John Kerry Is Jewish?

[Vigil]

A Look Inside Sen. John Kerry's Inner Circle

 

Tuesday, July 13, 2004

 

 

 

This is a partial transcript from "On the Record" with Greta Van Susteren, July 12, 2004 that has been edited for clarity.

 

Watch "On the Record" every weeknight at 10 p.m. ET!

 

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, HOST: "The Boston Globe" spent six months digging into the life and record of Senator John Kerry for what began as a newspaper profile. What they ended up with was an in-depth book about the Democratic presidential nominee.

 

And here to discuss the strengths and liabilities of the presidential hopeful are co-authors of "John F. Kerry, The Complete Biography" by "The Boston Globe" reporters who know him best Michael Kranish and Nina Easton. We probably should give credit to Brian Mooney as well, whose not here.

 

NINA EASTON, KERRY BIOGRAPHER: Absolutely.

 

VAN SUSTEREN: He's up in Boston. All right. Nina, you did the later part of his work but, you know, we see him so much publicly. Is that what he's really like? I mean I always wonder whether the public figure we see is how he is in person.

 

EASTON: Well, there is this element to John Kerry, which I think puzzles people. He's a bit of an enigma. People describe him as aloof, a little bit reserved. And what was most interesting in the research for the book was that we came to understand why that is to a large extent.

 

John Kerry isn't really from a Massachusetts town. He was born in Denver. He spent several years up to about age seven in Massachusetts. Then his father was a foreign service officer, so the family moved to Washington and then overseas and he was shipped off to boarding schools from age eleven on. As he says in the book, "We were always moving on. It steeled you. We were always saying goodbye."

 

And I think this accounts largely for the reserve and almost distrust of large groups of people that you see. He does, however, have a core of friends that he's developed from these boarding schools and from Vietnam that have stuck with him through the years.

 

So, he does have that core of friends but I do think when he comes off he has difficulty connecting with a broader audience. That's why the John Edwards' choice to a large extent makes sense.

 

VAN SUSTEREN: Michael, did he cooperate at all with this or participate or sit down for interviews?

 

MICHAEL KRANISH, KERRY BIOGRAPHER: Well, sure. We did a series last year. It was a seven part series that ran 14 pages in the newspaper and he sat down for about ten hours of interviews for this series.

 

The book was written during the time when he was still running for the nomination right at the height of the Super Tuesday primaries and so forth, so our material for interviews was from the series.

 

To go back to your question you asked Nina, you know, he's also a skeptic of government. So, you ask why does he go, some people say flip- flop, other people would say why does he question things the way that he does?

 

A very short anecdote, he was in Vietnam and he was in Cambodia as part of a mission. I don't know if he intended to go but that's where he was but the government that was running the war knew that troops were in Cambodia but Nixon, President Nixon at the time was telling the American public, "We're not in Cambodia."

 

So, from a very early time, John Kerry is skeptical of government and he came back to protest the war that he participated in, so this is where some of this inner belief comes from. He does -- he did serve but he also questioned.

 

VAN SUSTEREN: What was it like to, I mean you write a book the three of you, Brian who isn't here, was it easy to do these different sections of his life?

 

EASTON: It was because I think each of us brought a different element to it. You know, I'm sort of a creature of Washington and was able to look at his Senate career. Brian certainly understood his role in Massachusetts politics. And, Michael, investigated his lineage, his ancestry and his time in Vietnam and actually came up with some information that John Kerry didn't know.

 

And to talk about it a little bit here, except for a quirk of history, we would be talking about John Cohen not John Kerry because, in fact, John Kerry's paternal grandparents were Jewish, both of them, and they were from central Europe. They changed their name and their religion because they faced tremendous anti-Semitism and they immigrated to the United States.

 

And so, and John Kerry's ancestry as we see it today, people think of him as Irish-Catholic and certainly he's Catholic, but the Irish part is not at all accurate and Michael was able to dig this out and actually bring it to Kerry and Kerry kind of reacted to it in some emotional moments.

VAN SUSTEREN: Strong suit and weak suit as he runs for president.

 

KRANISH: Well, I think the strong suit is that he does believe in service. He certainly does believe in serving his country. Most of his life has been serving his country, hasn't really been in private business other than he was a lawyer for a couple of years and he ran a cookie business or invested in one for a couple of years. He has certainly been in service.

 

I think the weak suit will be this perception, what does he stand for and certainly the hits about flip-flopping will hurt a bit. So, I think when you look at those two he's a good closer. He does close very well in all the races that I've watched, so that will be very important.

 

VAN SUSTEREN: You guys have great timing writing this book, right?

 

EASTON: That's right.

 

KRANISH: Well, we wrote the book because he's a nominee obviously.

 

VAN SUSTEREN: Obviously. We'll probably get some journalists who will write the one now on Senator Edwards.

 

EASTON: That's right.

 

VAN SUSTEREN: Thank you very much.

 

EASTON: Thank you.

 

Content and Programming Copyright 2004 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2004 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

 

 

After the elections he will convert to Judaism!

 

He is not Irish-Catholic, but Jewish-Catholic.

 

If that is possible?

[Armat]

This thread belongs in trash bin! I live in Mass. and Kerry regardless his ancestry is a fine person and senator, we as Armenians should show some gratitude since he consistently supported AG issues and Karabagh aid etc. Edited July 14, 2004 by Armat

[mx5]

I dont know, I think he is selling himself as part jewish to attract their votes.I myself dont believe he is even remotely jewish in anyways,besides he is not the first who done it nore will be the last.I know many who pretended that for their personal interests...!!!.

[axel]

Who cares about Kerry's ethnic background? On the other hand, one should be aware of the policies he plans to conduct.

 

"The focal point of this liberal internationalist/interventionist movement is, Hand points out, the Democratic Leadership Council and its affiliated think tank, the Progressive Policy Institute, which have ties with Kerry. “Proponents of ‘progressive internationalism’ are a lock to control leadership positions at the State Department and key civilian posts at the Pentagon in a John Kerry administration. How do we know this? Because these New Democrats obviously ghostwrote Kerry’s campaign book, A Call to Service: My Vision for A Better America.”24

 

Israeli influence

While Hand illustrates the identical foreign policy views of Kerry and the DLC/PPI advocates of “progressive internationalism,” he completely overlooks the Zionist orientation of the DLC/PPI. It is quite evident that the effect of Kerry’s “progressive internationalism” would advance Israeli interests inasmuch as it would involve an international effort to fight “terrorism” (i.e., the enemies of Israel), eliminate WMD (remove weapons from Israel’s enemies leaving it with a WMD monopoly in the Middle East), and promote democracy (force other Middle East countries to undergo social and political change while Israel remains the same with continued control of the occupied territories.)

 

Moreover, significant figures in the DLC/PPI have close ties to Israel. One of the leading founders of PPI, was Michael Steinhardt, who made his fortune as a hedge fund operator and has become a Jewish philanthropist. Steinhardt helped to establish Birthright Israel, a program that sends young Jews to Israel.25 Vice Chairman of the DLC is David Steiner, a former president of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), who was forced to resign that position when he was secretly tape-recorded bragging about how he manipulated American government on behalf of Israel during the time of the first Gulf War in 1991.26 Barry Rubin, a featured speaker of PPI, is deputy director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Israel. Rubin also writes Middle East/Israel briefings for the American Jewish Committee, which sponsors the neoconservative Commentary Magazine, a strong backer of the Israel and the war on Iraq27

 

John Kerry himself blathers on about the high ideals of the state of Israel and the moral imperative for the US to support it in a recent article that came out in the Brown [university] Students for Israel publication, “Perspectives: An Israel Review.” In the article, Kerry recites the usual platitudes regarding Israel: the threat to Israeli security, Israel as the “Promised Land,” Jewish heroism, the democratic nature of the state of Israel. Kerry concludes by proclaiming that Americans “must again reaffirm we are enlisted for the duration--and reaffirm our belief that the cause of Israel must be the cause of America--and the cause of people of conscience everywhere.” 28

 

Kerry goes far in supporting some of Prime Minister Sharon’s most extreme policies. Whereas he once referred to Israel’s “security fence” as a “barrier to peace,” he more recently described its construction as a “legitimate act of self defense.”29

 

Given the pro-Israeli power in the US, it must be recognized that all successful candidates must pledge some degree of fealty to Israel. For instance, Bill Clinton, who managed to evade military service in the United States, went so far as to claim that if Saddam’s Iraq invaded Israel he “would personally get in a ditch, grab a rifle, and fight and die” on behalf of Israel’s defense.30

 

Continuation of militaristic imperialism in Middle East

Kerry’s positions differ little from the Bush administration’s favorable policy toward Sharon’s Israel. As reporter Rannie Amiri correctly observes: “But regardless of whether it is George Bush or John Kerry who wins the 2004 presidential race, Israel is assured of being the ultimate winner. And that is a sure bet.”31

 

Overriding Kerry’s sympathy for Israel is the simple fact that his stated positions clearly reveal that he will continue the militaristic imperialism in the Middle East introduced by the Bush administration. The irony is, of course, that he draws substantial support from the anti-war segment of the American population. In the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush (or at least his handler’s) felt the need to trick the American voters regarding the type of foreign policy his administration would pursue by including in his speeches pledges to avoid the “nation building” that Clinton had attempted in Haiti, Somalia, and the Balkans and to pursue a “humbler” foreign policy. With his neoconservative warmongering foreign policy advisers already close by his side during the 2000 campaign, the observant could infer that the reality of a Bush administration foreign policy would be radically different from its campaign rhetoric. With Kerry, however, his policies are an open book. He is a pro-war, pro-imperialist candidate, who will capture the peace vote. "

 

full article with footnotes and references: http://www.currentconcerns.ch/archive/2004/03/20040302.php

[DominO123]

must again reaffirm we are enlisted for the duration--and reaffirm our belief that the cause of Israel must be the cause of America--and the cause of people of conscience everywhere.

Bush wasn't that bad afteral.

 

How can a possible president of a country like the US make a such statment? How can the cause of another state on the other side of the ocean be the same causes of another independent state?

Edited July 14, 2004 by Fadix

[Armat]

Axel

Why all of sudden Israeli issues become more important then Armenian issues! This man supported Armenians period! Is it not obvious by now that no American presidential candidate can be elected in office without having deep $$ support of Jews. Does this surprise anyone?

[DominO123]

Axel

Why all of sudden Israeli issues become more important then Armenian issues! This man supported Armenians period! Is it not obvious by now that no American presidential candidate can be elected in office without having deep $$ support of Jews. Does this surprise anyone?

Armat, I agree with you... but I have a problem with the quote in bold. How can any potential president of an indepdent state say something like that?

[Armat]

Armat, I agree with you... but I have a problem with the quote in bold. How can any potential president of an indepdent state say something like that?

Clinton said the same but once in office policies change. In fact most American Jews are in support of independent Palestinian state. Kerry cannot afford to say otherwise if he wants to be electable. Jewish lobby money cannot be overlooked. Just running one add saying Kerry is against Israel is enough to discredit him to zero in the media. Unfortunately in the south you got millions of evangelical Christians who also support Israel and without the support of the south no candidate can even dream about the white house. It is politics ,and as such certain strategy is important.

[Vigil]

This thread belongs in trash bin! I live in Mass. and Kerry regardless his ancestry is a fine person and senator, we as Armenians should show some gratitude since he consistently supported AG issues and Karabagh aid etc.

 

I never implied the above, but instead am just asking how is it possible for Kerry to be Jewish-Catholic, that is all.

[Armat]

I never implied the above, but instead am just asking how is it possible for Kerry to be Jewish-Catholic, that is all.

Vigil by all respect does it matter?As Armenian he earned my support.

[Vigil]

Vigil by all respect does it matter?As Armenian he earned my support.

 

No and he will still get my vote, but I was just wondering how he can be Jewish-Catholic.

[Anoushik]

One of my classmates is a Chrisitian Jew. Actually, I don't think he cares at all about religion but his parents are Christian and they are both Jewish.

[Vigil]

One of my classmates is a Chrisitian Jew. Actually, I don't think he cares at all about religion but his parents are Christian and they are both Jewish.

 

Ok that makes sense, which means that Judaism is ethnicity? I mean if you are Jewish-Christian wouldn't that make a converted Jew not Jewish? This article does make it seem like that genetically John Kerry is Jewish, so, would that mean that anyone who is not genetically a Jew not Jewish?

 

Also assuming then that indeed John Kerry is Jewish-Catholic wouldn't that mean that Judaism is not a religion? I mean how can you be "Jewish-Catholic"?

 

I do not know, but it seems to me like they are using a double standard here. I feel that John Kerry is indeed Irish-Catholic, but his ancestry could have been Jewish due to the fact that genetically there is no such thing as a Jew.

 

Now I checked the encyclopedia to find any clue as to why this is and it stated:

 

"As a result of the long and varied history of the Jews, it is difficult to define a Jew. For example, there is no such thing as a Jewish race. Anyone born to a Jewish mother, or anyone who has converted to Judaism according to Jewish law, is a Jew. Many people define Jews as a persons who consider themselves Jews."

 

Now assuming then that Jews feel that anyone who "feels" Jewish is Jewish could we assume since John Kerry does not feel Jewish then he must not be Jewish, right? Right, so, for them to state he is indeed Jewish when in fact by their own definition he is not Jewish is wrong. Since, by a Jewish race does not exist then we must assume that this is the only way to define a Jew, which is if they "feel Jewish" they must be "Jewish".

 

Furthermore, since his “Jewish ness” stems from his paternal side that would mean he is not Jewish also since he was not born to a Jewish mother.

 

I think I answered my own question, thanks Anoush on your insight.

Edited July 15, 2004 by Vigil

[mx5]

you all must know by now that an elected american president cannot do anything about middle east on his first 4 years term in office whatever should be done must come on the second relection term this is why jews will see that bush is not elected for the second term because he will not be eligible for pressure by conventional means..

 

Clinton tried but he was scandalized!!

[Vigil]

Kerry sends brother to Israel to shore up the Jewish vote

By Inigo Gilmore in Jerusalem

(Filed: 18/07/2004)

 

 

John Kerry, the Democratic senator and presidential candidate, has sent his brother Cameron, a Jewish convert, on a delicate political mission to Israel to shore up Jewish support ahead of November's election.

 

 

The visit, which was due to end last night, has delighted Israeli government officials but has dismayed left-wing Israeli peace activists and Palestinian leaders, whom Mr Kerry studiously avoided as he voiced stridently pro-Israeli views on behalf of his brother.

 

 

In meetings with Ariel Sharon, Israel's prime minister, Silvan Shalom, the foreign minister, and Shimon Peres, the opposition leader, Mr Kerry delivered an unequivocal message from his brother: that he will take a firm pro-Israel line on all main issues, including the controversial construction of the security wall in the West Bank.

 

 

In an interview with one Israeli newspaper, Mr Kerry, 53, said: "He [senator John Kerry] is very clear in his statements: the security of Israel must come first and Israel needs to be able to protect itself."

 

 

He echoed the Israeli government's line on refusing to negotiate with Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader, and added: "There is no Palestinian partner at this time. It is not the place of the US to pressure Israel to reach an agreement with the Palestinians."

 

 

More controversially, he said the 425-mile security wall was "essential for the security of Israel" - an apparent reversal of remarks by his brother, earlier in the campaign, in which he described the wall as "a barrier to peace".

 

 

The apparent change of stance on the barrier by the Kerry camp came as the United Nations continued to consider a draft resolution demanding that Israel comply with last week's International Court of Justice ruling that the West Bank separation fence is illegal and must be dismantled.

 

Mr Kerry's new position will disappoint European officials, who have been highly critical of the security barrier.

 

 

Cameron Kerry insisted that his brother had previously raised questions only on the route of the fence, not the issue of the construction itself. Israeli peace activists were dismayed but not surprised by Mr Kerry's public pronouncements.

 

 

Jeff Halper, a leading Israeli peace activist and an opponent of the wall, said: "Bush has been incredibly pro-Israel but the Democrats are clearly not a liberal alternative who will be more critical of Israel.

 

 

"It is very distressing when you have issues of conflict, occupation, and violation of human rights, that the liberals seem worse than the Republicans in their support for the most extreme Israeli line. Just look at Hillary Clinton. The Democrats will not give the Palestinians or Israeli peace activists the time of day."

 

 

The Democratic Party is seen by most American Jews as their natural political home. Mr Kerry's own pro-Israel leanings may have been encouraged by his discovery last year that his paternal grandparents, who lived in Austria, were Jews who converted to Catholicism.

 

Cameron converted to Judaism from Catholicism in 1983 when he married a Jewish woman, Kathy Weinman.

 

 

During the Democratic party primaries, Cameron helped to arrange meetings between his brother and key Jewish leaders, and he has continued to be the campaign's "link man" to the American Jewish community.

 

One of the organisers of Mr Kerry's visit to Israel is Jay Footlik, an American Jew with close ties to AIPAC, the main pro-Israel lobby group in the US. Republican backing for Israel has also hardened in response to the growing strength of the evangelical Christian movement, which believes in the Jewish people's right to reside in the Holy Land and which the Bush administration has assiduously courted for votes.

 

The result is that all the key Washington institutions support the Israeli government.