NOVANEWS
- Video: IDF caught in a lie about Tristan Anderson
- Sabeel conferences in Sacramento, March 16-17 and Sunnyvale, March 23-24
- Israeli police use attack dogs on Palestinian protesters in the West Bank
- Rendell (of MSNBC and Friends of IDF) is under investigation for ties to Iranian terror group
- Uygur leads assault on Iran war– U.S. policy is being ‘dictated’ by Netanyahu
- Wall Street firm slammed the door on young Warren Buffett for religious reasons
- Brian Williams suggests that Israeli attack on Iran will invite terrorism to London Olympics
- ‘Tablet’ describes American veterans of IDF experiencing ‘dual loyalty’ issues
- Israel as strategic liability — US will trample human rights in Egypt for one reason
Video: IDF caught in a lie about Tristan Anderson
Mar 16, 2012
Allison Deger
Following a police investigation that closed with no criminal charges against the Israeli military, new video evidence in Tristan Anderson’s last round for justice—a civil suit—was brought forth, identifying the solider who injured the peace activist with a long-range tear gas canister in 2009. “Sergeant Jackie” is named as the border patrol officer who shot Anderson in the clip filmed by a Palestinian activist from Ni’lin, the village where Anderson was wounded.
In the video, Sgt. Jackie is with two other soldiers, walking towards Palestinians and activists who are in close proximity. Initially, Sgt. Jackie is on the right, then moves to the center as he fires tear gas into the already dispersed crowd. He carries an “extended-range tear gas” launcher, which looks like an oversized rifle. “It’s an experimental weapon,” said Gabby Silverman who was with Anderson that day. Speaking to me, she explained, “not everyone had them [a tear gas launcher] that day.”
An Israeli state attorney was then able to identify Jackie, whose face is not clear in the clip, by applying facial recognition software. Though out of frame, Silverman’s voice is also heard as Anderson’s wounds are dressed and he is transferred into an ambulance. Anderson’s skull was fractured and the frontal lobe of his brain was severely damaged.
Almost as important as naming Anderson’s shooter, the video shows that the border patrol unit Sgt. Jackie was with was at a distance different from the distance stated in testimony given during a military investigation. Silverman said “in order for this to have been a legal shooting, they would have to be about 100 meters away, as opposed to 50 meters away, as what is shown in the video.”
“Justice for Tristan,” Anderson’s support group, explains:
Note the scene where the Border Police are seen standing between two colorful doors. To the side of them, there is a gate going into a grassy area. This is the grassy area where they were standing when they shot Tristan. Activist eyewitnesses have testified all along that the shots were fired from this area. The Border Police, however, have testified that they were at another location on the other side of town, because to shoot a high velocity tear gas grenade from this distance is illegal. This video seriously undermines the IDF’s story by establishing that the shooters lied about their locations, and were in fact standing just where activists say they were.
For Silverman, the video “also establishes the military is willing to lie in order to cover up their story.” During their time in occupied Palestine, Silverman and Anderson attended many demonstrations in Ni’lin. The day Anderson was shot was their fifth protest. When asked if she had seen the Israeli military use the same weapon Anderson was injured with on other occasions, she said it was “standard…this wasn’t an anomaly, it’s part of a pattern of police violence.”
Supporters of Anderson hope the new evidence will be instrumental to both his current civil suit, as well as re-opening a criminal investigation against the Israeli military. “Both sides,” said Silverman, “have political point to make in the courtroom,” explaining the case is in part about negligence, and in part about Israeli’s systematic use of violence against Palestinians.
Sabeel conferences in Sacramento, March 16-17 and Sunnyvale, March 23-24
Mar 16, 2012
Annie Robbins and Kathleen Eschen-Pipes
Breaking the Barriers: Sabeel Conferences in Sacramento, 3-16-17 and Sunnyvale, 3-23-24

Naim Ateek
Friends of Sabeel has lined up another outstanding all-star cast of presenters for two conferences in Northern California this week, one beginning today!

Huwaida Arraf
Sabeel is an international peace movement initiated by Palestinian Christians in the Holy Land, who seek a just end to the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory. Friends of Sabeel – North America (FOSNA) is a non-profit Christian ecumenical organization seeking justice and peace in the Holy Land through non-violence and education.

Laila ElHaddad
If you’re in the region and you’ve never attended a Sabeel Conference this is an opportunity of a lifetime. I was swept off my feet when Sabeel hosted a conference in my hometown a couple years ago, absolutely mind blowing. No matter how much or how little you already think you know, run don’t walk, just get there!

Hatem Bazian
The Sacramento Conference this weekend is themed, “A Time for Justice: Supporting Human Rights in Palestine-Israel,” features presentations giving the context of the current situation in Palestine-Israel, with many workshops providing participants with various strategies and opportunities for taking action.

Cecilie Surasky
The Sabeel Regional Conference in Sunnyvale (right outside Santa Cruz) is on March 23 and 24, 2012. Even when Sabeel Conferences share some of the same speakers, no two conferences are alike! The Sunnyvale Conference next week on the theme, “Breaking the Barriers: To a Just Peace in Israel/Palestine” explores both broadly and in depth the barriers and potential breakthroughs for a just peace. This is an excellent opportunity for activists to attend either or both conferences and introduce family and friends who are just becoming aware of the issues for a weekend of Palestinian culture, food, education and engagement. Tune in to KPFA’s Morning Mix, Friday at 8AM (PST) to hear interviews with several of the conference speakers.

Remi Kanazi
Highlights of the conference include:
– Special Sessions on current topics such as “Islamophobia,” with Hatem Bazian of UC-Berkeley’s Department of Near Eastern and Ethnic Studies; “Palestine and the Arab Spring,” with Omar Dajani, professor of law at University of the Pacific, Leila Hilal, Director Of Middle East Task Force at the New America Foundation and Khalil Barhoum, Stanford professor of Middle Eastern Languages and “Censoring the Prophetic within Christian and Jewish Communities” and “Christian Zionism” with Marc Ellis, Baylor Professor of Jewish Studies and Don Wagner, Program Director of Friends of Sabeel.
– Plenary speakers and workshop facilitators from a range of backgrounds and faith traditions – Muslim, Jewish and Christian — who give the opportunity to gain a broad overview of the existing barriers to a just peace or to explore in greater depth the issues — such as the physical impact of the occupation and forms of nonviolent resistance, the economic dynamics between Israel, Palestine and the US, and the roles of Israeli and International Law, of ideological and political institutions and of mainstream and new media.
– Examples of Palestinian creativity and resilience: A sampling of Palestinian culture, including Middle Eastern food, poetry by spoken word artist, Remi Kanazi, music by the Georges Lamman group, Gaza Childrens’ Art Exhibit, traditional Palestinian hand-crafts and a marketplace with Palestinian fair trade goods. Also displays and speakers who will address Palestinian innovation and resilience under occupation — highlighting high tech and building bridges between Silicon Valley and Palestine.

Dalit Baum
– Opportunities to meet others who are concerned about Israel/Palestine and interested in working locally, regionally and nationally to promote a Just Peace. During the Saturday lunch hour, various interest groups will have the chance to caucus. Among the groups that have already signed up are Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Jewish Voice for Peace, Bloggers, and College Campuses.

Anna Baltzer
The College Campus Caucus will be convened by Dalit Baum of Global Exchange and the American Friends Service Committee and Anna Baltzer, of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, who will report on conferences and campaigns around the country in recent months.
The conference will be held at Sunnyvale Presbyterian Church, located at 728 West Fremont Blvd (corner of Hollenbeck Avenue) in Sunnyvale, California. You may register for the full two days or choose one day of the conference: the cost of the conference is $90; for students is $25, with student ID.
Other plenary speakers include the Rev. Naim Ateek, founder of Sabeel, Huwaida Arraf of the International Solidarity Movement, Laila El-Haddad, of gazamom.com and Anna Baltzer of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. For more information about SABEEL and the conferences, along with the most up to date listing of speakers and workshops, and conference registration, please visit Breaking the Barriers: To a Just Peace in Israel/Palestineand A Time for Justice: Supporting Human Rights in Palestine-Israel.
Israeli police use attack dogs on Palestinian protesters in the West Bank
Mar 16, 2012
Adam Horowitz

(Photo: Popular Struggle Coordination Committee)
From the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee:
Israeli Soldiers Sic Attack Dog on Protesters in Qufer Qaddoum
The dog bit one of the protesters in the arm, causing a serious wound, and did not release its hold for long minutes, even after its handler ordered it to. An Israeli woman suffered a head injury in Nabi Saleh.
Soon after the demonstration in Kufer Qaddoum began today, clashes between Israeli Border Police officers who shot tear-gas projectiles and rubber-coated bullets and local youth who threw stones at the forces developed. Roughly 15 minutes later – in a scene that seemed as if it was taking place in the American South of the 1960s – Border Police officers decided to sic an army dog at a group of the demonstrators, standing several dozens of meters away. The dog chased after the protesters, biting and locking his jaws into the arm of one of them – Ahmad Shtawi..
For long minutes, the dog would not release its hold of the bleeding arm, even as its handler arrived at the scene and tried to order it to do so. The Border Police officers then arrested Shtawi, despite the fact he was in obvious need of medical attention. Morad Shtawi, a member of the village’s popular committee, tried to reason with the commanding officer into releasing young man. He was then pepper-sprayed and arrested as well.
Two other residents of the village were injured during the demonstration, after being hit by tear-gas projectiles shot directly at them. One was hit in the leg and another in the shoulder.
The weekly protest in Kufer Qaddoum, west of Nablus, was dedicated to the memory of Rachel Corrie – an American protester who was killed after an Israeli D9 bulldozer drove over her in Rafah exactly nine years ago, on March 16, 2003.
Nabi Saleh
In Nabi Saleh, at least three protesters were injured during the demonstration, including an Israeli woman who was hit in the head by a rubber-coated bullet. The two others were hit lightly injured, one by a rubber-coated bullet and the other by a tear-gas projectile. The woman was evacuated to the Ramallah hospital.Earlier today, large forces entered the village and sprayed a foul-smelling liquid known as the Skunk from a water cannon.
During the night, the army staged yet another raid on the village, the fifth in a week’s time.
Here is video of the attack taken by Odai Qaddomi for B’tselem. (Warning: graphic):
Rendell (of MSNBC and Friends of IDF) is under investigation for ties to Iranian terror group
Mar 16, 2012
Philip Weiss
Ed Rendell
Mike Isikoff has broken an important story on the Treasury Department investigating several former gov’t officials for lobbying on behalf of an Iranian group classified by the State Department as terrorist. The story involves hundreds of thousands of speaking fees paid to the former officials’ speaking bureaus, money that apparently came from the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, the MEK.
The former officials were lobbying the government to delist the MEK as a terrorist group. Isikoff quotes an unnamed Obama official: “You have to ask the question, whether this is a prima facie case of material support for terrorism.”
The MEK is significant because it is tied to Israel. NBC has previously reported that the group “is financed, trained and armed by Israel’s secret service” and has been linked to the killings of Iranian scientists.
The former officials under investigation include several prominent supporters of Israel in U.S. politics: former Atty General Michael Mukasey, former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean, and former PA Gov’r Ed Rendell, who lately appeared at a fundraiser for the Israeli army.
From Isikoff’s report:
[Former FBI head Louis] Freeh and [former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Hugh] Shelton are among 40 former senior U.S. government officials who have participated in a public lobbying campaign – including appearing at overseas conferences and speaking at public rallies – aimed at persuading the U.S. government to remove the MEK from the terror list.
…Edward Rendell, a former Pennsylvania governor and ex-Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, whose speaking firm also received a subpoena, has received $160,000 over the past year for appearing at about seven conferences and rallies, including some in Paris, Brussels and Geneva, according to his office. (Rendell is a contributor to MSNBC TV.)…
Rendell said that there have been weekly conference calls among a “core group” of former U.S. senior officials participating in the lobbying campaign, organized by Freeh, to talk about ways to prod the State Department to remove the MEK from the terror list and protect its followers at Camp Ashraf. He identified this group as including former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean and Mukasey — all of whom have publicly spoken out on behalf of the MEK and spoken at its rallies.
Uygur leads assault on Iran war– U.S. policy is being ‘dictated’ by Netanyahu
Mar 16, 2012
Susie Kneedler
I used to dismiss Cenk Uygur as a timid right-winger back in Air America Radio days. Whew, was I wrong. Last year, Uygur was the only MSNBC host to pipe up about Palestinians’ rights after Benjamin Netanyahu lectured Congress that Israel would never return to the 1967 borders.
Uygur consistently led the best discussions with the most knowledgeable guests about how the U.S. should celebrate, not fear, the Arab Uprisings against U.S.-supported dictators. His reward for excellence: he disappeared suddenly last summer. Only later did Uygur announce that, rather than accept a demotion to a weekend slot, and a pay raise, in exchange for muting his criticism of the Obama Administration, he resigned.
In this video last summer, Uygur recounts how, when MSNBC pressed him to be an “insider” not an “outsider,” he reacted by “doing the opposite”: “challenging the government.” The result: his “ratings went up,” but MSNBC ousted him anyway, like Phil Donahue, for being too liberal. Uygur refused to be bought by “all that money thrown at you,” or–more seductive—“the perks”: “car rides to the airport,” “fancy hotels,” and “business class” privilege with “warm chocolate chip cookies.”
Uygur turned down the loot because of something far more valuable: “I had to tell you this story!” Uygur exclaims.
And the story’s a winner–one he was “holding” back while at MSNBC. It’s the saga of endless censorship: “the problem with the mainstream media is that they’re desperate to get access” and therefore “don’t challenge power.”
Since December, The Young Turks with Cenk Uygur has joined Current TV, where it does what’s rare for TV news: report facts, especially about power. Uygur even exposes the “war-mongering on Iran” and the fact that “American politics” decree that the US will back Israel up “right” or “wrong” (in the Feb. 20 show above).
Throughout the week of February 17 to 24– the links are here— Uygur devoted ten-minute exposes of the “drive to start a war against Iran unfortunately in the American media” (2.22.12). Each night, Uygur would quote a range of U.S. and/or Israeli defense officials, who urge, as Uygur paraphrases, “Don’t attack Iran!,” including:
General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence
General Ron Burgess, Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency
Tamir Pardo, Mossad Chief
Efraim Halevy, Former Mossad Chief
Dan Halutz, Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff,
Michael Hayden, Former CIA Director,
David Deptula, Air Forces General
Meir Dagan, Former Director of Mossad
Janet Napolitano, Head of Homeland Security
Leon Panetta, US Defense Secretary.
After each—varying–list, Uygur asks, contrasts the gulf between sober military advice and media frenzy, taking a different, brave tack on each succeeding night:
1. Uygur inquires, “Why are all the intelligence officials in Israel and the U.S. saying… ‘It’s a bad idea,’” yet there’s “this tremendous propaganda on television to go to war with Iran? (2.20.12).
The answer is the lobby: “Because the right-wing government of Israel and its allies here in the United States have made a decision: ‘Israel can’t do it alone: we’ve got to push the U.S. into war, so they can do our dirty work. And we don’t care that it’s a bad idea’;… they have their neo-con philosophy,…obliterate all the Middle Eastern governments that are opposed to them (2.20.12).”
Uygur continues, “If Israel does the original bombing, …. Iran is going to counter-attack. Once Iran counter-attacks….the US is going to get sucked into war and finish the job.”
Uygur adds this heresy about the U.S. subservience to Israel:
“If you know anything about American politics” “it doesn’t matter who started the war, who was right and who was wrong, if Israel gets counter-attacked… the U.S. will join Israel in whatever battle it has. Israel could attack [even] Norway–for no reason …[but] we would go to war on Israel’s side. So, … that’s why you see all this propaganda. That’s why the right-wing government of Netanyahu thinks, ‘Aaw, who cares what Mossad thinks, what my generals think, what the American generals think? All we have to do is press the button and…the U.S. is screwed, we can dictate their foreign policy for them; they’ve got to come join us.’ ….Let’s hope to God it doesn’t happen.”
2. Uygur re-frames Israeli “dictation” as a question: “whether we’ve handed off our foreign policy to Israel (2.21.12).”
Uygur often invites guests who challenge him, here, David Pakman, radio host, who claims that the U.S., while pretending otherwise, “actually has the same position as Israel.” Uygur counters that President Obama doesn’t want to bomb Iran. Comedian Jimmy Dore jokes crassly that Israel’s coastline is worth a nuclear war. Uygur grimaces. Dore retorts, “It’s not up to us….it’s their [Israel’s] decision, not ours.”
Dore has said in essence that the U.S. has relinquished its power to Israel. Dore, though, blames George W. Bush: “Iran was going to give us everything….[but] Bush didn’t even respond to the [Iranian government] letter.” Uygur adds, “Even Bush didn’t attack Iran,” in spite of Dick Cheney’s pressure. Dore points out American fallacies about Iran’s attitude toward Jewish people: 25,000 Jews live in Iran, with a “protected” status and guaranteed parliamentary representation.
Uygur, however, concludes the discussion, “We’re screwed: we’re going to war if Netanyahu presses the button.”
3. Uygur brings up the scaremongering images of Iranian scientists and President Ahmadinejad in a laboratory (2.22.12). Uygur ridicules the fear tactics, noting that we’re meant to be scared by nothing but white lab coats. Uygur points out that, “These are centrifuges that cannot make weapons,” but nuclear energy. Uygur lists the groups who nevertheless clamor for war:
* Neo-Conservatives, “the guys who are ideologically in favor of attacking different Middle Eastern countries–in fact they wrote a whole report on it.” Uygur leaves out the possible religious component of this “ideology,” but highlights such fervor in the next group.
* Christian Evangelicals, “Dominionists,” who want to “protect Israel at all costs…and have to start a giant war in the Middle East because that’s the only way Jesus arrives and we get the Second Coming.” Uygur cuts to John Hagee preaching on the End Times.
Uygur pivots from religion to money: the “prophets of war,” with “guys making a ton of money from wars in the Middle East”:
* Oil Speculators, with a graph tracing the spiking price of oil during these wars–which violates the law of supply and demand, for supply has risen, not fallen.
* Defense contractors, for the defense budget had more than doubled from 2001 to 2011, along with the cost of $3 trillion for the Iraq war alone, remarking that, “Somebody made that $3 trillion from Iraq.” Uygur reminds us that we “never hear about” how that money morphs into campaign contributions that spur politicians like Senators Lieberman and McCain to push for bombing Iran, or turns retired generals into “lobbyists getting stinking rich off these wars.”
4. Uygur climaxes his look at how war profiteers corrupt debate about Iran (02.24.2012) by focusing on Syria. Uygur is often passionate, mingling anger with mockery. But this night he gives us solemnity instead, mourning the “casualties, 7600 since March,” as well as the “several major journalists [who] have also been killed…in massacres in Syria,” including journalist Marie Colvin.
Turning to U.S. politics, Uygur shows President Obama asserting that the Assad “regime” should “move on,” then highlights the Republican candidates’ evasion of John King’s question about Syria–at the Feb. 22 Republican debate–in their eagerness to bomb Iran.
Uygur points out their indifference to Syrian deaths, “but when it comes to Iran, where no one is dying,” they’re anxious for the U.S. to attack. Uygur plays Santorum’s rant: Syria is a “puppet state of Iran…Syria and Iran are an axis…[Iran is the] most prolific proliferator of terror in the world.”
Uygur interjects: “I’m not sure the rest of the media grasps how stunning that answer is. [John King] asks about Syria and” Santorum says, “‘We hate Iran. Let’s go bomb Iran….Yeah, yeah, Syria, but the only relevant fear is of Iran.’”
Uygur then shows Romney agreeing with Santorum: “It’s unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, and Rick is absolutely right, Syria is their key ally…Lebanon…Hezbollah…threatens Israel, our friend and ally.” Romney promises modestly to “change the course of world history.”
Uygur parodies the Republicans’ priorities: “[When asked] ‘What do you think of Syria?’ – [They respond] ‘We should take military action against Iran.’’
Uygur pauses, then bursts out, “You soulless jerks.— They ask you about the Syrian people and…you just…[want to] bomb a different country,” because it “might develop a nuclear weapon many years in the future….” Uygur concludes, “These people are sick, man. They’re motivated by Neo-Cons, Evangelicals, Oil speculators, Defense Contractors: ‘There’s no money in Syria: who cares about the people? There’s no oil in Syria….We’re going to Iran where the oil is, where can make more money off a more disastrous war that would last a lot longer and cost a lot more money.’–As you can tell it disgusts me.”
Uygur explains that he doesn’t know how the U.S. can best help Syria, “I’m not saying we should go to war, but every time you turn on the television, everyone’s talking about [how]the one place you should take action is a totally separate country, Iran. It’s like when we got attacked on 9/11, [by] guys [who] came from Saudi Arabia, [with] their base in Afghanistan…, the Neo-Cons and Republicans [argued that] we should attack Iraq, a totally different country. I’ve seen this movie before and I hate this movie.”
The Young Turks with Cenk Uygur used to waste time with gimmicky sound effects and pointless headlines from each panelist. Now, though still stuck in a set unfortunately reminiscent of Ali G’s interview warehouse, the show offers much news discussed nowhere but the web. (The Young Turks has a web show on M-F 3-5 PM, which seems good, but because my online streaming cuts off often, I haven’t heard many shows).
Soon, Cenk Uygur may advocate freeing Palestine, as he did last spring, in a “Daily Rant” for The Dylan Rattigan Show, “Losing our minds over Israel.” Uygur protested Congress’s standing ovations for Netanyahu as the latter reneged on all previous agreements with the Palestinians about the 1967 borders, vilifying generations of U.S.-government policy.
To the Prime Minister’s contention that “the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers,” Uygur announced, “Except, of course, that there are millions of Palestinians who are currently occupied by the state of Israel. Can we please get some sanity on this? Just because the Israeli Prime Minister says it, doesn’t mean we have to agree with it. Let’s use our minds. I’m originally from Turkey. I can use my mind to say the Turkish government is wrong sometimes, oftentimes, and I’m not going to agree with a right-wing Turkish government. Why do we all agree with a right-wing Israeli government ? It makes no sense.”
Cenk’s got guts, but I’m not going to valorize his courage. I think emphasizing it only intimidates other newspeople and galvanizes the censors. And, I like to believe that Uygur enjoys truth-telling. His fascination with learning even makes him a better interviewer than other hosts, for–while articulate himself–he shuts up so guests can speak. Now that’s power, not the bogus influence of repeating the corporate line.
Wall Street firm slammed the door on young Warren Buffett for religious reasons
Mar 16, 2012
Philip Weiss

Warren Buffett
I’m reading a great book, What Goes Up: The Uncensored History of Modern Wall Street, by Eric J. Weiner, published in 2005. A lot of the uncensored history in Weiner’s oral history is his chronicle of the fall of the old patrician order on Wall Street and the rise of Jewish bankers and traders in the ’60s and ’70s.
A delicious anecdote involves maybe the greatest stockpicker of our time, Warren Buffett, who at 21 wanted nothing more than to work for the Wall Street firm of Graham Newman but was rejected because he was not Jewish.
The son of a Nebraska congressman, Buffett started dabbling in the stock market as a teenager. His life changed when he read The Intelligent Investor (1949) by Benjamin Graham. Buffett has called the book the best book ever written about the market. It advised studying the underlying value of companies and betting against the market’s swings. This theory has make Buffett’s company Berkshire Hathaway the greatest legend of modern American stockpicking.
When Buffett read that book, its author Benjamin Graham (1894-1976), a London-born Jew, was a professor at Columbia Business School and co-proprietor of Graham Newman, a small investment house on Wall Street.
Warren Buffett transferred from the University of Nebraska to Columbia Business School in order to study under Graham. But when he graduated and tried to work for Graham, the investor repeatedly put him off. For religious reasons. From Weiner’s book, of oral histories:
Tom Knapp (former analyst for Graham Newman):
Ben had a great reputation at Columbia for being a smart guy, and so when he decided to go to work on Wall Street he applied to several of the large firms. But they all turned him down. His belief was that it was because he was Jewish.
Irving Kahn (former analyst, Graham-Newman):
After he graduated [Columbia business school], Buffett came to Ben, but he wouldn’t hire him. He said he didn’t have enough experience. But Buffett kept after him. One day he said to Ben, “Mr. Graham, I’ll work for you for nothing.” He meant it, you know.
Tom Knapp:
Warren did offer to work for Graham for free, that’s absolutely true. But everyone at Graham-Newman was Jewish, from the top right down to the bottom. This was because Graham remembered how hard it was for a Jewish guy to get a job when he was trying to come to Wall Street. So Warren came in and offered to work for free. But Ben wasn’t about to break his philosophy on hiring. He told Warren no. And Warren went back to Omaha.
Roger Lowenstein (Buffet biographer)
Graham didn’t want Buffett to come to Wall Street to work for him because he wanted to save the positions in his firm for Jews, who had a hard time finding work on Wall Street. So Buffett went to work for his father for a little bit, and then he came back East to work for Graham.
Rejected in New York, Buffett worked in Omaha from 1951-1954.
Ben Graham finally hired Buffett in 1954. In this 1998 speech, Buffett said that he had “pestered” Graham during those years, and Graham relented.
Ultimately, Buffett became close to Graham, and named a child after him.
The story is a classic. It shows how the glass ceiling in American professions caused great bitterness among Jewish aspirants (Alan Dershowitz built his early career on such resentment).
It shows the power of Jewish kinship networks to shut out worthy applicants. And it shows why the glass ceiling broke. Because of Jewish success, because many non-Jews lacked prejudice and had no trouble working with Jews. Buffett was such a philo-semite he put Graham’s prejudice aside, and evidently helped to heal Graham.
I have often seen this process– the recognition of talent, regardless of the package, on all sides. It is why I believe in Jewish integration, not Jewish Marcus Garveyism (Zionism).
Thanks to Bruce Wolman.
Brian Williams suggests that Israeli attack on Iran will invite terrorism to London Olympics
Mar 16, 2012
Philip Weiss

Brian Williams
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Last night, boldly seeking to educate the American public on the error of making war on Iran,NBC Nightly News highlighted Brian Williams’s interview with David Cameron, the British prime minister, in which Cameron said Israeli should not attack.
“I don’t think the Israelis should take that action now. we told them they shouldn’t and said we wouldn’t support it if they did. We’ve been very clear.”
The piece was most remarkable for Williams’s advocacy. He said that the British are saying just what the U.S. is saying to Israel– “Not so fast!”– and he brought up an angle no one has focused on: the threat to the London Olympics this summer if there is an attack.
Prime minister, can you afford to contemplate the possibility of hosting the world for the Olympics here during or after an Israeli military action in Iran?
Williams’s question seemed argumentative, in a great way– these military plans are thoughtless. And of course there is the shadow of Munich, 1972.
(I guess this is right up there with the Israeli fans asking Netanyahu to put off attacking Iran till after Madonna’s concert, May 29? Priorities!)
Then Williams also brought up “containment,” the idea that few want to address in the MSM, that we can live with an Iranian nuke. I think we can clearly count Williams among the doves. And good for him.
Next he should take on Cameron’s claim that Iran has threatened to “wipe Israel off the map.” This translation has been repeatedly impeached.
NBC transcript:
Cameron: I don’t think as we stand today that military action by Israel would be justified. I don’t think the Israelis should take that action now. We told them they shouldn’t and said we wouldn’t support it if they did. We’ve been very clear. I’m a friend of Israel. Israel has a right to exist as a democratic state. It’s very, very important it knows it has strong allies like America, like the United Kingdom, but I don’t support action now because, frankly, we’ve got more road to run in putting in place sanctions and putting in place tough measures against the regime and saying to them they need to take a different path. they can have civil nuclear power, if they give up the ambition of having military nuclear power, they can have a future as a country that has more normal relations with the rest of the world. We need to keep up the pressure to encourage them to make the right choice.
Williams: Do you believe containment can and will work?
Cameron: What I’m arguing for is massive pressure. Europe has an oil ban on Iranian oil.
Williams: Prime Minister, can you afford to contemplate the possibility of hosting the world for the Olympics here during or after an Israeli military action in Iran?
Cameron: I’m very confident we’ll do that come what may. I don’t support Israeli action at this time. I think there is a lot more we can do to put pressure on Iran to get them to take a different path. We take nothing off the table. Britain is very clear just as America is. We don’t rule out taking action or supporting action, but that’s not where we are right now. Right now, turn up the pressure. Get Iranians to think again.
Williams: Is it tougher to deal with when the Israelis say this is about us, about our existence?
Cameron: I completely understand why the Israelis feel as strongly as they do. I feel strongly. I do not want to see an Iran with a nuclear weapon. This is, of course, about Israel and the middle east because an Iranian nuclear weapon would meet a state of a city that wants to wipe Israel off the map. countries that don’t have nuclear weapons would want to acquire them.
Haaretz is highlighting the comments.
‘Tablet’ describes American veterans of IDF experiencing ‘dual loyalty’ issues
Mar 16, 2012
Philip Weiss
A piece by Adam Chandler at Tablet describes a group of American veterans of the Israeli army who meet in New York. It is named Aluf Stone after an American soldier of an earlier generation who went to serve in Israel. I know we’re not allowed to talk about dual loyalty. But in this day and age sometimes we have to. How many other foreign armies are calling to American youth?
And I wonder about the numbers. “Aluf Stone currently has hundreds of members around the world.”
[Lilit Marcus] sees the group as a social corrective for the isolation that many of the veterans feel: loyal to both Israel and the United States, yet with an experience that’s foreign to most other people in both countries.
“Aluf Stone occupies an interesting middle ground in the U.S. They don’t belong in U.S. veterans’ groups and networks, as they didn’t [all] serve in the American military,” she explained. “But when they interact with other Jews in the United States, they can’t necessarily share their experiences without the stories being seen as politically charged. Several of the men who attend Aluf Stone meetings have told me that they have shared stories with each other that they can’t even share with their own families.”
Some of the members also interact with Israeli-born IDF veterans who have since moved stateside—but again, their experiences are not exactly the same, and native-born Israelis sometimes look askance at these vets. A common phrase used by Israelis to describe the foreign soldiers who came to join the IDF is the Yiddish slur “freier,” which is somewhere between a fool and a sucker. While each man says the respect eventually came, the broader sense of integration often didn’t. In this way, Aluf Stone deals with the consequences of dual loyalty—of not truly belonging in either place.
“Some people aren’t sure why we’re in the States at all,” said Matthew Ronen, 30, another of the group’s founders—an Ohio native now living in New York City after his IDF stint. Some in the group say that Americans shun them for leaving home to serve abroad; others note that Israelis shun them for leaving Israel after their service. “If you served in the IDF, people wonder why you came back,” Ronen said. “Sometimes there’s a sense of failure there.”
Israel as strategic liability — US will trample human rights in Egypt for one reason
Mar 16, 2012
Philip Weiss
(From a friend.) Today the Times piece on the Obama administration planning to give military aid to Egypt — despite its poor rights record — has this second paragraph:
To restart the aid, which has been a cornerstone of American relations with Egypt for more than three decades, the administration plans on sidestepping a new Congressional requirement that for the first time directly links military assistance to the protection of basic freedoms.
Hmmm. What happened three decades ago with Egypt that cause America to lavish it with funds? Well it recognized Israel and made a peace treaty with its neighbor. But the Times article never says so…
This is the fiscal and strategic cost of the U.S. special relationship with Israel, and one that runs against the convergence of values and interests in having a rights-respecting ally in Egypt. Egypt is not protecting human rights, but we are overriding our own laws so as to ignore its rights abuses. As we did with Mubarak for decades.
This is the strategic cost to the U.S. that is not repaid in kind by the Israelis. They refuse to make peace with their other neighbors, the Palestinians. Which was a core requirement of the “cornerstone” treaty of 1978.