Our Corrupt American Media: Two Examples of Chutzpagh

By Michael Hoffman

1. Media Blackout of Ron Paul  in South Carolina

Paul Craig Roberts, the former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, in his jeremiads focuses on the America media as a leading culprit in our national demise.

By way of proving Dr. Roberts’ point, let’s examine  two examples of media bias so flagrant we have to resort to the word chutzpagh to lend it the notoriety it so richly deserves.

Observing the run-up to the South Carolina Republican primary, one has to wonder whether the controversies over Romney’s tax returns and Gingrich’s sex life, with Santorum portrayed as the alternative to these two agents of the Establishment, is not really a contrivance for detracting from the only authentic anti-Establishment, peace candidate in the Republican race, Rep. Ron Paul, who since the New Hampshire primary, has been all but banished to the lower reaches of the System’s darkest memory hole.

The media do not even offer a pretext of objectivity in hammering home their Romney-Gingrich-Santorum triumvirate, wherein Paul doesn’t even exist and isn’t even a factor, despite the fact that Rep. Paul had a better showing in Iowa (where we now find that the caucus voting was subject to fraud) and New Hampshire -- than Gingrich -- who is being touted as the most popular anybody-but-Romney option.

The media are terrified by the prospect of a Paul nomination at the Republican national convention this summer and are pulling out all the stops to deny it to him. The major television networks and the three major national newspapers (USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Times) are all owned by corporations who, by boycotting Paul, are influencing and swaying the election just as surely as any of the super-pacs they have so haughtily denounced. 

If Paul does poorly in South Carolina it will be largely due to the blackout aimed at him by the media. The media are tampering with the will of the American people while posing as journalists who love America. Is this not treason?

2. New York Times resolves a Talmudic embarrassment with lies 

Our next case involves a Talmudic embarrassment which the New York Times has ignored for years: the gender segregation of Israeli “Mehadrin” buses, which require Judaic women to move to the back of the bus. Miriam Shear was one of the first activists to protest this outrage and she was ignored by the Times for years. Lately, however, the Hasidic Orthodox Judaics leading the segregated bus campaign clashed with the Modern Orthodox who have close ties to corporate honchos at the New York Times. The Hasidic Orthodox have been spitting on Christians, including priests in Jerusalem for years and the Times has barely reported it.  But when the Hasidim spat at Naama Margolese, a Modern Orthodox Judaic girl, claiming the modest dress she was wearing wasn’t modest enough to suit their particular level of Talmudic fanaticism, the Times sprang into action and publicized the Israeli bus system’s gender segregation policies which degrade women.

There is an inescapable dilemma in such reporting, however: the Hasidim act according to rabbinic halacha as enshrined in the Mishnah and Gemara (“Talmud"), and subsequent texts and responsa issued by rabbinic poskim and gedolim over the centuries.

In other words, exposing the Jim Crow-like dimensions of the “women to the back of the bus” Talmudic culture, simultaneously exposes the Talmud to derision as a misogynist document; a conclusion intolerable to the Times, which has its own in-house reporter (Joseph Berger) charged with writing regular puff pieces upholding the supposed nobility, decency, joy, love and warmth of Orthodox (Talmudic) Judaism.

How to reconcile this contradiction between the ballyhooed Talmudic culture most always portrayed in the pages of the Times as the pinnacle of justice and decency, and the degradation of women displayed by the Hasidim?

With a kind of intellectual dishonesty typical of the most disingenuous pilpulist, on Jan. 19 the Times parsed the moral lesson to be drawn as one that exonerates the Talmud: “Lechery, Immodesty and the Talmud”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/opinion/ultra-orthodox-jews-and-the-modesty-fight.html

"The Talmud, the foundation of Jewish law, acknowledges that men can be sexually aroused by women and is indeed concerned with sexual thoughts and activity outside of marriage. But it does not tell women that men’s sexual urges are their responsibility. Rather, both the Talmud and the later codes of Jewish law make that demand of men...The Talmud tells the religious man, in effect: If you have a problem, you deal with it. It is the male gaze — the way men look at women — that needs to be desexualized, not women in public. The power to make sure men don’t see women as objects of sexual gratification lies within men’s — and only men’s — control.”  - New York Times, Jan. 19, 2012

The New York newspaper puts forth the notion that the Talmud places the emphasis on controlling lust on the male Judaic. Therefore, with this in mind, the general public is lead to believe that the Hasidim are proceeding against the women victimized based on anti-Talmudic principles!

This is an easily proved, blatantly outrageous lie which depends for its credibility upon the gullibility and ignorance of the goyim as well as those Judaics who are lacking in knowledge of the Talmudic texts.

Compare the New York Times’ abysmal propaganda for the Talmud with Israeli journalist Yossi Sarid’s impassioned and candid cri de coeur against it: “Orthodox Judaism treats women like filthy little things” (Haaretz newspaper, December 30)

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/orthodox-judaism-treats-women-like-filthy-little-things-1.404505

Orthodox Judaism, whether in its “modern” or Hasidic incarnation, is ruled by the Talmud and cognate rabbinic texts. Those texts out-Taliban the Taliban in their sub-cellar denigration of women. The New York Times can’t come clean on this subject because they’ve staked their entire world view on propagating “The Holocaust” and Talmudic (Orthodox) Judaism as planet earth’s two most noble objects of unquestioning veneration and respect. So they lie to protect Talmudic Judaism from any lessening of the aura of supreme worship which the media in America cultivate concerning it. No other religion enjoys this level of protection and camouflage.

These two big deceptions: the blackout of Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul over the past week, and the promotion of the Babylonian Talmud as a pro-woman sacred text, are just two examples of the way in which one of the worst, most biased and crooked news media in the world operate, right here in the good ol’ US of A.

***

Michael Hoffman is the defiant and unrepentant author of the books The Israeli Holocaust Against the Palestinians; Judaism Discovered; and Judaism’s Strange Gods. He is a former reporter for the American Contemporary Radio Division of ABC News and the New York bureau of the Associated Press.

*** 

Hanukkah Assassination of Ron Paul’s Reputation

By Michael Hoffman

Hanukah concluded Dec. 28. This year Hanukkah entailed the ritual assassination of the reputation of Rep. Ron Paul (R.-Texas) by the New York Times. Beginning on Dec. 25, the fifth day of Hanukkah, the Zionist newspaper published an investigative report concerning support which Rep. Paul is receiving in his primary campaign from minuscule white racist groups and from populists on staff atThe American Free Press newspaper. 

While we have serious reservations about Rep. Paul due to his support for the system of usury and the Austrian School of Economics, we believe that he promotes this system of finance out of tragic (and abysmal) ignorance. He is, however, an honest man who distinguishes himself from the entire field of Republicans in the primary contests by the crucial fact that he is the only peace candidate and the only genuine enemy of of the privately controlled Federal Reserve banking structure which is endowed by Congress with the power to manufacture money.

The Times referenced twenty-year-old issues of Rep. Paul’s newsletters that made politically incorrect statements about Martin Luther King and compulsory integration. Together with his support for ending foreign aid and abolishing the Federal Reserve Bank -- which a Dec. 27 New York Times editorial published on the 7th day of Hanukkah described as “claptrap” — all this allegedly “disqualifies" him as a trustworthy candidate for President of the United States:

"Ron Paul long ago disqualified himself for the presidency by peddling claptrap proposals like abolishing the Federal Reserve, returning to the gold standard, cutting a third of the federal budget and all foreign aid and opposing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Now, making things worse, he has failed to convincingly repudiate racist remarks that were published under his name for years — or the enthusiastic support he is getting from racist groups. Mr. Paul, a Republican congressman from Texas who is doing particularly well in Iowa's precaucus polls, published several newsletters in the '80s and '90s with names like the Ron Paul Survival Report and the Ron Paul Political Report. The newsletters interspersed libertarian political and investment commentary with racial bigotry, anti-Semitism and far-right paranoia....Mr. Paul, who, beginning in 2008, has disavowed the articles and their ideas, now says that most of them were written by others and that he was unaware of their content. Even if that were the case, it suggests a stupendous level of negligence that should force a reconsideration by anyone considering entrusting him with the White House."

Peace is not a qualifying factor for the New York Times. The newspaper does not detract legitimacy from the presidential aspirations of Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney because if elected president, each of these candidates would burn and bomb Iran with American warplanes as soon as a pretext to do so would present itself. The spectacle of thousands of Iranian civilian corpses does not trouble the liberals at the Times. What infuriates them is the possibility that the Israeli capacity to make war on Iran, Palestine and Lebanon would be seriously curtailed by a Paul presidency.

_________________________________________

"How can rhetoric critiquing a Martin Luther King federal holiday compare on the scale of human atrocity with turning an Iranian nation of 50 million people into a smoking cinder at the behest of the Israeli Lobby?"

_________________________________________ 

Despite Zoharic theatre in which a Times columnist recently denigrated Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Netanyahu's staff in turn denounced the Times, the paper is one of the most Talmudic on the planet, its facade of liberal humanism not withstanding. Judaic victimhood trumps the travail of all other people in its pages. The memory of thousands of Palestinians and Lebanese killed in the first decade of the 21st century by Israeli forces long ago faded from the pages of the Times, while on the 8th day of Hanukkah the Times published a prominent Op Ed about “saving Jews,” which is ever their primary focus. The Talmudic religion teaches that Judaics have higher souls than gentiles; that pernicious dogma filtered into the Times decades ago and has been a mainstay ever since, as it is in most of the American media.

Many of the other Republican candidates have ties to extremist rabbis. Bachmann receives advice at the feet of a  Kabbalist rabbi. Santorum, while U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania, regularly conferred with and pledged his support to Hasidic rabbis who have an exceedingly low estimation of Arabs and gentiles in general. The New York Times couldn’t care less.

Gingrich and Romney are of the Norman Podhoretz school of Zionist war policy. Since the administration of George W. Bush, Podhoretz has been “praying” (his word) that the U.S. would bomb the nation of Iran. Podhoretz’ circle includes the neocon Weekly Standard, which launched the latest smear against Ron Paul from which the New York Times received its cue.

The “claptrap” drumbeat for war with Iran, led by homicidal rabbis and their clean-shaven Zionist fellow-travelers, does not trouble the august New York Times even one-tenth as much as some marginal characters from the South supporting Ron Paul’s campaign. The equivalence does not even bear comparison. When has Ron Paul ever supported racist legislation in his decades of service in Congress? He has not done so. How can rhetoric critiquing a Martin Luther King federal holiday compare on the scale of human atrocity with turning an Iranian nation of 50 million people into a smoking cinder at the behest of the Israeli Lobby? 

What riles the New York Times is Ron Paul’s peace advocacy at a time when the media are gearing an exhausted American populace and a drained U.S. treasury for another adventure in messianic invasion and therapeutic war according to Rabbi Moses Maimonides’ principles, even as the neocon intervention into the thousand-year-old Shiite/Sunni civil war in Iraq is proving to be the most egregious waste of American blood and treasure since Vietnam.

Media smears directed against the only peace candidate in the field of Republican presidential aspirants is one of the oldest tools in American politics for destroying the chances of a leader who the American people would actually overwhelmingly support if they were given a fair and accurate representation of his views. Instead, the Times casts Ron Paul in a white sheet while their anointed candidates walk about in the bloody robes of perpetual war for Talmudic ends.

Michael Hoffman is the author of Judaism’s Strange Gods, published in November by Independent History and Research.

*******