The ANC runs its country and
is a model of ethnic and religious tolerance. It never was
anti-Semitic and today there are seven Jewish ANCers in the
Pretoria parliament. Foxman was -- and is -- exactly what the
Jewish Bulletin's journalist described: a
steam-coming-out-of-his-ears right-wing ranter. VI - The ADL and
the affirmative action question

As many readers well know, whole Canadian forests have been
chopped down in recent years to provide newsprint for articles on
Black anti-Semitism. Such pieces frequently begin with a nostalgic
look back at the good ol' 'Black-Jewish alliance' of the early '60s
when the ADL was part of the great -- dare I say it? --
multicultural coalitions that marched behind Martin Luther King.

Such articles usually then turn into tales of Black
ingratitude. In life the Jewish establishment was only part of such
an alliance until the Black movement began to call for affirmative
action quotas, and the left-wing of the movement began to support
the Palestinians as fellow oppressed. From then on the ADL has been
a fanatic opponent of Black liberation. Jonathan Kaufman's Broken
Alliance tells of how Jack Greenberg, long-time head of the NAACP
Legal Defense Fund, came to see the ADL:

"As legal cases involving affirmative action began to appear
in the courts in the early 1970s, the Legal Defense Fund began
filing lawsuits... One of the first cases involved a challenge to
the New York prison system, which had never promoted a black
correction officer above the entry level... The Legal Defense Fund
sued successfully... When the case was appealed, Greenberg was
stunned to discover that the Anti-Defamation League had filed a
brief opposing the affirmative action plan... He did not know
officials at the ADL well. But he...called several of them up...
(Eventually) Greenberg felt some officials of the ADL, the most
vociferous opponents of affirmative action, had become "haters."

[54]
....[edit]

Arguments utilizing previous discrimination against Jews to
oppose present proposals to redress past discrimination against
America's ethnic minorities, and women, are ideological
self-deceptions, at best, and sophistries at worst. They are
designed to put a pseudo-progressive gloss on efforts to preserve
the economic status quo. And, as affirmative action in favor of
women stands or falls with similar policies towards Blacks and
other minorities, such specious reasoning is a razor against the
interest of the majority of Jews, who, as with all other groups,
are majority female.

VII - Yo! Abe! Make me rich and famous, not just famous

Since one of the most important things we learn from the past
is that most people don't learn from the past, I must automatically
presume that at least some of my readers will still say, even after
this obviously factual recounting of the ADL's record, that,
whatever its past sins, it performs a valuable service in exposing
some anti-Semites. But its reactionary politics constantly leads it
to libel and lunacy, so much so that I must confess that I
celebrated when I discovered Foxman's attack on me. It meant that
I certified as part of the intellectual elite.

Surely the most hilarious of the ADL's cockeyed accusations
were uttered by Forster and Epstein in their book:

"Film cartoons - like the the X-rated Fritz the Cat which...
had a tasteless synagogue sequence... contributed to the atmosphere
of anti-Jewish denigration, along with anti-Jewish stereotyping
found in such full-length 1972 feature films as Woody Allen's
Everything You've Always Wanted to Know About Sex, Such Good
Friends, and Made for Each Other in addition, of course, to
Portnoy.... Capping and capitalizing on the vogue for sick "ethnic"
humor and dehumanization was... The National Lampoon... October
1972. A major item was a mock comic book entitled "The Ventures of
Zimmerman," a put-down on folksinger Bob Dylan, drawn with Jewish
features, blue Yarmulke, and portrayed as a scheming, avaricious,
money-hungry "superman" type who poses as a simple idealistic
folksinger.... The mock cover... bore a 'seal' reading 'Approved by
the Elders of Zion'.... Are the editors of Lampoon anti-Semitic?
Probably not. But they have made a signal contribution to the
perpetuation of those destructive stereotypes - like the Stuermer
cartoons so intimately associated with the annihilation of European
Jewry." [59]

For my immediate purpose of defending myself, a Jew, against
a libelous accusation of being a Holocaust denier, I call your
attention to the fact that at least two of the people accused of
contributing to the atmosphere of anti-Jewish denigration were
Jews, Woody Allen and Philip Roth, two of the greatest comic
talents of our age. But frankly I must say that comparing a Lampoon
spoof to the Hitler regime's most virulent Jew-hating rag is easily
the maddest thing I've ever seen in any ADL production.

You didn't know that Spike Lee is an anti-Semite? Well then,
you just are not as smart as one Abraham Foxman. Here is the
Forward for August 10, 1990:

"Filmmaker Spike Lee's portrayal of two Jewish jazz club
owners in the new film 'Mo' Better Blues' is being called
anti-Semitic by... the Anti-Defamation League.... The
two-dimensional depiction of the two brothers, named Moe and Josh
Flatbush, who appear in brief scenes throughout the movie, was
sharply criticized by Abraham Foxman.... "Spike Lee's
characterization of Moe and Josh Flatbush as greedy an unscrupulous
club owners dredges up an age-old and dangerous form of
anti-Semitic stereotyping." [60]

Spike Lee isn't the kind of person to take that kind of crap
from anyone, and he replied to the charge in a New York Times
op-ed:

"I'm not a racist; I'm not a bigot; I am not an anti-Semite.
What I try to do with all my characters is offer what I feel are
honest portraits of individuals with both faults and endearing
characteristics.... I challenge anyone to tell me why I can't
portray two club owners who happen to be Jewish and who exploit the
Black jazz musicians who work for them. All Jewish club owners are
not like this, that's true, but these two are....I'm an artist and
I stand behind all my work, including my characters, Moe and Josh
Flatbush. As of now, this matter is closed for me." [61]

I have presented more than enough evidence for any serious
reader to grasp the base character of both the ADL and the Zionist
movement. Therefore it is time for me to close as well. I will do
so with a quote, from a Zionist writer's article in The New
Republic, a pro-Zionist publication:

"(W)hile ever growing numbers of Jews believe anti-Semitism in
America is rising to crisis proportions, by nearly every available
measure it is actually on the decline.... In private, some Jewish
agency staffers insist the alarmist tone set by a few national
Jewish agencies, mainly for fund-raising purposes, is a key cause
of Jewish anxiety. Fingers point most often at the ADL and the Los
Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, both of which specialize in
mass mailings warning of impending doom and urging donations.
'People don't give if you tell them everything's o.k.,' says a
cynical staffer at one of the smaller agencies. People give
generously to the Wiesenthal Center and the ADL." [62]

J.J. Goldberg concludes by saying that "maybe it's time for
the leadership to start leading, and tell their public the truth."
But of course they won't. Therefore I ask my readers to help me
expose these incurable frauds. Now that you have read this critique
of the ADL, pass it along to the general public, Jew and gentile
alike. And let me thank you, in advance, for your time and trouble
in this regard
.