Tuesday, 22 November 2011
Monday, 21 November 2011 Well worth reading. Atzmon on Lowles. This weekend, Bradford TUC (Trade Union Council) joined the Israeli lobby’s attempt to silence me. This sort of thing is no surprise since my book ‘The Wandering Who’ exposes the devastating continuum between Israel, Diaspora Sayanim, Anti-Zionist Zionists (AZZ) and the influential and varied communities of Shabbos Goyim(1). So, is it a coincidence that last Shabbos (Sabbath) eve Paul Meszaros Bradford TUC’s secretary and some of his fellow unionists got very busy indeed doing the Zionists’ bidding? These Bradford Trade Unionists clearly had a case against me which was that, as Meszaros said in his letter to his comrades, “in our opinion, one that is shared by many commentators Atzmon is a Holocaust denier and anti-Semite.” Strong words indeed, and words that one would expect to be accompanied by some concrete and conclusive evidence. Unfortunately this was not the case because, although Meszaros provided his comrades with some quoted ‘evidence’, he forgot to also supply them with any direct link to my original writing. And he had good reason for this omission. The document Meszaros provided for his comrades was a ‘fugazi’ – a fake. Yes, as outrageous as it may sound, Meszaros asked his fellow unionists to judge my words on the basis of a compilation of carefully selected sentences from five different paragraphs carefully stitched together to look as if it was a single statement made by myself. Here is the statement Meszaros attributes to me. “When I was young and naïve I was also convinced that what they told us about our ‘collective’ Jewish past really happened. I believed it all, the Kingdom of David, Massada, and then the Holocaust: the soap, the lampshade, the death march, the six million. As it happened, it took me many years to understand that the Holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative for historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and politicians” “It took me many years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. Here is just one little anecdote to elaborate on: If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein – free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war?” “I am left puzzled here; if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war? Why didn’t the Jews wait for their Red liberators?” To read the entire Bradford TUC letter click here: What Meszaros apparently did not share with his comrades, was the embarrassing fact that the above paragraph was crudely, yet deliberately put together to give the impression that I am indeed a Holocaust denier or an anti-Semite or both. My original words give a somewhat different impression. (The sentences that were cherry-picked by Meszaros are in red, those he left out are in bold) http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/truth-history-and-integrity-by-gilad-atzmon.html "When I was young and naive I was also somehow convinced that what they told us about our ‘collective’ Jewish past really happened. I believed it all, the Kingdom of David, Massada, and then the Holocaust: the soap, the lampshade, the death march, the six million. As it happened, it took me many years to understand that the Holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative for historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and politicians. It took me years to grasp that my great-grandmother wasn’t made into a ‘soap’ or a ‘lampshade’(2). She probably perished out of exhaustion, typhus or maybe even by mass shooting. This was indeed bad and tragic enough, however not that different from the fate of many millions of Ukrainians who learned what communism meant for real. “Some of the worst mass murderers in history were Jews” writes Zionist Sever Plocker on the Israeli Ynet disclosing the Holodomor and Jewish involvement in this colossal crime, probably the greatest crime of the 20th century. The fate of my great-grandmother was not any different from hundreds of thousands of German civilians who died in an orchestrated indiscriminate bombing, because they were Germans. Similarly, people in Hiroshima died just because they were Japanese. 1 million Vietnamese died just because they were Vietnamese and 1.3 million Iraqis died because they were Iraqis. In short the tragic circumstances of my great grandmother wasn’t that special after all. It doesn’t make sense It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. Here is just one little anecdote to elaborate on: If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein - free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war? I have been concerned with this simple question for more than a while. I eventually launched into an historical research of the topic and happened to learn from Israeli holocaust historian professor Israel Gutman that Jewish prisoners actually joined the march voluntarily. Here is a testimony taken from Gutman’s book "One of my friends and relatives in the camp came to me on the night of the evacuation and offered a common hiding place somewhere on the way from the camp to the factory. …The intention was to leave the camp with one of the convoys and to escape near the gate, using the darkness we thought to go a little far from the camp. The temptation was very strong. And yet, after I considered it all I then decided to join (the march) with all the other inmates and to share their fate " (Israel Gutman [editor], People and Ashes: Book Auschwitz - Birkenau, Merhavia 1957). I am left puzzled here, if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war? Why didn’t the Jews wait for their Red liberators?” As you probably gather, my original words actually give a completely different impression. Rather than deny the Holocaust, I actually want to strip from it, its primacy and to turn it into a universal and ethical message. I actually talk about my great grandmother who died in the Holocaust - but I argue that she wasn’t special at all (though she may be special to me). She had a fate similar to millions of Vietnamese, Iraqis, Germans, Russians and so on. I wonder, why would a socialist such as Meszaros or anyone else for that matter, object to such a universal and humanist approach? Taking quotes out of context is a common enough Zionist trick, but what we see here is a deliberate attempt to pervert the truth. In Meszaros’ text my words are actually re-assembled in order to give them a new, sinister meaning. You have to ask yourself: What might lead a perfectly decent trade unionist to operate in such a dishonest manner? So here are some questions to Meszaros and to anyone else tempted to engage in this kind of falsification and deception: If I am indeed as bad as you think, why the need to fake what I say? Why don’t you just present my own original words with their true and original meaning? I would also like to learn from Mr. Meszaros whether he considers falsifying quotes to be a legitimate, ‘progressive’ procedure? But I think we know the answers to these questions. So, I suppose in the end there’s only one question left to answer. Why did Paul Meszaros choose to deceive his comrades? Well, the answer is that I don’t think that he did. I don’t think that Meszaros did actually falsify the above text. I believe that he was himself fooled by our own and much-loved Jewish ‘anti’-Zionists and certainly by one particular gentleman named Nick Lowles who operates within an ‘anti-Racist’ organization named “Hope not Hate”. By the time I woke up this morning, London activists had provided me with all the information I needed concerning Mr. Lowles’ ‘Hope not Hate’ and Searchlight, the magazine Lowles until recently, edited. Clearly, we are dealing here with some obvious links with Zionist organizations. A quick search revealed that Searchlight is certainly committed to ‘fight fascism’ but it is equally committed to the battle against anti-Zionism in the left. “Much more commonplace on the left than Holocaust denial is the comparison of Israel with Nazi German”, complains the ‘far left’ ‘anti’ racist magazine in a clear and open attempt to gate-keep the Palestinian solidarity discourse. And would you believe it? Lowels is also active on the highly suspicious Socialist Unity – just one more pseudo-socialist cell devoted mainly to Zio-centric gate-keeping. To the Ultra Zionist Jewish Chronicle (JC) Lowles told that the "worry about antisemitism stemming from the far left's obsession with Israel was a concern". But Lowles doesn't just talk to the JC, he also writes for the rabid Zionist mouthpiece. I guess that as much as Lowles opposes racism , he must feel at home with Zionist racism. Apparently, Meszaros and his union branch, like so many before them, were simply taken for a Zionist ride. Rather than being asked to respond to my words, they were instead responding to a document that was deliberately and consciously falsified by an infiltrator. The good people in the Bradford union movement have been deliberately deceived by a bunch of Sayanim, embedded deep within the British left. In case anyone has failed to grasp it, Nick Lowles has every reason to oppose me. My latest book, ‘The Wandering Who’ is there to expose the high and sophisticated level of duplicity of Sayanim, AZZ, Shabbos Goyim and other forms of infiltrators in our midst. I don’t know how to save the British Trades Union movement and anyway, that’s not my job. But as things stand, Mr. Paul Meszaros and the Bradford TUC owe me one big apology. I hope Meszaros for once, will be brave enough to admit his mistake.
Saturday, 19 November 2011
By Gilad Atzmon 19 November 2011 Gilad Atzmon explains the latest – failed – attempt by Britain’s Zio-fascists to kill the UK's most precious cultural values: openness, pluralism, freedom of expression and artistic freedom. ”By bullying British cultural institutions and harassing artists in the name of the Jewish community, Jewish organizations are achieving nothing but the defamation of the whole of British Jewry.” (Gilad Atzmon) There was a time when Jewish politics and culture were associated with liberalism, human rights, pluralism and freedom of expression. Those days are clearly over. Nowadays, it is pretty much the opposite. Clear outburst of Zionist hysteria “What we see here is scarily similar to the experience of Jazz musicians in Nazi Germany. Astonishingly enough, it is Jewish representative bodies such as the Board of Deputies of British Jews that are actively engaging in trying to restrict artistic expression.” Here in Britain, Jewish nationalist lobbies are engaged in several kinds of repressive behaviour. Their practices include bullying, harassment, disinformation and smear campaigns. This kind of activity does not serve the Jewish community or its interests. In fact, it gives the Jewish community as a whole a thoroughly bad name. Last week, the American academic Norman Finkelstein and I were on the front of the Jewish Chronicle (JC). We were presented as “Public Jewish Enemies Number One”. We were branded together with British National Party leader and a racist Nick Griffin. This was obviously a clear outburst of Zionist hysteria. This week, in an embarrassingly crude attempt to stop my new book The Wandering Who, the JC now appear to be launching an attack on music. Together with the Board of Deputies of British Jews and other Jewish groups ,they attempted to put pressure on the British Arts Council to withdraw its funding from a music festival at which I am playing. Echoes of Nazi Germany What we see here is scarily similar to the experience of Jazz musicians in Nazi Germany. Astonishingly enough, it is Jewish representative bodies such as the Board of Deputies of British Jews that are actively engaging in trying to restrict artistic expression. Apparently, some people out there, really drew the wrong lesson from that disturbing era. Needless to say, they didn’t get far. The Arts Council, stood by its principles of freedom of expression and, in a statement responding to the JC's demands, it suggested that the Arts Council shouldn’t "restrict an artist from expressing their views". It stated that the council believes in funding events and artists that show "a diverse view of world society”. Once again, their campaign had backfired. The Jewish Chronicle “appears to want to transform the British music scene, cultural gatherings and festivals into Stalinist enterprises and demands the right to dictate its own political agenda to the British public”. Of course, the JC wasn’t at all happy. It appears to want to transform the British music scene, cultural gatherings and festivals into Stalinist enterprises and demands the right to dictate its own political agenda to the British public. The JC even went as far as to openly call for its subservient lobby-funded politicians to impose an “immediate sanction”. Reading the JC today, I wonder how long it will take before Ava Nagila becomes a compulsory part of our national musical curriculum. This is the reality: The most radical exponents of the most vile form of Jewish racist and supremacist ideology are accusing me, an anti-racist campaigner, of being an anti-Semite. Considering that I lead one of the most ethnically varied musical ensembles on this planet, this accusation is absurd, amusing or sad – and probably all three. But here’s the good news. On every possible front they are failing. No matter how much these Zionist supremacists convince themselves that I am the ultimate Jew hater, they have failed to convince anyone else. By bullying British cultural institutions and harassing artists in the name of the Jewish community, Jewish organizations are achieving nothing but the defamation of the whole of British Jewry. So, to the Jewish Chronicle and the Board of Deputies of British Jews: you are acting against openness, pluralism, freedom of expression and artistic freedom – probably the most precious values this country has. Perhaps it is worth bearing this in mind.
Monday, 14 November 2011
The Bund - A Disturbing Jewish Political Exercise http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/gilad-atzmon-the-bund-a-disturbing-jewish-political-exercise.html Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: A few years ago I saw a small extract of this film (The story of the Bund in Israel- film by Eran Torbiner). This week a bigger chunk of the documentary was left on YouTube. Bundaím, Socialists in Yiddish and Hebrew http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvmcRKvyrWk&feature=player_embedded or: http://youtu.be/SvmcRKvyrWk By the way, we do not have an access to the entire film, but so far, I didn’t notice a single reference to Palestine, Palestinians their cause or plight. This is a film about the ‘Jews only’ socialist party - The Bund. In the documentary you can watch for yourself ‘young’ revolutionary Bundists in action. In spite of being ‘Socialists’ and ‘Internationalists’, they, for some reason, ended up living in a ‘Jews only’ State in occupied Palestine at the expense of the Palestinians. I guess that this may as well be, the real meaning of ‘Jewish socialism’ - You sing the International in Yiddish on someone else’s land. By the way, we do not have an access to the entire film, but so far, I didn’t notice a single reference to Palestine, Palestinians their cause or plight. Towards the end, Bundist Yaakov Belek speaks nostalgically about the pre war Bund in Poland (7:41). His words are an insight into Jewish progressive supremacy and exceptionalism. It is almost disturbing to watch and listen. “The Bund was a unique Party” he says. “It wasn’t like any other party… it was an empire. A bund member was a different kind of person. Maybe I am a patriot but this is how it was. For years we grew bigger and bigger. Before the beginning of WWII it was the largest party in Poland. We possessed* everything. We had the youth, future, SKIP **, sport, so many schools, we were the new type, we were the new man.” It seems to me, as if Belek himself fails to grasp that he is outlining the true meaning of Jewish Power, we are special, we are unique, we are an empire, the future and we posses everything. I guess that AIPAC and CFI members are also blind to the potential danger entangled with their so-called ‘success’. --------- *GA: my translation from Hebrew **GA: SKIP is a sociality youth movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sotsyalistishe_Kinder_Farband --------- To read more about Tribal 'Marxism' and progressive thought: 1. http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/gilad-atzmon-tribal-marxism-for-dummies.html 2. http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/think-tribal-speak-universal-by-gilad-atzmon.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, 6 November 2011
Fraud in Psychological Research Posted: 05 Nov 2011 08:54 AM PDT A NYTimes article (“Fraud seen as a red flag for psychology research“) discusses the case of scientific fraud involving a Dutch social psychologist, Diederik Stapel. This is an amazingly egregious example of fraud by a psychologist well-known for his leftist views. Stapel got his Ph.D. in 1997 but managed to crank out 150 research papers and 24 book chapters in that short period. A recent paper of his, published in the very prestigious Science, “Coping with Chaos: How Disordered Contexts Promote Stereotyping and Discrimination” included two lab studies and three field studies. This study had a wonderfully liberal conclusion—that racial discrimination would be increased in chaotic environments because people have a tendency to simply their cognitive processing in such environments. The NYTimes article notes, In recent years, psychologists have reported a raft of findings on race biases, brain imaging and even extrasensory perception that have not stood up to scrutiny. Outright fraud may be rare, these experts say, but they contend that Dr. Stapel took advantage of a system that allows researchers to operate in near secrecy and massage data to find what they want to find, without much fear of being challenged. “The big problem is that the culture is such that researchers spin their work in a way that tells a prettier story than what they really found,” said Jonathan Schooler, a psychologist at the University of California, Santa Barbara. “It’s almost like everyone is on steroids, and to compete you have to take steroids as well.” The program, then, is to spin a pretty yarn that will fit into the liberal zeitgeist of social psychology. Apart from Stapel’s work, I am unaware of a “raft of findings on race biases … that have not stood up to scrutiny,” but it’s certainly not surprising that that would be the case. Recently a psychologist pointed out to me that the research on stereotype threat purporting to explain the poor performance of African Americans by the effects of negative stereotypes routinely partialled out the contribution of IQ before presenting the results, thus exaggerating the importance of stereotype threat. This is more a sin of omission than outright fraud, but a sin of omission that is then used to advance the liberal worldview that poor Black achievement is due to White attitudes rather than Black realities. As discussed here previously (“Social Psychologists: Becoming Self-Conscious of Their Liberalism“; “More on Jonathan Haidt’s Tribal Moral Communities“) Jonathan Haidt (a social psychologist himself) has made a major contribution calling attention to social psychology as a ”tribal moral community” united in its liberal political commitments. He notes that articles that contravene the tribal liberalism are subjected to much higher standards in order to get published. Even when it’s not a matter of outright fraud, there are sins of omission where certain types of racial research are just not conducted. Recall that Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam did not publish his findings on the costs of multiculturalism for years because he thought it might sour people on our glorious multicultural future. Here the NYTimes article adds that a recent study found that in an anonymous survey around 70% of psychologists admitted ”cutting corners” in reporting their data and 1% acknowledged falsification; statistical errors favoring the hypothesis occurred in around 15% of a random sample of papers in high-end psychology journals. I suppose that the long term effects of outright fraud in social psychology are less important than the lowered standards that apply when articles reaffirm liberal ideas in the social sciences. (This was famously true of the Boasians in anthropology [a Jewish intellectual movement reviewed in The Culture of Critique) and doubtless continues today since Boas’s intellectual descendants are still in control. Boas was the quintessential skeptic and an ardent defender of methodologi-cal rigor when it came to theories of cultural evolution and genetic influences on behavior, yet, as Sheldon White noted, “the burden of proof rested lightly upon Boas’s own shoulders”; see here, p. 27.) Reviewers are far less likely to catch corner cutting and statistical errors when they favor the leftist world view, while race realist papers are worked over with a fine tooth comb. In my own case as a consumer of social psychology research rather than a producer, I look for findings that make sense in the broad scheme of things, including the general framework of evolutionary psychology. For example, social identity theory is central to the theory of anti-Semitism (and Jewish ingroup psychology) developed in Separation and Its Discontents. These results have been replicated in dozens of social psychology laboratories over more than 40 years and fit well with an evolutionary perspective on the psychology of groups—that natural selection has resulted in mechanisms that would prepare people for between-group competition. (For example, even very young children show ingroup biases, such biases are universal among humans, and they are reflex-like and unconscious rather than the result of deliberation—good evidence for an evolutionary basis.) A science of social psychology is possible, even in a leftist environment, but one needs to be a cautious consumer. Nevertheless, there are some cases where outright fraud has had a long and influential life in the social sciences. Exhibit A is The Authoritarian Personality which was clearly the product of Jewish ethnic activism by the Frankfurt School and the American Jewish Committee in the service of Jewish ethnic interests. Here the “findings” were so clearly counter-intuitive, so strained, and so clearly manufactured to produce an outcome that was clearly set out long before they gathered the data, that fraud is the only reasonable explanation (my review is here, p. 168ff; the current TOO video is an extended commentary on The Authoritarian Personality put together by Byron Jost before his premature death; although unfinished, I think it’s his best work). Psychoanalysis was not so much fraud as simply the rejection of science completely. The fact that psychoanalysis was prominently used in The Authoritarian Personality is part of the indictment of this work and the entire politically and ethnically charged agenda of the Frankfurt School. The fact that The Authoritarian Personality has never really lost its respectability within social psychology is itself yet another serious charge against the entire field.