Loughner NOT Jewish

Anti-semites, whitesupremacists and nazis have been quick to promote the notion that Loughner was Jewish, thereby apparrently removing any anti-semitic motivation for Loughner's attack (supposedly). But seems it just isn't true:

It is appalling how one comment---a friend of Jared Loughner telling a Mother Jones’ reporter that Jared Loughner’s mother is “Jewish”---goes viral in an instant.

In hours, "this fact" was all over on anti-Semitic sites. And, of course, there are the “commentators” who love to ‘blame the victim’ via some pop psychology theory that Jared acted out of “Jewish self-hatred.”

I figured that this was the moment to try and get “truth” dressed, and into the public arena a lot faster than usual. In other words, to use the tools of the internet to determine the veracity of what this friend told Mother Jones.

I cover Jews in popular culture for Jewish newspapers and I know how often famous people are mis-identified as Jewish or mis-identified as not Jewish. I also know that a lot of people are not outright lying about claiming someone is Jewish---they just get it wrong.

So, with my friend Michael, we ran down everything we could from public records on Jared Loughner’s mother’s family background. It took a lot of “search terms” and databases to find what we did.

Here’s what we found:

Jared Lee Loughner’s mother is Amy Totman Loughner;

Amy Loughner---Known Parentage from Public Records:

Her [Amy’s] parents were Lois May Totman and Laurence Edward Totman.

----Lois M. Totman died in 1999 and Laurence E. Totman died in 2005. Both were registered nurses. Laurence worked at a VA facility in Tucson. We both found this info via google news archives, social security death index.

From 1930 census records

Laurence E. Totman was born in Illinois in 1925.

His (Laurence’s) parents were Laurence A. Totman and his wife, Mary.

Laurence Totman pere (the elder) was born in Kansas to a Pennsylvania father and an Illinois mother. Mary was from Illinois, as were both of her parents.

A sister-in-law named Myrtle M. Brennan is listed as living with them also.

1920/1910 census records---Totman Family:

In 1920, Lawrence Totman, (Jared’s) great-grandfather, is living with his aunt, Rosa Clarke, who was born in illinois to two Irish-born parents.

Rosa is his mother's sister. On the 1910 census, his (Laurence, the elder) maternal grandparents are listed as Irish-born.

Father, Orvie Totman was born in Ohio to Ohio-born parents.

Amy Loughner’s Mother’s Line:

See obit, below, from Arlington (Illinois) Daily Record, June 24, 1999---Obituary of Helen Medernach of Virgil, Illinois. Helen was the sister of Lois M. Totman (the mother of Amy Totman Loughner). Helen was the great aunt of Jared Loughner.

As you can see, Helen’s funeral (mass) was held at a Catholic church. Helen (and Lois) were the children of Anton Bleifuss and Jessie Bleifuss (nee Anderson). Lois M. Totman died just days after her sister, Helen.

According to the census records, Anton Bleifuss was born in Bremen, Germany, to German parents. Jessie Anderson Bleifuss was born in Illinois to a father born in Denmark and a mother born in Illinois.

Conclusion---It is exceedingly unlikely that Amy Loughner has any Jewish ancestry. The only “line” not traced his Amy’s father’s mother’s family. The other three lines (Amy’s father’s father, Amy’s mother’s father, and Amy’s mother mother)---show, to all but the most obtuse, that these were/are not Jewish families. Moreover, it is quite clear that Amy’s mother, Lois Bleifuss Trotman, came from a Catholic family.

Also, we have this from an interview with the Rabbi of the synagogue that was claimed to be Loughner's mother's place of worship:

"We had a meeting of the Tucson Board of Rabbis. We all looked at our rosters from many years back. No one has ever heard of the family -- him, his parents, any of them. I can say with absolute certainty that we do not know him in pretty much the entire affiliated community."

I would add this: Bleifuss may be a Jewish name. (The noted investigative journalist, Joel Bleifuss, is Jewish.) Anton Bleifuss, Jared Lee Loughner's great-grandfather, might then have been Jewish -- but not so committed that he didn't defer to his wife when it came to raising the children as Roman Catholics.

As I noted in my earlier posting, Jared Loughner is not the most reliable of reporters, and Tierney's recollection was added as an aside. Mix into this the fact that Amy Loughner's brother is Anton Totman -- apparently named for his mother's father.

Loughner's family was in no way Jewish, nor was his mother -- but she might have mentioned her Jewish grandfather, beloved enough to live on in her brother's name, with pride or interest. Under those circumstances Loughner, who sought "chaos" according to Tierney, might have sought to provoke his mother and his uncle by pretending to admire (or actually admiring) Adolph Hitler. He might have told Tierney that his mother was Jewish as a shorthand, or might have seen her as Jewish -- like I said, not the most reliable reporter. Or he might have explained the lineage, and Tierney might understandably have conflated it as "mother Jewish."

So........seems he wasn't Jewish. I notice that Rivero is carrying this story about Loughner being Jewish as FACT. It's also appeared at Rense.com, with the attribution being Jamie Nazi Kelso's WhiteNews website. Kelso's website started this story.....and who is this Jamie Kelso, trusted by Rivero, Alex Jones and Rense?

Kelso joined the neo-Nazi group National Alliance in 2003. He then spent two years living in former Klan leader David Duke’s house while working as his personal assistant, all the while serving as a moderator for hate web guru Don Black’s forum, Stormfront. In 2010, Kelso joined the racist political party, American Third Position, where he is a key behind-the-scenes operative.

What a source! Trustworthy, of course......

Real Fascists in Our Midst

This article better conveys something of what I was attempting in my last post:

From ZNet

Real Fascists in Our Midst

What if the Tucson shooter had been a Muslim?
January 12, 2011

By Zoltan Grossman

When the Tucson shooter Jared Loughner was publicly identified on Saturday afternoon, I immediately googled his name and found his now infamous video on YouTube. I was Hit # 304 at the time, and by Monday at least 1.3 million people had viewed his video. Perhaps attracting the world to his message was a central reason for his terrorist attack, and his message was not as irrational as it first appeared.

The first part of Loughner’s video consisted of text about dreaming and consciousness, easily dismissed as rantings of a mentally disturbed individual. But the last part focused on currency, federal conspiracies, government brainwashing, and other tenets of the far-right populist movements and armed anti-government militias. Loughner mixed these conspiracy theories with millenarian prophecies that the world is ending in 2012, for a extra-toxic brew of paranoia and chaos.

Like many others who have worked against fascist movements, I quickly recognized Loughner as a constitutionalist fascist, cut from the cloth of the Posse Comitatus (“Power of the County”), a Wisconsin-based survivalist militia founded in the 1970s. The Posse threatened judges, killed a number of people, and outgunned police SWAT teams at the time. It has since spun off into a variety of “plenipotentiary judges” (affiliated with the Sovereign Citizens Movement and other “common-law” groups) that issue their own liens, and refuse to pay taxes or apply for identification. Like Loughner, they deny the worth of U.S. currency as not backed by gold or silver, which they claim the Constitution requires.

The motivations of constitutionalist fascist movements are quite different than the current Tea Party conservative populists. They tended not to follow Christian fundamentalism, but promoted their own brand of “Christian Identity,” heavily racialized and driven by global conspiracy theories dominated by Jews (or euphemisms thereof, such as bankers or the Federal Reserve System). They may be mentally unbalanced, but somewhat rational in how they emulate and follow the example of earlier far-right militants such as Tim McVeigh

Much like McVeigh or the followers of Lyndon LaRouche, they do not defend the capitalist status quo, but pose themselves as a right-wing revolutionary alternative to it. They often oppose the same things as leftists--such as military interventions, trade deals, corporate power, and government surveillance--but for entirely different reasons. Their goals are to “protect U.S. sovereignty,” cut off contact with foreign peoples and the United Nations, and attack the global financial conspiracy.

Sarah Palin’s rhetoric, including her gunsights on Gabrielle Giffords’ district, certainly helps to legitimize violence and set the stage for the attack. But that does not mean that she would necessarily be the ideological inspiration for the likes of Jared Loughner. A far-right revolutionary would no more respect a Republican Party vice-presidential nominee than a left-wing revolutionary respects a Democratic Party vice president. (Glenn Beck, on the other hand, has served as a key ideological connection between conservative populists and the far-right conspiracists, a role once played by Pat Buchanan).

Loughner repeated another hallmark of most fascists, by declaring in his video that the government is practicing “mind control” and brainwashing citizens through the educational system--even through the structure of English grammar itself. Some of these views are promoted in American Renaissance, a magazine that describes itself as “America’s premiere publication of racial-realist thought.”

The New York Times noted on January 10 that Loughner’s views on grammar closely reflect those of David Wynn Miller, a Milwaukee-based far-right activist, and founder of the Sovereign Citizens Movement. Miller himself admitted that Loughner’s “argument sounded familiar,” and “He’s probably been on my Web site, which has been up for about 11 years. The government does control the schools, and the schools determine the grammar and language we use. And then it is all reinforced by newspapers, magazines, TV, radio and everything we do in society.”

Unlike earlier incarnations of the Klan or Nazis, the far-right militia movement no longer relies on centralized organizations or personality cults, but on the concept of “leaderless resistance.” Based the 1970s Nazi classic The Turner Diaries, ideologues such as Miller (like William Pierce and Tom Metzger before him) inspire others to commit acts of violence through media or the Internet. This same concept of “leaderless resistance” has been taken up by other militant groups around the world, such as the loose Islamist network sometimes called Al Qaeda.

The U.S. government accuses a U.S.-born cleric in Yemen, Anwar al-Awlaki, of inspiring young Islamist militants to commit acts of terror around the world. The homeland security state has accused al-Awlaki’s websites of ideological responsibility for acts from the Fort Hood shooting to the so-called “underwear bomber” and the FedEx package plot. The Obama Administration has targeted him for assassination, and worked with the Yemeni military to bomb and launch missiles at Islamist insurgents that may or may not sympathize with Al Qaeda.

It speaks volumes to see how the U.S. government has treated the threat of Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen differently that the threat of David Wynn Miller in Wisconsin. Although the young Islamist militants may themselves be psychologically unstable and have done poorly in school, they are presented as ideologically influenced by al-Awlaki’s websites. Jared Loughner, on the other hand, is depicted as a mentally ill loner, even though David Wynn Miller actually admits that Loughner’s far-right perspectives closely match his website.

If the Tucson shooter had been a Muslim, the media would have demonized the local Muslim community and mosque, launched an investigation of his ties to global groups, and probably launched commando raids, missiles or bombs in some Muslim country. But President Obama is not going to order the assassination of David Wynn Miller, not is he going to bomb Wisconsin in retaliation for the Tucson attack. Tim McVeigh’s hometown of Lockport, New York, was not raided or bombed after the Oklahoma City bombing. But if the culprit had come from Yemen, Pakistan or Somalia, we can be sure that military action would have followed against the terrorist’s home community.

This double standard shows the skewed priorities in the so-called “Global War on Terror.” Why is it so easy to accept that a website in Yemen can influence someone in Texas to commit violence, but not that a website in Wisconsin can inspire someone in Arizona? By defining Islamist militants as committed “terrorists,” but white Christianist militants as merely “lone wolves,” we are ignoring the underlying political motivations for violence in our country. In scouring the world for so-called “Islamofascists,” the government is ignoring the real fascists in our midst.

Dr. Zoltan Grossman is a professor of geography at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington. His website is at http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz and can be reached at grossmaz@evergreen.edu

The Arizona Shooting and "the movement"

WhatReallyHappened.com is spinning the Arizona shooting spree as a provocation intended to distract the US public (from what Rivero imagines to be some huge, all-encompasing mortgage-scam.) Here's Rivero's take on it -




















"A staged incident to distract the media." Right.......

"If he had really intended to kill the congresswoman...."? I have read reports that she was shot through the temple. How much more intent to kill can one show? Jeezuz, Rivero is disgusting enough anyway, but how out of touch is he? A child was killed too, but for Rivero the shooter "hadn't really meant to kill the congresswoman". And a child's murder isn't as "attractive to the media" as that of a Congresswoman, according to Rivero.

So, instead of the child being a victim of one of those amongst Rivero's own audience ("the movement") rather he'd have us believe it is "staged" and "fake":-



The dead child was faked? What?

And nevermind that the shooter appears to have been fuelled by the very propaganda that Rivero lives off and which he describes as "the history the government doesn't want you to learn".....? This shooter was probably a big fan of Rivero and Alex Jones, and likely an adherent to the "ideas" that characterise and distinguish what they like to call "the movement". This "movement" (911 Troof, patriot movement) is essentially an american fascism - a populist ultranationalism based on conspiracy theory. (Amongst all the posts on the Arizona/Gifford shooting Rivero includes a link to a Google Translation of some Holocaust denial. Google translate your pro-Nazi history? Great stuff, Mr Rivero, I'm sure.)

Rivero also links to two articles from the Alex Jones stable (here and here), both of which seek to spin the Gifford shooting with a view to distancing themselves from any responsibility and even suggesting any such charges of responsibility are evidence of 'the establishment' exploiting the attacks to attack "the movement". It's all a setup see, and nothing to do with "the movement" at all. Well, of course, what else? [It's a neat way of escaping having to deal with any responsibility, isn't it? And notice how Rivero lacks any irony when he says this story will be everywhere and is being "spun" by everyone for their own ends? Nevermind he's doing it too?]

One of the articles ends

"Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect

For the elite, the problem is not violence. It is the existence of and threat posed by a viable and growing constitutionalist movement that demands the Federal Reserve be closed down and the banksters responsible for the unfolding global economic crisis be arrested and tried for crimes against humanity."

So, it's not people like this shooter who pose a threat, it's people like this shooter. Eh?

The other Prisonplanet article, penned by the idiot Paul Watson, claims that

Despite the fact that Jared Lee Loughner was a psychotic loner with “left-wing” beliefs according to those who knew him, the establishment has hastily exploited yesterday’s tragic shooting in Tucson to demonize conservatives, libertarians and gun owners while ordering Americans to “tone down the rhetoric,” which is nothing more than a euphemism for stifling dissent and coercing people to roll over on Obamacare, bailouts and whatever big government is preparing to unleash next.

So....the supposedly "leftwing" shooter attacked a "big govt. socialist Democrat"? And thus it's going to be exploited to attack conservatives and libertarians? How does that make any sense at all? [It illustrates how far-gone "the movement" is that such utter crap can be posted at Alex Jones and echoed throughout the movement's propaganda organs such as Rivero's WhatReallyHappened.]

Here's an advert that accompanied the Prisonplanet article quoted above:










More soberly The Guardian writes

Of course, there's no suggestion that the suspected gunman – a college graduate from Arizona who lists reading as his favourite pastime – was particularly inspired by Sarah Palin or Jesse Kelly. But it's this kind of rhetoric that is lighting a fire under extremists who believe that Obama is, in fact, the devil – and, by association, so are all Democrats.

That may sound ludicrous, but last year, civil rights organisation the Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC) said extremist groups had exploded in the United States since Obama's election. These groups, it said, had increased by 244%, were "steeped in wild, anti-government conspiracy theories" that exploited populist anger across the country and had infiltrated the mainstream.
.....
Much of this is clearly the paranoid ramblings of a messed-up conspiracy theorist. But, if the SPLC is to be believed, these are paranoid ramblings that have been gaining currency.

Following the release of the SPLC report, I interviewed an armed militia group in west Texas. Many of their fears, I discovered, were of a kind of post-apocalyptic future in which the very infrastructure of civilisation collapses – something that could come about, apparently, if the government imposes public healthcare or increased gun control. One man recruiting for a new militia in Oklahoma told me he wanted to be "prepared to put down a tyrannical government". A member of a group in Mississippi said that if the government "did something crazy" – like take away their guns – he couldn't predict what people would do: "This could get real ugly, real quick."
SOURCE

Elsewhere the Guardian adds that the attack is.....

....disturbing set against a background of heated rhetoric. Much debate has painted American politicians in general, and the federal government in particular, as somehow being a force for evil. Indeed many rightwing commentators have portrayed President Barack Obama and senior Democrats as socialists or even Marxists bent on fundamentally changing the American way of life. Some fringe groups and conservative politicians have even hinted at resorting to illegal measures in order to defend the nation from what they see as a dire threat. Giffords's own offices were vandalised after she voted for healthcare reform.

Elsewhere, there has been a rash of attacks on government targets from individuals pursuing extremist aims. Last year in Texas Joseph Stack flew a private aeroplane into a branch of the Internal Revenue Service tax authorities. He left a rambling suicide note that contained numerous anti-government statements. Neo-Nazi James von Brunn shot dead a security guard at the Holocaust Museum in Washington in 2009. In the same year a doctor who performed abortion was killed in Kansas City and several incidents occurred in which people with links to white supremacists killed people or were found with explosives caches.

Gun-rights advocates across America have made a point of turning up to some political events carrying weapons, including powerful rifles, in order to demonstrate their right to bear arms. That is a fact that might become relevant given that the shooting of Gifford occurred in public at an open "meet and greet" political event.

The rise of political extremism in recent years has been tracked by the Southern Poverty Law Centre which issued a report in 2009 that warned of rising numbers of potentially violent right-wing militia groups. The numbers of hate groups grew from 602 in 2000 to 926 in 2009, the organisation has found.
SOURCE

Sad to read all this:

Surgeons at the University Medical Center said Giffords, a 40-year-old Democratic member of the House of Representatives, was communicating with them and able to follow simple commands, such as holding up two fingers when asked. A single bullet travelled the length of her brain on the left side, doctors said.

"This is about as good as good can get," said Dr Peter Rhee. Giffords had undergone surgery to remove bone fragments and some damaged brain tissue, and remains in a critical condition.

Six other people, including a nine-year-old girl, a federal judge and a member of Giffords's staff, were killed when a gunman opened fire outside a supermarket in Tucson where the politician was meeting with constituents, shooting 18 people.

A 22-year-old, identified by investigators as Jared Lee Loughner, was arrested at the scene and remains in federal custody.

The nine-year-old girl who was killed has been named as Christina Taylor Greene. Born on September 11 2001, her parents described her as the "best daughter in the world". She was featured in a book called Faces of Hope: Babies Born on 9/11. She had a keen interest in politics, was on her school council, and had wanted to go to the event to learn more about the political process.

The other victims were named today as John Roll, 63, a federal district court judge; Gabriel Zimmerman, Giffords's 30-year-old director of community outreach; Dorwin Stoddard, 76, a pastor; Dorothy Murray, 76; and 79-year-old Phyllis Scheck.

At a press conference following the attack, the Pima County Sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, blamed political vitriol for fuelling the attack.

"People tend to pooh-pooh this business that we hear about all the vitriol we hear inflaming the American public by people who make a living doing that," he said. "That may be free speech – but there are consequences."

He said Arizona had become "a Mecca for prejudice and bigotry" and that "people who are unbalanced are especially susceptible to vitriol".
SOURCE

It's despicable.

Poor little girl.

But of course, the shooter probably wasn't trying to kill a woman and a small child, instead he likely imagined he was killing a Congress Critter and some of her sheeple. The shooter surely thought he was making his stand against the dark forces of "the New World Order", fighting for "his rights", life, liberty, the American way, blah blah blah.

Pathetic. And dangerous. Obviously.

Dickens' Christmas Carol

It is doomed to wander through the world - oh, woe is me! - and witness what it cannot share.

The Reverend Pike and David Duke.

Israel’s Cyber Warriors Knock Duke Off YouTube
By Rev. Ted Pike
10-4-10

The Internet was probably the least foreseen of events challenging ADL/Israel’s agenda for world control. Leaping across previously Jewish-dominated media boundaries, the worldwide web has given people of conscience unfettered privileges to criticize Jewish supremacism and misbehavior of the state of Israel.

However, in my April 27 article, “Israeli Cyber-Warriors Crash Internet,” I detail how Israel, unable to legitimately dispel overwhelming world criticism, has been marshalling hundreds of thousands of Jews worldwide into an army of internet “cyber-warriors.” These act in unison to skew polls about Israel and disproportionately flood the internet with opinion favorable to the Jewish state and against its critics.
SOURCE
----------------------------------

Pike just wishes he could "marshall" more racists and achieve the same thing he accuses Israel of doing.

Pike believes Alex Jones could and should perform such a role. So what's Pike's complaint other than Israel is apparently more successful than himself, David Duke and Jones at "skewing polls" and "disproportionately flooding the internet with favorable opinion"? Pike condemns the Israelis for supposed success at it and Jones for his supposed failure at it. For Pike, and anti-semites more generally, when they suppose the Jews successfully work together it's a cabal and a dark malevolent conspiracy etc......but when they themselves work towards the same thing (and fail at it!) it's just never enough but an honour and duty all the same. Mad.

Pike continues:

Duke: First Domino to Fall?

After Canada passed ADL/B’nai B’rith’s hate law in 1971, the Jewish Gestapo’s strategy was to first indict those least in favor with Canadians: holocaust questioners and racists. While Duke is increasingly listened to on the far right, he will receive little sympathy in this controversy from mainstream Christian/conservatives who have been deeply imprinted with the negative stereotype of his KKK past and animus against blacks. Yet, in viewing several of his recent YouTube videos, I found everything he said to be factual and logical, without anything that could legitimately be described as racist or anti-semitic.

HAHA. He's a changed man! He hardly mentions Jews anymore....errr......just like Alex Jones.....oh, hold on!? Here's Pike in his letter to Jones -

When you do not faithfully warn against the Talmudic conspiracy, you sin most against your own family and loved ones. If you fail to be a dependable truthteller today, your descendants, shivering in a concentration camp someday, will curse you in your grave for not doing your utmost to identify and oppose the source of the horrific bondage that has come upon them.

The Reverend can't have it both ways, can he? Pike defends Duke against charges of anti-semitism, but attacks Jones for lacking it.

And note the source? Rense. That's Pike, writing at Rense, in defence of David Duke against charges of racism and anti-semitism. Elsewhere I have shown we have confirmation of Rense's friendship with David Duke - during his bust-up with Mark Glenn of the Crescent and Cross about supposed "anti-Islamic racism" featuring at Rense and preventing Glenn from getting published there.

What a merry little go around it all is. All these "independent alternative news" places all know each other. What are they independent of? Not each other, that's for sure.

Reverend Pike - Open letter to Alex Jones (HAHA)

Here's an open-letter from Ted Pike to Alex Jones. Jones heavily promoted Rev Pike and his efforts to stop passing of "hate-crime legislation." Pike has appeared as a guest, has been published at Prisonplanet and has a spot on both Willis Carto's AFP and David Dukes' WhiteCivilRights website.

Here's the letter:

National Prayer Network
AN OPEN LETTER TO ALEX JONES
By Rev. Ted Pike
7 Sep 10

Alex:

I watched with pleasure a two-year-old YouTube video clip of your program in which you indicated you were sick of not speaking the whole truth concerning the threat of Jewish supremacism. (Watch clips at bottom of page.) You then went on to discuss this threat, revealing a knowledge of the subject much more extensive than the great majority of right-wing leaders or talk show hosts.

Yet, for the most part, you have not shared such knowledge with your listeners over the years.

Jewish supremacism is untiring and relentless in its attempt to bring about a Judaic new world order. It is not enough that you occasionally punctuate your radio outreach with such truth, giving token opposition. It should be your habitual response to be vigilant and vocal against the greatest threat to Christianity and civilization that has ever existed.

You said in this clip that you are a Christian. If so, God obligates you to speak the whole, undiminished truth without fear of the Jews. There are at least three reasons you should now tell such truth:

First, as a Christian, God has empowered you with the opportunity and responsibility to be a “watchman,” capable of warning millions. Ezekiel also had that assignment and was told by God that if he did not warn the instant he saw evil approaching he would lose his soul. (Ez. 33)

Second, if you do not speak the whole truth about what you know, you become a deceiver. Half-truths are worse than outright lies. When a leader of your stature claims to have researched a topic yet holds back half of the truth, your followers relax, concluding that if a threat really existed, Alex would tell them! How wrong they have been.

Clearly, you have known for years that an all-pervasive, Talmudic threat exists. Yet, for fear of losing some of your mainline stations and perhaps being called “anti-Semitic,” you have not warned your audience as you should. Instead, you have given airtime to consideration of a myriad of lesser conspiracies, largely distracting your listeners and consuming their energies. In doing so, you have protected the most wicked conspirators from regular criticism and exposure. Since you have not gone to the heart of the problem, your message cannot save America. This is very wrong and unchristian. This is dereliction of duty and will merit the loss of your soul. You must repent of this great sin and do what is right: repeatedly, consistently speaking all that you know of this pervasive danger.

Third, you must do so, not just because God commands you or on penalty of your soul, but because the Christian is obligated to lay down his life, as Christ did, in love for others. When you do not faithfully warn against the Talmudic conspiracy, you sin most against your own family and loved ones. If you fail to be a dependable truthteller today, your descendants, shivering in a concentration camp someday, will curse you in your grave for not doing your utmost to identify and oppose the source of the horrific bondage that has come upon them.

Jesus describes the shepherd who does not adequately protect his flock as a “hireling.” Today, this untrustworthy guide might be a talk show host who is very concerned about the fate of our nation yet is even more concerned with acquiring a bigger following and number of stations. He rationalizes that, because he has become so big, he cannot jeopardize his influence by saying anything that might threaten his outreach. As a result, this “hireling” flees when the ADL “wolf” howls, “Anti-Semitism!”

Over the past five years, America has experienced repeated assaults from ADL-inspired, Christian-persecuting hate crimes legislation. During that period, especially during times of greatest crisis, I have repeatedly left messages imploring you to put me on your show to warn the people and take action. Unlike over a hundred other hosts, very rarely have you responded, and then only at the last minute, giving me perhaps 30 minutes of airtime. That happened more than a year ago, hours before the federal hate bill passed. You told our audience, “No one has done more to save freedom than Ted Pike.” Yet, during the station break, you told me the reason you have virtually never put me on is that you “had forgotten all about [me].” We both know the truth: If I am your guest, I cannot be depended on to avoid the Jewish issue.

The true Christian speaks the whole truth because it is the right thing to do, the responsible loving thing. The fate of many may depend on him. That is why he will not be distracted from delivering the message God has entrusted to him. When we do what is right, looking to God for guidance and protection, He and His mighty angels take special notice. They make a way for the truth to be told, even when there seems no way.

As I recently warned another media leader, WorldNetDaily’s Joe Farah, it is time to leave the endless strategies and self-protection of traditional right-wing power politics. Leaders must return to the ancient, divinely backed command to trust God and the whole truth. If you and other authorities like Farah do what is right, and the people respond in truth, then there is no restraint with God to save America for as long as He wants to.

How long will that be? Just as long as we fear God, not Jews.
SOURCE

Very interesting. I love it when these people fall-out and go for each other. Their vanities expose each other. Brilliant.

Pike's most interesting line was this, I thought: "We both know the truth: If I am your guest, I cannot be depended on to avoid the Jewish issue." And yet Jones did invite Pike several times, published him, claimed he had done "more for freedom" than anyone else, etc. Pike is saying Jones knew Pike's views and his refusal to avoid explicitly referencing Jews. (Pike is pretty candid about it isn't he? lol) And still Jones promoted him. That it wasn't sufficient promotion to satisfy the vanity of Pike is hardly surprising, however, if Jones is really such an enemy of the anti-semites why did he have Pike as a guest at all if, as Pike asserts, Jones knew the score?

Pike, like the others, fails to understand Jones' position: he isn't there to promote explicit anti-semitism, swaztikas and Hitler. That's exactly what he cannot do, and what he attempts to position himself in opposition to (though only superficially, of course).

Jones promotes the Reverend Pike, Eustace Mullins, Willis Carto and his hordes, Mike Rivero, Big Jim Tucker and all the rest - and they simply complain he isn't "going for the Jews" sufficently. lol. Even when that's the exact thing that will most quickly get him exposed as a hater and fascist sympathiser - overt anti-semitism and promotion of nazi notions of jewish world conspiracy is exactly what Jones must avoid if he is to succeed at going anywhere near mainstream. Pike and the others just don't understand.....and Jones can hardly defend himself by admitting his trojan-horse position (which serves himself and the movement both financially and in terms of exposure.)

Jones faces some problems now - if he wishes to continue growing he must continue being very careful about overt anti-semitism. Otherwise he will never break into bigtime. At least not unless anti-semitism becomes more acceptable in the mainstream.....which is what Jones is helping to accomplish, though perhaps too adroitly for Reverend Pike and the extremists to understand. So what will Jones choose if it comes to it? Throw his fascist friends overboard (as he should have done long ago), or spurn the more mainstream overtures of FOX and co?

Regardless, the question remains what people such as Pike were ever doing on Jones' shows anyway.....as Pike clearly suggests Jones knew full-well what Pike was about. Likewise, Jones must have known what Mullins was about, what Willis Carto's "interests" are..... All these fascists and fellow-travellers are his friends, guests and colleagues. These are people with whom Jones has been wilfully colluding so as to mislead his audience to their real intent - anti-semitism. According to Pike, Jones has been allowing these people to say just what they like, so long as they don't directly specify Jews as the target - hence the euphemism found littered throughout Jones' shows.

Update: I just found another version of this "Open Letter" from Pike about Alex Jones. It appears at Barbara Hartwell's website (yes, that Barbara Hartwell)

An interestingly different letter - totally different. Odd for an open letter? Here's the text as it appears at Hartwell's site - and from which she links to Pike's own website. Only the link goes to the other version of the letter I posted which is completely different. Odd. Anyway - here's Hartwell's version:

By Rev. Ted Pike
9 Sept. 10

Last year, prior to passage of the federal hate crimes bill, Alex Jones, after years of ignoring my requests to allow me to warn his huge audience of the hate bill threat, finally put me on his June 8th program.

As I was waiting to begin the broadcast, Jones told me off the air that he had heard me the previous morning on Joyce Riley's program criticizing Jewish supremacists as authors of the hate bill. He said what he was about to tell me was "off the record." He said his broadcasting empire has "gotten so big" with many mainline affiliates that he cannot afford to lose those stations by criticizing Jews.

"But I've got to mention ADL behind the hate bill!" I objected. "ADL is okay," he said. "Talk about ADL all you want, but we can't talk about Jews specifically." He then told me that, with this understanding, there would be many opportunities for me to be on his program, especially as new legislative threats emerged. Having said that, we were on the air. I did go after ADL and, fortunately, did not encounter any time in which I would have been morally bound to become more specific.

Yet I felt violated. I had experienced raw censorship in action, by a national talk show host who touts himself (and is believed by millions) as delivering only the truth -- whatever the cost or controversy.

Jones put me on again Oct 14th for fifteen minuntes. Yet, he was not true to his promise of future interviews, even as I repeatedly left him messages warning of more ADL legislation, such as ENDA and the cyber-bullying bill. Evidently, Jones was as uneasy about having me on as I was about operating under his gag order.

Now, with ENDA and the cyber-bullying bills most likely defeated, I am relieved I did not compromise myself in order to access Jones' vast audience. It is now so critically important that the populist right know which leaders can and cannot be trusted. The fate of our republic hangs in the balance.

What I learned, beyond any doubt, was that Alex Jones cannot be depended upon to provide the populist right with all the facts necessary to understand geopolitical reality. If he will censor the truth concerning a threat as dominant and well-documented as Jewish supremacism, what else will he manipulate?

Jones is widely regarded as the most effective spokesman for the far right, the "king of alternative talk radio."

It is time that lovers of freedom look for another.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rev. Ted Pike is director of the National Prayer Network, a Christian/conservative watchdog organization.
SOURCE

Why such a difference in the letters? Did Hartwell change hers or did Pike change his? Odd. Hartwell's version is more revealing, I think.

Update2: Here's a Stromfront thread on Pike's letter to Jones (what is it doing at Stormfront if the issues, Pike and Jones are irrelevant to them?)

Vindication - from the other side

Interesting to find a good example illustrating some of my perspective on Alex Jones written by someone from 'the other side': it's from Subverted Nation, an apparently neo-nazi but unquestionably visciously anti-semitic blog. (IIRC Rivero linked to to it during his dust-up with Alex Jones when he was fired etc. I had posted there at the time in response to an article they'd posted on Jones' being a supposed jew, zionist, whatever)

Anyway, the article shows a consciousness of "the movement" from its own particular, anti-semitic/nazi stance. It references something I have suggested - Jones' use of euphemism rather than blatant anti-semitism eg "the globalists, bankers, socialists and one-worlders" as perennial and historic euphemism for "the Jew". Subverted Nation recognises that some "make excuses for Jones" because of this use of euphemism rather than the explicit use of "Jew" preferred by those openly embracing nazism and anti-semitism. I'm reminded of Poplawski the cop-killer nazi who was linked to Prisonplanet so uncomfortably for Jones. Poplawski was saying exactly this point about Jones at Stromfront - that he "wasn't 100%" sure of Jones' -- meaning he wasn't 100% that Jones was properly anti-semitic/nazi - not 100% that Jones' euphemisms meant what Poplawski (and Stormfront) understand them to mean. (Jones and Prisonplanet spun that "not 100%" line to suggest Poplawski's views were 180 opposed to those of Prisonplanet! ha!!)

Anyway, here's the article:

Alex Jones – I support Israel

Here is all one needs to know about Alex Jones. If this fat retard were a real patriot, he would be telling you the truth about things like 911, the wars, the economic collapse, Obama, the police state, and all the other things he rants about. The truth about these topics are that every last one of them was engineered by, what he calls, the “global elite”. However, there is nothing “elite” about the monsters behind all of our ills, because they are nothing more than a bunch of blood sucking leeches known as JEWS

How many dopes out there still believe that Alex Jones is really on our side? How many people think he ignores the truth about jews, just because he’s playing it safe and politically correct? How many excuses have you heard people make for this overweight windbag? I know I’ve heard dozens myself, but once people start to read sites like SN, it doesn’t take them long to figure out exactly where this chump falls short.

In reality, all Alex Jones is out to do is keep you in fear, because fear paralyzes. At the same time, he’s also out to make sure that anyone who really knows the truth, makes a fool out of themselves trying to share it with others. This is why he brought other psy-op groups like We Are Change, the makers of Loose Change, etc. to the forefront. Simply because their methods sell real good to truthers, but at the same time, make you everyone involved look like idiots. At least, their line of crap sells good to those who haven’t reached an understanding about jews, but to those who have, these people are nothing but criminal conspirators and traitors.
SOURCE

So, more evidence from the far-right that it's aware of Jones and that one of the issues is his use of placeholder euphemism rather than overt anti-semitism.

It doesn't occur to SubvertedNation that maybe Jones deploys euphemism quite consciously so as to avoid mainstream criticism and thereby enable his outreach efforts? It's called propaganda......and hardly works when one is covered in Swaztikas and Heil Hitlering everywhere. Stormfront already does that anyway and how close are they to getting on major TV Networks? Jones can happily take flack from the far-right, it provides him ammunition to defend attacks from elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that Jones certainly is employing classic anti-semitic tropes as euphemisms. The far-right understand it - well, they would. The only question for them is if he really means Jews when he deploys euphemism, or whether the euphemism is to protect Jews.

Poplawski was "not 100%" on Jones.....SubvertedNation is definitely 0%, apparently. Regardless, they both confirm the issue is real and live - does Alex Jones mean Jews or not? For the prosecution I submit the evidence that Jones eulogised Eustace Mullins and heavily promoted him as central plank of his conspiratorial world view - and Eustace Mullins has 50 years of mixing with Nazism and anti-semites eg Willis Carto (whom Jones also heavily promotes). Did Jones not know Mullins' anti-semitism when he called him "a modern-day founding father" and promoted him and his work over and over? Does Jones not know Willis Carto's views even as he promotes his prolific output? Can we believe that Alex Jones does not know his mainstay of guests and opinion come from the anti-semitic far-right?