Martin Luther King Day, a victim of the (official) Women’s March

First off, yes, I may be a day late, but this is definitely not a dollar short! I wanted to make sure this post was as perfect as I could make it, like I do with all others.

Of course, it’s just a coincidence that Martin Luther King Day, which commemorates the birthday of the slain civil rights leader, happens to fall near Inauguration Day in certain years, and thus the Women’s March.

(Read through and see another coincidence. It involves an Israel-hater and what her name really means. Then tell me Gd doesn’t work in mysterious ways!)

But the calendar coincidence is now a damn shame to Dr. King’s memory.

I’ve said time and time again all decent people are for equality, and luckily there were alternatives for marchers who wanted to avoid the Women’s March and its leaders’ anti-Israel, anti-Semitism and pro-Farrakhan mentality.

I’ll add what I’ve also said and written frequently: that the far left of the Democratic Party – and the failure of its more moderate, experienced leaders to rein them in – could very well split the party and help the Republicans’ 2020 presidential nominee (Trump or not) win the election and put more justices on the Supreme Court. (Justices who don’t think transgender people should be allowed to volunteer to fight doe our country on that basis alone.) I can even see the right Republican able to pull it off by campaigning as a moderate.

Don’t forget what Will Rogers said: “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.”

Early Saturday, Linda Sarsour posted a link to this article on Facebook:2019-01-19 sarsour

 

“While the first set of Unity Principles written by members of the Women’s March steering committee, which itself included prominent Jewish leaders, focused specifically on those most vulnerable, it did not mention Jews, which raised unnecessary suspicion. White supremacy and fascism endanger all of us, but we are not all equally in danger at all times, and while some communities in the United States feel unsafe for the first time in a very long time, others, such as communities of color and immigrants, have lived with danger for this country’s entire history. Centering the most vulnerable means exactly that: focusing first on the most vulnerable, through which we all benefit. (The 2019 Unity Principles now explicitly mention Jewish women.)”

My thoughts: Afterward, I also read Latinx women and Asian/Pacific Islander women, who were also previously excluded from the list, are also now on it. Why such division?

I totally disagree about Jews not having to feel unsafe in the U.S. In 1862, in the heat of the Civil War, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant initiated the most blatant official episode of anti-Semitism in 19th-century American history. (Luckily, Pres. Abraham Lincoln overturned that, and Grant came to his senses before becoming president.) What about the KKK and Leo Frank in the early 20th century? What about Henry Ford and Father Coughlin in Detroit in the mid-20th century? What about the Holocaust in our collective memories, and all the white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and Holocaust deniers here in the US? And the Tree of Life synagogue massacre in Pittsburgh in October?

Back to the article:

“Tamika Mallory … refused to ‘condemn’ Black nationalist and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan for his anti-Semitic views. She has since been asked to do this over and over, irrespective of the fact that his words are not her words, she is not responsible for him, and that asking her to do so means effectively condemning her ‘family’ and community—the people who were there for her and her son after the death of her husband.”

From me: So she can’t use the magic word “condemn” for the sake of society, and obviously considers Farrakhan above the rest of us, meaning unequal. In the meantime, she’s getting asked about this over and over, taking far more time to not say it than to actually say it! Is she achieving her objective or trying to keep her 15 minutes of fame?

“In the Forward (Your racism is showing when you tear down the Women’s March), Nylah Burton, a Black Jewish woman, writes that the attacks on Mallory and other Women’s March leaders are not only based in racism but make Jews of color more vulnerable. While ‘Mallory’s public embrace of [Farrakhan] was inappropriate to begin with … the sheer amount of racism and Islamophobia that defines much of the criticism against Linda Sarsour, a Palestinian Muslim activist, Tamika Mallory, a black gun control activist, and Carmen Perez, a Latina activist, has become more toxic and harmful than the actions that spurred the protests [against Trump].’”

Me again: So now we’re comparing who has been more inappropriate and when? Perhaps Sarsour, Mallory and Perez are more than they were just described. They need to personally address that supposed amount of racism and Islamophobia reserved just for them, plus if and how they made Jews of color more vulnerable. Anybody going after a woman for being a woman is the outsider!

“No form of anti-Semitism is acceptable,” writes Burton in a different Forward article, Why do Jews keep tearing down Black leaders? “But not all forms of anti-Semitism are alike. White anti-Semites are motivated by a hatred of Jews and a desire for power. Black anti-Semites are motivated by anger over gentrification, police brutality, and slavery.”

Me: Nice history lesson. Why has the Forward been giving her space? Did it lead to Thursday’s announcement it’ll be ending its print operation to “become a digitally focused publisher” after 121 years? Another sad moment for the newspaper business, but I find this example hard to mourn.

“And the entire conversation has been turned from focusing on the most vulnerable, i.e. communities of color, to focusing on the angst of white Jews.”

Maybe they should’ve just stuck to equality for women. Instead, they got off their message and supporters are STILL blaming others! (More on this from someone who knows more than me on that subject, coming up right after this next prejudiced thought.)

“Zuckerberg and Sandberg have money and power, and we allow white people with money and power, no matter who they are, to get away with things no one should and that people of color certainly can’t.”

I won’t defend Facebook but the writer of this article, some Jodi Jacobson, is off the rails.

An article Monday morning reported what happened next: “Former Women’s March leader upbraids ‘antisemite’ Linda Sarsour for posting article claiming Jews are waging war on black people.”

She’s Mercy Morganfield, the daughter of famed American blues singer-songwriter Muddy Waters. This is just some of what she posted on Facebook less than three-and-a-half hours after Sarsour on Saturday. (Language warning!)

2019-01-19 mercy morganfield

“Tamika is not the problem. Tamika is the symptom. Tamika symbolizes everything wrong and deeply problematic about second-wave feminism. A white woman’s movement. Just like the first wave feminism was a white woman’s movement in the sixties. ‘March with one of them. But March,’ was Gloria Steinem’s advice just yesterday. This rhetoric by a 1st Wave Feminist is indicative of the mentality of the March itself. Let me translate: ‘March because optics are more important than inclusivity.’

“And Tamika is providing the optics. … The other co-chairs sit back and watch while Tamika says all the incendiary things. They push her to the front and let her believe she is their leader when in reality she is their fall guy.

“And her allies outside the WM are problematic. She has other black people chasing celebrity and the limelight riding on her coattails. They don’t have her back; they are riding her back but she can’t tell the difference. They say amen and egg her on while she doubles down on ignorance and xenophobia. She is mistaking their obsequiousness for support. She cannot recognize an opportunist right now because she is so deeply mired in her own opportunism. Tamika, you in danger, gurl.”

“She is not faultless; she is thoughtless. She is hapless. She is aimless and gameless. She is riding around butt naked and everyone is admiring her beautiful clothes.

“For the past two years, issues that impact black women and girls in the U.S. have taken a backseat to issues that impact Palestinian women. Awareness of ignorant religious dogma has replaced awareness around issues impacting black women in the black community. People are now more aware of the dumb shit Farrakhan says than they are the plight of missing black girls in Chicago. This is deeply problematic.”

“The only people quicker to stab you in the back than a white woman trying to cover her white supremacy in a blanket of liberalism are the black elite who serve up their own version of white supremacy by looking down their noses at their own people. They are also using Tamika.”

… (This is my favorite part of this Morganfield post. –Lenny)

“I wouldn’t have to denounce Farrakhan because I wouldn’t have been sitting there praising him in the first place. Academic rigor is required to get an advanced degree. A part of my Master’s thesis was to research the slave trade in the United States. Jewish people were not a huge part of the slave trade, dumb asses. Yeah, I said it. Dumb, fucking, asses. There are two prominent figures floating that theory, Louis Farrakhan and David Duke. What do those two men have in common? They both peddle hate. It is their business model. I think it is brilliant that white people got black people blaming Jewish people for slavery. Fucking Brilliant!”

“So Tamika becomes the face of antisemitism, while the enablers of antisemitism don pink pussy hats and march. She becomes their warrior. In a street brawl, she once said, ‘You don’t know me, baby. I will tear your motherfucking ass up.’ Unfortunately, we do know you Tamika. You are every black person who has ever had a once in a lifetime opportunity and lost it because of hubris. You are that black person with all that damn potential who allow your ego to rule your actions. We know you, Tamika. We wanted nothing more than to see you win, I know this black woman did.”

Morganfield followed it up Sunday with this post:

2019-01-20 mercy morganfield

But back on Thursday, Morganfield – to her credit – had more strong words over this, and here are most of them:

2019-01-17 mercy morganfield on sonalee“This is what is so troubling about associations and about liberals and progressives. This shameful woman, Sonalee R.—a therapist, someone who is respectful of transgender people—somehow believes the world would be better if millions of Jewish people weren’t in it. And the head of a woman’s movement is a friend of hers. They keep showing up in photos with antisemite after antisemite but they need us to believe they don’t have these deep-seated issues about Jews. Here in the U.S., Palestine and Israel conflicts took a more prominent seat and more prominent role in what the WM chose to throw their weight behind than did: the Flint Water crisis, the missing girls in Chicago, #metoo as it affects black girls, high infant mortality rate in the black community, high incarceration rate of black families, economic empowerment for the black community, voter suppression targeted at blacks, gun violence in our community, the increasing mortality rate of black women due to disparities in medicine—Linda Sarsour made Palestine issues take precedence over all of those other issues.

“Do you know how that looks? It looks like us defending comments made that are antisemitic more than raising awareness of all of those issues I just mentioned.”

… (This is my favorite part of this Morganfield post. –Lenny)

“Linda has not pushed money and support toward Fighting the Muslim Ban—she pushed it toward Palestinians who are fighting Israel. Where was Linda, Linda’s mom or dad—when we were fighting to desegregate schools, water fountains and lunch counters in the 1960s? And she comes in and sells black women a bill of goods that she is fighting for women of color and that simply isn’t true. She is fighting for Palestinian women and God bless her, she should. I agree that she should fight for the rights of Palestinian women, but should that take precedence over black girls in the U.S.—why? Why, again?

“Black people, we have to start being more woke and questioning the status quo. Ask these four co-chairs what they did for black women this year and you will find they did nothing. You are whispering and standing up for people who’ve done NOTHING—for black women. Being a black woman and telling white women to shut up and listen to black women makes a nice sound bite but does nothing to move the needle. Especially when you are saying that over and over again to a sea of white faces who are happy to exclude all marginalized women as long as they get to march and as long as they have an outspoken black, brown and Muslim token to legitimize them. Spreading false and ignorant information about Jewish people that have black folks nodding their heads in agreement is simply peddling hate. The same way Trump peddles hate. And hate is a destructive energy not a redemptive one.

“If a white woman was featured in a picture on social media with David Duke and the message read, ‘It would have been better if black people didn’t exist.’ Would you be okay with that white woman heading the women’s movement? You would be calling for her head and you know it. But you’re okay when a brown woman does that to a Jew? Please check your hypocrisy at the door of the church. You know that place you go every Sunday and act share the love of Jesus. A Jewish man who taught the world to love. Huh? What would Jesus do? If Jews didn’t exist as this asshole in the picture hopes–who would you worship on Sundays, Boo?

“You are okay with this because they are talking about people some preacher in a church you don’t even belong to—spewed off some uneducated bullshit about Jews and you ate it up hook, line, and sinker. What the hell is wrong with you, black people? This is not who we are. If it is we might as well grab a tiki torch and flame up—we’re no better. Do you understand how destructive the energy of hate is? Do you understand Dr. Martin Luther King Jr would be so ashamed of black people for supporting this while you celebrate his legacy this weekend?”

“Linda is a woman of color when it suits her—but I guarantee you this—her parents would never have allowed her to marry a Muslim of African descent. Chew on that while you are taking up for her.”

It takes a real leader to police one’s own people, and Mercy Morganfield didn’t just start this week, so thank you to her for that.

Another women’s issue is safety for journalists. I haven’t heard that mentioned. Read this story from last week, “For local female journalists in US, rape threats, stalkers, harassment can come with the beat,” from the Committee to Protect Journalists. Let that occupy the bigots’ time!

2019-01-19 sarsour ny times

Unfortunately, it’s hard to shut Sarsour up. Saturday night, she was thrilled after reading this piece from new New York Times columnist Michelle Alexander, subtitled “Martin Luther King Jr. courageously spoke out about the Vietnam War. We must do the same when it comes to this grave injustice of our time.”

Alexander started writing about the speech Dr. King gave at New York’s Riverside Church, exactly a year before his assassination.

“Many of King’s strongest allies urged him to remain silent about the war or at least to soft-pedal any criticism. They knew that if he told the whole truth about the unjust and disastrous war he would be falsely labeled a Communist, suffer retaliation and severe backlash, alienate supporters and threaten the fragile progress of the civil rights movement.

“King rejected all the well-meaning advice and said, ‘I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice.’ Quoting a statement by the Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam, he said, ‘A time comes when silence is betrayal’ and added, ‘that time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.’

“It was a lonely, moral stance. And it cost him. But it set an example of what is required of us if we are to honor our deepest values in times of crisis, even when silence would better serve our personal interests or the communities and causes we hold most dear. It’s what I think about when I go over the excuses and rationalizations that have kept me largely silent on one of the great moral challenges of our time: the crisis in Israel-Palestine.”

Another blemish among many in the New York Times’ coverage of the Middle East. (Definitely read! –Lenny)

Is she saying The New York Times never discussed article topics before hiring her last year, and how she might offer thoughts on topics different than other Times writers, and now she has gone rogue?

Alexander then launches into an attack on pretty much everything Israel with these one-sided, distorted phrases and sentences that make you wonder what a Jewish person must’ve ever done to her, and whether she had a Jewish friend in law school who wasn’t on the fringe left:

  • “Israel’s political lobby holds well-documented power”
  • “Many civil rights activists and organizations have remained silent … because they fear loss of funding from foundations, and false charges of anti-Semitism”
  • “compromised or discredited by smear campaigns”
  • “blacklists those who publicly dare to support boycotts against Israel, jeopardizing their employment prospects and future careers”

“And so, if we are to honor King’s message and not merely the man, we must condemn Israel’s actions: unrelenting violations of international law, continued occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, home demolitions and land confiscations. We must cry out at the treatment of Palestinians at checkpoints, the routine searches of their homes and restrictions on their movements, and the severely limited access to decent housing, schools, food, hospitals and water that many of them face.”

“We must not tolerate Israel’s refusal even to discuss the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, as prescribed by United Nations resolutions.”

“We must, with as much courage and conviction as we can muster, speak out against the system of legal discrimination that exists inside Israel.”

Talk about real hate! Don’t tell me Dr. King would’ve ever spoken like that. You’ll hear his “I Have a Dream” speech soon, and he didn’t use language like that – even when referring to racists in power.

I don’t know why Michelle Alexander feels the way she does and question whether her views belong in The New York Times (too many people are clicking onto the article), but you get the drift. Let her talk about this picture, especially the sign.

jews fight descrimination of negroes

Then, she mentioned Dr. King.

king brochure martin kramer
from website of historian Martin Kramer, http://martinkramer.org/sandbox/2013/01/why-martin-luther-king-never-visited-israel/, mentioned below

“King found himself conflicted. Like many black leaders of the time, he recognized European Jewry as a persecuted, oppressed and homeless people striving to build a nation of their own, and he wanted to show solidarity with the Jewish community, which had been a critically important ally in the civil rights movement.

“Ultimately, King canceled a pilgrimage to Israel in 1967 after Israel captured the West Bank. During a phone call about the visit with his advisers, he said, ‘I just think that if I go, the Arab world, and of course Africa and Asia for that matter, would interpret this as endorsing everything that Israel has done, and I do have questions of doubt.’

“He continued to support Israel’s right to exist but also said on national television that it would be necessary for Israel to return parts of its conquered territory to achieve true peace and security and to avoid exacerbating the conflict. There was no way King could publicly reconcile his commitment to nonviolence and justice for all people, everywhere, with what had transpired after the 1967 war.”

I’ll stop there and remind you – or teach you – the Six Day War happened because Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping and mobilized its army along its border with a much-smaller Israel. The U.N. was absolutely ineffective at avoiding war by running away. (Nobody talked about the West Bank or Gaza back in those days, did they, Ms. Alexander?)

Then, Nasser induced Syria and Jordan to begin attacks on Israel by using the initially confused situation to claim that Egypt had repelled the Israeli air strike, when it really destroyed the country’s air force.

The Arabs were big losers. What happens when a country loses a war? What has happened throughout history, Ms. Alexander, and why should this case be any different?

In fact, keep reading!

Israel didn’t ask for the war, the territories, definitely not the people there, and negotiated with anyone whenever possible. Egypt and Jordan are success stories, even if not wildly successful.

Who is available today? Dictator Mahmoud Abbas with his corruption and net worth of $100 million, or Hamas terrorists? More importantly, who do Palestinians support? Do they want peace with Israel? Look the the polls.

And demanding a right of return 70 years after 1948, or even 50 years after 1967, is preposterous and isn’t coming from anybody who wants peace!

Instead, Israel is making friends all over, or reestablishing friendships. Just Sunday, Israel and Chad restored relations. (Now would be a great time for Ms. Alexander to use the word “apartheid!”) Mali’s Prime Minister will be visiting soon. We don’t even know exactly what’s happening with the Gulf states, but relations are improving.

The war happened in the beginning of June and the Arab League Summit attended by eight Arab heads of state ended less than three months later with the Khartoum Resolution on Sept. 1. It became famous for the “Three No’s” in the third paragraph: “no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.”

mlk zionists jewsWould somebody tell me how the hell Israel, wanting land for peace, could deal with that?

Until I get an answer (comment section below) – if The New York Times, Michelle Alexander, Linda Sarsour, Electronic Intifada, and the folks at the United Nations don’t get it – Dr. King really admired Israel, and there’s no better evidence than his own words.

“The whole world must see that Israel must exist and has a right to exist and is one of the great outposts of democracy in the world.”

Here, he goes further, saying even if it wasn’t necessary, he’d speak out against anti-Semitism because it’s wrong, unjust and evil – and he’d do the same for Catholics.

In this speech, he says he knows white people who believe in justice and humanity are going to stay with the civil rights movement because it’s just and right.

Dr. King repeating some of what he said above, but I learned how much he really knew about life for Jews under the Nazis and Soviets.

This video from Christians United for Israel is to “discover the forgotten history of how the civil rights movement and Christian Zionism have united Christians and Jews to fight racism and anti-Semitism for over 50 years.”

This speaker from the IBSI – Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel teaches so much and shows how far Dr. King was ahead of his time.

Even The Young Turks (no friend of Israel) has advice for the Palestinians to get what they want, because they’ve been doing things wrong (terrorism, I suppose?), using quotes from MLK!

Finally, a longer video from Dumisani Washington, founder of the Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel, speaking about Dr. King’s true pro-Israel legacy, Israel’s diverse multi-ethnic community, and the racism of BDS. (Worthy of you watching as much as you can. That goes double for Michelle Alexander!)

Now, from the My Jewish Learning article “Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Trip to the Holy Land: What we can learn from MLK’s most important trip of his life”:

In Jerusalem in 1959,

“It troubled King that Jerusalem was divided, the western part controlled by Israel and the eastern part by Jordan. ‘And so this was a strange feeling to go to the ancient city of God and see the tragedies of man’s hate and his evil, which causes him to fight and live in conflict,’ he recalled.”

“The details of King’s only visit to the Holy Land, which has nearly been forgotten by history, are contained in a sermon he delivered at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, AL on Easter Sunday, 1959.”

Stanford University’s Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute lets us read and listen to it:

“I must say that when you say ‘landing in Jerusalem’ you must qualify what you are saying and tell what part of Jerusalem. That is because men have not solved their social problems, and we’re still banned because in their Jerusalem, that ancient holy city has been divided and split up and partitioned. And before you can enter one side of the city, it must be clear that you will not enter the other because one side is Jerusalem, Israel, the other side is Jerusalem, Jordan. Because of the Arab-Israeli conflict this city has been divided. And if on your visa it is revealed that you are going into any Arab nation, you can only go to Israel without being able to ever go back to an Arab country in the life of your passport; the hate is intensified. And so this was a strange feeling to go to the ancient city of God and see the tragedies of man’s hate and his evil, which causes him to fight and live in conflict. …

“This is always one of the interesting things about traveling, that you learn to know people. You meet people of all races and of all cultures, and you tend to be lifted above provincialism, and chauvinism, and what the sociologists call ethnocentrism. You come to see a unity in mankind. … I think this is the greatest education that can ever come to an individual. I think if more of our white brothers in the South had traveled a little more, many of our problems would be solved today.”

About being in Jerusalem, and when Jesus was there:

“And he entered this gate, and we walked around and through there and pretty soon, about fifty feet from the gate, we came to a spot and the guide said, ‘This is where the old temple stood, the Temple of Jerusalem.’ (Keep this in mind when someone lies to you and says there is no Jewish history in Jerusalem. Then ask them where the Muslims were at the time. –Lenny) You remember that temple fell in 70 A.D. The Roman Empire came to stop an uprising in Palestine, and they destroyed the temple. But the spot is still reserved, and there is a big stone in the middle of that point where all of the sacrifices used to take place on the altar.”

But King stayed on the Jordanian side of Jerusalem, where the Old City and Western Wall were, even though he visited Jewish holy sites that Jews were not allowed to visit. (We can’t let it go back to the way it was for those 19 years, 1948-67, under Jordan. –Lenny)

Back the My Jewish Learning article:

“He would later call the trip ‘one of the most important occasions of my life.’ …

“Prior to the Six Day War, King was an outspoken supporter of Israel, which he famously called ‘one of the great outposts of democracy in the world.’ After the war, in which Israel reunited Jerusalem and captured the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, West Bank, and Golan Heights, King expressed reservations about travelling to the country and having to defend its actions during the war. He feared doing so would alienate his supporters in Africa and the Arab world.  ‘I don’t think I could come out unscathed,’ he fretted to an adviser in a phone conversation recorded by the FBI.”

SIDEBAR: This immediately reminded me of my newspaper PGN’s editorial this week:

“Even Dr. King occasionally struggled with acceptance and tolerance issues.

“One of those struggles was when it came to Bayard Rustin. Rustin was an indispensable force behind the civil rights movement in the 1960s. He was also openly gay. Many have called him King’s right-hand man.

“And, while King needed Rustin for the movement, he did not immediately embrace Rustin and his sexuality (many labeled it ‘promiscuity’ then), which at times became a liability to the movement.

“Even Dr. King succumbed to fear and a desire to keep the movement on track, and the two parted ways a few times.

“Eventually, King evolved, realized Rustin’s worth and defended him.

“If King hadn’t, the movement would most certainly have been different and likely more violent and less effective.”

mlk torah heschel
You didn’t see this in the movie Selma

BACK TO THE STORY from My Jewish Learning:

“Israel had extended several invitations to King during the 1960s to visit the Jewish state as part of a wider effort to strengthen ties with the African American community. King accepted at least two official invitations but backed out both times. He also agreed to lead an interfaith pilgrimage of 600 to Israel in November 1967, but that didn’t pan out either. He was assassinated the following year.”

Click here for many more details about what happened behind the scenes in this article Why Martin Luther King never visited Israel from historian Martin Kramer.

Click here for the full story of how Kramer solved the mystery of this quote attributed to Dr. King – “When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You’re talking anti-Semitism!” – even though so many don’t want to recognize it.

“Ultimately, King’s failure to step foot in the State of Israel did not diminish his legacy in the eyes of most Israelis. His leadership during the civil rights movement has inspired generations of Israeli activists, from the Mizrachi Jews (those from Iraq, Syria, Bahrain, Kuwait, Dagestan, Azerbaijan,  Iran, Uzbekistan, the Caucasus, Kurdistan, Afghanistan, India and Pakistan but never mentioned in any right of return or compensation. –Lenny) who fought for better housing and jobs during the 1970s to the Ethiopian Israelis who, more recently, have demonstrated in the streets of Tel Aviv against police brutality and discrimination.  The Knesset has recognized Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and there is a forest in the Galilee that was planted in his honor.”

mlk3
Sept. 10, 1987: Martin Luther King III plants a tree in the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Forest during his religious pilgrimage and study mission in Israel (http://mochajuden.com/?p=4000)

That’s the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Forest in Israel’s Southern Galilee region, and the Israelis didn’t just love him. There’s also the Coretta Scott King Forest in Biriya Forest, Israel.

What’s especially interesting is that part of the forest had been destroyed over the summer of 2006 when Hezbollah in Lebanon launched Katyusha rockets into northern Israel. The terrorists from a neighboring country destroyed two million trees in the one country that had more trees at the end of the 20th century than it did at the beginning! That’s not what the Kings would’ve supported.

mlk st israel

I don’t think the Israelis would have any major problem with how the Kings would’ve thought of them today.

“One can’t help but wonder, if King were alive and visited Israel today, what would he think?

“One hint comes from Clarence B. Jones, one of King’s lawyers and closest advisors. Jones has said that he believes King would not shy away from criticizing Israel over specific policies, but that he would not stand for efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state. ‘No African-American leader of national stature was more passionate, privately and publicly, in fostering a working coalition with the Jewish community and his support for the State of Israel,’ Jones said of King in 2014. …

“No doubt, King would be disappointed that peace between Israel and the Palestinians still has not been achieved. And he would likely be troubled by the poor treatment of the thousands of African refugees who were denied asylum, held in detention centers in the Negev, and are now being told to return to either their home countries or a third country by April or face jail time. (The government considers the refugees to be economic migrants who entered the country illegally.)

“But he would be amazed at the diversity of the country’s population: that Jews from Morocco live next to Jews from Yemen and India and Ethiopia and Iran and France, among other places. And he would marvel that Arabs, Druze, Bedouins, Hebrew Israelites, Samaritans, and Circassians have also found a home in Israel—a place that one day might truly be, in King’s words, ‘an oasis of brotherhood and democracy.’”

I find this pretty positive when you look at the entirety. I think my point has been made.

Just one more: Ever the scholar, one thing I learned after Louis Farrakhan referred to Jews as “termites” is that Linda Sarsour’s last name means “cockroach” in Arabic.

cockroach
From Google Translate. Go ahead! Try it!

And this brings me to MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech, especially “the content of  their character” part. I played this video every year as a teacher – not just so my students could see and hear Dr. King, but also for its meaning, and how to properly give a speech – including speaking clearly, knowing your audience, and using inclusiveness, repetition, etc.

This is always worth a listen, for so many different reasons. So enjoy, as my students and I always have.

 

Advertisements

Tiffany Trump’s trouble, what unions could do to Amazon and the media

us constitution

It’s nice when Americans exercise their First Amendment rights (freedom of religion, speech, the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances) with good intentions, and that should be encouraged.

Last Saturday, many in the country were shocked after March for Our Lives rallies were held all over (more on that in a blog post coming up) and apparently caught Tiffany Trump making her political views known — and they were against her father’s, according to People magazine.

tiffany twitter

No, the daughter of President Trump and Marla Maples didn’t just support the thousands of students taking to the streets around the world, calling for stricter gun control in the U.S. after the massacre at Marjory Stoneman High in Parkland, Fla., in which 15 students and two teachers were killed.

That would be “relatively” easy.

Instead, People wrote, she “appeared to ‘like’ a photo from her verified Instagram account showing a protester holding a sign that read ‘Next Massacre Will Be the GOP in the Midterm Elections’ at the New York March.”

Ouch!

tiffany instagram
Tiffany Trump’s verified Instagram account

Look at the picture below. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find Ms. Trump’s ‘like’ there, and neither could others, but People showed somebody apparently did on Twitter and put a red rectangle around her name.

It appears to be true because Ashley Feinberg, with a verified Twitter account, posted the picture from Julia Moshy’s Instagram account (above).

Anyone can see Ashley Feinberg’s Twitter page. I know because I did and I don’t follow anybody I’m writing about here, on any social media.

tiffany julia

I also figured out Tiffany Trump follows the picture-poster Julia Moshy’s Instagram account (above), so she must’ve really seen the picture on the account. I didn’t know who Julia Moshy is, but she has 18,500 followers!

julia moshy instagram

Turns out, she has been described as “a fashion instagrammer with some legit street cred” and also “the daughter of … someone who didn’t believe in spankings” so the follow doesn’t surprise me.

You’ll also notice near the top Tiffany Trump’s Instagram account is tiffanytrump — one word, all lowercase — and the same after “liked by” in the red rectangle. (You should see who else she follows on Instagram! Click here, and then click where you see the number of accounts she’s following.)

ashley feinberg twitter

As for Ashley Feinberg, her verified Twitter account says she works for The Huffington Post and I can see she tweets a lot. (What looks like the latest tweet is really pinned to the top.) I clicked on her website that’s listed, which is a WordPress blog like this one, and got to the most bland page I’ve ever seen — especially for somebody whose Twitter account says “Graphic design is my passion.”

She described herself on her website: “Ashley is a Senior Reporter at HuffPost. Before that she was at Gizmodo Media Group’s Special Projects Desk, and before Gizmodo Media Group’s Special Projects Desk she was at Gawker.”

feinbergs on instagram

There are several Ashley Feinbergs on Instagram but I got lucky. She was listed first and her web address was a dead giveaway.

feinberg instagram

I wondered how Feinberg saw Moshy’s picture on Instagram that Tiffany Trump liked there. We established the connection between Moshy and Trump, but noticed as I’m writing Feinberg follows Trump but not Moshy.

That may not have been the case earlier in the week. Also, don’t look into Jeb Bush on the list. Feinberg, as a journalist, follows people and groups from both sides of the aisle, and Bush just happened to follow this Trump. (To see who else Feinberg follows on Instagram, click here for her account, and then click where you see the number of accounts she’s following.)

feinberg follows tiffany

So if Instagram is anything like Facebook (and earlier this week we discussed the repercussions of Facebook owning Instagram), then you will see that friends/connections liked something a stranger posted — which may be how Feinberg saw Trump liked Moshy’s picture. (Of course, Feinberg and Moshy may have dropped their direct connection this week.)

Back to the subject at hand, People wrote “Social media users were happy to welcome Tiffany to their side” and gave various examples. Tiffany, 24, is a Georgetown Law School student right there in Washington, DC, but has kept a relatively low profile. You know with law school and all.

Too bad she may have felt the need (or pressure) to remove her ‘like’ from that picture. It goes against her First Amendment rights but People points out from one of its sources,

“She says she is not guaranteed anything (from Donald Trump’s estate when he dies), which is one of the reasons Tiffany and Marla have been so respectful of her dad and tiptoed around so much.”

Money talks.

Speaking of money and TrumpWednesday, I wrote (and published minutes into Thursday), “Sources told Axios Trump has talked about changing Amazon’s tax treatment – using antitrust or competition law – because he’s worried about mom-and-pop businesses being run out of business.”

I also mentioned his theory Amazon abusing the U.S. Postal Service.

Thursday morning, the president tweeted this:

Let’s get a reality check, published Friday morning, from FoxNews.com of all places. The author’s bio on the site says, “Peter Morici served as Chief Economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission from 1993 to 1995. He is an economist and professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland.”

Morici starts with, “President Trump’s claim that Amazon is a tax scofflaw, subsidized by the U.S. Postal Service and an unfair threat to small businesses and malls, is absurdly wrong and dangerous.”

He follows immediately with the details, “Amazon is an online platform that markets products for thousands of manufacturers and smaller merchants. It’s also a retailer in its own right by distributing directly from its own warehouses.”

Then, some background:

“The company has branched into brick and mortar groceries with the acquisition of Whole Foods and is also building out its own package delivery system and entering a host of other businesses.

“Amazon may not pay a lot of income tax but a good number of companies don’t because of how Congress chooses to write the tax code. That was a problem long before Amazon came along and will continue after it is gone.

“Generally, online retailers enjoy an advantage over brick and mortar sores by not collecting sales taxes on shipments to states where they don’t have a physical presence. However, Amazon has warehouses in 45 states and collects sales taxes.”

After that, Morici goes into the Postal Service.

“It’s congressionally granted monopoly on your mail box comes with a requirement that it deliver six days a week to every address. … No matter how remote the location, the Postal Service charges the same 50 cents to deliver a first class letter. This just about guarantee it will lose money on mail service. In recent years, the Postal Service’s salvation has been in providing the last mile to large package delivery companies on less than urgent shipments. This means that Fedex, UPS and others can drop packages at your local post office and the Postal Service sends those out with your letter carrier.”

His bottom line: “Taken alone, neither business would be viable. … Mail delivery can’t be viable without package delivery, and running the last mile for delivery services would not be possible without mail delivery.”

Finally, he goes off on “What makes Amazon so menacing is that it is so efficient” and describes situations including Amazon beating out other companies, how brick-and-mortar stores and local governments reacted by imposing costs, and how Amazon only has a 4 percent market share of retail sales, much less than Walmart, according to the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.

And then he takes on Trump. A good, short read after getting the background.

Don’t think Amazon treats its employees right? That thought has been around for years, while dozens of locations are competing to be the home of its second headquarters, and offering pots of gold (or rather huge tax breaks) among other things to win.

Are Amazon employees union members? Sure wouldn’t hurt if they’re not!

Look what West Virginia teachers got by striking. Now, teachers in other red states are noticing.

According to the Associated Press, “A teacher rebellion that started in the hills of West Virginia spread like a prairie fire to Oklahoma this week and now threatens to reach the desert in Arizona.”

Good for them, and America’s children! Bad for blindly cutting taxes.

Univision Communications owns satire site The Onion, and The Wall Street Journal reports editorial and video staffers there and and its sister sites, Clickhole and A/V Club, announced they’re unionizing while Univision “is exploring extensive cost cuts at its digital properties.”

According to Variety, the Writers Guild of America East announced “’an overwhelming majority’ of the staff, comprised of about 100 employees, have signed union cards and called on management to voluntarily recognize the WGA East as the collective bargaining representative.”

Onion Inc. spokesman David Ford told the Chicago Tribune the company started discussions with the guild and they “hope to arrive at an arrangement in short order,” according to the A.P. via U.S. News and World Report.

Good for them! From what I’ve heard, Univision isn’t known as one of the best employers out there. It may be having a huge presence in free-for-all Miami, or the prejudice of serving Hispanic and Latino Americans, or being non-union — at least for the most part.

Let’s look at its history.

On Nov. 16, 2016, Deadline reported, “A week after most of the staff at Univision’s Fusion.net voted to join the Writers Guild of America, the company announced sweeping layoffs.”

Earlier, Univision bought unionized Gawker Media and according to its editorial union on Sept. 12, 2016:

“Univision’s first act on acquiring the company was to delete six true and accurate news stories from our archive, because those stories had been the targets of frivolous or malicious lawsuits. This decision undermines the foundation of the ability of Gawker Media’s employees to do our work. We have seen firsthand the damage that a targeted lawsuit campaign can do to companies and individual journalists, and the removal of these posts can only encourage such attempts in the future.”

Ah, money over journalism! How many times have I written about that on this blog? (Click here for a pretty good-sized list, just from the search box.)

I think we have an answer for Amazon employees who want more money and better working conditions from a growing company that will be making more money.

The same would be true for Sinclair Broadcast Group employees. (Notice how I didn’t mention that company AT ALL in my last post!)

On March 11, I wrote that awful company — the largest owner of television stations in the U.S. — trying to buy Tribune Media through unethical methods was forcing news anchors at its 193 owned, or not owned but operated local TV stations in 89 markets (at least the ones that actually produce news) to read a script that offered no news.

Instructions from Corporate (thanks to Esquire):

Please produce the attached scripts exactly as they are written. This copy has been thoroughly tested and speaks to our Journalistic Responsibility as advocates to seek the truth on behalf of the audience.”

Millions of Americans will soon be watching promotions that begin with one or two anchors introducing themselves and saying,

Script:

“I’m [we are] extremely proud of the quality, balanced journalism that [proper news brand name of local station] produces. But I’m [we are] concerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.”

“The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media. More alarming, national media outlets are publishing these same fake stories without checking facts first. Unfortunately, some members of the national media are using their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control ‘exactly what people think’ … This is extremely dangerous to our democracy.”

Then the anchors are supposed to strike a more positive tone and say that their local station pursues the truth.

“We understand Truth is neither politically ‘left or right.’ Our commitment to factual reporting is the foundation of our credibility, now more than ever.”

I tell a lot more in this post, including CNN concluding its description with,

“At the end of the promo, viewers are encouraged to send in feedback ‘if you believe our coverage is unfair’ and ‘Corporate will monitor the comments and send replies to your audience on your behalf,’ so ‘In other words, local stations are cut out of the interactions with viewers. Management will handle it instead.’”

Do you think anyone wanted to look into a camera and read that promotional nonsense during newscasts from the media company with must-run conservatively-bent editorials? I think a union would’ve helped the journalists keep the business people in their place, which is out of the newsroom.

Today, FTV Live’s Scott Jones showed this example of the anchors at KBOI in Boise following corporate directions.

Jones ended by writing, “How these anchors sleep at night after reading this crap, I have no clue.”

jerry springer
Jerry Springer

I wonder when it’s time to jump ship, like WMAQ’s Carol Marin did in Chicago in 1997 when Jerry Springer started giving commentaries on her newscast. The New York Times called her “one of that city’s most popular and respected television news anchors.” Her co-anchor also quit.

logo strip latest

 

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer — which properly discloses “KOMO News and SeattlePI have a content-sharing agreement” — calls that script “the next step in the company’s plan to undermine non-Sinclair outlets.” KOMO-4 is one of Sinclair’s largest stations, after Washington DC, and in a liberal city. Sinclair bought its parent company in 2013.

I’ve had my say in these posts plenty of times — especially here (with a whole lot more reasons and ending with directions on letting the FCC know the danger that Sinclair poses by its size, power and ethics) but also here, here, here, and a few more if you search — so I’ll let SeattlePI continue:

“The claim of balanced reporting is undermined by must-run segments like the one about the ‘Deep State’ that ran during KOMO’s 6pm newscast last week. In the March 21 segment, former Trump adviser Sebastian Gorka parroted a Trump talking point regarding the existence of a ‘Deep State’ attempting to undermine the U.S. government.

“That segment was produced by Sinclair’s Kristine Frazao, who before coming to Sinclair was a reporter and anchor for the Russian-government funded news network RT, described as ‘the Kremlin’s propaganda outlet’ by the Columbia Journalism Review.

“Sinclair also requires stations to run segments from Boris Epshteyn, a Russian-born former Trump adviser who now serves as Sinclair’s chief political analyst. Epshteyn recently produced stories with titles like, ‘Pres. Trump deserves cabinet and staff who support his agenda, yield successes’ and ‘Cable news channels are giving way too much coverage to Stormy Daniels.'”

Also, “Sinclair was fined $13.3 million by the FCC in December for running over 1,700 commercials designed to look like news broadcasts without properly identifying them as paid content on its stations over a six-month period.”

And in January, it had some nerve when it “asked employees to donate to its political action committee meant to sway lawmakers.” FTV Live’s Scott Jones leaked the document that called the Sinclair Political Action Committee, “our fund that supports candidates for Congress who can influence the future of broadcasting” — in their interest, of course!

It’s no wonder New York magazine wrote a piece titled “Local news is turning into Trump TV, even though viewers don’t want it” describing — without repeating what’s above — how “Trump’s handpicked FCC chair, Ajit Pai, spent much of last year dismantling regulatory obstacles to media consolidation — including two rules that stood in the way of Sinclair’s desired merger with Tribune Media.”

Then it presumes “Sinclair has repaid this favor with interest” and asks “Why has Sinclair’s programming become more right-wing, even as it has expanded into more left-leaning media markets?”

It answers by saying, “A new study from Emory University political scientists Gregory J. Martin and Josh McCrain suggests that both of these explanations are wrong: The ideological bent of Sinclair’s programming does turn off local news viewers — but broadcasting such unpopular, ideological content is (probably) a good business decision for the company, anyway.”

Specifically, “The researchers found that Sinclair-acquired stations became both more right-wing in their ideological orientation (as calculated by ‘text-based measures of ideological slant’) and more focused on national politics (as opposed to local politics) than their competitors did over the same period.”

And, “they discovered that the Sinclair-acquired stations did seem to pay a price for these programming changes — but not a terribly large one:

“In ratings terms, the shift towards national politics was costly to these stations: viewers appear to prefer the more local-heavy mix of coverage to the more national-heavy one. Nonetheless, there are very clear economies of scale for a conglomerate owner in covering national as opposed to local politics, thanks to the ability to distribute the same content in multiple markets. Given that the ratings penalty we document is fairly small, it seems likely that these cost efficiencies dominate in Sinclair’s calculus.”

So, New York magazine concludes,

“Sinclair’s commitment to substituting pro-Trump propaganda for local news reporting costs the company viewers — but that commitment does not (necessarily) cost the firm profits.”

sinclair numbers
from http://sbgi.net/

It continues that this is happening while the United States is “suffering through a crisis of local journalism. Regional newspapers are either dead, dying, or hobbling along, shedding resources for local reporting with each step.”

 

And since “Americans increasingly view national events through an algorithmically customized, ideological filter — local TV news has assumed a heightened importance.”

In fact, “‘local news organizations’ remain the most trusted source of information in Pew Research Center’s polling on trust in media.”

Click here for the long list of Sinclair owned, or not owned but operated stations. The number would reportedly grow to 233 stations if the Federal Communications Commission approves its acquisition of Tribune Media. It should not.

sinclair before tribune
Sinclair’s size without Tribune

And at the end of this post, let’s mark the end of Don Imus’ radio career. The shock jock left the airwaves after nearly half of a century on the radio, Thursday.

I wrote about him a month-and-a-half ago when sportscaster Warner Wolf sued, claiming he was fired in 2016 for age discrimination.

The Associated Press had reported Wolf’s suit claimed, “Imus once said it was time to put Wolf ‘out to pasture’ and ‘shoot him with an elephant dart gun.’”

The New York Daily News reported the Imus-Wolf trouble really started a few months before when Wolf moved to Naples, Fla., and contributed to the show from there.

Imus — who himself left the Big Apple a year earlier, in 2015, to live on a Texas ranch — didn’t like it. (At least they have the Gulf of Mexico between them!) The rest of the crew worked in New York.

Now, The Daily News quoted the I-Man,

“I know in my heart there’s been nobody ever better on the radio than me,” the less-than-modest 77-year-old DJ declared shortly before signing off from his studio in Texas. “Nobody ever did this.”

Imus fought back tears while thanking his listeners and saying “You have no idea how much I’m going to miss you.”

The paper also said he “appeared to take subtle parting shots at past rivals including the Rev. Al Sharpton and the self-proclaimed ‘King of All Media’ Howard Stern.

“Imus in the Morning” aired weekdays on 84 stations around the country.