Lowell Cohn writes: All this makes you wonder what is going on with Kaepernick.
How about this? Kaepernick is desperately flailing for attention. And he’s getting it. He always has been an attention junkie — all that “Kaepernicking” — kissing his bicep. He filed for a trademark for that in 2013. Quite the capitalist Kaepernick despite our corrupt system. And that “7tormscoming” hashtag I’ve never understood. Big ego. Me-firster.
He’s getting less attention for his quarterbacking.
He only started his protest this year when he was out of the headlines. Needed to find another way to get ink and air time. It’s all about him, not the team. Maybe not even about society. When asked what one thing he would change in America right now, he said, “That’s a tough question because there’s a lot of things that need to change. That’s something that it’s hard to lock down.”
Really? Not one thought yet?
It’s the attention he needs. He’s shot as an athlete. His confidence is gone, has been since last season. The Cardinals called him out, said they could intercept him if he threw outside the numbers. Proceeded to intercept him four times. His confidence probably was gone before that. He’s afraid to compete with Gabbert, is using his complaint against America as an excuse. I wonder if he even knows what he’s doing.
In spite of his diminishing returns, he’s the center of the sports world now. He is the center of hard news in America. This Kaepernick news cycle way exceeds the time the 49ers offense controlled the ball Friday night.
Again, what do I really see? I see Kaepernick grabbing the spotlight any way he can.
What Kaepernick did — he will continue to sit in future games — changes his equation with the Niners. They issued a statement defending his right to protest. You can bet it galled them to do it.
Last week, he made snotty comments about Trent Baalke. He’s doing everything he can to make himself persona non grata, to get cut or traded. Taking the focus away from football and from the team with the season fast approaching. What football team needs that?
Of course, when the 49ers get rid of him next week, Kaepernick will say, “It’s not because of my play. It’s because I took a political stance.”
He’s created a can’t-lose system for himself, a way to cushion the blow.
Posted inFootball|Comments Off on 49ers’ Colin Kaepernick ignores the contradiction of his outrage
I’ve been writing on this subject since 1998 when Reggie White got in trouble for remarking on group differences. Around the same time, I read The Bell Curve which made it obvious what I had always suspected — different races have different gifts and diversity with proximity creates conflict and tragedy.
Just as Jews want to control their own destiny in their own state, so too many French and Germans want to control their own national destinies and they don’t always want alien groups running important things such as media and finance. The Jewish state would never permit its media and finance to be run by non-Jews so Jews can’t expect gentile states to be indifferent to the influence of Jews in their media and finance.
I think I understand white nationalists — they want the same kind of cohesion that the Torah seeks for Jews.
Torah makes no provision for non-Jewish citizenship in the Jewish state, just as Japan allows little power and influence for non-Japanese in Japan, so minority groups in the diaspora including Jews should be grateful and non-troublesome when the majority give them full citizenship.
Brett Stevens notes: “Minority groups (of any race) never vote for majority interests.”
People, be they Jews or non-Jews, rarely care about the motives of people who hurt them. They judge individuals and groups based on their actions. So white nationalists see the multiculti push by organized Jewry as malicious. Every major Jewish organization in America, for instance, supports immigration amnesty, which will hasten the time that whites become a minority in the country they developed.
As a result of historical trauma, organized Jewry has a reflexive fear of gentile nationalisms and thus promotes diversity, globalism and tikkun olam (social justice).
So when American Jews such as Stephen Steinlight point out to organized Jewry the great harm mass immigration will do to Jews, the organized Jewish community can’t see it because of the blinders imposed by their tribal addiction. They can’t see themselves as doing any harm to their host countries. They think they are only doing good by promoting multi-culturalism, immigration and ever-increasing minority rights.
I have never heard a Jew say that he wants to weaken gentile racial, religious and national identity so that gentiles are easier to manipulate (aka make America and other gentile countries more “user-friendly” for Jews). That sounds crazy.
The best way to see this tribal addiction, this reset addiction, is among those frumies (Orthodox) who have reflexively negative views of gentiles. Think about those Orthodox Jews always defending Sholom Rubashkin. No matter what you said, they had an answer. If they accepted he did some wrong things, they would then argue that everyone in the meatpacking industry does wrong things. The difference is that the average gentile meatpacker, when reprimanded by the feds, mends his way but Sholom Rubashkin and company just kept on brazenly breaking the law while retaining the complete support of their community.
Another example of this tribal reset against admitting fault is the Orthodox response to any negative reports about Orthodox-run nursing homes or denying any wrongdoing by Bikur Cholim.
This addiction to pushing reset in the face of any negative news about one’s own group is a normal part of group identity. It is not unique to Jews. The more you identify with your group, the less likely you will see its faults.
So now that organized Jewry in America is facing a rising tide of implicit white identity in the form of the Donald Trump campaign, how are they reacting? Are they having second thoughts about pushing multiculturalism and increased immigration? No way! Organized Jewry has an addiction to seeing gentile nationalism as dangerous while its mirror imagine in Jewish nationalism is great. They can’t see the harm they are doing in pushing for things such as immigration amnesty and taking in more Muslim refugees. They don’t see the danger they are facing. So they double down on the multi-culti agenda.
So why do my Jewish friends and I see things the way we do? Because we don’t assume that Jews as a group are always innocent. Instead, we see Jews as like other people in that they have gifts and flaws and that their actions always affect other people, everything we do affects other people, and not always for the good as no group always acts for the good of other groups.
Few people are willing to take stock of the harm they have done. Jews are no different from non-Jews in this regard.
Absent a religious faith, there are no good guys and no bad guys in the world. There are just different forms of life fighting to perpetuate their genes.
Every life form has a strong reaction against anything that threatens its survival. Groups normally need cohesion to survive. Threats to group cohesion, such as multiculturalism, should be expected to produce violent responses.
Shutter Island (2010) is Martin Scorsese’s film about Jewish tribal addiction, aka Jewish resetting to its default position that Jews are always right and gentiles wrong whenever there is a conflict of interest. Organized Jewry calls this conflict of interest anti-Semitism.
Scorsese has spent his career working in Hollywood and he knows Jewish blind spots. This movie is his perspective on the Jewish addiction to hitting reset whenever uncomfortable perspectives come up that show Jews are not innocent (no group is innocent, but because Jews are particularly smart, hard-working, organized and passionate, they are often more influential than most groups in things such as finance, politics, and media).
The movie is set in the 1950s and almost everyone is white. The clue that this movie is really about the Jews is the German doctor.
The protagonist played by Leonardo DiCaprio is a stand-in for Jews. The whites want him to accept responsibility for his actions and to act white. They don’t want to go nazi on him, but when he keeps misbehaving, they finally go nazi.
That’s like white nationalists such as Jared Taylor, Kevin MacDonald, Richard Spencer, Gregory Hood, etc. They don’t want to go nazi on the Jews, but if they have to to survive, to protect their people, they will, just as Jews will fight for the preservation of the Jewish state against all enemies.
“In the end, notwithstanding a surreal detour in the 1970s, Patricia led the life for which she was destined back in Hillsborough. The story of Patty Hearst, as extraordinary as it once was, had a familiar, even predictable ending. She did not turn into a revolutionary. She turned into her mother.”
* Toobin also cheated on his wife with the daughter of his CNN colleague and knocked her up. If I recall correctly he was not entirely chivalrous with regard to his bastard offspring either.
A defense of Clinton probably has a lot to do with a defense of himself.
* History, even recent history, is cyclical. 1975 was probably the height of both second-wave feminism and official sympathy for what was then called “black power”, effectively exculpating blacks from any agency in their low culture and high crime rate. Feminists did not want to admit the fragility of the female mind (particularly the young female mind), and the government/media did not want to admit the scope of the racial animus inherent to all black power movements, not just the SLA. So, Patty Hearst had to be guilty.
The tide turned with Reagan, and more so with Giuliani, and we have had a more or less three decade reprieve from this foolishness; but now we have come full circle with grrl-power media, Hillary (who is nothing if not a sclerotic 2nd-wave remnant), and Black Lives Matter, which might as well be the SLA, and probably soon will be (at least the parts that get frozen out of the Soros money).
* What a coincidence that I’m reading the book right now. About 3/4 the way through. It’s probably the best true-crime book I’ve ever read, right up there with In Cold Blood. Very difficult to put down.
The author says Hearst was 100 lbs when she was arrested. She was a voracious smoker and was thin before she was kidnapped.
The other living SLA members in jail said all the sex was consensual (and that DeFreeze never did it with her), and that specifically she was in love with one of her captors: Willy Wolfe. She had lost her virginity at 15 and had been living with her fiance, Steve Weed, when she was abducted at 19. She falls in love with Weed, then Wolfe, then after he’s dead, another guy named Steve Soliah. She sends him love letters while they’re both in jail. Then she gets close to one of her lawyers during the trial. Toobin doesn’t say they have a relationship, though.
Basically she’s a love-sick teen who falls for whatever guy can sweep her off her feet. Her revolutionary feminism just sounds like self-defense because she can’t stop falling in love. Who can blame her for that? But participating in so many violent felonies, according to the author, makes her sound like the fierce, revenge and hate-filled guerrilla that so many youngsters get sucked in to be. Apparently there were bombs going off all over California at that time. The term “boomers” is starting to make more sense for that generation.
* Stockholm Syndrome is a real thing but at some point Patty seemed to have become a real convert. After the bulk of the SLA including DeFreeze were killed in a shootout with the cops, she stayed with the remnant of the group for a year. By the end she was with only 1 – Wendy Yoshimura. She could have escaped many times. Even someone who is brainwashed must have moments of clarity where they remember their former selves. I’m not sure that it was really wrong to hold her accountable for her acts after her “conversion”. What if she had actually used the rifle she carried in the bank robbery and killed someone? Would she have had no responsibility for that?
During the course of one of the SLA bank robberies, Emily Harris murdered a customer who was waiting in line to make a deposit. Somehow, the state of California did not get around to prosecuting her until 2003 and then she got only 8 years. For killing someone during a bank robbery. Maybe there really is a double standard for SWPL type white people.
MS. GREENFIELD’s time in those trenches began in 2008, when, as a first-year associate at Gibson Dunn, a strait-laced corporate law firm, she found herself single and pregnant at 35.
The presumptive father was Mr. Toobin, a senior political analyst for CNN, staff writer for The New Yorker, best-selling author, married father of two teenagers and a close friend of Justice Elena Kagan of the Supreme Court, a classmate of his from Harvard Law. Ms. Greenfield met Mr. Toobin in the Condé Nast cafeteria when, while taking a breather from law school in her mid-20s, she worked as a fact-checker for Glamour magazine. They fell into a secretive off-and-on relationship spanning nearly a decade.
When Ms. Greenfield first informed him of her pregnancy, she said, Mr. Toobin questioned the paternity, balked at submitting to a test and vowed to take no responsibility for a baby he wasn’t sure was his. Both hired lawyers. Inevitably, the tabloids and gossip sites took notice of the scandal, dropping increasingly detailed hints about the behind-the-scenes drama.
“The one time you really don’t want to get pregnant is when you’re single and the other person is married and you’re working as a first-year junior associate at a law firm in a hard-core phase of trying to prove yourself to them,” Ms. Greenfield recalled last week. She said she ruled out an abortion. She did not delude herself that the emotional nadir of her life would qualify for much external sympathy. “I had a job at a prestigious firm,” she said, “a law degree from Yale that was paid for, a wonderful support group of friends.” But when she informed her parents that she was pregnant, she did not say by whom.
In March 2009, Ms. Greenfield had a baby boy and named him Roderick Henry Greenfield: Roderick is Mr. Labby’s middle name, and Henry is her father’s actual first name. She went on maternity leave for four months and then returned to Gibson Dunn until January 2011. She also sued Mr. Toobin for child support and custody of the baby, while being officially represented by Heidi Harris of Aronson, Mayefsky & Sloan, a preeminent matrimonial firm, and unofficially assisted by Mr. Labby, whom she calls her “fixer.”
Mr. Toobin ultimately acquiesced to a paternity test that confirmed he was the father of the boy, who is nicknamed Rory. He contested portions of her suit. The tabloids zeroed back in. In February 2010, the custody case was heard in Manhattan Family Court. It was not resolved until late last year, with Ms. Greenfield receiving full custody of Rory, including the right to make all pivotal decisions in his upbringing and schooling. She briefly represented herself in the remaining phase of litigation, a dispute over the amount of child support to which she was entitled; barring an 11th-hour settlement, the case is scheduled to return to Manhattan Family Court next month, this time with Mr. Labby litigating.
FATHERS Jeffrey Toobin, left, and Jeff Greenfield in 2008.
* In the book, “Empire of the Summer Moon” the Comanches rarely kept infants, usually killing them. They may have kept the occasional pre-teen or boy, but these captives were often treated as slaves and abused. The rare adult woman that they kept was usually raped and tortured and treated with utter contempt. The book is historically factual and foot noted.
* There are quite a few captivity narratives from that era. Nine Years Among the Indians by Herman Lehman tells how he was captured by Apaches and became a warrior. There’s some cold-blooded stories of how Indian raids worked. The Captive Boys by Jeff and Clinton Smith is similar. Cynthia Ann Parker was captured as a child, married a chief, and was the mother of the Comanches’ greatest war chief, Quanah.
While children seemed to adapt, adult women were just plain brutalized. Matilda Lockhart was horribly abused. When she revealed that the Comanches had other captives, Texan leaders tried to hold Comanche chiefs in San Antonio for treaty negotiations until they released other captives and the Council House fight resulted.
Scott Zesch wrote a pretty decent account of child captives held by Texas Indians, going into detail about the difficulty of returning to white society. But he glosses over the brutality meted out to adult women. Jack Jackson wrote a very good graphic novel biography of Quanah Parker, not omitting the horrors.
Posted inAmerica|Comments Off on Jeffrey Toobin Reveals Patty Hearst’s Real Crime
She had a gift, she had passion, she was a mighty warrior for her people and she did all her campaigning within the strict confines of Orthodox Judaism. There can be a public role for women in Orthodox Judaism.
Esther Jungreis never claimed to be a rabbi. She believed in separate roles for men and women.
(JTA) — Esther Jungreis, a pioneer in the Jewish outreach movement and founder of the organization Hineni, died Tuesday. She was 80, according to the Vos Iz Neias blog.
An announcement published in October on the site Only Simchas indicated Jungreis was “in serious condition” and fighting an infection, but did not specify her ailment.
Jungreis was born in Szeged, Hungary, in 1936, where her father was chief rabbi. A child survivor of the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, she and her family resettled in 1947 in Brooklyn, where she married her distant cousin, Rabbi Meshulem HaLevi Jungreis, according to the Yeshiva World. She and her husband, who died in 1996, founded the North Woodmere Jewish Center/Congregation Ohr Torah on Long Island in 1964.
Jungreis, known universally by the honorific rebbetzin, founded Hineni in 1973 in order to bring young Jews closer to Orthodox Judaism by offering Torah classes, singles events, and Shabbat and holiday services. She spoke to audiences across the United States, including at Madison Square Garden in 1973.
She was known for her work in outreach to young Jews, as well as for self-help books about a variety of topics, including marriage and relationship advice, as well as how to deal with challenges in life.
Jungreis drew inspiration from her experience as a Holocaust survivor to fight for Jewish continuity and against intermarriage. But her statements comparing assimilation to the Holocaust sometimes sparked controversy.
“To be a Jew is the greatest privilege,” she implored at a speech in Johannesburg, South Africa, in 1999. “To be unaware of it is the greatest catastrophe — spiritual genocide.”
Posted inOrthodoxy|Comments Off on Esther Jungreis, Orthodox Jewish Outreach Pioneer, Dies at 80
The beach is a key part of Australian culture. If you won’t go to the beach and have a swim, you’re not a real Australian.
I guess the ancient Greeks said that anyone who does not compete in the nude is not a Greek.
So how much, if at all, should Jews and Muslims compromise their traditions to fit in with their gentile host countries?
Forward: Moshe Sebbag, the rabbi of the Grand Synagogue of Paris, announced this week that he supports the French ban on burkinis, the modest swimwear some Muslim women wear to cover up on the beach.
Wearing a burkini, he said, is not “innocent” and it sends a message.
But, we ask Sebbag, what difference exactly is there between the garb Orthodox Jewish women wear to the beach than the burkinis that some Muslim women wear?
And why should one religious group of women be allowed to follow their traditions over another?
Posted inOrthodoxy|Comments Off on What Orthodox Women Wear to the Beach Is No Different From a Burkini
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
