...Before the Dawn: a Tip of the Iceberg Emerges
The Musk-ADL war reveals something that cannot be ignored, and so how was it dealt with?
Continuing my thoughts on last week’s events, the email I sent Kim Iversen that I included at the start of my last piece was about the ADL, and I mentioned to Kim in it that she should consider how the organization came into existence. So here is E. Michael Jones last week on the Pete Quinones Show laying out his history on that (10 minutes, but worth it):
Two things I should clarify here. First, the governor didn’t pardon Frank, he commuted his death sentence, which meant he was still sentenced to life in prison. Second, the ADL wasn’t formed after the Frank lynching in 1915, it was formed by the B’nai B’rith a month after the Frank conviction in 1913. That means the outrageous act of antisemitism was a court of law convicting a Jew of a crime - a Jew who just happened to be the Atlanta chapter president of B’nai B’rith.
What Jones doesn’t address there is the Frank lynching resulting in the complete Jewish takeover of the NAACP in 1914 and Jews running that for the next 60 years. This was the formative event for Jewish social activism in the 20th century, and by creating the black-Jewish alliance it set the stage for civil rights after World War II, the first notable act of cultural Marxism. But it also set the stage for the Jewish proxywarrior Barack Obama, the BJA rebirth with BLM, and now the deeply-flawed puppet candidacy of Cornel West.
What was pointed out by Quinones is that the man who the ADL has implicitly or explicitly fingered for the crime is Jim Conley, a black man guilty without a trial, which is so ironic considering how important this event was regarding the black-Jewish alliance.
So my first question is, related to yesterday’s article and the opinions of Iversen and Jimmy Dore, will the covid vaccine mandates play out to be as important to US socio-politics through the rest of the 21st century as the lynching of Leo Frank was to US socio-politics in the 20th century? I think there’s almost no chance of that - that would require the descendants of Tony Fauci to have almost-complete power over the nation’s culture, its foreign policy, its economics by 2101, the way that the Jews had by 2001.
Kim isn’t the only one who addressed this matter last week, and so I am going to show the opening bits on three videos tackling this matter, the ADL and its origins, starting with Kim:
So that was pretty straightforward, wasn’t it? Although we didn’t hear the word “Jew” there, but there was plenty of semitism.
Next up is Glenn Greenwald, who talked a lot about Musk and the ADL last week, mostly not connected:
So GG sidewinds into this by framing it as just another victim interest group that is aligned with and beholding to the Democratic party. He says it was created by B’nai B’rith, which he plays up as a “widely-respected Jewish group”, but of course nothing specific about the cause of its creation. He plays up its role in fighting McCarthyism but says nothing about Jews being hugely disproportionate in the targets of all that, because they were disproportionate among the nation’s Marxist activists. But that all changed in the Trump era, when their censorship efforts started targeting populism, which happened to be more on the right.
He also brings up the ACLU (and their disproportionate Jewishness) and the Jewish left god Chomsky and tries to associate the ADL with that historically, more prettying up this pig. I mean, do you really think the ADL sided with the ACLU on defending the right of free expression of nazis marching through Skokie? Historically they may have been farther on the left than today, but that’s because Jews were more on the left and outside the establishment power structure - the ADL goes where the Jews are.
The entry point matter Greenwald then gets to is different than what Iversen said, it starts with the ADL gloating over getting Twitter under their thumb, via this new relationship czar deep state frontwoman Musk hired; she’s been a concern of anti-censorship people since she entered the Twitter picture. I assume that's what set Musk off, which makes me wonder how long that woman is going to last at Twitter.
Finally, Max Blumenthal (and Aaron Mate, who, to no surprise, mostly keeps his mouth shut on this matter):
Beyond all the usual nudging of reality here, there are two particular things worth addressing, first at the end when he says, “we could reduce antisemitism by simply having no ADL”. Yes, Max, of course, just as we could reduce antisemitism by having no Southern Poverty Law Center, or having no AIPAC, or having no American Enterprise Institute, or having no American Jewish Committee, the mother organization of them all, or a myriad of other Jewish organizations. The problem is that American socio-politics is dominated by Jewish organizations, and the ADL is only one of them. Last week it just happened to be the most visible one.
The other part was when he said this:
“The ADL is is just going after him, trading on its reputation as a defender of the Jewish community, an ill-gotten reputation to be sure, but trading on that, exploiting Jewish historical suffering to advance the agenda and power-hungry malevolent imperatives of the hegemonic political force in the US, which is now centered in the Biden administration. And so this doesn’t really have anything to do with Jewish power, in my opinion.”
Sorry, Max, but you are completely wrong, 180 degrees from the truth, it has EVERYTHING to do with Jewish power. And that makes you either a fool or a liar, and you ain’t no fool. But I give you mucho credit for actually saying “Jewish power” out loud.
Before getting back to these guys I want to address the Twitterfilers' on this, the people most responsible for the “it’s the government, stupid!” view of new media giant censorship, Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger. I listened to Taibbi’s America This Week podcast posted on Friday, and it was most about... comedy.
At the end they kind got to current events when Matt raises the debate between (Jewish) comedian Gnome Dworman and Philip Bump at WaPo on Huntergate. He does that because Bump took some shots at Taibbi in it, and of course it’s one-sided and all about mainstream media “expertise”. I found the debate kind of interesting because I haven’t followed the Biden corruption story, because I don’t think it’s that important - it's partisan politics and it won't have that much impact. Either Biden will go down before the nomination or he won’t, and that might be related to Huntergate or it might not. If he does get replaced, that all will become irrelevant to the election, in the age of Trump; the Dems are not going to need the second coming of Jimmy Carter to cleanse the palate, anyone who is not Biden and isn’t in their ‘80s will do.
But what I thought was the debate wasn’t that one-sided, in part because I don't know the details of the matter, which I'd guess makes me like most Americans. What I saw was that it likely would just reinforce whatever predisposition one had going in. Me, I don’t have a dog in that fight.
That aside, Taibbi hasn’t addressed ADL-Xwitter at all that I can see, at least not at his substack Racket. Boo.
As for Shellenberger, I stumbled onto this, titled Twitter/X advertiser boycott is STATE-FUNDED:
So we have the ADL, the CCDH and the ISD; the ADL is of course Jewish through and through, and I detailed the Jewish funding of the CCDH in my last piece. As for the ISD, here is a bit from its wiki:
The Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) is a think tank founded in 2006 by Sasha Havlicek and George Weidenfeld that specializes in research and policy advice on hate, extremism, and disinformation. It is headquartered in London, United Kingdom.
Here’s a bit from Weidenfeld’s wiki:
George Weidenfeld, Baron Weidenfeld, GBE (13 September 1919 – 20 January 2016) was a British publisher, philanthropist, and newspaper columnist. He was also a lifelong Zionist and renowned as a master networker. He was on good terms with popes, prime ministers and presidents and put his connections to good use for diplomatic and philanthropic ends. Weidenfeld was born in Vienna, Austria, in 1919. He was born to an Austrian-Jewish family, the only son of Max and Rosa Weidenfeld. Weidenfeld attended the University of Vienna and the city's Diplomatic College. Following the Anschluss (Germany's annexation of Austria) in 1938, he emigrated to London…
So he was Jewish from A(ustria) to Z(ionist). Havlicek’s bio tells us she also has roots in the Austrian Empire (Bohemia) and is in fact the great-granddaughter of composer Gustav Mahler, who was Jewish:
She is the granddaughter of Austrian sculptor Anna Mahler and great-granddaughter of Austrian composers Gustav and Alma Mahler… Sasha began her career as a Senior Director at the EastWest Institute, where she headed the Centre for Border Cooperation, setting up field operations across the Balkans, Eastern Europe and Russia. She also served on a Task Force of the Stability Pact for Southeastern Europe in the aftermath of the Balkan wars. In 2006, she co-founded the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) along with George Weidenfeld and has since served as the organisation’s Chief Executive Officer.
The activities and funding of the ISD are varied and complicated, but they have received funding from a number of governments as well as oligarchs like Bill Gates, Pierre Omidyar and George Soros as well as Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center and the German Marshall Fund, both significant players in the so-called censorship-industrial complex; ISD has worked cooperatively on projects with Google, Microsoft and Meta/Facebook funded by those companies.
In that piece they’re even talking about Israel, but what’s the bottom line? It’s the government, stupid! Something that is so drenched in Jewishness is being turned inside out to spin the misdirection line that I’ve been talking about ever since Tiabbi and Shellenberger got to the conclusion stage on their T-File reporting, swallowed hard and screamed government. Double boo.
We also should remember how Shellenberger got involved in this matter in the first place - he was invited in by his friend, the Zionist neocon “journalist” Jewess Bari Weiss, who a few years ago wrote a book on antisemitism (including the left version that attacks the UK’s Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn) that surely was applauded by the ADL. Oh, and article co-author Alex Gutentag writes for Tablet magazine, so…
So let’s get back to Dr. Jones, from his own podcast Friday on the subject of X-blatt, countering the Twitterfilers’ misdirection:
Now there’s a rant! So what he’s saying is the line between government and monopolistic corporations with their oligarchic CEOs has become completely blurred, in part because those corporate dictators are also the masters over our politicians, largely because of their money.
But Shellenberger is naively or crypto-subversively trying to spin this story of clear and present danger in the opposite direction, as if it’s 1953 and not 2023. And Taibbi appears to be running and hiding from the ADL like a little girl.
But Greenwald and Blumenthal are tackling it head-on and at least trying to deal with it. The fundamental problem with their narratives is that they’re both trying to tie the ADL to the Democratic Party and at least imply that it’s the neoliberal Dems that are the core of the problem instead of recognizing that the primary problem with the Dems are the Jews who have been funding the party since the Clinton Sellout 30 years ago and now own it. This is a version of the Chomsky Inversion, the narrative that Israel is a puppet of the US instead of essentially the other way around.
The interesting thing to me is that they don’t seem to push it that hard, as if they are conceding that no one really quite believes it anymore.
Greenwald’s entire show was on this topic, and hour and 20 minutes, so he gets deeply into a lot of angles. One of those was focused on Dem megadonor George Soros as well as GOP megadonor Shelly Adelson. He first brought up Soros while talking about the ADL trying to get Tucker the Fucker fired at Fox, and then later related to the Jew-sucker Mehdi Hasan at MSNBC:
There GG cited three Jewish megadonors - Soros, Bankman-Fried and Adelson - and says it’s fine and not antisemitic to criticize them or the Koch brothers. But what he doesn’t address is if it’s okay and not antisemitic to address the cabal of Jewish megadonors as a group. For instance, in my recent article on Dr. Robert Epstein I included this on the 2016 Clinton donors:
You won’t find Page or Brin on that list, which are the top 20 donors to Clinton’s superPAC as of May of 2016. But I went to opensecrets.org again to check, and this is what I found:
There are their top 15 donor organizations, and there’s no Google/Alphabet there. But who is there?
#1 Paloma Partners is Donald Sussman, #5 on the Forbes list (that list runs from the lower right to the left and then up)
#2 Pritzker Group is Forbes #4 JB Pritzker
#3 Renaissance Technologies is Forbes #3 James Simons and #11 Henry Laufer
#4 Saban Capital is Forbes #1 Haim Saban
#5 Newscorp is Forbes #10 Fred Eyechaner
#6 Soros Fund Mgmt is of course Forbes #2 George Soros
#7 Asana is Dustin Moskovitz and Justin Rosenstein, not on the Forbes list; Moskovitz is one of The Facebook founders at Harvard, along with Mark Zuckerberg and Eduardo Saverin.
#8 Slim-Fast Foods is Forbes #7 Daniel Abraham
#9 Lone Pine Capital is Stephen Mandel, not on the Forbes list
#12 DE Shaw Research is Forbes #9 David Shaw
#14 Sandler Foundation is Forbes #8 Herb Sandler
#15 Laurel Foundation is old Mellon runoff money from Pittsburgh, from what I can tell
So what do we have here, besides the labor unions and no Google? Every person I have named here is Jewish, with the lone exception of Fred Eychaner (as best I can determine - you can never tell for sure). That is staggering - but it is also NEVER addressed, by essentially everyone.
So is that antisemitism, Glenn? Because now we’re talking about “the Jews” and not just a billionaire or two who just happens to be Jewish. Have I crossed the invisible blue line here?
Btw, what Greenwald said about Soros barely out-donating Bankman-Fried to Dems in the ‘22 election isn’t correct, at least according to these numbers from opensecrets:
There you can see Soros is #1 and SBF’s FTX is #3 overall but also #3 to Dems (behind Bloomberg), since he donated about 35% of his money to GOP candidates, and his total to Dems is only a quarter of that of Soros.
Later Greenwald brings up Soros again, at length:
So this is framed as all about hypocrisy and partisanship, even though GG says that’s not the issue at the end. What he says is the issue is that these Dem neoliberals are in charge of censorship, which again is a partisan viewpoint only excused by what I’m sure Glenn would say, that he’s a leftist, or at least non-partisan.
Also note that at a couple points he says these billionaire Jewish oligarchs are within their rights to heavily manipulate politics in the manner that they desire using their mountains of money. Yes, they are within their legal rights in the post-Citizens United ruling world, but the intention of US election law has been that individuals are limited to donations of $2800 per candidate. No mention of any of this.
But the core issue, the mountains of money donated by Jews (and not just billionaires - that individual limit was increased by McCain-Feingold from $1000, and one can argue that this was a gift to Jewish mid-level donors and specifically those bundled by the AIPAC network), is never addressed here, as if that matter simply doesn’t exist - at least not in the US:
So again we see here this walling off of the Democratic Party from its owners, to preserve it as the villain which is in turn used in the narrative instead of those owners. This is the tactic used by Jews Greenwald and Blumenthal re the ADL, and also by goy Twitterfilers Taibbi and Shellenberger re the censorship-industrial complex, the ADL now clearly a subset of that. It’s bullshit.
Blumenthal takes some serious shots at the ADL, he even uses the same exact clip from Defamation as Iversen did in her vid, but there are the slippery moments as well; this is one I found particularly interesting;
So he starts out with the irony of an oligarch drawing the line when we live in this (primarily Jewish) oligarchy, but then he wobbles off on the ADL not representing “all Jews”, his version of the requisite “not all Jews” that we all live with, then he focuses the ADL’s actions on being anti-Palestinian, the one allowable criticism of Jews, and then says the ADL’s war on antisemitism is set aside when that conflicts with US imperial objectives, using as an example… the fucking Azov Battalion! 😂 Max and his nazis, I swear…
The one point where Aaron Mate says much of anything in this 50-minute segment is here:
So there we have the narrative: “releasing the Twitter files which showed a huge effort to crack down on social media from the government… which obviously angered neoliberals who want to control the information space… claims about a spike in antisemitism”
From there he goes to his strong suite, faked Russian propaganda, then the neocon lies about WMD, really not talking about the ADL at all. But it’s this narrative that’s so problematic, blaming censorship on the government (only), using this hopelessly generalized false term neoliberal for whatever centrist establishment Dems represent, and then connecting that to the claims of antisemitism as culture war identity politics. But if the narrative is Jews censoring speech using their new media platforms and their control over government and NGOs, and then utilizing their strongest suite of Holocaustism (which is what makes the slander of antsemitism so powerful) then it all comes together in a clear, concise package.
So to close on the ADL let’s go back to EMJ on Quinones, starting with the Klan and Leo Frank, and roll forward until today:
So there we have the chicken-and-egg aspect to this - who came first, Democrats or Jews? Given that the non-converso Jews were expelled from Spain in the same year that Columbus discovered America, I think we know the answer.
What we have here is this tip of the iceberg of real power emerging and people scrambling - or not scrambling - to deal with it. For some people like Jones it’s obvious, for others like Taibbi it’s just another day of whistling past the graveyard, and for a few like Greenwald and Blumenthal it’s a test of their ability to walk the tightrope of that thin blue line.
Btw, greetings on 9/11. I did listen to that Iversen interview of Kevin Ryan, and yes, he’s still blaming it on Cheney and Rumsfeld, and he’s still saying it was all about oil. Ryan doesn’t list his other 19 in total, but no one that he names in this hour+ video is a Jew - no Wolfowitz or the other Pentagon neocons, no Larry Silverstein, no Philip Zelikow (he does talk about the 9/11 commission falsehoods), no Mossad, etc. Here’s the one point where Kim at least asks part of that question:
Ryan does later talk about Occam’s razor, but in my opinion he’s not applying that within his theory, which simply contains too many perps to be believable, an army of them - a foreign operation with a relative handful of US insiders is much more likely.
It’s funny to look back more than a decade in my own personal history of understanding and shake my head at the feet-in-clay cluelessness of people like Ryan.
Since it’s 9/11 and since he has shit all over 9/11 truthers in the past, I don’t feel that bad shitting on Matt Taibbi in this piece. But I’ll make up for that by linking a Youtube article he posted last week which is about the deep state. Both Blumenthal and Greenwald used the term in clips I included here, and Ryan not only used it in this Iversen interview but also attributed it to Peter Dale Scott, which in American terms is correct. He didn’t only coin the term but he nurtured it over years of time - when his Deep Politics and the Death of JFK was published in 1993 he hadn’t actually used the term yet, including in that book.
But in this video piece Taibbi never attributes or defines the term, and doesn’t even convey its history very accurately. Where I link it here is where he drops deep state and starts talking about working class and the evolution of that term over the last 50 years.
Early on in this he talks about the Dem electoral disasters of 1972 and 1984 when upper midwest liberals headed their ticket, and then the Clinton rebound in 1992. But instead of talking about the alliance with Wall St. and Hollywood shekels, he instead talks about the DLC moving away from unions and Clinton focusing on “more of a ‘pro-growth’ profile”, which I guess means neoliberals.
And at the same time, not unrelated, we saw the start of the PC era; by that I mean political correctness and not personal computer. That evolved into social justice warfare and identity politics, which explains his “class not race” better than he does. Today we have ex-progressive alt talking heads chiding cultural Marxists like Cornie West for talking about victim groups instead of class, as if we are in a class warfare period and not an ethnic or culture war. The lack of understanding is fundamental.
What this piece feels like is someone manufacturing a past that helps to explain that history as well as the present without actually explaining the actual history or the actual present, so the writing of a kind of fiction.
Finally a humorous note on the anniversary of a dark day. This is from another recent Greenwald episode and an interview of Freddie deBoer on his new book How Elites Ate the Social Justice Movement. Listen to this and guess who he’s talking about:
What did Jones call them there, rootless cosmopolitans? 😂😂😂
:Thumbs Up!: ADL attack is a 'Limited hang out' as you say.
ADL _DID_ support Skokie, they DID Skokie.
Frank Collin, whose family name is COHN lead the march. He's JEWISH.
When there's no Nazis, and you need to have Nazis, You Create Nazis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0v7855-fnE