Mediaboss Marketing

They were members of the Black Hebrew Israelites, the same delightful group who inappropriately taunted a group of high school students who were guilty only of being pro-life and being Catholic...and white.

Jews of all ethnicities are trained to eschew racism, bullying, and cruelty to others--actually, Jews are trained to embrace and fit in with all others who accept them, particularly if they are in a minority who wants to survive and thrive in a majority of people who have different religious beliefs than they do.

And there are, therefore, "real" Jews who are black, brown, and of all ethnicities who want NOTHING to do with the so-called Black Hebrew Israelites, who would otherwise be welcomed within Judaism but whose actions and racist beliefs (and not their skin color) prevent them from being acknowledged as followers of the Torah and Old Testament and later Jewish writings.

Ditto for any white or black or other "follower" of Christianity who bullies, harms, or kills in the name of Christianity--neither the KKK nor any black-separatist Christian group can ever claim the mantle of a true follower of Jesus' teachings...because Jesus died for the "sin" of being a pacifist.

So, when the Nessah synagogue in Beverly Hills was vandalizedand ransacked, the only thing that all could agree upon was Mayor John Mirisch's statement that "this cowardly attack hits at the heart of who we are as a community. It is not just an attack on the Jewish Community of Beverly Hills; it's an attack on all of us.".

But I'm sure that...even among those reading this now...there is this "hope" or "rooting for" the Jew-hater to be on the "other side". If you're a through-and-through right-winger, you're hoping this vandalizing creep is Arab/Muslim, or a left-wing socialist; if you're a through-and-through left-winger, you're hoping this ransacking loser is a neo-Nazi Trump supporter.

But these stupid games belie so many realities that go far beyond the left-right divide:

1) A breathtaking and history-making vote in the U.K. propelled the party of Boris Johnson over Jeremy Corbyn...but inasmuch as it's a demand of Britons to promote "Brexit" it certainly was connected to Jeremy Corbyn's own anti-Semitism (arguably, it should be called "Jew-hatred" because many Arabs are also Semites), and that of the Labour Party's current leaders.

And to prove that theory beyond all doubt, former London mayor and left-winger Ken Livingstone blamed the "Jewish vote" for Corbyn's eye-popping trouncing.

2) Hailed by both liberals and conservatives, despite many who didn't like the source of the executive order, President Trump intervenedon the BDS movement that increasingly threatens the policies and safety of Jews on campuses throughout the nation.

3) And then, yet again, the debate over whether being anti-Israel is the same as Jew-hatred is raised yet again by Dennis Prager.

While the debates over West Bank Jewish settlements, and the debate over the future of Jerusalem, is fair game, when one discovers and hears a rabid anti-Israel individual (arguing against its very existence), that person almost certainly (if one asks the right questions) will prove himself/herself a Jew-hater.

Even more fascinating, of course, is that extends to those individuals who are themselves Jewish!

What the heck they're trying to prove, of course, is something else to be figured out. After all, Jewish guilt comes in many flavors--the greatest capitalists, and the greatest communists/socialists, all were well-represented by Jews. Ditto for our nation's philanthropic leaders and Mafia leaders.

Leaving many outside of Judaism, and many within Judaism, to try and figure out what's going on.

But there are a few common issues that can be considered as "truisms":

1) Ignorance of, and a lack of communication with, Jews leads to anti-Semitism (again, more appropriately termed "Jew Hatred).

2) No one despises Jewish criminals such as Jeffrey Epstein, Harvey Weinstein, and Bernie Madoff more than other Jews--they're everything that Jews are trained NOT to be, and NO ONE, Jewish or otherwise, wants to be associated with that sort of ilk. Let them rot in prison en route to Hell--and the ONLY loss associated with Epstein's suicide or murder is the knowledge he took with him.

3) Non-Jews and non-African-Americans look upon anti-Jewish or anti-black racism or other bigotry as all that goes against humanistic and rational thinking.

So, left-wingers may get heartburn over the prominence of disgusting bigots like Sharpton, Tlaib, and Omar in the Democratic Party, just as right-wingers may get heartburn over the strange outlying groups such as the Proud Boys...

...because if you're an honest, kind, and morally-upright left-winger or right-winger, or anywhere between the two groups, you don't tolerate David Duke, Al Sharpton, Ilhan Omar, or any other race-baiting bigot.

Hence Nikki Haley, as former South Carolina governor, respects what the Confederate flag means to many good-hearted Southerners (it does NOT always mean racist thoughts), but had to yank it down to not reward a deranged and bigoted shooter in a black Church.

Haley also had a lot of support, during her tenure as U.N. ambassador when she called out the U.N. for being both anti-Israel and (yes!) anti-Jewish for decades.

So, for those who want to play the game of "is the Nessah Synagogue vandal Arab or white Neo-Nazi?" it's probably better to step back and see the bigger picture.

Because anyone who's a Jew-hater, a black-hater, or a white-hater, or any other hater, has really (if unknowingly) become a hater against his/her own humanity.

And every morally-upright left-winger, moderate, and right-winger is all too aware of that, and has little to no tolerance or time to play that sort of game.

(CityWatch Columnist, Kenneth S. Alpern, M.D, is a dermatologist who has served in clinics in Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside Counties, and is a proud husband and father to two cherished children and a wonderful wife. He was(termed out)also a Westside Village Zone Director and Board member of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC), previously co-chaired its Outreach Committee, and currently is Co-Chair of its MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee and Vice-Chair of its Planning Committee. He was co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and chaired the nonprofit Transit Coalition and can be reachedatKen.Alpern@MarVista.org.He also co-chairs the grassroots Friends of the Green Lineatwww.fogl.us. The views expressed in this article are solely those of Dr. Alpern.)

-cw

Read more here:
Jew-Hatred: The Beat Goes On - City Watch

Outrage spread rapidly via Twitter earlier this week based on the spurious claim that President Trump intended to label Jews a separate nationalitya move denounced as encouraging anti-Semitism or as itself anti-Semitic. Although correct information about the executive order that sparked the controversy is now widely available, one need not look far to find essays and editorials condemning it in heated terms. Liel Leibovitz notes that just as our bien pensants were whipping everyone into a wild frenzy over this imagined act of anti-Semitism, an armed couple attacked a kosher grocery store in a asidic enclave in Jersey City, killing two Jews, one Gentile, and a police officer. The couple had brought with them multiple pipe bombs, and could easily have achieved far bloodier results. Leibovitz writes:

The shooting, we now know, was a premeditated attack, and one of the suspects was a black nationalist [a member of an anti-Semitic group styling themselves Black Hebrew Israelites] who had a long and proven track record of posting anti-Semitic screeds online.

Jews make up about 2 percent of the American population, yet were the victims of a whopping 57.8 percent of all religious-bias crimes last year, according to the FBI. Rather than vocally and unequivocally demanding that their Jewish constituents be protected, the politicians representing those targetedfrom New York Citys Mayor Bill de Blasio to Senator Chuck Schumerhave been largely silent on this issue, while at the same time loudly and vigorously accusing the right of racism. Videos like [the] one shot at the scene shortly after the Jersey City attack and featuring local neighbors blaming the Jews for Jews being murdered are not likely to make any politician on the left take action, especially not someone like de Blasio, who has for years been kissing the ring of Al Sharpton, an anti-Semite best remembered for inciting an actual pogrom against the Jews of Brooklyn.

Read more at Tablet

More about: Al Sharpton, Anti-Semitism, Bill de Blasio, U.S. Politics

Read more from the original source:
From Jersey City, a Bloody Lesson on the Real, and the Imagined, Dangers Facing American Jews - Mosaic

By California Black Media Staff

Keeping up with the high cost of pensions in California is hurting public sector employers, city budgets and leading to the firing of some minority money managers at CalPERS, the California Public Employee Retirement System, which is valued at $387 billion, according to Bloomberg News.

In its annual report, released in November, CalPERS confirmed that it risks falling into low funding levels. If this happens, the agency responsible for managing the health and pension benefits of more than a million public employees in California may not able to pay its bills or pay out its commitments.

The League of California Cities, which represents more than 400 municipalities across the state, is alarmed by the growing mandatory payments they have to cough up to CalPERS for employee pensions and benefits, too, according to CalMatters. Between fiscal years 2016 and 2017, that number skyrocketed by more 8 billion.

In an effort to streamline its own costs, CalPERS announced last week that it is scaling back on its Emerging equity fund program. Launched in 1991 to increase diversity among its portfolio managers, the program contracts external money mangers, mostly women and minority-owned firms managing assets worth less than $2 billion who are charged with investing on behalf of the largest public pension system in the United States.

The returns those emerging managers were bringing in fell below the agencys targets by 126 basis points, according to an agency spokesperson.

The Rev. Al Sharpton, President and Founder of the National Action Network, said CalPERS decision to cut the minority money mangers is unacceptable and comes as a surprise to him.

Last year, the National Action Network and I met with Marci Frost and Ted Eliopoulis from CalPERS in Sacramento, both of whom committed to increasing the utilization of diverse asset managers across all asset classes by creating a level playing field, Sharpton told California Black Media. It is clear that Ted is gone and the board has inoculated the new CIO, Ben Meng, from finding and utilizing high performing talented diverse managers that reflect the diversity of the pensioners.

In an October memo, CalPERS CEO Marcie Frost said the agency is restructuring its emerging manager program, reducing the number of managers, and cutting the assets those investors manage from $3.6 billion to $500 million.

Continue reading here:
The Soaring Cost of California Pensions Is Hurting Employers and Taking Away Minority Contracts - San Diego Voice and Viewpoint

Afghan security forces take position at the site of an attack in a U.S. military air base in Bagram, north of Kabul, Afghanistan, on December 11, 2019. MOHAMMAD ISMAIL/REUTERS

Kabul, Afghanistan A powerful suicide bombing targeted an under-construction medical facility on Wednesday near Bagram Air Base, the main American base north of the Afghan capital, the U.S. military said. Two civilians were killed and more than 70 people wounded.

The Taliban later claimed responsibility for the attack and Afghan officials said all the insurgents were killed. The Bagram airfield was not in danger, said Colonel Sonny Leggett. The facility is being rebuilt to help the Afghan people who live in the area, the U.S. military said.

The Taliban statement denied any civilian casualties and claimed the attackers had managed to enter the Bagram base, even penetrating barracks used by coalition forces.

Outside the sprawling base, several homes, mostly belonging to poor Afghans, were destroyed. A large mosque in the area was also badly damaged.

Shortly after the bombing, Afghan troops, special forces and intelligence officers cordoned off the perimeter of the base with armored personnel carriers. Heavily armed soldiers kept residents far from the gates to Bagram Air Base.

Within minutes of the suicide bombing, U.S. fighter aircraft bombed the area, according to witnesses

Dr. Abdul Qasim Sangin, a physician who heads the main hospital in the province, said the hospital near the perimeter of the base was on fire. It wasn't immediately clear if any foreigners were inside the hospital.

Sangin said his hospital received six wounded, all Afghans. Five were in stable condition and one was critical, he said. Scores more were treated and released by medics at the scene. Most were suffering cuts and bruises from flying glass and debris.

The Taliban control or hold sway over nearly half of Afghanistan, staging regular attacks that target foreign and Afghan forces, as well as Kabul government officials, but also kill scores of civilians.

See the rest here:
Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan fends off Taliban attack but ...

The interviews published by the Post provide a starker version of SIGARs previous analysis, but in many ways, they tell the same story. In its reports and testimony before Congress, SIGAR has revealed waste, abuse, and questionable judgment in a host of Afghanistan programs and projects. The interviews are stripped of the dry inspector-general verbiage and also of the strategic context within which judgments were made; senior officials frankly assess their failures to produce security, stability, or transparent and effective governance in Afghanistan. Those failures are documented in SIGARs reports.

But the extensive oversight mechanisms created for this massive project were not enough to force a rethink in the face of inertia, sunk costs, and short-term political calculations. SIGARs extant analysis of failures and missteps should have prompted a greater reckoning some time agoif not within the executive branch, then within Congress, which regularly authorized and appropriated funds for the ongoing campaign.

This attempt at nation-building in Afghanistan was embarked on by one president and embraced, at least for a time, by two more. Each one, when faced with the decision, chose to continue down this doomed road, believing it less risky and more palatable than his available alternatives. What the Post reporting reveals is that, while this path may have been easier, it was a road that would never reach its stated destination.

The U.S. effort in Afghanistan was an undertaking of breathtaking ambition: to oust a Taliban regime that gave haven to international terrorists; to defeat those terrorists and their allies and supporters in a counterinsurgency campaign; to set up and sustain a democratic government in a society riven by years of factional war; and to promote human development, human security, and basic human rights in a country where religious extremists, drug lords, and tribal chiefs had long ruled over (and fought for control of) a beleaguered populace. The overarching result seems to be a sort of D-minussome degree of visible achievement, but still a failing grade.

The Posts reporting is unsparing in its depiction of second-guessing and back-biting among U.S. government officials about their work in Afghanistan. Field staff argued that higher-ups didnt understand the realities they faced on the ground, didnt give them enough leeway to be effective, or cut off resources at the wrong time. Senior staff questioned strategies chosen by their superiors or determined in internal debates in which they participated. These concerns, voiced mostly in confidential interviews with SIGAR, were no doubt honestly felt, and had real foundations.

The existence of such doubts and concerns, however, does not necessarily reveal the roots of the Afghanistan failure. This kind of second-guessing is endemic in any large organization undertaking a long-term, complex project. Field staff close to on-the-ground implementation often question how their work is valued or prioritized by central decision makers, or question how their contribution fits into the wider strategy; central decision makers often fail to see the reality of implementation on the ground, and focus their energies on the policy battles theyve won and lost around the interagency table.

Read the original:
The Lessons of the Afghanistan Papers - The Atlantic