HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Aug. 17, 2005 Mark Gelbart stated in a recent article, “Mr. Keyes is a card carrying believer in stereotypes. He professes to love Arabs, yet in his very first column he wrote, ‘Arabs have a fundamental inability to organize.’” What I really said was this, “There’s no denying that many Egyptians live in dreadful poverty, and I wouldn’t presume to say I know whether this springs from Egypt’s lack of natural resources or Egyptians’ fundamental inability to organize effectively, but this inspires a feeling of compassion and sorrow in me, not one of contempt and hatred.” So, “I wouldn’t presume to say I know whether this springs from…Egyptians’ inability to organize,” is garbled into, “Arabs have a fundamental inability to organize.” He caps off this idiotic misquotation with the charge that I am a “card-carrying believer in stereotypes.” I didn’t know believers in stereotypes carry cards, but if they do, I don’t have one. I believe in stereotypes only if they are true. Calling a belief a stereotype does not prove it false. Argue the truth or falsity of an idea, rather than the degree to which it may or may not be stereotypical. Then he continues misrepresenting me by saying, “In another column he writes that Eastern Europeans make model citizens and perfect blue collar workers. I'm sure they'd be glad to hear this, though my many Slavic friends would find this a bit condescending.” My article about Eastern Europeans was not condescending at all. I praised them highly for their industry, integrity and loyalty. I did call them “model citizens”. I did not call them “perfect blue collar workers”. Gelbart’s a liar. It merely happened to be a large factory where I met the workers I was discussing. I did not say or imply that they are not also good doctors or engineers or salesmen. In the same paragraph, Gelbart writes, “Mr. Keyes points out that there is a higher percentage of criminality among black people. One wonders why this is worth mentioning, this naked meaningless statistic.” He doesn’t deny that this statement is true, since hopefully he isn’t stupid enough to claim it false. But to say that is meaningless is ridiculous. If he thinks it is meaningless, let him send his young daughter, if he has one, all alone into Gary, Indiana at night. Apparently, he believes that there are some statistics that are acceptable to mention and others that aren’t, regardless of their truth or falsity. Gelbart continues in the next paragraph, “It may be true that percentage wise blacks are convicted of more crimes, but Mr. Keyes is silent about the reasons. He doesn't discuss poverty and discrimination and racial profiling; factors that skew these statistics.” This is another brazen lie. I discussed the poverty-excuse extensively in a long series of debates with Frederick Smith. I don’t accept the poverty-excuse as the complete explanation or even a large part of it. Any explanation of black criminality that ignores blacks’ muscularity and poor academic showing is immediately falsified, in my opinion. Then Gelbart says, “Mr. Keyes thinks there is a pro-Israeli bias in the American media. To prove this he again cites naked meaningless statistics. Israel is mentioned more than other countries. So in his mind, just mentioning Israel is somehow evidence of bias. He doesn't discuss the reasons why Israel is mentioned more often. Israel is simply more newsworthy.” But I say that, of course, just mentioning Israel more often than other countries is proof of bias, even if some of the attention is negative. Gelbart says that Israel is more newsworthy, but can he defend this sentimental banality? I happen to think that Uzbekistan, for example, is just as newsworthy as Israel. Can Gelbart tell me why Israel enjoys 100 times Uzbekistan’s coverage? Uzbekistan is larger in area, has a greater population, with beautiful cities, has a fascinating history and an archaeology as ancient as Israel’s. It has been in the throes of social change also. What objective evidence can Gelbart provide that Israel is more newsworthy than Uzbekistan? This man simply is not a thinker. Gelbart admits Jewish domination of the motion-picture industry and other media that I document, but says I fail to trace the history of this development, which he pretends to recapitulate from the beginning of the 20th century. But that is all beside the point. They do dominate it now, and they do skew the news, and that was what I was pointing up. He continues with this, “And Mr. Keyes even claims Jews are not Jewish, that they converted Ukrainians of the Khazarian Empire in the ninth century.” Raising the possibility of an hypothesis is not the same thing as “claiming” it. This theory was treated fully by Arthur Koestler in his book “The Thirteenth Tribe”. I cannot vouch for the truth of this thesis, but I do admit that it is a plausible idea. Gelbart say, “Genetic tests prove this is entirely false.” However, Dr. Robert Pollack of Columbia University disagrees with Gelbart. Pollack says, “At a recent meeting of the Association of Orthodox Jewish scientists and the Columbia Center for the Study of Science and Religion, it became clear that Jewish curiosity has provided sufficient genetic material to give a perfectly clear negative answer: There is no support in the genomes of today's Jews for the calumnious and calamitous model of biological Judaism. Though there are many deleterious versions of genes shared within the Ashkenazic community, there are no DNA sequences common to all Jews and absent from all non-Jews. There is nothing in the human genome that makes or diagnoses a person as a Jew.” I don’t necessarily agree, but this does show that there are other opinions on the matter than the one Gelbart has chosen prejudicially to espouse. Gelbart attacks my suggestion that the Jews may have exploited the Holocaust as a means of garnering even more Nobel Prizes than they had received before, I don’t see how the statistics can be fallible. The probabilities are just too great. That the Jews have made capital of the Holocaust is a rather obvious tale that many writers, including Norman Finkelstein, himself a Jew, have told. If they can put themselves at the captaincy of the media by whatever method they may have used, it is not a great leap to suspect they may have done something of the kind with the Nobel Prizes as well. Gelbart brings up many other irrelevancies, but I won’t discuss each and every one. I don’t know if Gelbart is Jewish, but if he is, he shouldn’t take offense at my writings. My commentary has to do primarily with the invasion and theft of Israel under the aegis of US Jewish media moguls. I wasn’t talk about insignificant people like Gelbart. Let him stay in his kitchen with his jambalaya, and he and I will get along just fine! ------------ About the author Thomas Keyes: I have written two books: A SOJOURN IN ASIA (non-fiction) and A TALE OF UNG (fiction), neither published so far. I have studied languages for years and traveled extensively on five continents. Email: udikeyes@yahoo.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
