Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

zaterdag 30 oktober 2021

Israel to Attack Iran? If So Iran Can Bomb Israel

 Israel to Attack Iran? Washington Gives the Green Light to the ‘Military Option’


The U.S. will be seen as endorsing the crime, resulting in yet another foreign policy disaster in the Middle East, Philip Giraldi writes.

By Philip Giraldi

Mr Giraldi attached the following statement with this article "Friends - This article, a regular Thursday feature for the past three years, will be the last I write for the site Strategic-Culture.org (SCF) as the Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has notified me that the SFC website has been "designated" and blocked. No American citizen can have "transactions" with SFC. Violators will be subject to criminal and civil penalties including fines up to $311,562. No reason was given for the government action. "

October 28, 2021 -- "Information Clearing House - "SCF"-  Some might recall candidate Joe Biden’s pledge to work to rejoin the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) which was a multilateral agreement intended to limit Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon. The JCPOA was signed by President Barack Obama in 2015, when Biden was Vice President, and was considered one of the only foreign policy successes of his eight years in office. Other signatories to it were Britain, China, Germany, France, and Russia and it was endorsed by the United Nations. The agreement included unannounced inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities by the IAEA and, by all accounts, it was working and was a non-proliferation success story. In return for its cooperation Iran was to receive its considerable assets frozen in banks in the United States and was also to be relieved of the sanctions that had been placed on it by Washington and other governments.

The JCPOA crashed and burned in 2018 when President Donald Trump ordered U.S. withdrawal from the agreement, claiming that Iran was cheating and would surely move to develop a nuclear weapon as soon as the first phase of the agreement was completed. Trump, whose ignorance on Iran and other international issues was profound, had surrounded himself with a totally Zionist foreign policy team, including members of his own family, and had bought fully into the arguments being made by Israel as well as by Israel Lobby predominantly Jewish groups to include the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Trump’s time in office was spent pandering to Israel in every conceivable way, to include recognizing Jerusalem as the country’s capital, granting Israel the green light for creating and expanding illegal settlements on the West Bank and recognizing the occupied Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel.

Given Trump’s record, most particularly the senseless and against-American-interests abandonment of JCPOA, it almost seemed a breath of fresh air to hear Biden’s fractured English as he committed his administration to doing what he could to rejoin the other countries who were still trying to make the agreement work. After Biden was actually elected, more or less, he and his Secretary of State Tony Blinken clarified what the U.S. would seek to do to “fix” the agreement by making it stronger in some key areas that had not been part of the original document.

No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

Get Our Free Newsletter 

Iran for its part insisted that the agreement did not need any additional caveats and should be a return to the status quo ante, particularly when Blinken and his team made clear that they were thinking of a ban on Iranian ballistic missile development as well as negotiations to end Tehran’s alleged “interference” in the politics of the region. The interference presumably referred to Iranian support of the Palestinians as well as its role in Syria and Yemen, all of which had earned the hostility of American “friends” Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Israel inevitably stirred the pot by sending a stream of senior officials, to include Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, Defense Minister Benny Gantz and Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to discuss “the Iranian threat” with Biden and his top officials. Lapid made clear that Israel “reserves the right to act at any given moment, in any way… We know there are moments when nations must use force to protect the world from evil.” And to be sure, Biden, like Trump, has also made his true sentiments clear by surrounding himself with Zionists. Blinken, Wendy Sherman and Victoria Nuland have filled the three top slots at State Department, all are Jewish and all strong on Israel. Nuland is a leading neocon. And pending is the appointment of Barbara Leaf, who has been nominated Assistant Secretary to head the State Department’s Near East region. She is currently the Ruth and Sid Lapidus Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), which is an AIPAC spin off and a major component in the Israel Lobby. That means that a member in good standing of the Israel Lobby would serve as the State Department official overseeing American policy in the Middle East.

At the Pentagon one finds a malleable General Mark Milley, always happy to meet his Israeli counterparts, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, an affirmative action promotion who likewise has become adept at parroting the line “Israel has a right to defend itself.” And need one mention ardent self-declared Zionists at the top level of the Democratic Party, to include Biden himself, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and, of course, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer?

So rejoining the JCPOA over Israel objections was a non-starter from the beginning and was probably only mooted to make Trump look bad. Indirect talks including both Iran and the U.S. technically have continued in Vienna, though they have been stalled since the end of June. Trita Parsi has recently learned that Iran sought to make a breakthrough for an agreement by seeking a White House commitment to stick with the plan as long as Biden remains in office. Biden and Blinken refused and Blinken has recently confirmed that a new deal is unlikely, saying “time is running out.”

And there have been some other new developments. Israeli officials have been warning for over twenty years that Iran is only one year away from having its own nukes and needs to be stopped, a claim that has begun to sound like a religious mantra repeated over and over, but now they are actually funding the armaments that will be needed to do the job. Israel Defense Force Chief of Staff Aviv Kohavi has repeatedly said the IDF is “accelerating” plans to strike Iran, and Israeli politicians to include former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have regularly been threatening to do whatever must be done to deal with the threat from the Islamic Republic. Israeli media is reporting that $1.5 billion has been allocated in the current and upcoming budget to buy the American bunker buster bombs that will be needed to destroy the Iranian reactor at Bushehr and its underground research facilities at Natanz.

In the wake of the news about the war funding, there have also been reports that the Israeli Air Force is engaging in what is being described as “intense” drills to simulate attacking Iranian nuclear facilities. After Israel obtains the 5000 pound bunker buster bombs, it will also need to procure bombers to drop the ordnance, and one suspects that the U.S. Congress will somehow come up with the necessary “military aid” to make that happen. Tony Blinken has also made clear that the Administration knows what Israel is planning and approves. He met with Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid on October 13th and said if diplomacy with Iran fails, the U.S. will turn to “other options.” And yes, he followed that up with the venerable line that “Israel has the right to defend itself and we strongly support that proposition.”

Lapid confirmed that one of Blinken’s “options” was military action. “I would like to start by repeating what the Secretary of State just said.  Yes, other options are going to be on the table if diplomacy fails.  And by saying other options, I think everybody understands here … what is it that we mean.” It must be observed that in their discussion of Iran’s nuclear program, Lapid and Blinnken were endorsing an illegal and unprovoked attack to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon that it is apparently not seeking, but which it will surely turn to as a consequence if only to defend itself in the future.

In short, U.S. foreign policy is yet again being held hostage by Israel. The White House position is clearly and absurdly that an Israeli attack on Iran, considered a war crime by most, is an act of self-defense. However it turns out, the U.S. will be seen as endorsing the crime and will inevitably be implicated in it, undoubtedly resulting in yet another foreign policy disaster in the Middle East with nothing but grief for the American people.  The simple truth is that Iran has neither threatened nor attacked Israel. Given that, there is nothing defensive about the actions Israel has already taken in sabotaging Iranian facilities and assassinating scientists, and there would be nothing defensive about direct military attacks either with or without U.S. assistance on Iranian soil. If Israel chooses to play the fool it is on them and their leaders. The United States does not have a horse in this race and should butt out, but one doubts if a White House and Congress, firmly controlled by Zionist forces, have either the wisdom or the courage to cut the tie that binds with the Jewish state.

Philip Giraldi is a former counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer of the United States Central Intelligence Agency. 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/56835.htm



Chris Hedges: The Most Vital Battle for Press Freedom in Our Time

 

Chris Hedges: The Most Vital Battle for Press Freedom in Our Time


If Assange is extradited and found guilty of publishing classified material it will set a legal precedent that will effectively end national security reporting.

WikiLeaks Editor in Chief Kristinn Hrafnsson addressing supporters of Julian Assange outside the London court where the U.S. appeal hearing took place, Oct. 28. (Don’t Extradite Assange Campaign)

By Chris Hedges
in Washington, D.C.
ScheerPost.com

For the past two days, I have been watching the extradition hearing for Julian Assange via video link from London. The United States is appealing a lower court ruling that denied the U.S. request to extradite Assange not, unfortunately, because in the eyes of the court he is innocent of a crime, but because, as Judge Vanessa Baraitser in January concluded, Assange’s precarious psychological state would deteriorate given the “harsh conditions” of the inhumane U.S. prison system, “causing him to commit suicide.” 

The United States has charged Assange with 17 counts under the Espionage Act and one count of trying to hack into a government computer, charges that could see him imprisoned for 175 years. 

Assange, with long white hair, appeared on screen the first day from the video conference room in HM Prison Belmarsh. He was wearing a white shirt with an untied tie around his neck. He looked gaunt and tired. He did not appear in court, the judges explained, because he was receiving a “high dose of medication.” On the second day he was apparently not present in the prison’s video conference room.

Assange is being extradited because his organization WikiLeaks released the Iraq War Logs in October 2010, which documented numerous U.S.  war crimes — including video images of the gunning down of two Reuters journalists and 10 other unarmed civilians in the Collateral Murder video, the routine torture of Iraqi prisoners, the covering up of thousands of civilian deaths and the killing of nearly 700 civilians who had approached too closely to U.S. checkpoints.

He is also being targeted by U.S. authorities for other leaks, especially those that exposed  the hacking tools used by the CIA known as Vault 7, which enables the spy agency to compromise cars, smart TVs, web browsers and the operating systems of most smart phones, as well as operating systems such as Microsoft Windows, macOS and Linux.  

If Assange is extradited and found guilty of publishing classified material, it will set a legal precedent that will effectively end national security reporting, allowing the government to use the Espionage Act to charge any reporter who possesses classified documents, and any whistleblower who leaks classified information.

If the appeal by the United States is won, the High Court can send the case back to Magistrate’s Court. The ruling on the appeal is not expected until at least January.

Assange’s September 2020 trial painfully exposed how vulnerable he has become after 12 years of detention, including seven in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. He has in the past attempted suicide by slashing his wrists. He suffers from hallucinations and depression, takes antidepressant medication and the antipsychotic quetiapine. 

After he was observed pacing his cell until he collapsed, punching himself in the face and banging his head against the wall he was transferred for several months to the medical wing of the Belmarsh prison. Prison authorities found “half of a razor blade” hidden under his socks. He has repeatedly called the suicide hotline run by the Samaritans because he thought about killing himself “hundreds of times a day.”

James Lewis, the lawyer for the United States, attempted to discredit the detailed and disturbing medical and psychological reports on Assange presented to the court in September 2020, painting him instead as a liar and malingerer. He excoriated the decision of Judge Baraitser to bar extradition, questioned her competence, and breezily dismissed the mountains of evidence that high-security prisoners in the United Sates, like Assange, subjected to Special Administrative Measures (SAMs), and held in virtual isolation in supermax prisons, suffer psychological distress.

He charged Dr. Michael Kopelman, emeritus professor of neuropsychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, who examined Assange and testified for the defense, with deception for “concealing” that Assange fathered two children with his fiancée Stella Moris while in refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. He said that, should the Australian government request Assange, he could serve his prison time in Australia, his home country, after his appeals had been exhausted, but stopped short of promising that Assange would not be held in isolation or subject to SAMs [until the last minutes of the two-day hearing concluded on Thursday.]

The authority repeatedly cited by Lewis to describe the conditions under which Assange will be held and tried in the United States was Gordon Kromberg, the assistant United States attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Supporters of Julian Assange block the road opposite the Royal Courts of Justice where the U.S. appeal was being heard, Oct. 28. (Don’t Extradite Assange Campaign)

Kromberg is the government’s grand inquisitor in cases of terrorism and national security. He has expressed open contempt for Muslims and Islam and decried what he calls “the Islamization of the American justice system.” He oversaw the nine-year persecution of the Palestinian activist and academic Dr. Sami Al-Arian and at one point refused his request to postpone a court date during the religious holiday of Ramadan. 

“They can kill each other during Ramadan, they can appear before the grand jury. All they can’t do is eat before sunset,” Kromberg said in a 2006 conversation, according to an affidavit filed by one of Arian’s attorneys, Jack Fernandez. 

Kromberg criticized Daniel Hale, the former Air Force analyst who recently was sentenced to 45 months in a supermax prison for leaking information about the indiscriminate killings of civilians by drones, saying Hale had not contributed to public debate, but had “endanger[ed] the people doing the fight.” He ordered Chelsea Manning jailed after she refused to testify in front of a grand jury investigating WikiLeaks. Manning attempted to commit suicide in March 2020 while being held in the Virginia jail.

Please Support CN’s Fall Fund Drive!

Having covered the case of Syed Fahad Hashmi, who was arrested in London in 2006, I have a good idea of what awaits Assange if he is extradited. Hashmi also was held in Belmarsh and extradited in 2007 to the United States where he spent three years in solitary confinement under SAMs. His “crime” was that an acquaintance who stayed in his apartment with him while he was a graduate student in London had raincoats, ponchos and waterproof socks in luggage at the apartment. 

The acquaintance planned to deliver the items to Al-Qaida. But I doubt the government was concerned with waterproof socks being shipped to Pakistan. The reason, I suspect, Hashmi was targeted was because, like the Palestinian activist Dr. Sami Al-Arian, and like Assange, he was fearless and zealous in his defense of those being bombed, shot, terrorized and killed throughout the Muslim world while he was a student at Brooklyn College. 

Hashmi was deeply religious, and some of his views, including his praise of the Afghan resistance, were controversial, but he had a right to express these sentiments. More important, he had a right to expect freedom from persecution and imprisonment because of his opinions, just as Assange should have the freedom, like any publisher, to inform the public about the inner workings of power. Facing the possibility of a 70-year sentence in prison and having already spent four years in jail, much of it in solitary confinement, Hashmi accepted a plea bargain on one count of conspiracy to provide material support to terrorism.

Judge Loretta Preska, who sentenced the hacker Jeremy Hammond and human rights attorney Steven Donziger, gave him the maximum 15-year sentence. Hashmi was held for nine years in Guantanamo-like conditions in the supermax ADX [Administrative Maximum] facility in Florence, Colorado, where Assange, if found guilty in an American court, will almost certainly be imprisoned. Hashmi was released in 2019.

“If the government will go to this length to persecute someone who was alleged to have been involved in sending waterproof socks to Al-Qaida, what can we expect the government to do to Assange?”

The pre-trial detention conditions Hashmi endured were designed to break him. He was electronically monitored 24-hours a day. He could only receive or send mail with his immediate family. He was prohibited from speaking with other prisoners through the walls. He was forbidden from taking part in group prayer. He was permitted one hour of exercise a day, in a solitary cage without fresh air. 

He has unable to see most of the evidence used to indict him which was classified under the Classified Information Procedures Act, enacted to prevent U.S.  intelligence officers under prosecution from threatening to reveal state secrets to manipulate the legal proceedings. The harsh conditions eroded his physical and psychological health. When he appeared in the final court proceeding to accept a guilty plea he was in a near catatonic state, clearly unable to follow the proceedings around him.

If the government will go to this length to persecute someone who was alleged to have been involved in sending waterproof socks to Al-Qaida, what can we expect the government to do to Assange?

A society that prohibits the capacity to speak in truth extinguishes the capacity to live in justice. The battle for Assange’s liberty has always been much more than the persecution of a publisher. It is the most important battle for press freedom of our era. And if we lose this battle, it will be devastating, not only for Assange and his family, but for us.

“There is no legal basis to hold Assange in prison. There is no legal basis to try him, an Australian citizen, under the U.S.  Espionage Act.” 

Tyrannies invert the rule of law. They turn the law into an instrument of injustice. They cloak their crimes in a faux legality. They use the decorum of the courts and trials, to mask their criminality. Those, such as Assange, who expose that criminality to the public are dangerous, for without the pretext of legitimacy the tyranny loses credibility and has nothing left in its arsenal but fear, coercion and violence.

The long campaign against Assange and WikiLeaks is a window into the collapse of the rule of law, the rise of what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls our system of inverted totalitarianism, a form of totalitarianism that maintains the fictions of the old capitalist democracy, including its institutions, iconography, patriotic symbols and rhetoric, but internally has surrendered total control to the dictates of global corporations and the security and surveillance state.

There is no legal basis to hold Assange in prison. There is no legal basis to try him, an Australian citizen, under the U.S.  Espionage Act. The CIA spied on Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy through a Spanish company, UC Global, contracted to provide embassy security.

Jeremy Corbyn expressing support for Julian Assange outside the High Court in London where the U.S. appeal hearing was taking place, Oct. 28. (Don’t Extradite Assange Campaign)

This spying included recording the privileged conversations between Assange and his lawyers as they discussed his defense. This fact alone invalidated the trial. Assange is being held in a high security prison so the state can, as Nils Melzer, the U.N. special rapporteur on torture, has testified, continue the degrading abuse and torture it hopes will lead to his psychological if not physical disintegration.

The architects of imperialism, the masters of war, the corporate-controlled legislative, judicial and executive branches of government and their obsequious courtiers in the media, are guilty of egregious crimes. Say this simple truth and you are banished, as many of us have been, to the margins of the media landscape. Prove this truth, as Assange, Chelsea Manning, Jeremy Hammond and Edward Snowden have by allowing us to peer into the inner workings of power, and you are hunted down and persecuted.

Assange’s “crime” is that he exposed the more than 15,000 unreported deaths of Iraqi civilians. He exposed the torture and abuse of some 800 men and boys, aged between 14 and 89, at Guantánamo. He exposed that Hillary Clinton in 2009 ordered U.S.  diplomats to spy on U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and other U.N. representatives from China, France, Russia and the U.K., spying that included obtaining DNA, iris scans, fingerprints, and personal passwords, part of the long pattern of illegal surveillance that included the eavesdropping on U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in the weeks before the U.S. -led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

He exposed that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the CIA orchestrated the June 2009 military coup in Honduras that overthrew the democratically-elected President Manuel Zelaya, replacing him with a murderous and corrupt military regime.

He exposed that George W. Bush, Barack Obama and General David Petraeus prosecuted a war in Iraq that under post-Nuremberg laws is defined as a criminal war of aggression, a war crime, which authorized hundreds of targeted assassinations, including those of U.S.  citizens in Yemen. He exposed that the United States secretly launched missile, bomb and drone attacks on Yemen, killing scores of civilians. 

He exposed that Goldman Sachs paid Hillary Clinton $657,000 to give talks, a sum so large it can only be considered a bribe, and that she privately assured corporate leaders she would do their bidding while promising the public financial regulation and reform.

He exposed the internal campaign to discredit and destroy British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn by members of his own party. He exposed how the hacking tools used by the C.I.A. and the National Security Agency permits the wholesale government surveillance of our televisions, computers, smartphones and anti-virus software, allowing the government to record and store our conversations, images and private text messages, even from encrypted apps. 

He exposed the truth. He exposed it over and over and over until there was no question of the endemic illegality, corruption and mendacity that defines the global ruling elite. And for these truths alone he is guilty.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning NewsThe Christian Science Monitor and NPR. He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America show “On Contact.” 

This column is from Scheerpostfor which Chris Hedges writes a regular columnClick here to sign up for email alerts.

https://consortiumnews.com/2021/10/28/chris-hedges-the-most-important-battle-for-press-freedom-in-our-time/

Jewish Racism

 Native Americans condemn the Braves’ tomahawk chop — but some Atlanta rabbis won’t

Louis Keene October 29, 2021

By Kevin C. Cox

Years ago, when Rabbi Josh Lesser was in college, his dad, a diehard Atlanta Braves fan, invited him to a playoff game. He had splurged for good seats. But Lesser had just spent several weeks on a cultural exchange at the Lac du Flambeau Reservation in Wisconsin, and he dreaded the stadium ritual that many Braves fans love: the tomahawk Chop. Native Americans generally see it as a racist caricature. The future rabbi didn’t want to go.


“It felt really hypocritical to me,” Lesser, 52, said. “But my dad was really insistent.”


Decades later Braves fans still do the tomahawk chop. And it’s all the more visible this week, as the Braves and the Houston Astros head into the third game of the World Series Friday, where the Braves have not made an appearance for 22 years.


Lesser feels the chop is morally wrong, a reflection of the nation’s past and current mistreatment of Native Americans. But an informal survey shows that his view is not necessarily the norm among Atlanta rabbis — of seven contacted, two described it as offensive and the others took a middling position or no position at all, except one, who defended it.

In a very Jewish World Series, it’s Astros vs. Braves, and rabbi vs. rabbi

Louis Keene October 26, 2021

The tomahawk Chop — often called “the chop” — is a back-and-forth motion of the arm, accompanied by a sing-song war chant, and often cued by stadium music and a drumbeat. Native Americans have characterized it as both bigoted and an insensitive appropriation of their culture and all the more offensive in Georgia, where the U.S. government in the 19th century forced thousands of Native Americans off their land and onto the Trail of Tears — for many, a death march.


Baseball fans who defend the gesture see it as a way to generate crowd participation, intimidate the opponent and create a home-field advantage.


In a very Jewish World Series, it’s Astros vs. Braves, and rabbi vs. rabbi



The controversy surrounding the tomahawk Chop isn’t new. Native American groups have been calling it demeaning almost from the moment it caught on in Atlanta, in 1991, when the team made the World Series and the franchise started selling foam tomahawks in the team store. In a statement this week calling again for its ban, the head of the National Congress of American Indians labeled the chop “degrading.”


But many Braves fans remain fiercely protective of it, and in the most exciting sports moment in decades for the team, local Jewish leaders are among them.


Rabbi Ilan Feldman, head of Beth Jacob, an Orthodox synagogue in Atlanta, grew up listening to baseball games on a transistor radio and has been going to Braves games for decades. He said he would do the tomahawk chop “every time I have the chance.”


“The whole point of the tomahawk Chop is that a Brave is a courageous warrior for a good cause,” Feldman said, “and therefore it’s honoring Braves, not dishonoring them. It’s saying ‘I want to be like a Brave.’”


tomahawk chop by the Forward

By Kevin C. Cox/Getty


The tomahawk chop is a tradition many Atlanta Braves fans grew up with, and its defenders say there is no intent to offend.


The Cherokee Nation, the largest tribe in the United States, sees it differently. In a statement this week the tribe said, “’This does not honor Cherokee traditions, nor do they honor our fellow tribes,” adding, “The 574 federally recognized Native American tribes are each distinct, sovereign governments with their own unique history, culture and language, and should be respected as such, not as stereotypes or mischaracterizations or derogatory terms.”



What does Feldman make of these objections?


“I think it has more to do with rivalry than with some noble devotion to racism,” he said. “Everyone is trying to outdo each other to prove their nobility regarding racism. I realize that makes me a racist — I realize that.”


Feldman offered the only full-throated endorsement of the chop. Other rabbis the Forward contacted, describing themselves as avid baseball fans, did not defend it, but were not ready to cut ties with the tradition, either.


Rabbi Micah Lapidus, director of Judaic studies at The Alfred & Adele Davis Academy, a Reform Jewish day school in Atlanta, has written a song honoring Braves legend Hank Aaron called “Keep Swinging.”


In an email, Lapidus said about the chop, “As with all issues that understandably evoke strong emotions in today’s world, as an educator I encourage individuals to educate themselves on the topic to determine their personal position, with an emphasis on seeking out opinions, perspectives, and narratives different from their own and which challenge their assumptions and comfort.” He said he was not in a position to comment further.


tomahawk chop by the Forward

By Pouya Dianat/Atlanta Brav...


Atlanta Braves fans do the tomahawk chop against the Chicago Cubs at Turner Field in 2013. Native American groups say the gesture is demeaning.


Rabbi Adam Starr, head of Congregation Ohr HaTorah, an Orthodox synagogue in Atlanta, is bringing his son to Sunday’s Game 5, their second game of the postseason. When it came to the chop, the rabbi declined to take a stance.


“These issues are certainly complex,” Starr said. “I grew up a, what-was-then, the Washington Redskins fan. So there has to be some sensitivity on these issues. I don’t know how it’s perceived by the Native American community. I think it’s something that needs to be explored, but I can’t say definitively one way or another at this point.”


Rabbi Daniel Dorsch has been head of Atlanta Conservative synagogue Congregation Etz Chaim since 2016, and was reticent to weigh in on the chop, he said because he is new to town and a fan not of the Braves, but of the Philadelphia Phillies.


“Am I aware in general that this is something that would in general be problematic? Of course,” Dorsch said.


Told of some Native groups’ recent condemnations of the gesture, the rabbi wasn’t ready to deem the chop inherently offensive. In any event, Dorsch said, the idea of taunting an opponent was troubling.


“From my perspective, just the whole idea of taunting seems rather un-Jewish, and unfortunate, and not in conjunction with our values. That’s what I’ll say.”


Out of six Atlanta rabbis who responded to the Forward’s request for comment on the chop, only Lesser and Rabbi Ron Segal, who leads Temple Sinai, a Reform congregation, railed unequivocally against it as a derogatory gesture. (A seventh, Rabbi Rachael Klein Miller of Temple Emanu-El, declined to comment.)


Segal, whose synagogue has a wager for charity with a Houston counterpart, said Jewish people doing the chop runs counter to their intense focus on fighting antisemitism.


“We still have teens and others who encounter slights in their school and stereotypical prejudicial treatment,” Segal said, “and each time we perpetuate things like that it reflects such insensitivity and blindness to our own experience.”


Would he call the chop racist?


“It is based on racist stereotypes, for sure,” he said. “That is what those actions are at their core — what their origins are entirely based upon.”


As for Jewish communal groups, the Atlanta chapter of the American Jewish Committee was measured in its response. In a statement, regional director Dov Wilker said, “We believe that concerns from the Native American community should be heard and discussed.”


Sarah Podemski in "Reservation Dogs." (Shane Brown/FX) by the Forward

For Jewish Indigenous actress Sarah Podemski, it’s a miracle just to exist

Evelyn FrickOctober 11, 2021

The Atlanta chapter of the Anti-Defamation League referred questions on the topic to a national spokesperson, who said in an email, “Our position for nearly a decade is that sports teams should reconsider team names, mascots and imagery based on Native American stereotypes.”


Segal, the Temple Sinai rabbi, said he was confident his rabbinical colleagues had no racist intent, and suggested two reasons people might not want to call the chop out as offensive.


“Either there’s an understanding or perception that those are now so commonplace and mainstream that they’re not really attached to a particular people or intended as a slight,” he said, “or, you know, you have a team in the World Series for the first time in 22 years, and why would you want to rain on their parade?”


When Lesser’s father brought him inside the Braves’ stadium that night in 1991, they were quickly enveloped by hordes of fans holding foam tomahawks sold at the team store. When they started the chant, he groaned. But his dad considered himself a progressive, and hoped to convince his son that the chop was morally permissible. He pointed to former President Jimmy Carter, a Georgia native known as a bleeding-heart liberal, doing the chop in his suite. It only disappointed his son.


When Lesser got back to school that fall, he started a Native American-Jewish partnership at the college Hillel. Today, he’s helping assemble a similar coalition through Repair The World Atlanta, a Jewish social justice group.


These days, the rabbi thinks of the Carter moment as a reminder that everyone — himself included — has room for growth.


“I know people think it’s fun,” Lesser says. “But when we look at our true commitments, it’s fun that we can give up.”

https://forward.com/news/477426/atlanta-rabbis-wont-condemn-braves-tomahawk-chop/?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_3113924



Does Zuckerberg Longs To Be Dead?

 

Does Mark Zuckerberg know what Meta means in Hebrew?

Facebook is dead, long live Meta. But, actually, Meta is dead, too.

Let me explain.

On Thursday, Mark Zuckerberg unveiled the new name for Facebook to mark its transition to what he calls “the metaverse.” The name, which is, perhaps unsurprisingly, Meta, doesn’t translate well. Unless that’s the point.

While the word, now applied to such narratively self-aware works as “Adaptation” and “Deadpool,” derives from the Greek prefix meaning “after” or beyond,” and indicates something that transcends the word it latches onto (think metaphysics), in Hebrew the word “Meta” is the feminine form of “is dead.” Don’t just take my word for it!

Hebrew speakers may have chuckled at Zuckerberg’s pronouncement, from an eerily art-directed room, that Meta was chosen to better reflect “who we are and what we hope to build.” The metaverse he’s building, may be a subtle multilingual counter to Trump’s golem-esque Truth platform, with the Hebrew words “Emet” (Truth) and “Met” (Death) both playing a big role in the golem story.

It would be funny if it wasn’t all so morbid, seeming to portend the flailing end of a tech empire hoping to distract from intense public scrutiny prompted by a litany of scandals brought to light by reporting and a whistleblower.

Is Meta’s birth — or rather, naming — announcement really a proof of death? Only if Zuck is being meta in the self-aware sense and knows some Hebrew.

Zuckerberg’s company, by any other name, is now alleged to be a major source of societal rot, from devouring the self-esteem of teenagers to peddling misinformation to maintaining a startlingly feckless — or worse, laissez-faire — approach to policing hate speech.

So who really died here, with the rise of Meta? Society as we know it? The pre-Zuckerverse, where us poor plebes couldn’t text via Ray-Ban-branded augmented reality glasses while pretending to be paying attention to an in-person conversation?

The answer, far from an acknowledgment of defeat to the slings and arrows of Congressional investigation and investor distress, appears to be an invitation to a danse macabre, implicating us in the demise of life as we know it as he strives to “bring the metaverse to life.”

“Our mission remains the same, it’s still about bringing people together,” Zuckerberg insisted.

Sounds like a shiva.

https://forward.com/culture/477390/meta-dead-hebrew-facebook-mark-zuckerberg-new-name-metaverse/?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_3113924

Trump’s 100% Neocon MIC-MAGA Plan for the U.S. to Conquer the World

  Trump’s 100% Neocon MIC-MAGA Plan for the U.S. to Conquer the World ERIC ZUESSE AUG 06, 2026 5 August 2026, by  Eric Zuesse . ( All of my ...