This is not the 1st time a foreign company with Holocaust ties has caused controversy when trying to do business in this country.  In 2008,  the Germany based financial services giant(the largest in the world),  Allianz received similar treatment when they announced that they would bid for the naming rights to the NFL’s New York Jets and New York Giants new Meadowlands Stadim.   Allianz  has its name on Allianz Arena in Munich, Germany. That’s the relative present.  In the historical past, Allianz insured the building of concentration camps.  In the past Allianz  had given money owed to Jewish beneficiaries of their life insurance policies to the Nazi authorities instead.

Like Allianz,  SNCF has poured on excuse after excuse of justification and order following to minimize their historical complicity in mass murder. SNCF  argues that it had no control over railroad operations when France was under Nazi occupation from 1940 to 1944. It was simply under orders to transport Jews to death camps.  The firm also has said the French government has made an apology and offered reparations.  The company however has reportedly not apologized for its direct role.  Moreover, the “following orders” argument goes directly to the moral low ground explicitly rejected in the Nuremberg Trials  and other war crimes tribunals.  It is insultingly despicable that it would even be put forth in a  good faith attempt to deal with the facts.

In the end, the Stadium Authority decided that the public relations damage that would ensue was not worth taking millions from Allianz.  As I was with Allianz, I am against SNCF or any company who played a direct role in the Holocaust and has not confronted it through direct apologies and/or reparations doing business in this country.

As to the high speed rail, other states have recognized the sensitivity and historical significance of the issue.  In California, lawmakers passed a bill that forces companies  wanting to bid on a share of  California’s $45 billion high-speed rail project to disclose whether they transported Holocaust victims.

Will we reach a historical point where companies who wish to shed their Holocaust past can do business without fear of negative publicity and blackballed business dealings?  To a large extent time is taking care of that.  Within 10 years there will be few if any survivor left.  Many of us will always remember but many will forget, especially when profits make it expedient to do so.  There however,is still more than enough time for companies who have not adequately confronted their past to do so and re-brand themselves for the future without excuse or justification.

“”Black guys use it all the time. Turn on HBO and listen to a black comic, and all you hear is n****r, n****r, n****r. I don’t get it. If anybody without enough melanin says it, it’s a horrible thing. But when black people say it, it’s affectionate. It’s very confusing.”  When the caller was offended, Dr. Laura went on to state:

“Oh, then I guess you don’t watch HBO or listen to any black comedians. My dear, the point I am trying to make … [is that] we’ve got a black man as president and we’ve got more complaining about racism than ever. I think that’s hilarious.”

You can listen to the actual rant here.

This controversy illustrates how  dangerous  it is to attempt to spin racial epithets in a public forum.  Some words, especially the n-word, are so historically soaked in negativity and hate that just the word itself in any context draws on the worst feelings and perceptions in people.  There is no spin to be had.  There is no upside.  Even if we give her some benefit of the doubt and say that there was a point to be made, there is no question that she used the word in a very aggressive and angry tone that left it open to every negative interpretation that the mind can envision(as if the word does not do that all on its own).

Dr. Laura compounded her mistake by engaging in racial stereotyping in using an out of context example that African-Americans throw the n-word around among each other indiscriminately. I do not know if  she is right or not but it is extremely hostile territory to venture when you are not part of that class of people and making a generalization based on intermittent observations of the class. The final nail in her racial meltdown was to sarcastically suggest that people sensitive about the N-word should not marry out of their race. This was the most indefensible statement in her rant,  not open to any legitimate interpretation.

Why did she go there?  I do not believe she is a racist. She is no Mel Gibson.  If anything, her mistake was arrogance of perceived  stature.  The belief that you are so above the fray that you can make a point in any manner you see fit.  A Bill O’Reilly like belief that anything you say can be force fed to mainstream acceptance regardless of the negativity.

Dr. Laura is now attempting to portray herself as a victim of political correctness.  She claims she is leaving her show so she can “re-claim” her 1st Amendment rights.  While the 1st Amendment does not apply to her situation, she is right about one thing.  She can go to her blog and use the n-word as much as she wants to make whatever point she wants.  No one is going to fire her.  No worry about advertisers.  I am sure that was her long term plan all along….(sarcasm)

I and others raised a similar issue not long ago with NBC in the use of similar imagery in conjunction with their popular Parks And Recreation Series.  NBC was nice enough to respond and provide context for the use of the anti-Semitic image.  Their explanation was reasonable within the context of the show.  I have a hard time imagining any similar context for The Onion.  Anyone there care to respond?

Grabbler image via simplyjews.blogspot.com and thanks to @criticalanalyst on Twitter for alerting me to it.

Overcome Stress By Visualizing It As A Greedy, Hook-Nosed Race Of Creatures

If the authorities believe a particular location would be offensive to some segment of the public, the time, place and manner doctrine gives them the power to prevent construction of a church, or a mosque, at the offensive location.

It is true that Court has held that the 1st Amendment’s Free-Exercise Clause, the right of citizens for free exercise of their religion, is not absolute. A citizen’s free-exercise right must be weighed against the public interest and a state can regulate to ensure that it is practiced in a reasonable time, place, and manner.

What Ferrara does not tell you is that in the case of religion, these types of restrictions are looked upon skeptically and rarely upheld by the courts.

What Ferrara is really endorsing and calling it something else is content based, viewpoint discrimination.  That viewpoint is the practice of Islam.  For those unfamiliar, for a law to be content based, it discriminates based on the content of the message AS OPPOSED to the, time, place and manner in which the message is made, or the reactions it incites in people. These types of laws are presumptively unconstitutional.  What Ferrara is really saying is that the Ground Zero Mosque should not be built because he finds Islam offensive. Regardless of the validity of his viewpoint on that subject or anyone else’s view, this is content based.  It fits into no legal exception for regulation and is unconstitutional. 

“public opinion in America was focused on the Holocaust as a result of the “Jewish domination of the media”

I would hardly call the thought that the media is dominated by Jews or that Jews have played up the Holocaust for their own purposes original. These types of anti-Semitic stereotypes dating back to the Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion have  have been played out time and time again throughout history around the world.

Stone’s comments come at at time when he is promoting his upcoming documentary, “The Secret History of America. I have no doubt that in  his view, Stone is simply “keeping it real”.  That is the perspective of  Holocaust Deniers. While Stone is not a denier in the traditional sense of  rejecting the historical fact of the Holocaust, he is a denier in the use of antisemitic stereotypes to diminish it’s place in history.

Here is what is “real”.  Eleven Million innocents murdered under Hitler.  Twenty million or more murdered under Stalin. None of Stone’s antisemitic marketing tactics or ignorant revisionism will change that.  The real secret exposed here is Stone’s antisemitism.  I doubt anything will change that either.

This presents an interesting dilemma for the federal government. While the benefits of medical marijuana are documented and vets are being helped by its use, it is still illegal under Federal law and certainly in federal facilities like VA clinics.  Legally, the fact that it is being used in a state that allows medical marijuana is irrelevant to federal enforcement. While the Obama Administration and the DEA have taken the position that they will not go after those using the drug in compliance with state law, it remains to be seen if medical marijuana crossing the border into federally funded facilities and getting that first foot hold into the federal domain a will sit well with Eric Holder and the DEA.  No one wants to look like the bad guy where our vets are concerned.

I came across the video on the blog of Debbie Schlussel. Debbie and I have had our differences on various issues.  This is however, one time I am completely on board with her views. There is a huge difference between pimping out a tragedy and celebrating survival of that tragedy. I will not restate the entire controversy as she has covered it quite well.  As goofy as the video is, I frankly cried when I watched it.  For a survivor to go back and joyfully dance on the horrendous memories of his fight and the fight of all European Jews for their survival to me is a celebration of life and our ability as humans to take tragedy and smile back at it.  We did survive and more power to Adolek Kohn for allowing me to remember with a smile on my face.  IMHO, Adolek Kohn has earned the right to “dance his experience” any damn place he pleases.

“...I don’t want him convicted of felony assault Brian. Because if she was REALLY hit then there would have been a police report.  If she was REALLY hit then she would have had to have her lip sewn up.  It’s “he said she said” and I don’t think it’s good enough for a conviction.No evidence = no conviction as far as I’m concerned. People lie and have agendas so word can only go so far. … ‘

Here is another:

“those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones’. everyone lives in one. Mel, has at least brought some great masterpieces onto the screens. Rubberneckers only see the reck, not knowing the full context of an incident…..

Are these the Neanderthal views the general public has with regards to domestic violence?   If it doesn’t draw blood or leave a mark it didn’t happen?  If he is talented we will excuse it?  According to one study, 27% of the victims of domestic violence in a year period did not report the incident to the police.  With attitudes like this it is no wonder more battered women do not come forward.

While Mel’s outbursts speak for themselves as to his ethnic and racial views, he is certainly entitled to his day in court any criminal allegations.  Is it possible that his ex is lying?  Sure it is.  Regardless of what “truth” comes out,  I read crap like above and despair the human condition just a little bit more..

The 1970′s were great years for the Pirates and fans alike.  They were in contention practically every year. They won two World Series Championships in 1971 and 1979.  I loved going to games.  I often went with my two brothers.  Back in those days double headers prevalent.  My older brother would take me and my younger brother to a doubleheader. We would however first stop at the local deli for a corned beef sandwich, not to eat at the game, but to bribe the guard at the entrance to the box field seats to lets us in on our general admission tickets.  We would take the seats of those who had only stayed for the 1st game of the doubleheader.  I miss those days.  The glory days of The Pirates and my love for baseball.

My allegiance did not end with the good times.  I faithfully attended games through the Three Rivers Stadium wasteland of the 80′s.  The Pirates were not a good team but with the exception of a couple years they were never terrible. What was terrible was attendance. Pittsburgh as a city was struggling economically.  I remember attending games were there could not have been more than a few thousand in the stands.  Those days also seem like grand old times as I watch the ownership wasteland that is now the Pittsburgh Pirates.

It is a wasteland. A wasteland of total indifference to winning regardless of profits.  That’s a bold statement when you consider that the Pirates were for quite a few years were owned in part by the financially strapped city of Pittsburgh and some other local businesses.   A pre-revenue sharing ownership group that did not hide that fact that there was not much  money. It’s possible that I am romanticizing a much worse situation but I recall that they did the best they could with what they had. They were the last option in the game to prevent what would amount to a hostile takeover by another city which would have certainly resulted in the team leaving Pittsburgh.  Their job was to be as competitive as possible with what they had until they could find a buyer who would put some money into the team and take it to the level of greatest it achieved in the 70′s.  The irony is that with their limited resources, they almost did it on their own terms with the arrival of Barry Bonds and the Pirates near miss on the World Series in 1992.  That was the high point. It was a different era and different economics.

The low point is an ownership group that actually has money running a scorched earth business model, taking substantial revenue sharing, putting none of it into salaries and doing what with it?  Putting a AAA caliber ball club on the field and have the gall to insult our intelligence as to their major-league worthiness.  They have never really been clear about what is being done with revenue sharing profits other than to state that they are running the team in a fiscally responsible manner.  One theory is that they are using it to pay down team debt.  How is that not the same as putting it in your own pocket?   Whats the excuse for 2011?  We are young?  We will develop?  The line of every GM stuck with a stable of non-producing trades and busted Vegas lottery picks.  It’s akin to saying 110 degrees is not hot in Las Vegas because its a dry heat.  In the end dog-shit stinks regardless of what perfume rhetoric you pour on it…

The Legalities of Lindsay Lohan written July 29. 2006

I have never seen a Lindsay Lohan movie. I do not read gossip columns, or frequent TMZ. I could not care less about her off screen antics. I however could not resist seeing what kind of threatening letter a top studio executive sends a 20 year old out of control, party-wild, self impressed actress when they are not happy with her work habits.

In this case it involves a movie in production called “Georgia Rule” in which she is the star. The studio is apparently concerned with Lindsay’s failure to show up for production calls and showing up late when she did show. They feel there is some relationship to her perceived excessive partying. In the letter James G. Robinson, CEO of Morgan Creek Productions, calls Lohan’s recent absences from the set “irresponsible and unprofessional.”

Being an attorney, I took interest in the letter. I scanned quickly through all the emotional rhetoric and right down to the legal threats. They of course threaten to take all action necessary to ensure the protection of the integrity of the film. Having some limited exposure to the film industry, the first thing that came to my mind and was what is generally considered one of the more costly aspects of a major motion pictures aside from salaries. This is the completion completion insurance or a “completion bond.”

Now you may ask, what the hell does insurance have to do with Lindsay Lohan and the making of her film? It may not have a lot to do with this film, but I can guarantee you it will affect her future films and if she doesn’t calm down. She may find herself a “B” movie queen because she will be uninsureable or it will be cost prohibitive to insure her.

When a studio is casting for a major production it is a crap shot on whether it makes money. Like most other business ventures it is about minimizing risk. If an actor or actress can not be insured or be insured for a reasonable amount in comparison to the projected revenues of the film that person is probably not going to get many starring or mainstream roles. This is because the producers of the film may not be able to get a completion bond.

A completion bond is a motion picture completion guaranty is a written contract that guarantees a motion picture will be finished and delivered on schedule and within budget. The majority of films produced and fully financed by the major Hollywood studios are self-guaranteed. However, most independently financed films, including many that are released and distributed by the major studios, require a completion guaranty.

A producer usually secures a completion guaranty for the benefit of the bank or other financiers who agree to make the necessary production funding strike price available to the producer. In general, a completion guaranty assures banks and financiers that:
1. The producers will complete and deliver the film in keeping with the screenplay, budget and production schedule that the bank or financiers approved; or
2. The completion guarantor will complete and deliver the film in keeping with such pre-approved screenplay and production schedule, and advance such sums in excess of the pre-approved budget necessary to do so; or
3. In the event production of the film is abandoned, the completion guarantor will fully repay all sums invested in the film by the bank or financiers.

If Lindsay, who is from what I hear a very talented actress when she is sober, does not get her act together soon, she will find herself relegated to low budget Indies such as “Herbie Retooled and Reloaded Again And Again And Again And Again”

There was one a few days ago that the organization was successful in getting taken down.  Another one popped up two days later to take its place. It looks like it’s the same people trying to get a rise but the general bottom line is the same.  In addition to all the great content and information on Facebook, there is a lot of antisemitism and hate speech against  ethnic, religious and gender orientation minorities.  Facebook does what it can to keep it in check when made aware of the problem within the inherent flaws of  user-based self-reporting systems.  There however, is simply so much more of the hatred than there are employees at Facebook to monitor it.

I try to take most of this crap in stride as there are idiots everywhere.  The most troubling aspect of “the day” is not that some anti-Semitic idiot would put it up but that so many are willing to play along and incite the hatred in the page commentary.  Strong evidence that it is much more than a silly page put up by a moron. It is a stark reminder that Facebook is not just a place for friends to connect and share information.  It is a venue for those of like mind in hatred of not only Jews but any minority group to take that message, find those who agree and take hatred viral.

I wonder if they will talk about that in the new Facebook movie, The Social Network. I doubt it.  People are more interested In Mark Zuckerberg’s quirks and dalliances than they are about real issues affecting all of us in that network.  That’s to be expected.  People want to be entertained.  I hope it’s more entertaining than Kill A Jew Day.

Germany happens to have laws in place against hate speech, Holocaust Denial and other types of hateful expression borne of Nazi Germany.  The guy faces up to 6 months in jail.  It brings to mind an incident not long ago.  I was at the gym listening to my iPod.  Just after I was serenaded by Billy Joel, I was snapped to attention when a Hitler speech started playing!  Quite the musical transition!  Imagine my surprise when I went from Billy Joel to a Hitler rant.

I had previously downloaded some Hitler speeches as part of my research for a book on hate speech.  Unbeknown to me, the speeches had transferred to my iPod when I synced it with my Mac.   Glad there were no police waiting to arrest me.  I will be sure to check my Ipod play-list before my next trip to Germany.

As reported in the Dallas Morning News, the case focused on several winter break parties from 2001 to 2004 at Thomas Elementary and Rasor Elementary. Lynn Swanson, the principal at Thomas, stopped a third-grade boy from distributing the candy cane pens with the Christian message that read, in part, “The blood Christ shed for the sins of the world.”

A month later, Jackie Bomchill at Rasor prevented a girl from handing out tickets for a Christian drama and from distributing religious-themed pencils. The boy’s parents and others whose children were prevented from handing out the materials sued the school district.

The courts have held that the constitutional rights of students are not surrendered at the school door.  The courts have also held however ,that schools can however regulate activities that disrupt the educational purpose.  This was most recently addressed by the Supreme Court  in the  Bong Hits For Jesus case in which a student, during a school sanctioned off premises event, put up a banner on a public sidewalk that read, “Bong Hits 4 Jesus”.  The banner was confiscated and the student disciplined. The court found in part, that as the banner promoted illegal drug use, it did disrupt the educational mission and the speech was therefore not protected under the 1st Amendment.

In this case, we are dealing with censoring of a private exchange of a  a benign religious message.  It is not occurring in the classroom, at the behest of the school or in any type of school sanctioned manner.  The mere fact that it occurs on school premises does not in itself inure it with this quality   There is no disruption to the educational mission and no illegal activity is encouraged.  The school is not sanctioning it, encouraging it or endorsing it simply by the mere fact that it is occurring.

The fact that it is an elementary school student versus a high school student in my mind is irrelevant.  The message is the message regardless of age.  To claim that the 1st amendment applies differently to the message in the 4th grade versus high school in my mind is the very essence of a viewpoint discrimination and the school unacceptably invading the province of the parents how they raise their children.

In the end, the 1st Amendment applies to the government’s attempt to regulate our speech including religious expression. That means that the school can not engage in conduct that endorses  religious viewpoints.  It does not mean that the school can muzzle a student from expressing their viewpoints in a non-school endorsed private manner.  If I do not agree with the message that is my job as a parent to deal with it at home and not to try to censor the message simply because I disagree.

You can read case here.