Newtown Massacre: Why the ADL’s gun control agenda isn’t about reducing violence
By Maidhc Ó Cathail
The Passionate Attachment
December 16, 2012
As if on cue, the Anti-Defamation League has issued a press release in response to the Newtown school massacre. Expressing its “shock, disbelief and horror” over the killing of at least 18 children, the ADL statement by national director Abraham Foxman and the organization’s Connecticut regional director reads in part:
There is nothing that can justify the killing of innocents, especially young children. We hope that this was not an act motivated by hatred, as so many other school shootings have been in the past.
The statement concludes with a reminder that the self-described “nation’s premier civil rights/human relations agency” is hardly a disinterested party in such tragic events:
ADL has long been an advocate for strong, effective and sensible gun control legislation. Since 1967, ADL has favored expanded federal and state regulation of the sale and transfer of firearms and other dangerous weapons. Unfortunately, all too many times we have sadly witnessed the tragic dangers guns present. Across the country in schools, businesses and houses of worship, individuals have used guns to terrorize communities and local institutions. We firmly believe that one way to limit the power of extremists and reduce violence in our communities is to enact tough, effective gun control legislation.
The ADL’s purported concern for the children of Connecticut, however, stands in stark contrast to its clear indifference to the children of Gaza. When the Israel Defense Forces killed 34 children and wounded 274 others in its recent “Pillar of Cloud” onslaught on the world’s largest open air prison, the “civil rights” group rushed to justify the killing. Among its numerous “online resources, reports, statements and other materials” designed to explain in typical hasbara style “Why Israel is Fighting Back” were a press release expressing support for the “targeted military action” and a blog post condemning the “extreme comments” and “anti-Semitism” of critics of Israel’s slaughter of innocents.
There are other reasons to believe that the pro-Israel organization’s support for gun control — outside of Israel — is motivated by something other than its expressed desire to curb violence in American communities. In a 2003 column, The New Republic’s senior editor Gregg Easterbrook decried the “preposterous violence” glorified in the movies of Hollywood director Quentin Tarantino:
Kill Bill is distributed by Miramax, a Disney studio. Disney seeks profit by wallowing in gore — Kill Bill opens with an entire family being graphically slaughtered for the personal amusement of the killers — and by depicting violence and murder as pleasurable sport. Disney’s Miramax has been behind a significant share of Hollywood’s recent violence-glorifying junk, including Scream, whose thesis was that murdering your friends and teachers is a fun way for high-school kids to get back at anyone who teases them. Scream was the favorite movie of the Columbine killers.
Set aside what it says about Hollywood that today even Disney thinks what the public needs is ever-more-graphic depictions of killing the innocent as cool amusement. Disney’s CEO, Michael Eisner, is Jewish; the chief of Miramax, Harvey Weinstein, is Jewish. Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice. But history is hardly the only concern. Films made in Hollywood are now shown all over the world, to audiences that may not understand the dialogue or even look at the subtitles, but can’t possibly miss the message — now Disney’s message — that hearing the screams of the innocent is a really fun way to express yourself.
Notwithstanding its supposed concern to reduce violence in American society, the ADL did not relent until the magazine published an apology admitting that it was “wrong to bring the Jewishness of Hollywood executives into a discussion about money, greed and the film industry.” Notably absent from Abe Foxman’s statement in acceptance of the editors’ apology was any reference to the crux of Easterbrook’s argument: the deleterious influence of violent movies on impressionable minds.
So, what is it then that motivates the ADL’s advocacy of gun control? In a piece written last year entitled “Adam, Get Their Guns,” I suggested the following answer:
Could it be that Israel’s fifth columnists are worried that if enough Americans ever become aware of how much their “unbreakable bond” with Israel has cost them in blood, treasure and credibility, they might have an American Intifada on their hands?
To that, I would now add that the Second Amendment may be the last remaining obstacle to the imposition of a full-blown Israeli-inspired “Homeland Security” police state on the American people. And given the Israel lobby’s decisive influence over U.S. foreign policy, the rest of the “free world” too is already well on its way to this fascist New World Order.