FAIR takes on the Chavez anti-semitism slur

[High Plains]

That's Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, not the anti-immigration group

Here's the link to the full story http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2805


Media Advisory

Editing Chavez to Manufacture a Slur
Some outlets spread spurious charges of anti-Semitism

1/23/06

It began with a bulletin from the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles (1/4/06) accusing Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez of invoking an old anti-Semitic slur. In a Christmas Eve speech, the Center said, Chavez declared that "the world has wealth for all, but some minorities, the descendants of the same people that crucified Christ, have taken over all the wealth of the world."

The Voice of America (1/5/06) covered the charge immediately. Then opinion journals on the right took up the issue. "On Christmas Eve, Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez's Christian-socialist cant drifted into anti-Semitism," wrote the Daily Standard, the Weekly Standard's Web-only edition. The American Spectator (1/6/06) was so excited about the quote, which it called "the standard populist hatemongering of Latin America's new left leaders," that it presented it as coming from two different speeches: "Venezuela's Chavez in his 2005 Christmas address couldn't resist commenting that 'the descendants of those who crucified Christ' own the riches of the world. And on a Dec. 24 visit to the Venezuelan countryside, Chavez stirred up the peasants by claiming that 'the world offers riches to all. However, minorities such as the descendants of those who crucified Christ' have become 'the owners of the riches of the world.'"

Then more mainstream outlets began to pick up the story. "Chavez lambasted Jews (in a televised Christmas Eve speech, no less) as 'descendants of those who crucified Christ' and 'a minority took the world's riches for themselves,'" the New York Daily News' Lloyd Grove reported (1/13/06). A column in the Los Angeles Times (1/14/06) used the quote to label Chavez "a jerk and a friend of tyranny." The Wall Street Journal's "Americas" columnist, Mary Anastasia O'Grady (1/16/06), called Chavez’s words "an ugly anti-Semitic swipe.”

<snip>



That Chavez's comments were part of some anti-Semitic campaign is directly contradicted by a letter sent by the Confederation of Jewish Associations of Venezuela to the Wiesenthal Center (AP, 1/14/06). "We believe the president was not talking about Jews," the letter stated, complaining that "you have acted on your own, without consulting us, on issues that you don't know or understand." The American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress agreed with the Venezuelan group's view that Chavez was not referring to Jews in his speech (Inter Press Service, 1/13/06).

<snip>

[High Plains]

1. The Wiesenthal Center's claim "tantamount to fabrication"

FAIR says further down in the piece.

[xchrom]

2. i can imagine this is going to get exciting

before it goes away.

[Ian David]

3. The Wiesenthal Center was careless but not malicious

It was a cultural misunderstanding.

The Wiesenthal Center should have checked with Venezuelan Jewish groups before issuing a statement.

But on the surface, it was hard to imagine 'descendants of those who crucified Christ' as anything other than a slam against Jews. It must have seemed like a no-brainer to them at the time.

Of course, plenty of right-wing organizations (and Wiesenthal is very liberal) gleefully picked-up on this, didn't they?



Venezuela's Jews Defend Leftist President in Flap Over Remarks
Thursday, Jan 12, 2006

The Venezuelan Jewish community leadership and several major American Jewish groups are accusing the Simon Wiesenthal Center of rushing to judgment by charging Venezuela's leftist president, Hugo Chavez, with making antisemitic remarks.

Officials of the leading organization of Venezuelan Jewry were preparing a letter this week to the center, complaining that it had misinterpreted Chavez's words and had failed to consult with them before attacking the Venezuelan president.

<snip>

In his speech, Chavez lamented that while the world had enough resources for all, "some minorities, the descendants of the same ones who crucified Christ, the descendants of the same ones who threw out {South American liberator Simon} Bolivar from here and also crucified him in a way in Santa Marta, over there in Colombia — a minority took possession of all the planet's gold, of the silver, the minerals, the waters, the good land, the oil, the riches, and they have concentrated the riches in a few hands. Less than 10% of the world's population possesses over half of the world's riches, and more than half of the planet's population is poor, and every day there are more poor in the world."

Both the AJCommittee and the American Jewish Congress seconded the Venezuelan community's view that Chavez's comments were not aimed at Jews. All three groups said he was aiming his barbs at the white oligarchy that has dominated the region since the colonial era, pointing to his reference to Bolivar as the clearest evidence of his intent.

One official noted that Latin America's so-called Liberation Theology has long depicted Jesus as a socialist and consequently speaks of gentile business elites as "Christ-killers."

Sergio Widder, the Wiesenthal center's representative in Latin America, countered that Chavez's mention of Christ-killers and wealth was ambiguous at best and in need of clarification. He said that the decision to criticize Chavez had been taken after careful consideration.

More:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1864

[Peace Patriot]

5. "a cultural misunderstanding"?

The Venezuelan Jewish groups, in their letter on this matter, said that the Simon Wiesenthal centered had done this THREE times--criticized Chavez unfairly--without consulting local Jews.

Sounds to me like purposeful misunderstanding.

Sergio Widder, of the Wiesenthal center, says they criticized Chavez "after careful consideration." That "careful consideration" did NOT include consulting local Jewish groups, who would have pointed out the cultural differences regarding the Simon Bolivar reference and also Liberation theology. And, since this had already happened twice, one can't help but feel that they were deliberately avoiding such input.

Chavez has now been slandered--completely unfairly. What will the SW Center do to repair his reputation among Jews and others? Anything?

I know a lot about Hugo Chavez and his government, and I would say that he is probably the last person on earth to have a racial prejudice. He is part African American and part Native American himself--and was the FIRST brown-skinned man to be elected as a head of government in South America (we now have Evo Morales in Bolivia as well, a full native). He's been fighting racial prejudice all his life! He is furthermore an expansive man--open handed, big hearted-- as well as highly intelligent. I just don't think it's in him to have such a prejudice. And I think that anyone who knew anything about him would have presumed in his favor that they did not understand his remarks, and would have sought LOCAL Jewish opinion.

But I am beginning to think that those at the Simon Wiesenthal Center who published this criticism have a prejudice against HIM--maybe not racial, but political. That's how it looks to ME. In spite of previous local Jewish defense of Chavez, they presumed against him, did not seek further information, and accomplished some intentional goal by slurring him before the world.

I'd like to know the why's and the wherefore's of that goal. And I'd like to see those persons responsible for it fired or resign--if they won't apologize to Chavez and try to repair the damage. Because, frankly, I will never trust the SW center's word again until they do.

[Ian David]

6. Being a persecuted minority doesn't automatically mean you're not a bigot

Martin Luther King Jr.'s daughter is an anti-gay crusader, for example.

Al Sharpton, while he's in favor of gay rights, hates Jews.

But I too am curious to know if there's bad blood between Wiesenthal and Chavez. They really seem to be going out of their way to make enemies out of an ally.

But now that this whole "Christ Killer" thing is resolved, my only beef with Chavez is that he's against celebrating Halloween and might ban gay marriage.

[Selatius]

4. Chavez must've meant the power elite of the era

The fact is Chavez considers Jesus as much a revolutionary as any other in history. Who but the most powerful would find that kind of revolutionary acceptable to the existing power order? The Roman patricians were the power center of that part of the world at that time, and I would figure they, as well as the Pharisees who aided and abetted the power of Roman authority in that part of the world, were those Chavez condemned. Whether they were Jewish or not is irrelevant.