January 21, 2012
Jewish American newspaper publisher suggests Israel assassinate Barack Obama
Chemi Shalev in Haaretz:
The owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, Andrew Adler, has suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu consider ordering a Mossad hit team to assassinate U.S. President Barack Obama so that his successor will defend Israel against Iran.
Adler, who has since apologized for his article, listed three options for Israel to counter Iran’s nuclear weapons in an article published in his newspaper last Friday. The first is to launch a pre-emptive strike against Hamas and Hezbollah, the second is to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities and the third is to “give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place and forcefully dictate that the United States’ policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.”
Adler goes on to write: “Yes, you read “three correctly.” Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel’s existence. Think about it. If have thought of this Tom-Clancy-type scenario, don’t you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel’s most inner circles?”
More here.
Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 03:03 PM | Permalink
Comments
What a jerk that so-called journalist is.
Clearly, he should know better than to say what he really thinks.
Posted by: Dredd | Jan 21, 2012 3:10:33 PM
Haha, how I love reactionaries.
Posted by: Foppe | Jan 21, 2012 3:32:45 PM
Isn't "American right-wing (wannabe) pundit makes offensive and inane statement, without any material repercussion" the "dog bites man" of our times?
Posted by: Max | Jan 21, 2012 3:44:19 PM
Ruchira: If Mossad went ahead with Adler' idea, how many GOP congressmen's co-operation can it count on?
Apt question. More important, how many and which media personalities in the US will cooperate or condone? By extension, what percentage of US population would condone this act? What a way to reveal the primary colors!
CF
Posted by: CF | Jan 21, 2012 4:18:02 PM
I believe this was no faux pas, but a calculated bid to gauge the outrage such a statement would provoke. And if the outrage cannot be judged as great enough? Well, then Adler & Co will know something. If Jews all over the world will not speak up to slap Mr. Adler down, then is it a sign they see what he means, and would not greatly mind the life of a US president being made a forfeit to Rightist government now in power in Israel? I certainly hope not.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jan 21, 2012 5:32:58 PM
"I believe this was no faux pas, but a calculated bid to gauge the outrage such a statement would provoke."
This is a terrible thing to suggest Elatia. Unless I misread you, you're suggesting that the Israeli government -- or perhaps a cabal of right wing Jews -- is contemplating the assassination of President Obama, and has released a trial balloon to see what the reaction is likely to be if they go through with their plan. Do you have any evidence at all to support this accusation?
Posted by: Dave Hammer | Jan 21, 2012 7:04:50 PM
Dave, you've made a leap I didn't suggest, and you do misread me.
I do believe that this _kind_ of outrageous, "I got carried away" remark that people may apologize for but can never really take back, is not an accident but a strategy to gauge support by testing what the blowback is. And I believe Adler should be treated like other people who call publicly for the death of a president. Sarah Palin has come so close, for instance. But Adler is a responsible journalist who was not rallying malcontents via a speech but writing for a respectable paper. I cannot believe he misjudges the gravity of his words, and has simply let them slip out in an indiscreet moment.
My believing there's method in Adler's madness is a far cry from _knowing_ that the Israeli Government finds Obama too little a friend of Israel to bear with, or that Adler is a tool of a cabal of right wing Jews who have it in for Obama. I hope that the many people who do not like the president, for their very own reasons, will be satisfied if he leaves office alive, but have you seen that the death threats he gets exceed in number those of other US presidents? This latest has not added to that number only in that it is a call for his death rather than a threat to bring it about. One can have a purely legalistic appreciation of that difference.
And, for all I know, Adler's text could well be along the lines of that famous though many-versioned utterance of Henry II re Thomas a Becket: "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" People who thought they understood the king the right way acted fast to oblige him, though of course he he commanded no one's death, exactly.
Finally, instead of getting all over me about what you hope I did not mean, and instead of wondering if I can support it -- why don't you get all over Adler? Like it or not, he's the heavy here. He has called for the death of the President of the United States, and linked that wished-for death to the benefit of Israel. How, after this, can he be other than an intimate and grotesquely misguided enemy of the best prospects for long term survival that Israel has?
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jan 21, 2012 8:35:11 PM
Elatia,
Well of course I denounce Adler. In fact, I think he should be prosecuted, since it sounds like he actually was soliciting support for the assassination of the president. And yes, I've been reading with dismay the hints and sometimes more than hints by right-wing ghouls that O'Bama should be killed, and this sickens and frightens me. But I read your post to suggest that there was a Jewish plot to kill the president in the crazy belief that this would somehow improve Israel's strategic position. With such suggestions (e.g. that 9/11 was a Jewish plot to get the US to invade Iraq) I also am familiar. And while I'm very glad to learn that's not what you were implying, I do think your post could have been a little clearer.
Posted by: Dave Hammer | Jan 21, 2012 9:12:28 PM
I can't help but notice the similarities, in lack of legal consequences, to the case of Robert Novak outing Valerie Plame as a CIA agent, which, from everything I've read, met the legal definition of treason, in US law. (I'm assuming, for lack of evidence to the contrary, that Adler hasn't been whisked off by the Secret Service and charged with making threats, and that reaction was confined to the sort of outraged calls for him to apologize we see quoted, and nothing stronger.) Would a leftwinger or an anarchist be treated so lightly?
Posted by: Kai Matthews | Jan 21, 2012 9:26:13 PM
I see that I've made the president Irish, referring to him as O'Bama. Meant Obama.
Posted by: Dave Hammer | Jan 21, 2012 9:27:33 PM
Well Dave, the president is actually part Irish. People who hate him because of his appearance forget that he is 50% white.
The most troubling part of this story is not that one angry man was wishing out loud but that he also slyly hints, "If [I]have thought of this Tom-Clancy-type scenario, don’t you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel’s most inner circles?
It is Adler who is thinking about a putative Jewish (specifically, Israeli) hit squad that wants to assassinate Obama for the supposed benefit of Israel. I hope Netanyahu would come out and denounce this man loudly and unequivocally while he is sweating it out with the US Secret Service.
Posted by: Ruchira | Jan 21, 2012 9:38:23 PM
Yes, I think you're correct. Adler didn't come out of nowhere. The Jewish right has grown increasingly crazy about Obama, and not just the lunatic right but the almost respectable Norman Podhoretz/Martin Peretz crowd who really did support the invasion of Iraq in the crack-brained belief that it would help Israel. But until Adler, I hadn't heard any of them call for murder.
Posted by: Dave Hammer | Jan 21, 2012 9:48:28 PM
Re: The Bid to Gauge the Outrage.
1. As we speak, Jews all over the world are speaking up and slapping Adler down (and subscriptions to the Atlanta Jewish Times have dropped from 67 to 34).
2. Fortunately for the POTUS, outrage has been gauged as 'high' by Adler & Co.
3. Consequently, the Co from Adler & Co now know 'something' and furthermore they now have a clear 'sign' that the assassination is a definite no go.
4. Democrats can rest easy.
Posted by: Troy | Jan 21, 2012 9:54:02 PM
http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2012/01/jewish-newspaper-proposes-obamas-assassination-789.html#more
Posted by: Louise Gordon | Jan 21, 2012 10:21:09 PM
http://www.politicususa.com/en/sergeant-prayer-obama
Posted by: Louise Gordon | Jan 21, 2012 10:44:15 PM
Troy, I take it you thought my remarks were excessive and perhaps anti-Semitic. If so, you are singling out the wrong person for those things. Andrew Adler is the loose-lipped one here, and, for the odium that gets heaped on Jews when such as Adler get more disinhibited in their communications than usual, whether he is a true friend to Israel should be starkly in question. I think he's about as aligned with the actual interests of Israel as those elderly Haredi who troubled to spit on an 8-year old girl last week, for dressing modestly but not modestly enough.
Also, I have read that the AJT, going on 100 years old, is a community newspaper with a subscriber base of approximately 3500. Adler is a relatively new owner, and it has not flourished under him, but I still don't know where your numbers come from. If you mean between 34 and 67 individual subscribers have cancelled in the last week -- well, good. Many more like that. Adler has gone on record saying he "only" wanted to see what people in the community said, how they reacted. So I guess not too many are coming out for him. But if I said I read the papers and knew that Obama was not terribly popular among ultra-rightist American Jews, so that my understanding is yet that Adler probably has adherents, even though they are not openly high-fiving him these days, what could I be accused of -- reading the papers and noticing that a menacing trend (menacing also, perhaps most of all, to Israel) is gathering strength?
Finally it is not a matter of partisan politics whether the president is assassinated, so it's not just Democrats who are worried by ghastly situations like this. Religious fundamentalism of every stripe is a hideous and incalculable threat at this time in history. We should be prepared to call out rather than roll our eyes at any believer who broadcasts his murderous and rageful thoughts -- crazy people who think they can be martyrs and heroes are listening to those dog-whistles.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jan 21, 2012 11:02:15 PM
Why should only Democrats rest easy that the president may now not be assassinated? Shouldn't you too, Troy? Or do you think that Adler was not that outrageous, after all?
Posted by: Ruchira | Jan 21, 2012 11:37:33 PM
Adler is a kook Ruchira and I think in most cases there is bi-partisan rejoicing that the POTUS will not be assassinated. As a non-Yank I think he's the best president the US has had in decades, so it would be a pity if the Co from Adler & Co did indeed give Mossad the nod to whack the Pres. Thank god for the suitable level of outrage from 'Jews all over the world' being plainly visible otherwise the Co from Adler & Co may well have green-lit the hit.
Posted by: Troy | Jan 22, 2012 3:31:28 AM
He should be prosecuted and jailed just like Hal Turner was for similar recommendations for the judges in Chicago.
But then our justice system is not fair is it?
The corrupt justice department tried him numerous times before they could overcome a hung jury.
Let's end all foreign aid to Israel. After all, America is broke isn't it?
Posted by: W.J. Abbe | Jan 22, 2012 2:22:47 PM
By the way, there is a hearing this week, Thursday, Jan. 26, in Atlanta, challenging the placement of Mr. Obama on the ballot in Georgia. The news about this hearing, which is being obstructed by Mr. Obama, and his continuing refusal to provide detailed information about his background, is being censored by most of the cowardly media. Here are a few links:
Georgia judge orders President to appear at hearing , breaking news,
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/ga-judge-orders-president-1310568.html?cxtype=rss_news_61499 January 20, 2012.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/judge-rejects-obama-demand-to-quash-subpoena/
Partial quote from above article:
Judge Michael M. Malihi, however, took a different view.
“Defendant argues that ‘if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as president of the United States’ to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend,” he wrote in his order, released today.
“Defendant’s motion suggests that no president should be compelled to attend a court hearing. This may be correct. But defendant has failed to enlighten the court with any legal authority,” the judge continued.
“Specifically, defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is ‘unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony … [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party’s preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced.’”
The claim is that Mr. Obama does not satisfy the demand of our U.S. Constitution that he is a natural born citizen since his Father was by his own admission not a U.S. Citizen. So far the authorities have been giving the middle finger to our Consitution which so many have died "defending".
Posted by: W.J. Abbe | Jan 22, 2012 2:48:56 PM
Ooh, look, a birther!
Posted by: Zora | Jan 23, 2012 1:34:02 AM
Mr. Abbe is constantly writing off-topic comments on science posts pushing various crackpot theories (usually involving cancer cures) that have nothing to do with the topic of the post, so it's no surprise he'd write an off-topic comment on this post pushing some new mutation of birtherism. He might consider the fact that Chester A. Arthur's father was not a citizen at the time of Arthur's birth, as well as the precedent set by United States vs. Wong Kim, an 1898 case involving a child born in the US to Chinese parents; the Supreme Court decided that Wong Kim was indeed a citizen under the 14th Amendment. From the "opinion of the court" section of the article:
'Upholding the concept of jus soli (citizenship based on place of birth),[86] the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment's citizenship clause needed to be interpreted in light of English common law,[87] which had included as subjects virtually all native-born children, excluding only those who were born to foreign rulers or diplomats, born on foreign public ships, or born to enemy forces engaged in hostile occupation of the country's territory.[88][89][90] The court's majority held that the subject to the jurisdiction phrase in the Citizenship Clause excluded from U.S. citizenship only those persons covered by one of these three exceptions (plus a fourth—namely, that Indian tribes "not taxed" were not considered subject to U.S. jurisdiction[91][92]). The majority concluded that none of these four exceptions to U.S. jurisdiction applied to Wong; in particular, they observed that "during all the time of their said residence in the United States, as domiciled residents therein, the said mother and father of said Wong Kim Ark were engaged in the prosecution of business, and were never engaged in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China".[54]'
Posted by: Jesse M. | Jan 23, 2012 2:43:44 AM
The call to get the Mossad to kill Obama is disgusting in so many ways, but the fact is that the internet / press is so full of extreemist views that you can't reasonably expect the Israeli PM to issue a condemnation everytime one of these obscenities surface. May I remind you that that the GOP and Fox News came as close as is legal to endorsing the Gabrielle Gifford shooting.
Also, I should point out that the Mossad is not at the behest of the right wing in Israel, and the idea that lack of sufficient Jewish outrage at the remark would be a greenlight for a Mossad operation is ludicrous.
Posted by: aguy109 | Jan 23, 2012 10:21:49 AM
How sad that the Jews, having been victims of Nazis, have become Nazis themselves. It's well known how victims become victimizers. And it clearly is a serious crime to call for the assassination of the president.
Posted by: reader | Jan 23, 2012 11:21:50 AM
No, aguy109, you cannot expect the Israeli PM to provide a running commentary on all the craziness there is on the Internet and otherwise in the media -- even I, my hands idle from running no government at all, do not ferret out all the nut-bars there are for special odium. The AJT is not delivered online, either, so the story waited a week to get legs. Still, an American newspaper owner who reaches about 3500 people with his paper, and who presumes to lay out "the options" for Netanyahu, one of which is to order the murder of the President of the United States, is not the maker of the average rant. It is precisely because of the "almost guilty of endorsing the shooting of Giffords" situation that you speak of that any media rabble-rouser, no matter how "zany" needs to be admonished. As there is nothing almost illegal about what Andrew Adler did, perhaps he will be prosecuted for calling for the death of the president.
Further, while lack of Jewish outrage at this hideous situation is not a literal nudge to Mossad -- who said it was? -- it goes into the creation of a climate of escalating danger to everyone, and invites the kind of blowback that law-abiding, non-violent Muslims in a position to speak up know too well whenever they hold back from denouncing extremely harmful members of the faithful who call for drastic and sickening measures to be taken. Don't you ever wish, that for the honor of peaceable Muslims everywhere -- Muslims who do not think writers should be murdered nor peoples eliminated -- more would speak out when Islamist extremists treat the world to their threats and hate speech?
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jan 23, 2012 11:46:54 AM
This story was not reported at all in that bastion of the free press, the New york Times and the Washington Post (at least that I came across or resulted from a Google search). So much for outrage!
And how did this article on a Jewish extremist also become an indictment of Muslims who do not speak out against their own extremists. While this is true, it is unfair to drag in a whole people into this discussion, even if you are trying to defend them, which I truly and honestly believe you are. It would be like someone comparing the lack of Jewish outrage on this incident to the lack of Vatican outrage during the holocaust.
Posted by: Raza | Jan 23, 2012 1:24:47 PM
Raza, I stand by my analogy. When moderate and law-abiding Muslims (an overwhelming majority of Muslims, that is) do not call out the fanatics among the faithful, it raises suspicion in suspicious outsiders in precisely the same way that failure to denounce Jewish crackpots can make violence-hating Jews look complicit. I understand that everyone is reluctant to speak in public against their own people, no matter how extreme -- that's natural. But, can it be also overdone? As for the Vatican, the powers that be there fit into this dynamic re: purging the Catholic Church of pedophile priests and making reparations to the children those priests have hurt. That they don't do this lays them open to charges they are unaware or uncaring that those children have rights that were deeply violated.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jan 23, 2012 3:49:20 PM
Elatia, First of all I agreed with your analogy and I said so in my post. My point was that you could just as well have given some other as example, which you did in your next comment.
Not to pick, but here is another example of stereotyping that goes round and round... "moderate and law-abiding Muslims (an overwhelming majority of Muslims, that is)". Well, if the great majority of Muslims are indeed moderate and law abiding, why use these adjectives to qualify the word Muslim as if "Muslim" by itself implied extremist and criminal. Why not say "the extremist and law breaking ones amongst the Muslims" and then make your point. To me, for anyone to say "moderate and law-abiding Christians (an overwhelming majority of Christians, that is)" would be an insult to all moderate and law-abiding Christians, or Jews, or Hindus, or Buddhists, as the case may be.
Posted by: Raza | Jan 23, 2012 6:09:22 PM
Raza, sorry to have offended you, but I don't want to split hairs. Your post upstream does not appear to agree with me on second reading, any more than on first. No matter. Most people of every stripe are moderate in their views and law-abiding in their behavior. Also, most people belong to some kind of an in-group, and may be hotly critical of others within it among themselves, but not to placate out-groups. As Dr. Jonathan Miller once remarked, "I am not much of a Jew among other Jews, but I am a formidable Jew for anti-Semites." If, however, moderate people spoke their minds -- at times like this (the AJT article), for reasons like this (crazies are the minority here) -- out-group members would not be given the means to paint whole civilizations with a very broad brush. Out-group members would at least ponder the idea that that their thinking might run to stereotyping, and that a faith community they don't know well but have heard bad things about, can be, and usually is, highly diverse. In recognizing this kind of diversity, people do draw closer together -- the world needs that rapprochement.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Jan 23, 2012 6:54:59 PM
The guy who made this statement has now resigned, so that's something anyway.
Posted by: Jesse M. | Jan 23, 2012 8:22:12 PM
Resignation may be "something" but not enough. This man needs to be interrogated and prosecuted for incitement. That will send a message to reckless loose mouths of all stripes.
Posted by: Ruchira | Jan 23, 2012 9:24:28 PM
Who killed Israeli Prez Rabin? A crazy Jew, like that Russian Jew in Hollywood who did the fires. They are out there. The Blacks will burn the cities if a Jew kills Obama.
The newspayer editor is revealing the true state of mind of too many Jews.
Posted by: Tyrone | Jan 28, 2012 6:58:20 PM
Post a comment