And So it Begins Again

Friday, January 13, AD 2017

(I ran this post on February 10, 2015.  An appellate court in Germany has affirmed the ruling of the trial court, finding that the arson attack on the Synagogue was a justified expression of criticism of the policies of Israel.  An appellate court in the Third Reich could not have improved on this justification of  violence against Jews.)

 

My advice to Jews in Germany, get out while you can:

 

A German court in the city of Wuppertal convicted two German Palestinians on Thursday of an arson attack on a Synagogue but denied the crime was motivated by anti-Semitism, prompting Green Party deputy Volker Beck to urge the court to designate the act as anti-Semitic.

The Wuppertal court sentenced the two men, ages 24 and 29, to a suspended prison term of one year and three months. The two men, along with an 18-year-old juvenile, in July tossed Molotov cocktails at the synagogue in Wuppertal, a city in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia with a population of nearly 344,000. The court ordered all three to perform 200 hours of community service.

Beck said on Saturday the “attack on the Synagogue was motivated by anti-Semitism” and blasted the court for issuing a decision stating that the goal of the attack was to bring “attention to the Gaza conflict.” Israel, last summer, was involved a 50-day war in the Gaza Strip.

“This is a mistaken decision as far as the motives of the perpetrators are concerned. Therefore, I have written the prosecutor and called for the filing of a legal objection,” he said, adding that the burning of a synagogue in Germany because of the Middle East conflict can be attributed only to anti-Semitism.

“What do Jews in Germany have to do with the Middle East conflict? Every bit as much as Christians, non-religious people or Muslims in Germany, namely, absolutely nothing. The ignorance of the judiciary toward anti-Semitism is for many Jews in Germany especially alarming.”

The three German Palestinians caused €800 damage to the synagogue. The original synagogue in Wuppertal was burned by Germans during the Kristallnacht pogroms in 1938.

Go here to read the rest.  In the days of the Weimar Republic, Nazis who committed crimes, Hitler was a prime example of this, were given slap on the wrists sentences if their offenses could be interpreted as having a political motivation that the court thought praise-worthy.  This is precisely what happened in this case.  Europe in general is becoming a dark place for Jews as Islamic “immigrants” make their lives a living hell, often aided and abetted by home grown anti-Semites.  So, I think the Jews of Europe in general should be looking for a place of refuge.  This advice I would also give to believing Christians in Europe.  The hateful forces that use Jews as scapegoats never stop with Jews, but sooner or later attack Christians.

Continue reading...

23 Responses to And So it Begins Again

  • This court decision is horrible. But I am willing to be that the court members who made the decision are not in the least believers in Naziism or in Anti-Semitism or Islam.

    Rather, I bet the court members made this decision based on their commitment to liberal/progressive concepts of fairness, mercy, redemption, and benevolence.

    But yes, the Jews of Germany had better flee Germany, because soon these liberal German leaders will be overthrown and replaced by Neo-Nazi German leaders. The Radical Secular Left will be cast out and replaced with the Radical Secular Right. Somehow the centrist, sensible, Catholic middle is going to get lost again in Germany, just as it was in the 1930s and 1940s.

  • I tend to agree with Jim Bob for a couple of reasons: 1). There may have more severe penalties if the crime was designated as Anti-Semitic given that the damages were relatively minor. 2). A finding of Anti-Semitism may have caused an uprising in the neighborhood. However, on the face of it this crime was clearly Anti-Semitic and will probably encourage similar acts in the future.

  • We might be looking at the beginning of a new Holiday in Germany. Let’s call it “Crystal Night”.
    Timothy R.

  • Jom Bob comments the court decision was made not but adherents of Nazism but by adherence of liberal progressivism. That is true on the face of it. But consider this. Nazism is the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. Liberal progressivism is green on the outside, pink on the inside international socialism. The operative word is socialism. It is as diabolically evil as the demonic Islam possessing the men that were under trial.

  • I have never understood why there were thousands of College students, and College aged kids, rioting as the “Red Brigade” ( young communists ) in Berlin. As a member of our Military Police I had to help guard against them invading our Air Base. These riots were going on while their kinfolk, on the other side of the Wall, were being systematically slaughtered by the real communists For Seeking Freedom !
    Timothy R.

  • I’m also quite sure the court isn’t motivated by a hatred of the Jews; they just think that burning the holy place because of hatred of the faith would be more wrong than burning it because they think the Jews have wronged them, by action or inaction.
    … this is exactly why the demonization of the Nazis is such a really freaking bad idea. Hate is seldom divorced from a justification– it may be a false one, but there are always reasons.

  • ’m also quite sure the court isn’t motivated by a hatred of the Jews;

    The court has defined hatred of Jews as a form of legitimate political protest. We can draw our own conclusions.

    In New York, that crime would be at least a Class C felony for which the standard penalty is an indeterminate sentence of 5 to 15 years in prison. It’s not clear whether German statutory law is worthless or their judges are.

  • No, the court defined attacking members or property of a group that you disagree with or feel wronged by is acceptable.
    And it makes sense if you assume that there are other groups who would do it for totally without any sort of reason for their anger. Not without a good reason, but without reason.
    Germany outlawed talking about the excuses that their ancestors used to attack the Jews, disabled, resisting religious, etc, did they not?

  • No, the court defined attacking members or property of a group that you disagree with or feel wronged by is acceptable.
    And it makes sense i

    It’s a synagogue in the Ruhr Area, where there are perhaps 3,000 Jews, if that. It’s not the Israeli consulate (of which there is certainly one within 50 miles of the synagogue in question).

  • Irrelevant in the logic applied. It has a rational connection, it has a reason, so it’s not the boogieman of “racism.”
    They made a caricature so extreme, so divorced, that they can’t recognize the original subject. It’s like having mice in your house and you’re trying to look for Mickey Mouse to fight.

  • Of course it was anti-semitism.

    If you were mad at something the Italian government had done, would you vandalize the nearest Catholic church at hand?

  • ….you realize that people have attacked Mormons doing the door-to-door thing because of the California “gay marriage” opposition thing, right?
    They have a “reason,” instead of it being “just” hatred.
    Which is a foolish division, folks always have a reason…unless you’ve othered the guys who show exactly why hate is so bad so much that you cannot even understand they had reasons. It wasn’t bad because they didn’t have a reason, it’s bad because it was wrong.
    Look at the abortion debate, with the “kill the kid because he could be born disabled” folks, who can’t understand that they’re doing exactly what the Nazis did, and take outrage at it being pointed out.

  • Which all proves that we are incapable of governing ourselves. Please, Lord, come quickly ! Timothy R.

  • Irrelevant in the logic applied.

    Since the ‘logic’ is nonsense, I’m not applying it. Nor should any non-fool.

  • Then you will continue the rousing success of managing to pick fights with those who agree with you in your actively alienating those who disagree with you, due to exercising fallacies under the flag of not being a “fool,” creating even bigger messes for others to combat and making it so that scumbags like the Synagogue burning SOBs move on to more direct and larger harm before people are shocked into reconsidering the logic.
    Some of them will get locked into it by doing horrible things themselves, and not being strong enough to say “I was wrong. This is a bad thing. It must stop.” Instead, they will viciously attack anyone who steps near that sore spot where they can feel that if what that person says is true, then they are wrong– and they won’t be able to argue against it rationally, just lash out, because the person is telling the truth.
    Just like with abortion.

  • Foxfier, I am not responsible for coping with your moods. Someone else’s job.

  • Stay on topic folks and no personal attacks.

  • The Lord said, that anyone who curses the Jews will be cursed. Perhaps Germany”s tragic immigration mess is the start of that curse. Timothy R.

  • The Lord said, that anyone who curses the Jews will be cursed.

    Hm… you know, that’s kind of the founding myth for Islam, isn’t it? They’re Ishmael’s heirs, the Jews are from Isaac. And they’re still holding a grudge.

    And look at what it’s gotten them; Israel makes the desert bloom. Christian nations feed the world, bring back the mostly dead, do all sorts of faint echos of Christ… and their cultures send off their own children to slaughter others by suicide.

  • Genesis 12:3 Timothy R.

  • The Bible describes Ishmael as ” a donkey of a man”; and tells us that “his hand was against all of his brothers, and all of his brothers was against him.” Sounds like someone that should be on our modern
    “No Fly List”, does it not ? Timothy R.

  • Pingback: Outsiders, Insiders, and Watching Europeans Steam | Cat Rotator’s Quarterly | Head Noises
  • I’m trying to picture the average suicide-belt user, waking up in Sheol, and asking “Allah” where his 72 virgins are. Timothy R.

And So It Begins Again

Tuesday, February 10, AD 2015

My advice to Jews in Germany, get out while you can:

 

A German court in the city of Wuppertal convicted two German Palestinians on Thursday of an arson attack on a Synagogue but denied the crime was motivated by anti-Semitism, prompting Green Party deputy Volker Beck to urge the court to designate the act as anti-Semitic.

The Wuppertal court sentenced the two men, ages 24 and 29, to a suspended prison term of one year and three months. The two men, along with an 18-year-old juvenile, in July tossed Molotov cocktails at the synagogue in Wuppertal, a city in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia with a population of nearly 344,000. The court ordered all three to perform 200 hours of community service.

Beck said on Saturday the “attack on the Synagogue was motivated by anti-Semitism” and blasted the court for issuing a decision stating that the goal of the attack was to bring “attention to the Gaza conflict.” Israel, last summer, was involved a 50-day war in the Gaza Strip.

“This is a mistaken decision as far as the motives of the perpetrators are concerned. Therefore, I have written the prosecutor and called for the filing of a legal objection,” he said, adding that the burning of a synagogue in Germany because of the Middle East conflict can be attributed only to anti-Semitism.

“What do Jews in Germany have to do with the Middle East conflict? Every bit as much as Christians, non-religious people or Muslims in Germany, namely, absolutely nothing. The ignorance of the judiciary toward anti-Semitism is for many Jews in Germany especially alarming.”

The three German Palestinians caused €800 damage to the synagogue. The original synagogue in Wuppertal was burned by Germans during the Kristallnacht pogroms in 1938.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to And So It Begins Again

  • ‘And meanwhile, the German episcopal conference has made public its own contribution to the synod last October: a document in support of communion for the divorced and remarried that has been signed by a large majority of German bishops and in fact is already being put into practice on a wide scale: – See more at: http://the-american-catholic.com/2015/02/10/popewatch-battlelines/#sthash.ffPMrr8b.dpuf

  • The devil hates Jews because from a Jewish woman came Christ in His Body. The devil hates Christians because the Christian (i.e., Catholic) Church is the Body of Christ. The devil hates Jews and Christians because the devil hates Christ.

  • OK -maybe – MAYBE – if they stood outside a synagogue peacefully holding signs of protest regarding Israeli policies towards Palestinians, I might believe them, although I could see someone reasonably thinking otherwise even then. But throwing freaking Molotovs?!?! No. Just no. And this in GERMANY – you think they might be a little more attuned to masked anti-semitism

    When they have to try Muslims for hate crimes against homosexuals, the progressives’ heads are going to explode.

  • Come to think of it, not even sure then – maybe peaceful protests in front of the Israeli embassy. They make the same mistake many others do – confusing the State of Israel (a political entity) with Jews (an ethno-religious group of people). After all, there are non-Jewish Israelis.

  • The only thing I can think of to explain this – Europe is terrified of the Muslim within their borders. Imagine the rioting if they had gotten anything more than a light sentence.

  • I wonder if the Catholics in the area will speak out. I think that is where this new cardinal is:
    Vatican Appoints ‘New Generation’ Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki Head Of Cologne Archdiocese

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/16/cardinal-rainer-maria-woelki_n_5587938.html

  • “I think the Jews of Europe in general should be looking for a place of refuge.”
    When the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, warned that France’s Jews “could find themselves in great danger,” and encouraged them to make aliyah, many French Jews were, frankly, horrified. People told me that it would be a disaster for French Jews, to regress into their own communal identity, which could, in turn, validate that of the Muslim community. They were concerned that “the Jewish community” and “the Muslim community” could be seen as two mutually hostile minorities, separate from the mass of the French nation, especially as 60% of France’s Jews are, themselves, second-generation immigrants from the Maghreb.
    Alas! Many French people, including politicians and the media, find it comforting to be able to present anti-semitic incidents as inter-communal clashes between two minorities.

Is The Left Anti-Semitic?

Tuesday, July 29, AD 2014

The essence of Judaism and the root of the Jewish soul is expediency and self-interest; the God of Israel is Mammon, who expresses himself in the lust for money. Judaism is the embodiment of anti-social attitudes.

Karl Marx

 

 

Much of it, well yes.  Next question?  Brendan O’Neill gives us a bit more detail:

This is a recurring theme in anti-Israel sentiment today: the idea that a powerful, sinister lobby of Israel lovers has warped our otherwise respectable leaders here in the West, basically winning control of Western foreign policy. You see it in cartoons depicting Israeli leaders as the puppet masters of politicians like William Hague and Tony Blair. You can hear it in Alexi Sayle’s much-tweeted claim that the “Western powers” kowtow to Israel because they are “frightened of it… frightened of the power that it wields”. You can see it in the arguments of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt in their popular book The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, which holds an apparently super-powerful pro-Israel lobby in the heart of Washington responsible for the Iraq War and all other kinds of disasters. The claim is often made that Israel has corrupted Western officials, commanding them to carry out its dirty work.

Sound familiar? Yes, this has terrible echoes of the old racist idea that Jewish groups controlled Western politics and frequently propelled the world into chaos – an idea that was especially popular in the early to mid-20th-century Europe. Very often, anti-Israel protesters treat Israel not just as a nation at war – like Britain, America or France, which also frequently launch wars that kill huge numbers of civilians – but also as the warper of policy and morality in the West, as a source of poison in global affairs, as the architect of instability across the globe. Indeed, a few years ago a poll of Europeans found that a majority of them view Israel as “the biggest threat to world peace”. So Israel is undoubtedly singled out by Leftists and others, and even more significantly it is singled out in a way that the Jews used to be singled out – that is, as a sinister, self-serving corrupter of nations and causer of chaos.

Continue reading...

10 Responses to Is The Left Anti-Semitic?

  • “…attacks on Jews are a warning sign for Christians that bad times are ahead for them as well…”
    .
    Satan hates Jesus Christ. Satan therefore hates the people who gave us Jesus Christ – the Jews – and the people who comprise the Body of Jesus Christ – Christians. Therefore, it is entirely unsurprising that Satan’s demonic spawn – the liberal progressive Democratic left – hates Jews and Christians.

  • I think that anti-Semitism on the Left in the US is pretty restrained overall, but not so in western Europe.

  • Archbishop Fulton Sheen said: “God makes us human.” The Democratic National Convention forfeited their humanity with the rejection of God, recently.
    .
    Israel is the only really democratic nation, a free nation. in the mid-east. Israel must be crushed before other nations choose to be free and democratic nations too, free of what and of whom?
    .
    In Paul W. Primavera’s words: “Satan’s demonic spawn”
    .
    Atheists love to blame God for the devil. Atheists reject God and embrace the devil. How smart is that?
    .
    Brendan O’Neill has an excellent grasp of the frightening reality of atheism, unchained. The links of the Rosary are very effective, chaining “Satan’s demonic spawn” to the Rock, the Truth of Christ. The Blessed Virgin Mary willed to be in perfect conformity to the will of God, who is our Creator and Father. The “Our Father” casts Satan into hell every time persons acknowledge God, for in his own will, Satan rejects God and his own very existence. How smart is that?

  • Mike Petric: “I think that anti-Semitism on the Left in the US is pretty restrained overall, but not so in western Europe.”
    .
    I believe that anti-Semtism in the U.S., as well as anti-Catholicism is biding its time to enslave the nations. Of the 923 Executive Orders signed by Obama, these are terrifying.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.
    .
    read chain gangs.
    .
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations. read concentration camps.
    .
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.
    .
    Congress cannot review the action of six months? Who is going to reinstate the will of the free people?
    .
    Executive Order 13575 Rural Councils allows the government agents to come onto private farms and confiscate them if the agent does not like the way the farm is being run, or the government may not like the owner of the farm.
    The Fifth Amendment allows eminent domain with just value compensation. Arrogating private property, even public property that belongs to all citizens in joint and common tenancy is unconstitutional. Our constitutional expert in the White House is either stupid or subversive. I believe that latter.
    .
    read the rest at: Vision to America News.

  • Mike Petric: “I think that anti-Semitism on the Left in the US is pretty restrained overall, but not so in western Europe.”

    Seriously?? Not at all.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/07/ten_reasons_i_am_no_longer_a_leftist.html

  • Sorry Mike Petric, I miss read your comment. I thought you said that you thought the left here in America was pretty restrained compared to Europe.

    My comment on that is–it is there bubbling right beneath the surface–give them time.

  • Re: ongoing anti-Semitism/anti-Christianity in Europe (in this case Great Britain)

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2659237/More-Brits-signing-fight-jihadist-militants-Iraq-Syria-UK-Army-Reserve.html

    Re: anti-Semitism/anti-Christianity on the American Left–See specifically, # 1, # 6 & # 9 in the list at the following link. WARNING: This post quotes actual leftist hate speech which is not family friendly.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/07/ten_reasons_i_am_no_longer_a_leftist.html

  • Alain Finkielkraut, who is himself Jewish, has written extensively on the New Anti-Semitism. He argues that traditionally anti-Semites were Nationalists: “the French who worship a cult of their identity and who love each other in opposition to Jews.” “Contemporary anti-Semitism,” however, is the domain of the French who “do not love each other, who think in terms of a post-national future, who rid themselves of their Frenchness to better identify with the poor of the Earth, and who, through Israel, group Jews in the camp of the oppressors.” [L’Arche Mars 2002]

    He also points out that “anti-Jewish hatred of today comes not from those nostalgic for Pétain and Vichy but rather the activists of the anti-globalization and anti-racism movements. He explains that European unity is constructed around a series of “never agains” – No more war, nor power, nor empire, nor nationalism. Progressive Europe has disavowed its embarrassing past. This makes it ill at ease with a state, Israel, that clings to its borders just as Europe renounces its own, that nurtures its army just as Europe demilitarizes, and that must combat implacable enemies just as Europe denies such things exist.” [Au Nom de l’Autre: Réfléxions sur l’antisémitisme qui vient (In the Name of the Other: Reflections on the Coming Anti-Semitism)]

    I think he is right.

  • “Progressive Europe has disavowed its embarrassing past.”

    Peoples who forget their past tend to have very bleak, and short, futures.

  • “the French who worship a cult of their identity and who love each other in opposition to Jews.”
    .
    All the culture in the world is not worth one human being.

Jews Today, Christians Tomorrow

Tuesday, July 22, AD 2014

20 Responses to Jews Today, Christians Tomorrow

  • There’s a saying in Islam, “First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people.” Islam’s history shows they first got rid of the Arabian Jews, then they disposed of the Arabian Christians. So remember not only who’s on first, but what’s on second.

  • The statement in the article that “the belief is that specifically doing anything proactively stopping anti-Semitic violence would be “provocative,” and the Jewish leadership, as a well-placed European friend told me, is too ineffectual to demand anything different,” does less than justice to the Jewish position.
    Most of my Jewish friends are French and, for them, there is real concern that Anti-Semitism, thinly veiled as Anti-Zionism, and Islamophobia could, indeed, become linked as two sides of the same coin.

    When the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, warned that France’s Jews “could find themselves in great danger,” and encouraged them to make aliyah, many French Jews were, frankly, horrified. People told me that it would be a disaster, for French Jews, to regress into their own communal identity, which could, in turn, validate that of the Muslim community. They were concerned that “the Jewish community” and “the Muslim community” could be seen as two mutually hostile minorities, separate from the mass of the French nation, especially as 60% of France’s Jews are, themselves, second-generation immigrants from the Maghreb.

    The Jewish community is not cowering in hiding. Over 31 000 pupils are attending Jewish schools. Jewish studies have become more and more popular, including Hebrew and Yiddish classes. There is an active Jewish press, four Jewish radio stations in Paris and many more in the provinces, a Jewish television station and a second one in the pipeline, plus several Jewish web sites on the Internet. Jews are well represented in the French theatre and film industries and these often deal with Jewish topics.

  • “When the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, warned that France’s Jews “could find themselves in great danger,” and encouraged them to make aliyah, many French Jews were, frankly, horrified.”

    Considering how the Vichy government turned Jews over to Hitler, I think the reliance of French Jews upon their status of being French protecting them from the consequences of being Jews long term in France is probably misplaced.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/21/world/europe/number-of-french-jews-emigrating-to-israel-rises-sharply.html?_r=0

  • If the overall demographics of the French migration to Israel mirrors that of those interviewed in the NYT piece, then it’s just a matter of time for the Jewish community in France.

  • Donald R McClarey
    One might have thought that, as Jews, memories of Vichy would have given them some qualms; but no, with them, it was an article of faith that Vichy was not fascist, but counter-revolutionary – the last kick of the Throne and Altar conservatives against the great principles of 1789.
    Back in the ‘Seventies, people like my friends, professional people or bureaucrats, products of the Grandes Ecoles, were so optimistic about their country and, in particular, its educational system. They were (and are) totally committed to its ideal of laïcité and they had unbounded faith in its capacity to eliminate communautarisme (that fertile source of all social ills) and to mould future citizens of the Republic, one and indivisible.
    Now, they feel not only betrayed, by the growing anti-Zionism (and covert anti-Semitism) of the Left, which, in their imaginations, was always the old Left of Léon Blum and the Front Populaire but also disillusioned by the failure of the school system to integrate the second generation of immigrants and by the feral youth of the Zone.

  • My question is does the anti-Semitism rise as the Christianity declines in Europe and around the world
    0?
    I know that history of Christians and Jews is difficult, but I have been under the impression that people who really practice their Christian faith appreciate the Judeo-Christian connection, and in fact, share a protective concern for the Jewish people, beloved of God.

    I teach and lead bible studies. I honestly had an adult student ask; “Do you mean Jesus was a Jew!!?”

  • Anzlyne asks, “My question is does the anti-Semitism rise as the Christianity declines in Europe and around the world?”
    People need myths. As Robert Redeker put it, after the Cold War, the Left replaced “sovietophilia” with “islamophilia,” in which “Palestinians and the contemporary Muslim masses replace the proletariat in the intellectuals’ imagination” as the pure, ideal alternative to Western capitalism.
    According to Taguieff, in this myth, the cosmic struggle between good and evil takes place between the “cosmopolitan Satan,” the unholy trinity of the United States/Israel/The West and the “dominated and the oppressed.” Thus, the new anti-Semitism recycles old stereotypes, the rich Jew and the dominating Jew under the “varnish of progressivism.” For many, humanitarians, Third-Worldists and anti-globalisation activists (with not a few Christians in their ranks, too), the Jew is once more the stand-in for capitalism, imperialism, cosmopolitanism, indeed the whole economic order.

  • Considering how the Vichy government turned Jews over to Hitler, I think the reliance of French Jews upon their status of being French protecting them from the consequences of being Jews long term in France is probably misplaced.

    There was considerable Jewish immigration into France after 1927. IIRC, the Vichy government was grotesquely unsentimental about these Jews and turned them over to the Nazis, but Jews with a longer settlement history in France were generally protected (IIRC, Robert O. Paxton estimated that 96% survived).

  • the failure of the school system to integrate the second generation of immigrants and by the feral youth of the Zone.

    They ruined their labor market with a stupefyingly verbose regulatory architecture, they damaged their housing market (and the public fisc) by puking megabillions into public housing development and making episodic forays into rent control, they constructed the most absurdly hypertrophied social security system in the occidental world, they ceded control of their immigration policy to Brussels, and their police behave like…unionized government employees. The purveyors of Frenchification via stereotyped national curricula had quite a headwind.

  • Anzlyne – My impression is that anti-Semitism rises on days that end with a “y”, unless we stand particularly on-guard against it. Sociologists can talk about the Other, and historians can talk about inculturation, but it is impossible to explain the persistence of anti-Semitism across history without reference to the supernatural. The moment someone says, “hey, let’s hate someone”, someone else says, “yeah, let’s hate the Jews”. You look at the classic temptations that humans fall into: lust, gluttony, pride, anti-Semitism – how in the world do you explain that last one on a purely natural basis?

  • And speaking of “Jews today, Christians tomorrow”, there are news stories out today about the departure of the entire Christian community from Mosul, Iraq.

  • I agree about the supernatural… what makes the “other”ness? Like Pinky, I don’t think the anti-semitism can be separated from the supernatural.
    Perhaps some secular Jews may want to blur the distinction of otherness by denying their religion/heritage, but we know historically secular jews suffered the same fate, as have other jews who converted to Christianity (Edith Stein).

  • “Considering how the Vichy government turned Jews over to Hitler, I think the reliance of French Jews upon their status of being French protecting them from the consequences of being Jews long term in France is probably misplaced. ”

    OMG I had no idea that the French government did this!!

  • Barbara Gordon wrote, “OMG I had no idea that the French government did this!!”

    Not only the Vichy government, but in the Occupied Zone, too, the French authorities co-operated with the Germans in the deportation of Jews. Not a single German was engaged in the Vel d’Hiv Roundup of 16 and 17 July 1942, when nearly 13,000 Jews were rounded up, 7,000 of whom (including 4,000) children were crammed into a velodrome, before deportation to concentration camps.

    President Jacque Chirac described it thus, “These black hours will stain our history for ever and are an injury to our past and our traditions. Yes, the criminal madness of the occupier was assisted by the French, by the French state. Fifty-three years ago, on 16 July 1942, 4,500 French policemen and gendarmes, under the authority of their leaders, obeyed the demands of the Nazis. That day, in the capital and the Paris region, nearly 10,000 Jewish men, women and children were arrested at home, in the early hours of the morning, and assembled at police stations… France, home of the Enlightenment and the Declaration of the Rights of Man, land of welcome and asylum, France committed that day the irreparable. Breaking its word, it delivered those under its protection to their executioners.” [La France, patrie des Lumières et des Droits de l’Homme, terre d’accueil et d’asile, la France, ce jour-là, accomplissait l’irréparable. Manquant à sa parole, elle livrait ses protégés à leurs bourreaux]

    It is only fair to recall that three-quarters of the Jewish community did survive, thanks to the heroic efforts of thousands, who protected them at the peril of their own lives. Almost the entire indigenous Jewish community survived; they were easier to “hide in plain sight,” as it were.

  • We have an elderly friend, Catholic, who says his parents were Palestinian Christians (Catholics). He despises Israel and blames Israel for the disappearance of Christians from the area, for all the oppression. Every so often we get an email talking about the horrible oppression the Palestinians suffer under Israel. Never does it seem to occur to him that the Muslims might be partly to blame.

  • Pingback: Jews Today, Christians Tomorrow | The American Catholic | Head Noises
  • They were concerned that “the Jewish community” and “the Muslim community” could be seen as two mutually hostile minorities, separate from the mass of the French nation, especially as 60% of France’s Jews are, themselves, second-generation immigrants from the Maghreb.

    That is going to happen anyways, because the “Muslim Community” will insist on treating them as a separate group– and that targeting will make others believe it.

  • Never does it seem to occur to him that the Muslims might be partly to blame.

    I have forgotten who it was who said that when a man’s job depends on not understanding something, he will not understand it. Same goes for a man’s self-concept.

  • Foxfier wrote, “That is going to happen anyways, because the “Muslim Community” will insist on treating them as a separate group– and that targeting will make others believe it.”
    That is why Jewish historian Esther Benbassa wrote to Le Monde(12/18/01) to denounce what she considered to be an over-reaction by Jewish leaders and to reject the dangerous “mirage” that there even is a Jewish community (In the sense defined above). Likewise, adjunct mayor, Henri Israël attacked Jewish spokesmen for encouraging the belief that Jews are guilty of a “sentiment of double allegiance, of double attachment” (Le Monde 01/16/02).

    Anyone who knows France and the French press will know that there is great concern about communautarisme, by which they mean ethnic and religious solidarities and allegiances that threaten to override Republican unity. This concern is deeply rooted in French political culture, going back at least as far as Rousseau’s suspicion of particular interests that undermined the general will. Hence, the determination to keep the State and Civil Society, l’espace public and l’espace privé distinct and separate. Religious and cultural activities belong to l’espace privé

    Very different sentiments, these, to the UK and American models of a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society. Rather, they would endorse Teddy Roosevelt’s condemnation of “hyphenated Americans”; they would find the idea of someone describing themselves as “Italian-French,” or “Polish-French” as profoundly shocking. Of course the United States has, proportionately, a much smaller Muslim community, so the tensions are not as obvious.

In Which I Agree with Mark Shea

Monday, April 30, AD 2012

Agreeing with something Mark wrote in criticizing Michael Voris?  This might just be my last post at The American Catholic.

All kidding aside, I second Mark’s concerns regarding Vorris’s association with E. Michael Jones.  As Shea details:

Let us be clear about what is happening here. Marc Brammer and Michael Voris, Folk Hero to the Utterly Undiscerning, will be working hard to mainstream somebody
Jim Stone shows Israel Behind Fukashima Disaster
The European Jewish Union Exonerating Everything Jewish
Jewish Child Molesters
Mossad Involvement in 9/11
Jewry’s push for War with Iran
Jewish Atzmon Says Merah Was a Mossad False Flag Agent
and, last but not least, E. Michael Jones: Who is the World’s Real Enemy?(Guess who?)
(For a full catalog of Sungenis’ vast corpus of crazy statements about the Jews, go here.)

I’ll be the first to admit that sometimes Mark can exaggerate (I’m being charitable here) others’ viewpoints, but I don’t believe he is doing so here.  Jones has a fairly extensive record of what can only be described by any reasonable person as anti-Semitism, and yet Voris is happy to give the man a platform.

I’m sure there will be those that object that Voris himself does not hold these views, and that this is a game of guilt by association.  I would counter that providing an open platform to such a person as Jones is beyond reprehensible.   People should be able to engage in honest discussion with others who hold differing viewpoints, but this goes well beyond that.  There are certain lines that when crossed should disqualify individuals from ever being taken seriously again.  When you willingly not only associate yourself with such individuals, but actually provide a forum which grants a certain amount of legitimacy, then you should also be taken to task

And of course leave it to the very first commenter on Mark’s post to play the “but what is anti-Semitism?” game.  It’s an insipid attempt to change the discussion and avoid having to address the issue at hand.

I haven’t gotten involved with previous discussions about Voris because I haven’t really seen that much of his work.  And I think it’s fairly well-known that I have had my share of disagreements with Mark, to say the least.  So I have no personal axe to grind with Voris.  But he should be held to account for his decision to associate with Jones.

Continue reading...

101 Responses to In Which I Agree with Mark Shea

  • There is an alarming trend with ultra-conservatives (don’t get started, I am a frequent EF Mass attendee and can sing a mean Missa del Angelis!) towards anti-semitism. From Mel Gibson to SSPX BIshop Wiiliamson, they have moved from praying for Israel to accept her Saviour to downright sinful anti-semitism.

  • E.M. Jones was, once upon a time, an engaging and insightful writer. Sorry to hear about all this.

  • Yeah, E. Michael Jones is an anti-semitic, conspiracy mongering nutcase:

  • Right-wing commentary is the most potent stuff in the sphere…..and then someone mentions the joooos and it is like watching a helicopter with its rear rotor shot off.

  • It should be understood that Voris didn’t just happen to do this interview. He, Marc Brammer, and Jones are now business partners. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2012/01/uh-oh-3.html

    That’s why I say Voris is deliberately mainstreaming Jones’ antisemtism. The goal is to make this stuff normal and acceptable, all while portraying themselves as valiant champions of True Catholic Faith who are standing up to evil bishops (like Chaput(!)). And note the kooks in my comboxes who are cheering for it. This guy is poison.

  • I don’t endorse anti-Semitism as I’ve always understood it, which is a hatred for Jews as a race or for the Jewish religion.

    But I sure get accused of it often enough for simply questioning the wisdom of the United States’ apparently unconditional support for Israel or for my own traditional Catholicism. And I think some of us are a little sick of this card being played, over and over again. I really resent it, and I can see how it can push some people right into anti-Semitism.

    It seems both sides, Jewish activist groups like the ADL/SPLC, as well as traditional Catholics, are pushing each other into mutual hatred sometimes. The SPLC puts traditional Catholic groups on their “hate watch” list, groups that have never made a single threat against a single Jewish person organization, who have simply taught what the Church has taught for 2000 years. The traditional Catholics react with hostilities for Jews as such, which further justifies the scrutiny they’ve been put under. It’s a cycle I’d like to see come to an end, but don’t think will.

    The bottom line is that while I absolutely reject the insane conspiracy theories of the sort advocated by this writer (of whom I’ve never heard), I also reject the race-baiting that Jewish groups engage in with people who simply disagree with their political positions, or who proclaim the traditional faith. I am willing to die for the traditional faith, including its teachings on the Jews and the Old Covenant. And no matter how the teaching itself may offend the Jews, it is also a historical fact that the Papacy absolutely forbade anyone to do violence to Jews, or to spread blood libels, despoil them of their property, etc. Those bulls are still in force as far as I am concerned.

  • Michael Voris is absolutely wrong in supporting an anti-Semite.

    I have been accused of being a Zionist. That gratifies me. I hope Israel kicks the Islamic fanatics back into the stone age.

    I want a strong and powerful Israel with lots of thermonuclear weapons. Don’t like that? Too bad. I don’t care any longer. I won’t argue the point with anyone. Say what you want. Israel free and secure forever!

  • When it comes to Jews my sentiments are those of Pope Pius XII:

    “On the 28th of April 1944 the Palestine Post published an article entitled ‘A Papal Audience in War-Time’. A young Jewish man told how three years before he had managed to meet the Pope with the help of a German priest. In 1941, after escaping from Germany, the young man entered the Apostolic Palace. He was filled with fear since there were also a few German soldiers present at the papal audience, but he managed to talk with Pius XII for a few minutes. He told the Pope about the conditions of five hundred Jewish refugees living in poverty in Rhodes and held captive by the Italian military who were waiting to hand them over to the Germans.

    After telling the Pope who he was, Pius XII replied “You have

    done well to come to me and tell me this. I have heard about it before. Come back

    tomorrow with a written report and give it to the Secretary of State who is dealing

    with the question. But now for you, my son. You are a young Jew. I know what that

    means and I hope you will always be proud to be a Jew!”

    Then raising his voice so those who were close by could clearly hear his words, Pius XII said “My son, whether you are worthier than others only the Lord knows, but believe me, you are at least as worthy as every other human being that lives on this earth! And now, my Jewish friend, go with the protection of the Lord, and never forget, you must always be proud to be a Jew!”

    In the latest issue of ‘Inside the Vatican’, the American scholar William Doino, author of several papers and articles on Pius XII, managed to give a name and a face to the author of this story (http://moynihanreport.itvworking.com/author/billdoino).

    It is Heinz Wisla: Jewish, born in Germany, at the time of the audience he was 21 years old. In his writings during the winter of 1941-1942, Wisla attested that, thanks to the personal intervention of the Pope, the Red Cross saved the Jews who had been imprisoned and took them to Italy. This is yet another testimony of the behaviour and actions of Pius XII, wrongly considered an ‘anti-Semitic’ Pope by some publications.”

  • If Jones had ended that little history lesson with “Well, what are you going to do about it, whitey?” it would not have been out of place.

  • “I hope Israel kicks the Islamic fanatics back into the stone age.”

    For a lot of Islamists that’s what–two hours ago?

  • “If Jones had ended that little history lesson with “Well, what are you going to do about it, whitey?” it would not have been out of place.”

  • Sometimes the pot is right when it calls the kettle black.

  • Mr. Price,

    I did NOT say that I hope Israel kicks the Islamists back into the stone age. I said the Islamic fanatics – you know the kind: those who make women wear hoods over their heads and treat them as slaves, those who teach little children to be suicide bombers on Israeli school buses, those who declare that Israel should be driven inot the sea, those who pilot jet aircraft into towers filled with thousands of innocent people.

    And by the way, we are only branches grafted in. We had better not become haughty and self-satisfied as the “new Israel.” Read Romans 11. St. Paul said that all Israel will be saved.

    I despise and loathe anti-Semitism. I also despise and loathe Muslim women and children being treated in the way that their religion treats them – just for the record.

  • Paul,

    You’re right. We shouldn’t be haughty and self-satisfied as the New Israel.

    But the Catholic Church IS the New Israel, and Jesus Christ was the son of God. Both beliefs are antithetical to Judaism, and there are some Jews, especially in Israel, who virulently hate Christianity.

    It would really be shocking and amazing if there was ANY group of people on the Earth that didn’t have members who really hated people of other groups.

  • Paul, it was a misfired attempt at humor. As in, they’re only two hours out of the Stone Age *right now.*

    “How can you tell if they’ve been bombed back to the Stone Age?” and the like.

    The main difference I can see between the murderous fanatics and Islamists is the former tries to murder you and your loved ones, while the latter patiently explains to you why you deserve it.

  • Maybe Vorhis et al., are just depressed a$$#oles.

  • Pingback: I Agree with Mark Shea’s taking on of Michael Voris. This article expresses well why he should be of concern to Catholics everywhere | Catholic Canada
  • “It seems both sides, Jewish activist groups like the ADL/SPLC….”

    The SPLC is not a Jewish organization in any explicit sense. In fact, claiming that they are would plausibly be considered defamatory to any number of Jews — or at least those who recognize Morris Dees as the shamelessly self-aggrandizing huckster that he is. (And for what it’s worth, Wikipedia lists him as a Unitarian.)

  • Just a tangential observation, Voris’ identification of Murray as a participant of the infamous Hyannisport, MA meeting with the Kennedy’s (around the 40 minute mark) is historically incorrect — Murray not only wasn’t present, he reportedly perturbed by Kennedy’s attempt to sever any connections between one’s religious and political creeds. “To make religion merely a private matter,” Murray argued, “was idiocy.” (See: JFK’s Houston Speech at 50: Three Views, by George J. Marlin. The Catholic Thing 9/9/10.

    If there’s one thing I’ve gathered from reading Murray, it’s that he is appropriated by both ends of the Catholic political spectrum, and what Murray actually countenanced in his lifetime is often different from speculation of what Catholics like to imagine he would have, or might have endorsed. (Of course, being dead, he’s not very adept at defending himself from exploitation).

  • Gotta hand it to Jones, though — that part about Archbishop Chaput being involved in a black operation, continuing the devious work of Murray, Luce and the CIA to the point of infiltrating the papacy itself (“occupying the mind of [Pope Benedict XVI] and he doesn’t even know it“) was a new twist I hadn’t heard before.

  • This runs rampant through Shaw’s alleged mind. “Why do we live like this? The violence and the hatred, Bernardo . . . ” With apologies to whoever copied “West Side Story” from Shakespeare.

  • I have a copy of Murray’s “We Hold These Truths,” and what I’ve read so far is very worthwhile. I think the problem is that he’s been soundbitten and turned into a totem, mostly by the left. I suspect he would not appreciate it.

  • I don’t know Mike Jones, I’ll make my judgement after watching the video with Voris.

    So far, I know he got fired from Notre dame for being pro-life.

  • I think you mean that you know Jones says he got fired from Notre Dame for being pro-life. As a good friend of mine likes to say, sometimes Christians are persecuted for their Christian beliefs and sometimes they’re just persecuted for being a-holes. Some people (think Fr. Corapi) use their identity/credibility in one area as a cover for other garbage. Just a thought.

  • @ Francis

    “Some people (think Fr. Corapi) use their identity/credibility in one area as a cover for other garbage.” True in general cases, but in this specific one, is there material evidence, or is there simply circumstantial occurrences and innuendo? OK, don’t answer that. Not relevant to the topic. I hope and pray Fr. Corapi is innocent, but I am a pessimist by nature. 🙁

    @ Dale

    Sometimes I am the anal orifice. Sorry I didn’t see the humor. I had a boss once who is an Iranian Shiite. He had a Koran on his desk just as I have a Bible on mine. He turned out to be more Christian in his behavior than most so-called Christians I know. How’s that for irony?

    @ Bonchamps

    If we are members of the new Israel, then we should each and everyone of us go to Eucharistic Adoration and get prostrate before the Blessed Sacrament for as long and as often as possible, begging forgiveness for our sins and thanking the Ruler and Creator of this universe that He grafted us into the Olive Tree because clearly we don’t deserve it. BTW, St. Paul does say that all Israel will be saved, and I don’t think he is referring to just the Gentile grafts, and I still support the modern State of Israel over the barbaric fanatics running most Middle Eastern countries.

  • I just saw that Shea posted a follow-up to this, too. This can only end very badly. I don’t know what they were thinking in starting a business collaboration with Jones.

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2012/04/since-various-people-have-shown-up-in-the-comboxes.html

  • Mike Jones sounds reasonable, he rejects anti-Semitism in his interview with Voris.

    “I think you mean that you know Jones says he got fired from Notre Dame for being pro-life. ”

    what evidence do you have that he got fired for another reason?

    “Some people (think Fr. Corapi) use their identity/credibility in one area as a cover for other garbage.”

    Fr. Corapi was an excellent priest who has taken a terrible fall, I hope he comes back.

  • Jasper, if you find Michael Jones to be “reasonable,” then there’s honestly nothing we can do for you.

    he rejects anti-Semitism in his interview with Voris.

    And then immediately engages in a bizarre tirade that essentially blames the Jews for everything that is wrong with the world. If I were to go on a long rant about how black people were responsible for all the crime and villainy in the world, and then said that “of course, I’m not a racist,” that declaration would not in fact absolve me of racism.

  • “And then immediately engages in a bizarre tirade that essentially blames the Jews for everything that is wrong with the world. ”

    I didn’t get that Paul. What I heard is that we should be preaching the Gospel to jews instead of just going along with them.

  • Listen a little more closely to how Jones defines anti-Semitism. That’s a very narrow understanding of it. A person can be an anti-Semite without having a purely racial prejudice against Jews. Some of the commenters at Shea’s blog (including Shea) already picked up on that. I think Paul Zummo’s point (above) is on target as well.

    In regard to Jones’ firing at Notre Dame (supposedly merely for being openly pro-life), all I’m pointing out is that all we have is his personal say-so. What corroborating evidence is there for Jones’ claims? Considering his affinity for conspiracy-theories, it seems reasonable to question whether he may have imagined or exaggerated a conspiracy against him at Notre Dame as well. In my experience, people like this tend to be a bit on the paranoid side in general. Maybe what he says about his firing is true. Maybe it’s not. Maybe it’s partially true.

    Regardless, from what I have seen, it’s a mistake for Voris and his enterprise to collaborate with Jones. This is bound to end very badly.

  • “In my experience, people like this tend to be a bit on the paranoid side in general.”

    was he paranoid about the corruption and heresy in church when he wrote about it back in the 80’s?

  • Voris is not a “business partner” with E. Michael Jones.

  • You missed the point about Jone’s view of what “anti-Semitism” means, Jasper. It’s unduly narrow. And your point about what he wrote isn’t really relevant to mine. I didn’t say Jones has never been correct about anything. I said that he’s into conspiracy theories and in my experience people like that tend to be a bit on the paranoid side in general – increasingly so the longer they stay engaged in that kind of theorizing. I said he may or may not be right about what actually happened at Notre Dame. But I’d like to see corroborating evidence other than his personal say-so.

    If Voris intends to increase his collaboration with Jones, I think it’s a mistake that will not end well for him and his enterprise.

  • Paul P,

    “If we are members of the new Israel, then we should each and everyone of us go to Eucharistic Adoration and get prostrate before the Blessed Sacrament for as long and as often as possible, begging forgiveness for our sins and thanking the Ruler and Creator of this universe that He grafted us into the Olive Tree because clearly we don’t deserve it.”

    I don’t disagree.

    “BTW, St. Paul does say that all Israel will be saved, and I don’t think he is referring to just the Gentile grafts”,

    Even if he isn’t, he still wouldn’t be referring to people who reject Christ. The New Israel originally consisted of converted Jews, people who accepted Christ as the Messiah. The “grafting” (what a word!) of Gentiles did not take much longer. There is no Jew or Greek in Christ – hence his words in Galatians. Such distinctions no longer matter. Our faith is what counts, and our membership in the Body.

    “and I still support the modern State of Israel over the barbaric fanatics running most Middle Eastern countries.”

    I support us minding our own business. Had we done so consistently, Islam would not have become the potent political force it is today. Saddam Hussein was a secular socialist. So was Yasser Arafat. So was Momar Qaddafi. Meanwhile our most cherished ally in the region, Saudi Arabia, has been an Islamic regime for ages.

  • Franicis,

    I came into this thread being accused of being an ‘Undiscerning’ idiot. I wonder now who is being undiscerning, neither Voris’s video or McClarey’s have convinced me. Arn’t we suppose to try and convert jews? after all, they are flawed in what they believe What am I missing?

  • I didn’t call you or anyone an “undiscerning idiot”, Jasper. I’ve just pointed out some things about what you wrote in regard to Jones. I think the kinds of things documented at Shea’s blog, like calling Jews “the enemy of the human race” and the interviews Jones gave to a white supremacist and another extremist are disturbing. There’s more over there, did you read it all?

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2012/04/since-various-people-have-shown-up-in-the-comboxes.html

  • Christine – I hope you’re right, but how do you know this? Shea put up some information supporting a different conclusion. Are you saying Voris and Jones are not collaborating at all? Or are you just saying that they are not strictly “business partners”?

  • @ Bonchamps,

    I mostly agree. To your point about Saudi Arabia: Had we fully developed our nuclear energy capability in the 1970s, then we would by now be producing liquid fuels or hydrogen from nuclear power plants to fuel our cars, trucks, trains and airplanes. But after TMI, Jimmy Carter allowed the industry to become emasculated by the excessive regulations of the US NRC, and thus coal (which has to be transported to coal fired power plants by diesel fueled trains), oil and natural gas became dominate. So now we import much of our oil from Canada while our military keeps the sea lanes open from the Middle East to Europe so that Europe can get Saudi oil (there’s only so much oil to go around). Renewable energy is a joke that natural gas companies just love – always got to have spinning reserve. So we support Saudi Islamic extremism – Wahhabism – in the name of “democracy.” We have enough thorium and uranium to tell these fanatics to go drown in their mineral slime, but we can’t because we are now hopelessly addicted.

    I won’t go on further right now because it’s not on topic, but I agree that we made our own mess. As for Israel, supporting them is probably the only right thing we did. You’ll disagree, of course. That’s OK. Personally, I just wish we’d go all nuclear and tell the Muslim fanatics (not the Muslims – there’s a difference) to take their oil and shove it. But first, NRC Chairman Jackzo has to be fired and the NRC has to go from being an antagonist to actually living up to its charter in ensuring the SAFE use of nuclear power, not the non-use of nuclear power. Of course that’s not going to happen under Obama. It was happening under Bush with his GNEP initiative, but that’s a story for a different blog post.

  • PS, sorry I wasn’t on topic, but I agreed with Bonchamps for reasons that Bonchamps might not have expected. Now that this rare moment of lucidity has passed, I shall return to being an ultra-conservative pro-Israel pain in the neck. 😉

  • “Arn’t we suppose to try and convert jews?”

    We are supposed to convert everyone Jasper. That has nothing to do with the fact that E. Michael Jones is an anti-semite, who believes in bizarre conspiracies to support his hate and who peddles wretchedly bad history while doing so.

  • Francis wrote: “Christine – I hope you’re right, but how do you know this? Shea put up some information supporting a different conclusion. Are you saying Voris and Jones are not collaborating at all? Or are you just saying that they are not strictly “business partners”?”

    I know because I know. Shea has a very fertile imagination, and he lets it take him to rather interesting places. Voris is not collaborating with E. Michael Jones, nor are they business partners. He had him on his show “Roman Forum” for an interview–that’s it. He’s had a number of people on for interviews, and he doesn’t necessarily agree with everything his interviewees say or do. This whole “guilt by association” tactic is nonsense.

  • Vincent Lewis’ comment is a You Tube video by Brother Nathanael, a Jew and now a Russian Orthodox Monastic who himself is ironically anti-semitic:

    http://www.realzionistnews.com/

    http://www.thebrothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

    I watched several You Tube videos and browsed around. There is only so much fecal matter I can stand in any one day. According to this guy, Jews are in control of the banks and the Congress and everything else, and soon Christmas will be outlawed and we’ll be forced to celebrate Hannukah instead while the goyim get taxed to death. What planet is this guy from? Or am I the one in outer space?

  • Well, I was kind of hoping for something a bit more than “I know because I know”. 😉 I still hope you’re right, though. And maybe it’s me, but I thought Voris seemed a bit more than a simple, disinterested interviewer with Jones. IMO, he came across as someone who really admires Jones – someone very sympathetic to his view of Jews. I don’t remember ever seeing him smile and chuckle so much. Considering the fact that he obviously knows about Jones’ reputation in regard to Jews (he mentions it in the interview), it’s hard to understand how he could not be aware of the disturbing things about Jones that are documented at Shea’s blog. The information is readily available on the Internet.

  • Never mind. The offending video is deleted, so feel free to delete mine “response.” I couldn’t believe my eyes and ears. Thought I was going batty!

  • Francis wrote: “I thought Voris seemed a bit more than a simple, disinterested interviewer with Jones. IMO, he came across as someone who really admires Jones – someone very sympathetic to his view of Jews. I don’t remember ever seeing him smile and chuckle so much.”

    As someone who has watched every interview Michael has done on Roman Forum, he smiles and laughs with every single one of his guests. I didn’t notice that he was any friendlier toward Jones than toward the others. As to your other questions, I don’t speak on Michael’s behalf. Perhaps you should send him an e-mail at RealCatholicTV.com and ask him directly yourself.

  • Whenever the subject of Jews is raised on a Catholic website nutcases start coming out from underneath rocks to proclaim their undying hatred of the Children of Abraham. That is simply not going to be tolerated on The American Catholic. I deleted the idiotic video of the racist and anti-semite who goes by the name of Brother Nathanael Kapner and banned Vincent Lewis for posting it. Anyone who wishes to engage in paranoid rantings against the Jooos!, or defend those who do engage in such paranoid rantings, will have to find another venue to do so.

  • “I know because I know”.

    Irrefutable.

    Meanwhile, Voris *entire* defense against his bishop when he was ordered to stop using the name “Catholic” was, “Who? Me? I don’t run Real Catholic TV! Brammer does! And he lives in Indiana! Talk to him! I just work here.”

    Yes. Brammer lives in Indiana. And by a strange coincidence he shares exactly the same mailing address as Jones for his business.

    So yeah, these guys are in bed together, Christine’s ineffable and incommunicable knowledge to the contrary notwithstanding. We’ll see more from these guys. They are in cahoots. And Voris *is* trying to mainstream Jones–with some success. Not good.

  • (at 31:44 in the video)

    Jones: And so what was neo-conservatism? 2003. We are involved in a war. Who would have thought we were going to get involved in this war? Who was responsible for this war? It was the neo-conservatives. Neo-conservatism is a Jewishrevolutionarymovement. And that got me thinking, how is this fit into history. And that’s the genesis of the book that I wrote called The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit.

    Voris: Some people have read that book and said, “Oh, Michael Jones is clearly an anti-Semite”

    Jones: Anti-Semitism is very clear. Every Catholic has to condemn anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism says that the Jew cannot be trusted, is an evil person, because of his racial inheritance, because he’s got bad DNA. No Catholic could ever say that. Okay? What we are saying here is, the traditional teaching of the Church is basically, when Jesus Christ came to this earth He came for one group of people, and that was the Jewish people. And the Jewish people had to make a decision. They had to either accept Him as the Messiah or not. The Jews who accepted Jesus Christ as the Messiah are now known as the Catholic Church. The Jews who rejected Jesus Christ as the Messiah are known as Jews. Okay? When they rejected Jesus Christ they rejected Logos, which is the order of the universe. When they rejected the order of the universe they rejected the social order as well and when you reject any possible social order you become a revolutionary. And they confirmed that decision by choosing Barabbas over Christ. And the history, the history of history since that time is the battle between the descendants of the Jews who accepted Jesus Christ and the descendants of the Jews who rejected Jesus Christ. And that’s what that book is about. And that is not anti-Semitism, in any way, shape or form. And I go on record, I condemn anti-Semitism. I do not believe in any form of racial determinism, period.

    Paul Zummo observed that “[Jones] rejects anti-Semitism in his interview with Voris. And then immediately engages in a bizarre tirade that essentially blames the Jews for everything that is wrong with the world” To which Jasper responded, “I didn’t get that Paul. What I heard is that we should be preaching the Gospel to jews instead of just going along with them.”

    Really, Jasper? That’s all you heard? Jones had just been asked to defend himself against the charge of anti-Semitism. And what does he do? Exactly what Paul Zummo said–he charged the Jews, all Jews, with rejecting the order of the universe, rejecting “any possible social order”, and therefore being by nature “revolutionary”. He made absolutely no distinctions or qualifications, he just broadbrushed all Jews of all time in the very place in which he was supposedly defending himself against the charge of anti-Semitism. How did you miss that?

    But more seriously, Jones has his theology all screwed up. The Church does not teach that Jesus Christ “came for one group of people”. It teaches that He came for all men, the Jew first and then to the Gentile. Taken at face value, Jones’ statement is heretical. On the contrary, “as the Church has always held and holds now, Christ underwent His passion and death freely, because of the sins of men and out of infinite love, in order that all may reach salvation” (Nostra Aetate 4).

    Second, it seems to me that Jones here outlines a sort of second Original Sin, in which the decision of many of the Jews of that day to reject Christ–“the Jewish people had to make a decision”–and some of them to put Him to death–“they confirmed that decision by choosing Barabbas over Christ”–was a decision made on behalf of all Jews, those living and all those yet to be born. By that corporate decision, all Jews automatically (and apparently culpably) a) reject Logos, and therefore b) reject the order of the universe, which leads automatically to them c) rejecting “any possible social order”, and therefore d) they are all, by definition and intrinsically, “revolutionary”. Not treated in any way as individuals by Jones, the “Jewish people” without any distinctions all share in this revolutionary inheritance of the decision of those living at the time of our Lord. Thus all of subsequent history comes to be defined as the struggle of these revolutionaries against “any possible social order”. No wonder, then, that they can be fairly described as the enemies of the universe.

    But that’s not anti-Semitism, mind you. (Wink, wink.)

    It’s not that the Jews are evil and not to be trusted on account of their DNA. No, that would be racial determinism. It’s just that they’re not to be trusted because they all share in the corporate sin of their forefathers, they have corporately rejected Logos, they corporately reject “any possible social order” and therefore they are all revolutionaries, bent on subverting all good order and right morals. Who could possibly see anything dangerous about that?

    How is this not directly contrary to the teaching of the Church that, “His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures” (Nostra Aetate 4)? And even more pointedly, the Church teaches that:

    “our sins consigned Christ the Lord to the death of the cross, most certainly those who wallow in sin and iniquity crucify to themselves again the Son of God, as far as in them lies, and make a mockery of Him. This guilt seems more enormous in us than in the Jews, since according to the testimony of the same Apostle: If they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory; while we, on the contrary, professing to know Him, yet denying Him by our actions, seem in some sort to lay violent hands on him.” (Catechism of Trent, Article IV)

    And why the double-standards when it comes to Jews? Historically speaking, the Protestants of today are far closer in time to the fathers of their schism than are the Jews to theirs. Therefore, there is certainly at least equal excuse for today’s Jews for not expressly entering the Catholic Church as there is for Protestants. Lutherans who are born into their faith are quite different from the perspective of moral culpability than Martin Luther and his contemporary followers. The same is true of today’s Jews vs. the Jews 2,000 years ago who actually knew and heard Jesus. And while the selective rigorist who is fixated on followers of Judaism may argue that at least Protestants “accept Christ,” one may counter that rejection of the Church is also rejection of Christ (Lk. 10:16). The notion that all of today’s Jews who haven’t been baptized are consciously rejecting Jesus Christ and His Church–and that this rejection must truly be of Jesus and His Church and not what they falsely believe them to be (perhaps as a result of the kind of “teaching” spewed by people like Robert Sungenis and E. Michael Jones under the guise of “Catholic” theology)–is preposterous.

    Some weeks ago, in a lengthy discussion on the Catholic Answers Forum, I repeatedly challenged Bob Sungenis (a follower, friend and collaborator with E. Michael Jones) to provide magisterial support for his novel and idiosyncratic views on the Jewish people. In the face of these repeated challenges, there was nothing but a resounding silence. The same goes for Dr. Jones, who brazenly claims that he’s simply upholding “the traditional teaching of the Church”. So I issue the same challenge to Jones. Back up your novel theology from magisterial teachings of the Catholic Church, Mike.

    I anticipate the same response. Silence.

  • Exhibit A, Christine.

    And yes, you do–constantly–speak on Michael’s behalf all over the blogosphere, perpetually turning up on any blog that says anything critical of him. You may not have been *sent* by him to speak on his behalf. But speak on his behalf you constantly do.

  • Indeed, Christine, as I scroll down the comboxes of the link I just posted, there you are! So you *know* that Brammer, who Voris insists is the one in charge of RCTV, and Jones have the same address and phone.

  • Mark Shea is right about this. I like Voris, but this stuff is creepy.

  • When I see a good man maligned, yes, I will speak on his behalf.

    Brammer owns the domain name for RealCatholicTV.com, which is registered in Indiana. The Institute for New Media is Brammer’s baby; it has nothing to do with St. Michael’s Media or RCTV.

  • I understand Mark S’s concerns, I’m sure he knows alot more about EMJ than I do.

    But, let’s take a step back and look at who controls the awful anti-catholic media, anti-catholic hollywood, the porn industry, those who lead the legalization of abortion, the anti-christian legal system, etc. For being just 1-2 % of the US population they sure have wreaked alot of havoc.

    This is my last comment of this thread, I had a good, clean comment up that got deleted…

  • “For 1 to 2 % of the population, they sure have wreaked a lot of havoc.”

    No. Rather, we Catholics with our pitiful embrace of social justice / common good nonsense did that. We wanted bellies filled with the food that perishes instead of the Bread of Life. It’s our very own – Biden, Kerry, Kennedy, Kucinich, Cuomo (Mario and Andy), Leahy, Pelosi, etc ad nauseam who have done this, along with too many effeminate, hand-wringing clerics more interested in the praises of men than of God. NOT the Jews! The Jews didn’t do this.

    BTW, aren’t this week’s daily gospel readings on Jesus’ bread of life discourse?

  • I am amazed that absolutly no one has pointed out the mean spirited, unchartible way that Shea makes his points in this article.

    …..Michael Voris, Folk Hero to the Utterly Undiscerning

    What a wonderful thing to say. A nice insult really gets a point across.

    Another charitable description:

    It will be interesting to see how long fanboys of Voris’ dangerous demagoguery will go on defending this or drinking this poison because “He has some good things to say you know”.

    I was completely unaware of this whole situation, but I am glad to be labeled utterly undiscerning and a “fanboy”.

    I am amazed a Catholic blogger can be so nasty and not be called out on it.

  • This is my last comment of this thread,

    No jasper, that is your last comment on this blog. Bye.

    Though I will leave your comment up as it destroys the facade you were so careful to erect.

  • Chris P:

    If Jasper wasn’t on this very thread (and several other over at my blog) demonstrating exactly what I’m talking about, you’d have a point.

    Christine: Somehow your concern for people being maligned only extends to Voris and not to a nation being maligned en masse as “enemies of the human race” while Voris chuckles and rolls his eyes at the dolts who (“get this” says his mocking tone) think Jones is anti-semite. You have no problem with Voris helping to malign Chaput and encouraging contempt for him. Or, really, anybody Voris deems to be not a “Real Catholic[TM]”. Seriously, when the moneybags behind RCTV is Brammer and Brammer is in bed with Jones and Jones is given a softball interview by Voris calculated to mainstream his nuttery and create more Jaspers, Voris passes his sell by date. He is a dangerous demagogue and what he is selling is poisonous Jew-hatred. That the Jew-hatred is dolled up as Traditional Catholic Teaching and not as racism, just makes his poison more toxic. Stop making excuses for him.

  • Chris P is correct. Mark Shea is every bit as diplomatic and “charitable” as Michael Voris is. Sorry, Mark. I agree with you about this particular issue, but you and Michael do share some characteristics. No insult is intended.

    PS, I too am about as diplomatic and “charitable” as a skunk off gassing at Sunday morning Mass. Fortunately, I have little audience if any to speak of.

    😉

  • Considering the things that Jones has said, and the platform and supportive interview Voris provided, I feel Mark was actually restrained in his comments.

  • Quite rite, Paul Z. Mark was certainly more restrained than what I am capable of.

  • Yeah, you know how THOSE people are, Jasper. I mean, they’re basically all the same, THOSE people…those…JEWS. They have wreaked a lot of havoc…those enemies of the universe.

    As Paul Primavera pointed out: Who is in control of our government? Jews? No. The Supreme Court? Jews? No.

    Boy, they are pretty tricky mind-controllers, those Jews. They manage to control 98-99% of the population. They must have special Jew-powers. Maybe they’re doing something to us all through our cell phones? I’d really like to see where they all meet to come up with their plans. I hear they don’t even have to all vote on what evil they’re going to perpetrate. They just KNOW! They all think alike, kind of like the Borg!

    So, who invented the birth control pill – the very thing that enabled the sexual revolution? That Jew, John Rock. Oh, wait. John Rock was a Catholic.

    Who did away with the decency code in Hollywood. That Jew, Jack Valenti. Oh, wait. Valenti was an Italian Catholic.

    Who introduced Rock and Roll and crazy sexual gyrations to our youth? That Jew, Elvis Presley. Oh wait, Presley was a member of the Assembly of God.

    Who founded Playboy? That Jew, Hugh Hefner. Oh, wait. Hefner’s lineage is German/English and he was raised a Methodist.

    Penthouse? That Jew, Bob Guccione. Oh, wait. Guccione was an Italian Catholic.

    Hustler? That Jew, Larry Flynt. Oh, wait. Flynt’s ancestry is English.

    But it’s all the fault of the Jews. These poor, simple Gentiles couldn’t resist the mind-control power of THE JEWS!

    :-/

  • Paul P.: No disagreement. I know I irk people. I don’t much care about it in this case since people irked on Voris and Jones’ behalf for this are people whose opinion I don’t value and whose approval I would feel ashamed of. I do care about Catholics pretending that declaring the Jews the enemy of the human race is “Traditional Catholicism” and I acutely care that influential demagogues like Voris package, market, and sell that to suckers who have anointed him the latest Folk Hero. That sh*t is poison and he needs to be stopped. I hope the bishops of Detroit and South Bend step on them *hard*.

  • And I got to agree w/ you, Mark. Someone in authority should step in. I don’t like any of this. 🙁

    Hail Mary, full of grace……….Maybe that’s what we should do – pray.

  • Paul P.:

    In cyberspace, you’re on your own. In the real world, on rare ocassions, bishops step in to put out fires if they threaten to burn out of control. Vigneron tried it once and Voris defied him while posing as persecuted savior of the American Church and disingenously passing the buck to Brammer. If these guys keep this up, my prayer, frankly, is that Rhoades of South Bend (who already has had to tangle with Sungenis’ nuttery) and Vigneron of Detroit will bring the hammer down on this whole dodgy operation. It’s a faint hope: a poor thing but mine own. And when it happens you can *bet* that there will be screams from the Voris crowd about the liberal gay cabal silencing a brave hero (just like with Corapi). For my part, I will applaud it as a real act of episcopal courage.

  • I tend to agree with Bonchamps. Saudi Arabia that excellent friend of the US, is the main sponsor of Islamism. Of course they do not need sponsor Bin Laden or AlQueda to get their job done, merely pour in billions into their taquiyya in various countries. Things will then take care themselves. It turns out that Hans Blix was right: Saddam Hussein neither had nuclear weapons nor the means to produce any. Essentially the US took out a toothless tiger who had some value in preventing wholesale Iranian takeover of the Persian Gulf to no purpose. Christians are routinely hounded and murdered in the new Iraq. A few hundred thousand of them are refugees in the surrounding countries. If the remaining neocons and Hillary Clinton have their way, the two million Christians in Syria would meet the same fate. I don’t think the Israelis give a damn one way or another about the Christians so any hope that the paladins would ride out from Tel Aviv is forlorn indeed. They abandoned their Christian allies the SLA without much heartache in 2000.

  • Ivan:

    Both the Kay and Duefluer reports affirmed that Hussein posed an even greater threat than even the Bush administration thought. WHile there were no WMD stockpiles found, he was retaining all his experts that could very easily make WMD after the UN sanctions had been lifted, something that was in the works but the US overthrew the regime. Plus Saddam was awash with cash, thanks to the corruption of the Oil for Food program.

  • Hussein posed a greater threat… to whom, exactly?

    Not the United States of America. In fact he only invaded Kuwait the first time around because he mistakenly believed that our government wouldn’t mind if he did.

  • Sorry, this is off topic. I’ll start a foreign policy discussion soon and we can all have it out then 🙂

  • Pingback: Good for Paul Zummo and the American Catholic blog!
  • Mark,

    I would rather Voris repents of association with Jones. I would also pray for Corapi’s return. The Bishops have a bigger cleanup job to do w/ Pelosi, Sebelius and crew than w/ Voris.

  • Is the Old Testament still part of the Catholic Tradition to the “Traditionalist Catholics”?….in my recollection I believe there are numerous passages in which God warns in scripture, that the Jewish People are his and he will deal with his people himself.. and that anybody who wrongfully or unjustly persecutes them will bring genuine “creator-of-the-universe-wrath” onto themselves…. as mentioned previously in these forums… history has already shown this, time and time again.

    Mark’s sage-like ability to detect the beginnings of yet another so-called orthodox Catholic personality spectacular falls from their mountain tops is both uncanny & depressing…

  • Not the United States of America. In fact he only invaded Kuwait the first time around because he mistakenly believed that our government wouldn’t mind if he did.

    Nice bit of excuse-mongering. He conquered and despoiled a harmless neighboring principality in an effort to treble his proven reserves of oil. Previously, he had thrown eight years and several hundred thousand lives into an effort to conquer the Iranian province of Khuzestan. You seem to forget the Ba’ath Party was a multinational pan-Arab fascist organization and the limits on his ambitions in and amongst the Arab states were purely practical. From 1972 to the day it was ejected in April of 2003, it was consistently among the half-dozen or so most abusive governments in the world and in a similarly exclusive club as regards the use of military conquest as a political tool and developing nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.

  • I really didn’t know what to think of this guy Voris with the wig until I got to know him through this interview yesterday.
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/up-close/2012/05/01/up-close-with-michael-voris

    Quite a different picture.

  • Sometimes I am the anal orifice. Sorry I didn’t see the humor. I had a boss once who is an Iranian Shiite. He had a Koran on his desk just as I have a Bible on mine. He turned out to be more Christian in his behavior than most so-called Christians I know. How’s that for irony?

    Nah, Paul, you’re a good egg, all around. In my attempt at humor, I deliberately used Islamist as opposed to Muslim. Your point is a good one. And since the only doctor to ever cut into my innards is a Muslim, I’m inclined to agree with your distinctions. 🙂

    In my experience, the Shia are really a good bunch. Alas for Khomeini and the Mullahocracy, who are the worst possible examples of Shiism ever to exist.

  • Art Deco correctly wrote: “He [ Saddam Hussein ] conquered and despoiled a harmless neighboring principality in an effort to treble his proven reserves of oil.”

    If we did this (see web links below), then we wouldn’t need to care about Kuwaiti or Iraqi or Iranian or Saudi oil:

    http://www.gen-4.org/Technology/systems/vhtr.htm
    http://www.eoearth.org/article/Hydrogen_production_from_nuclear_power

    @ Dale – thanks for the kind response.

  • If Jasper wasn’t on this very thread (and several other over at my blog) demonstrating exactly what I’m talking about, you’d have a point.

    I really don’t know who Jasper is and it was not relevant to what I said. I didn’t know two wrongs make a right???

    I do know this, when I go to the youtube RCTV I see an excellent video on abortion. I watched an excellent series on overcoming pornography. He talks about attaining holiness and praying for others.

    I found out about this site and some others through RCTV.

    Obviously I don’t agree with everything he says, but why don’t you try pointing out his errors without the snide comments….

  • A rant.

    The reason why the Middle East is so messed up is human envy, greed and lust for power.
    The reason why the US is not energy self-sufficient is human envy, greed and lust for power.
    The reason why some hate Jews is human envy, greed and lust for power.
    The reason why some hate Arabs, Persians, Muslims, etc. is human envy, greed and lust for power.

    The problem is sin. The problem has always been sin – rebellion against God. And the problem always will be sin.

    Now as for Voris, I really like it when he slames liberal politicians and clerics (sorry, I’m bad and I know it). And no, I am not a shrill for the GOP-Republicans; personally, I prefer the Constitution Party, but that’s a different topic.

    But I don’t like it when Voris goes in with anti-Semitic jerks like Jones or when he unfairly demeans our separated Protestant brethren. I used to post his videos at my blog. I have since stop doing that except in rare cases. My family is all Protestant and I’ll be darned if I am going to insult them with the declaration “Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.” My Mom and siblings will learn more about the Catholic faith if I actually live that faith instead of acting like a triumphal jerk (which I am well adept at doing).

  • Paul wrote: “My family is all Protestant and I’ll be darned if I am going to insult them with the declaration “Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.” ”

    Voris didn’t make up that doctrine–he’s merely repeating what the Church has always taught. If merely teaching basic Catholic doctrine offends people, so be it.

    The Church allows for the possibility of salvation outside the fold in cases of invincible ignorance. But that is the exception, not the rule. By the ordinary means of grace, we need the Church to be saved. We do protestants no favors by sugarcoating or whitewashing this teaching, as their very souls are in danger of hell without the sacraments.

    The purpose of proclaiming “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” is not to be triumphalist–it is to SAVE SOULS. That should be the only motive for anything we say or do.

  • Paul,

    The dogmas of the Church will always be insulting to those who reject them. But they are the divinely revealed truths which we MUST believe as Catholics. EENS is not negotiable, and you only cause harm to souls by pretending otherwise. I have many Protestant family members too. Sugar-coating things won’t help them.

  • Oh darn! This is another thing not directly related to the topic. Voris apparently thinks (well, I’m not inside his head, so I don’t know what he thinks) that “Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus” means “Extra Ecclesiam Romanam Nulla Salus.” That “Ecclesia Romana” recognizes as valid the Holy Orders and Sacraments within the independent autocephalus Eastern Orthodox Churches demonstrates that “Extra Ecclesiam Romanam Nulla Salus” is a false sentiment and one need not be “In Communione Plena cum Sede Petri” to be saved.

    OK, now I suppose that I too will be branded a heretic. Can’t win no matter what.

    🙁

    BTW, my whole family knows exactly where I stand on the primacy of the Catholic faith. If I am an opinionated “loud mouth” here, how do you I am around my own family? Rhetorical question.

    😉

    We simply don’t argue the point any longer. Now I guess I should get back on topic.

  • Paul,

    You certainly can’t win when you disagree with God and His Church.

    Valid sacraments, BTW, have nothing to do with Church membership. The sacraments are valid because they have power in and of themselves, just like the name of Jesus Christ does. But just as NOT everyone who says “Lord, Lord” – including those who even cast out demons with His name – will be saved, neither will people be saved merely because they gave or received valid sacraments.

    The Easterners are still in schism, and none of the basic conditions for unity such as those spelled out by Pius XI in Mortalium Animos have been met. But if THEIR position is precarious, then that of the Protestants is even worse.

    This isn’t some petty academic dispute either. St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that outside the Church it is all but impossible to stay free of mortal sin, to acquire the graces and helps needed for salvation. The Protestant confessions present a version of the faith that does not produce saints, nor does it even really acknowledge the validity of sainthood as we do.

    That said, there will be as many Catholics in hell as there are Protestants. Being a Catholic isn’t a one-way ticket to Heaven. It’s just a boarding pass. You can get kicked off the train at any time before you die.

  • “Voris apparently thinks (well, I’m not inside his head, so I don’t know what he thinks)…”

    No, you don’t know what he thinks, so best to leave all speculation aside and refrain from attributing beliefs to him that are false. He follows the Church’s teachings on EENS–no more, no less.

  • Bonchamps wrote: “St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that outside the Church it is all but impossible to stay free of mortal sin, to acquire the graces and helps needed for salvation.”

    Very true. Just think: one mortal sin is sufficient to send one’s soul to hell, unless one receives sacramental absolution. And protestants not only reject sacramental absolution, they also in many cases reject the notion that grave sins can cause loss of salvation, and even reject what those sins might be. According to the Catholic Church, using contraception is a mortal sin; masturbation is a mortal sin; indulging in pornography is a mortal sin; sex outside of marriage is a mortal sin; etc. If a protestant has done any of these even ONCE in his life, he has lost his salvation, until he is absolved through the sacrament of penance.

    Our Lady of Fatima said souls are falling into hell like snowflakes because they have none to pray and sacrifice for them. We have the truth that the world is literally dying to hear, and we must share it.

  • David Palm specializes in half truths. First let me say that the only “silence” he received was when I said “we are done” to anymore discussion with Mr. Palm after I caught him divulging a private email on the CA thread I sent him several months prior. As for his “challenge,” Yanni and I spent two weeks informing Mr. Palm about what Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium teach about the Jews, but he simply didn’t want to accept it. That’s because Mr. Palm believes the Jews are “special people” just because they are Jewish, just as Roy Schoeman and David Moss teach. This is nothing more than spiritual racism. It is heretical and sinful, and it is precisely what Dr. Jones and I are fighting against. Neither Scripture, Tradition or the Magisterium teach it.

  • Christine, are you a Feenyite?

  • “Christine, are you a Feenyite?”

    I’d think my remarks would have answered that question clearly. No.

  • The Shadow Priest on EENS:

  • I apologize, Christine, but it was not obvious to me. You are correct that the related doctrines of invincible ignorance and Baptism of Desire are exceptions to the rule so to speak, but some exceptions swallow rules. The Holy Spirit has not yet revealed the precise contours of these related teachings to the Church, so we must acknowledge them as not being fully understood. Accordingly, we must be cautious in assuming a perfect understanding of the eternal fate of our non-Catholic brothers and sisters, including those who are unbaptized. This cuts two ways of course. We must evangelize since we cannot assume our non-Catholic loved ones who live in accordance with natural law will know God, but we may also avoid despair for our loved ones by knowing that the Church most definitely holds out the possiblity that their souls may experinece eternal rest with the Lord. This uncertainty may be a gift in that it avoids the temptation to despair as well as the temptation to dismiss the importance of evangelization.
    Finally, your apparent assertion that a single moral sin necessarily consigns a Protestant to eternal damnation absent the Sacrament of Penance is not a Church teaching; it is but a speculation.

  • Mike, I was following what you said, up until this: “Finally, your apparent assertion that a single mortal sin necessarily consigns a Protestant to eternal damnation absent the Sacrament of Penance is not a Church teaching; it is but a speculation.”

    The Catholic Church unambiguously teaches that mortal sin causes the death of the soul. There is no speculation there.

    From the Baltimore Catechism:

    “68. Besides depriving the sinner of sanctifying grace, what else does mortal sin do to the soul?

    Besides depriving the sinner of sanctifying grace, mortal sin makes the soul an enemy of God, takes away the merit of all its good actions, deprives it of the right to everlasting happiness in heaven, and makes it deserving of everlasting punishment in hell.”

    The Church also unambiguously teaches that the only way to be forgiven of mortal sin is through sacramental absolution. There are exceptions of invincible ignorance–but those are the exceptions, and we cannot go about acting as if the exception is the rule.

  • Mike P:

    Christine may not be a “Feeneyite”, but I am, more or less.

    If you want to debate the merits, I will be happy to do so. If the argument is simply “Feeneyism is heresy”, well, that is a whole different debate. Obviously I don’t think it is, and neither does the current pope for that matter. From all I have read, this is considered a legitimate theological dispute.

    I’ll grant that this is one of the most terribly misunderstood positions a person can hold, and I’ve heard every – and I mean every – concievable argument against it. This might not be the thread to have it out on this topic, or maybe it is.

  • I say “more or less”, btw, because Fr. Feeney wasn’t right about everything. He held a few erroneous positions, but his position on EENS and baptism wasn’t one of them.

  • I had to look up Feeneyism:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeneyism

    Wow! No offense, Bonchamps, but there are as many “sects” (well, maybe that’s not the right term) within Ecclesia Romana as there are without.

  • Bonchamps,

    Didn’t Feeney reject Church teaching on both Baptism of Desire as well as invincible ignorance as being incompatable with EENS?

    Do you think that martyrs who died absent baptism by water are consigned to eternal damnation?

  • Guys (and gals),

    I know the horse is out of the barn, so to speak, but we are diverging quite a bit from the topic at hand.

  • Christine,
    It is true that we cannot go about acting as if the exception is the rule, but nor should we assume the exception is narrow when the Church does not teach that. In fact an examination of Church teaching in its fullness strongly suggests otherwise.
    In any case, it would be foolish to evangelize via citation to EENS. One must evangelize by convincing non-Catholics that the Church is Christ’s true mystical body on earth. No thinking person will agree to be received into the Church for fear of his soul until he first determines that the Church is what She claims to be. Leading with EENS is destined to be feckless.

  • So now Robert Sungenis has gotten into the comments box here defending his associate E. Michael Jones? This is the sort of company Michael Voris is exposing his viewers to. As I said, I think this is going to end badly for Voris.

    Christine, you’re obviously an energetic supporter of Voris. It sounds like you know him personally. Maybe he would listen to you. Have you tried to help him by warning him?

  • Mike wrote: “It is true that we cannot go about acting as if the exception is the rule, but nor should we assume the exception is narrow when the Church does not teach that. In fact an examination of Church teaching in its fullness strongly suggests otherwise.”

    No one can reasonably come to that conclusion by reading all the magisterial pronouncements on EENS, which proclaim forcefully and unequivocally that the Church is necessary for salvation. It has only been in the 20th century that the teaching seems to have been watered down to near-meaninglessness.

    “In any case, it would be foolish to evangelize via citation to EENS.”

    I leave it to each person to decide the best way to evangelize in a particular situation. I do know that in my experience, downplaying the necessity of the Church never leads to any good, and deprives non-Catholics of the graces of the sacraments they so desperately need. We do souls no favors by watering down this teaching.

    “Christine, you’re obviously an energetic supporter of Voris. It sounds like you know him personally. Maybe he would listen to you. Have you tried to help him by warning him?”

    Michael’s a big boy and needs no advice from me. The fact that his detractors like to make connections that do not exist in order to tarnish his reputation is their problem, not his. His chief concern is the salvation of souls; all the rest is a distraction.

  • Mike P,

    “Didn’t Feeney reject Church teaching on both Baptism of Desire as well as invincible ignorance as being incompatable with EENS?”

    First, there is no “Church teaching” on Baptism of Desire. It is not a Magisterial teaching. It appears in many catechisms, yes, but there is no “ex cathedra” statement on this. Some point to a passage in the Council of Trent, but if it is studied contextually, it is by no means certain that the council is actually teaching the doctrine – and even if it were, it would have been teaching the doctrine as it was believed by some (though not all or even the majority) of the Church Fathers, which basically limited the possibility of BOD/BOB to catechumens with explicit faith in Christ.

    “Do you think that martyrs who died absent baptism by water are consigned to eternal damnation?”

    There’s no evidence that anyone died without baptism (saying “by water” seems redundant, since the word means “immersion in water”…). There are some martyrs for whom there is no record of a baptism; there is no case that I know of in which historians are absolutely positive that there was no baptism.

    What I do know is that there is no basis in Scripture, Tradition, or the Magisterium for any exceptions to Jn. 3:5, and I find 99% of the attempts to find one to be based upon purely subjective emotions. Are these emotions understandable? Yes. Are they valid as far as establishing the truth of this matter goes? Not in the least. People who worry about their non-Catholic relatives going to hell should recall, as well, what Jesus said:

    “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” — Lk. 14:26

    I’m not saying my take on BOD is dogma and you have to share it to be a good Catholic. I am saying, though, that every person I’ve discussed this with has a personal, subjective motivation for wanting to reject Feeney (and St. Augustine). They are unable or unwilling to seriously and objectively consider the facts. And that’s fine, if you just can’t bring yourself to it. But then usually follows the name-calling, the “you must think you’re so great” line of thought.

    As I see it, I just believe what the man said, and what the Church always taught.

  • “Michael’s a big boy and needs no advice from me. The fact that his detractors like to make connections that do not exist in order to tarnish his reputation is their problem, not his. His chief concern is the salvation of souls; all the rest is a distraction.”

    Christine, based on the information brought out by Mark Shea, there clearly seems to be some type of collaboration going on between Jones, Brammer and Voris beyond Jones’ appearance on Voris’ show. And he conducted an interview with Jones in which he allowed Jones to white-wash the whole “Jewish issue.” Do you see what that might not be a good idea for Voris’ reputation? Why it might not be good for his audience? Now Jones’ associate Robert Sungenis is chiming in. I don’t think that’s a good thing for Michael Voris, either.

    I’d think that he would appreciate and value feedback from someone like yourself who has devoted such time and energy to defending him. For all we know, maybe he’s not fully aware of these things. So you’d be doing him a real service. Maybe even more of a service than promoting and defending him on blogs. I mean that sincerely.

  • Yes, it’s going to end very badly for Voris. The greater tragedy will be how many people get sucked into the Jew-hating pit with him.

    No one who claims to care for his work seems inclined even to warn him away, which is another, lesser tragedy.

  • Paul asked that this thread return to the topic of his post and his request has been ignored. I am going to disable comments for this thread. Paul may re-enable comments if he wishes. Right now this thread seems to be home to several debates that are far removed indeed from the original topic raised by Paul.

David Mamet, Liberals, Israel and Blood Sacrifice

Wednesday, December 14, AD 2011

 

Playwright David Mamet has an interesting column in the Wall Street Journal today examing hostility towards Israel on the Left:

The Liberal West has, for decades, indulged itself in an orgy of self-flagellation. We have enjoyed comfort and security, but these, in the absence of gratitude and patriotism, cause insecurity. This attempted cure for insecurity can be seen in protestations of our worthlessness, and the indictment of private property.

But no one in the affluent West and no one among the various protesters of various supposed injustices is prepared to act in accordance with his protestations. The opponent of “The Corporation” is still going to use the iPhone which permits him to mass with his like. The celebrities acting out at Occupy meetings will still invest their surplus capital, and the supposed champion of the dispossessed in the Levant will not only scoff at American Indian claims to land he has come to understand as his—he will lobby the City Council to have the homeless shelter built anywhere but on his block.

The brave preceptors who would like to end Poverty, War, Exploitation, Colonialism, Inequality and so on, stop at the proclamation. How may they synchronize their wise fervor with their inaction?

How may they still the resultant anxiety? The Left’s answer is the oldest in the world: by appeal to The Gods. But how may The Gods be appeased? The immemorial answer is: By human sacrifice.

Continue reading...

3 Responses to David Mamet, Liberals, Israel and Blood Sacrifice

  • God promised Abraham in Genesis that He would bless those who bless Abraham and his descendents, and curse those who curse them. And St. Paul explained in his epistle to the Romans that God has not reneged on His promises to the Jews. Regardless that we may view ther Church as the new Israel, the inheriter of the promises of God (and there is truth to that description), nevertheless, there is still a special place in our Blessed Lord’s heart for His people, the Jews. That doesn’t make Jews superior or inferior to Gentiles, or makes us Gentile Christians not His people; we know from St. Paul’s letters that that isn’t the case. Rather, it means exactly what God promised Abraham, and liberal leftist Democrats may find that out to their own doom just as Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did. Furthermore, those who persecute Jews will almost invariably persecute authentic Christians of any religious denomination (to be differentiated from the liberal social justice or reactionary fascist types of pseudo-Christians).

    BTW, I am increasingly finding that the differences between Nazism (or any reactionary fascist group) and liberal leftist democracy (two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner) are ever narrowing more and more rapidly.

  • Oh, I forgot to add: Jesus was (and is) a Jew. Right?

  • Being filled with pure hatred and and unadulterated evil, the liberal is anti-semitic by nature.

A One State Solution for Peace in the Middle East

Monday, June 20, AD 2011

No, no Klavan on the culture!  Everyone knows that if the Jews would simply disappear the Arab world would become an oasis of peace and tolerance!  At least that is what I have been told over the years by numerous combox adversaries and correspondents.  Prior to becoming a blogger, I would comment on other Catholic blogs, and one of my favorits sites was Amy Welborn’s Open Book.  After commenting there one day I received a lengthy e-mail from a correspondent who I responded to in a fisk format.  This correspondence occurred on April 17, 2007, and I thought that some of our readers might find it diverting: 

Continue reading...

49 Responses to A One State Solution for Peace in the Middle East

  • Does Israel have sins? YES! Just read the Old Testament and see also that it applies to the modern nation-state as well. So what? America has sins too. We kill over 4,000 innocents daily – probably more than the Nazis did.

    I find it odd that we compare Israel (whether fabricated political Zionism or Judiasim in general) and America with the perfect and always find them wanting. Surprise! What a shocker that nations of sinners are flawed. Yet, at the same time we highlight the good that all our enemies do. Did Saddam do some good? Was he somewhat stabilizing? Was he a counterweight against Iran? Yes. So what. He was also a murderous thug who ran a totalitarian state and often worked against our interests. Most often our legitimate interests as well as the interests of the transnational globalist bankers and their minions who act as a parasite on our country, and Israel too (psst- most these globalist bas!@&ds are Jewish! But, not really – they are actually atheists, or worse Luciferians who are only culturally ‘Jewish’ – this gives lefties the cover to be anti-Semites (but only Jewish anti-Semites, they treat Arab Semites as noble savages, you know like Native Americans and Negros – aren’t lefties sweet!) because lefties hate God and apparently God loves Jews, I think His Son’s Jewish)

    When we compare the atrocious state of Israel with the rest of the tyrannies in the middle-east, she don’t look so bad. When we compare post WWII America with the Constitutional Republic intended by the Founders she looks pretty bad, even downright disappointing. Again, so what. Compare America with all of our neighbors in the southern part of our hemisphere, most of Europe, China, Russia, or any other nation in the history of civilization for that matter. We look pretty darn good,

    The simple fact is the UN, communist (democratic socialist) powers that desire a one-world tyranny need a world war beginning in the middle east and are even moving the pieces to do so right now. Why? To exhaust the West (NATO which is the USA under Euro-socialist control) and empower the East (Commies), while redistributing our wealth to the third-world in order to gain a lock over all the natural resources. Political Zionism (which is an anti-Jewish scheme) considered establishing the homeland for the Jews in Uganda, but it was decided that had no Biblical basis. You know how we Western Christians are so stupid that we will go along with anything if you can find a textual, albeit not contextual, basis in the Bible we blindly believe in, with not rational thought.

    Israel in Palestine had both the Biblical basis and the strategic location of placing an ‘enemy’ in the middle of the middle-east. Furthermore, for just about all of its history the territory of Palestine has always been a garrison state. Just ask King Baldwin. Why would anyone want to have their homeland there? It defies logic. I would have picked New Zealand.

    If you are a tyrannical enemy of mankind and you want global hegemony how would you look at the chess board of the world? America is always standing in your way, so erode her from inside and tie her closely with Israel. Inspire the Moslem and Arab world to attack Israel and draw America into a long war to drain her (why is it that the war in Iraq was quick, decisive and extremely successful and then we entered into a long, protracted and messy occupation). This will destroy Israel, America and the Moslem world. What will be left? Atheistic Communism from China, with a resurgence of it in Russia and probably a UN Communist Federal System of global tyranny. This is Stalin, Hitler and Mao’s dream along with a host of uber-elite Western ‘capitalists’.

    Will it happen? We can’t know. Will they try? Without a doubt. If the Bible is any indication, it is likely, if we turn to God, that Israel will surprise everyone by defeating insurmountable odds. Then again, God’s Wrath has been harshest on Israel for her fornication in the past and America is no exception to this rule. The big question is not so much will a world war start in the middle-east, it is not an if, it is a when. We just have to wonder on which side of this conflict the USA will be. By all indications right now – it is not the side of Israel.

    Those pesky Jews have been causing problems forever. They undermined the utopian, pharonic regime in Egypt, they invaded and slaughtered every tribe in Palestine, they vandalized the walls of Jericho with a shofar, they brought the Colonial Western Powers (Romans) to the middle-east and their Rabi Yesua min Nazret spread a counter-revolutionary ideology that has been the bane of totalitarian governments for over 2,000 years. No wonder worldly powers hate Jews and by extension the Catholic Church and America too.

  • Just out of curiousity, was your correspondent Daniel Nichols, Marv Wood, or some other individual?

  • I know it wasn’t Marv Woods Art. I can’t recall the name of my correspondent, although it was someone whose name I didn’t recognize. I didn’t retain the original e-mails, just copies of my fisks, so I can’t check the name.

  • Just saying: to set straight the record:

    During each week in June 1967, 200 to 300 Americans were getting killed in Vietnam.

    On the other side of the world . . .

    At 0800 hrs, 8 June, 1967, eight Israeli recon flights flew over ‘Liberty,’ which was flying a large American flag. At 1400 hrs, waves of low-flying Israeli Mystere and Mirage-III fighter-bombers repeatedly attacked the American vessel with rockets, napalm, and cannon. The air attacks lasted 20 minutes, concentrating on the ship’s electronic antennas and dishes. The ‘Liberty’ was left afire, listing sharply. Eight of her crew lay dead, a hundred seriously wounded, including the captain, Commander William McGonagle.

    At 1424 hrs, three Israeli torpedo boats attacked, raking the burning ‘Liberty’ with 20mm and 40mm shells. At 1431hrs an Israeli torpedo hit the ‘Liberty’ midship, precisely where the signals intelligence systems were located. Twenty-five more Americans died.

    Israeli gunboats circled the wounded ‘Liberty,’ firing at crewmen trying to fight the fires. At 1515, the crew were ordered to abandon ship. The Israeli warships closed and poured machine gun fire into the crowded life rafts, sinking two. As American sailors were being massacred in cold blood, a rescue mission by US Sixth Fleet carrier aircraft was mysteriously aborted on orders from the White House.

    An hour after the attack, Israeli warships and planes returned. Commander McGonagle gave the order. ‘prepare to repel borders.’ But the Israelis, probably fearful of intervention by the US Sixth Fleet, departed. ‘Liberty’ was left shattered but still defiant, her flag flying.
    The Israeli attacks killed 34 US seamen and wounded 171 out of a crew of 297, the worst loss of American naval personnel from hostile action since World War II.

    Less than an hour after the attack, Israel told Washington its forces had committed a ‘tragic error.’ Later, Israel claimed it had mistaken ‘Liberty’ for an ancient Egyptian horse transport. US Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, and Joint Chiefs of Staff head, Admiral Thomas Moorer, insisted the Israeli attack was deliberate and designed to sink ‘Liberty.’ So did three CIA reports; one asserted Israel’s Defense Minister, Gen. Moshe Dayan, had personally ordered the attack.

    In contrast to American outrage over North Korea’s assault on the intelligence ship ‘Pueblo,’ Iraq’s mistaken missile strike on the USS ‘Stark,’ last fall’s bombing of the USS ‘Cole’ in Aden, and the recent US-China air incident, the savaging of ‘Liberty’ was quickly hushed up by President Lyndon Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara.

    The White House and Congress immediately accepted Israel’s explanation and let the matter drop. Israel later paid a token reparation of US $6 million. There were reports two Israeli pilots who had refused to attack ‘Liberty’ were jailed for 18 years.

    Also, during the 1973 war, they tried and failed to shoot down our SR-71’s. If I told yoiu how I know, I’d have to shoot myself.

    Tagged: Don’t Urinate on My Shoes and Tell Me It’s Raining Department.

  • Where to begin T. Shaw?

    1. Compensation-Israel paid $6,000,000.00 for damage to the Liberty, $3,323,500.00 to the families of the 34 men killed and $3, 566, 457 to the 170 crewmen wounded. Much more when I have time later today.

  • Here is a discussion you had.

    http://amywelborn.typepad.com/openbook/2007/04/okay_one.html#comments

    You were contending with “Al” (an admirer of Fr. Feeney), Morning’s Minion, Chris Sullivan, and Nate Wildermuth. The style is most unlike any one of them. The bilge about William Kristol’s defunct advocacy group sounds like Daniel Nichols, but the U.S.S. Liberty is not one of his fixations. Amusing puzzle….

  • Klaven’s Jewish one state solution would be as bad as the Palestinian one state solution. The Jewish culture that Zionism came from is just as anti-christian as the Muslim culture that now dominates the Middle East. If the Israelis were to achieve this goal of a one state solution, it would further inflame the situlation in the Middle East. They would lose the war with the Muslims in the long run, because there are more Muslims than Jews in the Middle East, and the high rate of abortions in Israel and the high Muslim birthrate are guaranteeing the IDF won’t have enough soldiers to fight it’s battles in the near future.
    If anyone wants some intelligent commentary on the Middle East from a Catholic perspective, thecatholicknight.blogspot.com is a good place to go. TAC should link to it.

  • and the high rate of abortions in Israel and the high Muslim birthrate are guaranteeing the IDF won’t have enough soldiers to fight it’s battles in the near future.

    Fertility rates have been tanking in the Arab world and adjacent areas for a generation and have been measured in recent years as being below replacement levels in Tunisia, Algeria, Lebanon, and Iran. Israel has a total fertility rate of 2.7 (the occidental world’s highest) and net immigration as well. See the CIA World Factbook on these matters.

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

  • “You were contending with “Al” (an admirer of Fr. Feeney), Morning’s Minion, Chris Sullivan, and Nate Wildermuth.”

    It certainly was none of those gentlemen as I am quite familiar with each of their writing styles and, as you pointed out, my interlocutor exhibited none of their usual writing traits.

  • Stephen, Klavan’s one state solution was meant to be completely humorous, although in on off the record conversations Arab leaders have been known to admit wryly that their countries were often better off being run by the Turks, the French or the British. I disagree that Zionism is anti-Christian. Catholics are free to worship as they please in Israel. The problem for Arab Christians is not the Jews but their Arab muslim “brothers and sisters” whose attitude towards the Arab Christians usually run the gamut from disdainful contempt to murderous persecution. The best gift any Christian can give to an Arab Christian living in the Arab world is a one way plane ticket to the West.

  • Mac,

    Don’t bother trying to convince any sentient being that in the middle of a “life-or-death”, national-survival war, the IDF had excess fighter bombers, TP boats, and munitions and eight tactical hours to strafe life boats trying to sink an Egyptian army horse transport.

    No wait! The Egyptian horse cavalry had them surrounded!

    The 34 KIA of the Liberty and about 58,000 other Americans in the 1960’s and 1970’s were expendable.

  • Lunch time and time to respond to T. Shaw. T. Shaw, why attack the Liberty and not sink it? The Israelis had it well within their power to do so. Instead, after they realized their mistake they called off their torpedo boats and had them radio the Liberty to offer assistance. The Captain of the Liberty, Commander McGonagle, confirmed this. The Israelis also immediately notified the US embassy in Israel of the mistaken attack and provided a helicopter to fly a naval attache to the ship.

    Let us assume that the Israelis wished to sink the Liberty for some reason unknown to us. Why didn’t they do it when they had the opportunity? The conspiracy nuts and raving anti-Semites who have seized upon this have no explanation for this, just as they have been unable to provide any rational explanation as to why the Israelis would want to sink the Liberty in the first place.

    T. Shaw, if you, and all and any other sentient creatures on the planet, wish to know the actual facts about the Liberty attack, go to the website linked below:

    http://www.thelibertyincident.com/

  • Interesting comments, all. God promised Abraham that whoever curses his descendants will be cursed and whoever blesses them will be blessed. St. Paul says in Romans 11:1, “…has God rejected His people? By no means!” Indeed, every government that has persecuted the Jews lies in the dung heap of history. They are gone, and against all odds (right or wrong) there is a nation called Israel exactly as prophesied.

    I am sorry, but I can’t buy into all the anti-Israel stuff. Was Israel wrong in attacking the USS Liberty? You betcha! Is Israel really the state that God envisioned would be the re-constituted new Israel? Probably not. Is Zionism really Christian? Nope – only Christian is really Christian. But when an Israeli soldier shoots and kills a Palestinian child, it’s a complete miss whereas when an Islamic Jihaddist does the same thing, it’s a direct hit.

    Is Israel a bad nation. Yup, and so are we. And there are worse ones: Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Red China for starters. We had better all repent – Jew and Gentile – before God’s wrath comes upon us. Romans 11:11-24 comes to mind.

  • Don, Zionism sprang from Jewish minds. The Jews reject Jesus as the Christ come in the flesh. I Jno. 2:22-23 and II Jno. 7 says any one or any group that believes this is anti-christ.
    As for the claim that “Christians are free to worship as they please in Israel” they may be “free” but they’re mistreated by the Israelis. Go to the catholicknight.blogspot.com and click on the article Catholics Can Not Be Zionists. Read the first comment to the article by Sarah. The Israeli’s use our Catholic Breathern as buffers to shied them from the Muslims. Some freedom, eh?
    Art, even if fertility rates have been tanking in the Arab countries, that’s not what I was talking about. The Palestinian Muslim birthrate in Israel is growing faster than the Israeli Jewish birthrate. The Israeli Jews, with the exception of the Orthodox and Haredim groups, are declining, due to abortion and contraception. Most of these people are anti-zionist, so they won’t be really eager to help the Zionist state. And that 2.7 birthrate, the highest in the Middle East, most of that 2.7 is coming from the Orthodox and Haredim, who, as I’ve already pointed out, are not too thrilled about Zionism. Again read the articles that the Catholic Knight has posted on his site about Zionism, Israel, Jews, and Middle Eastern Christians so you can be better informed about wants really going on over there.

  • “Don, Zionism sprang from Jewish minds. The Jews reject Jesus as the Christ come in the flesh. I Jno. 2:22-23 and II Jno. 7 says any one or any group that believes this is anti-christ.”

    That is not what the Church teaches Stephen.

    839 “Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.”

    “The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, “the first to hear the Word of God.” The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”, “for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.”

    840 “And when one considers the future, God’s People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.”

  • Don,

    The Catechism is right about those Jews who practice the Hebrew faith. However, Zionism is not Judaism. Zionism is a manufactured political movement and the only theology employed by its fabricators is Luciferianism. They twisted Scripture in order to justify Zionism to ignorant Jews and Christians. Zionism was cooked up in the same vat as Communism, democratic Socialism, Fascism, Corporatism, State Capitalism, National Socialism, etc. It is an evil idea, it is not Scriptural, it has no basis in Tradition and it does not help the Jewish people in the least. In fact, it is probably a sick way of getting them all into one place so they can be more easily annihilated by their Moslem neighbors.

    The ‘Jews’ that came up with Zionism, like Theodore Herzel are cut from the same cloth as ‘Jews’ like the Rothschilds, Weishupt, Marx, Freud and Soros. That is they are worldly minded men, atheists, and Satanists who happen to be born of a Jewish womb. None of them practice the Jewish religion. They either don’t believe in God, or if they do, they hate God. Any truly faithful Jew cannot in good conscience be a Zionist (in the political sense) neither can a good Christian and especially Catholics.

  • Stephen Dalton, what you said was as follows:

    They would lose the war with the Muslims in the long run, because there are more Muslims than Jews in the Middle East, and the high rate of abortions in Israel and the high Muslim birthrate are guaranteeing the IDF won’t have enough soldiers to fight it’s battles in the near future.

    You made reference to ‘muslims…in the middle east’, not the Arab population in the West Bank, Gaza, or Israel. In any case, the recent demographic history of the broader and the narrower population have been much the same.

    The salient statistic for this discussion is the Total Fertility Rate, not the birth rate. Again, Israel is reproducing in excess of replacement levels. The size of their manpower pool is increasing, not declining, so it is difficult to understand how you acquired this fancy that their population will be denuded by abortion. While we are at it, these statistics here (source not vetted) would seem to indicate that Israel has one abortion for every eight live births, which is half what that rate is is in France or the United States (to take two examples).

    http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-israel.html

    The weighted average of the fertility rates for the Arab population on the West Bank and Gaza is currently 3.7. That is less than half of what it was a generation ago while the Total Fertility Rate in Israel has, if anything, increased slightly. The ‘birth rate’ in the territories in question is not ‘growing faster’ than in Israel. The differential in fertility between the two populations has declined dramatically. Also, Israel has net immigration. The West Bank and Gaza do not.

    As for the composition of Israel’s fecund population, I have not time to check proper survey research. I would note, however, that United Torah Judaism (the political party of non-Zionist Orthodox Jews in Israel) commanded about 4.7% of the vote during the country’s most recent parliamentary election. Somehow, I do not think this subpopulation accounts for Israel’s fertility.

  • Zionism is a manufactured political movement and the only theology employed by its fabricators is Luciferianism

    You think Chaim Weizmann was a devil worshiper?

  • Rubbish AK from beginning to end. Zionism is a political movement among Jews to establish a homeland for themselves after almost 2000 years of bitter persecution. Both observant and non-observant Jews have embraced it. To call it Luciferianism is both obscene and ignorant. Your ranting about a laundry list of Jews comes close to anti-Semitism. Any more along those lines and your comment will be deleted and you will be banned from this website. First and last warning. I have very low tolerance for anti-Semitism.

  • It would help the case of self-described Christian anti-Zionists if they would acknowledge that Zionism didn’t grow in some nefarious vacuum.

    Rather, it was a response to increasingly virulent anti-Semitism, often in Catholic garb. If you want to be upset about Zionism, be prepared to point a finger at our ancestors in the Christian faith.

  • I’m currently reading (and very much enjoying) David Mamet’s The Secret Knowledge. I think this passage is rather apt:

    Our American plane has been forced to land at some foreign airport, by the outbreak of World War III. It will not be allowed to depart. Two planes are leaving the airport; we must choose which we want to board. One plane is flying to Israel and one to Syria, and we must choose.

    . . . No one reading this book would get on the plane to Syria. Why? It is a despotism, opposed to the West, to women, to gays, to Jews, to free speech. It is a heinous Arab version of National Socialism, dedicated to the murder of every person in Israel. And yet one may gain status or a feeling of solidarity by embracing the “Arab cause.”

    But we embrace it only as entertainment. In the free market, which is to say when something is at stake, we will vote otherwise.

  • Some people forget Romans 11:17-24:

    But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place and have come to share in the rich root of the olive tree,
    do not boast against the branches. If you do boast, consider that you do not support the root; the root supports you. Indeed you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is so. They were broken off because of unbelief, but you are there because of faith. So do not become haughty, but stand in awe. For if God did not spare the natural branches, (perhaps) he will not spare you either. See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God’s kindness to you, provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. And they also, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated one, how much more will they who belong to it by nature be grafted back into their own olive tree.

    I especially like verses 28 and 29:

    In respect to the gospel, they are enemies on your account; but in respect to election, they are beloved because of the patriarchs. For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.

    —–

    God does NOT renege on His promises.

  • When someone brings up Bush and illegal invasion of Iraq, I go to the below website and relook what was said:

    http://www.reasons-for-war-with-iraq.info/index.html

  • Hey, the IDF is on our side, now.

    However,

    1. The IDF knew it was a US ship. 0800 multiple recon flights.
    2. Aerial recon photos from recon flights delivered to higher HQ.
    3. Any E-2 gomer could see it was a US Navy ship.
    4. The pols and generals run it up the flagpole.
    5. They decided they need to stop the US Navy from observing whatever IDF was doing.
    6. Didn’t need to sink the ship to accomplish that mission.

    Anyhow,

  • Slightly off-topic, can anyone recommend a good book on the Suez Crisis? I’m currently reading a book on the Israeli War of Independence and would like to follow it up with one about 1956.

  • A nice brief history is linked below. The Osprey Essential Histories are excellent on the military aspects on any conflict in history and their maps are of very high quality:

    http://www.ospreypublishing.com/store/book.aspx?bookcode=s4183

    American historians have by and large ignored the Suez crisis in 1956. The Brits have written quite a bit on it, but much of it strikes me as too focused on the domestic political consequences of the Brits going into Suez and that is not what I am interested in.

  • “5. They decided they need to stop the US Navy from observing whatever IDF was doing.
    6. Didn’t need to sink the ship to accomplish that mission. ”

    Ridiculous T. Shaw. You have not given any indication about what could be so sensitive for the Israelis that they would risk attacking an American naval vessel. If they were going to take such a risk in order not to be detected doing whatever, (Activating the ark of the Covenant? Talking to aliens?), there would only have been one way to be certain that the Liberty could not detect what they were doing and that was to send it to the bottom of the Mediterranean. Not to mention that attacking a US ship would be precisely the wrong way to get the US Navy not to pay very close attention to what the Israelis were doing from then on. The whole idea that this was a deliberate attack is simple nonsense.

  • the high rate of abortions in Israel

    This fellow Johnston has a table which offers a useful summary of the share of pregnancies lost to abortion across 101 countries. Israel is somewhere around the 30th percentile.

    http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/wrjp334pd.html

  • Don,

    As a Semite, I take offense to being accused of being anti-Semitic. I am pretty sure most of my Jewish friends would be shocked at that too.

    I said nothing anti-Jewish in my post. It was anti-Zionist. Whether you believe it or not, even whether it is true or not, I stated that I SEE A DIFFERENCE between the two and I chided one and praised the other. So whatever I posted was most definitely anti-Zionist, but I know that our older brothers in faith have a big role to play yet in salvation history and I do not disparage faithful Jews or the Jewish faith. This applies to modern Rabbinical Judaism as well as the ancient faith.

    The modern nation-state of Israel is NOT Biblical Israel, although it could very well be prophetic Israel. We are Israel, as in Catholics. Mary, another Jew that I love, stated it clearly in her Magnificat.

    Most of the political movements of the 19th and 20th century, including political Zionism, were cooked up by the same vain of humanistic pride.

    Note: Political Zionism is not religious Zionism. The return of the people Israel to Palestine is inevitable, it is probably occurring now as a result of political Zionism, but the intention is not the same. Faithful Jews who return to Palestine may be mentioned by St. John as the or the fore-bearers of the 144,000 in the Apocalypse, although I suspect that large numbers of Moslems who were probably Jews before the eighth century might be included. Nevertheless, the political movement of Zionism has a different intent in its inception. I am not suggesting that most participants knew that. The fear and confusion following WWII and the fact that half of the Nazi’s camp victims were Jewish moved many Jews who wouldn’t have bothered with Zionism to embrace it.

    It is clear that there is an intent to place a small, yet powerful Israel right in the middle of Arab National Socialist and Moslem Jihadists in order to ignite war and probably world war. War is good business and we always need to have enough tension to launch one anytime. Clearly the mid East is gearing up for war again, on a big scale. Will it be the trigger of WWIII? Perhaps. Yet, if we would pray the Rosary for Peace, perhaps not.

    I apologize if my poor writing skills sparked your rebuke. Nevertheless, being that my Mother and Queen is Jewish, I do not take these things lightly.

  • AK, you can hold whatever views you wish, but on this blog there are limits on what I will tolerate in the comboxes. Your comment above does not come close to those limits, even though I disagree with a fair amount of it. Your earlier comment went over the edge of what I am willing to tolerate in regard to the discussion of Jews and Zionism, and I pointed it out to put you on notice since you have been commenting here for a long time and I did not wish to immediately ban you as a result. As for your views of Israel, I would merely note that John Paul II, who did so much to improve relations between Jews and Catholics, did not share them. I quote from his speech given in 2000 during his pilgrimage to Israel:

    “Dear President and Madame Weizman,
    Dear Prime Minister and Madame Barak,
    Dear Israeli Friends,
    Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

    1. Yesterday, from the heights of Mount Nebo I looked across the Jordan Valley to this blessed land. Today, it is with profound emotion that I set foot in the Land where God chose to “pitch his tent” (Jn 1:14; cf. Ex 40:34-35; 1 Kgs 8:10-13), and made it possible for man to encounter him more directly.

    In this year of the two thousandth anniversary of the Birth of Jesus Christ, it has been my strong personal desire to come here and to pray in the most important places which, from ancient times, have seen God’s interventions, the wonders he has done. “You are the God who works wonders. You showed your power among the peoples” (Ps 77:15).

    Mr President, I thank you for your warm welcome, and in your person I greet all the people of the State of Israel.

    2. My visit is both a personal pilgrimage and the spiritual journey of the Bishop of Rome to the origins of our faith in “the God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob” (Ex 3:15). It is part of a larger pilgrimage of prayer and thanksgiving which led me first to Sinai, the Mountain of the Covenant, the place of the decisive revelation which shaped the subsequent history of salvation. Now I shall have the privilege of visiting some of the places more closely connected with the Life, Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Along every step of the way I am moved by a vivid sense of God who has gone before us and leads us on, who wants us to honour him in spirit and in truth, to acknowledge the differences between us, but also to recognize in every human being the image and likeness of the One Creator of heaven and earth.

    3. Mr President, you are known as a man of peace and a peacemaker. We all know how urgent is the need for peace and justice, not for Israel alone but for the entire region. Many things have changed in relations between the Holy See and the State of Israel since my predecessor Pope Paul VI came here in 1964. The establishment of diplomatic relations between us in 1994 set a seal on efforts to open an era of dialogue on questions of common interest concerning religious freedom, relations between Church and State and, more generally, relations between Christians and Jews. On another level, world opinion follows with close attention the peace process which finds all the peoples of the region involved in the difficult search for a lasting peace with justice for all. With new-found openness towards one another, Christians and Jews together must make courageous efforts to remove all forms of prejudice. We must strive always and everywhere to present the true face of the Jews and of Judaism, as likewise of Christians and of Christianity, and this at every level of attitude, teaching and communication (cf. Address to the Jewish Community of Rome, 13 April 1986, 5).

    4. My journey therefore is a pilgrimage, in a spirit of humble gratitude and hope, to the origins of our religious history. It is a tribute to the three religious traditions which co-exist in this land. For a long time I have looked forward to meeting the faithful of the Catholic communities in their rich variety, and the members of the various Christian Churches and Communities present in the Holy Land. I pray that my visit will serve to encourage an increase of interreligious dialogue that will lead Jews, Christians and Muslims to seek in their respective beliefs, and in the universal brotherhood that unites all the members of the human family, the motivation and the perseverance to work for the peace and justice which the peoples of the Holy Land do not yet have, and for which they yearn so deeply. The Psalmist reminds us that peace is God’s gift: “I will hear what the Lord God has to say, a voice that speaks of peace, peace for his people and his friends, and those who turn to him in their hearts” (Ps 85:8). May peace be God’s gift to the Land he chose as his own!

    Shalom.”

  • The attack on the USS Liberty has all the attributes of a deliberate attack. Quite clearly the downing of the Iranian airliner by the USS Vincennes was a tragic mistake. Captain Rogers had a window of only about a minute to decide on a missile launch. At the back of every Allied captain’s mind at that time was the fiery demise of the UK destroyers, in the earlier Falklands war at the hands of Argentinian pilots armed with Exocet missiles. A very strong and convincing case has also been made that the downing of the Korean airliner over Sakhalin in 1985, by a Soviet pilot was similarly a tragic error, brought about by the fatal confluence of loss of navigation on the 747, the lack of any means of contact between the fighter pilot and the stricken plane, and the cat and mouse games that US and Soviet air forces play in that part of the world.

    However given the duration of the attack on the Liberty and the fact that the Israeli pilots could make out the US markings, which is quite unlike these other cases, the weight of the circumstantial evidence points to a deliberate and sustained attack. To my conspiratorial mind, in 1967 some Israelis who had not forgiven the Americans for sabotaging the 1956 Suez campaign against Nasser felt no qualms about attacking a US ship which they had reason to believe was not on an innocent mission. They had been burned once before by the Americans, and were not about to let them a mere eleven years later, derail what in the event proved to be an overwhelming victory over the Muslims.

  • Whomever said, “In war, the first casualty is truth.”

    “The whole idea that this was a deliberate attack is simple nonsense.”

    You insist that the Israeli War Ministry and Government and IDF pilots (do not wear eyeglasses, either!) did not know that that was a US Navy vessel, or that the IDF and Israeli Government did not issue orders to attack said noncombatant US Navy vessel for two hours. That is beyond credibility.

    I do not know the motive. I will not speculate.

    You may ask Moshe Dayan why he ordered the USS Liberty massacre . . . when you see him.

  • “I do not know the motive. I will not speculate.”

    Because you have no answer T.Shaw as to what could have possibly motivated a deliberate attack, and why, if the attack was deliberate, the Israelis did not finish the attack and send the Liberty to the bottom of the sea, rather than halting the attack and seeking to give aid to the Liberty. Like most conspiracy theories, those surrounding the Liberty flourish in the absence of knowledge of what actually occurred, and endure because of passion substituting for simple common sense.

  • The U.S.S. Liberty has been a particular fixation of the American Educational Trust and advocacy journalists like Donald Neff (who Time made use of as their bureau chief in Jerusalem, go figure). These characters find nothing anomalous about the absence of any conceivable purpose for attacking the U.S.S. Liberty because they regard Israel as simply malign. In their minds, Israel does this because that is what Israel does. Some more inventive sorts have concocted an explanation that states that Israel attacked the Liberty as a diversion to cover up war crimes like the mass execution of prisoners in the Sinai. That no such mass execution can be shown ever to have occurred is a petty detail.

  • Thank God for Israel. American Jews have a place to go when America goes belly up. I’m emigrating to Canada.

    Of course, the IDF made many other fatal mistakes during the six day war.*

    It is counter-intuitive to think the IDF believed the USS Liberty was an Egyptian ship. Facts prove otherwise.

    I do not need to prove motive**. The IDF had the opportunity and they did it – habeus 34 corpi. Yeah! Your ilk got OJ off on two murders. What is 34 to a whole country?

    If you need the motive . . . When you and Mac get to the the place where he has gone, you can ask Dayan why he did it.

    * Wikipedia: “In three hours on the morning of June 5, 1967, the first day of the Six Day War, the Israeli Air Force executed Operation Focus, crippling the opposing Arab air forces and attaining air supremacy for the remainder of the war. In a surprise attack, the IAF destroyed most of the Egyptian Air Force while its planes were still on the ground. By the end of the day, with surrounding Arab countries also drawn into the fighting, the IAF had mauled the Syrian and Jordanian air forces as well, striking as far as Iraq. After six days of fighting Israel claimed a total of 452 Arab aircraft destroyed, of which 49 (11%) were aerial victories.”

    ** I am not a tool sitting in your jury box, counselor. I prefer the company of used car salesmen and real state agents.

    Love them ad hominems, too.

  • No ad hominems T. Shaw, but simple analysis of what happened. You, like all those who embrace a conspiracy angle on the Liberty, are unable to ascribe motive to the Israelis to conduct a deliberate attack or explain why the Israelis called off the attack and offered assistance. People may be entitled to their opinions, they are not entitled to their own set of facts.

    I believe you may have been taken off moderation. Back on moderation for you, not for your arguments in this thread but because of the “colorful and exuberant manner” in which you sometimes express your opinions.

  • “I can tell you for an absolute certainty (from intercepted communications) that the Israelis knew they were attacking an American ship.”
    — NSA Deputy Director Oliver Kirby

  • The Israelis screwed up and people died. The Israelis admitted they screwed up (maybe they didn’t admit the screw up in the way that some would have liked them to have admitted the screw up, but they did admit it). The Israelis paid reparations. What more should we or could we want?

    Given a choice between Israel and most other nations on this planet, I would choose Israel.

  • I want somebody to apologize to USS Liberty survivors who were accused of being Arab propagandists and antisemites.

  • I wonder if we deliberately attacked HMAS Hobart on June 17, 1969?

    “On the early hours of 17 June, while preventing North Vietnamese resupply of Tiger Island, Hobart was fired upon by a United States Air Force (USAF) aircraft.[6] The aircraft approached Hobart with its IFF transponder switched off, and fired three missiles during two passes.[6] The second missile failed to explode, but the first and third damaged the superstructure, radar room, exhaust funnels, Ikara missile magazine, and superstructure, killed two RAN personnel, and injured seven others.[6] The aircraft came around for a third attack run, but was scared off when Hobart fired five rounds from her main gun.[7] Despite being damaged, Hobart sailed to the nearby cruiser USS Boston, which had been hit by a missile from another USAF aircraft, and formed an anti-aircraft screen with the cruiser and her escort, USS Blandy.[7] After being relieved, Hobart sailed for Subic Bay, where the damage was inspected by RAN and USN personnel, including three admirals.[7]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Hobart_(D_39)

    I say deliberate since these type of attacks never happen by accident and our motivation was clearly to corner the world market on kangaroos and bloomin’ onions.

  • “I do not need to prove motive.”

    And yet people wonder why America is festooned with lawyers. As an aside, it’s strikingly reminiscent of a rather famous Jewish bureaucrat’s similar approach to what he also regarded as legal frippery: “What need have we for witnesses?”

    “I can tell you for an absolute certainty (from intercepted communications) that the Israelis knew they were attacking an American ship.”
    — NSA Deputy Director Oliver Kirby

    Have these been declassified, or did a Deputy Director of No Such Agency talk out of turn and disclose the content of classified material? If it’s the former, I’d sincerely like to read them.

  • You need to put me back on moderation.

  • I got my version of the Liberty incident from reading Bamford’s book which paints the attack as a deliberate and unprovoked one in order to hide an ongoing Israeli massacre of Egyptian POWs. However after having just read Michael Oren’s analysis ‘The USS Liberty: Case Closed’ I have to agree that there is a strong case for the defence. In the first place there was no widespread massacre of Egyptain prisoners. It appears that there was a series of fateful coincidences and errors that led to the attack. Pres Johnson, who is routinely reviled in the further reaches of Libertyland as a sellout to Israel, emerges as a sensible man. Apparently the planes that were sent out from the USS Saratoga at the distress signal of the Liberty were F-104s armed with nuclear weapons. It was a most sensible decision to recall them back. Had they been used, it would have been akin to dropping a 1000lb bomb to settle a playground fight. The clincher in the NSA transcripts is that it shows that Israeli pilots for whatever reasons thought that were in fact attacking an Egyptian ship. Again the fact the Israelis launched 5 or 6 torpedoes, only one of which hit home points to a helter-skelter operation rather than one of clockwork precision directed from on high. Unless one wishes to posit another level of conspiracy, this time involving pilots using napalm instead of missiles and naval units unable to find their targets, the conclusion has to be that the Liberty incident was the result of tragic mistakes rather than a deliberate act.

  • Thank you Ivan. Honest assessment of historical evidence is always necessary when trying to recreate the past. The best study that I have read of the Liberty incident is that of Jay Cristol, a Captain in the US Naval Reserve and a Bankruptcy Judge. He has a topnotch site in which he goes over the incident in exacting detail.

    Below is a link to a letter Cristol has at his site by Marvin E. Nowicki, who was one of the Hebrew-English specialists aboard a Navy EC121 and who listened in on the Israeli pilots and the crews of the Israelis motor torpedo boats during the attack on the Liberty. The text of the letter is as follows:

    “Letter from Marvin E. Nowicki, Ph.D., published in The Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, May 16, 2001, page A-23:

    Tragic “Gross Error” In a 1967 Attack

    In regard to Timothy Naftali’s review of James Bamford’s book “Body of Secrets” (Leisure & Arts, May 9): Mr. Naftali doesn’t quite have it right concerning the book portion dealing with the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in 1967. I know because I am the person to whom Mr. Natfali [sic] refers as the “chief Hebrew-language analyst” aboard the U.S. Navy (not Air Force) EC121 aircraft. He says that I recall one of my teammates telling me of hearing references to “a U.S. flag” from Israeli pilots.

    For the record, we (my teammate and I) both heard and recorded the references to the U.S. flag made by the pilots and captains of the motor torpedo boats. My personal recollection remains after 34 years that the aircraft and MTBs prosecuted the Liberty until their operators had an opportunity to get close-in and see the flag, hence the references to the flag.

    My position, which is opposite of Mr. Bamford’s, is that the attack, though terrible and tragic especially to the crew members and their families on that ill-fated day in June 1967, was a gross error. How can I prove it? I can’t unless the transcripts/tapes are found and released to the public. I last saw them in a desk drawer at NSA in the late 1970s before I left the service.

    MARVIN E. NOWICKI, PH.D.
    Ashley, Ill.”

    http://www.thelibertyincident.com/nowicki-wsj.html

    And here is a link to the NSA intercepts which were released by the NSA in 2003:

    http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/declass/uss_liberty/recordings.shtml

  • Hi Donald, I have since read some of the threads on this matter. The impression I now have is that some of the more subtle (and thus more effective) insinuations, are from followers of the Pat Buchanan School of Selective Historical Reconstruction. For a particularly dishonest example, a phrase from an Israeli pilot “it is an American flag” is melded together with a phrase from his control station “fire anyway” or words to that effect to imply that the Israelis deliberately set out to destroy an American ship, when the truth is that the Israeli control was acting on the belief that it was an Egyptian ship running a false American flag. In addition there is too much recovered ‘memory’ years after the event, strewn around for my liking.

    The original inquest conducted a few days after the event http://www.thelibertyincident.com/docs/CourtOfInquiry.pdf contradicts later, lurid accounts of Israelis shelling lifeboats and firing on seamen in the waters among other lies. Not for nothing do the Romans have a principle of law : the first thought is the true thought.

  • Quite right Ivan. I hope I have conveyed on this blog what a sacred thing History is to me. History is not served when people attempt to twist it by lies to serve another purpose than letting us know what happened in the past. Here is another example, the use of alleged unnamed informants:

    “Fifteen years after the attack an Israeli Pilot who was ordered to participate in the attack came forward, approaching Liberty survivors and former Congressman Paul N. McCloskey. The pilot relates that he identified the ship as American and informed his superiors, but was told to proceed with the attack. When he refused to do so, he was arrested on returning to base.”

    Note, no name is given, nothing is brought forward to substantiate this. This unnamed fellow is usually described as a “senior Israeli lead pilot”.

    Well, the problem with all of this is we know who the lead Israeli pilot on the attack was: Yiftah Spector. After he was dismissed by the IAF in 2003 for his signing of a pilot’s protest against Israeli air operations in Gaza and on the West Bank, Spector talked about the attack on the Liberty. Here is a story that appeared on this in the Jerusalem Post on October 10, 2003:

    “An Israeli pilot who mistakenly attacked the American intelligence ship USS Liberty during the 1967 Six Day War said they were lucky he had no bombs – otherwise he would have sunk her.

    “There was a mistake. Mistakes happen. As far as I know, the mistake was of the USS Liberty being there in the first place,” said Brig.-Gen. (res.) Yiftah Spector.

    After 36 years Spector, who this week was dismissed by the IAF for signing the pilots’ refusal letter protesting the policy of targeted killings, agreed to speak to a reporter for the first time on his role in the attack on the Liberty, an American spy ship strafed on the fourth day of the war.

    Flying a Mirage III fighter jet code named “Kursa” or couch, Spector was the first pilot to reach the ship, which was about 20 nautical miles west of Gaza. He had been on an air-to-air mission and was not loaded with bombs.

    Spector, now 63, went on to become a triple ace, shooting down 15 enemy aircraft, and take part in the 1981 raid on the Iraqi nuclear reactor, earning himself a place in the pantheon of Israeli fly boys. This week he ended a 20-year stint teaching new generations of pilots.

    Spector had always refused to discuss the attack on the USS Liberty, which killed 34 US sailors and wounded 172, or even be revealed as the pilot who led the attack on her. Until now.

    “I did not fire on the Liberty as a human target. I was sent to attack a sailing vessel. This ship was on an escape route from the El Arish area, which at that same moment had heavy smoke rising from it,” Spector said.

    “It was thought to be an Egyptian vessel. This ship positively did not have any symbol or flag that I could see. What I was concerned with was that it was not one of ours. I looked for the symbol of our navy, which was a large white cross on its deck,” he told The Jerusalem Post. “This was not there, so it wasn’t one of ours.”

    The concern of the IAF was that Spector and his wingman, who had been diverted from the Suez Canal, would strike one of the Israel Navy ships in pursuit of the vessel, which was assumed to be Egyptian. IAF archival recordings of the pilots’ radio transmission of the actual attack obtained by the Post show that Spector was specifically requested to verify that the ship was a military vessel and not Israeli.

    According to the June 8, 1967, radio transmission, Spector said: “I can’t identify it but in any case it’s a military ship.”

    Speaking of the event 36 years later may have caused Spector to mix what he remembered with what he may have read and his testimony does not always match archival facts.

    “I circled it twice and it did not fire on me. My assumption was that it was likely to open fire at me and nevertheless I slowed down and I looked and there was positively no flag. Just to make sure I photographed it,” said Spector, who retired from active duty as a brigadier-general in 1984.

    Experts intimately acquainted with the incident said that the only photos Spector took were from his gun-sight camera during his strafing run. Regardless of whether the 455-foot ship bristling with eavesdropping antennas flew a US flag, which it evidently did from its starboard halyard, that banner was shot off in Spector’s first strafing pass.

    “I was told on the radio that it was an Egyptian ship off the Gaza coast. Hit it. The luck of the ship was that I was armed only with light ammunition [30mm] against aircraft. If I had had a bomb it would be sitting on the bottom today like the Titanic. I promise you,” Spector said.

    The 30mm rounds were armor piercing, which to this day led Liberty survivors to believe they had been under rocket attack. Spector’s first pass ignited a fire which caused the ship to billow black smoke. Ironically, Spector transmitted he suspected the Liberty was putting out smoke to deliberately mask itself.

    “Every order is given by commanders and the last one to receive it has to decide whether he will pull the trigger or not. In this instance I was the fighter. I checked what I had to check [i.e. that it was a military ship and not one of ours] and pulled the trigger,” Spector said.

    “The crew should be thankful for their luck [that I was on an air-to-air mission and did not have any bombs]. It is a pity we attacked. I’m sorry for poor Capt. (William Loren) McGonagle, who was wounded in the leg and the other guys who were killed and wounded.”

    “I’m sorry for the mistake. Years later my mates dropped flowers on the site where the ship was attacked,” Spector said. “I’m the last guy who has a problem with admitting mistakes and asking for forgiveness. There was a mistake, but it wasn’t my mistake.”

    He added he remains baffled that the conspiracy theories live on that Israel deliberately attacked the US intelligence ship. He suggested it might be due to anti-Semitism, or anti-Israeli sentiments.

    “I know that after the war one of the first things that was done was the establishment of a [US] senator’s inquiry. I know this personally, because I was called upon to testify before it. They came to the country and I was questioned. I told them what I told you just now – that there was a mistake. I am sorry for the mistake. In war mistakes happen,” Spector said.

    He said that he had never in the past 36 years ever met with any of the Liberty survivors, but has no qualms about doing so now.

    “They must understand that a mistake was made here,” Spector said. “The fool is one who wanders about in the dark in dangerous places, so they should not come with any complaints.”

Hearst Stands Behind Anti-Semite Helen Thomas

Sunday, June 6, AD 2010

Breaking News: The USA Today is reporting that Helen Thomas has retired following her anti-Semitic comments from last week (Biretta tip to TAC reader Phillip)

The Hearst Corporation, which owns Hearst Newspapers, continues to stand behind their ‘news reporter’ the anti-Semite Helen Thomas despite video evidence of her anti-Semitic remarks.

In her anti-Semitic remarks she called on Jews in the Middle-East to ‘get the hell out of Palestine’ and go back home to ‘Germany’ and ‘Poland’.  Apparently forgetting that they have been inhabiting the Holy Land for several thousands of years.

The Hearst Corporation, Helen Thomas’ employer, continues to stand behind her, but are saying her comments do not represent the values of the Hearst Corporation.

Continue reading...

49 Responses to Hearst Stands Behind Anti-Semite Helen Thomas

  • Fire the bigot. She has shamed herself, her profession and any organization she represents. Her apology rings hollow. She has revealed her true face and no mealymouthed apology can take that away.

  • The bigot should be fired. I am so sick of there being a double standard in our society. Liberals can get away with pretty much anything, while conservatives have to walk around treating every situation, every person, and everything with kid gloves for fear of being taken out of context or being falsely accused of something. She has violated journalistic integrity, ethics, and needs to go.

  • A bigot is a bigot, whether liberal or conservative! While I am personally left of center on political and social issues, I have no tolerance for racism. With respect to this issue, Hearst Corporation needs to fire Helen Thomas for her ignorant and inflammatory words and quickly distance themselves from this pitiful person.

  • GaryS,

    I tweaked my post just a bit to be more balanced.

    Bigots come from all parts of the political spectrum.

    It’s our duty as New Media journalists to call for fairness in reporting and even our columns.

    Helen Thomas may be a liberal, but that’s not the reason why she’s a bigot.

    She’s a bigot because she’s ignorant.

  • ISRAEL HAS DIRESPECTED AMERICA AND THE CATHOLIC RELIGION LONG ENOUGH WE HAVE SEEN ENOUGH KILLING ITS TIME TO STOP AND BY NOT STANDING UP TO THEM MAKES THE PROBLEM LAST. OBAMA IS AMERICAS #3 BEST IN HISTORY GET IT RIGHT

  • What Helen said is true,then why that much hullabaloo..
    It seems even “The American Catholic” is sleeping over the hubris of total silence which prevails here,so much so that speaking about zionist barbarism and holocaust is taboo.Lets break this shield and make this country free from the grip of zionist menace.

  • The Jew haters are crawling out from beneath their rocks Tito, which is completely unsurprising. Anti-Semitism is an interesting example of how fools project their own failings in life upon some “devil” group. Similar headcases can be seen among the ranks of Catholic haters and among those who today fear that the Masons are behind all things evil. For these type of loons, evil is personified in the group they hate and fear and reasoned debate with such idiots is as futile as attempting to debate a forest fire.

  • Liberalism is a pathology.

    God bless freedom loving-people everywhere. God bless the gallant Israel people courageously building their nation under constant rocket attacks from Gaza and south Lebanon.

    ATG: Who were the other two great POTUSes? Carter and Clinton?

    If nothing else (and there are other reasons to support Israel, including it’s our ally in the global terror war on us), Isreal is the only democracy in the entire Mid East. Seems you rats hate Jooooos more than you love freedom.

    Get out of the way. There is a war on, morons.

  • I agree, Donald. How about like debating a robot or a brick wall?

  • It’s amazing that people would come out defending such bigotry Don.

    I agree on projecting. If they would only turn to God and pray they will find relief from the grip of hate they are in.

  • Not to defend Helen Thomas in ANY way (she’s always been an overrated gasbag in my opinion), but perhaps Hearst Corp. fears that they will get MORE flak from the MSM if they throw the almost 90-year-old “dean of the White House press corps” under the bus. Perhaps a bit of reverse sexism is at work here also… they can’t bring themselves to treat a woman, especially an elderly woman, with the same harshness that would certainly be meted out to a young or middle-aged man who said the same thing?

  • Elaine,

    Playing devil’s advocate is tough.

    But in that case, then it would be reverse ageism.

  • For what its worth,

    The recent ‘go back to Poland’ remarks of Helen Thomas did not come out of the blue. She has made literally hundreds of remarks over the past 30 years that come from the same mind set.

    Anybody who considers themselves shocked at her latest remarks hasn’t been paying attention.

  • I apologize in advance.

    Jim Treacher, “Remember: You’re a Nazi for saying we should enforce our own immigration laws… But not for telling the Jews to beat it.”

  • Beat you to the punch by seconds Phillip!

    That’s an interesting crowd.

  • I support Helen Thomas.

    Helen, keep speaking your mind. You are an inspiration.

  • Though Mike gives needed perspective. Like pro-abort nuns show that some Catholics voted for Obama because he is pro-abortion, Mike shows that some who oppose any and all Israeli actions do so because they want Jews to abandon Israel.

  • WOW, I see Hamas has their media commenting here on politico, how about let’s try this. I say, “All Muslims should leave America and go back home to the middle east, I guess Mecca” put on your burkes, take off your socks, put on your crocks, and start doing some pushups to the black stone” let’s try something else, Muhammad was a evil devil, and the Muslim religion runs on blood, like a car runs on gas, Muslims survive on blood, you kill, you slaughter, even your own children if they dear take off the burke, you choke them with your own hands, and then you go to mecca, take these big iron chains and you bang yourself up until you see yourself standing in a blood bath. My point is, get out of America and do some more of that iron chain bloody banging thing.

  • Thanks Phillip for that update.

    Need/want a job that doesn’t pay anything?

  • Always looking for non-paying jobs.

  • My message is of support for Helen Thomas. Helen Thomas spoke a truth and she should be thank for her frankness. She is right – Israel should get out of Palestine. After WW II, Germany should have been required to provide the land for the Jewish home state – not the Palestinians.

    The pressure of a few Zionists changed the course of Middle East history. According to President Truman, “The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders — actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats — disturbed and annoyed me.”

    AIPAC continues that pressure and propaganda today and the White House continues to do their bidding. It’s irrational and unbalanced.

  • Germany should have been required to provide the land for the Jewish home state

    Germany, home of the Jews. Not like, say, Judea or any place near there.

  • She had de facto tenure like Strom Thurmond in the Senate and the old man who changes the toner at work. They shouldn’t be there anymore but nobody has the heart to throw them out.

    Question: When was the last time you read her column? I honestly never have.

  • RR,

    I don’t disagree, but I’d point out that the old man changing the toner is not mean and even Strom mellowed a lot with age, but HT was famous for her wicked tongue, acid pen, and unabashed anti-Semitic views. Most companies would not tolerate a toner-changer who lapses into chronic bigoted commentary.

    Also agree that no one read her though.

  • RR,

    Thurmond is elected.

    Helen Thomas is employed.

    Big difference.

  • Helen is right to tell the right-wing killer state of Isreal to get out of Palenstine!

  • “Isreal to get out of Palenstine”

    Isreal and Palenstine? If you are going to spew hate at least adjust the tin foil hat to spell check mode.

  • “The archeological record indicates that the Jewish people evolved out of native Cana’anite peoples and invading tribes. Some time between about 1800 and 1500 B.C., it is thought that a Semitic people called Hebrews (hapiru) left Mesopotamia and settled in Canaan.”

    So, why should the Jews be forced to leave Israel?

  • I don’t really care what the reason is, I’m glad she isn’t propagandizing, er, ah, I mean reporting from the White House.

    As for her being a bigot – It is an odd thing since she is of Lebanese descent that makes her as Semitic as Sephardic Jews. Of course, Karl Marx hated Jews too and he was born Jewish – go figure. She isn’t necessarily wrong that Ashkanazi Jews are of European stock (for the most part). Nevertheless, lefties tend to take a small kernel of truth and arrive at a severely erroneous conclusion. Perhaps she forgot what happened to Jews in Germany and Poland.

    She’s anti-Jewish for the same reasons most people who hate Jews are – Jews represent the spoken Word of God. Jesus was a Jew. Usually when it is unfashionable to attack Christians because they represent a political majority then it is better to attack Jews. Hitler attacked Jews because most Germans were Christian (nominally in most cases in the decadent Wiemar Republic – huh – seems familiar). He didn’t want the Christians to feel threatened – yet. Of course, Hitler, like all lefties was a pagan and wanted a racist-nationalistic-pagan (probably homosexual) ethos to rule. Christ had to be evicted without upsetting the Christians. So evict his origins – Salvation comes from the Jews. Once the Jews were demonized and paganism unleashed – Catholic priests were next in line and then more and more Christians of all stripes.

    I don’t know who is surprised by her statements – they are nothing new, nor are they unique. Most ‘Arabs’ feel that way. Sadly, I have to state that I share a common heritage with Thomas – I am of Levantine descent born in Lebanon with roots from Jerusalem, Palestine. Incidentally, Palestine has never been a country so I am not sure how Israel can occupy it. Palestine is an ancient Roman province and has been occupied as such by various regimes most notably the Ottomans and the British. Most other Arabs, Muslims and liberal opportunists use the Palestinians (many of whom are truly suffering) as tool to beat Israel with. They don’t care about the people who live in Gaza and the West Bank anymore than liberal opportunists (racists) cared about the plight of American Negros in the 60s – blacks were just a convenient tool with which they beat the Man, the establishment. Liberals have done nothing to help blacks – in fact, liberals are responsible for the holocaust of 15 million blacks in this country. As usual when your scheme is based on a victim class – you cannot allow that class to ever stop being victims.

    If the Palestinians had welcomed the Holocaust survivors things may be very different today. Nevertheless, Israel played a hand in the animosity – many atrocities were committed (then again I love America and we slaughtered Indians and enslaved Africans so we can’t all be proud of everything our nation does/did). Additionally as inhospitable as Muslims are to Christians, Israel hasn’t been much of a friend either. The true victims of this Palestinian/Israeli conflict are the minority of Christians whose roots go back to the time of Christ in His land and most notably in the city He conquered with His own Blood. Don’t confuse Jews with Israel and don’t confuse the modern-nation state with ancient Israel and certainly not with the inheritors of the promise as most of our Protestant brothers do.

    Nothing good ever comes from anti-Jewish expressions because once the demon of bigotry is unleashed he attacks the source and we all know the source is God.

    Since liberals (lefties) are godless, it goes to follow that they will hate Jews and by extension the Church. Nothing new under the sun.

  • Many Americans feel the same way! She was an easy target to push away! I remember when I attended a lecture at USC by President George H W Bush with my ex girlfriend who was a USC Student and Jewish. She was upset by the comments by the former president when he said that “one of the problems in America is that that Jews have too much power and influence in Washington”. I could not believe my ears, all the board of trustees were there, the university president, and the notable members of the Jewish community of Los Angeles, President Bush knew that they were present because we had attended a diner and got photographed. Yet he did not care to upset them and the event when without further incident. The tapes released about president Nixon and many other presidents show that they all have issues with Israel and Jewish people.

  • I suspect Mr. Paterson that you are lying not only about what former President Bush said, but also about ever having a girlfriend who was Jewish. As to the comments by Bush, link to a news account of them.

  • In reply to Tito – Ignorance is a lack of education not understanding. Thomas is a bigot not out of ignorance, for she is certainly what society would call an educated person; she is an anti-semetic loon whose bigotry and hatred of President Bush finally emerged. There are few things worse than closet bigotry. I can’t agree with Obama’s racism but at least he is out in the open about it. (Read his book.)
    Thomas on the other hand hid hers and probably effected many aspiring Jewish writers before she fortunately lost her control and spouted forth her true feelings.
    Remember this absolute truth about the Middle East: When the Arabs lay down their arms there will be peace; when the Israelis lay down their arms there will be a slaughter that will make the Holocaust pale in comparison.

  • Well stated American Knight ! I was thinking of composing the same message until I read your post 🙂

  • Donald & Erik,

    I doubt that even Mr. George “NWO” Bush (41) would have been stupid enough to make comments like that, even if he believed them. Of course, his anti-Jewish feelings could have been inherited from his Nazi-supporting father – but I don’t know of any evidence that indicts George H. W. of this directly.

    As for Jews having too much power and influence in the U.S. I totally agree that they do. Of course that can only be true if by Jews we mean liberals of Jewish origin that hardly practice a tenet of the Hebrew faith and are represented in larger percentages than the Jewish population at large in Hollywierd, the press (so-called), and academe. Of course, if one were to really ask these ‘Jews’ about their Jewishness – it would be a cultural identity and not a religious conviction. I’d suspect a properly catechized Catholic knows more about the Hebrew religion than the average, secular, lefty-loony ‘Jew”. These people can hardly be Jewish – even just culturally – after surviving the extermination of as much as 85% (Germany and Poland – Ms. Thomas) of your population, how can you abort babies at such high percentages – something is very, very wrong and sadly most Hebrews are making sacrifices to Moloch and not following Moses and the Prophets.

  • “from his Nazi-supporting father”

    Prescott Bush was not a support of the Nazis AK. That is simply another meme of the tinfoil hat brigade. He served in WWI as an artillery officer and participated in the Meuse-Argonne offensive.

    The Anti-Defamation League years ago addressed the vile conspiracy allegations against Prescott Bush:

    “Rumors about the alleged Nazi ‘ties’ of the late Prescott Bush … have circulated widely through the internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated. Despite some early financial dealings between Prescott Bush and a Nazi industrialist named Fritz Thyssen (who was arrested by the Nazi regime in 1938 and imprisoned during the war), Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathizer.”

    Prescott Bush did have close ties with Planned Parenthood which of course makes him persona non grata for me. However, fair is fair, and conspiracy nuttiness is conspiracy nuttiness.

  • Perhaps ‘Nazi-sympathizer’ is a bit extreme; however, he was indifferent to the evils of Nazism. He made a fortune and continued to work with the Nazi financiers after the war started and after the nature of Nazism and the atrocities committed by them was known.

    Perhaps Nazism isn’t what Sen. Bush wanted, but it is pretty clear that he desired some form of totalitarianish society and he most certainly was a Eugenicist. Fellow-travelers are just as guilty as those they travel with.

    This is not conspiracy nuttiness (although there is much of that out there). This is conspiracy fact, although it would be foolish not to admit that since conspiracies are secret it is often difficult, but not impossible, to discern the proper context.

    Republicans are not infallible and the party has been controlled by those not loyal to orthodox conservatism far more often than it has not. Not every attack on a ‘Republican’ is from the left and many of the attackers are legitimate conservatives. Perhaps if more Republicans were orthodox conservatives, America would not be in the state she’s in and people like Helen Thomas would not have voices to spread propaganda and maybe even BHO would not be the chief executive – of course, neither would John McCain.

    Ignore conspiracies at your own peril Mr. McClarey – King Louis certainly did and so did the residents of the Wiemar Republic.

  • “He made a fortune and continued to work with the Nazi financiers after the war started and after the nature of Nazism and the atrocities committed by them was known.”

    Complete baloney AK.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html

  • Fox News isn’t exactly the source I would go to for this. The declassified (with some redaction) papers indicate that many American capitalist/industrialists were involved with the Nazis and also the Bolsheviks – including Sen. Bush. Profiting from war is not a new activity and it hasn’t gone away. The Soviets, the Nazis, the Chi-Comms and many others would not have ever been able to come to the level of power they achieved without the financial help of trans-national financiers – many of them ‘Americans’. For that matter Saddam and the opium warlords couldn’t survive for long either and when they get taken down who profits again?

    Some of these men were perhaps just interested in making money, some may have been misled, but at some point they knew what they were involved in and either didn’t care, chose to ignore or were complicit in the atrocities committed by the regimes they were supporting and profiting from.

    Just to be clear – I don’t transfer Prescott’s guilt to his son, although I suspect that G.H.W. had a sinister agenda and was placed in the Reagan camp to undermine orthodox conservatism – I don’t ascribe Nazi sympathies to him – and certainly not to W. But, I also don’t accuse J.F.K of the guilt of his father either.

    Believe what you want, but I would strongly suggest a little more skepticism toward the duo-opoly propaganda that is designed to manage the way we think. By creating an us vs. them, we are right they are wrong paradigm – there are powers that seek to manage outcomes while giving us the false impression of choice. We are fools if we confuse the GOP with authentic conservatism. If one is a Republican party member with a my party right or wrong attitude, one is hard-pressed to call themselves a conservative.

    John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Nelson Rockefeller are all Republicans – non of them are conservatives – at least one of them is an honorable man who loves his country – but that doesn’t change the fact that he isn’t conservative. Wake up – the time to play party games has passed. Blindly defending everything Republican is almost, but not quite, as foolish as Thomas blaming Israel and Jews for all the world’s evils. This is not a personal attack – it is a fraternal correction. I believe that all orthodox Catholics are conservative by nature – but we shouldn’t be Republicans and we can’t be Democrats.

  • ATG insists that Israel disrespects America and the Catholic “Religion”. This borders on paranoid delusion. It is true that many actions and policies taken by the modern state of Israel were not enacted in order to better adhere to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The same could be said about many of the actions and policies of our own bishops- particularly here in the good ol’ US of A.

    As for Israel and the Catholic religion, what came first, the chicken or the egg? Catholic shrines and orders in the Holy Land have taken a bit of abeating recently at the hands of the Israeli government in matters relating to immigration and visas. Given the absolute trash spewed out by some who were authorized (or at least allowed) to speak from Peter’s See, had I been in charge of Israeli INS operations and policy, I would have zeroed out visa requests from the Vatican not tied to diplomatic necessity.

    I would have to say that a fair measure of the maltreatment of Church officials and interests in Israel was richly earned; not by Church teaching, but often by those expected to teach it.

    There are many seemingly even handed statements that can have no other political effect than to morally equate attempted mass murder (burka bombers, rocket attacks) with any reasonably effective steps available to prevent it. When church mouthpieces have uttered these statements, they have done willful violence to the truth and have brought shame on the Body of Christ.

  • Fox News isn’t exactly the source I would go to for this. T

    AK, though your intentions are honorable, you have this nasty habit of simply dismissing any piece of evidence that contradicts your worldview. Donald has now provided a couple of links to discredit your position, and yet you just charge ahead based on nothing more than supposition. Do you have any evidence to back up your claims that Prescott Bush was a Nazi sympathizer.

    If one is a Republican party member with a my party right or wrong attitude, one is hard-pressed to call themselves a conservative.

    Talk about a non sequiter, the only person making a partisan point is you. I don’t think Donald or anyone else here is defending Prescott Bush because he was a Republican – indeed Donald indicated disliking him because of his associations with Planned Parenthood. I couldn’t care less about salvaging the reputation of anyone with the last name Bush. But what’s fair is fair, and accusing someone – even a person long dead – of being a Nazi sympathizer is a pretty serious charge that should be backed up with something resembling real evidence.

  • What Paul said.

  • Paul I accept the criticism fairly – I will admit that I take the com boxes to be more a casual conversation than a master’s thesis and my inflection, etc. doesn’t translate into writing – I don’t think I am particularly good writer. I am also aware that I tend to be a velvet hammer in debating – please accept my apologies for the nasty habit – I meant no harm – I like y’all. Please also accept my apologies for not listing all the source documents. I can list one or two – only due to lack of time; however, my technological capability isn’t any better than my writing so the link probably won’t work.

    As for my world view, I try to make sure it is a Catholic world view – I am sure I fail often. I will admit that I am extremely skeptical of government power and see numerous conspiracies in history – I assume that there are numerous conspiracies now – although, I am sure I don’t know about them all and may have some incorrect information about some of them, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t occurring. I am not referring to aliens, Area 51, and other nutty ideas; rather, things like Jacobins, Masons, Nazis, Bolsheviks, etc.

    Here is a facsimile of the Federal Register listing Prescott Bush as one of seven owners of Union Banking Corp, which handled financial interests for Fritz Thyssen – an early supporter of the Nazis. Assets seized by the US government for supporting enemies of the USA.

    http://www.mbpolitics.com/bush2000/Vesting.htm

    Also, see an article by John Buchanan in the New Hampshire Gazette – I think it was October 2003.

    There is no question that there are some in power who wish to manage the whole globe and the lives of every human – although not every human currently living because they want to reduce our numbers – they are eugenicists after all. It is also clear that they are using psychological warfare to manipulate our thinking because they prefer to set up totalitarianism on the Brave New World – happy slavery model; rather than the 1984 forced slavery models used in the past. It seems that Sen. Bush was one of those men, or at least willing to go along with their designs even if he didn’t agree or couldn’t see the whole conspiracy.

    This is not a reflection on both presidents Bush – although H.W. was certainly leaning in the new world order direction.

  • Here is an unbiased article on the accusation that Senator Prescott Bush was a Nazi sympathizer.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

  • Here is a good overview of why the accusations against Prescott Bush are firmly in the realm of the deranged:

    http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2434/was-president-bushs-great-grandfather-a-nazi

  • Deranged?

    “So, did Bush and his firm finance the Nazis and enable Germany to rearm? Indirectly, yes.”

    That last word is YES – indirect? So what – it was still done. If he is such a good banker how could he not have seen it?

    “But they had a lot of company. Some of the most distinguished names in American business had investments or subsidiaries in prewar Germany, including Standard Oil and General Motors. Critics have argued for years that without U.S. money, the Nazis could never have waged war. But American business has always invested in totalitarian regimes–witness our dealings with mainland China.”

    So that makes it OK, because most of the other American big wigs have been and continue to invest in totalitarian regimes. This sounds more like a support for my ‘theory’ than a refutation.

    “Loftus tells me there’s more to it than that. He says that the value of German industrial assets in which Bush and friends invested increased during World War II, in part due to slave labor, and that Bush benefited from this increase when the assets were returned–supposedly he got $1.5 million when UBC was liquidated in 1951. I’ll buy the claim that Bush got his share of UBC back–it was an American bank, after all–but the idea that his German holdings increased in value despite being obliterated by Allied bombs is ridiculous.”

    Actually most ‘American’ assets in Germany, especially Rockefeller/IG Farben structures were specifically not bombed. Much like all the targets that our Naval aviators were not allowed to bomb during Vietnam. Does anyone think that we couldn’t have won in Vietnam and for that matter Iraq in less than a decade – how about a couple of months? That is unless our military is specifically not allowed to bomb certain things because certain politicos backers have interests in prolonged wars.

    Read Ephesians 6 and tell me that St. Paul is a conspiracy theorist.

Juden Raus!

Saturday, June 5, AD 2010

Helen Thomas, the Deaness of the Washington Press Corps, delivered the above charming sentiments at a Jewish Heritage Celebration at the White House on May 27.  Thomas has been a left wing loon forever, and has always been hostile to Israel, but here she let the mask slip to reveal the bigot within.  She later made a perfunctory apology for saying what she obviously believes with all her heart.

Continue reading...

20 Responses to Juden Raus!

  • Will there be a cry for her employer to fire her?

    If she were a conservative there would be hell to pay.

  • I thought a house landed on her.

  • T. Shaw,

    You shouldn’t drag down witches like that. It’s an insult to witches everywhere.

  • I apologize.

    Silver lining: She’s an appropriate “spokes-model” for the antisemites masquerading as peace and justice liberals.

  • If Helen Thomas was, say, a woman of 40, I’d blame such a ridiculous statement on ignorance due to an appallingly poor educational system. But she was in her 20’s when WWII ended and they showed newsreels of the death camps in the movie theaters. No excuses.

    Thomas also seems unaware that a majority of Israeli Jews are not from “Germany and Poland” but are Sephardis from the Muslim world who were booted out of their old countries when the state of Israel was created.

    If she is so blatantly ignorant of such basic facts, I’d say it’s long past time she retired.

  • Tito, if she were a conservative, liberals would nod in silent agreement and conservatives would jump through hoops to explain why she didn’t really mean what she said.

  • “liberals would nod in silent agreement and conservatives would jump through hoops to explain why she didn’t really mean what she said”

    You are wrong about the latter part of that equation restrainedradical. Most conservatives are very supportive of Israel and have very little tolerance for anti-Semites.

  • Additionally the mind boggles at the concept of Helen Thomas as a conservative. One might as well attempt to consider Bill Clinton as a trappist monk.

  • conservatives would jump through hoops to explain why she didn’t really mean what she said.

    Pat Buchanan would like a word with you.

  • I probably should expand upon my comment just a tad, in case it flew over anyone’s head. Pat Buchanan is regularly excoriated by many conservatives for his anti-Israeli sentiments (and indeed defended by those sympathetic to his worldview).

  • I was thinking the same thing Paul

  • Re: Anti-Semite Helen Thomas
    She shows her complete lack of knowledge concerning Israel. Historically, the land belongs to them. She should read up on the kings of Israeland how the Jewish nation was formed.
    The UN gave back a portion of the Jewish land to its people in 1948. They have a legal right to be there. “Palestine” was a name given to the land of Israel by the Romans to humiliate the Jewish people. If she reads her history she will learn this.
    SHE SHOULD BE FIRED! She’s an insensitive bigot.

  • Though I think Buchanan was deemed an anti-semite by William F. Buckley a number of years ago in an articl at National Review. Good to know we all agree that Helen Thomas is in he same league.

    RR is right that here are anti-semites on the right. I think it is becoming much more fashionable on the left however. That’s not to say anyone who disagrees with Israel is. But there they are.

  • And as Buckley’s example shows, Conservatives kick them off the magazine. What will liberals do with Thomas?

  • Actually, IIRC Buckley was less definitive re Buchanan. What I believe he wrote was something to the effect that given all the evidence a reasonable man could conclude that Buchanan was anti-semitic. But that was enough for many conservatives, including those who otherwise agreed with many of PB’s positions.

  • I think the best quote from the article in question is where Buckley found it “impossible to defend Pat Buchanan against the charge that what he did and said during the period under examination amounted to anti-Semitism, whatever it was that drove him to say and do it: most probably, an iconoclastic temperament.”

    So he perhaps didn’t see him as an anti-Semite though he found what he wrote and said anti-Semitic.

  • Pingback: Hearst Stands Behind Anti-Semite Helen Thomas « The American Catholic
  • Fire the bigot. She has shamed herself, her profession and any organization she represents. Her apology rings hollow. She has revealed her true face, and no mealymouthed apology change that.

  • I’ll grant that PB is extremely non-interventionist. I don’t think that necessarily equates with anti-semitism. He seems to advocate cutting foreign aid pretty much across the board. But most journalists, left or right, are extremely afraid of making any criticism of Israel (or our aid to them) and incurring the A-S label.

  • I don’t really think Thomas and PB are in the same league. PB, although I suppose you could interpret his stance against aid to Israel as anti-semitic, I don’t recall him advocating for kicking the Jews out of Israel. He seems to be more of the opinion that it’s simply not our business (and not in our interest) to get involved. I would welcome any correction on that.

    Thomas seems to clearly advocate the US and the world being involved, and wanting the Jewish people out, with apparently very little interest in the various claims involved. I can’t really tell from the clip if she was referring only to the occupied territories, but the fact she said they should go back to Poland and Germany (rather than Israel proper) reveals that she considers Israel itself to be occupied territory.