Discussion:
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
(too old to reply)
HHW
2009-02-28 23:46:49 UTC
Permalink
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.

For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.

To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "antidefamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.

Take, for example, Foxman's recent attack on Bill Moyers (a
longstanding friend and occasional supporter of my work). When Moyers
broadcast a less than laudatory commentary about Israel's Gaza
invasion, Foxman accused the veteran journalist and liberal icon of --
I kid you not -- "moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism." (You can read it online, together with
Moyers's response.) The incident says far more about Foxman than
Moyers. As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum observed, Moyers
"is one of the most admired figures in America. This attack will harm
not at all. It will, in fact, enhance his reputation just as Ed
Murrow's was enhanced by the attacks on him during the McCarthy era."
Still, it is demonstrative of the maximalist Manichaean mindset that
characterizes so much of American Jewish officialdom. Among Moyers's
myriad sins, says Foxman, was his "ignorance of the terrorist threat
against Israel, claiming that checkpoints, the security fence, and the
Gaza operation are tactics of humiliation rather than counter-
terrorism." Now really: is it so hard to imagine that the checkpoints,
security fence and Gaza operations are tactics of both humiliation and
counter-terrorism? Where, exactly, would be the contradiction?

But for the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto
defensive and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
He goes so far as to attack Barack Obama's choice of former Senator
George Mitchell as the U.S. envoy to the region because -- get this --
Mitchell is "fair" and "meticulously even-handed," and Foxman says he
is "not sure the situation requires that kind of approach." Foxman's
moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to
undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide --
specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians. Foxman
does not dispute that genocide took place; rather, he argues that it
would be inconvenient for Turkish (and Israeli) Jews were Congress to
take note of it. So we have reached a point where an organization
founded by Jews in 1913 to "secure justice and fair treatment to all
citizens alike" is now in the business of defaming those with whom its
director disagrees and purposely turning a blind eye to genocide. In
light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in
a similar fashion, Foxman's position strikes this Jew at least as one
too many ironies to be tolerated.

What's more, the defamation of Moyers escalated further. Following
Foxman's fusillade, New York Times neocon William Kristol inserted in
a regular column -- yet another devoted as usual to the majesty of
George W. Bush's leadership -- an attack on Moyers for allegedly
"lambast[ing] Israel for what he called its 'state terrorism,' its
'waging war on an entire population' in Gaza." Like Foxman, Kristol
also implied that Moyers was guilty of racism.

Again, read the text of Moyers's remarks. Neither Kristol nor Foxman
notes his stated belief that "every nation has the right to defend its
people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would
like to see every Jew in Israel dead," or his deep concern about the
growth of "a radical stream of Islam [that] now seeks to eliminate
Israel from the face of the earth." Yet despite the fact that Bill
Moyers is, well, Bill Moyers, the Times editors not only allowed
Kristol to deliberately distort and decontextualize his remarks; they
would not allow Moyers to defend himself in his own words in response.
After the PBS journalist submitted a letter to the editor, he was
told, "We will not print that 'William Kristol distorts or
misrepresents,' and the editors will not budge." They insisted that
the letter be changed for publication to read, "I take strong
exception to William Kristol's characterization," and they truncated
much else.

This is pathetic and ridiculous. If one were to survey, say, 1,000
journalists or even 1,000 New York Times readers and ask them whether
they were more likely to trust the judgment, honesty or bravery of
Bill Moyers or of William Kristol, my guess is that the result would
be a landslide victory in Moyers's favor that would dwarf that of
Barack Obama's over John McCain. I'd even bet the same would be true
in a private survey of Times editors. Yet publisher Arthur Sulzberger
Jr. and editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal -- rather than admit
their colossal mistake in giving so prestigious and influential a
perch to Kristol, who was at long last ushered off the page with his
next column just one week later -- instead chose to empower his
McCarthyite slanders against one of America's most distinguished
patriots and practitioners of their profession.

Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the celebrated author and
patriot David Grossman termed the Gaza operation "just one more way-
station on a road paved with fire, violence and hatred," and added,
"our conduct here in this region has, for a long time, been flawed,
immoral and unwise."

When Foxman and Kristol have the guts to go after Grossman -- who,
after all, lost his son two years ago in a war both men supported from
the comfort of their armchairs -- then perhaps we might take seriously
their complaints about the relatively moderate sentiments expressed by
Moyers. Until then, I fear, we must chalk up their ideological
fanaticism and their moral and intellectual confusion as yet another
casualty of this endlessly destructive conflict.

See more stories tagged with: bill moyers, mitchell, abe foxman, anti-
defemation league
B. Cramer
2009-02-28 23:56:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
I've always thought the image of Foxman (link attached) is so very typical
of the gimme, gimme, gimme attitude he displays.

The man is a disgrace.

Loading Image...
Post by HHW
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "antidefamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
Take, for example, Foxman's recent attack on Bill Moyers (a
longstanding friend and occasional supporter of my work). When Moyers
broadcast a less than laudatory commentary about Israel's Gaza
invasion, Foxman accused the veteran journalist and liberal icon of --
I kid you not -- "moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism." (You can read it online, together with
Moyers's response.) The incident says far more about Foxman than
Moyers. As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum observed, Moyers
"is one of the most admired figures in America. This attack will harm
not at all. It will, in fact, enhance his reputation just as Ed
Murrow's was enhanced by the attacks on him during the McCarthy era."
Still, it is demonstrative of the maximalist Manichaean mindset that
characterizes so much of American Jewish officialdom. Among Moyers's
myriad sins, says Foxman, was his "ignorance of the terrorist threat
against Israel, claiming that checkpoints, the security fence, and the
Gaza operation are tactics of humiliation rather than counter-
terrorism." Now really: is it so hard to imagine that the checkpoints,
security fence and Gaza operations are tactics of both humiliation and
counter-terrorism? Where, exactly, would be the contradiction?
But for the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto
defensive and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
He goes so far as to attack Barack Obama's choice of former Senator
George Mitchell as the U.S. envoy to the region because -- get this --
Mitchell is "fair" and "meticulously even-handed," and Foxman says he
is "not sure the situation requires that kind of approach." Foxman's
moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to
undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide --
specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians. Foxman
does not dispute that genocide took place; rather, he argues that it
would be inconvenient for Turkish (and Israeli) Jews were Congress to
take note of it. So we have reached a point where an organization
founded by Jews in 1913 to "secure justice and fair treatment to all
citizens alike" is now in the business of defaming those with whom its
director disagrees and purposely turning a blind eye to genocide. In
light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in
a similar fashion, Foxman's position strikes this Jew at least as one
too many ironies to be tolerated.
What's more, the defamation of Moyers escalated further. Following
Foxman's fusillade, New York Times neocon William Kristol inserted in
a regular column -- yet another devoted as usual to the majesty of
George W. Bush's leadership -- an attack on Moyers for allegedly
"lambast[ing] Israel for what he called its 'state terrorism,' its
'waging war on an entire population' in Gaza." Like Foxman, Kristol
also implied that Moyers was guilty of racism.
Again, read the text of Moyers's remarks. Neither Kristol nor Foxman
notes his stated belief that "every nation has the right to defend its
people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would
like to see every Jew in Israel dead," or his deep concern about the
growth of "a radical stream of Islam [that] now seeks to eliminate
Israel from the face of the earth." Yet despite the fact that Bill
Moyers is, well, Bill Moyers, the Times editors not only allowed
Kristol to deliberately distort and decontextualize his remarks; they
would not allow Moyers to defend himself in his own words in response.
After the PBS journalist submitted a letter to the editor, he was
told, "We will not print that 'William Kristol distorts or
misrepresents,' and the editors will not budge." They insisted that
the letter be changed for publication to read, "I take strong
exception to William Kristol's characterization," and they truncated
much else.
This is pathetic and ridiculous. If one were to survey, say, 1,000
journalists or even 1,000 New York Times readers and ask them whether
they were more likely to trust the judgment, honesty or bravery of
Bill Moyers or of William Kristol, my guess is that the result would
be a landslide victory in Moyers's favor that would dwarf that of
Barack Obama's over John McCain. I'd even bet the same would be true
in a private survey of Times editors. Yet publisher Arthur Sulzberger
Jr. and editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal -- rather than admit
their colossal mistake in giving so prestigious and influential a
perch to Kristol, who was at long last ushered off the page with his
next column just one week later -- instead chose to empower his
McCarthyite slanders against one of America's most distinguished
patriots and practitioners of their profession.
Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the celebrated author and
patriot David Grossman termed the Gaza operation "just one more way-
station on a road paved with fire, violence and hatred," and added,
"our conduct here in this region has, for a long time, been flawed,
immoral and unwise."
When Foxman and Kristol have the guts to go after Grossman -- who,
after all, lost his son two years ago in a war both men supported from
the comfort of their armchairs -- then perhaps we might take seriously
their complaints about the relatively moderate sentiments expressed by
Moyers. Until then, I fear, we must chalk up their ideological
fanaticism and their moral and intellectual confusion as yet another
casualty of this endlessly destructive conflict.
See more stories tagged with: bill moyers, mitchell, abe foxman, anti-
defemation league
B***@isp.com
2009-03-01 00:14:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by B. Cramer
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
I've always thought the image of Foxman (link attached) is so very typical
of the gimme, gimme, gimme attitude he displays.
The man is a disgrace.
According to Foxman "I was saved from the Germans by my Polish
(Catholic) nanny".

I wonder how many Polish Catholic families had jew nannies, or even
had a nanny at all.

One must wonder why people in their own countries end up as servants
in the homes of
the jew instead of the other way around. How many German women were
servants in their
own nation to the jew? Hitler's grandmother was a servant in the home
of some rich jew in
Austria. I look forward to the day when it is the jew who nannies and
does the cleaning
in the homes of the people in whose nations they have settled, or is
honest labour something
tht only the "goy" is capable of?
Post by B. Cramer
Post by HHW
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "antidefamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
Take, for example, Foxman's recent attack on Bill Moyers (a
longstanding friend and occasional supporter of my work). When Moyers
broadcast a less than laudatory commentary about Israel's Gaza
invasion, Foxman accused the veteran journalist and liberal icon of --
I kid you not -- "moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism." (You can read it online, together with
Moyers's response.) The incident says far more about Foxman than
Moyers. As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum observed, Moyers
"is one of the most admired figures in America. This attack will harm
not at all. It will, in fact, enhance his reputation just as Ed
Murrow's was enhanced by the attacks on him during the McCarthy era."
Still, it is demonstrative of the maximalist Manichaean mindset that
characterizes so much of American Jewish officialdom. Among Moyers's
myriad sins, says Foxman, was his "ignorance of the terrorist threat
against Israel, claiming that checkpoints, the security fence, and the
Gaza operation are tactics of humiliation rather than counter-
terrorism." Now really: is it so hard to imagine that the checkpoints,
security fence and Gaza operations are tactics of both humiliation and
counter-terrorism? Where, exactly, would be the contradiction?
But for the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto
defensive and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
He goes so far as to attack Barack Obama's choice of former Senator
George Mitchell as the U.S. envoy to the region because -- get this --
Mitchell is "fair" and "meticulously even-handed," and Foxman says he
is "not sure the situation requires that kind of approach." Foxman's
moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to
undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide --
specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians. Foxman
does not dispute that genocide took place; rather, he argues that it
would be inconvenient for Turkish (and Israeli) Jews were Congress to
take note of it. So we have reached a point where an organization
founded by Jews in 1913 to "secure justice and fair treatment to all
citizens alike" is now in the business of defaming those with whom its
director disagrees and purposely turning a blind eye to genocide. In
light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in
a similar fashion, Foxman's position strikes this Jew at least as one
too many ironies to be tolerated.
What's more, the defamation of Moyers escalated further. Following
Foxman's fusillade, New York Times neocon William Kristol inserted in
a regular column -- yet another devoted as usual to the majesty of
George W. Bush's leadership -- an attack on Moyers for allegedly
"lambast[ing] Israel for what he called its 'state terrorism,' its
'waging war on an entire population' in Gaza." Like Foxman, Kristol
also implied that Moyers was guilty of racism.
Again, read the text of Moyers's remarks. Neither Kristol nor Foxman
notes his stated belief that "every nation has the right to defend its
people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would
like to see every Jew in Israel dead," or his deep concern about the
growth of "a radical stream of Islam [that] now seeks to eliminate
Israel from the face of the earth." Yet despite the fact that Bill
Moyers is, well, Bill Moyers, the Times editors not only allowed
Kristol to deliberately distort and decontextualize his remarks; they
would not allow Moyers to defend himself in his own words in response.
After the PBS journalist submitted a letter to the editor, he was
told, "We will not print that 'William Kristol distorts or
misrepresents,' and the editors will not budge." They insisted that
the letter be changed for publication to read, "I take strong
exception to William Kristol's characterization," and they truncated
much else.
This is pathetic and ridiculous. If one were to survey, say, 1,000
journalists or even 1,000 New York Times readers and ask them whether
they were more likely to trust the judgment, honesty or bravery of
Bill Moyers or of William Kristol, my guess is that the result would
be a landslide victory in Moyers's favor that would dwarf that of
Barack Obama's over John McCain. I'd even bet the same would be true
in a private survey of Times editors. Yet publisher Arthur Sulzberger
Jr. and editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal -- rather than admit
their colossal mistake in giving so prestigious and influential a
perch to Kristol, who was at long last ushered off the page with his
next column just one week later -- instead chose to empower his
McCarthyite slanders against one of America's most distinguished
patriots and practitioners of their profession.
Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the celebrated author and
patriot David Grossman termed the Gaza operation "just one more way-
station on a road paved with fire, violence and hatred," and added,
"our conduct here in this region has, for a long time, been flawed,
immoral and unwise."
When Foxman and Kristol have the guts to go after Grossman -- who,
after all, lost his son two years ago in a war both men supported from
the comfort of their armchairs -- then perhaps we might take seriously
their complaints about the relatively moderate sentiments expressed by
Moyers. Until then, I fear, we must chalk up their ideological
fanaticism and their moral and intellectual confusion as yet another
casualty of this endlessly destructive conflict.
See more stories tagged with: bill moyers, mitchell, abe foxman, anti-
defemation league- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Marcus Aurelius
2009-03-01 01:20:06 UTC
Permalink
It is true that Hitler's grandmother worked in the home of a Jewish
family. It is,also, true that she became pregnant during that same
time period. Hitler's father, the son of this same grandmother, was
illegitimate. He did not know who his father was. Therefore, it is
reasonably possible that Hitler's grandfather was fathered by some one
in this Jewish house hold. Therefore, it is reasonably possible that
Hitler's father was one half Jewish! Therefore, it is reasonably
possible that Adolf Hitler, himself, was one quarter Jewish!
Post by B. Cramer
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
I've always thought the image of Foxman (link attached) is so very typical
of the gimme, gimme, gimme attitude he displays.
The man is a disgrace.
 According to Foxman  "I was saved from the Germans by my Polish
(Catholic) nanny".
I wonder how many Polish Catholic families had jew nannies, or even
had a nanny at all.
One must wonder why people in their own countries end up as servants
in the homes of
the jew instead of the other way around.  How many German women were
servants in their
own nation to the jew?  Hitler's grandmother was a servant in the home
of some rich jew in
Austria.  I look forward to the day when it is the jew who nannies and
does the cleaning
in the homes of the people in whose nations they have settled, or is
honest labour something
tht only the "goy" is capable of?
Post by B. Cramer
Post by HHW
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "antidefamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
Take, for example, Foxman's recent attack on Bill Moyers (a
longstanding friend and occasional supporter of my work). When Moyers
broadcast a less than laudatory commentary about Israel's Gaza
invasion, Foxman accused the veteran journalist and liberal icon of --
I kid you not -- "moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism." (You can read it online, together with
Moyers's response.) The incident says far more about Foxman than
Moyers. As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum observed, Moyers
"is one of the most admired figures in America. This attack will harm
not at all. It will, in fact, enhance his reputation just as Ed
Murrow's was enhanced by the attacks on him during the McCarthy era."
Still, it is demonstrative of the maximalist Manichaean mindset that
characterizes so much of American Jewish officialdom. Among Moyers's
myriad sins, says Foxman, was his "ignorance of the terrorist threat
against Israel, claiming that checkpoints, the security fence, and the
Gaza operation are tactics of humiliation rather than counter-
terrorism." Now really: is it so hard to imagine that the checkpoints,
security fence and Gaza operations are tactics of both humiliation and
counter-terrorism? Where, exactly, would be the contradiction?
But for the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto
defensive and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
He goes so far as to attack Barack Obama's choice of former Senator
George Mitchell as the U.S. envoy to the region because -- get this --
Mitchell is "fair" and "meticulously even-handed," and Foxman says he
is "not sure the situation requires that kind of approach." Foxman's
moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to
undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide --
specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians. Foxman
does not dispute that genocide took place; rather, he argues that it
would be inconvenient for Turkish (and Israeli) Jews were Congress to
take note of it. So we have reached a point where an organization
founded by Jews in 1913 to "secure justice and fair treatment to all
citizens alike" is now in the business of defaming those with whom its
director disagrees and purposely turning a blind eye to genocide. In
light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in
a similar fashion, Foxman's position strikes this Jew at least as one
too many ironies to be tolerated.
What's more, the defamation of Moyers escalated further. Following
Foxman's fusillade, New York Times neocon William Kristol inserted in
a regular column -- yet another devoted as usual to the majesty of
George W. Bush's leadership -- an attack on Moyers for allegedly
"lambast[ing] Israel for what he called its 'state terrorism,' its
'waging war on an entire population' in Gaza." Like Foxman, Kristol
also implied that Moyers was guilty of racism.
Again, read the text of Moyers's remarks. Neither Kristol nor Foxman
notes his stated belief that "every nation has the right to defend its
people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would
like to see every Jew in Israel dead," or his deep concern about the
growth of "a radical stream of Islam [that] now seeks to eliminate
Israel from the face of the earth." Yet despite the fact that Bill
Moyers is, well, Bill Moyers, the Times editors not only allowed
Kristol to deliberately distort and decontextualize his remarks; they
would not allow Moyers to defend himself in his own words in response.
After the PBS journalist submitted a letter to the editor, he was
told, "We will not print that 'William Kristol distorts or
misrepresents,' and the editors will not budge." They insisted that
the letter be changed for publication to read, "I take strong
exception to William Kristol's characterization," and they truncated
much else.
This is pathetic and ridiculous. If one were to survey, say, 1,000
journalists or even 1,000 New York Times readers and ask them whether
they were more likely to trust the judgment, honesty or bravery of
Bill Moyers or of William Kristol, my guess is that the result would
be a landslide victory in Moyers's favor that would dwarf that of
Barack Obama's over John McCain. I'd even bet the same would be true
in a private survey of Times editors. Yet publisher Arthur Sulzberger
Jr. and editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal -- rather than admit
their colossal mistake in giving so prestigious and influential a
perch to Kristol, who was at long last ushered off the page with his
next column just one week later -- instead chose to empower his
McCarthyite slanders against one of America's most distinguished
patriots and practitioners of their profession.
Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the celebrated author and
patriot David Grossman termed the Gaza operation "just one more way-
station on a road paved with fire, violence and hatred," and added,
"our conduct here in this region has, for a long time, been flawed,
immoral and unwise."
When Foxman and Kristol have the guts to go after Grossman -- who,
after all, lost his son two years ago in a war both men supported from
the comfort of their armchairs -- then perhaps we might take seriously
their complaints about the relatively moderate sentiments expressed by
Moyers. Until then, I fear, we must chalk up their ideological
fanaticism and their moral and intellectual confusion as yet another
casualty of this endlessly destructive conflict.
See more stories tagged with: bill moyers, mitchell, abe foxman, anti-
defemation league- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
l***@yahoo.com
2009-03-01 00:46:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "antidefamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank? He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Post by HHW
Take, for example, Foxman's recent attack on Bill Moyers (a
longstanding friend and occasional supporter of my work). When Moyers
broadcast a less than laudatory commentary about Israel's Gaza
invasion, Foxman accused the veteran journalist and liberal icon of --
I kid you not -- "moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism." (You can read it online, together with
Moyers's response.) The incident says far more about Foxman than
Moyers. As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum observed, Moyers
"is one of the most admired figures in America. This attack will harm
not at all. It will, in fact, enhance his reputation just as Ed
Murrow's was enhanced by the attacks on him during the McCarthy era."
Still, it is demonstrative of the maximalist Manichaean mindset that
characterizes so much of American Jewish officialdom. Among Moyers's
myriad sins, says Foxman, was his "ignorance of the terrorist threat
against Israel, claiming that checkpoints, the security fence, and the
Gaza operation are tactics of humiliation rather than counter-
terrorism." Now really: is it so hard to imagine that the checkpoints,
security fence and Gaza operations are tactics of both humiliation and
counter-terrorism? Where, exactly, would be the contradiction?
But for the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto
defensive and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
He goes so far as to attack Barack Obama's choice of former Senator
George Mitchell as the U.S. envoy to the region because -- get this --
Mitchell is "fair" and "meticulously even-handed," and Foxman says he
is "not sure the situation requires that kind of approach." Foxman's
moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to
undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide --
specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians. Foxman
does not dispute that genocide took place; rather, he argues that it
would be inconvenient for Turkish (and Israeli) Jews were Congress to
take note of it. So we have reached a point where an organization
founded by Jews in 1913 to "secure justice and fair treatment to all
citizens alike" is now in the business of defaming those with whom its
director disagrees and purposely turning a blind eye to genocide. In
light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in
a similar fashion, Foxman's position strikes this Jew at least as one
too many ironies to be tolerated.
What's more, the defamation of Moyers escalated further. Following
Foxman's fusillade, New York Times neocon William Kristol inserted in
a regular column -- yet another devoted as usual to the majesty of
George W. Bush's leadership -- an attack on Moyers for allegedly
"lambast[ing] Israel for what he called its 'state terrorism,' its
'waging war on an entire population' in Gaza." Like Foxman, Kristol
also implied that Moyers was guilty of racism.
Again, read the text of Moyers's remarks. Neither Kristol nor Foxman
notes his stated belief that "every nation has the right to defend its
people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would
like to see every Jew in Israel dead," or his deep concern about the
growth of "a radical stream of Islam [that] now seeks to eliminate
Israel from the face of the earth." Yet despite the fact that Bill
Moyers is, well, Bill Moyers, the Times editors not only allowed
Kristol to deliberately distort and decontextualize his remarks; they
would not allow Moyers to defend himself in his own words in response.
After the PBS journalist submitted a letter to the editor, he was
told, "We will not print that 'William Kristol distorts or
misrepresents,' and the editors will not budge." They insisted that
the letter be changed for publication to read, "I take strong
exception to William Kristol's characterization," and they truncated
much else.
This is pathetic and ridiculous. If one were to survey, say, 1,000
journalists or even 1,000 New York Times readers and ask them whether
they were more likely to trust the judgment, honesty or bravery of
Bill Moyers or of William Kristol, my guess is that the result would
be a landslide victory in Moyers's favor that would dwarf that of
Barack Obama's over John McCain. I'd even bet the same would be true
in a private survey of Times editors. Yet publisher Arthur Sulzberger
Jr. and editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal -- rather than admit
their colossal mistake in giving so prestigious and influential a
perch to Kristol, who was at long last ushered off the page with his
next column just one week later -- instead chose to empower his
McCarthyite slanders against one of America's most distinguished
patriots and practitioners of their profession.
Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the celebrated author and
patriot David Grossman termed the Gaza operation "just one more way-
station on a road paved with fire, violence and hatred," and added,
"our conduct here in this region has, for a long time, been flawed,
immoral and unwise."
When Foxman and Kristol have the guts to go after Grossman -- who,
after all, lost his son two years ago in a war both men supported from
the comfort of their armchairs -- then perhaps we might take seriously
their complaints about the relatively moderate sentiments expressed by
Moyers. Until then, I fear, we must chalk up their ideological
fanaticism and their moral and intellectual confusion as yet another
casualty of this endlessly destructive conflict.
See more stories tagged with: bill moyers, mitchell, abe foxman, anti-
defemation league
HHW
2009-03-01 05:48:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "antidefamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?  He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Take, for example, Foxman's recent attack on Bill Moyers (a
longstanding friend and occasional supporter of my work). When Moyers
broadcast a less than laudatory commentary about Israel's Gaza
invasion, Foxman accused the veteran journalist and liberal icon of --
I kid you not -- "moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism." (You can read it online, together with
Moyers's response.) The incident says far more about Foxman than
Moyers. As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum observed, Moyers
"is one of the most admired figures in America. This attack will harm
not at all. It will, in fact, enhance his reputation just as Ed
Murrow's was enhanced by the attacks on him during the McCarthy era."
Still, it is demonstrative of the maximalist Manichaean mindset that
characterizes so much of American Jewish officialdom. Among Moyers's
myriad sins, says Foxman, was his "ignorance of the terrorist threat
against Israel, claiming that checkpoints, the security fence, and the
Gaza operation are tactics of humiliation rather than counter-
terrorism." Now really: is it so hard to imagine that the checkpoints,
security fence and Gaza operations are tactics of both humiliation and
counter-terrorism? Where, exactly, would be the contradiction?
But for the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto
defensive and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
He goes so far as to attack Barack Obama's choice of former Senator
George Mitchell as the U.S. envoy to the region because -- get this --
Mitchell is "fair" and "meticulously even-handed," and Foxman says he
is "not sure the situation requires that kind of approach." Foxman's
moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to
undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide --
specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians. Foxman
does not dispute that genocide took place; rather, he argues that it
would be inconvenient for Turkish (and Israeli) Jews were Congress to
take note of it. So we have reached a point where an organization
founded by Jews in 1913 to "secure justice and fair treatment to all
citizens alike" is now in the business of defaming those with whom its
director disagrees and purposely turning a blind eye to genocide. In
light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in
a similar fashion, Foxman's position strikes this Jew at least as one
too many ironies to be tolerated.
What's more, the defamation of Moyers escalated further. Following
Foxman's fusillade, New York Times neocon William Kristol inserted in
a regular column -- yet another devoted as usual to the majesty of
George W. Bush's leadership -- an attack on Moyers for allegedly
"lambast[ing] Israel for what he called its 'state terrorism,' its
'waging war on an entire population' in Gaza." Like Foxman, Kristol
also implied that Moyers was guilty of racism.
Again, read the text of Moyers's remarks. Neither Kristol nor Foxman
notes his stated belief that "every nation has the right to defend its
people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would
like to see every Jew in Israel dead," or his deep concern about the
growth of "a radical stream of Islam [that] now seeks to eliminate
Israel from the face of the earth." Yet despite the fact that Bill
Moyers is, well, Bill Moyers, the Times editors not only allowed
Kristol to deliberately distort and decontextualize his remarks; they
would not allow Moyers to defend himself in his own words in response.
After the PBS journalist submitted a letter to the editor, he was
told, "We will not print that 'William Kristol distorts or
misrepresents,' and the editors will not budge." They insisted that
the letter be changed for publication to read, "I take strong
exception to William Kristol's characterization," and they truncated
much else.
This is pathetic and ridiculous. If one were to survey, say, 1,000
journalists or even 1,000 New York Times readers and ask them whether
they were more likely to trust the judgment, honesty or bravery of
Bill Moyers or of William Kristol, my guess is that the result would
be a landslide victory in Moyers's favor that would dwarf that of
Barack Obama's over John McCain. I'd even bet the same would be true
in a private survey of Times editors. Yet publisher Arthur Sulzberger
Jr. and editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal -- rather than admit
their colossal mistake in giving so prestigious and influential a
perch to Kristol, who was at long last ushered off the page with his
next column just one week later -- instead chose to empower his
McCarthyite slanders against one of America's most distinguished
patriots and practitioners of their profession.
Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the celebrated author and
patriot David Grossman termed the Gaza operation "just one more way-
station on a road paved with fire, violence and hatred," and added,
"our conduct here in this region has, for a long time, been flawed,
immoral and unwise."
When Foxman and Kristol have the guts to go after Grossman -- who,
after all, lost his son two years ago in a war both men supported from
the comfort of their armchairs -- then perhaps we might take seriously
their complaints about the relatively moderate sentiments expressed by
Moyers. Until then, I fear, we must chalk up their ideological
fanaticism and their moral and intellectual confusion as yet another
casualty of this endlessly destructive conflict.
See more stories tagged with: bill moyers, mitchell, abe foxman, anti-
defemation league
Frank was lynched,
l***@yahoo.com
2009-03-01 14:13:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "anti defamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?  He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
There are lots of "injustices" in the world, then as now, the ongoing
slaughter of innocents by Israel coming immediately to mind, along
with their illegal occupation, etc., etc.

Frank was convicted and sentenced to death after a lengthy trial.
1913 GA would've much preferred to convict the black men, Conley
or Lee, but the evidence wasn't there. Frank was not even one
of the first suspects, which pretty much throws water over the
claims of rife anti-semitism in Atlanta at that time.

The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles have never exonerated
Frank of the crime, only issuing a pardon based on not protecting
Frank from those who dragged him from prison and executed him,
this issued in '86, caving a bit from Jewish group pressure, after
first refusing in 1982, after the Mann "revelation," which of course
proved nothing. The Phagan family still believe the right man
died for the crime.

The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
HHW
2009-03-02 04:34:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "anti defamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?  He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
There are lots of "injustices" in the world, then as now, the ongoing
slaughter of innocents by Israel coming immediately to mind, along
with their illegal occupation, etc., etc.
Irrelevant. The issue you raised is the Frank murder case. That his
murder in effect denied him due process of law is undeniable.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Frank was convicted and sentenced to death after a lengthy trial.
1913 GA would've much preferred to convict the black men, Conley
or Lee, but the evidence wasn't there.
I'm not so sure of that either. The American Deep South is today very
pro-Israel and not very anti-Semitic. A century ago the opposite was
true. Frank was far more vulnerable to prejudiced justice that were
non-Jewish whites. The Frank case is difficult to parse.

  Frank was not even one
Post by l***@yahoo.com
of the first suspects, which pretty much throws water over the
claims of rife anti-semitism in Atlanta at that time.
He became a suspect.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles have never exonerated
Frank of the crime, only issuing a pardon based on not protecting
Frank from those who dragged him from prison and executed him,
They murdered him. Executions are done by the state. And the murder
resulted in the failure to accord him due process.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
this issued in '86, caving a bit from Jewish group pressure, after
first refusing in 1982, after the Mann "revelation," which of course
proved nothing.   The Phagan family still believe the right man
died for the crime.
He may have been the right man. We'll never know in terms of legal
process.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
Maybe. But that's not related much to Frank's actual guilt. He was
murdered prior to having an opportunity to exhaust his rights. Had he
not have been murdered he might have gone free.
l***@yahoo.com
2009-03-02 16:15:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "anti defamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?  He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
There are lots of "injustices" in the world, then as now, the ongoing
slaughter of innocents by Israel coming immediately to mind, along
with their illegal occupation, etc., etc.
Irrelevant.
No it isn't.
Post by HHW
The issue you raised is the Frank murder case. That his
murder in effect denied him due process of law is undeniable.
He had due process. He was tried, convicted in a court of law,
and sentenced to death. Have you ever gone to the downtown
Atlanta Public Library and read the voluminous coverage of the
murder and trial that is on microfilm? I have. Frank had
a fair trial, and there was no anti-semitism of any note
in Atlanta at the time. Jews lived quite well here, and if there'd
been any anti-semitic incidents to fuel the Leo Frank apologists,
you'd
know about it.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Frank was convicted and sentenced to death after a lengthy trial.
1913 GA would've much preferred to convict the black men, Conley
or Lee, but the evidence wasn't there.
I'm not so sure of that either.
I am. Tell me H, how much time have you spent in the American South?
Changed planes in Atlanta a couple of times? Seen To Kill a
Mockingbird
on the Hollywood screen? I grew up and haved lived most of my life
in the South, as deep South as you can get! In the small GA town
I grew up in, I never heard any anti-Jew talk or actions, and we had
a few Jewish families in town. I recall one owning a factory, and
a couple of others having retail stores in town.

Blacks were another matter. I've known some real anti-black racists.
In my teenage years I almost came to a fistfight a couple of times
with them. But the 1960s-70s were nothing compared to 1913.
Post by HHW
The American Deep South is today very
pro-Israel and not very anti-Semitic.
Oh really? Tell me about it. Yes, some of the more ignorant
Bible-thumper types may be pro-Israel, simply because
of the Biblical connection, but nothing more.
Post by HHW
A century ago the opposite was
true. Frank was far more vulnerable to prejudiced justice that were
non-Jewish whites. The Frank case is difficult to parse.
What happened to Frank would've happened to him if he'd been
some Irish guy named Ryan. Leo Frank is the only Jew ever
lynched in U.S. history, which is why the Leo Frank myth-spinners
ain't about to let go of it.
Post by HHW
  Frank was not even one
Post by l***@yahoo.com
of the first suspects, which pretty much throws water over the
claims of rife anti-semitism in Atlanta at that time.
He became a suspect.
Yes, and for damn good reason: He did the crime.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles have never exonerated
Frank of the crime, only issuing a pardon based on not protecting
Frank from those who dragged him from prison and executed him,
They murdered him. Executions are done by the state. And the murder
resulted in the failure to accord him due process.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
this issued in '86, caving a bit from Jewish group pressure, after
first refusing in 1982, after the Mann "revelation," which of course
proved nothing.   The Pagan family still believe the right man
died for the crime.
He may have been the right man. We'll never know in terms of legal
process.
The legal part ended with the commutation by a crooked Governor
about to leave office.

I can tell you this. The black man, Jim Conley, lived till 1962, a
full
49 years after the Phagan rape/murder. He was never once arrested
or charged with any rape, murder, or pedophilia in all those years.
Strange isn't it. Anyone who knows pedophiliac criminals will tell
you that they don't get cured of their behavior.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
Maybe. But that's not related much to Frank's actual guilt. He was
murdered prior to having an opportunity to exhaust his rights. Had he
not have been murdered he might have gone free.
Yeah, gone free to do it again. Another striking thing about today's
version of the Frank case is that the real victim, Mary Phagan,
is nothing more than an incidental to the story. It is all, of
course,
about poor Jew Leo Frank, killed for just being Jewish. And virtually
all mainstream sources today give this Zionist-vetted version, some
outright
hilarious, chock full of lies and distortions, but they dare not do
otherwise.

http://theatre_chick.tripod.com/Phagan.htm
HHW
2009-03-03 05:50:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "anti defamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?  He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
There are lots of "injustices" in the world, then as now, the ongoing
slaughter of innocents by Israel coming immediately to mind, along
with their illegal occupation, etc., etc.
Irrelevant.
No it isn't.
Murder cases are tried one by one. The rules of evidence exclude the
fact that there are "lots of 'injustices' in the world..." And for
good reasons too. That fact is not germane to the specific
circumstances of a particular case.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
The issue you raised is the Frank murder case. That his
murder in effect denied him due process of law is undeniable.
He had due process.  He was tried, convicted in a court of law,
and sentenced to death.
He had a right to the full appellate process. Only the State of
Georgia had the right to take his life and then only after the entire
appellate procedure was completed. What you are defending here is a
heinous murder, a lynching, an insult to a democratic people. Whether
or not it was a heinous murder is irrespective of whether he had been
convicted and sentenced to death.


 Have you ever gone to the downtown
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Atlanta Public Library and read the voluminous coverage of the
murder and trial that is on microfilm?  I have.  Frank had
a fair trial, and there was no anti-semitism of any note
in Atlanta at the time.  Jews lived quite well here, and if there'd
been any anti-semitic incidents to fuel the Leo Frank apologists,
you'd
know about it.
We need to look at the early history and doctrine of the KKK.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Frank was convicted and sentenced to death after a lengthy trial.
1913 GA would've much preferred to convict the black men, Conley
or Lee, but the evidence wasn't there.
I'm not so sure of that either.
I am.  Tell me H, how much time have you spent in the American South?
Changed planes in Atlanta a couple of times?   Seen To Kill a
Mockingbird
on the Hollywood screen?   I grew up and haved lived most of my life
in the South, as deep South as you can get!   In the small GA town
I grew up in, I never heard any anti-Jew talk or actions, and we had
a few Jewish families in town.  I recall one owning a factory, and
a couple of others having retail stores in town.
I say that there is a history of anti-Semitism in the American South.
I don't know what if any specific role it had in the Frank case. What
I'm certain of is that there was no justification whatever for the
murder of Frank and that it obviously resulted in a miscarriage of
justice at several levels.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Blacks were another matter.  I've known some real anti-black racists.
In my teenage years I almost came to a fistfight a couple of times
with them.  But the 1960s-70s were nothing compared to 1913.
Post by HHW
The American Deep South is today very
pro-Israel and not very anti-Semitic.
Oh really?  Tell me about it.  Yes, some of the more ignorant
Bible-thumper types may be pro-Israel, simply because
of the Biblical connection, but nothing more.
That's precisely what I'm referring to, the effects of
"dispensationalist" theology. It's pretty wide spread there.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
A century ago the opposite was
true. Frank was far more vulnerable to prejudiced justice that were
non-Jewish whites. The Frank case is difficult to parse.
What happened to Frank would've happened to him if he'd been
some Irish guy named Ryan.
You don't know this. Half the state's population of 3,000 Jews left
the state when Frank was lynched. Would half of the Irish have done
that if the Defendant was a Ryan?

  Leo Frank is the only Jew ever
Post by l***@yahoo.com
lynched in U.S. history, which is why the Leo Frank myth-spinners
ain't about to let go of it.
It doesn't matter much to me whether he was objectively guilty. There
were great principles at stake and the people of Georgia blew it. You
and I will never actually know one way or the other about actual
guilt. That's not the salient point. It's the lynching and the denial
of appellate review in a case tried in the presence of angry mobs
surrounding the courthouse which was pivotal.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
  Frank was not even one
Post by l***@yahoo.com
of the first suspects, which pretty much throws water over the
claims of rife anti-semitism in Atlanta at that time.
He became a suspect.
Yes, and for damn good reason:  He did the crime.
You can not know that. But as you say he was convicted and sentenced
to death. Whether that conviction and sentence would have been upheld
will never be known because he was murdered by hotheads.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles have never exonerated
Frank of the crime, only issuing a pardon based on not protecting
Frank from those who dragged him from prison and executed him,
They murdered him. Executions are done by the state. And the murder
resulted in the failure to accord him due process.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
this issued in '86, caving a bit from Jewish group pressure, after
first refusing in 1982, after the Mann "revelation," which of course
proved nothing.   The Pagan family still believe the right man
died for the crime.
He may have been the right man. We'll never know in terms of legal
process.
The legal part ended with the commutation by a crooked Governor
about to leave office.
That had nothing to do with due process of law. That was interrupted
by the lynching.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I can tell you this.  The black man, Jim Conley, lived till 1962, a
full
49 years after the Phagan rape/murder.  He was never once arrested
or charged with any rape, murder, or pedophilia in all those years.
Strange isn't it.  Anyone who knows pedophiliac criminals will tell
you that they don't get cured of their behavior.
You're not following. Perhaps it's not fair of me to expect a non-
lawyer the same thing I see in the outline of this case. The problem
you have on these facts is the lynching. You pass over it as if it
were meaningless.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
Irrelevant.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Maybe. But that's not related much to Frank's actual guilt. He was
murdered prior to having an opportunity to exhaust his rights. Had he
not have been murdered he might have gone free.
Yeah, gone free to do it again.
You're not focusing on the Constitutionally based process and the
overriding significance of the lynching.


 Another striking thing about today's
Post by l***@yahoo.com
version of the Frank case is that the real victim, Mary Phagan,
is nothing more than an incidental to the story.  It is all, of
course,
about poor Jew Leo Frank, killed for just being Jewish.  
I think you're wrong about the history of anti-Semitism in the South
at the time of Franks murder. But his Jewishness has no effect on my
analysis. Nor do the pro-Frank narratives you speak of. His lynching
does.


And virtually
Post by l***@yahoo.com
all mainstream sources today give this Zionist-vetted version, some
outright
hilarious, chock full of lies and distortions, but they dare not do
otherwise.
I don't know about that but I'm certain that justice can not be served
by lynchings. They represent its perversion.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
http://theatre_chick.tripod.com/Phagan.htm
l***@yahoo.com
2009-03-03 13:58:58 UTC
Permalink
<time to trim this one some>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What happened to Frank would've happened to him if he'd been
some Irish guy named Ryan.
You don't know this.
I know that thousands of men have been lynched in the U.S., and
only ONE of them Jewish. I am quite sure there were quite
a few lynchings of men of Irish extraction included.
Post by HHW
Half the state's population of 3,000 Jews left
the state when Frank was lynched.
I don't know that. I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though. Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people. They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia. They probably also suspected Frank was guilty.
His wife *had* to know it.

<snip>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I can tell you this.  The black man, Jim Conley, lived till 1962, a
full
49 years after the Phagan rape/murder.  He was never once arrested
or charged with any rape, murder, or pedophilia in all those years.
Strange isn't it.  Anyone who knows pedophiliac criminals will tell
you that they don't get cured of their behavior.
You're not following. Perhaps it's not fair of me to expect a non-
lawyer the same thing I see in the outline of this case. The problem
you have on these facts is the lynching. You pass over it as if it
were meaningless.
No no, I get your position, as a lawyer. Technically, the lynching
was
illegal yes. But this is not a perfect world to say the least. When
the people observed what they definitely saw as an injustice to HER
unfolding, they took action, and carried out the sentence imposed
in the courtroom.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
Irrelevant.
Not to the citizens, obviously.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
 Another striking thing about today's
version of the Frank case is that the real victim, Mary Phagan,
is nothing more than an incidental to the story.  It is all, of
course,
about poor Jew Leo Frank, killed for just being Jewish.  
I think you're wrong about the history of anti-Semitism in the South
at the time of Franks murder.
I see no more evidence of it than in anywhere else they've lived.

As far as Leo Frank's guilt, I have very little doubt. Fact is, if
I'd
lived then and known him innocent, I'd have defended him with force
if necessary. But I know, I know, H, you real point in this
discussion
is the lynching.
HHW
2009-03-03 15:25:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
<time to trim this one some>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What happened to Frank would've happened to him if he'd been
some Irish guy named Ryan.
You don't know this.
I know that thousands of men have been lynched in the U.S., and
only ONE of them Jewish.  I am quite sure there were quite
a few lynchings of men of Irish extraction included.
Post by HHW
Half the state's population of 3,000 Jews left
the state when Frank was lynched.
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.  Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.   They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.   They probably also suspected Frank was guilty.
His wife *had* to know it.
<snip>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I can tell you this.  The black man, Jim Conley, lived till 1962, a
full
49 years after the Phagan rape/murder.  He was never once arrested
or charged with any rape, murder, or pedophilia in all those years.
Strange isn't it.  Anyone who knows pedophiliac criminals will tell
you that they don't get cured of their behavior.
You're not following. Perhaps it's not fair of me to expect a non-
lawyer the same thing I see in the outline of this case. The problem
you have on these facts is the lynching. You pass over it as if it
were meaningless.
No no, I get your position, as a lawyer.  Technically, the lynching
was
illegal yes.  But this is not a perfect world to say the least.  When
the people observed what they definitely saw as an injustice to HER
unfolding, they took action, and carried out the sentence imposed
in the courtroom.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
Irrelevant.
Not to the citizens, obviously.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
 Another striking thing about today's
version of the Frank case is that the real victim, Mary Phagan,
is nothing more than an incidental to the story.  It is all, of
course,
about poor Jew Leo Frank, killed for just being Jewish.  
I think you're wrong about the history of anti-Semitism in the South
at the time of Franks murder.
I see no more evidence of it than in anywhere else they've lived.
As far as Leo Frank's guilt,  I have very little doubt.   Fact is, if
I'd
lived then and known him innocent, I'd have defended him with force
if necessary.  But I know, I know, H, your real point in this
discussion
is the lynching.
Yes. I think of it as an extra-judicial murder designed to undermine
and supplant the justice system. That tendency strikes me as very
dangerous in a democracy.

However, Shwerner, Goodman and the other guy, the Jewish
"carpetbaggers" of the civil rights movement, were lynched. And when
you compare their situation with that of Mary Phagan, it seems to me
to have been a more flagrant and dangerous crime. Phagan was raped
and murdered in a garden variety "crime of passion". A single event
'banality of evil' situation. Shwerner and Goodman's killings were
crimes against democracy, crimes against our very Constitution. That
should be of interest to all citizens, not just locals in Georgia.
l***@yahoo.com
2009-03-03 16:00:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
<time to trim this one some>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What happened to Frank would've happened to him if he'd been
some Irish guy named Ryan.
You don't know this.
I know that thousands of men have been lynched in the U.S., and
only ONE of them Jewish.  I am quite sure there were quite
a few lynchings of men of Irish extraction included.
Post by HHW
Half the state's population of 3,000 Jews left
the state when Frank was lynched.
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.  Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.   They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.   They probably also suspected Frank was guilty.
His wife *had* to know it.
<snip>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I can tell you this.  The black man, Jim Conley, lived till 1962, a
full
49 years after the Phagan rape/murder.  He was never once arrested
or charged with any rape, murder, or pedophilia in all those years.
Strange isn't it.  Anyone who knows pedophiliac criminals will tell
you that they don't get cured of their behavior.
You're not following. Perhaps it's not fair of me to expect a non-
lawyer the same thing I see in the outline of this case. The problem
you have on these facts is the lynching. You pass over it as if it
were meaningless.
No no, I get your position, as a lawyer.  Technically, the lynching
was
illegal yes.  But this is not a perfect world to say the least.  When
the people observed what they definitely saw as an injustice to HER
unfolding, they took action, and carried out the sentence imposed
in the courtroom.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
Irrelevant.
Not to the citizens, obviously.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
 Another striking thing about today's
version of the Frank case is that the real victim, Mary Phagan,
is nothing more than an incidental to the story.  It is all, of
course,
about poor Jew Leo Frank, killed for just being Jewish.  
I think you're wrong about the history of anti-Semitism in the South
at the time of Franks murder.
I see no more evidence of it than in anywhere else they've lived.
As far as Leo Frank's guilt,  I have very little doubt.   Fact is, if
I'd
lived then and known him innocent, I'd have defended him with force
if necessary.  But I know, I know, H, your real point in this
discussion
is the lynching.
Yes. I think of it as an extra-judicial murder designed to undermine
and supplant the justice system.  That tendency strikes me as very
dangerous in a democracy.
However, Shwerner, Goodman and the other guy, the  Jewish
"carpetbaggers" of the civil rights movement, were lynched.
Well, after checking on these, it appears that "lynching" would
not be the most accurate term. Murdered yes, lynched no.
Even Zionist pro-Leo Frank sites acknowledge that Frank is
the only Jewish lynching in U.S. history.
Post by HHW
And when
you compare their situation with that of Mary Phagan, it seems to me
to have been a more flagrant and dangerous crime.  Phagan was raped
and murdered in a garden variety "crime of passion".
Crime of passion? Child rape and murder would be more the label.
Post by HHW
A single event
'banality of evil' situation. Shwerner and Goodman's killings were
crimes against democracy, crimes against our very Constitution. That
should be of interest to all citizens, not just locals in Georgia
Yes, but the Constitution is under attack in other ways too now,
and liable to get worse.
_ G O D _
2009-03-03 19:57:08 UTC
Permalink
....<snip>....irrelevant crap has been carefully removed.....
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
'banality of evil' situation. Shwerner and Goodman's killings were
crimes against democracy, crimes against our very Constitution.
That should be of interest to all citizens, not just locals in Georgia
Yes, but the Constitution is under attack in other ways too now,
and liable to get worse.
Aren't you both way off the base, while drifted
completely off the subject, in your justification
of lynching by a mob (that does not need your
excuses) or the decision by a kangaroo court,
which is made in clear violation of the Human
Rights, to begin with....

If the COck-sucking sectarians did not like the
idea that the guy was a member of Judaic cult,
then they would have addressed so. However,
this wasn't the case. Leo Frank was likely of a
Catholic denomination, according to Christian
name, given in accordance to a cult's calendar.

Unless, of course, he was maliciously labeled
as a "Jew" (on the same sectarian grounds of
pride for their sectarian cult) or other reasons,
in enticing the mob to kill a defenseless victim,
or that perpetrators are quite ignorant retards,
who're also incompetent, sadistic americunts...

Therefore, that does not exclude the elements
of natural sectarian antagonism, which always
present in the capacity of prejudice of the mob....

But please stop justifying a completely corrupt
and criminal justice system in covering of mob.
Because it's designed to perpetuate disparity,
injustice, racism, slavery, genocide - you name
it, in order to serve the tyrannical rulers and the
despotic establishments for their capitalization
from unfair and illegal exploitation of hostages
of the incarceration industry with complete and
utter impunity....

Therefore, if I were you, I would have gone after
individuals who committed his murder (a crime
of collective passion by mob), directed against
his heinous crime - and would have demanded
their banishment from a civilized community for
demonstrating this deliberate disregard for law....
--
_____________________________________________________

I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism
does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It
undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts
sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it
helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it
reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~
___________________________________________________
--
B***@isp.com
2009-03-12 04:34:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
<time to trim this one some>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What happened to Frank would've happened to him if he'd been
some Irish guy named Ryan.
You don't know this.
I know that thousands of men have been lynched in the U.S., and
only ONE of them Jewish.  I am quite sure there were quite
a few lynchings of men of Irish extraction included.
Post by HHW
Half the state's population of 3,000 Jews left
the state when Frank was lynched.
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.  Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.   They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.   They probably also suspected Frank was guilty.
His wife *had* to know it.
<snip>
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I can tell you this.  The black man, Jim Conley, lived till 1962, a
full
49 years after the Phagan rape/murder.  He was never once arrested
or charged with any rape, murder, or pedophilia in all those years.
Strange isn't it.  Anyone who knows pedophiliac criminals will tell
you that they don't get cured of their behavior.
You're not following. Perhaps it's not fair of me to expect a non-
lawyer the same thing I see in the outline of this case. The problem
you have on these facts is the lynching. You pass over it as if it
were meaningless.
No no, I get your position, as a lawyer.  Technically, the lynching
was
illegal yes.  But this is not a perfect world to say the least.  When
the people observed what they definitely saw as an injustice to HER
unfolding, they took action, and carried out the sentence imposed
in the courtroom.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
Irrelevant.
Not to the citizens, obviously.
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
 Another striking thing about today's
version of the Frank case is that the real victim, Mary Phagan,
is nothing more than an incidental to the story.  It is all, of
course,
about poor Jew Leo Frank, killed for just being Jewish.  
I think you're wrong about the history of anti-Semitism in the South
at the time of Franks murder.
I see no more evidence of it than in anywhere else they've lived.
As far as Leo Frank's guilt,  I have very little doubt.   Fact is, if
I'd
lived then and known him innocent, I'd have defended him with force
if necessary.  But I know, I know, H, your real point in this
discussion
is the lynching.
Yes. I think of it as an extra-judicial murder designed to undermine
and supplant the justice system.  That tendency strikes me as very
dangerous in a democracy.
However, Shwerner, Goodman and the other guy, the  Jewish
"carpetbaggers" of the civil rights movement, were lynched.
They were shot. Perhaps if they had stayed in New York and helped the
blacks in that city,
they would still be alive today. The jew slumlords of Harlem could
have used their
advice on how to clean up their rat-infested buildings. Goodman and
Schwerner
could have told them to get their liquor stores out of black areas and
relocate them to jew
neighbourhoods. They might hve helped to close down those pawnshops
and high interest
loanshark places. Why was it necessary to go all the way to
Mississippi to help black
people, when Nww York is full of poor blacks who needed help?


And when
Post by HHW
you compare their situation with that of Mary Phagan, it seems to me
to have been a more flagrant and dangerous crime.  Phagan was raped
and murdered in a garden variety "crime of passion". A single event
'banality of evil' situation. Shwerner and Goodman's killings were
crimes against democracy, crimes against our very Constitution. That
should be of interest to all citizens, not just locals in Georgia.
Whatever makes you think that New York jews are interested in
democracy? They
ran for their lives when blacks moved to Harlem, formerly a jew
neighbourhood. They
do the same thing whenever non-whites move too close to them.
Beverly Hills, California
is mostly jew. However, a large number of black multi millionaire rap
stars have moved there
in recent times. Guess who ran as far away as thier little legs could
carry them?
It it the jews hate of whites that drives them to stir up the blacks,
not their concern
of black people. Who do think ran the slave markets? Who do you
think owned most
of those slave ships? Who do you think owned slaves? Hint - not the
Irish.

- Hide quoted text -
Post by HHW
- Show quoted text -
z
2009-03-04 02:39:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.  Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.   They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.  
Yeah, what's up with that? why on earth are the Jews so sensitive to
being murdered?
B. Cramer
2009-03-04 03:59:22 UTC
Permalink
I don't know that. I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though. Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people. They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.
Yeah, what's up with that? why on earth are the Jews so sensitive to
being murdered?
If the jews were more sensitive to the 6 billion residents of the world,
there would be no yid murders, you stupid jew cunt.

Cause and effect, dopey.
f***@verizon.net
2009-03-04 05:16:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.
Translation: people who know the truth usually proclaim it.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
 Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.
Yes: we always tell the truth.
It's why bigots hate us.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
  They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.  
Yeah, what's up with that? why on earth are the Jews so sensitive to
being murdered?
Shame on us for not letting them kill us!

Susan
B. Cramer
2009-03-04 10:22:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@verizon.net
I don't know that. I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.
Translation: people who know the truth usually proclaim it.
BBBBWWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Because the fucking yids will hurl the truthteller into gaol, you
cloth-eared bint.

The yids have no use for truth.
Eli Grubman
2009-03-04 11:33:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.
Translation: people who know the truth usually proclaim it.
Here's/here;s a truth for you, KKKohen: you're/you;re Ir*sh not
jewish!
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
 Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.
Yes: we always tell the truth.
He's talking about jews not boghoppers, KKKohen.
Post by f***@verizon.net
It's why bigots hate us.
"Bigots" hate the Ir*sh because you're/you;re a bunch of drunken
idiots.
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
  They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.  
Yeah, what's up with that? why on earth are the Jews so sensitive to
being murdered?
Shame on us for not letting them kill us!
Susan
Who's/who;s talking about killing the Ir*sh, KKKohen?

Eli
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-04 12:24:46 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:33:12 -0500, Eli Grubman, the housebound, mental,
Post by Eli Grubman
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.
Translation: people who know the truth usually proclaim it.
Here's/here;s a truth for you, KKKohen: you're/you;re Ir*sh not
jewish!
Here's the one and only truth for you:

you are a sick, housebound, subnormal, degenerate, psychopathic swine! And
you KNOW it! LOL

Doctor Panta
--
Various quotes about psycho Grabmen: "His faith is stupidity & his sect is
hatred"

"Eli is clearly from the lowest dregs of humanity."

"Any sex act involving YOU is bestiality."

"Eli's sexual identity crisis blooms again. Maybe Eli is suffering from
split personality disorder?"
Eli Grubman
2009-03-04 11:34:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.  Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.   They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.  
Yeah, what's up with that? why on earth are the Jews so sensitive to
being murdered?
Beats me. You jew assholes should be used to being massacred, purged,
pogromed, persecuted, expelled, 'holocausted'® etc etc by now.

Eli
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-04 12:24:46 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:34:30 -0500, Eli Grubman, the housebound, mental,
Post by Eli Grubman
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
I don't know that.  I am sure the Leo Frank apologist sources
claim this though.  Even if true, you have to know the nature
of the Jewish people.   They have a 2500-year-old case of
paranoia.  
Yeah, what's up with that? why on earth are the Jews so sensitive to
being murdered?
Beats me. You jew assholes should be used to being massacred, purged,
pogromed, persecuted, expelled, 'holocausted'® etc etc by now.
Eli
Are YOU used to YOUR "life" yet, poor, housebound, psychopathic swine
Grabmen?

The Top 5 Truths About Poor Psychopathic Swine Grabmen:

the poor swine can't SLEEP anymore,
it can't FUCK anymore,
it can't get out of the house anymore,
it got NOBODY to talk to anymore,
it got no life outside Usenet AT ALL, anymore!

And the real hilarious part of it: the poor psychopathic swine keeps
desperately trying to ignore that it's misery is so OBVIOUS to ANYONE!

Doctor Panta
--
Retarded, Subnormal and Extremely Proud of it: Poor Psychopathic Swine
Grabmen! LOL
HHW
2009-03-03 06:39:04 UTC
Permalink
Here is Wiki on the Second Klan which was founded in 1915 in the
aftermath of the Frank case. The article establishes that the Second
Klan was formally anti-Semitic. That anti-Semitism is mentioned at
least four times in the article.

---------------------------------------------------------

The second Klan 1915–1944

Movie poster for The Birth of a Nation
Creation
The second Klan rose in response to urbanization and
industrialization, massive immigration from eastern and southern
Europe, the Great Migration of African Americans to the North, and the
migration of African Americans and whites from rural areas to Southern
cities. The Klan grew most rapidly in cities which had high growth
rates between 1910 and 1930, such as Detroit, Memphis, Dayton,
Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston.[50]

Its growth was also affected by mobilization for World War I and
postwar tensions, especially in the cities where strangers came up
against each other more often. Southern whites resented the arming of
black soldiers. Black veterans did not want to go back to second class
status.[51]

This Klan modeled itself after other fraternal organizations created
in the early decades of the 20th century. Organizers signed up
hundreds of new members, who paid initiation fees and bought KKK
costumes. The organizer kept half the money and sent the rest to state
or national officials. When the organizer was done with an area, he
organized a huge rally, often with burning crosses and perhaps
presented a Bible to a local Protestant minister. He then left town
with the money. The local units operated like many fraternal
organizations and occasionally brought in speakers. State and national
officials had little or no control over the locals and rarely
attempted to forge political activist groups.[citation needed] Stanley
Horn, a Southern historian sympathetic to the first Klan, was careful
in an oral interview to distinguish it from the later "spurious Ku
Klux organization which was in ill-repute — and, of course, had no
connection whatsoever with the Klan of Reconstruction days".[52]

An illustration from The Clansman: "Take dat f'um yo equal—"
The accumulating social tensions that resulted from rapid change were
sparked by events in 1915:
The film The Birth of a Nation was released, mythologizing and
glorifying the first Klan.

Leo Frank, a Jewish man accused of the rape and murder of a young
white girl named Mary Phagan, was tried, convicted and lynched near
Atlanta against a backdrop of media frenzy.

The second Ku Klux Klan was founded in Atlanta with a new anti-
immigrant, anti-Catholic, and anti-Semitic agenda. The bulk of the
founders were from an Atlanta-area organization calling itself the
Knights of Mary Phagan that had organized around the Frank trial. The
new organization emulated the fictionalized version of the Klan
presented in The Birth of a Nation.

Director D. W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation glorified the original
Klan. His film was based on the book and play The Clansman and the
book The Leopard's Spots, both by Thomas Dixon. Dixon said his purpose
was "to revolutionize northern sentiment by a presentation of history
that would transform every man in my audience into a good Democrat!"
The film created a nationwide Klan craze. At the official premier in
Atlanta, members of the Klan rode up and down the street in front of
the theater.[53]

Much of the modern Klan's iconography, including the standardized
white costume and the lighted cross, are derived from the film. Its
imagery was based on Dixon's romanticized concept of old Scotland, as
portrayed in the novels and poetry of Sir Walter Scott. The film's
influence and popularity were enhanced by a widely reported
endorsement by historian and U.S. President Woodrow Wilson.

President Wilson
The Birth of a Nation included extensive quotations from Woodrow
Wilson's History of the American People, as if to give it a stronger
basis. After seeing the film in a special White House screening,
Wilson allegedly said, "It is like writing history with lightning, and
my only regret is that it is all so terribly true."[54] Given Wilson's
views on race and the Klan, his statement was taken as supportive of
the film. In later correspondence with Griffith, Wilson confirmed his
enthusiasm. Wilson's remarks immediately became controversial. Wilson
tried to remain aloof, but finally, on April 30, he issued a non-
denial denial.[55] Historian Arthur Link quotes Wilson's aide, Joseph
Tumulty: "the President was entirely unaware of the nature of the play
before it was presented and at no time has expressed his approbation
of it."[56]
Another event that influenced the Klan was sensational coverage of the
trial, conviction and lynching of a Jewish factory manager from
Atlanta named Leo Frank. In lurid newspaper accounts, Frank was
accused of the rape and murder of Mary Phagan, a girl employed at his
factory.


The lynching of Leo Frank
After a trial in Georgia in which a mob daily surrounded the
courtroom, Frank was convicted. Because of the presence of the armed
mob, the judge asked Frank and his counsel to stay away when the
verdict was announced. Frank's appeals failed. Supreme Court Justice
Oliver Wendell Holmes dissented from other justices and condemned the
mob's intimidation of the jury as the court's failing to provide due
process to the defendant. After the governor commuted Frank's sentence
to life imprisonment, a mob calling itself the Knights of Mary Phagan
kidnapped Frank from prison and lynched him.
The Frank trial was used skillfully by Georgia politician and
publisher Thomas E. Watson, the editor for The Jeffersonian magazine.
He was a leader in recreating the Klan and was later elected to the
U.S. Senate. The new Klan was inaugurated in 1915 at a meeting led by
William J. Simmons on top of Stone Mountain. A few aging members of
the original Klan attended, along with members of the self-named
Knights of Mary Phagan.

Simmons stated that he had been inspired by the original Klan's
Prescripts, written in 1867 by Confederate veteran George Gordon in an
attempt to create a national organization. These were never adopted by
the Klan, however.[57] The Prescript stated the Klan's purposes in
idealistic terms, hiding the fact that its members committed acts of
vigilante violence and murder from behind masks.

Lender et al. state that the Klan's resurgence in the 1920s was aided
by the temperance movement. They state that in Arkansas and elsewhere,
the Klan opposed bootleggers, and in 1922, two hundred Klan members
set fire to saloons in Union County. They further state that the
national Klan office was finally established in Dallas, Texas, but
that Little Rock, Arkansas was the home of the Women of the Ku Klux
Klan. They go on to state that the first head of this auxiliary was a
former president of the Arkansas WCTU.[58][verification needed]


Stone Mountain, site of the founding of the second Klan in 1915.
In 1921, the Klan arrived in Oregon from central California and
established the state's first klavern in Medford. In a state with one
of the country's highest percentages of white residents, the Klan
attracted up to 14,000 members and established 58 klaverns by the end
of 1922. Given the small population of non-white minorities outside
Portland, the Oregon Klan directed attention almost exclusively
against Catholics, who numbered about 8% of the population. In 1922,
the Masonic Grand Lodge of Oregon sponsored a bill to require all
school-age children to attend public schools. With support of the Klan
and Democratic Governor Walter M. Pierce, endorsed by the Klan, the
Compulsory Education Law was passed with a majority of votes. Its
primary purpose was to shut down Catholic schools in Oregon, but it
also affected other private and military schools. It was challenged in
court and struck down by the United States Supreme Court Pierce v.
Society of Sisters (1925) before it went into effect.[citation needed]

One historian contends that the KKK’s "support for Prohibition
represented the single most important bond between Klansmen throughout
the nation".[59] Membership in the Klan and other prohibition groups
overlapped, and they often coordinated activities. For example, Edward
Young Clarke, a top leader of the Klan, raised funds for both the Klan
and the Anti-Saloon League.[60] A man with his own demons, Clarke was
indicted in 1923 for violations of the Mann Act.[61]
Members

William Joseph Simmons founded the second Ku Klux Klan in 1915.
A significant characteristic of the second Klan was that it was an
organization based in urban areas, reflecting the major shifts of
population to cities in both the North and the South. In Michigan, for
instance, 40,000 members lived in Detroit, where they made up more
than half of the state's membership. Most Klansmen were lower to
middle-class whites who were trying to protect their jobs and housing
from the waves of newcomers to the industrial cities: immigrants from
southern and eastern Europe, who tended to be Catholic and Jewish in
numbers higher than earlier groups of immigrants; and black and white
migrants from the South. As new populations poured into cities,
rapidly changing neighborhoods created social tensions. Because of the
rapid pace of population growth in industrializing cities such as
Detroit and Chicago, the Klan grew rapidly in the U.S. Midwest. The
Klan also grew in booming Southern cities such as Dallas and Houston.
[62]
For some states, historians have obtained membership rosters of some
local units and matched the names against city directory and local
records to create statistical profiles of the membership. Big city
newspapers were often hostile and ridiculed Klansmen as ignorant
farmers. Detailed analysis from Indiana showed the rural stereotype
was false for that state:
Indiana's Klansmen represented a wide cross section of society: they
were not disproportionately urban or rural, nor were they
significantly more or less likely than other members of society to be
from the working class, middle class, or professional ranks. Klansmen
were Protestants, of course, but they cannot be described exclusively
or even predominantly as fundamentalists. In reality, their religious
affiliations mirrored the whole of white Protestant society, including
those who did not belong to any church.[63]

The Klan attracted people but most of them did not remain in the
organization for long. Membership in the Klan turned over rapidly as
people found out that it was not the group they wanted. Millions
joined, and at its peak in the 1920s, the organization included about
15% of the nation's eligible population. The lessening of social
tensions contributed to the Klan's decline.
Activities


Cross burning is said to have been introduced by William J. Simmons,
the founder of the second Klan in 1915.
In reaction to social changes, the Klan adopted anti-Jewish, anti-
Catholic, anti-Communist and anti-immigrant slants. The social unrest
of the postwar period included labor strikes in response to low wages
and poor working conditions in many industrial cities, often led by
immigrants, who also organized unions. Klan members worried about
labor organizers and the socialist leanings of some of the immigrants,
which added to the tensions. They also resented upwardly mobile ethnic
Catholics.[64] At the same time, in cities Klan members were
themselves working in industrial environments and often struggled with
working conditions.

Klan groups lynched and murdered Black soldiers returning from World
War I while they were still in military uniforms. The Klan warned
Blacks that they must respect the rights of the white race "in whose
country they are permitted to reside".[65] The number of lynchings
escalated, and from 1918 to 1927, 416 African Americans were killed,
mostly in the South.[66]

In Florida, when two black men attempted to vote in November 1920 in
Ocoee, Orange County, the Klan attacked the black community. In the
ensuing violence, six black residents and two whites were killed, and
twenty five black homes, two churches, and a fraternal lodge were
destroyed.[66]

Although Klan members were concentrated in the South, Midwest and
west, there were some members in New England, too. Klan members
torched an African American school in Scituate, Rhode Island.[67]

In the 1920s and 1930s, a violent and zealous faction of the Klan
called the Black Legion was active in the Midwestern U.S.. The Legion
wore black uniforms and targeted and assassinated communists and
socialists.[citation needed]
In southern cities such as Birmingham, Alabama, Klan members kept
control of access to the better-paying industrial jobs but opposed
unions. During the 1930s and 1940s, Klan leaders urged members to
disrupt the Congress of Industrial Organizations(CIO), which advocated
industrial unions and was open to African-American members. With
access to dynamite and skills from their jobs in mining and steel, in
the late 1940s some Klan members in Birmingham began using bombings to
intimidate upwardly mobile blacks who moved into middle-class
neighborhoods. "By mid-1949, there were so many charred house
carcasses that the area [College Hills] was informally named Dynamite
Hill." Independent Klan groups remained active in Birmingham and were
deeply engaged in violent opposition to the Civil Rights Movement.[68]
Political influence


Sheet music to "We Are All Loyal Klansmen", 1923
The Klan had major political influence in several states and was
influential mostly in the center of the country. The Klan spread from
the South into the Midwest and Northern states, and into Canada where
there was a large movement against Catholic immigrants.[69] At its
peak, Klan membership exceeded four million and comprised 20% of the
adult white male population in many broad geographic regions, and 40%
in some areas. Most of the Klan's membership resided in Midwestern
states.

In another well-known example from the same year, the Klan decided to
turn Anaheim, California, into a model Klan city. It secretly took
over the City Council, but the city conducted a special recall
election and Klan members were voted out.[70]

Klan delegates played a significant role at the path-setting 1924
Democratic National Convention in New York City, often called the
"Klanbake Convention". The convention initially pitted Klan-backed
candidate William Gibbs McAdoo against Catholic New York Governor Al
Smith. After days of stalemates and rioting, both candidates withdrew
in favor of a compromise. Klan delegates defeated a Democratic Party
platform plank that would have condemned their organization.
In some states, such as Alabama, the KKK worked for political and
social reform.[71] The state's Klansmen were among the foremost
advocates of better public schools, effective prohibition enforcement,
expanded road construction, and other "progressive" political
measures. In many ways these reforms benefited lower class white
people. By 1925, the Klan was a political force in the state, as
leaders like J. Thomas Heflin, David Bibb Graves, and Hugo Black
manipulated the KKK membership against the power of Black Belt
planters who had long dominated the state.

Black was elected senator in 1926 and later became a Supreme Court
Justice. In 1926, with Klan support, a former Klan chapter head named
Bibb Graves won the Alabama governor's office. He pushed for increased
education funding, better public health, new highway construction, and
pro-labor legislation. Because the Alabama state legislature refused
to redistrict until 1972, however, even the Klan was unable to break
the planters' and rural areas' hold on power.

Resistance and decline
Many groups and leaders, including prominent Protestant ministers such
as Reinhold Niebuhr in Detroit, spoke out against the Klan. In
response to blunt attacks against Jewish Americans and the Klan's
campaign to illegalize private schools, the Jewish Anti-Defamation
League was formed after the lynching of Leo Frank. When one civic
group began to publish Klan membership lists, the number of members
quickly declined. The National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People carried on public education campaigns in order to
inform people about Klan activities and lobbied against Klan abuses in
Congress. After its peak in 1925, Klan membership began to decline
rapidly in most areas of the Midwest.[62]

In the second wave of the Great Migration, from 1940-1970 another five
million blacks left the South for northern, midwestern and western
cities. Due to the buildup of its defense industries, California was a
new destination for this migration, especially for those African
Americans from Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. They refused to
tolerate for any longer the miserable conditions and economic
situation in the South.

In Alabama, KKK vigilantes, thinking that they had governmental
protection, launched a wave of physical terror in 1927, targeting both
blacks and whites who had violated racial norms and for perceived
moral lapses.[72] The state's conservative elite counterattacked.
Grover C. Hall, Sr., editor of the Montgomery Advertiser, began
publishing a series of editorials and articles that attacked the Klan
for its "racial and religious intolerance". Hall won a Pulitzer Prize
for his crusade.[73] Other newspapers kept up a steady, loud attack on
the Klan, referring to the organization as violent and "un-American".
Sheriffs cracked down. In the 1928 presidential election, the state
voted for the Democratic candidate Al Smith, although he was Catholic.
Klan membership in Alabama dropped to less than six thousand by 1930.
Small independent units continued to be active in Birmingham, where in
the late 1940s, members launched a reign of terror by bombing the
homes of upwardly mobile African Americans. KKK activism increased as
a reaction against the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s.
(see below.)
When D.C. Stephenson, the Grand Dragon of Indiana and 22 northern
states, was convicted in 1925 of the notorious rape and murder of
Madge Oberholtzer, the Klan declined dramatically in Indiana.
Stephenson was convicted in a sensational trial. According to
historian Leonard Moore, a leadership failure caused the
organization's collapse:[74]
Stephenson and the other salesmen and office seekers who maneuvered
for control of Indiana's Invisible Empire lacked both the ability and
the desire to use the political system to carry out the Klan's stated
goals. They were disinterested in, or perhaps even unaware of, grass
roots concerns within the movement. For them, the Klan had been
nothing more than a means for gaining wealth and power. These marginal
men had risen to the top of the hooded order because, until it became
a political force, the Klan had never required strong, dedicated
leadership. More established and experienced politicians who endorsed
the Klan, or who pursued some of the interests of their Klan
constituents, also accomplished little. Factionalism created one
barrier, but many politicians had supported the Klan simply out of
expedience. When charges of crime and corruption began to taint the
movement, those concerned about their political futures had even less
reason to work on the Klan's behalf.

Imperial Wizard Hiram Wesley Evans sold the organization in 1939 to
James Colescott, an Indiana veterinarian, and Samuel Green, an Atlanta
obstetrician, but they were unable to staunch the exodus of members.
The Klan's image was further damaged by Colescott's association with
Nazi-sympathizer organizations, the Klan's involvement in the 1943
Detroit Race Riot, and efforts to disrupt the American war effort
during World War II.[citation needed] In 1944, the IRS filed a lien
for $685,000 in back taxes against the Klan, and Colescott was forced
to dissolve the organization in 1944.


Ku Klux Klan members march down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington,
D.C. in 1928.
After World War II, folklorist and author Stetson Kennedy infiltrated
the Klan and provided information to media and law enforcement
agencies. He also provided secret code words to the writers of the
Superman radio program, resulting in episodes in which Superman took
on the KKK. Kennedy's intention to strip away the Klan's mystique and
trivialize the Klan's rituals and code words may have contributed to
the decline in Klan recruiting and membership.[75] In the 1950s,
Kennedy wrote a bestselling book about his experiences, which further
damaged the Klan.[76]

The following table shows the change in the Klan's estimated
membership over time.[77] (The years given in the table represent
approximate time periods.)
Year Membership
1920 4,000,000
1924 6,000,000
1930 30,000
1980 5,000
2008 6,000
Later Klans, 1950 through 1960s



Soviet propaganda poster ("Freedom, American style") (1950, by Nikolay
Dolgorukov and Boris Efimov). It shows the Ku Klux Klan lynching
blacks.

The name "Ku Klux Klan" began to be used by several independent
groups. Beginning in the 1950s, individual Klan groups began to resist
the Civil Rights Movement by bombing houses in transitional
neighborhoods and the houses of activists, as well as by physical
violence, intimidation and assassination. In Birmingham, Alabama,
during the tenure of Bull Connor, Klan groups were closely allied with
the police and operated with impunity. There were so many bombings of
homes by Klan groups that the city's nickname was "Bombingham". In
states such as Alabama and Mississippi, Klan members forged alliances
with governors' administrations.[7]

Many murders went unreported and unprosecuted. Continuing
disfranchisement of blacks meant that most could not serve on juries,
which were all white. According to a report from the Southern Regional
Council in Atlanta, the homes of forty black Southern families were
bombed during 1951 and 1952. Some of the bombing victims were social
activists whose work exposed them to danger, but most of them were
either people who refused to bow to racist convention or were innocent
bystanders, unsuspecting victims of random terrorism.[78]

Among the more notorious murders by Klan members:
The 1951 Christmas Eve bombing of the home of NAACP activists Harry
and Harriette Moore in Mims, Florida, resulting in their deaths.[79]
The 1957 murder of Willie Edwards, Jr. Klansmen forced Edwards to jump
to his death from a bridge into the Alabama River.[80]
The 1963 assassination of NAACP organizer Medgar Evers in Mississippi.
In 1994, former Ku Klux Klansman Byron De La Beckwith was convicted.
The 1963 bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham,
Alabama, which killed four black girls. The perpetrators were Klan
members Robert Chambliss, convicted in 1977, Thomas Blanton and Bobby
Frank Cherry, convicted in 2001 and 2002. The fourth suspect, Herman
Cash, died before he was indicted.
The 1964 murders of three civil rights workers Chaney, Goodman, and
Schwerner in Mississippi. In June 2005, Klan member Edgar Ray Killen
was convicted of manslaughter.[81]
The 1964 murder of two black teenagers, Henry Hezekiah Dee and Charles
Eddie Moore in Mississippi. In August 2007, based on the confession of
Klansman Charles Marcus Edwards, James Ford Seale, a reputed Ku Klux
Klansman, was convicted. Seale was sentenced to serve three life
sentences.[82] Seale was a former Mississippi policeman and sheriff's
deputy.[83]


Violence at a Klan march in Mobile, Alabama, 1977
The 1965 Alabama murder of Viola Liuzzo. She was a Southern-raised
Detroit mother of five who was visiting the state in order to attend a
civil rights march. At the time of her murder Liuzzo was transporting
Civil Rights Marchers.
The 1966 firebombing death of NAACP leader Vernon Dahmer Sr., 58, in
Mississippi. In 1998 former Ku Klux Klan wizard Sam Bowers was
convicted of his murder and sentenced to life. Two other Klan members
were indicted with Bowers, but one died before trial, and the other's
indictment was dismissed.
There was also resistance to Klan violence. In a 1958 North Carolina
incident, the Klan burned crosses at the homes of two Lumbee Native
Americans who had associated with white people and threatened to
return with more men. When they held a nighttime rally nearby, they
found themselves surrounded by hundreds of armed Lumbees. Gunfire was
exchanged, and the Klan was routed at what became known as the Battle
of Hayes Pond.[84]
When Freedom Riders arrived in Birmingham, Alabama, the police
commissioner Bull Connor gave Klan members fifteen minutes to attack
the riders before sending in the police.[7] When local and state
authorities failed to protect them, the federal government established
more effective intervention.
While the FBI had paid informants in the Klan, for instance in
Birmingham, Alabama in the early 1960s, its relations with local law
enforcement agencies and the Klan were often ambiguous. The head of
the FBI J. Edgar Hoover, appeared more concerned about Communist links
to civil rights activists than about controlling Klan excesses. In
1964, the FBI's COINTELPRO program began attempts to infiltrate and
disrupt civil rights groups.[7]
Since the 1970s

Once African Americans secured federal legislation to protect civil
and voting rights, the Klan shifted its focus to opposing court-
ordered busing to desegregate schools, affirmative action, and more
open immigration. For instance, in 1971, Klansmen used bombs to
destroy ten school buses in Pontiac, Michigan. Klansman David Duke was
active in South Boston during the school busing crisis of 1974. Duke
was leader of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan from 1974 until he
resigned from the Klan in 1978.
The Greensboro massacre occurred on November 3, 1979 in Greensboro,
North Carolina, United States. In the shoot-out, five marchers were
killed by members of the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party
while staging a protest. It was the culmination of attempts by the
Communist Workers Party to organize industrial workers, predominantly
black, in the area.[85]
Jerry Thompson, a newspaper reporter who infiltrated the Klan in 1979,
reported that the FBI's COINTELPRO efforts were highly successful.
Rival Klan factions accused each other's leaders of being FBI
informants. Bill Wilkinson of the Invisible Empire, Knights of the Ku
Klux Klan, was revealed to have been working for the FBI.[86] During
Thompson's brief membership, his truck was shot at, he was yelled at
by black children, and a Klan rally he attended turned into a riot
when black soldiers on an adjacent military base taunted the Klansmen.
Attempts by the Klan to march were often met with counter protests and
sometimes with violence.
After Michael Donald was lynched in 1981 in Alabama, the FBI
investigated his death. Two local Klansmen were convicted of having a
role including Henry Hays who was sentenced to death. With the support
of attorneys Morris Dees and Joseph J. Levin at the Southern Poverty
Law Center (SPLC), Michael's mother, Beulah Mae Donald, sued the Ku
Klux Klan in civil court in Alabama. Her lawsuit against the United
Klans of America was tried in February 1987. The all-white jury found
the Klan responsible for the lynching of Michael Donald and ordered
the Klan to pay $7 million USD. To pay the judgment, the Klan turned
over all of its assets, including its national headquarters building
in Tuscaloosa.[87]
After exhausting the appeals process, Henry Hayes was executed for
Donald's death in Alabama on June 6, 1997. It was the first time since
1913 that a white man had been executed in Alabama for a crime against
an African American.[88]
Thompson, the journalist who claimed he had infiltrated the Klan,
related that Klan leaders who appeared indifferent to the threat of
arrest showed great concern about a series of civil lawsuits filed by
the Southern Poverty Law Center for damages in the millions of
dollars. These were filed after Klansmen shot into a group of African
Americans. Klansmen curtailed activities to conserve money for defense
against the lawsuits.
The Klan itself used lawsuits as tools. They filed a libel suit to
prevent publication of a paperback edition of Thompson's book. The
publisher canceled the publication.[citation needed]
The present-day Ku Klux Klan is not one organization. Rather it is
made up of small independent chapters across the United States.[89]
The formation of independent chapters has made the KKK groups more
difficult to infiltrate and researchers find it hard to estimate its
numbers.
KKK members have stepped up recruitment in recent years but the
organization continues to grow slowly, with membership estimated at
5,000-8,000 across 179 chapters. These latest drives have seized upon
issues such as people's anxieties about illegal immigration, urban
crime and same-sex marriage. [90]
The only known former member of the Klan to hold a federal office
currently in the United States is Democratic Senator Robert Byrd of
West Virginia, who said he "deeply regrets" having joined the Klan
more than half a century ago, when he was about 24 years old. Byrd
joined as a young man in the 1940s, recruiting 150 friends and
acquaintances from his small West Virginia town. He later said he was
a Klan member for about a year, but contemporary newspapers carried
stories about a letter of his recommending a friend as Klaneagle in
1946.[91] In 2005, when he published a memoir and was asked again
about his life, Byrd said, "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no
place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind
apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."[91]
Some of the larger KKK organizations in operation include:
Bayou Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, prevalent in Texas, Oklahoma,
Arkansas, Louisiana and other areas of the Southeastern U.S.
Church of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan[92]
Imperial Klans of America[93]
Knights of the White Kamelia
Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, headed by national director and self-
claimed pastor Thom Robb, and based in Zinc, Arkansas. It claims to be
the biggest Klan organization in America today. Spokesmen refer to it
as a "sixth era Klan", and it continues to be a racist group.
Numerous smaller groups use the Klan name. Estimates are that about
two-thirds of KKK members are concentrated in the South, with another
third situated primarily in the lower Midwest.[94][92][95]
On November 14, 2008, an all-white jury of seven men and seven women
awarded $1.5 million in compensatory damages and $1 million in
punitive damages to plaintiff Jordan Gruver, represented by the
Southern Poverty Law Center against the Imperial Klans of America.[96]
The ruling found that five IKA members had savagely beaten Gruver,
then 16 years old, at a Kentucky county fair in July 2006.[97]
Many Klan groups have formed strong alliances with other white
supremacist groups like Neo-Nazis. Some Klan groups have become
increasingly "Nazified" adopting the look and emblems of Nazi
skinheads.[98]
Although there are numerous KKK groups, the media and popular
discourse generally refer to the Klan for expediency.
The ACLU has provided legal support to various factions of the KKK in
defense of their First Amendment rights to hold public rallies,
parades, and marches, and their right to field political candidates.
Vocabulary

Membership in the Klan is secret. Like many fraternal organizations,
the Klan has signs which members can use to recognize one another. A
member may use the acronym AYAK (Are you a Klansman?) in conversation
to surreptitiously identify himself to another potential member. The
response AKIA (A Klansman I am) completes the greeting.[99]
Throughout its varied history, the Klan has coined many words[100]
beginning with "KL" including:
Klabee: treasurers
Kleagle: recruiter
Klecktoken: initiation fee
Kligrapp: secretary
Klonvocation: gathering
Kloran: ritual book
Kloreroe: delegate
Kludd: chaplain
All of the above terminology was created by William Simmons, as part
of his 1915 revival of the Klan. The Reconstruction-era Klan used
different titles; the only titles to carry over were "Wizard" for the
overall leader of the Klan, "Night Hawk" for the official in charge of
security, and a few others, mostly for regional officers of the
organization.
See also

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Ku Klux Klan
History of the United States (1865–1918)
Jim Crow laws
Knights of the Golden Circle
Leaders of the Ku Klux Klan
Notable alleged Ku Klux Klan members in national politics
Silent Brotherhood
Timeline of racial tension in Omaha, Nebraska
White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan
Footnotes

^ The Various Shady Lives Of The Ku Klux Klan - Time
^ [1]
^ "Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871." Civil Rights in the United States. 2
vols. Macmillan Reference USA, 2000. Reproduced in History Resource
Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale. url=http://galenet.galegroup.com/
servlet/HistRC/
^ Jackson 1992 ed., pp. 241-242.
^ According to the 1920 census, the population of white males 18 years
and older was about 31 million, but many of these men would have been
ineligible for membership because they were immigrants, Jews, or Roman
Catholics. Klan membership peaked at about 4-5 million in the
mid-1920s. "The Ku Klux Klan, a brief biography". The African American
Registry.
^ Lay, Shawn. "Ku Klux Klan in the Twentieth Century". The New Georgia
Encyclopedia. Coker College.
^ a b c d McWhorter 2001.
^ Horn 1939, p. 9. The founders were John C. Lester, John B. Kennedy,
James R. Crowe, Frank O. McCord, Richard R. Reed, and J. Calvin Jones
^ Horn 1939, p. 11, states that Reed proposed κύκλος (kyklos) and
Kennedy added clan. Wade 1987, p. 33 says that Kennedy came up with
both words, but Crowe suggested transforming κύκλος into kuklux.
^ W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America: 1860–1880, New
York: Oxford University Press, 1935; reprint, The Free Press, 1998, pp.
679-680
^ W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America: 1860–1880, New
York: Oxford University Press, 1935; reprint, The Free Press, 1998, p.
671-675.
^ "Ku Klux Klan, Organization and Principles, 1868". State University
of New York at Albany.
^ Horn 1939. Horn casts doubt on some other aspects of the story.
^ Cincinnati 'Commercial', August 28, 1868, quoted in Wade 1987.
^ Horn 1939, p. 27.
^ Parsons 2005, p. 816.
^ a b Foner 1989, p. 425-426.
^ Foner 1989, p. 342.
^ W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America: 1860–1880, New
York: Oxford University Press, 1935; reprint, The Free Press, 1998, p.
677-678.
^ Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863–
1877, New York: Perennial Classics, 1989; reprinted 2002, p.432
^ A special report prepared by the Southern Poverty Law Center. "A
Hundred Years of Terror". Indiana University-Purdue University
Indianapolis.
^ W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America: 1860–1880, New
York: Oxford University Press, 1935; reprint, The Free Press, 1998, pp.
674-675
^ W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America: 1860–1880, New
York: Oxford University Press, 1935; reprint, The Free Press, 1998, pp.
680-681
^ Bryant, Jonathan M.. "Ku Klux Klan in the Reconstruction Era". The
New Georgia Encyclopedia. Georgia Southern University.
^ The Invisible Empire: The Ku Klux Klan in Florida by Michael Newton,
pp. 1-30. Newton quotes from the Testimony Taken by the Joint Select
Committee to Enquire into the Condition of Affairs in the Late
Insurrectionary States. Vol. 13. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1872. Among historians of the Klan, this volume is
also known as "The KKK testimony".
^ Rhodes 1920, pp. 157–158.
^ a b Horn 1939, p. 375.
^ a b Wade 1987, p. 102.
^ White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy and Southern
Reconstruction by Allen W. Trelease (Louisiana State University Press:
1995)
^ Trelease 1995.
^ quotes from Wade 1987.
^ Horn 1939, p. 360.
^ Horn 1939, p. 362.
^ a b Wormser, Richard. "The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow — The
Enforcement Acts (1870–1871)". Public Broadcasting Service.
^ Wade 1987, p. 85.
^ Foner 1989, p. 435.
^ Wade 1987.
^ Horn 1939, p. 373.
^ Wade 1987, p. 88.
^ Wade 1987, p. 109, writes that by ca. 1871–1874, "For many, the
lapse of the enforcement acts was justified since their reason for
being — the Ku-Klux Klan — had been effectively smashed as a result of
the dramatic showdown in South Carolina". Klan costumes, also called
"regalia", disappeared by the early 1870s (Wade 1987, p. 109). The
fact that the Klan did not exist for decades was shown when Simmons's
1915 recreation of the Klan attracted only two aging "former
Reconstruction Klansmen." All other members were new.(Wade 1987, p.
144).
^ "The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow: The Enforcement Acts, 1870–1871",
Public Broadcast Service, accessed 5 Apr 2008
^ Wade 1987, p. 109–110.
^ Foner 1989, p. 437, and KKK Hearings, 46th Congress, 2d Session,
Senate Report 693, and Taylor 1974, p. 268-270.
^ Balkin, Jack M. (2002). "History Lesson" (PDF). Yale University.
^ Simon, Dennis M.. "The Civil Rights Movement, 1964–1968". Southern
Methodist University.
^ "Viola Liuzzo". Spartacus Educational.
^ Richard H. Pildes, "Democracy, Anti-Democracy, and the Canon",
Constitutional Commentary, Vol.17, 2000, p.27, accessed 10 Mar 2008
^ Richard H. Pildes, "Democracy, Anti-Democracy, and the Canon",
Constitutional Commentary, Vol.17, 2000, pp.12–13, 27, accessed 10 Mar
2008
^ Maxine D. Rogers, Larry E. Rivers, David R. Colburn, R. Tom Dye, and
William W. Rogers, Documented History of the Incident Which Occurred
at Rosewood, Florida in January 1923, Florida: Dec 1993, p.2, accessed
28 Mar 2008
^ Jackson 1967, p. 241.
^ Maxine D. Rogers, et.al., Documented History of Rosewood, Florida in
January 1923, op.cit., pp.4-6, accessed 28 Mar 2008
^ An Interview with Stanley F. Horn - Oral History Interviews of the
Forest History Society
^ Dray 2002.
^ Dray 2002, p. 198. Griffith quickly relayed the comment to the
press, where it was widely reported. In subsequent correspondence,
Wilson discussed Griffith's filmmaking in a positive tone, without
challenging use of his statement.
^ Wade 1987, p. 137.
^ Letter from J. M. Tumulty, secretary to President Wilson, to the
Boston branch of the NAACP, quoted in Link, Wilson.
^ The Ku Klux Klan and Related American Racialist and Antisemitic
Organizations: A History and Analysis by Chester L Quarles, Page 219.
The second Klan's constitution and preamble, reprinted in Quarles
book, stated that the second Klan was indebted to the original Klan's
Prescripts.
^ Lender et al 1982, p. 33.
^ Prendergast 1987, pp. 25-52, 27.
^ Barr 1999, p. 370.
^ "A Wizard's Indictment". TIME. March 10, 1923.
^ a b Jackson, 1992.
^ Moore 1991.
^ Maxine D. Rogers, et.al., Documented History of Rosewood, Florida in
January 1923, op.cit., p.6, accessed 28 Mar 2008
^ Franklin 1992, p.145
^ a b Maxine D. Rogers, et.al., Documented History of Rosewood,
Florida in January 1923, op.cit., p.7, accessed 28 Mar 2008
^ Smith, Robert L. (April 26, 1999). "In the 1920s, the Klan ruled the
countryside". The Providence Journal.
^ Diane McWhorter, Carry Me Home: Birmingham, Alabama, The Climactic
Battle of the Civil Rights Revolution, New York: Touchstone Book,
2002, p.75
^ Weedmark, Kevin. "When the KKK rode high across the Prairies".
Moosomin World-Spectator.
^ It's been seventy years since Anaheim booted the Klan, reprinted
from the Los Angeles Times
^ Feldman 1999.
^ Rogers et al, pp. 432-433.
^ Rogers et al, p. 433.
^ Moore 1991, p.186.
^ von Busack, Richard. "Superman Versus the KKK". MetroActive.
^ Kennedy 1990.
^ "The Ku Klux Klan, a brief biography". The African American
Registry. and Lay, Shawn. "Ku Klux Klan in the Twentieth Century". The
New Georgia Encyclopedia. Coker College.
^ Egerton 1994, p. 562-563.
^ "Who Was Harry T. Moore?" — The Palm Beach Post, August 16, 1999
^ Cox, Major W. (March 2, 1999). "Justice Still Absent in Bridge
Death". Montgomery Advertiser.
^ Axtman, Kris (June 23, 2005). "Mississippi verdict greeted by a
generation gap". The Christian Science Monitor.
^ Mitchell, Jerry. "Seale gets 3 life terms for '64 murders". USA
Today.
^ "Reputed Klansman, Ex-Cop, and Sheriff's Deputy Indicted For The
1964 Murders of Two Young African-American Men in Mississippi; U.S. v.
James Ford Seale". January 24, 2007. Retrieved on 2008-03-23.
^ Ingalls 1979; Graham, Nicholas (January 2005). "January 1958 -- The
Lumbees face the Klan". University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
^ Mark Hand (2004-11-18). "The Greensboro Massacre". Press Action.
^ Thompson 1982.
^ "Ku Klux Klan". Spartacus Educational, accessed 22 Apr 2008.
^ "Ku Klux Klan". Spartacus Educational.
^ About the Ku Klux Klan, Anti-Defamation League, 2002. According to
the report, the KKK's estimated size then was "No more than a few
thousand, organized into slightly more than 100 units."
^ Brad Knickerbocker (9 February 2007). "Anti-Immigrant Sentiments
Fuel Ku Klux Klan Resurgence". Christian Science Monitor.
^ a b Eric Pianin, "A Senator's Shame", Washington Post, 19 Jun 2005,
accessed 4 Aug 2008
^ a b "Church of the American Knights of the KKK". Anti-Defamation
League. October 22, 1999.
^ "No. 2 Klan group on trial in Ky. teen's beating". Associated Press.
November 11, 2008. Retrieved on 2008-11-22.
^ "Active U.S. Hate Groups". Intelligence Report. Southern Poverty Law
Center.
^ "About the Ku Klux Klan". Anti-Defamation League.
^ "Jury awards $2.5 million to teen beaten by Klan members". CNN.
November 14, 2008. Retrieved on 2008-11-18.
^ "Southern Poverty Law Center vs. Imperial Klans of America".
Southern Poverty Law Center. July 25, 2007. Retrieved on 2007-09-18.
^ Ku Klux Klan - Affiliations Anti-Defamation League.
^ "A Visual Database of Extremist Symbols, Logos and Tattoos". Anti-
Defamation League.
^ Axelrod 1997, p. 160.
Bibliography

Axelrod, Alan (1997). The International Encyclopedia of Secret
Societies & Fraternal Orders. New York: Facts On File.
Barr, Andrew (1999). Drink: A Social History of America. New York:
Carroll & Graf.
Chalmers, David M. (1987). Hooded Americanism: The History of the Ku
Klux Klan. Durahm, N.C.: Duke University Press. pp. 512. ISBN
9780822307303.
Dray, Philip (2002). At the Hands of Persons Unknown: The Lynching of
Black America. New York: Random House.
Egerton, John (1994). Speak Now Against the Day: The Generation Before
the Civil Rights Movement in the South. Alfred and Knopf Inc..
Feldman, Glenn (1999). Politics, Society, and the Klan in Alabama,
1915-1949. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: University of Alabama Press.
Foner, Eric (1989). Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution,
1863-1877. Perennial (HarperCollins).
Franklin, John Hope (1992). Race and History: Selected Essays
1938-1988. Louisiana State University Press.
Horn, Stanley F. (1939). Invisible Empire: The Story of the Ku Klux
Klan, 1866-1871. Montclair, New Jersey: Patterson Smith Publishing
Corporation.
Ingalls, Robert P. (1979). Hoods: The Story of the Ku Klux Klan. New
York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.
Jackson, Kenneth T. (1967; 1992 edition). The Ku Klux Klan in the
City, 1915-1930. Oxford University Press.
Kennedy, Stetson (1990). The Klan Unmasked. University Press of
Florida.
Lender, Mark E.; James K. Martin (1982). Drinking in America. New
York: Free Press.
Levitt, Stephen D.; Stephen J. Dubner (2005). Freakonomics: A Rogue
Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything. New York: William
Morrow.
McWhorter, Diane (2001). Carry Me Home: Birmingham, Alabama, The
Climactic Battle of the Civil Rights Revolution. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
Moore, Leonard J. (1991). Citizen Klansmen: The Ku Klux Klan in
Indiana, 1921-1928. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Newton, Michael; Judy Ann Newton (1991). The Ku Klux Klan: An
Encyclopedia. New York & London: Garland Publishing.
Parsons, Elaine Frantz (2005). "Midnight Rangers: Costume and
Performance in the Reconstruction-Era Ku Klux Klan". The Journal of
American History 92 (3): 811–836.
Prendergast, Michael L., "A History of Alcohol Problem Prevention
Efforts in the United States", written at Greenwich, Connecticut, in
Holder, Harold D., Control Issues in Alcohol Abuse Prevention:
Strategies for States and Communities, JAI Press, 1987.
Rhodes, James Ford (1920). History of the United States from the
Compromise of 1850 to the McKinley-Bryan Campaign of 1896. 7.
Winner of the Pulitzer Prize.
Rogers, William; Robert Ward, Leah Atkins and Wayne Flynt (1994).
Alabama: The History of a Deep South State. Tuscaloosa, Alabama:
University of Alabama Press.
Steinberg, Alfred (1962). The man from Missouri; the life and times of
Harry S. Truman. New York: Putnam. OCLC 466366.
Taylor, Joe G. (1974). Louisiana Reconstructed, 1863-1877. Baton
Rouge.
Thompson, Jerry (1982). My Life in the Klan. New York: Putnam. ISBN
0399126953.
Trelease, Allen W. (1995). White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy
and Southern Reconstruction. Louisiana State University Press.
First published in 1971 and based on massive research in primary
sources, this is the most comprehensive treatment of the Klan and its
relationship to post-Civil War Reconstruction. Includes narrative
research on other night-riding groups. Details close link between Klan
and late 19th century and early 20th century Democratic Party.
Wade, Wyn Craig (1987). The Fiery Cross: The Ku Klux Klan in America.
New York: Simon and Schuster.
An unsympathetic account of both Klans, with a dedication to "my
Kentucky grandmother ... a fierce and steadfast Radical Republican
from the wane of Reconstruction until her death nearly a century
later".
Further reading
Blee, Kathleen M. (1992). Women of the Klan. University of California
Press. ISBN 0-520-07876-4.
"White supremacist groups flourishing". The Associated Press.
Nelson, Jack (1993). Terror in the Night: The Klan's Campaign Against
the Jews. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-671-69223-2.
External links

The Ku Klux Klan website
Imperial Klans of America: "Stand for Christ, Race and Nation"
Klan Tableau A film documenting William Christenberry's Klan Tableau
in Washington, D.C. (Includes interview with Christenberry.)
The History of the Original Ku Klux Klan — by an anonymous author
sympathetic to the original Klan.
The Southern Poverty Law Center Report
The ADL on the KKK
Proceedings of the Second Imperial Klonvocation (1924)
In 1999, South Carolina town defines the KKK as terrorist
A long interview with Stanley F. Horn, author of Invisible Empire: The
Story of the Ku Klux Klan, 1866-1871.
Full text of the Klan Act of 1871 (simplified version)
The Protestant "Kluxing" of Cañyon City, Colorado — (Cañyon City
Public Library)
Ku Klux Klan leader predicts Barack Obama will be assassinated -
Scotsman.com August 10, 2008.
KKK (Amarillo, Tex.) Records, 1921-1925 and undated, in the Southwest
Collection/Special Collections Library at Texas Tech University
Ku Klux Klan from the Handbook of Texas Online
z
2009-03-04 02:37:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "anti defamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?  He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
There are lots of "injustices" in the world, then as now, the ongoing
slaughter of innocents by Israel coming immediately to mind, along
with their illegal occupation, etc., etc.
Frank was convicted and sentenced to death after a lengthy trial.
1913 GA would've much preferred to convict the black men, Conley
or Lee, but the evidence wasn't there.   Frank was not even one
of the first suspects, which pretty much throws water over the
claims of rife anti-semitism in Atlanta at that time.
The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles have never exonerated
Frank of the crime, only issuing a pardon based on not protecting
Frank from those who dragged him from prison and executed him,
this issued in '86, caving a bit from Jewish group pressure, after
first refusing in 1982, after the Mann "revelation," which of course
proved nothing.   The Phagan family still believe the right man
died for the crime.
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
explain the lack of any wounds, scratches, etc. on Frank? and explain
the "shit in the shaft"?
f***@verizon.net
2009-03-04 05:15:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
There are lots of "injustices" in the world, then as now, the ongoing
slaughter of innocents by Israel coming immediately to mind,
As all *other* sorts of lies come immediately to the "mind"
of lying cowardly losers ---
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
along
with their illegal occupation, etc., etc.
--- I rest my case.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Frank was convicted and sentenced to death after a lengthy trial.
Filled with lies:

http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/leofrank.htm

"George Epps, a fifteen year old friend of Mary Phagan, testified that
Phagan was afraid of Frank because he had flirted and made advances toward
her. Newt Lee testified that Frank was nervous the day of the murder and had
telephoned to see if everything was fine at the factory - not his usual
practice. But two mechanics who had worked on the top floor of the factory
that morning disputed Lee's story, saying Frank had acted normally."

and

"The Atlanta Constitution also reported that Atlanta police were questioning
a new suspect in the case and had asked him for handwriting samples. The new
suspect was James Connolly (sic), a sweeper at the factory, who had been
arrested "several days earlier" (actually on May 1) when he was discovered
rinsing a soiled shirt at the pencil factory. The stains on the shirt turned
out to be blood. Jim Conley would turn out to be the prosecution's lead
witness in its case against Leo Frank; Conley was also the man who had
actually committed the murder, according to Alonzo Mann, a thirteen year old
employee of the factory. Mann, in a story he did not tell until 1982,
claimed he saw Conley carrying Phagan's body at the factory that day; Conley
threatened Mann with death if he ever was to report what he had seen. Mann's
mother advised him to keep quiet, which he did for almost seventy years."

and

"[O]fficials of the National Pencil Factory claimed they believed Jim Conley
was the true murderer of Mary Phagan. Atlanta detectives said they believed
Conley's story, though admitting it had changed several times and still had
many inconsistencies."

and

"Though no one realized it at the time, there was a major flaw in Conley's
story. He had told detectives he had defecated into the elevator shaft
earlier that Saturday morning. But when police first investigating the
murder took the elevator down the pile of feces left by Conley had been
"fresh," that is unmashed. If Conley and Frank had indeed taken the
elevator down with Phagan's body, the feces would already have been
flattened. The police and Frank's attorneys failed to notice this glaring
mistake in Conley's testimony....Conley was then returned to police
headquarters where he would be readily available for further questioning;
despite the police believing Frank was guilty of the murder, they were still
concerned over the "flaws and rough places" in Conley's story."

There's plenty more at the site.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
1913 GA would've much preferred to convict the black men, Conley
or Lee, but the evidence wasn't there.
Quite untrue (see above, for starters).
Some lawyer this HHW is...
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Frank was not even one
of the first suspects,
Which means only that here was no real evidence except
that which was contrived & thrown his way.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
which pretty much throws water over the
claims of rife anti-semitism in Atlanta at that time.
Untrue.

http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/leofrank.htm

"Solicitor Hugh Dorsey took up the argument on this day, blistering the
character of Leo Frank and portraying Mary Phagan as a symbol of lost
innocence and virtue. He tried to deflect charges of anti-Semitism by
recalling the great names in Jewish history, arguing that Frank with his
deviant behavior dishonored them as well as the Southern girl he had so
brutally murdered. Although Judge L.S. Roan kept strict control of the
courtroom, Dorsey's words were quickly relayed to the large crowd waiting
outside. When Dorsey emerged he was greeted with thunderous applause."

and

"While charges of anti-Semitism had certainly surrounded the trial of Leo
Frank, Watson was blatant in his sentiments. His inflammatory writings are
generally credited with pushing the already strong feelings regarding this
case past the boiling point. In what is now ominous phraseology, Watson
called on the citizens of Georgia to take justice into their own hands and
inflict the death sentence upon Leo Frank."

and

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/frank/1.html

"They were waiting for the Baptist minister to rouse them, to fuel their
smoldering anger. When the preacher had finished, proclaiming the man on
trial, Leo Frank, to be a despoiler of innocence, the devil who had killed
the little girl, Mary Phagan, the crowd cried, "Hang him, hang him, hang the
Jew!"

http://www.newgeorgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-906

"Watson's accusations against Jews and Leo Frank in particular increased the
paper's sales and elicited enormous numbers of letters praising him and his
publication. As Watson continued to fan the flames of public outrage, his
readership grew. By the time Slaton reviewed the case, there was tremendous
pressure from the public to let the courts' verdicts stand."

and

"Frank's Jewish identity compounded southern resentment toward him, as
latent anti-Semitic sentiments, inflamed by Tom Watson, became more
pronounced."

and

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTRIALS/frank/frankaccount.html

"Unfortunately, it now seems, events and the South's anti-Semitism conspired
to lead to the conviction of the wrong man, the factory's Jewish
superintendent, Leo Frank."

and

"Defense attorney Reuben Arnold ... told jurors that "if Frank hadn't been a
Jew he never would have been prosecuted."

and

"One of the jurors, buggy salesman Atticus Henslee, was quoted as telling
fellow members of the Atlanta Elks Club, two days after the indictment
against Frank was returned by the grand jury, "I'm glad they indicted the
goddamn Jew. They ought to take him out and lynch him, and if I get on that
jury I'll hang that Jew for sure."

and

"When the announcement of the commutation came, protesters demonstrated and
burned Slaton in effigy. A dummy hanging in Phagan's hometown of Marrietta
bore a sign: "John M. Slaton, King of the Jews and Georgia's Traitor
Forever." "
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles have never exonerated
Frank of the crime, only issuing a pardon based on not protecting
Frank from those who dragged him from prison and executed him,
Yes, how utterly pathetic.
Proof of nothing but either intransigence or more anti-Smitism
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
this issued in '86, caving a bit from Jewish group pressure,
A lie.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
after
first refusing in 1982, after the Mann "revelation," which of course
proved nothing.
Only to lying cowardly losers determined to believe exactly
what they want to believe:

http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/leofrank.htm

"Pardon

March 4, 1982 - Alonzo Mann, in failing health, signed an affidavit
asserting Leo Frank's innocence and Jim Conley's guilt. He admitted he had
seen Conley carrying the limp body of Mary Phagan on his shoulder near the
trapdoor leading to the basement on April 26, 1913. Conley had threatened to
kill him if he ever told anyone what he had seen. He did go home and tell
his mother, who advised him to keep quiet. After Frank's conviction, his
parents still kept him quiet, saying it would do no good to come forth after
the verdict. He was telling the story now to unburden his soul. He had
actually tried to tell the story several times before, but no one had paid
any attention. He had even gotten into a fight with a fellow soldier in
World War I when he tried to asset Frank's innocence. He took several lie
detector tests while telling his story to a group of reporters for The
Tennessean, a newspaper in Nashville, TN. The tests indicated Mann was
telling the truth. "
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Phagan family still believe the right man
died for the crime.
Which means nothing - the proof is not there &
all the facts point to Conley.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
The Governor at the time (Slayton) almost certainly took a Jewish
payoff
And the proof for this is...?
The same for all "proof" submitted by lying cowardly losers: nonexistent.
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
to commute the sentence to life just before leaving office.
explain the lack of any wounds, scratches, etc. on Frank? and explain
the "shit in the shaft"?
Don't hold your breath waiting.

Susan
B. Cramer
2009-03-04 10:23:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Post by HHW
Frank was lynched after being kidnapped in a prison hospital by a mob
who were largely professional men. This happened after he was
convicted but before the appellate process was over. We will never
know what the system might ultimately have done with him. The lynching
can only be said to have been an injustice.
There are lots of "injustices" in the world, then as now, the ongoing
slaughter of innocents by Israel coming immediately to mind,
As all *other* sorts of lies come immediately to the "mind"
of lying cowardly losers ---
Post by l***@yahoo.com
along
with their illegal occupation, etc., etc.
--- I rest my case.
Post by l***@yahoo.com
Frank was convicted and sentenced to death after a lengthy trial.
Never been proved, cunt. He was tried, found guilty and sentenced to death.

End of fucking story.
z
2009-03-04 02:35:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?  He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
oh, you were an eyewitness? tell us what you saw.
B. Cramer
2009-03-04 04:00:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank? He is
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
oh, you were an eyewitness? tell us what you saw.
If he was a hebe he could. And anyone questioning his story would be hurled
into a German gaol.
z
2009-03-09 04:29:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by B. Cramer
And anyone questioning his story would be hurled
into a German gaol.
oh, do you have an objection to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
Eli Grubman
2009-03-09 06:16:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by B. Cramer
And anyone questioning his story would be hurled
into a German gaol.
oh, do you have an objection to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz. You people have always deserved
what came to you. As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."

Eli
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-09 12:28:13 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 02:16:38 -0400, Eli Grubman, the mental, emotional and
Post by Eli Grubman
Post by z
Post by B. Cramer
And anyone questioning his story would be hurled
into a German gaol.
oh, do you have an objection to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz. You people have always deserved
what came to you. As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
You've repeatedly been asked to provide the source of your statement and
ALWAYS failed to do so! So, you are nothing but a typical lying Nazi swine!

Doctor Panta
--
Retarded, Subnormal and Extremely Proud of it: Poor Psychopathic Swine
Grabmen! LOL
z
2009-03-09 18:37:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by B. Cramer
And anyone questioning his story would be hurled
into a German gaol.
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
Eli Grubman
2009-03-09 21:44:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by B. Cramer
And anyone questioning his story would be hurled
into a German gaol.
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
"G-d told them to".

Eli
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-09 22:45:14 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:44:31 -0400, Eli Grubman, the mental, emotional and
Post by z
Post by z
Post by B. Cramer
And anyone questioning his story would be hurled
into a German gaol.
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
"G-d told them to".
Eli
Why do primitive anti-Semites like you blame everything on the Jews? It
makes them forget their own inferiority, abnormality and personal misery.
The more intensely their own inferiority and abnormality is felt, the more
they will hate and project their misery on any scapegoats (Jews, homos, any
other minorities) they can find.

Doctor Panta
--
Everyone check this: psychopath Grabmen glued to his computer today as from
06:04 a.m. again (MID: <***@4ax.com>).
Watch the poor psycho with no life AT ALL making a complete ass of himself,
AGAIN, for the next EIGHTEEN to TWENTY HOURS (and more) at a stretch!
Michael Ejercito
2009-03-10 14:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by z
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.

You are a Nazi.

As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a craven coward.

You are afraid to compete with others as equals because you know
you can not measure up.

You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.

You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder those who would
tell it.

You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.

Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners. You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way. You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy, or a patient in a mental hospital.

That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.

Michael
Eli Grubman
2009-03-10 16:12:41 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 07:59:56 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
Post by Michael Ejercito
Post by z
Post by z
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
Odd, that's PRECISELY what mexes, spics and coons do. "Where's the
check?"
Post by Michael Ejercito
You are a Nazi.
You are a niggerloving mex/spic.
Post by Michael Ejercito
As a Nazi, you are, above all else
As a craven niggerloving mex/spic, you are, below all else.

Eli
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-10 17:02:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:12:41 -0400, Eli Grubman, the mental, emotional and
Post by Eli Grubman
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 07:59:56 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
Post by Michael Ejercito
Post by z
Post by z
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
Odd, that's PRECISELY what mexes, spics and coons do. "Where's the
check?"
Are you now trying to DENY that you blame every evil on earth on the Jews,
you miserable housebound psychopathic swine?
Post by Eli Grubman
Post by Michael Ejercito
You are a Nazi.
You are a niggerloving mex/spic.
You are a sick, housebound, subnormal, degenerate, psychopathic swine. And
you KNOW it!
Post by Eli Grubman
Post by Michael Ejercito
As a Nazi, you are, above all else
As a craven niggerloving mex/spic, you are, below all else.
Eli
As the sick, housebound, subnormal, degenerate, psychopathic swine that you
are, NOBODY and NOTHING is below you.

Doctor Panta
--
Rev. Richard Skull about Eli Grabmen: "Any sex act involving YOU is
bestiality."
Michael Ejercito
2009-03-11 15:27:44 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 07:59:56 -0700 (PDT),Michael Ejercito
Post by z
Post by z
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
  Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
Odd, that's PRECISELY what mexes, spics and coons do.  "Where's the
check?"
  You are a Nazi.
You are a niggerloving mex/spic.
That would be better than being YOU.


Michael
Eli Grubman
2009-03-11 15:57:40 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 08:27:44 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
Post by Michael Ejercito
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 07:59:56 -0700 (PDT),Michael Ejercito
Post by z
Post by z
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
  Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
Odd, that's PRECISELY what mexes, spics and coons do.  "Where's the
check?"
  You are a Nazi.
You are a niggerloving mex/spic.
That would be better than being YOU.
Only being a coon would be worse than being YOU.

Eli
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-11 18:12:46 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:57:40 -0400, Eli Grubman, the mental, emotional and
Post by Eli Grubman
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 08:27:44 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
Post by Michael Ejercito
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 07:59:56 -0700 (PDT),Michael Ejercito
Post by z
Post by z
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
  Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
Odd, that's PRECISELY what mexes, spics and coons do.  "Where's the
check?"
  You are a Nazi.
You are a niggerloving mex/spic.
That would be better than being YOU.
Only being a coon would be worse than being YOU.
Eli
LOL!!! You are avoiding the issue again, poor wriggling sod: he said it
would be better than being you!

You KNOW it yourself that ANYTHING would be better than being you or evne
having your sort of a miserable "life"!

Doctor Panta
--
Everyone check this: psychopath Grabmen glued to his computer today as from
04:38 a.m. again (MID: <***@4ax.com>).
Watch the poor psycho with no life AT ALL making a complete ass of himself,
AGAIN, for the next EIGHTEEN to TWENTY HOURS (and more) at a stretch!
Michael Ejercito
2009-03-12 00:34:45 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 11, 10:12 am, Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:57:40 -0400, Eli Grubman, the mental, emotional and
Post by Eli Grubman
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 08:27:44 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
Post by Eli Grubman
You are a niggerloving mex/spic.
  That would be better than being YOU.
Only being a coon would be worse than being YOU.
Eli
LOL!!! You are avoiding the issue again, poor wriggling sod: he said it
would be better than being you!
You KNOW it yourself that ANYTHING would be better than being you or evne
having your sort of a miserable "life"!
Doctor Panta
His life would yield a hundred episodes of Law & Order: SVU.


Michael
B***@isp.com
2009-03-12 04:50:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by z
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
   Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
   You are a Nazi.
   As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a
Oh no, they've let him out again! I hope he isn't going to go about
"nithings"
and sex with little boys.If he does, they are sure to throw a net
over him again.
I hope he doesn't go on about "murder" either, or they will never let
hiom own
another butter knife.
   You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.
Uh Oh, he said it - "murder!
   You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder
And again!!
   You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.
I've warned him time and again not to say the word "Socialism". All
those kibbutz jews
will find out where he lives and send the Mossad after him and if all
those 1950's
Hollyvood jews hear about his dislike of Socialism, they will get the
ACLU after him.
   Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Well, that lets *you* off the hook.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners.
Uh oh. He did it again.

You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way.
Uh oh.


 You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy
I knew it! He's back to his sex with young boys obsession.

, or a patient in a mental hospital.

And yet again he has to bring mental hospitals into it!! I wonder
if he's posting
from Bellevue Hospital. Ward 8.
   That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.
And you are a blithering idiot who is missing all of his marbles. Get
rid of
your nizkor site daily fix and try to find a doctor who can restore
you to sanity.
I know it will be difficult but where's there life there's hope.

"I have photos of naked children in my wallet"
OyVey McVay, who, if you ever come across him on a dark night - run
like hell!!
 Michael- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-12 12:36:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by B***@isp.com
Post by z
Post by z
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
   Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
   You are a Nazi.
   As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a
Oh no, they've let him out again! I hope he isn't going to go about
"nithings"
and sex with little boys.If he does, they are sure to throw a net
over him again.
I hope he doesn't go on about "murder" either, or they will never let
hiom own
another butter knife.
   You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.
Uh Oh, he said it - "murder!
   You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder
And again!!
   You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.
I've warned him time and again not to say the word "Socialism". All
those kibbutz jews
will find out where he lives and send the Mossad after him and if all
those 1950's
Hollyvood jews hear about his dislike of Socialism, they will get the
ACLU after him.
   Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Well, that lets *you* off the hook.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners.
Uh oh. He did it again.
You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way.
Uh oh.
 You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy
I knew it! He's back to his sex with young boys obsession.
, or a patient in a mental hospital.
And yet again he has to bring mental hospitals into it!! I wonder
if he's posting
from Bellevue Hospital. Ward 8.
   That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.
And you are a blithering idiot who is missing all of his marbles. Get
rid of
your nizkor site daily fix and try to find a doctor who can restore
you to sanity.
I know it will be difficult but where's there life there's hope.
"I have photos of naked children in my wallet"
OyVey McVay, who, if you ever come across him on a dark night - run
like hell!!
 Michael- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
<no snip of screeching, for laughs>

LOL Hard to believe you are NOT drugged, hilariously stupid Boedicia!

But thanks for the entertainment!

Doctor Panta
B***@isp.com
2009-03-13 20:43:57 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 12, 4:36 am, Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
Post by z
Post by z
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
   Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
   You are a Nazi.
   As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a
Oh no, they've let him out again!  I hope he isn't going to go about
"nithings"
 and sex with little boys.If he does, they are sure to throw a net
over him again.
I hope he doesn't go on about "murder" either, or they will never let
hiom own
another butter knife.
   You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.
Uh Oh, he said it - "murder!
   You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder
And again!!
   You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.
  I've warned him time and again not to say the word "Socialism". All
those kibbutz jews
 will find out where he lives and send the Mossad after him and if all
those 1950's
Hollyvood jews hear about his dislike of Socialism, they will get the
ACLU after him.
   Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
     Well, that lets *you* off the hook.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners.
Uh oh.  He did it again.
You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way.
Uh oh.
 You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy
I knew it!  He's back to his sex with young boys obsession.
, or a patient in a mental hospital.
   And yet again he has to bring mental hospitals into it!!  I wonder
if he's posting
from Bellevue Hospital. Ward 8.
   That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.
And you are a blithering idiot who is missing all of his marbles. Get
rid of
your nizkor site daily fix and try to find a doctor who can restore
you to sanity.
I know it will be difficult but where's there life there's  hope.
"I have photos of naked children in my wallet"
OyVey McVay, who, if you ever come across him on a dark night - run
like hell!!
 Michael- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
<no snip of screeching, for laughs>
My God, it's panatloons again!! Why the idiots keep letting him out
is a mystery.
He's obviously off his rocker and has a jew complex i.e. he thinks
he's one of
the tribe and goes around wearing a little black beanie and a long
black coat.
There are those, according to the jew Freud who was thrown out of
Austria for his
vile sex obsessed writings, who become fixated on those they would
like to be
part of. In pantaloon's case, it's hebes and pigs. One can't help but
notice how many times
he says "swine" in his ravings i.e. he identifies with them. But how
can that be since
pigs are intelligent and clean and panaloons is an imbecile with the
IQ of a grape.
Notice how he insists on calling me "Mirelle" in spite of providing
no proof that I have
ever posted under that name and don't even know that person. Notice
how daft
pantaloons keeps following Eli around like a sick puppy waiting for a
pat. pantaloons even
keeps track of the times when Eli posts and when he logs off. What
kind of an idiot
would waste time doing that!!

This jew group is full of wannabes and they are all as crazy as
bedbugs. Can anyone
be as moronic as Erjecitooo with his cretinous "You are a
Nazi........." drivel, which
he aped from some ape in that silly nizkor site.
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
LOL Hard to believe you are NOT drugged, hilariously  stupid Boedicia!
See what I mean. What fool in his right mind would post such inane
drivel. I have no
doubt he's posting from some mental hospital when his keeper allows
him to use the computers hoping it will calm him down before they put
him to bed in his pink
padded cell.
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
But thanks for the entertainment!
Doctor Panta- Hide quoted text -
"Doctor"? Take my advice pantaloons, ask *your* doctor to increase
the dose before you escape again and run naked down Main Street and
frightening everyone with your
rambling garbage. Oy!!
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
- Show quoted text -
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
2009-03-13 22:17:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by B***@isp.com
On Mar 12, 4:36 am, Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
Post by z
Post by z
oh, do you have an objection  to Germany re a history of persecuting
people who don't deserve it? please tell us more.
I hope you don't mean jews, zzzzzz.  You people have always deserved
what came to you.  As the venerable Kissinger once admitted in a rare
moment of jew candour, "Any people that have been persecuted for 2000
years must be doing something wrong."
Eli
heh heh
"why do antisemites sexually abuse small children and pets?"
"something about the children and pets is at fault"
heh heh
"Why do semites blame everyone else for their shortcomings and the
reaction of others to them?"
   Funny, that is EXACTLY what Nazi nithings do.
   You are a Nazi.
   As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a
Oh no, they've let him out again!  I hope he isn't going to go about
"nithings"
 and sex with little boys.If he does, they are sure to throw a net
over him again.
I hope he doesn't go on about "murder" either, or they will never let
hiom own
another butter knife.
   You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.
Uh Oh, he said it - "murder!
   You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder
And again!!
   You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.
  I've warned him time and again not to say the word "Socialism". All
those kibbutz jews
 will find out where he lives and send the Mossad after him and if all
those 1950's
Hollyvood jews hear about his dislike of Socialism, they will get the
ACLU after him.
   Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
     Well, that lets *you* off the hook.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners.
Uh oh.  He did it again.
You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way.
Uh oh.
 You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy
I knew it!  He's back to his sex with young boys obsession.
, or a patient in a mental hospital.
   And yet again he has to bring mental hospitals into it!!  I wonder
if he's posting
from Bellevue Hospital. Ward 8.
   That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.
And you are a blithering idiot who is missing all of his marbles. Get
rid of
your nizkor site daily fix and try to find a doctor who can restore
you to sanity.
I know it will be difficult but where's there life there's  hope.
"I have photos of naked children in my wallet"
OyVey McVay, who, if you ever come across him on a dark night - run
like hell!!
 Michael- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
<no snip of screeching, for laughs>
My God, it's panatloons again!! Why the idiots keep letting him out
is a mystery.
He's obviously off his rocker and has a jew complex i.e. he thinks
he's one of
the tribe and goes around wearing a little black beanie and a long
black coat.
There are those, according to the jew Freud who was thrown out of
Austria for his
vile sex obsessed writings, who become fixated on those they would
like to be
part of. In pantaloon's case, it's hebes and pigs. One can't help but
notice how many times
he says "swine" in his ravings i.e. he identifies with them. But how
can that be since
pigs are intelligent and clean and panaloons is an imbecile with the
IQ of a grape.
Notice how he insists on calling me "Mirelle" in spite of providing
no proof that I have
ever posted under that name and don't even know that person. Notice
how daft
pantaloons keeps following Eli around like a sick puppy waiting for a
pat. pantaloons even
keeps track of the times when Eli posts and when he logs off. What
kind of an idiot
would waste time doing that!!
This jew group is full of wannabes and they are all as crazy as
bedbugs. Can anyone
be as moronic as Erjecitooo with his cretinous "You are a
Nazi........." drivel, which
he aped from some ape in that silly nizkor site.
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
LOL Hard to believe you are NOT drugged, hilariously  stupid Boedicia!
See what I mean. What fool in his right mind would post such inane
drivel. I have no
doubt he's posting from some mental hospital when his keeper allows
him to use the computers hoping it will calm him down before they put
him to bed in his pink
padded cell.
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
But thanks for the entertainment!
Doctor Panta- Hide quoted text -
"Doctor"? Take my advice pantaloons, ask *your* doctor to increase
the dose before you escape again and run naked down Main Street and
frightening everyone with your
rambling garbage. Oy!!
Post by Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
- Show quoted text -
<no snip, for laughs>

Folks read it all!!! It's just too funny!

*LMAO*!!!!

Doctor Panta

f***@verizon.net
2009-03-04 04:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by z
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?
I knew this lying jackass was a lying jackass, but this is insane, even for
him.

http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/leofrank.htm

"Pardon

March 4, 1982 - Alonzo Mann, in failing health, signed an affidavit
asserting Leo Frank's innocence and Jim Conley's guilt. He admitted he had
seen Conley carrying the limp body of Mary Phagan on his shoulder near the
trapdoor leading to the basement on April 26, 1913. Conley had threatened to
kill him if he ever told anyone what he had seen. He did go home and tell
his mother, who advised him to keep quiet. After Frank's conviction, his
parents still kept him quiet, saying it would do no good to come forth after
the verdict. He was telling the story now to unburden his soul. He had
actually tried to tell the story several times before, but no one had paid
any attention. He had even gotten into a fight with a fellow soldier in
World War I when he tried to asset Frank's innocence. He took several lie
detector tests while telling his story to a group of reporters for The
Tennessean, a newspaper in Nashville, TN. The tests indicated Mann was
telling the truth. "
Post by z
He is
Post by l***@yahoo.com
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Paging Dr. Freud!
A neo-nazi wannabe proven liar has just admitted that
"Zionist views" are the truth!
Post by z
oh, you were an eyewitness? tell us what you saw.
Oh, I'm sure he has visions...

Susan
l***@yahoo.com
2009-03-04 12:53:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by l***@yahoo.com
What should we expect from an organization inspired by the conviction
and execution of child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank?
I knew this lying jackass was a lying jackass, but this is insane, even for
him.
http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/leofrank.htm
Zionist-vetted verson, Muttzy, like most. Most online sources
from GA simply lift the verson written by Dinnerstein.
Post by f***@verizon.net
"Pardon
March 4, 1982 - Alonzo Mann, in failing health, signed an affidavit
asserting Leo Frank's innocence and Jim Conley's guilt. He admitted he had
seen Conley carrying the limp body of Mary Phagan on his shoulder near the
trapdoor leading to the basement on April 26, 1913. Conley had threatened to
kill him if he ever told anyone what he had seen.
Which only says he saw Frank's flunky Conley carrying Mary's body,
Muttzy.
The claim does nothing to show Frank innocent of the crime, Muttzy.
Post by f***@verizon.net
  He is
Post by l***@yahoo.com
still
their poster boy, and most mainstream sources don't dare print
a version of the Leo Frank story now that is not ZioNazi-vetted, i.e.
the truth.
Paging Dr. Freud!
A neo-nazi wannabe proven liar has just admitted that
"Zionist views" are the truth!
No Muttzy, you just admitted that you support child rape and murder.
Nomen Nescio
2009-03-01 05:30:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Aurelius
It is true that Hitler's grandmother worked in the home of a Jewish
family. It is,also, true that she became pregnant during that same
time period. Hitler's father, the son of this same grandmother, was
illegitimate. He did not know who his father was. Therefore, it is
reasonably possible that Hitler's grandfather was fathered by some one
in this Jewish house hold. Therefore, it is reasonably possible that
Hitler's father was one half Jewish! Therefore, it is reasonably
possible that Adolf Hitler, himself, was one quarter Jewish!
Bullshit. But there are genetic considerations that you obviously missed.

The filthy dead jew demons down in the lowest pits of Hell can only rise up to take
possession of newborn jew baby body if its mother is a jew. Not the father. When a
jew is born it is literally a case of demon possession. Thought everybody knew that.

Hitler was obviously not a jew. Hitler was the enemy of the jews. Because Hitler
spoke the truth, that the jews are demons incarnate. Hitler said a lot of things
that turned out to be true. But the world wasn't quite ready for the final solution.
The naive "goy" world didn't understand that jews are actually demons From Hell. The
world didn't quite understand that every jew in the world must be killed to global
extinction. That there cannot be one jew left alive on Earth. They all must die.
Does that mean killing all the female jews? Of course. It also means killing all
the male jews. Because they were born of jew mothers. The only viable way of making
that happen is through a global nuclear and germ warfare holocaust. How else can you
be certain that every jew in the world is dead? The Islamists have already figured
this out. That's why they are willing and able to die martyrs in the war against the
Zionist terror. Would that all "goys" learn from our brave Islamist brothers.

But I'm only replying for the benefit of "goy" readers. Not the filthy jew demons
or their treasonous jewmason supporters. I do not reply personally to Zionist pigs.




The Juwes are
the men that
Will not
be Blamed
for nothing
-W.W. Gull
HHW
2009-03-01 05:50:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Aurelius
It is true that Hitler's grandmother worked in the home of a Jewish
family. It is,also, true that she became pregnant during that same
time period. Hitler's father, the son of this same grandmother, was
illegitimate. He did not know who his father was. Therefore, it is
reasonably possible that Hitler's grandfather was fathered by some one
in this Jewish house hold. Therefore, it is reasonably possible that
Hitler's father was one half Jewish! Therefore, it is reasonably
possible that Adolf Hitler, himself, was one quarter Jewish!
  Bullshit.  But there are genetic considerations that you obviously missed.
  The filthy dead jew demons down in the lowest pits of Hell can only rise up to take
possession of newborn jew baby body if its mother is a jew.  Not the father.  When a
jew is born it is literally a case of demon possession.  Thought everybody knew that.
  Hitler was obviously not a jew.  Hitler was the enemy of the jews.  Because Hitler
spoke the truth, that the jews are demons incarnate.  Hitler said a lot of things
that turned out to be true.  But the world wasn't quite ready for the final solution.
The naive "goy" world didn't understand that jews are actually demons From Hell.  The
world didn't quite understand that every jew in the world must be killed to global
extinction.  That there cannot be one jew left alive on Earth.  They all must die.
Does that mean killing all the female jews?  Of course.  It also means killing all
the male jews.  Because they were born of jew mothers.  The only viable way of making
that happen is through a global nuclear and germ warfare holocaust.  How else can you
be certain that every jew in the world is dead?  The Islamists have already figured
this out.  That's why they are willing and able to die martyrs in the war against the
Zionist terror.  Would that all "goys" learn from our brave Islamist brothers.
  But I'm only replying for the benefit of "goy" readers.  Not the filthy jew demons
or their treasonous jewmason supporters.  I do not reply personally to Zionist pigs.
The  Juwes are
the men  that
       Will not
be  Blamed
     for nothing
-W.W. Gull
Bugger off, Nescio.
HHW
2009-03-02 04:40:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by HHW
Abe Foxman: A One-Man Defamation League
By Eric Alterman, The Nation. Posted February 4, 2009.
For the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto defensive
and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
To delve deeply almost anywhere into the arguments over the Israeli/
Palestinian conflict is to invite an overload of irony, but let us
focus for one moment on a fracas caused by Abe Foxman, national
director of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League. Irony No. 1 is
that a "league," as such, does not exist. Foxman is it. (When asked,
for a New York Times profile, whom in the organization besides himself
a reporter might interview, Foxman "couldn't think of anyone.") Irony
No. 2? Under Foxman, "antidefamation" is not really the ADL's line;
defamation is.
Take, for example, Foxman's recent attack on Bill Moyers (a
longstanding friend and occasional supporter of my work). When Moyers
broadcast a less than laudatory commentary about Israel's Gaza
invasion, Foxman accused the veteran journalist and liberal icon of --
I kid you not -- "moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism." (You can read it online, together with
Moyers's response.) The incident says far more about Foxman than
Moyers. As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum observed, Moyers
"is one of the most admired figures in America. This attack will harm
not at all. It will, in fact, enhance his reputation just as Ed
Murrow's was enhanced by the attacks on him during the McCarthy era."
Still, it is demonstrative of the maximalist Manichaean mindset that
characterizes so much of American Jewish officialdom. Among Moyers's
myriad sins, says Foxman, was his "ignorance of the terrorist threat
against Israel, claiming that checkpoints, the security fence, and the
Gaza operation are tactics of humiliation rather than counter-
terrorism." Now really: is it so hard to imagine that the checkpoints,
security fence and Gaza operations are tactics of both humiliation and
counter-terrorism? Where, exactly, would be the contradiction?
But for the likes of Foxman, any action Israel takes is de facto
defensive and solely in the interests of peace, no matter how warlike.
He goes so far as to attack Barack Obama's choice of former Senator
George Mitchell as the U.S. envoy to the region because -- get this --
Mitchell is "fair" and "meticulously even-handed," and Foxman says he
is "not sure the situation requires that kind of approach." Foxman's
moral compass has gotten so twisted, he has the ADL working to
undermine Congressional resolutions condemning genocide --
specifically, that committed by Turks against the Armenians. Foxman
does not dispute that genocide took place; rather, he argues that it
would be inconvenient for Turkish (and Israeli) Jews were Congress to
take note of it. So we have reached a point where an organization
founded by Jews in 1913 to "secure justice and fair treatment to all
citizens alike" is now in the business of defaming those with whom its
director disagrees and purposely turning a blind eye to genocide. In
light of the desire of so many anti-Semites to treat the Holocaust in
a similar fashion, Foxman's position strikes this Jew at least as one
too many ironies to be tolerated.
What's more, the defamation of Moyers escalated further. Following
Foxman's fusillade, New York Times neocon William Kristol inserted in
a regular column -- yet another devoted as usual to the majesty of
George W. Bush's leadership -- an attack on Moyers for allegedly
"lambast[ing] Israel for what he called its 'state terrorism,' its
'waging war on an entire population' in Gaza." Like Foxman, Kristol
also implied that Moyers was guilty of racism.
Again, read the text of Moyers's remarks. Neither Kristol nor Foxman
notes his stated belief that "every nation has the right to defend its
people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would
like to see every Jew in Israel dead," or his deep concern about the
growth of "a radical stream of Islam [that] now seeks to eliminate
Israel from the face of the earth." Yet despite the fact that Bill
Moyers is, well, Bill Moyers, the Times editors not only allowed
Kristol to deliberately distort and decontextualize his remarks; they
would not allow Moyers to defend himself in his own words in response.
After the PBS journalist submitted a letter to the editor, he was
told, "We will not print that 'William Kristol distorts or
misrepresents,' and the editors will not budge." They insisted that
the letter be changed for publication to read, "I take strong
exception to William Kristol's characterization," and they truncated
much else.
This is pathetic and ridiculous. If one were to survey, say, 1,000
journalists or even 1,000 New York Times readers and ask them whether
they were more likely to trust the judgment, honesty or bravery of
Bill Moyers or of William Kristol, my guess is that the result would
be a landslide victory in Moyers's favor that would dwarf that of
Barack Obama's over John McCain. I'd even bet the same would be true
in a private survey of Times editors. Yet publisher Arthur Sulzberger
Jr. and editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal -- rather than admit
their colossal mistake in giving so prestigious and influential a
perch to Kristol, who was at long last ushered off the page with his
next column just one week later -- instead chose to empower his
McCarthyite slanders against one of America's most distinguished
patriots and practitioners of their profession.
Writing in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the celebrated author and
patriot David Grossman termed the Gaza operation "just one more way-
station on a road paved with fire, violence and hatred," and added,
"our conduct here in this region has, for a long time, been flawed,
immoral and unwise."
When Foxman and Kristol have the guts to go after Grossman -- who,
after all, lost his son two years ago in a war both men supported from
the comfort of their armchairs -- then perhaps we might take seriously
their complaints about the relatively moderate sentiments expressed by
Moyers. Until then, I fear, we must chalk up their ideological
fanaticism and their moral and intellectual confusion as yet another
casualty of this endlessly destructive conflict.
See more stories tagged with: bill moyers, mitchell, abe foxman, anti-
defemation league
===============================

Exchange Between Bill Moyers and Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation
League

Following Bill Moyers' reflections on the events in Gaza on the
JOURNAL last week, Anti-Defamation League National Director Abraham
Foxman sent him this letter:

Mr. Moyers,

In less than a thousand words, you managed to fit into your January 9
commentary: (1) moral equivalency between Hamas, a radical Islamic
terrorist group whose anti-Semitic charter cites the Protocols of the
Elders of Zion, and Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and
perhaps America’s greatest ally in the world; (2) historical
revisionism, asserting that Canaanites were Arabs; (3) anti-Semitism,
declaring that Jews are “genetically coded” for violence; (4)
ignorance of the terrorist threat against Israel, claiming that
checkpoints, the security fence, and the Gaza operation are tactics of
humiliation rather than counter-terrorism; and (5) promotion of an
individual, the Norwegian doctor in Gaza, who has publicly expressed
support for the September 11 attacks.

I have seen and read serious critiques of Israel’s military campaign
in Gaza, and I have disagreed with many of them. Your commentary,
however, is different, consisting mostly of intellectually and morally
faulty claims that do a great disservice to the PBS audience. It
invites not disagreement, but rebuke.

On one point you are correct – “America has officially chosen sides.”
And rightly so. Fortunately for our nation, very few of our citizens
engage in the same moral equivalency, racism, historical revisionism,
and indifference to terrorism as you. If the reverse held, it would
not be a country that any decent person would want to live in.

Sincerely,

Abraham H. Foxman
National Director
Anti-Defamation League

In response, Bill Moyers sent Mr. Foxman the following message:

Dear Mr. Foxman:

You made several errors in your letter to me of January 13 and I am
writing to correct them.

First, to call someone a racist for lamenting the slaughter of
civilians by the Israeli military offensive in Gaza is a slur unworthy
of the tragedy unfolding there. Your resort to such a tactic is
reprehensible.

Earlier this week it was widely reported that the International Red
Cross “was so outraged it broke its usual silence over an attack in
which the Israeli army herded a Palestinian family into a building and
then shelled it, killing 30 people and leaving the surviving children
clinging to the bodies of their dead mothers. The army prevented
rescuers from reaching the survivors for four days.”

When American troops committed a similar atrocity in Vietnam, it was
called My Lai and Lt. Calley went to prison for it. As the publisher
of a large newspaper at the time, I instructed our editorial staff to
cover the atrocity fully because Americans should know what our
military was doing in our name and with our funding. To say “my
country right or wrong” is like saying “my mother drunk or sober.”
Patriots owe their country more than that, whether their government
and their taxes are supporting atrocities in Vietnam, Iraq, or, in
this case, Gaza.

Contrary to your claim, I made no reference whatsoever to “moral
equivalency” between Hamas and Israel. That is an old canard often
resorted to by propagandists trying to divert attention from facts on
the ground, and, it, too, is unworthy of the slaughter in Gaza.
Contrary to imputing “moral equivalency” between Hamas and Israel, I
said that “Hamas would like to see every Jew in Israel dead.” I said
that “a radical stream of Islam now seeks to eliminate Israel from the
face of the earth.” And I described the new spate of anti-Semitism
across the continent of Europe. I am curious as to why you ignored
remarks which clearly counter the notion of “moral equivalency.”

And although I specifically referred to “the rockets from Hamas”
falling on Israel and said that “every nation has the right to defend
itself, and Israel is no exception,” you nonetheless accuse me of
“ignorance of the terrorist threat against Israel.” Once again, you
are quite selective in your reading of my essay.

Your claim that “the checkpoints, the security fence and the Gaza
operation” [I used the more accurate “onslaught”] are not humiliating
of the Palestinians is lamentable. I did not claim that these were, as
you write, “tactics of humiliation rather [emphasis mine] than counter-
terrorism,” but perhaps it is overly simplistic to think they are one
and not the other, when they are both. Also lamentable is your
description of my “promotion” of the Norwegian doctor in Gaza when in
fact I was simply quoting what he told CBS News: “It’s like Dante’s
Inferno. They are bombing one and a half million people in a cage.”
The whole world has been able to see for itself what he was talking
about, and as one major news organization after another has been
reporting, is reeling from the sight.

And, to your claim that I was “declaring Jews are ‘genetically coded’
for violence,” you are mistaken. My comment – obviously not
sufficiently precise – was not directed at a specific people but to
the fact that the human race has violence in its DNA, as the biblical
stories so strongly affirm. I also had in mind the relationship
between all the descendents of Abraham who love the same biblical land
and come to such grief over it.

From my days in President Johnson’s White House forward, I have
defended Israel’s right to defend itself, and still do. But sometimes
an honest critic is a government’s best friend, and I am appalled by
Israel’s devastation of innocent civilians in this battle, all the
more so because, as I said in my column, it is exactly what Hamas
wanted to happen. To be so indifferent to that suffering is, sadly, to
be as blind in Gaza as Samson.

Sincerely,

Bill Moyers
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...