From Goyim Claiming ‘Jews Spreading Disease!’ to, well… ‘Jews Spreading Disease!’

Anti-Semitic Democrats Blame Orthodox Jews For The Coronavirus

October 13, 20202:45 pm

“I have to say to the Orthodox community tomorrow, ‘If you’re not willing to live with these rules, then I’m going to close the synagogues,’” Gov. Andrew Cuomo told religious Jews.

His basis for the decree was a photo of mourners who weren’t practicing social distancing at a funeral. But the photo of a crowd of Orthodox Jews on Cuomo’s slide was from 2006.

It was a very different message than Cuomo’s condemnation of bigotry when he had insisted, “There is zero evidence that people of Asian descent bear any additional responsibility for the transmission of the coronavirus.” The new message is, don’t blame the Asians, blame the Jews.

They did go to a funeral in 2006.

Cuomo was picking up where Mayor Bill de Blasio had left off in his infamous tweet targeting Orthodox Jews. “My message to the Jewish community, and all communities, is this simple: the time for warnings has passed,” the New York City leftist boss had raged.

Medieval bigots blamed the Black Plague on Jews poisoning wells. Modern Democrats blame the coronavirus on the Jews. Despite the plague of media narratives accompanied by photos of Chassidic Jews praying or mourning, there’s as little evidence for the latter as for the former.

Cuomo’s threat to synagogues was prompted by a supposed resurgence of the virus. De Blasio had already announced that the spike in the targeted areas would lead to school and business closures. Except that a number of those areas have African-American, Latino or Asian majorities. But instead Democrats and the media have focused in on the “Jewish” areas.

And even those “Orthodox Jews” areas are far from a homogenous monocultural community.

Chassidic Jews, a subset of Orthodox Jews, may stand out, but so do the Amish. So-called “Chassidic neighborhoods” in Brooklyn are actually made up of the usual New York mix of African-Americans, Latinos and assorted immigrant groups, including Muslim immigrants.

Coronavirus deaths among Asians in New York have been twice as high among whites and approaching five times as high among Latinos and African-Americans. New York City’s worst death rates were not in Borough Park or Williamsburg, but in a Bronx neighborhood, in East New York, in Flushing, Queens, in Far Rockaway and in Brighton Beach.

None of those are Chassidic neighborhoods. Only one has a significant Orthodox population.

Nor are the highest positive rates in Orthodox or Chassidic areas. You have to get through five Queens neighborhoods before making it to Borough Park. And Borough Park, and most Brooklyn neighborhoods, except East New York, are far below Queens and Bronx neighborhoods when it comes to cases per population. Borough Park is only the 49th highest ZIP code in actual mortality rates, Williamsburg is in 79th place.

And yet the insistence that the outbreak is an Orthodox Jewish problem is ubiquitous. It pops up in the media and in rhetoric by top Democrats that stigmatize religious Jews for the virus.

The Democrats who rose to denounce scapegoating of Asians have joined in the racism.

The media pumps out stories blaming the outbreak on Orthodox Jews with a cheerful disregard for facts or basic urban geography. The Associated Press rolled out an entire story blaming the outbreak of coronavirus infections on Orthodox Jews, but the only actual neighborhood that it offers statistics for is the “Gravesend section of Brooklyn,” a mostly immigrant area that is not home to a Chassidic community and whose Orthodox Jews are Syrian refugees, but is mostly associated with Italian-Americans, with large populations of Chinese and Russian immigrants.

The media won’t stop claiming that Orthodox Jews spread the virus because they make a convenient boogeyman for its hipster readers who despise traditional Judeo-Christian religions.

The New York Times, which has run the most articles blaming Orthodox Jews for the outbreak, has linked them to cultural lefty hobgoblins like opponents of vaccines and Trump supporters.

“N.Y.C. Threatens Orthodox Jewish Areas on Virus, but Trump’s Impact Is Seen,” one New York Times headline read.

The power of othering is that all your hatreds and fears can be projected onto those who are different. And despite all the politically correct lectures on race and hate, the Times needs its own others to hate. The most obvious “tell” is that when the Times writes about any other group, it quotes members of the community, but when it writes about Chassidic Jews, it turns to opponents and critics of the community who are happy to nod along to the negative coverage.

That’s why a rise in positive test results in a Chinese area isn’t a story, a rise in a black area is a story about racism and inequity, but a rise in an Orthodox Jewish area is a story about ignorant religious fanatics who support Trump, insist on praying and don’t trust the medical experts.

The Orthodox Jewish community has suffered from the virus, as have many other groups. It’s no more at fault for it than they are. It isn’t unique because more Orthodox Jews have come down with the virus, but because they make a convenient scapegoat for the failures of Democrat officials like Cuomo and de Blasio, for the blatant flouting of their rules by rioters and hipsters.

Chassidic Jews, in particular, are stereotypically “other” with strange garb, incomprehensible beliefs, accents, large families and long beards, but they’re white enough that hating them is socially acceptable for progressives who can act out their xenophobia without feeling guilty.

Even before the pandemic, the media was eager to provide a platform for every special interest out to bash Orthodox Jews, from the YAFFED campaign by leftists against religious Jewish schools to opponents of circumcision to animal rights cranks campaigning against Kosher meat.

The new coronavirus anti-Semitism relies on the same stereotypes and slurs: Orthodox Jews are ignorant, superstitious, flout authority and need to be saved from their backward ways. These are the progressive prejudices that permeate the media’s coverage of Orthodox Jews. And it’s part of the reason why Orthodox Jews are a Republican constituency in presidential elections.

Bigotry isn’t just about the pleasures of hate. It’s how those in power redirect blame for their crimes and failures, and a means for those who hate to gain a false sense of power and control.

Blaming the upsurge on an outside group creates a false sense of security for everyone else.

And when it’s no longer possible to pretend that the upsurge is limited to Orthodox Jews, then they can still be blamed for having caused it with their weddings, funerals and their prayers.

Best of all, none of the newfound bigots will blame Cuomo or de Blasio.

The two top Democrats who mishandled the pandemic in the worst ways possible, while spewing lies, excuses and smears at their serial press conferences, won’t be held accountable.

And that’s why every time things get worse, Cuomo and de Blasio will blame the Jews.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical left and Islamic terrorism.

{JNS}

From Matzav.com, here.

FREE: Donovan Courville’s Defense of the Biblical Dating of the Exodus

Free PDF: Donovan A. Courville, The Exodus Problem and Its Ramifications, 2 Vols. (1971)

Gary North – September 24, 2020

 

Donovan Courville was a professor of chemistry. In his spare time, he wrote the most important revisionist book on the dating of the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt. He defended the Bible’s dating: 15th century, B.C.

He self-published his two-volume book in 1971. It is difficult to locate a copy.

The book was ignored by Egyptologists. This was predictable. Courville promoted a chronological reconstruction along the lines of the one offered by Immanuel Velikovsky in Ages in Chaos. Velikovsky is a pariah for ancient historians. Not for Courville.

. . . . Velikovsky should be credited with the first serious attempt to point out that there is no genuine possibility of arriving at any credible harmony between Old Testament history and current views, and that the solution lies in the direction of a complete reconstruction of the chronology of the ancient world (Vol. 1, p. 128).

Courville went far beyond Velikovsky’s revision. He was a revisionist’s revisionist.

In 1974, I gave a lesson to R. J. Rushdoony’s Sunday morning Bible study, held in Westwood, California. I mentioned the 13th-century dating of exodus. After the meeting, Rushdoony told me to read Courville’s book. I ordered a copy. I read it. I then recorded a revised presentation, which Rushdoony’s tape producer sent to subscribers.

I found his narrative difficult to follow. He was not a well-organized writer. So, I wrote to him. I asked him to write a summary article on Old Testament biblical chronology for The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, which I edited.

He was retired from Loma Linda University. He asked me to drive to Loma Linda for a talk. He was interviewing me. I met with him. In our discussion, he mentioned that he had published the book under the name “Challenge Books.” He said that he was then contacted by a publishing company with that title. He was asked not to use that name. He agreed. He changed his company’s name to Crest Challenge Books. But it was too late. The book never went into a second edition. He never used the new publisher’s name.

He agreed to write the article. I published it in the Summer 1975 issue. It is here.

This week, I paid to have the book scanned and made searchable. I also appended the 1975 article. It is a large file. It may take two minutes to download. Download it here:

The Exodus Problem and Its Ramifications

From Gary North, here.

This Is SATIRE. Israeli Pols Would Never Be This Explicit

Cabinet Decides Masks, Distancing Only Apply To ‘Little People’

“Everyone should have grasped long ago that there is a special elite to whom the rules do not apply. It’s actually a little shameful to me that we had to make this explicit after all this time.”

Jerusalem, September 24 – Months of tension and recriminations over persistent accusations that prominent political figures flout the measures that the Ministry of Health has mandated to curtail the spread of COVID-19 have led to an official resolution today, in which the government formalized the distinction between hoi polloi and policymakers: the former must adhere to all restrictions, whereas the latter may dispense with measures that only the unworthy masses must maintain.

The cabinet voted unanimously Thursday morning to draw formal social and legal lines between the political aristocracy and the plebeians, in a move aimed at silencing months of criticism concerning senior political figures seen socializing, meeting, and conducting business without social distancing and without masks, even as police and Ministry of Health personnel imposed fines on citizens failing to adhere to the same public health guidelines.

“Officials at the level of government minister or deputy minister, Member of Knesset, ministry director-general, police commissioner, senior military officers, and direct family relation to any of the above are exempt from Ministry of Health distancing measures,” the cabinet’s post-meeting statement read. “We have decided unanimously that we as public officials cannot perform our official duties of exploiting our positions for special treatment and personal gain if we face the restrictions that the Ministry of Health has imposed on the unwashed masses, and have therefore enshrined that exemption into official policy.”

Cabinet members expressed hope that the formalization of the different statuses will settle the issue once and for all. “It’s really ridiculous that it had to come to this,” lamented Alternate Prime Minister Benny Gantz. “In our society, everyone should have grasped long ago that there is a special elite to whom the rules do not apply. It’s actually a little shameful to me that we had to make this explicit after all this time.”

Opposition figures voiced cautious praise for the move. “My main criticism is this should have happened way back in March, so we could spare ourselves a lot of useless rhetoric in the meantime,” stated Opposition leader Yair Lapid. “But at least now we can get back to the main reason we’re all here instead of fielding complaints from every little serf out there who saw Joe MK at a wedding without a mask and wants to know why he gets fined if he does the same thing. Well, it’s because you’re a nobody, that’s why. Let’s move on, please.”

Please support our work through Patreon.

From PreOccupied Territory, here.

Rabbi Kook’s Advice for ‘Corona Zionists’

Like Doves Flying Home

In the 1930s, a group of new immigrants visited Rav Kook in Jerusalem. The Jewish refugees had fled Germany, forced to leave behind most of their wealth and property.

As the chief rabbi met with them, he felt the depth of their dejection and unhappiness.

Wishing to boost their spirits, Rav Kook quoted Isaiah’s comforting words of consolation. With poetic imagery, the prophet described Jerusalem’s amazement as her children — the Jewish people — suddenly return after long years of exile:

 

מִי אֵלֶּה כָּעָב תְּעוּפֶינָה וְכַיּוֹנִים אֶל אֲרֻבֹּתֵיהֶם.

“Who are these? They fly like clouds, like doves returning to their cotes!” (Isaiah 60:8)

What is the difference, Rav Kook asked the new arrivals, between the flight of a cloud and that of a dove? Why did Isaiah use these two analogies?

Clouds and Doves

A cloud, he explained, moves involuntarily. Buffeted by storms and strong winds, clouds are pushed from place to place.

The dove, however, is a different story. It flies where it wishes to travel. Longing for home, the dove returns to its beloved nest.

Isaiah foresaw that the Jews returning to the Land of Israel would not be a homogenous group. Some would arrive charged with idealism. Stirred by powerful yearnings to return to their homeland, they would come like doves returning to their cotes.

But other Jews would migrate because violent storms uprooted them from their countries. With few available options, they would find themselves in the Land of Israel, wandering like the involuntary movement of clouds.

Rav Kook then spoke directly to the new immigrants:

Even those who arrive like displaced clouds can find within themselves the longings of a dove wanting to come home. Once you have discovered these aspirations within, you will be able to make your homes here in joy and happiness. As it says,

 

וּפְדוּיֵי ה’ יְשׁוּבוּן וּבָאוּ צִיּוֹן בְּרִנָּה וְשִׂמְחַת עוֹלָם עַל רֹאשָׁם.
שָׂשׂוֹן וְשִׂמְחָה יַשִּׂיגוּן נָסוּ יָגוֹן וַאֲנָחָה.

 

“Those whom God redeemed will return.
Singing, they will enter Zion;
everlasting joy will crown their heads.
Gladness and joy will overtake them,
while sorrow and sighing will flee away.” (Isaiah 51:11)

 

(Adapted from Mo’adei HaRe’iyah pp. 148-149)

From Rav Kook Torah, here.