Category Archives: Duke David

David Duke and Glenn Greenwald

Selective Affinities:  David Duke and Glenn Greenwald

To David Duke, Glenn Greenwald is a great source of wisdom.  He cites him, he quotes him, he basks in the reflected prominence of this apparent soulmate.  Offhand there would seem to be a problem  for someone like Duke,  the very Duke who is unashamedly a hater of Jews and is often considered “extreme right.”  Yet here Duke is  drawn to  Greenwald, yes the Greenwald who is openly gay, Jewish, and conventionally considered “extreme left.”  No, as we shall see, there is no anomaly here.  “Left” or “right,” we are dealing here with figures on the lunatic fringe where the logic of ordinary life plays little role.  Among a slew of other affinities, Greenwald and Duke both see the American government as wholly evil, and not coincidentally, both see Israel as the great scourge of our time.

(Here is a list of articles on Duke’s website in which Greenwald is admiringly used as an authority.)

The surface differences between Duke and Greenwald are as obvious as they are misleading.  Where Duke freely intones against “Jews” and “Zionists,” Greenwald speaks only of “Israel,” “Israel’s” alleged war crimes, and so forth (all while praising Hamas and its “resistance”).  Neither are good at standard English prose, but Greenwald’s infelicities are minor compared to Duke’s.  But these differences only obscure the similarity in the underlying manichean philosophy, a philosophy in which the West and all its institutions are presented as personifications of the Devil.

So here is our cast of characters, David Duke and Glenn Greenwald.

First of all, David Duke, or, as he would have it, “Dr. David Duke, Ph.D.”  Yes indeed, Duke has a Kandidat Nauk degree from a private Ukrainian institution (which, according to a US State Department assessment, is “one of the most persistent anti-Semitic institutions in Eastern Europe”).  Duke, but nobody else, interprets  this degree as a Ph.D. The title of his, well, “dissertation,” was Zionism as a Form of Ethnic Supremacism.

What else is known about Duke ?  Quite a bit, actually.  Wikipedia summarizes as follows:

David Ernest Duke (born July 1, 1950) is an American white nationalist, conspiracy theorist, far-right politician, former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and a political writer. A former one-term Republican Louisiana State Representative, he was a candidate in the Democratic presidential primaries in 1988 and the Republican presidential primaries in 1992. Duke unsuccessfully ran for the Louisiana State Senate, United States Senate, United States House of Representatives, and Governor of Louisiana. Duke is a felon, pleading guilty to defrauding supporters … Duke describes himself as a “racial realist”, asserting that “all people have a basic human right to preserve their own heritage.”An advocate of antisemitic conspiracy theories, Duke speaks against what he considers to be Jewish control of the Federal Reserve, the federal government and the media. Duke supports the preservation of what he labels Western culture and traditionalist Christian “family values”, Constitutionalism, abolition of the Internal Revenue Service, voluntary racial segregation, anti-Communism and white separatism.  He opposes what he considers to be “promotion of homosexuality” by Jews. [You say that his friend Glenn Greenwald has a husband ?  No matter]

The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Duke as “the most recognizable figure on the American radical right” and “a neo-Nazi”. His views are characterized by conspiracy theories, racism, antisemitism, and Holocaust denial.

As we shall see, Duke currently maintains an extensive website, from which I quote a few characteristic items:

Boehner out Zios Obama by inviting Netanyahu to lecture Congress

ISIS threatens to behead two Japanese hours after Netanyahu predicts Japan will experience terror

Israel attacks Syria in support of ISIS

CNN fires Jim Clancy after 34 years over tweeting row with Jewish activists. Welcome to Press Freedom in Zio-America!

Are You an “Anti-Semite”? If You Dare Quote the Jewish Elite Themselves — You Are!

More Zio-Treason Against America! Spymaster Admits Israeli President Lied to US over Pollard

Jewish Supremacist “Refugee” Hypocrisy: Yes in America, No in Israel

Zio-Control of US Government: Blatant Jewish Supremacist Appointed Head of DHS Task Force on “Foreign Fighters”

Chutzpah: $3.1 Billion US “Aid” to Israel as it “Buys” $2.75 billion Worth of F35 Jets

Zio-Racists Welcome Obama Immigration ‘Amnesty’—but Support Immigrant Expulsion from Israel

But enough about Duke;  on to Mr. Greenwald.  Since I have already devoted  a number of previous postings to Greenwald’s writings and his website Intercept, a brief summary here must suffice.  Financed by the enigmatic multi-billionaire Pierre Omidyar, Greenwald’s Intercept has certain bed-rock principles:  1)  The US, and especially its President, are war criminals and are by far the greatest danger to the world at this time;  2)  Israel, as an appendage of US imperialism, is a “murderous state;” Hamas is not at all a terror organization but rather a laudable resistance movement   3) terror actions by hapless Moslems, for instance the recent shootings in Ottawa, are but natural consequences of the West’s relentless aggression against Islam.  In its first year of operation, I counted seventeen “anti-Israel” postings on Intercept that I would consider anti-Semitic in intent.

Most recently Duke and Greenwald have taken similar positions,  and Duke has cited Greenwald, concerning the arrest of the French anti-Semite “Dieudonne”  in the aftermath of the Paris terror killings. (See Greenwald here, and Duke here.)  As far as I can make it out,  their somewhat torturous  reasoning seems to be as follows: 1)  the Charlie Hebdo materials constitute an attack on Muslims;  2) the Western media laud such attacks;  ergo 3), we must all applaud  all incitement of hatred against Jews. Neither Greenwald nor Duke seem to see a difference between blasphemy (as in Charlie Hebdo)  and the incitement to hatred against actual living people.  Greenwald took the opportunity to publish a particularly ugly series of anti-Semitic cartoons in the Stürmer style:  big ugly “Jewish noses,” and all the rest.  The article on Duke’ site on the subject reads Dieudonne arrested as French Zio-puppet kill free speech for good.

Strange minds like those of Duke and Greenwald have always been with us.  Only rarely do they constitute real threats, as they obviously did, in retrospect, in the Germany of the 1920’s.  But what worries me now about the Duke-Greenwald duo is the enormous wealth that sustains Greenwald.  Not only does the Omidyar organization supply Greenwald with apparently unlimited finances, but it has also used these resources to largely silence effective criticism.  Intercept and its parent First Look Media  have hired high-priced help, all of whom seem to be in full support of the manichean line, at least in public.  As if to mock critics, Omidyar has spoken of his crew as “fiercely independent,” which means, in Omidyar-talk, fiercely obedient to the Greenwald take on the world.  If the seriously strange ideas of Greenwald cannot be expected to enforce total loyalty in the Omidyar organization, the serious Omidyar dollars may do the trick.  And that will work out as a diminution of the free market of ideas in America.

Read my previous posting on Dieudonne, the French anti-Semite now promoted by Duke and Greenwald

Addendum — May 4, 2015

 Mr. Glenn Greenwald, the Ayatollah, and Mr. David Duke all Celebrate the anti-Semitic Cartoonist Carlos Latuff

On January 9 of this year, Mr. Greenwald introduced the anti-Semitic cartoons of his friend, the Arab-Brazilian Carlos Latuff.  He presents this propaganda as  “some not-remotely-blasphemous-or-bigoted yet very pointed and relevant cartoons by the brilliantly provocative Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff.”

In 2006, Mr. Latuff had won second prize for Holocaust Denial at the Teheran International Holocaust Cartoon Competition.  Whatever victims there may have been in any so-called Holocaust, they were, by Mr. Latuff’s lights, Palestinians, not Jews.

Not to be outdone by either Mr. Greenwald or the Supreme Leader, Mr. David Duke (who defines anti-Semitism as “stating basic facts about the subversive, criminal nature of organized Jewry and the Jewish state of Israel”)  is as  proud as Greenwald to publish an anti-Semitic cartoon  by Latuff, on April 16, 2015.

Addendum – July 21, 2015 

Among the ostensibly Jewish writers who attack Israel, none is more hysterically anti-Semitic than Max Blumenthal.  As he is described in an excellent article by David Mikics, nothing less than the physical annihilation of most of Israel’s Jews will please Mr. B.  For this, Blumenthal has received the enthusiastic endorsement of both Greenwald and Duke.  If anyone had doubts about Greenwald’s maniacal hatreds, this posting of his, endorsing Blumenthal, will dispel them.

Life Among the Fellow-Travelers — Then and Now

Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has a bit of a sour face in this picture, and well he might.  His predecessor of sorts  — Comrade Jos. Stalin of the late Soviet Union — had many more, and infinitely more prestigious fellow-travelers in the West.
A day after I celebrated my twenty-third birthday, on March 25 of 1949, Stalin’s fellow-travelers in the United States  convened their Cultural and Scientific Conference for World Peace in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York. [This link leads to a complete list of participants]. This “Waldorf Conference,” not to put too fine a point on it, was organized to denounce the United States and to praise the Soviet Union and Stalin’s dictatorship.  (William O’Neill has furnished an insightful description in his 1982 volume “A Better World. The Great Schism:  Stalinism and the American Intellectual.”  [yes, one still has to go the library for important materials !])
The list of luminaries who allowed their names to appear as “sponsors” of the Waldorf Conference appears incredible to us now.  Some of them no doubt held crossed fingers behind their backs, and  at least one, Norman Mailer, used the conference to come out as an anti-Stalinist, much to the chagrin of his erstwhile comrades.  But for the rest of roughly six hundred — what could they have been thinking ?  The facts of the Gulag, by and large, were known to anyone who cared to know.  
Among the most familiar of the Waldorf sponsors, here are some that are household names to this day:
Leonard Bernstein
Marlon Brando
Rudolf Carnap
Aaron Copland
W.E.B. DuBois
Albert Einstein   —  yes, THE  Albert Einstein
Lillian Hellman  —  nor surprise here
Langston Hughes
Norman Mailer (but see above)
Thomas Mann  —  remember that when you’re told about the wisdom of great writers
Clifford Odets
Eugene Ormandy
Paul Robeson
Artur Schnabel
Henry Wallace
Norbert Wiener
Frank Lloyd Wright
Notably absent from the list were the prominent open Communists of the time;  for example,  William Z. Foster, the CP boss, did not sign.  (Paul Robeson, a secret Communist, did sign.  He was outed as a Communist only after his death — by his own comrades.  See my previous blog here.)  The idea was, in line with the well-known deviousness of the Stalinist movement, that this Conference was not at all a Communist enterprise — no no no, not Communist at all !  Just a sincere, honest, peace-loving initiative by sincere, honest, peace-loving progressive human beings. 
But be that as it may, the list of celebrities was truly dazzling.  More sober American intellectuals like Dwight Macdonald and my erstwhile teacher Sidney Hook thought that this Waldorf group were dupes of totalitarianism (as did I, when I confronted a signer who was one of my CCNY teachers).  But the opponents could in no way match the prominence of the Waldorf supporters.
Now, compare this list of 1949 luminary Soviet enthusiasts with the tiny list of what are, by just about any standard, the  nonentities who make up  the Western supporters of the Iranian dictatorship.
Perhaps the best known is the British MP George Galloway.  Here is Wikipedia’s take on his relationship to Ahmadinejad:

Galloway has attracted criticism from both the Left and the Right for his comments relating to the regime in Iran, and his work for the state-run satellite television channel, Press TV. Scott Long, writing in The Guardian, criticised Galloway’s claim that “homosexuals are not executed in Iran, just rapists”, pointing out that current law in the country stipulates that “Penetrative sex acts between men can bring death on the first conviction”.[137] Long-time Gay Rightsactivist Peter Tatchell, also writing in The Guardian, accused Galloway of spouting “Iranian Propaganda”, continuing: “His claim that lesbian and gay people are not at risk of execution in Iran is refuted by every reputable human rights organisation, including Amnesty InternationalHuman Rights Watch, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission and the International Lesbian and Gay Association.”[138] Galloway argued that Western governments should accept the election of the conservative President of the Islamic Republic of Iran,Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.[139]The Trotskyist Workers’ Liberty group also condemns Galloway, largely on the basis of his support and work for the current Iranian regime. In “No vote for Galloway – an open letter to the left”, he is quoted from his Press TVinterview with President Ahmadinejad as stating that he requires “police protection in London from the Iranian opposition because of my support for your election campaign. I mention this so you know where I’m coming from.”[140]

On the other side of the Channel there is the African-French self-styled comedian known as Dieudonné, about whom I have blogged before.  Here is the latest news about Dieudonné:  a) last Sunday he was defeated in his run under the “Anti-Zionism” label for the French Assembly, receiving a score of 0.14% in his district;  and b) he has made an anti-Semitic movie called, appropriately, L’antisémite, for which he has received money and sponsorship from the Iranian government.  Robert Faurisson, dean of Holocaust deniers but perhaps best known as friend of Chomsky’s, appears in the movie as himself.
For those who can understand French, here is Monsieur Dieudonné in Teheran, praising the Iranian dictatorship:


(Here is a good article on Dieudonné by Tom Reiss in The New Yorker some years ago.)

Both Galloway and Dieudonné enjoy something of an international notoriety, something than can scarcely be said of the American retired sociologist James Petras.  More or less alone even among leftist anti-Israel activists, Petras supports the Ahmadinejad regime.  He calls Jewish dentists and doctors, whom he sees as prone to be active in AIPAC, as the main peril to America.  His difference from  Chomsky — whom he criticizes for his “ethnicity” — is that he sees the problem, frankly, with Jews as such, without bothering to employ code terms like Zionist.  His approval of Ahmadinejad has been criticized by fellow leftists.

No review of Western supporters of Ahmadinejad would be complete without a bit of comic relief.  The American Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke sees Teheran as his spiritual home, and has participated in Ahmadinejad’s 2006 Holocaust-denial conference, as have some self-styled rabbis of the unfortunate Neturei Karta (about whom the less said the better).  

So here it is,  the story of the mighty fellow-travelers and how they have fallen — from Einstein all the way to David Duke.