‘I Thought You People Didn’t Drink Soda’

I ordered a $1.65 cup for the soda fountain at a goyisha cafeteria in Norwalk this afternoon.

The friendly Hispanic lady behind the counter said to me, pulling on imaginary sidecurls (payos): "I thought you people didn’t drink soda."

"Not many of us do," I said. "Maybe a Diet Coke."

I got my drink and sat down. The radio was tuned to black music.

An overweight but cute 40ish black lady behind me started dancing.

"You go girl!" I encouraged.

She told me as she danced that she was going to really dance today but that last week in this very cafeteria, she gave a male stranger a lap dance. "But I’m not going to give you one."

I haven’t had a lap dance in my life. I have truly preserved my purity and my wife will be grateful on our wedding night.

Posted in Personal | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on ‘I Thought You People Didn’t Drink Soda’

Fear, Not Hope: Edgar M. Bronfman Publishes Another Book

I read his first two. Big mistake. They were dull.

His new book: "Hope, not fear: a path to Jewish renaissance"

Why does anyone publish this man? He has nothing to say.

Publishers Weekly says: Bronfman, a philanthropist, former World Jewish Congress president and former Seagram CEO, bemoans the dry, joyless Judaism of his youth, which he in turn transmitted to his own children. The Holocaust and fear of anti-Semitism are no longer enough to drive Jewish identity and participation, he argues, along with writer Zasloff; only a more open, more celebratory and hopeful communal life will draw and retain young Jews. This community must be pluralistic, unreservedly welcoming intermarried Jews and their spouses, gay Jews and others outside the traditional Jewish mold. (Among the scores of mostly young leaders the authors quote is the first Asian-American rabbi.). Few of these ideas are new, and, occasionally, Bronfman oversimplifies, as when he reduces the complex issue of intermarriage to the need for an open tent, mirroring the hospitality of the biblical Abraham and Sarah. Still, Bronfman has spoken to and learned from a highly diverse group of American Jewish religious and cultural leaders outside the mainstream to fashion a fairly coherent view of what a more vibrant Jewish future might looks like.

Posted in Book Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Fear, Not Hope: Edgar M. Bronfman Publishes Another Book

Was Bible Scholar Nechama Leibowitz A Feminist?

Rabbi Gil Student writes:

The main question discussed is Nehama’s relationship with feminism. On the one hand, she was a female Torah teacher long before they became common, as they now are in some communities. And she was such a unique educator with only one agenda — to teach Torah — that she broke through most barriers. In that sense, she was a feminist.

But her agenda was solely in regard to teaching Torah. She believed that she had something to teach and she was going to teach it. Other than that, though, she was entirely traditional. She was dead set against any type of religious innovation and often debated her students about this, some of whom devoted their lives to feminism — like Blu Greenberg and Prof. Tamar Ross. Students like Greenberg and Prof. Chana Safrai tried to convince Nehama, but Nehama consistently rebutted their advances. One time, R. Avi Weiss (not a student) visited her and gave her a copy of his book advocating women’s prayer groups. Nehama responded with a letter opposing the innovation (anyone have a copy of the letter?).

Unterman writes (p. 296):

In keeping only those mitzvot customary for women, Nehama did not feel deprived in any way. She viewed the desire to take on more mitzvot as a mdoern innovation resulting not from authentic religious emotion but from the influence of secular feminism. She was very outspoken on this issue. Had women fulfilled all their present obligations that they needed to go pursue some more? Had they run the gamut of charitable deeds? If God did not want women to lay tefillin then they should not — what need had they for a black box on their heads? Whoever wanted more devotion every morning should get up early and visit the sick.

She also repeatedly expressed the idea that raising children is more important than anything else and that she would have given up all of her accomplishments for a child of her own: "Nehama said explicitly she would have given it all up for a child. In response to a disparaging comment regarding women who choose children over career, she retorted, ‘Do you think I’d be writing these gilyonot if I had children?!’" (pp. 284-285)

I think in some respects Nehama was a feminist, but in the sense that nowadays almost everyone is. Some feminist attitudes have become so mainstream that they are almost not noticed. Concepts like "equal pay for equal work" are also feminist ideas, and Nehama embraced them just like almost all of us embrace them. However, the ideas that are currently associated with feminism are those that she rejected.

NACHUM LAMM POSTS: I know one of my rebbeim, also a dean of a YU school at the time, described her as one of (actually, he may well have said "the") greatest talmid chacham alive, and stood when she entered a room.

DF POSTS: I dont think NL was a torah scholar. Rather, she was a product of the soft bigotry of low expectations. That is, because she was a woman, and because she was championed by some against her will as though she was a feminist, her actual product was elevated far beyond what it deserved intrinsically. I have read through a fair amount of her work, and have never been impressed. Had the same work been written by Norman Leibowitz, it never would have sold anything.

Now, she may have been a great TEACHER. And, curiously, her status as a woman, and her non judgmentral nature, made her able to teach Torah to many people who might otherwise never have been exposed to it. So she was undeniably a great woman, worthy of a biography. But that is not the same as being a great torah scholar.

GIL WRITES: I was very underwhelmed by her books as well. From what I’ve been told, they don’t include her best material. The biography explains the genesis of the books — she wasn’t generally happy about writing up insights because that stops people from thinking on their own and she had to be pressured to write these, which were intended for lazy, stupid people.

YAEL UNTERMAN WRITES:

Hello Gil and everyone,

Yasher Kokacha to Gil for posting this and I’m glad that it is creating discussion around NL’s feminism and about her work in general. One of my hopes for the book was to generate further discussion on topics of great importance that arise when looking at her life and works.

I’m not sure it’s my place to get involved here, and I also don’t believe that my research makes me necessarily more authoritative when it comes to matters of opinion, but I do have some grasp of facts; and as such was asked to respond to DF’s comment about NL deserving of less credit than given her, and being a great teacher and not a "Torah scholar."

I do not believe for a moment that she was "a product of the soft bigotry of low expectations." I do not recall hearing of any case where she was hired *because* she was a woman, or given any breaks due to her gender. On the contrary, testimony by various people bears out that they were initially prejudiced *against* her for being a woman; and that she was hired *despite* her being a woman. Some brilliant and critical men whom I interviewed, were completely won over by Nehama’s work once they could get past the fact of her being a woman. I refer DF to the chapter in my book for more details.

DF writes: "her actual product was elevated far beyond what it deserved intrinsically." Not everyone will love the books, depending on what one is looking for. Yet many people, even today, open these books and are wowed by them (a very intelligent Jewish educator friend opened them almost against her will, assuming they would be boring, and found many precious gems in there); and certainly when they first appeared, there was nothing like them in existence.

We have to remember that what she did in her work was revolutionary for the time; today we might shrug when we see them and say "what’s the big chiddush", and that itself testifies to their importance, because NL’s effect on how we see commentaries has been so great upon all of us that we are entirely used to that way of thinking now and it seems banal. But before her, who was analysing the commentaries in this way? Several people have compared what she did to the Brisker derech in Talmud, in its clarity, structure and fine analysis. This is not even to speak of the literary and psychological insights she achieved, way before this was being done by scholars both in academia and in the Torah world.

Many of her words are still fresh and pertinent, decades after she wrote them. It is true that many people today are looking for more than NL can provide. That is only natural, the world moves on and revolutions become mainstream. This does not take away from the value of her work. Would we turn to Freud and say dismissively, "oh well, neuroses, yes everyone knows about that, tell me something new"?

DF is however raising an important point, which was that Nehama saw herself primarily as a teacher, not a scholar. So did her academic peers, which was why she was appointed Professor of Bible Education at Tel Aviv University, not of Bible (though this was also to do with her avoidance of Biblical Criticism, I believe). Nevertheless, we have to ask ourselves what a scholar is. I believe that if we define a scholar as someone who intelligently researches a topic, analyses it, exhibits expertise in it and contributes original insights, NL certainly qualifies. And what is a "Torah scholar"? Only someone who has written chiddushim on Talmud? Or someone who has devoted her life to study of Torah, and taught and written brilliant insights on it that have changed the lives of thousands?

While I am posting here, I’d like to note that I did not in fact originally write twice as much as was eventually published. I included all the material I wished to, after much re-reading to try to skim off repetitions. Perhaps this error originated in the history of the book by Hayuta Deutsch; I heard that she had to cut out a third of her material. I’d like to take the opportunity to add that Hayuta’s book is certainly interesting and valuable. She covers some biographical aspects that I omitted (e.g. family background, Israeli social circles), while I cover methodological and philosophical aspects she does not deal with. These are two different books, with different purposes. Anyone wanting to get a rounded picture of Nehama Leibowitz is recommended to read both.

Posted in Feminism, Orthodoxy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Was Bible Scholar Nechama Leibowitz A Feminist?

Leah Kleim Hurt In Car Accident

The controversial Chabad blogger and mother emails: I did a three day stunt on a morphine drip in the hospital had my nose reconstucted and sewn back together . have a few staples in my arm, I was "ejected" from a car flying down the BQE, a few CT scans later nothing broken doc’s in shock Im sewn back together and home sweet home.

Posted in Leah Kleim | Comments Off on Leah Kleim Hurt In Car Accident

The Moral Leader Reality Show

Joe emails: Like most people in LA, I have a concept for a TV show that I

Posted in Personal | Comments Off on The Moral Leader Reality Show

The Week In Jewish News

Steven I. Weiss reports:

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on The Week In Jewish News

He Says, She Says

I said.

She says:

Let’s start from the beginning…. It was October of 2003. I was over at my friend KB’s house, harassing him. We turned on 60 Minutes I saw this eccentric Australian journalist. I said to KB, who knew him, “I’d like to meet that guy.” And he said, “You probably never will.” Days later, we called him from breakfast as KB tried to brag about hanging with tons of girls in San Diego. I got Luke’s number and began to chat with him and write him over the course of about 6 years. I followed Luke’s journalism through his website and shared with him some of my scribbles. When I asked him what he thought he sent me the following email…

Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 11:18 PM, Luke Ford wrote: Your stories, like your life, are so depressing. You need to find God…but keep writing meanwhile…

I honestly thought he would be impressed with what I wrote but that comment was just passive aggressive way to say, “You are a shitty writer and your life is shit!” I didn’t like that, so I wrote back…

Sent: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 23:46:50 -0700 (PDT) Lana wrote: How could a writer have any good material without going through turmoil. If your life was perfect I guess your stories would be boring just like your life. I thought you’d appreciate some madness but I guess it’s over your head. I didn’t know you were so perfect and close minded. Why did it take you two days for your judgmental “constructive” criticism anyhow? I find you average and predictable like every conceded writer with boring socially acceptable material! I ate pork today…

This was when I began to dislike Luke Ford, but none the less, I recall being flattered that a well known journalist had an opinion about my writing all. I was thinking that any press was good press.

My writing was a little shady at the time and my only true fan was based out of a Mental Ward, due to his annual suicide attempt. You really had to be in touch with your dysfunctional side to appreciate my earlier work. I hadn’t yet discovered that (slit your wrist) writing was not of interesting to the “general public.” KB was also not a fan of my writing and highly unsupportive. Though KB is a good friend because he makes you laugh, he can be very cynical. Let me use ten words to describe KB; Kanga hat, Jewish, neurotic, pessimistic, loud-laugh, left-brained, narcissistic, name dropper, critic, class-clown. I remember calling KB with a movie idea and without hearing the idea; he said something along the lines of… (douche bag voice) “How can you write a movie if you can’t even spell?”

So, Luke and I had lost contact but he had published some things about me on his site that were obnoxious. They were basically calling me a poor old pretty girl with no brains. I thought, how can I take myself seriously if this crap comes up when you Google me? It began to wear on my insomnia. I even had some paranoid thoughts that a guy did not call me back after a first date because he may have Googled me. So, I began to nudge-negotiate with him by sending many annoying emails, to kindly take down the slander. I even tried to strong arm him by contacting some people that he might find prominent. I knew I was making headway as his “never’s” turned into “maybe’s.” Regardless of my bother towards Luke, I could not shake the initial urge of wanting to meet him in person. After all, I am a glutton for punishment.

What really pushed me to contact Luke for a meeting was a quote. One day, as I sit in an appointment with a woman, I began to spy around her desk. She had all these butterflies and quotes meticulously laminated around her work area. She walked away for a minute giving me an opportunity to be the nosey/ADD person I am. I was now free to read and analyze everything on her manic desk. Then I saw it… I almost broke my neck looking at it. It was one of the best quotes I’ve ever read… “In the practice of tolerance, one’s enemy is the best teacher.” … Dalai Lama. It was at that very moment that I knew I had to pay a visit to Luke ford, my literary nimbuses.

Luke agreed to meet and asked if I was reliable. I knew I was not but I fibbed and hoped for the best. He explained the rules of Shabbot and how I’d have to call once and he’d open the gate. I don’t really know what I expected of this meeting. Beyond being a fan, I suppose I’ve always had these premonitions of things I must do with no real motive attached. Maybe, at the least, it would be a dual of wits that I could take something from. Either way, I was in route.

The night before I met Luke I was with about 10 girls is a large hot tub shooting the shit until 5 in the morning. I had to drive to a family event on the way to Luke’s. I got lost, threw my phone at my car door and broke it. I didn’t realize how socially retarded I was until I fell asleep in the middle of my Aunt’s living room for about 4 hours. I heard my family whisper about me saying God knows what, but defiantly not good things. I thought to myself, “How am I going to make it Luke Ford’s house and appear smart when I’m this inept?”

I bounced up to hush the whispers and started driving towards Luke’s hobble.

I approached Luke’s lair and realized that I did not have a working phone and could not call him. So, I found some neighbors in the street and did the whole girly “I need help” dance. He came out into the street and we had to practically walk a block to reach each other. Luke had a big wizard smile to match his beard. He was dressed in casual linens and his personal magnetism was screaming monk. I wondered if he was stoned because he looked so at peace and his eyes were slightly squinted. He looked like a very peaceful person, but more like a prophet than a person.

I always wondered what Luke Ford’s hobble, as he calls it, looked like. I pictured a dome house in a garden with a little wooden fence. It was sort of like that, but more square. He had what I like to call a “Bukowski look” to the arrangement of his belongings. A couple months ago, after seeing my friend Steve’s eclectic room, I had told him that it was very “Bukowski.” He didn’t understand that it was a complement. The next time I went to Steve’s house, the room was clean. It was very depressing. It was not him and he admitted that my comment had made him want to clean for the first time in years. A “Bukowski” look is stacks of literature, art, strange inventions and collectable all spread about in very natural way. It’s actually the art of living your life with no regard for judging guests.

I wanted to ask Luke the question, “Do you choose to live like a monk or do you have to?” But I thought it rude and didn’t ask. When I realized that he did not drink, I thought about taking something to deal with all of the sobriety I would endure. I then realized what a silly thought that was and that I might have a problem. So I opted against it and threw it in the “Easy Way Out Bucket.”

Luke and I sat and threw a football back and forth and he asked me a million random questions. It reminded me of my friend Gary Kremen in a way. Gary is a very intelligent entrepreneur is this same group of friends. Gary can’t help but ask a new person 150 question within the first five minutes of meeting them. It amuses me every time. He then files you away in his Mensa head for a later consideration of friendship or business. If he disqualifies you, he perhaps puts you away for good and seizes to ask more questions because he becomes bored with your lack of positive or negative energy. Neutral people give geniuses anxiety.

Luke was doing the same type of questioning. I wasn’t sure if I was being interviewed or if he was truly interested in talking writer shop with an unaccomplished writer. I believe we both felt we had to meet up to figure out what all the hype was about, as we are both popular within our strange network of friends. So curiosity got the best of us. Like a wild child trying acid for the first time, Luke and Lana had to meet. I answered his questions honestly, hoping he would not publish everything we spoke of. Though, I knew he would write a polite short story if I could get out the door without sticking my foot in my mouth.

Luke then invited me on a walk through his very Jewish neighborhood. My cameleon instincts quickly set in as a realized I was talking too loud and too much. Everyone we passed was highly religious and very quiet. Not to mention, this was Shabbot. It was a nice and refreshing walk. I told him about a movie I want to write involving New World Order and how I need all the religious education I can get. I asked a lot of questions about his religion, the rules and the history. I felt pretty stupid when asking some of these questions but I had done little research and every religion is so complex. He told me about an experience he had on Rush Hashanah some years back where everyone was in the streets celebrating and he felt an out of body experience, as if reality was not real. I can still picture all of these people in the streets as he sort of rises above the man made world and discingrates from flesh. That was my take on it anyways.

When we got back to the square hobble, we decided to watch a movie and decided on a French film called, “The Secret”. We laid down on the floor like monks, kicked our feet up and enjoyed the film. I wondered what his stance was on women, since he was so religious. But I figured asking was almost an invitation and we should keep this professional, so I let it go. I decided that it was the best movie I have seen in my entire life and ranked it #1 above “Easy Money.”

The next day we went to a nice kosher restaurant for breakfast. I asked more questions about religion as neighbors came up to greet him like a literary celebrity exclaiming “I love your work, I read it every day”.

We began talking about movie writing again and I told him about this movie I wrote for a script call called “Mid Life Crisis.” This movie was about a character I had created with the personalities of friends, Gary Kremen, Kevin Blatt and Jonathan Silverstein. He laughed pretty loud, since he knew all those people.

While discussing the movie “W,” I made a comment thinking that his political stance was opposite of what it actually was. I stuck my foot in my mouth as usual and finally learned my lesson about speaking politics so freely. So, I curiously asked about his views, which were very practical and intelligent. This, matched some other views I had heard recently, made me question my own standpoint. The more information I gather, the more I think that every party has pros and cons and that I it would behoove me to be less passionate about taking sides.

On another note, we were discussing a piece he had written and how I loved the shame in it. Luke said the greatest memoir writing is the part that has shame, the part that makes you embarrassed. It’s the only part that’s honest and it captivates drama, which keeps interest. I admitted to always writing in code as if the person I was writing about would read it and never revealing the real shame. I had a (light bulb moment) about this theory and it stuck with me for days.

Moving on, I paid for breakfast because I figured I owed him for not exercising his first amendment and taking down his old literate about me off the web. I think he knew what my thoughts were and didn’t argue.

I drove home trying to put my finger on a word that would explain my experience of Luke Ford. “Sobering” kept coming to mind and I kept trying to replace it with “Inspiring.” But I couldn’t come up with anything else. I drove for hours and could only come up with those two words.

Was the Dalai Lama right? Could you practice tolerance by making your enemy your teacher? I pictured Luke Ford to be this rash, aggressive, womanizing, heartless Gonzo. But he turned out to be a very gentle monk who actually lives the life that I fear to live but truly want. He is a true artist who awakes on his own schedule, doesn’t answer to anyone and sacrifices self gratification for purity. He does what he loves and eats from it. The only society he depends on is his fans.

That’s the life I’ve always wanted to live but feared I would end up like my father, who will surely die poor. But I had never considered that he will definitely die happy. In this very moment, every awful word my mother spoke about my father and suffering through poverty fell to the floor. Maybe she wasn’t ready to live the dream… Maybe her dissatisfaction with starvation and living in vehicles had sent my father into a downward spiral of unsellable art.

But not Luke, like Henry David Thoreau who lived in solitude to write his greatest piece, “Life in the Woods”. Luke is “Life in the Hobble.” Waking up to the birds chirping, his cold shower is his only vice.

Posted in Personal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on He Says, She Says

Investigation Or Extortion?

The Enterprise Report says:

Award winning local Los Angeles TV investigative personality Joel Grover, set to receive another national IRE (www.ire.org) award this weekend for a piece on contaminated water in public schools last year, has used some highly questionable tactics in his efforts to extract confessions from the subjects of his infamous hidden-camera stories.

Here, while reporting for KCBS-TV in Los Angeles, Grover confronts an L.A. County Health Dept. restaurant inspector he allegedly caught taking a bribe in 1999, Grover threatens to call the police if the inspector won’t talk to him, and later lies about recording the inspector on camera.  The entire confrontation was caught by Grover’s hidden cameras.

In, “Grade A Bribery,” Grover tells viewers his hidden cameras have caught the inspector taking a cash payoff from a restaurant owner, in order to boost the restaurant’s cleanliness letter-grade rating, from a, “B,” to an, “A.”

Grover presents hidden-camera video that shows the restaurant owner counting out cash and handing it to the inspector – but what he doesn’t tell viewers – is that Grover supplied the money and scripted the exchange between the inspector and the owner, according to a Los Angeles County District Attorney investigator’s tape-recorded interview with the owner, obtained by The Enterprise Report.

 

The Enterprise Report will have more on this story next week.

Posted in Journalism | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Investigation Or Extortion?

This Summer’s Hottest Bachelor!

Sorry, George Clooney!

Posted in Personal | Comments Off on This Summer’s Hottest Bachelor!

A Holocaust Revisionist Reacts To The Holocaust Museum Shooting

Mike H. Ahlens writes:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — To most, the evidence against alleged Holocaust Museum shooter James von Brunn may seem overwhelming.

Surveillance camera video.

Eyewitness accounts.

Von Brunn’s red Hyundai parked outside.

Ballistics.

But to some people in Von Brunn’s e-mail chain and Web circles, there’s a darker truth.

They say the June 10 shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum may be a "false flag" operation. The incident could have been staged by one group, perhaps what they describe as the Jewish-controlled U.S. government, to make it appear to be the actions of another group — in this case, von Brunn and others who believe Jews exercise too much control in the United States.

In other words, von Brunn could have been set up, they contend.

Where others see meaningless coincidence, members of "Ghost Troop," an online group of writers and investigators bent on disproving official versions of the September 11, 2001, attacks and other major events, have a penchant for seeing what they argue is meaningful evidence. Where others see the smoke of understandable and inevitable inconsistency, they see fire.

Ghost Troop members are trying to build the case that von Brunn, an ardent believer in conspiracy theories, was himself the victim of a conspiracy.

THE LOS ANGELES TIMES REPORTS:

Monterey County officials knew James W. von Brunn as a difficult man, a distraught father who insisted in numerous e-mails that the county had bungled its investigation into the death of his 55-year-old son.

Now they know Von Brunn, 88, as the alleged shooter at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, a raging anti-Semite and racist who is charged with killing a security guard at the crowded site June 10.

Authorities have not found any connection between the two incidents. But in the wake of the horror at the Washington, D.C., museum, Von Brunn’s lengthy correspondence with Monterey County officials provides a chilling glimpse of a man driven by a conviction that he was treated unjustly.

Von Brunn’s son, James B. von Brunn, was unemployed and living alone in a motel in Seaside, adjacent to the city of Monterey. On Jan. 21, 2007, the longtime area resident was discovered dead in his room by the motel manager. An autopsy determined that he had died of bronchopneumonia, according to Cmdr. Mike Richards, a spokesman for the Monterey County Sheriff’s Department.

The elder Von Brunn, living in Maryland, told police that he and his son had been estranged for years. He said the county could sell his son’s belongings to pay for a cremation.

"He basically divested himself of all responsibility," Richards said. "At one point, we got his written authorization to scatter his son’s ashes in a garden or at sea."

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL REPORTS:

The recent killings of a U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum guard and a Kansas abortion doctor came a few months after the Federal Bureau of Investigation stepped up efforts to pre-empt violence committed by just such political extremists working alone.

"Lone-wolf offenders continue to be of great concern to law enforcement," the agency said in a February memo reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. The FBI is "trying to identify a potential lone wolf before he or she would act out violently," Michael Ward, the bureau’s deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, said in an interview earlier this year.

The lone-wolf initiative is one element of a broader strategy to fight domestic terrorism, dubbed "Operation Vigilant Eagle," launched late last year in response to what the memo identified as "an increase in recruitment, threatening communications, and weapons procurement by white supremacy extremist and militia/sovereign citizen extremist groups."

ZAN OVERALL RESPONDS TO ME:

Dear Luke, I promised I would write you an unhurried reaction to the terrible event at the Holocaust Museum. Here it is.

Some of the quotations I gleaned from David Duke’s book, "My Awakening." You expressed an interest in the book. You can download it for free at davidduke.com but I was so impressed with the book that I am buying some copies of the 2008 edition and would like to gift you with one of them. When they arrive we can talk about getting one to you, should you choose to accept it. You could find a place where guests would not see it, I imagine.

That reminds me of the fate of a book I presented to the Museum of Tolerance some years ago. It was "The Pink Swastika," by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams, a Christian and an Israeli. It treats the widespread homosexuality in the Nazi party and argues against a "Gay Holocaust."

Neither idea appealed to the MOT. They did not put it on their shelves. Instead they put it in what they call the "Special Collection." A reader has to ask for it. Someone descends into a dark little room somewhere and retrieves it. Takes a few days. Last I checked it was not listed in their computer under books on homosexuality so there probably is not a lot of call for the book.

Best wishes, Zan Overall, your in-house Holocaust Revisionist.

**************************************

GOOD FROM EVIL (OR A RECIPE FOR MAKING LEMONADE FROM A BAD APPLE NAMED VON BRUNN)

The media and the talking heads on TV think that, as long as they are quoting a despised murderer, it is safe to pronounce words they would never otherwise utter. (They should rethink that.)

Before Von Brunn did what he did at the Holocaust Museum, would you EVER have heard these words strung together on TV?: “Jews control the media in the United States.”

Or: “Jews control the United States government.”

The danger for the talking heads is that some people will look into those statements and learn, to their great surprise, that they are true. Jews even admit their truth. Here are a couple of examples.

Screenwriter Ben Stein wrote an article for E!-online entitled “Do Jews Run the Media?” with a subtitle that read “You Bet They Do—And What of It?”

In a story called “The Jews Who Run Clinton’s Court.” the major Israeli newspaper Maariv quoted Rabbi Avinoam Bar-Yosef as saying: “The U.S. has no longer a government of Goyim, but an adminis tration in which the Jews are full partners in the decision making at all levels. Perhaps the aspects of the Jewish religious law connected with the term ‘government of goyim’ should be re-examined, since it is an outdated term in the U.S.”

(“Partners?” Partners don’t call the shots. Perhaps the Rabbi had an attack of modesty—or caution. And, by the way, who elected them to be “partners?”)

People who hold these taboo but true* opinions have tried unsuccessfully to discuss them on TV or in the public print. It would be nice if we lived in a free country and they had been able to do so. Possibly, if those forums had been open to Von Brunn, the head of steam building in him could have found a release before it reached the explosion point.

So let’s make some lemonade from a lemon—or a bad apple. Let’s consider whether Von Brunn was right in his opinions while wrong in his actions.

Do Jews control the American media? How long have the Sulzberger family owned the New York Times? How long have the Meyer family owned the Washington Post, and how did they come to own it? Who owns the three major networks?

Do Jews control the American government? Was Senator William Fulbright mistaken when he said: "Israel controls the United States Senate. We should be more concerned ab out the United States’ interests."

Do Jews plot to destroy the white European genotype? Do you remember the Jewish movie “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?” Does the Jewish media promote multiculturalism, intermarriage and wide open borders for non-European immigrants? At the same time, do Jews hypocritically oppose Jews marrying Gentiles and allow only Jews to immigrate to Israel?

Can we talk?

Let’s utter the unutterable!
Let’s think the unthinkable!
Let’s dispute the indisputable! -Zan Overall (16 June 2009) *Try saying “taboo but true” ten times fast.

Posted in Holocaust, Jews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Holocaust Revisionist Reacts To The Holocaust Museum Shooting