January 11, 2011

"Did anti-Semitism factor into the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords?"

The mainstream media had been working themselves up into a frenzy of hatred over the last year against the voters of Arizona, ever since the passing of the state's illegal immigration bill. Thus, the press was primed to flagrantly misinterpret the Tucson Massacre.

From The New Republic, a story that let's you get a glimpse of the irrational attitudes that have so much impact over how The Narrative gets framed in the mainstream media.
A Gnawing Worry
Did anti-Semitism factor into the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords?
by David Greenberg
   
The papers have mentioned it mainly in passing. Had this happened a decade ago, I would not have fixed on this detail. But Gabrielle Giffords is Jewish. And her alleged assassin, Jared Lee Loughner, is reported to have admired Mein Kampf

He also admired the Communist Manifesto and To Kill a Mockingbird. Most of his reading list pretty much reflected the kind of books that get assigned in schools.
and claimed ties to the anti-Semitic hate group called American Renaissance. 

No, he didn't. That's a libelous hoax. As is calling American Renaissance anti-Semitic or a hate group.
Was this an anti-Semitic attack? There is no significant evidence to conclude as much, since we know hardly anything about the suspected killer. And yet, I’m confident that I’m not the only one today with a gnawing worry.

... The news of the years since September 11 has been full of more anti-Semitism than any decade in my lifetime, from the murderous kind in Mumbai and the banlieues of Paris to the “genteel” variety espoused by Caryl Churchill and Stephen Walt and John Mearshimer [sic]. Much of it has been blithely tolerated.

Walt & Mearsheimer?
 ... My point is not to place blame but rather to call attention to the chill in the air, the silent worry—harbored, I suspect, in more quarters than we will hear from in the news media.

Forty-two years ago, when Sirhan Sirhan murdered Robert F. Kennedy because of his support for Israel, Americans everywhere despaired that the nation was coming apart at the seams, but Jews felt no special sense of fear. Today, in contrast, for all the Tea Party extremism, the streets are still calm. And yet, the sense of anxiety felt specifically by the Jews of America is, I suspect, considerably more acute.

Contributing Editor David Greenberg is a professor of history and of journalism and media studies at Rutgers University and a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars for the 2010-11 academic year.

Both poor Rep. Giffords and the assassin have (reportedly) one Jewish parent, but why let facts get in the way?

UPDATE: The Jewish Telegraph Agency looks at Loughner's genealogy and rules out Jewishness for at least three grandparents, probably all four.

35 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hey, Marx hated the Jews too! So, you can shoehorn that into an anti-Semitic narrative!

Whew, here I thought we were going to have to take a long, hard look at the violent rhetoric of the Left.

Thomas said...

The New Republic? Seriously? At this point, they would see an anti-Semitic conspiracy in the local Kiwanis.

Anonymous said...

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voicemail-phone-message?page=2

According to his friend he was half-Jewish himself.

The most likely explanation is that he was a paranoid schizophrenic, not his political views (he appears uninterested in normal politics).

Paranoid schizophrenics often hate the government, not because they are philosophically libertarian, but because the government is the most powerful single entity in society. For instance, the most natural source of mind-control would be the state.

Smoking Gun: When he got to ask Giffords a question in a townhall, he didn't ask about taxes or the deficit or Obamacare as a Tea-Partier would. Nor did he ask about immigration or Jews as a paranoid racist might.

Loughner asked Gifford about the government controlling minds by manipulating the language.

This is what *he* cared about. Politics is what the left cares about, so they are projecting motives.

RKU said...

Both poor Rep. Giffords and the assassin have (reportedly) one Jewish parent, but why let facts get in the way?

Actually, I saw the claim on some WN blogsite that Giffords and the Loughners actually both attended the same small Synagogue. The TNR article becomes awfully hilarious if that's actually true...

Anonymous said...

Greenberg: "Today, in contrast, for all the Tea Party extremism, the streets are still calm. And yet, the sense of anxiety felt specifically by the Jews of America is, I suspect, considerably more acute."
If correct, this is a fascinating insight or admission. In all the talk of the 'Chinese Century' aka, the end of the American Century, I have not seen explicit analysis of how this entails the end of the Jewish Century. (You don't need to be MacDonald to agree that the Jews were at the very epi-center of 20th century history and geopolitics.)
But the neo-cons seem to have overplayed their hand in the last ten years: Iraq, the Wall Street bust, the denunciation of the fop, Assange.. etc.
Now Israel seems isolated, the tea party has proved unruly, and the rampant Chinese don't give a damn about 20th century niceties. Anxious times indeed.
Gilbert Pinfold.

Anonymous said...

"But Gabrielle Giffords is Jewish."

Hypothetically speaking if a leftist psycho was going simply by looks and name i'd think they'd be more likely to think she was one of Krugman's SB1070 supporting evil tea party anglo-nazis.

asdfasdasdfsf said...

Jews can be very 'creative' thinkers. If the Jewish Lougher is a 'Nazi', then there's Jonah Goldberg to tell us that Hitler was really a big government leftist.

Also, sometimes offense is the best defense. Until the story dies down, the Jewish left will keep making crazy accusations, thus putting the Right constantly on the defensive. Too busy defending itself, the Right won't have the chance to blame the Left for Loughner's madness(at least while the story is hot).

Mr. Anon said...

"Today, in contrast, for all the Tea Party extremism, the streets are still calm."

Yeah, why just at the last tea-party rally I attended everyone was wearing brown shirts and goose-stepping and sieg-heiling like there was no tomorrow.

What a bunch of lying scum TNR journalists are.

"Anonymous said...

Nor did he ask about immigration or Jews as a paranoid racist might."

one doesn't have to be a paranoid racist to ask about immigration, you know. You're playing into the hands of the TNR crowd by making such an assumption.

The Wobbly Guy said...

A thought occurred to me: those advocating gun controls usually also advocate unrestricted immigration. The problems are obvious. Has anybody called them out on it?

You can't have gun control with easy movement over the border. Gun control HAS to go hand-in-hand with strict enforcement of the border.

My country can do it because we're small, our borders are short, and we're an island. And even then, it's backed by a strong anti-illegal immigration regime. Because of all these factors, gun control works for us (mostly), though there have been a few incidences of people going nuts as well.

Let's! said...

BTW, the NYT "discovers" Affordable Family Formation. SWPL commenters are none too pleased!

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/what-democrats-might-learn-from-the-census/

adfasdfasfs said...

A noose was found on some college, and there was a huge outcry about 'racism'. When it was discovered the perpetrator was a non-white woman, the narrative was STILL the 'evil of white racism'. When legend becomes fact, print the legend.

And the Duke Lacrosse case: there were signs early on that the whole thing was a fraud, but the MSM kept on running the same themes over and over--evil rich white kids raping a helpless black woman. The MSM madness stopped ONLY WHEN the real evidence became irrefutable even by the Left.
Liberals have worked so hard to create this fantasy reality via academia, media, and Hollywood that they mistake it for actual reality. It goes back to the HOPE of the 60s when supposedly Camelot, MLK, youth, rock music, drugs, liberation, and etc were all supposed to CHANGE everything and create a more perfect union. Those days have become so romanticized and spiritualized that they serve as a near-religions template for liberal view of reality ever since. As for the failures of the 60s, they've been blamed almost entirely on the intrasigence of the Right(and silent majority), which is why Tim Wise thinks there can only be a better America when all these evil-white-people-standing-in-the-way-of-progress die off.

Even when a non-white hangs a noose, whites are guilty. Even when a black woman lies and makes ludicrious accusations, she is a victim. When when some Jewish kid shoots a woman, a "Nazi" must have done it. The left--often the Jewish Left--is projecting its own neurosis, paranoia, and fantasies on the Right. Of course, there are crackpot elements on the Right: Holocaust Deniers and Alex Jones fans. But pathological DENIAL of reality to serve some GRAND NARRATIVE has gotten out of hand on the Left. A Marxist killed Kennedy, but it was spun as 'evil rightwingers did it', and Stone's ludicrous and trashy JFK was loved by many liberals.
And though many of the 'victims' of HUAC were indeed communists and Soviet spies, the fairytale narrative still exists that they were patriotic Americans set upon by rightwing wolves. And long after it was irrefutable that the Rosenbergs were indeed Soviet Spies, we got stuff like DANIEL by E.L. Doctorow and ANGELS IN AMERICA by Tony Kushner. These people who howl about Holocaust Denial should look in the mirror for they are in denial mode themselves.
(And think of movies like V for Vendetta which called for the murder of figures representing Bush and Rush. Gee, I wonder if they contributed to the 'culture of hate').
During the 2008 election, it didn't bother MSM that Obama had links with the crazy Wright or that leftists rioted outside REpublic convention(and were worshiping Obama as a demi-god). But there were endless stories of 'racist' chants at Sarah Palin's rallies.
Liberal Jews have become corrupt from a near absolute power in the media. They've been able to say so much shit without getting called out on their lies--not least in their coverage of Israel(in deep contrast with coverage of apartheid Africa)--that they take for granted that TRUTH IS WHAT THEY SAY IT IS.

Michelle Malkin hit the bulls eye on this bogus media hypocrisy. 'Reality' for liberal MSM is not what really happens but whatever validates their fantasy view of reality. Well, they can keep waiting for superman(and the toothfairy). We are sick of this shit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4htIDMuIT9k

Hail said...

Notice none of the victimization hand-wringing here has asked-loudly about a "misogynism factor".

(The killer is an alienated male and the victim a powerful female -- That actually is a lot more valid than the laughable nonsense about the "band of radical anti-Semites calling themselves AmRen".)

It's just like the observation so many made in the Democratic primaries in 2008: Almost no black women sided with Hillary (woman) over BHO (black...or close enough).

Ethnicity trumps gender, again.

adasdfadsf said...

MSM is trying to make this a USEFUL CRIME.

AmericanGoy said...

Walt & Mearsheimer, huh.

They are such anti-semitic bastards that they were invited to tour and speak in Israel.

http://americangoy.blogspot.com/2008/06/2-anti-semites-go-to-israel.html

Frank said...

This is just stupid. They're not even thinking before they talk anymore. If he was really motivated primarily by anti-Semitism, instead of just craziness, well, I'm sure there's a synagogue or two in Tucson he would have shot up instead. Not only would that make his point more clear, but he wouldn't have to worry about any non-Jewish collateral damage there. Instead he shoots a congresswoman who nobody would guess was Jewish unless they were told, and a bunch of presumably non-Jewish bystanders.

It took me about five seconds to think of that, and I'm certainly no rocket scientist. How anyone can take this stuff seriously is beyond me.

Chief Seattle said...

A rabbi wrote an op-ed the local paper accusing a pro-palestinian group of anti-semitism. It's just how these people operate. If they were smart they'd keep their trump cards in their hand. But they're not smart, just noisy.

Anonymous said...

Does having one parent a Jew make you "Jewish"? And do only Jews subscribe to TNR anymore? It now seems to be more Jewish than Commentary or the Jerusalem Post.

Tom in VA said...

And what did he use? A GLOCK, an AUSTRIAN gun. Who do we know who was an Austrian? (Hint: Not the former gov of California).

ben tillman said...

Hey, Marx hated the Jews too! So, you can shoehorn that into an anti-Semitic narrative!

That canard has grown very tired. Put it to bed already.

ben tillman said...

Instead he shoots a congresswoman who nobody would guess was Jewish unless they were told, and a bunch of presumably non-Jewish bystanders.

Presumably, but not actually. One of the dead was a reportedly Jewish Gabe Zimmerman.

Big Bill said...

More importantly from azJewish perspective, the shooter's mom was a Jew, therefore the shooter is a real Jew. Giffords' mother, on the other hand, is not a Jew, so she isn't a Jew. The shooter could have escaped to Israel and become an immediate citizen, whereas Giffords, as a gentile, couldn't have. Even more importantly and until very recently, the shooter would not be extradited from Israel, since it is unlawful under Jewish law to surrender a Jew (which the shooter is) to gentile punishment.

Justin said...

Steve, Gabby Giffords did not just have one Jewish parent. She was deeply Jewish herself, and an outspoken Zionist. You can read her own profession of both:

http://www.jewishtucson.org/page.aspx?id=136353

Harry Baldwin said...

Justin said...Steve, Gabby Giffords did not just have one Jewish parent. She was deeply Jewish herself, and an outspoken Zionist.

There is a profile of Giffords titled "Giffords known for her openness and Judaism" at the JTA site.

Giffords’ father is Jewish and her mother is a Christian Scientist, and she was raised in both faiths.

Her husband, Mark Kelly, presumably is not Jewish.

As far as her discovery of her faith, "The turning point came in 2001 following a tour of Israel with the American Jewish Committee, she told The Arizona Star in 2007.

"It just cemented the fact that I wanted to spend more time with my own personal, spiritual growth. I felt very committed to Judaism," she said.

"Giffords, who last week took the oath of office for her third term in Congress, has pushed Jewish and pro-Israel issues to the forefront at the state and federal levels. She initiated an Arizona law facilitating Holocaust-era insurance claims for survivors, and in Congress she led an effort to keep Iran from obtaining parts for combat aircraft.

She didn’t stint in seeking Jewish and pro-Israel funding. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.), the premier pro-Israel lawmaker in Congress, fundraised for her, as did Steve Rabinowitz, the Washington public relations maven whose shop represents a slate of Jewish groups.

“'She was so heimishe, so down to earth,' Rabinowitz, himself from Tucson, recalled of his fundraiser last spring."

Anonymous said...

"Instead he shoots a congresswoman who nobody would guess was Jewish unless they were told, and a bunch of presumably non-Jewish bystanders."

Actually, Gifford's religion was pretty well known in Tucson.

sabril said...

I doubt that anti-Semitism played a role in this shooting, but it's not an outrageous hypothesis.

"A rabbi wrote an op-ed the local paper accusing a pro-palestinian group of anti-semitism. It's just how these people operate"

It's also not outrageous to hypothesize that anti-semitism informs much of the "pro-palestinian" sentiment. For example, when David Duke writes a "Salute to the Brave Palestinians"

"The shooter could have escaped to Israel and become an immediate citizen, whereas Giffords, as a gentile, couldn't have. Even more importantly and until very recently, the shooter would not be extradited from Israel,"

I doubt it. Isn't this what Meyer Lansky tried to pull (and didn't get away with) back in the 70s?

"Giffords, as a gentile, couldn't have."

I believe that Israel's law of return has a broader definition of Jew than what is contained in Halachic Law.

Svigor said...

And the Duke Lacrosse case: there were signs early on that the whole thing was a fraud

That's putting it mildly. There were giant neon signs screaming "HOAX!" all over it. Just a passing familiarity with the demographics of rape should have suggested caution. The real story is that nobody's advocating for white males so the media had no reason to even ask itself, "what's the down side?"

Anonymous said...

A UK newspaper has tried to link
AMERICAN RENAISSANCE, the Arizona
shooter, and anti-Semitism. I attended some early on AR Conferences, and there were enough Jews particpating in presentations, regularly in attendance, etc., that if there were a real basis for concern, it would have surfaced "in house" a long time ago. I've overheard some hallway discussions of what to some--not probably to most attendees--was
The Jewish Question. But for all I know there were hallway discussions about Elvis sightings,
and astral projections, etc.--i.e., Sidebars created not by AR but by fools enjoying freedom of speech in elective social interaction.. Wanna outlaw THAT??

sabril said...

"The real story is that nobody's advocating for white males so the media had no reason to even ask itself, 'what's the down side?'"

I think it was a bit more than that. As another poster pointed out, Leftism is as much a narrative as an ideology. A big part of the Leftist narrative is that wealthy whites exploit everyone else.

That's why global warming alarmism is so popular and it's also why the Duke Lacrosse hoax had so much traction. It fit the Leftist narrative so wonderfully.

Of course the Leftists aren't the only ones with a narrative. A lot of people were hoping that Mike Nifong, the prosecutor in the case, was Jewish. (He isn't.)

Svigor said...

"The real story is that nobody's advocating for white males so the media had no reason to even ask itself, 'what's the down side?'"

I think it was a bit more than that. As another poster pointed out, Leftism is as much a narrative as an ideology.


Lol. I'm the other poster you're referring to. :)

Leftism is a Narrative. The parts that look like ideology are just dressed-up parts of the Narrative. The parts that pass for academic are like the academic study of Middle Earth. Leftism isn't an ideology. It isn't even "left," really, since it encompasses so much of the "right" and everything else. "Leftism," "liberalism," etc., are not adequate names for whatever "it" is; they are flavors of "it." It does have a teeny, tiny bit of "logic" at its core, though: "who - whom?"

If I had to name it...?

Leviathan?

Hail said...

I wrote above:
Notice none of the [coverage has mentioned] a "misogynism factor". ...The killer is an alienated male and the victim a powerful female -- That actually is a lot more valid than the laughable nonsense about [anti-Semitism, which has been focused on]. ...

Ethnicity trumps gender, again.


Some of his Internet postings have been discovered.It looks like he does have genuine mysongist tendencies, amidst all his other craziness. Excerpt:

____________________________________
[The Killer's posts] cover a time period during which Loughner struggled immensely to find work, and was repeatedly rejected by women.

The Journal notes the overriding misogyny of many of the posts, including the one titled, "Why Rape?," which argues that college girls enjoy being raped: "There are Rape victims that are under the influence of a substance. The drinking is leading them to rape. The loneliness will bring you to depression. Being alone for a very long time will inevitably lead you to rape."
____________________________________

David said...

"Did anti-Semitism factor into the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords?"

When one looks for something, one generally finds it, or creates it.

>Loughner asked Gifford about the government controlling minds by manipulating the language.<

If anything, Loughner was a grammar Nazi. "What is government if words have no meaning?" A question to raise the hackles of political speechwriters, few others.

Fred said...

The true insanity of the anti-Semitism claim is that based on what I have read, Loughtner would be a true Jew by Jewish descent rules (i.e.- mother was Jewish), whereas Giffords would not be considered a Jew (father only, was Jewish). Which would make it actually a case of a Jew gunning down a gentile. Maybe some Jewish pundits knew about this and decided to attack with the anti-Semitism claim so that others would be defensive and have to respond that ethnicity was not a factor at all, to avoid the potential of backlash sentiment against Jews. Seems to have worked for the lefties in general- all the talk about Loughtner being a right wing psycho made the right wing respond that politics had nothing to do with it, even though the evidence suggests that Loughtner was a leftist... And there is certainly no shortage of blatantly violent rhetoric from the left and the idea of silencing the opposition by any means necessary...

TGGP said...

I find it doubtful that Loughner read all the books in his list, any more than Matt Continetti has read Wealth of Nations.

It's bad internet form to reference a publication like the JTA without either linking or explicitly stating that it's not online.

The International Jew said...

Loughner MAY have had one Jewish great-grandfather---so, sorry, Loughner = NOT a Jew.

http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2011/01/12/2742519/loughners-jewish-mother-not-so-much

sabril said...

"but why let facts get in the way?"

Indeed.