Nixon, Billy Graham on tape expressing anti-semitism

EXCELLENT!!!

Nice way to put it in proper perspective.

The Greatest Taboo: Speaking out about Jewish media dominance

Jews “control” the media.

We are told it is an age-old anti-Semitic canard. But when is a canard just what it is, the truth.

Jewish media hegemony doesn’t have to be conspiratorial and nefarious. It could just allow Jews to effectively combat anti-Semitism. What a powerful weapon! Considering the history European Jews and Gentiles have shared- The Holocaust, Eastern European pogroms, the Spanish Inquisition, ancient Rome…thousands of years of anti-Semitism, can you blame Jews for using the media to promote their interests?

Why wouldn’t such an abused group try to keep themselves safe here in the U.S. and throughout the world? It’s apparent that groups like the ADL don’t think the U.S. is safe. So, why shouldn’t one expect there to be an active campaign to mitigate anti-Semitism?

What’s the most effective way to shape public opinion? Control what people read, watch, and listen to. Also, tell them what they can and cannot say in polite society. Tell them what is good and what is evil…over and over and over. (Why, you could also mandate Holocaust education in schools)

Norman Finkelstein, the author of “The Holocaust Industry,” identifies two dividends Jewish American’s enjoy courtesy of the promotion of Holocaust awareness- “victim status and immunity to criticism.” Many American gentiles are afraid to engage in a dialogue, let alone a debate with Jews about Jewish media dominance for fear of being branded an anti-Semite.

Again, we’re told that the ethnicity of the Jewish media moguls doesn’t matter. But imagine if all of the Jewish moguls, agents, producers, editors, writers, publishers, journalists, directors, various impresarios, etc. were Italian, WASPs, or African Americans. Do you think that their ethnicity would go unquestioned? But when you’re “immune to criticism,” and any dissent is met with the accusations of “hate,” “anti-Semitism,” and fanning the flames of the Holocaust…not much changes.

So, is it possible that the Jewish media elite may be individuals acting alone with the same “noble” purpose, “Is it good for the Jews?” No conspiracies, no Protocols of Zion rubbish, just individuals working to keep Jews safe, however, often to the detriment of gentiles…

“Nixon then broaches a subject about which "we can't talk about it publicly," namely Jewish influence in Hollywood and the media…"That right?" says Graham, prompting Nixon to claim that Life magazine, Newsweek, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and others, are "totally dominated by the Jews." He calls network TV anchors Howard K. Smith, David Brinkley and Walter Cronkite "front men who may not be of that persuasion," but that their writers are "95 percent Jewish."

From “The Rest Of Us: The Rise of America’s Eastern European Jews” by Stephen Birmingham

“Though the boardrooms of the three major networks had become largely populated by descendants of Russian Jews, the out-front faces that the public saw would be the Christian one of Walter Cronkite, John Chancellor, David Brinkley, Chet Huntley, Dan Rather, Roger Mudd, Harry Reasoner, and Howard K. Smith. As a result, the general public would not think of television as a Jewish enterprise-simply as a rich one.”

What about gentile media barons?

From Thomas Kiernan’s Citizen Murdoch:

Goldenson’s Jewishness also had a significant impact on Murdoch. Until then, Murdoch had known few Jews well… Leonard Goldenson finally helped Murdoch sort out his mixed feelings about Jews, though. As head of ABC, Goldenson was a major figure in New York’s Jewish establishment. As well, he was an outspoken supporter of Israel, appearing frequently at fund-raising dinners and bond rallies and heading up various committees devoted to advancing the cause of Israel in the United States. He was, to put it in a phrase, a charter member of the so-called “Jewish Lobby” in America.

Murdoch, on the other hand, as publisher and editor-in-chief of the New York Post, had a large Jewish constituency, as he did to a lesser degree with New York magazine and The Village Voice. Not only had the pre-Murdoch Post readership been heavily Jewish, so, too, were the present Post advertisers. Moreover, most of Murdoch’s closest friends and business advisers were wealthy, influential New York Jews intensely active in pro-Israel causes. And he himself still retained a strong independent sympathy for Israel, a personal identification with the Jewish state that went back to his Oxford days.

No one in America should be beyond criticism, and no one in America should be afraid to express his or her opinion about sensitive issues.

You have responded with obfuscation, presumably because you had no adequate, rational response to my post. Cheers.

I think that it is a stretch to suggest that nigger, etc. where common epithets coming out of public figures in those times.

Maybe not in public, but those words were very commonly used by many in everyday life. Not out of a racist hatred, but out of habit. Richard Nixons's language in private is no surprise to me....that has been public knowledge for years.

I've been around long enough to know today's values cannot be applied to yesterday's events. My 89 year old Southern, farm raised grandfather is a good example. I have never heard him say anything that would lead me to believe he hated blacks. He grew up in the age of "separate, but equal." The words "nigger" or "colored boy" were used often, but not out of anything except that's the word they used. In fact, one word was a term of affection among blacks & whites. It may be hard to understand, but you have to judge in context. Today, he would not use it. If you heard a tape with him calling me saying, "Come here, little nigger," unless you knew the customs & values of the times, you would swear the man was as bigoted as Archie Bunker.

Anti-semitism usually has something to do with the stereotyping of Jews and money. This may have been a poor choice of words, but not anti-semitism.

You should hear what they said about Russia, if you want to hear some 'funny stuff', comrade. (-:

I've been Jewish all my life and I have never experienced any animosity toward Christians among my peers.

Nixon was pretty good on Israel and Christian Evanegicals are very good on Israel now. It's what people do....not say, that matters. Clinton kissed Jewish rear 24-7, and he was terrible for Israel.

I wonder what people will whine and generalize about, when Jews vote for Bush, as I think they will in surprising numbers, in 2004.

My father thought "All In The Family" was a documentary

Are you telling us that it wasn't?

not proof of a Jews controlling anything

do Jews run Hollywood?

You bet they do--and what of it?

by Ben Stein

"Hollywood is run by Jews; it is owned by Jews--and they should have a greater sensitivity about the issue of people who are suffering. Because...we have seen...the greaseball, we've seen the Chink, we've seen the slit-eyed dangerous Jap, we have seen the wily Filipino, we've seen everything but we never saw the kike. Because they knew perfectly well, that that is where you draw the [line]." --Brando on Larry King Live

A few days after Marlon Brando scandalized the airwaves by referring to the Jews who worked in Hollywood as "kikes," I got a call from an editor at 60 Minutes. The woman wanted to know how I felt about Brando's use of words and his allegation that Hollywood is "run by Jews."

She suggested the desired answer by noting that her researchers had conclusively proven that Jews do not run Hollywood.

Crafty 60 Minutes had studied the top slots in town. Their research showed that "only" about 60 percent of the most important positions in Hollywood were run by Jews. What did I think?

I managed to disqualify myself by saying that while Hollywood was not really "run" by anyone (it's far too chaotic for that), if Jews were about 2.5 percent of the population and were about 60 percent of Hollywood, they might well be said to be extremely predominant in that sector.

That was far too logical and un-PC an answer, and I never heard from her again.

But Jews are a big part of my thoughts (as they are of every Jew's thoughts). Plus, I live and struggle in Hollywood, so the combination intrigues me. What exactly is the role of the Jew in Hollywood? More to the point, what does it signify, if anything, if Jews have a big role? And, most interesting of all, why do we care?

First, it is extremely clear to anyone in Hollywood that Jews are, so to speak, "in charge" in Hollywood in a way that is not duplicated in any other large business, except maybe garments or scrap metal or folding boxes.

keep reading

Perhaps you'd like to point out one movie in the past 20yrs that has put a favorable spin on Christianity.

The idiocy you people manifest.

I'm going to respond to you in a way you never imagined.

Christianity is portrait as everything good. It is the light of the World. It protects the World for all sort of evil? In hundreds, maybe thousands of movies

If it's symbolism that counts, look at horror movies. They are fights between good and evil. And what is the good? What does evil fear? Who are the sentinels protecting humanity from the demons of Hell?

Christianity and the Cross.

What is a more powerful symbolisms?

Strange that you miss that very powerful "favorable spin" on Christianity. Maybe not so strange from a nightcrawler.

"You should hear what they said about Russia, if you want to hear some 'funny stuff', comrade. (-:"

It's still classified but I have a secret copy.
Nixon: "We are going to H-bomb these ungodly bolsheviks and their [unintelligible] to hell, reverend."
Rev. Graham: "Where they belong, Mr. President, uhuh, uhuh!"

So now you are admitting to some bigotry against Christians?

You have responded with obfuscation, presumably because you had no adequate, rational response to my post. Cheers.

Rather because I still bear a grudge against those Europeans who supported the evil ones of Germany. I can't abide their Jew hatred.

Polarization. Balkanization. Match struck. And then "oops!"....No thanks....First_Salute

I couldn't have said it better, Mike.

"This stranglehold has got to be broken or the country's going down the drain," the nation's best-known preacher declared as he agreed with a stream of....Nixon comments about Jews and their perceived influence in American life...."They don't know how I really feel about what they're doing to this country."

There's not even a trace of anti-Semitism in these statements.

The powerful influence of American Jews on American life is not a perception. It is a black-and-white, check-the-numbers fact. All one needs do is calculate the percentage of Jews in decision-making positions in the entertainment/news/publishing industries, and it is apparent to anyone with the ability to use a simple calculator that they have a decided corner on all three markets. And those three markets comprise three of the most powerful cultural influences in modern American history.

American Jews of the liberal bent have been in control of the American (so-called) entertainment industry, the news media, and the publishing world for decades. And many of these powerful liberal American Jews are not only playing a major role in the destruction of the moral/historic fabric of this country; but they are also working every bit as hard as Arafat and his minions to achieve the destruction of the Jewish State. They put their political liberalism before their Judaism, and seek peace in the Middle East, even if it means the fall of Israel. They are betrayers not only of their adopted country, but of their heritage and their homeland.

As a Christian, I know that the Jewish people are God's chosen people. And the state of Israel must be defended to the last. But I am not (nor is Billy Graham) obligated to speak nicely of those powerful American Jews who, for the sake of a perverse political ideology or the almighty dollar, have betrayed their own people.

In its purest form, the state of Israel represents a large branch of the Semitic people, and it is the liberal American Jews (in name only), not Billy Graham, who are the true anti-Semites.

Actually I think it is the biggest blot. He has said some stupid things in his life. Haven't we all.

That is true!

Rather because I still bear a grudge against those Europeans who supported the evil ones of Germany. I can't abide their Jew hatred.

Thanks for the clarification. Such a grudge is easy to understand, and is no doubt justified by any standard. It is my view, however, that Nixon did not hate Jews, but viewed most liberal Jews in the media as his implacable adversaries, which was no doubt true. This does not make him antisemitic. Interestingly, Nixon's most strenuous defenders against charges of antisemitisim are Jews who knew him well and worked with him, all of whom are fully cognizant of his comments on the White House tapes. In his autobiography, Leonard Garment, a Jew who knew and worked closely with Nixon over many years, and who succeeded John Dean as Nixon's counsel, wrote in his 1997 autobiography, Crazy Rhythm, that, among the people he had met in his own public life, Nixon rated better than most in this respect. Indeed, after the release of the Graham-Nixon conversation this past week, Garment was one of the first to leap to Nixon's defense.

A bump for bravery.

Check your Email.

Every word of your #98 is the truth. Thank you for speaking it.

This does not make him antisemitic.

Neither were slaveholders anti-Black ?

I could hear the bigotry on that tape
from both Nixon
and Graham.

You must be of a different race
or have your spiritual ear plugs on.

veronica,

In your view, is there a strong majority of Israelis who will support complete incorporation of the West Bank into Israel?

If there is, then in my view, Israel must act now and not look back.

If there is not, then in my view, Israel must bargain as best it can, to secure the remains of the state; and, do it now.

While it would be nice to see the apparently, predominant leftist Jews in the U.S.A. "suddenly get religion" and vote for George Bush's second term in office, I would bet that the "liberal media" controlled by leftist Jews ("J.I.N.O."), will try hard to make President Bush to be the cause of Mid-East unrest as well as a failure in "the peace process."

I am betting that at some point, taking advantage of peoples' "short memories," the Palestinians will be made to appear as "earnestly" interested in peace (in contrast to the obvious for anybody who cares to notice). A lot of that re-engineering of the appearances of things, will be affected by socialists working the scenes at the P.A., in Israel, and in the leftist-control booths of the "liberal media."

President Bush will be portrayed as, or positioned to be, or defined as, the "obstacle to world peace."

The West Bank will be made to appear as something taken away from the P.A. and "thus Israel's peace is threatened" in parallel with how "the year 2000 Presidential Election was taken away from Jews who had 'obviously' voted for the Democrat Party" and "thus Israel's peace has been threatened."

The "liberal media" production may even include that "Sept. 11th and all the hell that has broken loose," "would not have happened if that election had not been stolen, and stolen by arch-right-wing conservative judges" (much inferrence on the nightly news of "anti-Semitism" here by the "liberal media").

As much as the Arabs who do not like Jews, may be plotting against Israel, now, militarily, to hurt Israelis, I believe such Arabs are fully aware of who they would like to see in the White House. I am betting that they too will be aware enough of the campaign time frame and thence act accordingly.

Though I would temper this theory with the probability of how committed are such Arabs to the war they have so far prosecuted against the U.S.A. directly; that is to say, if so committed to war, then that committment puts limits upon how far they can suddenly position themselves to be the "peace makers" early enough in order that such marketing has some affect on the elections here.

It's just a hunch; but I suspect that a more secure path to peace AND Israel's liberty, is for Israel to not waste time, with regard to my original question to you.