# Helen Thomas calls group's criticism of opinions 'intimidation'



## Big Don (Dec 9, 2010)

* Posted: Dec. 8, 2010  | Updated: 3:11 p.m.  Dec. 8, 2010 *

*Helen Thomas calls group's criticism of opinions 'intimidation'*

                      By Niraj Warikoo
Free Press Staff Writer Detroit Free Press EXCERPT:
Defending her controversial comments in Dearborn, journalist Helen Thomas said on a radio show  aired Tuesday that a prominent Jewish group was intimidating her. And  she maintained her belief that Zionists are controlling U.S. foreign  policy.
                              "I just think that people should be enlightened as to who is in  charge of the opinion in this country," Thomas, 90, told the Marion,  Ohio, radio station, WMRN-AM. "I mean, they've gotten the First  Amendment." 
In response, ADL Director Abe Foxman told the Free Press today  that the group has a right to criticize Thomas, whose bigoted comments  are "doing body blows to her image." 
After she said Thursday in Dearborn that Zionists control major  U.S. institutions, the head of the Anti-Defamation League, Abe Foxman,  said her comments were "classic...anti-Semitism." He called upon groups  and universities to disassociate themselves from her by removing any  honors in her name. Hours later, Wayne State University pulled a  journalism award in her name. 
"I'm going to tell the Anti-Defamation League to back off,"  Thomas said on the radio show. "They think they have the right of  intimidation." 
"They already got my job. They want to get my honorary degrees. I  mean, who are these people? What's the matter, they can't take freedom  of speech?" 
She added: "I'm getting tired of this intimidation. I'm  going to report him (ADL director Abe Foxman) to President Obama and all  the proper authorities. He better stop intimidating me. He has to shut  up everyone in the country who is against Israeli tyranny. That's his  job. That's what he is paid for." 

END EXCERPT
So, pointing out that her saying the Jews control EVERYTHING, is bigoted is "intimidation?" You'd think someone who had spent so long in journalism would know the first amendment only protects people from the government.


----------



## billc (Dec 9, 2010)

I have to say, someone should ask her to leave public life and go into retirement in a more obvious way.  Keep her away from microphones and cameras.  I never liked her but this is like kicking puppies.  Whoever does put  a microphone in front of her should be ashamed of themselves.  Her fellow journalists should protect her from herself.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 9, 2010)

This is the Guardian's story on the venerable lady:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/08/helen-thomas-reporter-why-resign

Now, is she gradually losing her faculties and mixing conspiracy 'fluff' with verifiable fact or has she just finally got fed up of keeping quiet on certain issues?  From what I have read elsewhere over the years, the ADL is a 'piece of work', as our trans-Atlantic cousins say, so I'm not surprised a reporter of this ladies pedigree is pushing back.


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 9, 2010)

Most people are okay with 'intimidating' people with dissenting opinions.  They only rediscover their devotion to free speech when their own opinion gets attacked.  Boo fricking hoo.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> This is the Guardian's story on the venerable lady:
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/08/helen-thomas-reporter-why-resign
> 
> Now, is she gradually losing her faculties and mixing conspiracy 'fluff' with verifiable fact or has she just finally got fed up of keeping quiet on certain issues? From what I have read elsewhere over the years, *the ADL is a 'piece of work'*, as our trans-Atlantic cousins say, so I'm not surprised a reporter of this ladies pedigree is pushing back.


 

Really? why do you say that? Can't have 'uppity' Jews.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 9, 2010)

I think you know me better than that, Tez.  

NGO's have a tendency to go beyond their remit and the ADL is not an exception.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> I think you know me better than that, Tez.
> 
> NGO's have a tendency to go beyond their remit and the ADL is not an exception.


 

Does the ADL have a remit? Or is it what we the members decide it is? We fight anti semitism where ever it's found and saying that the Jews control everything smacks of the fear of someone who is anti semitic.
http://www.adl.org/about.asp?s=topmenu

http://www.adl.org/latino_affairs/

http://www.adl.org/civil_rights/


Go straight to the horses mouth and ask them if they go beyond their 'remit' which is the protection of our people.


----------



## granfire (Dec 9, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Does the ADL have a remit? Or is it what we the members decide it is? We fight anti semitism where ever it's found and saying that the Jews control everything smacks of the fear of someone who is anti semitic.
> http://www.adl.org/about.asp?s=topmenu
> 
> http://www.adl.org/latino_affairs/
> ...




I did not follow the links.
But I would like to respectfully disagree. 

The situation these days is that the action, events transpireing in Israel these days are dispicable. I do understand the threat of bombers. But I can also see a cause and effect. 

However if anybody - regardless of nationality or party book were to point out how ridiculous and outright unethical these actions are, you are automatically pushed into the league of antisemits/nazis. 

Freedom of speech is not for those who repeat popular opinion. 

And sometimes the biggest nonsense spewed can be a spark for new ideas. Sometimes even better ones. 

And frankly, dismissing her opinion because she is old is disgraceful. maybe she just got old enough to not care anymore. 

The wall building, travel restrictions and all that jazz have parallels in history and frankly not good ones. 
It is difficult to have a clear course when the state and the ideology are so tightly intertwined. So to not get your butt into hot water you ignore the blatant blunders the state either condones or actively encourages. 
Israel has become the wild card in the middle east. A target to most neighbors and only a fragile alliance keeps things in check. 



Personally I don't spend the energy to compartmentalize people much, I have 2 categories that work well for me: Nice guys and a$$holes...I usually find more for the first, less to go in the latter category. Life can be easy...


(Edit: maybe later I go back and read the links, so I am sure I disagreed to what I think I did)


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 9, 2010)

granfire said:


> I did not follow the links.
> But I would like to respectfully disagree.
> 
> The situation these days is that the action, events transpireing in Israel these days are dispicable. I do understand the threat of bombers. But I can also see a cause and effect.
> ...


 
No disrespect intended, but I really don't think you understand the threat of the bombers.  Or rather, you don't understand the _nature_ of them.  Israel isn't thinking up stuff to do to the "Palestinians" for the hell of it.  They're just not as good at working the media.  



granfire said:


> The wall building, travel restrictions and all that jazz have parallels in history and frankly not good ones.


 
No, they don't.  There is a world of difference between holding someone in and holding them out.  There's no parallel.


----------



## granfire (Dec 9, 2010)

CoryKS said:


> No disrespect intended, but I really don't think you understand the threat of the bombers.  Or rather, you don't understand the _nature_ of them.  Israel isn't thinking up stuff to do to the "Palestinians" for the hell of it.  They're just not as good at working the media.
> 
> 
> 
> No, they don't.  There is a world of difference between holding someone in and holding them out.  There's no parallel.



There is a lot in life I don't understand. Bombers are one of them. I mean, they should have gotten a clue by now that nobody really wants them...

But anyhow. There are so many things going on that are not right, culminating in abominable walls. and yes, some keep people in, some keep people out. 

been a couple of decades, something blows up, the border between the westbank and the mainland are closed, keeping people from going to work...in or out, it's a matter of perspective. Officially Gaza strip and the west bank are not part of Israel, which did not and does not prohibit Jewish settlers to build villages there. 
By now there is such a quagmire you can't simply say we give the land back, because there are too many of your people living there. That creates a situation that is fair to nobody.

But the point would be this: Am I antisemitic for realizing that the state of Israel is making grave mistakes in the matter?

I think the lady has a valid point. The slightest 'erm, that's not good' is met with a 'YOU HATE US' 
That is insane! So nobody speaks their mind, or calls the offenders - regardless of religion or nationality - to task. And you have effectively given in to a bully. 


Then you got a segment of the population bullying the rest, which you despise and bingo, you are a hater...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2010)

Why do people assume that Israel is the only thing connected to the Jews? Why assume that's what I'm talking about? Do Catholics have to take the blame for Italy's doings?

Anti semitism is rife in many countries, there's neo Nazis we are trying to fight, there's racists who hate anyone not of their ilk, we have Jews in Arab countries that need help, there's Jews in Russia and other former USSR countries that need help but no it's all about Israel, as if every single Jew is responsible for what goes on there and every single Jew is in agreement with what is happening there.

No, lets blame every Jew for Israel instead of looking at the anti semitism that's going on in front of you. I believe the anti semitic remarks this woman made were specifically about Jews in America 'running' everything but no let's bring up Israel instead shall we?


----------



## CanuckMA (Dec 9, 2010)

granfire said:


> There is a lot in life I don't understand. Bombers are one of them. I mean, they should have gotten a clue by now that nobody really wants them...
> 
> But anyhow. There are so many things going on that are not right, culminating in abominable walls. and yes, some keep people in, some keep people out.


 
Other than some ara to provide protection from sniper fire, the 'wall' is mostly a fence. Just like between the US and Mexico. Between Egypt and Gaza. Between India and Bangladesh.



> been a couple of decades, something blows up, the border between the westbank and the mainland are closed, keeping people from going to work...in or out, it's a matter of perspective. Officially Gaza strip and the west bank are not part of Israel, which did not and does not prohibit Jewish settlers to build villages there.


 
Egypt and Jordan occupied that land up to '67. They don't want it back.



> By now there is such a quagmire you can't simply say we give the land back, because there are too many of your people living there. That creates a situation that is fair to nobody.


 
Israel will gladly give it back if it means peace. They tried with Gaza. What did that bring? a new launchpad for rocket attacks and an extremist Islamic government. 

Have a look at the West Bank. There have been no terrorist attacks from there in quite a while. And they have the fastest growing economy in the region. 



> But the point would be this: Am I antisemitic for realizing that the state of Israel is making grave mistakes in the matter?
> 
> I think the lady has a valid point. The slightest 'erm, that's not good' is met with a 'YOU HATE US'
> That is insane! So nobody speaks their mind, or calls the offenders - regardless of religion or nationality - to task. And you have effectively given in to a bully.
> ...


 

Criticizing the govt's actions is Israel's national sport. A rational critique is fine. When the lady spews out that Israelis should go back to Germany and Poland and that the Jews control the US, that's the slide into anti-semitism.


And just before you cry about how horrible the Jews are, care to hazzard a guess which country has absorbed the greater number of Muslim refugees from the Sudan?


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 9, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Why do people assume that Israel is the only thing connected to the Jews? Why assume that's what I'm talking about? Do Catholics have to take the blame for Italy's doings?
> 
> Anti semitism is rife in many countries, there's neo Nazis we are trying to fight, there's racists who hate anyone not of their ilk, we have Jews in Arab countries that need help, there's Jews in Russia and other former USSR countries that need help but no it's all about Israel, as if every single Jew is responsible for what goes on there and every single Jew is in agreement with what is happening there.
> 
> No, lets blame every Jew for Israel instead of looking at the anti semitism that's going on in front of you. I believe the anti semitic remarks this woman made were specifically about Jews in America 'running' everything but no let's bring up Israel instead shall we?


 
Well, the remark that initially got Thomas into trouble was something to the effect that the Jews need to "get the hell out of Palestine". Which is when the ADL came into it and _then_ she went off about Jews controlling everything. So Israel is connected to this particular case though of course not to all anti-semitism.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2010)

CoryKS said:


> Well, the remark that initially got Thomas into trouble was something to the effect that the Jews need to "get the hell out of Palestine". Which is when the ADL came into it and _then_ she went off about Jews controlling everything. So Israel is connected to this particular case though of course not to all anti-semitism.


 
Well I'm trying to point out that not all Jews are involved in Israel and not all the government members in Israel are actually Jews, so why isn't she saying the Israelis should get out of 'Palestine'? I don't go around saying the Christians should get out of Afghanistan, I'd say the Americans, British etc should get out or even stay, why this 'Jew' thing all the time? I'm also pointing out that the ADL is there to defend Jews, why shouldn't they be but instead we get a rant about how bad the Jews are in Israel, it missed my point about the Jews helping Hispanics in America then didn't it?

This woman can say what the hell she likes about Israel but when she starts spouting  the 'Jews' run everything stuff then I get annoyed and will protest. It's the latter remark that is offensive.


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 9, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Well I'm trying to point out that not all Jews are involved in Israel and not all the government members in Israel are actually Jews, so why isn't she saying the Israelis should get out of 'Palestine'? I don't go around saying the Christians should get out of Afghanistan, I'd say the Americans, British etc should get out or even stay, why this 'Jew' thing all the time? I'm also pointing out that the ADL is there to defend Jews, why shouldn't they be but instead we get a rant about how bad the Jews are in Israel, it missed my point about the Jews helping Hispanics in America then didn't it?
> 
> This woman can say what the hell she likes about Israel but when she starts spouting the 'Jews' run everything stuff then I get annoyed and will protest. It's the latter remark that is offensive.


 
I see what you're saying, but I don't see the relevance of it in this case.  I mean, the woman went full moron and you're arguing the semantics of it.  Would it have been any less moronic for her to have said the Israelis need to get out of Palestine?  Besides which, I think the word choice was intentional on her part.  If she had said Israelis, it would have implied that there is a nation called Israel and its citizens need to move; saying that the Jews need to leave denies the very existence of Israel.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2010)

CoryKS said:


> I see what you're saying, but I don't see the relevance of it in this case. I mean, the woman went full moron and you're arguing the semantics of it. Would it have been any less moronic for her to have said the Israelis need to get out of Palestine? Besides which, I think the word choice was intentional on her part. If she had said Israelis, it would have implied that there is a nation called Israel and its citizens need to move; saying that the Jews need to leave denies the very existence of Israel.


 
As a Jew in the UK I rather mind some American woman telling me I should get out of 'Palestine'
Calling Israel Palestine actually denies the existance of Israel.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 9, 2010)

The very issue of the existence of a state called Israel is a whole other whirlpool of international decisions, sad to say.  I'd like to say they were made with the best of intentions but communal Holocaust Guilt saw to it that 'promises' made during wartime to gain cooperation were carried through, despite the fact that trying to compensate for one wrong caused another one.

But we are getting a bit far off beam with regard to the actual topic of this thread and I am sorry to say that I am the cause of it, allbeit without intent.

My question was actually meant to be with regard to the state of mind of the long serving reporter in question and was meant to be provoking of thought in a whole other direction than the track that is being followed here.

As to the ADL, that could be the subejct of another thread perhaps but I can't see it being a productive one - ever wish you'd never mentioned something?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2010)

The ADL, needs must when the devil drives.


----------



## CoryKS (Dec 9, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> The ADL, needs must when the devil drives.


 
I'm completely failing at parsing this sentence.  Could you please explain this?  Sounds like a quote of some sort, but it's not one I'm familiar with.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2010)

CoryKS said:


> I'm completely failing at parsing this sentence. Could you please explain this? Sounds like a quote of some sort, but it's not one I'm familiar with.


 
It didn't occur to me that this might not be known outside UK, sorry!

Try this explanation. 

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-nee1.htm

basically I used the espression to mean that when things are bad we have to use whatever means we can like it or not.


----------



## Big Don (Dec 9, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> It didn't occur to me that this might not be known outside UK, sorry!
> 
> Try this explanation.
> 
> ...


Speak American, damn it, we don't speak English!


----------



## CanuckMA (Dec 9, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> The very issue of the existence of a state called Israel is a whole other whirlpool of international decisions, sad to say. I'd like to say they were made with the best of intentions but communal Holocaust Guilt saw to it that 'promises' made during wartime to gain cooperation were carried through, despite the fact that trying to compensate for one wrong caused another one.


 

The idea of recreating Israel where it once was pre-dates the Shoah. See Theodore Herzl  and also the Balfour Declaration.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

CanuckMA said:


> The idea of recreating Israel where it once was pre-dates the Shoah. See Theodore Herzl and also the Balfour Declaration.


 

QFT
As far as the UK is concerned it's more making good a promise they reneged on earlier in the century. 
The end of the last world war was an opportunity for people to make good what was already promised to the Jewish people long belong that war, it didn't come about suddenly because people felt guilty. The Jewish people weren't promised anything for their co-operation, there was none to give and none asked though many Jews who were already in Israel did join the Allied forces and of course Jews did their bit for the war effort in whatever Allied country they lived in but that wasn't in return for anything other than they were fighting for freedom with everyone else.


----------



## billc (Dec 10, 2010)

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/is-dr-doolittle-working-with-mossad/


----------



## billc (Dec 10, 2010)

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/daniel-pipes-israel-has-no-policy/ 


here is a link.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

billcihak said:


> http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/is-dr-doolittle-working-with-mossad/


 

:lfao::lfao::lfao::lfao::lfao::lfao:

You want to see what they are teaching the kittens. Ninja cats!


----------



## Big Don (Dec 10, 2010)




----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2010)

billcihak said:


> http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/daniel-pipes-israel-has-no-policy/
> 
> 
> here is a link.


 
Well, that's as naff as hell, dear me, Nonentities spouting hot air bless them. I hope you aren't taking this as being genuinely insightful political thought, it's all bollocks.


----------



## billc (Dec 10, 2010)

I now have the power of the link.  Fear me.  The mac is a little different than the pc.


----------



## billc (Dec 10, 2010)

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2010/12/10/students-against-hummus-not-hamas/#more-425493

Perhaps the Israelis should surrender now.


----------



## CanuckMA (Dec 12, 2010)

billcihak said:


> I now have the power of the link. Fear me. The mac is a little different than the pc.


 

Now you need to aquire the power of the quote to at least quote some relevant text from the link. There are some of us who don't click on random links.


----------



## billc (Dec 12, 2010)

I'll work on that.  The link thing was a big step for me.  The thing that threw me is that I tried the control c thing but it wasn't working.  My brother pointed out, "Hey, you have a Mac, you probably use command c," and presto, the power of the link was mine.  Any thoughts on quotes with a mac?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 12, 2010)

billcihak said:


> I'll work on that. The link thing was a big step for me. The thing that threw me is that I tried the control c thing but it wasn't working. My brother pointed out, "Hey, you have a Mac, you probably use command c," and presto, the power of the link was mine. Any thoughts on quotes *with a mac*?


 

Best when raining.


----------

