How Abramoff Abused Judaism

Now that we know how much of a scumbag Abramoff was and all of his connections, let's look back on how he has used and abused the Jewish faith to hide and deceive his money-making schemes:

First off, let's look at how he used donations to Jewish charities as a cover and laundry for his ill-gotten gains.  None of the charities reported ever receiving any of the money.  The school he set up, Yeshkol Academy, was essentially a money laundromat, using money to buy zambonis when it didn't own a hockey rink and didn't pay it's staff and "screwed it's tuition-paying students out of a diploma".

He tried to get his good friend and rabbi, Daniel Lapin of the Toward Traditions, to create fake awards for him, then used money from the Choctaw tribe funneled to Russian businesses to fund Israeli paramilitary groups.  Such a nice boy.

He is bonded at the hip with Lapin, who was paid $60,000 as an absentee dean at the yeshiva Abramoff set up. Lapin has a history all it's own teetering on anti-semitism:

"You'd have to be a recent immigrant from Outer Mongolia not to know of the role that people with Jewish names play in the coarsening of our culture

The sad fact is that through Jewish actors, playwrights, and producers, the Berlin stage of Weimar Germany linked Jews and deviant sexuality in all its sordid manifestations just as surely as Broadway does today.

He set up Stacks, the only Jewish deli in D.C., used like Signatures for wining and dining politicos, and then closed soon after. I wonder how it didn't make money when people didn't pay their tabs as political favors.

''With all this influence and all this power/His deli still couldn't cook a burger in an hour.''

He produced the movie Red Scorpion, a movie where Dolph Lundgren kills everything in sight, then "established a short-lived Committee for Traditional Jewish Values in Entertainment, but then concluded he wouldn't be able to put out movies that met his standards."

I'm no religious expert, but for a guy who wore his orthodox Judaism on his sleeve and dealt almost exclusively with gambling, he forgets that the Talmud states that "one who plays with dice" is unfit to bear witness.

Maybe he was using all of his greed to send money to paramilitary operations in Israel for some exrtremist religious vision, but he abused people's faith to get his own ends in the process which seems unconscionable.

•  Would you have written this type of diary

  if Abramhoff had been a Catholic and created bogus Catholic charities, etc?

  That's right, I didn't think so.  

  by mlk on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:37:45 PM PDT

  •  Flamboyant

    Abramoff was flamboyantly religious.  I think that that is why this has become a story.  

    by bink on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:42:45 PM PDT

    •  That's BS

      If he had been flamboyantly Catholic or Protestant this wouldn't become a story at all.  It's because people can use the "greedy Jew" stereotype with impunity that this has legs.  It is latent anti-semitism.

      by mlk on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:45:43 PM PDT

      •  Disagree

        When a Fundamentalist hypocrite is exposed, people just as eagerly identify his or her failings and contrast them with the identity the hypocrite sought to create.  Think of all of the Jim Bakkers and the like ...  With Catholics, it is a bit different, as the appearance of righteousness is not as prized as with Evangelicals, but if Santorum was exposed as a big-time sinner, no one would be more gleeful than I.

        by bink on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:49:45 PM PDT

        •  Although

          The media and many non-Catholics slobbered with gratification when some pedophiles in the Catholic clergy were exposed.  The fact that these handful of pedophiles represent the most minute percentage of the 45,000 priests and other quarter of a million nuns, lay ministers and Catholic school teachers in the U.S. ... never reached the public ear.

          by bink on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:53:26 PM PDT

          •  I used Catholic as an example

            Insert any non-Jewish religion in the first statement.

            by mlk on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:58:07 PM PDT

            •  Awesome

              I'll use Christianity as an example.

              You've been reading some alternate reality version of Daily Kos if you think this is only made an issue because he is Jewish.   You're way off the mark.

              by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:06:14 PM PDT

          •  What are you, nuts??

            The priest abuse scandal was a huge deal because the numbers were so huge.  After years of little press attention, the whole thing blew up in 2002 in the Catholic Church's face - and rightfully so.
            TEN THOUSAND KIDS MOLESTED BY THOUSANDS OF PRIESTS!!! Many experts believe the number of kids molested is much higher - like 100,000.  

            Get a clue before you post your discredited right-wing defense of possibly the worse scandal in the whole scandal-ridden history of the Catholic Church.

            by Monteego on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:24:09 PM PDT

            •  You Seem Like a Disturbed Person

              This looks like a pretty good study:

              http://www.americancatholic.org/...

              It does not report tens of thousands of abusers, nor does it report the hundred thousand victims that you mention.

              by bink on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:14:22 PM PDT

              •  Umm, maybe you could read what I actually wrote

                I didn't say tens of thousands of abusers - I said "thousands of abusers." You gonna dispute that one?  You gonna dispute the 10,000 figure?  Since, after all, those figures come directly from the two big studies last year!!  You think those numbers are small??  Talk about disturbed!!

                You gonna dispute that many more victims have never come forward??  Ask any expert on the subject.

                Re: the 100,000 figure that some have suggested, see, for example, Father Andrew Greeley.

                Pathetic attempt to minimize a monumental scandal.  Shame on you.    

                by Monteego on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:55:11 PM PDT

                •  C'mon

                  Nobody is minimizing anything regarding the horrors of what was exposed as you are insinuating.

                  You're misinterpreting that post and giving it a meaning and position that I do not at all see Bink taking.

                  by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 09:01:16 PM PDT

                  •  No, you come on

                    "Media slobbering..."  WTF?  It was and is a horrible scandal that the press failed to report on until, essentially, 2002. Go read Jason Berry on the subject.  For a long time the media didn't want to take on the Church hierarchy - until it happened in Boston in '02.

                    No objective analysis would say the media was "delighting" or "slobbering."  They were finally doing their job.  The false impression given of the media finally doing their job is most definitely a form of minimizing.  You might think a few thousand pedophile priests and at least 10,000 molested kids are small numbers on a percentage basis but I say 1 kid molested is too many.  We are, after all, talking about priests!!  They're supposed to have a higher calling.  

                    by Monteego on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 10:02:15 PM PDT

                    •  Dude or dudette...seriously....come the fuck on

                      * [new]   No, you come on (none / 0)

                      "Media slobbering..."  WTF?

                      Could you use context or is that inconvenient?

                      Compare the absolute media blitz that took place (at which point I turned off any story about it because, quite frankly, it wasn't even shocking to me) about the Catholic priests to the media coverage of Abramoff and the gangland style murders that took place, the fleecing of probably hundreds of millions of dollars, and the financing of Republicans by a criminal who is tied to them by their necks.

                      Seriously.....come the fuck on.   You aren't doing yourself any justice by creating strawmen out of Bink's post.   You are simply wrong.

                      by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 11:02:29 PM PDT

                      •  Measuremeant of media slobbering...

                        is hard...but in generallythe preist pedophilia scandal was a story that definitely needed to be told.  An institution that is supposed to be the groundwork of moral compassing being the exact opposite is a huge deal even if it was only 1%.

                        Abramoff should be covered much more than it is as well, but they sure hav etime for both.  Or was thaat runaway bride taking up too much airspace.

                        by ortsed on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 08:06:37 PM PDT

            •  Holy crap

              This diary's comment section is the gift that keeps on giving.
              
              1.  The diary is anti-semitic because it (gasp!) speaks about the way in which Abramoff used his faith to front his millions in illegal operations which he is now going to prison over.

              That one was expected though.   You can't really write a diary or a comment at DailyKos that connects any bad event or action with Israel or the Jewish faith without it being labeled anti-semitic.  It's almost as if it's written in the rules here or something.

              2.  Bink is now a right winger.  LMAO @ that one.  Hell, Bink is one of the Kossacks who actually takes on the RedState.orgers and hasn't been banned yet.   He gets props for that as his points are never on their side of things.   Holy crap I can't believe I just saw Bink get called a de facto right winger.  
              
              Grab me another beer and toss the popcorn in the microwave.   It's one crazy comment after another tonight at dkos.

              Monteego, Bink's point is not in error.   No matter what the number of convicted priests totals out to, it is an minute percentage of priests worldwide.   That point is correct and is far from a right wing defense.

              by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:16:32 PM PDT

              •  Eh

                Look, to be clear:

                Sexual abuse is bad.  Sexual abuse by priests is bad.  Do I really have to say this or people will think otherwise?

                The way that the media delighted in parading about any range of bizarre myths and stereotypes about Catholic priests and Catholics during the whole tragic episode was what I was trying to point out here.

                I wasn't trying to point out that sexual abuse was good or somehow defensible.

                Good lord.

                I can't believe how you have to spell things out these days.

                by bink on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:21:56 PM PDT

                •  lol

                  Your point was clear.   I don't know how accurate the media portrayal analogy is as I didn't pay enough attention to the coverage when it was at it's peak to judge but the point you made was clear.

                  by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:24:25 PM PDT

      •  oh please.

        by therightlies on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:54:49 PM PDT

      •  Stated contradictions

        The diary specifically mentions how Abramhoff played up his faith while deliberately acting in direct opposition to the stated tenets of Judaism.  It's no different than enjoying a televangelist getting caught with e prostitute.  

        by scottman on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 09:58:58 PM PDT

  •  I'm a bit more familiar with the topic

    ...not so much familiar with Catholicism.  

    Still, what point are you trying to make?  Should people not speak out about people abusing people's religious faith?  Do you want me to rescind my diary because it doesn't cover everybody who's ever abused a religious charity?

    by ortsed on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:44:00 PM PDT

    •  My question is

      If he had been any other religion would this be an issue at all?  

      by mlk on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:47:55 PM PDT

      •  It should be

        I can't explain why more folks don't stand up to people who use the name of religion to hide their improprieties.  Why not start standing on some conviction now?

        by ortsed on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:54:30 PM PDT

      •  YES...I didn't even know he was Jewish.

        by therightlies on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:56:57 PM PDT

        •  I didn't know he was Jewish either

          though I know a lot about Lapin.  This ultra-right wing zealotry ahs infected American JUdaism at the more orthodox end, and it is a cancer.

          I thank the diarist for bringint this to my attention and reminding me that when I first thought Lapin was bad news, I was right.

          So, as a Jew, let me say, Abramoff abused us all. He abused all Jews.  He should be ashamed and make apologies to all of us.
          He'd better have one hell of a Yom Kippur.

          by Percheronwoman on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:12:56 PM PDT

      •  I think the simple answer is yes

        After five years of watching those who wear their faith on their sleeves while their actions hypocritically fly in the face of the true tenants of any faith, we have all become quite skeptical of those who feign religiosity. The story would be they same regardless of creed.

        by Duke1676 on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:57:32 PM PDT

      •  You are absolutely correct

        We at DailyKos never, and I mean never go after Christians who use exploit the Christian faith for their own twisted political agendas, money, and power by focusing in on that fact.

        Never that.

        Not for Dobson.
        Not for Robertson.
        Not for Falwell.
        Not for Perkins.
        Not for Bush.
        Not for Santorum.
        Not for Phelps.
        Not for..........................

        Get a clue.  This diary is spot the fuck on.

        by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:02:37 PM PDT

        •  Amen, brother (or sister)!

          Some people are hopelessly clueless.

          by Monteego on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:18:37 PM PDT

        •  And it's worth noting...

          ...that if you check the diariast's other diaries, there IS one on how the Bush regime is misusing and abusing Christianity.  And another on the religioius right.

          Evidently this is not aimed at any one religion.
          

          by daulton on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:57:46 PM PDT

          •  Holy crap the irony

            by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:18:34 PM PDT

      •  Creating fake charities is newsworthy

        no matter which religion. Delay and Abramoff both deserve censure for this.

        by viral on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:18:38 PM PDT

        •  or prison

          by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:20:51 PM PDT

  •  I am Jewish and I think the diarist

    makes it clear Abrahamoff abused Judaism.  I do not think this diary is anti-semitic.

    Abrahamoff is a shande fur die goyim (he shames us in front of the gentiles.. an old Yiddish expression.)

    I am glad someone points out that this is not how good Jews, or good Catholics or good Muslims behave.

    This is very bad behavior.

    by Percheronwoman on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:09:02 PM PDT

    •  I wasn't quite as kind in

      my 'old school' interpretation

      :}

      by shpilk on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:03:18 PM PDT

•  that's what he gets...

  that's what he gets for hanging out with all those "family values" christian conservatives. the hypocrisy must have been contagious.

  by campskunk on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:44:51 PM PDT

  •  Exactly.

    I don't think "greedy Jew" as some above get from the reading. I get "another terrible man in Washington using religion as a veneer for his shady dealings".

    by BornUnderPunches on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 05:55:59 PM PDT

•  I'm Jewish and I am SURE Abramoff is a phony...

  How do I know?? Well, of course I can't crawl into his scuzzy little mind, but I absolutely DO NOT BELIEVE FOR A SECOND that he is a truly observant Orthodox Jew. He crafted a false piety in the way 90% of those sickening Evangelical Republicans do: as socio-cultural cover for misdeeds. I'm actually surprised JACK ambramOFF didn't have a public baptism/conversion to Christianity simply as a shrewd career move. Generally we Jews don't believe in a Hell, but I will make an exception for Jack and his merry band of creeps.

  by I Hate Republicans on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:04:10 PM PDT

  •  Yeah

    Abramoff is one of these guys who are such an embarassment to us. It's a shame the non-Jews should see the Jews acting so badly, to paraphrase most of my older relatives.

    by metal prophet on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:09:59 PM PDT

  •  People who had their children

    in Eshkol Academy also feel betrayed. I know some of the parents who had to scramble to find a place to put their children after the school was closed. And the teachers who weren't paid don't think much of Abramoff either.

    Interesting, though, that Ken Lay is going to frog walk to Leavenworth but we're not seeing headlines like "Christian faith threatened by the act of a born again member..."

    This has nothing to do with Judiasm. It has a lot to do with sociapathism and capitalism.

    by captainlaser on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:32:34 PM PDT

    •  Why aren't there headlines?

      It does have a lot to do with sociopathic capitalism, but why shouldn't people point out religious hypocricy?  Have you just given up on holding anyone accountable for anything besides monetary transactions?  

      I did feel a bit awkward writing the diary since I'm not Orthodox and can't speak with much authority about how hypocritical Abramoff was with respect to Talmudic law, but I think there's enough there to warrant some outrage.

      by ortsed on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:46:21 PM PDT

•  At my temple in Ithaca

  there are a lot of truly pious pe, and their piety shows in their humility, their kindness, the fact that they never have an unkind word, are always there for the young, the old, the oppressed.  They never gossip. They help kids, clean yards, take care of people.  They gvie charity. They live within their means. They work ahrdest at improving thesmelves.  They yearn for wisdom, not things. One of the reasons I like to go to this temple is to see these truly pious people and think, "I can be like this. I can learn from these people."  They say they have learned their lessons from our sages. They make me so proud to be a Jew.

  I once introduced my graduate student to a man named Ted, who is one of the most humble, pious people I know.  I told him, "This person is my idea of a real mensch." My student said, "He is just a common man."  But a year later, my student came to me and said, "Ted is amazing."  I asked, "What did he do?" He replied, "It is just the way he is.  He is always totally present."

  I know in my heart that true Judaism cultivates humility and social justice and ethics in people.

  So I do not need to be convinced that Abramoff is a fraud.  I know he is. All I have to do is think of Ted and Richard and Steven and Betsy (may her name be for a blessing) and Judith (may her name be for a blessing) and I know that real piety exists in my tradition and I am proud of it.

  I turn my back on Abramoff.

  I know many Christians who feel the same way about thier community and faith as I feel about mine.

  by Percheronwoman on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:21:29 PM PDT

  •  apologies for typos

    by Percheronwoman on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:22:09 PM PDT

•  Lapin

  I've never seen those quotes from Lapin.  He really is a Hitler protege.  That stuff is all right there in Mein Kampf.

  by thehim on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 06:56:56 PM PDT

•  Abramhoff is

  • a momzer
    
  • a paskudniak
    
  • a shmuck
    
  • a putz

  Yo, Jack!

  Gai kakhen afenyam!

  Ver derharget {but only after you tesify}!

  Go shtup you pal Tom DeLay up the tokhis, you farshtinkener!
  __

  There - I feel so much better now!

  by shpilk on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:01:31 PM PDT

  •  I would give you a 4

    But I have no idea what you said.  :p

    Can we get a translator to step in lol?

    by tlh lib on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 08:56:40 PM PDT

•  Jack, Tom and all these guys

  abuse the Faiths they claim to support. They wear religion like they wear their friendships (Kenny Boy who?), outward attributes that are easily manipulated and dropped when they are no longer convenient.

  I'm sure Jack is turning back to his Faith, as did Duke, as will Tom, Karl, Ralph, George W and the rest.

  As for Lapin, I would like to know more about his time in South Africa. Especially what he did during the Apartheid years.

  And about how he hooked Jack up with Tom...

  by dengre on Fri Dec 30, 2005 at 07:23:02 PM PDT