Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Upholding most of a $10 million defamation suit against the Anti-Defamation League, a federal judge in Denver has lambasted the organization for labeling a nasty neighborhood feud as an anti-Semitic event.
In upholding the first-ever court defeat handed to the 87-year-old ADL, U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham said the organization had endorsed and publicized the bigotry accusations of a Jewish couple against its neighbors without either investigating the case or weighing the consequences.
"Based on its position and history as a well-respected civil-rights institution, it is not unreasonable to infer that public charges of anti-Semitism leveled by the ADL will be taken seriously and assumed by many to be true without question," the judge wrote on March 31 in a 46-page order and memorandum of decision obtained by the Forward. "In that respect, the ADL is in a unique position of being able to cause substantial harm to individuals when it lends its backing to allegations of anti-Semitism."
The judge's opinion confirmed a verdict reached last April by a federal jury, which essentially accused the Denver chapter of the ADL and its regional representative, Saul Rosenthal, of falsely portraying William and Dorothy Quigley as anti-Semites. Mr. Quigley, an executive of the United Artists theater chain, said his career in the "predominantly Jewish and close-knit" film business had stalled after the incident.
"The ADL seized an opportunity to aggrandize itself as the defender of the Jews by unjustly accusing a middle-class couple of being anti-Semitic crooks," said Jay Horowitz, the Quigleys' Denver-based lawyer. "And all along, they showed an unbelievable arrogance."
At the same time, the judge reduced last year's judgment by some $675,000, cutting the punitive damages awarded to Mrs. Quigley under state law and reducing the Quigleys' compensatory damages to reflect money they received in an earlier settlement with opposing lawyers.
The ADL said it would appeal the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver later this spring. The ADL's law firm, Long and Jaudon, claimed in a statement issued by the ADL last week that "there were reversible errors made during both pretrial and trial proceedings." Both the ADL and attorney Joe Jaudon refused to comment further.
What is not in dispute is that the ADL, after springing to the defense of a Jewish couple essentially seeking to strengthen their hand in a private dispute, now finds itself entangled in an embarrassing and potentially costly legal stew. The league's annual budget hovers around $50 million. The judgment could harm its reputation as an aggressive but reliable monitor of anti-Semitism.
The ruling comes at a time when the ADL is also embroiled in the Marc Rich pardon scandal. The organization said it received some $250,000 in the past 15 years from the fugitive financier who received a controversial 11th-hour pardon from President Clinton. The league's national director, Abraham Foxman, declared last month that he "probably" had made a mistake in writing a letter to Mr. Clinton supporting the Rich pardon.
All this was not lost on Mr. Horowitz, the Denver attorney.
"Can you imagine an organization using money from Marc Rich, a guy who made millions dealing with anti-Semitic countries like Iran, attacking powerless people for some alleged anti-Semitic slurs?" he said.
The Denver dispute began in August 1994, when Mitchell and Candice Aronson moved to the affluent suburb of Evergreen, Colo. The couple was initially befriended by the Quigleys, their neighbors, but relations quickly began to sour, escalating from complaints about dogs and stolen plants to an allegation by Mrs. Aronson that Mr. Quigley tried to run her over with his car.
The Aronsons contacted the ADL on October 21, after concluding that the Quigleys were plotting to drive them out of the neighborhood because they were Jewish. The suspicions were based partly on a conversation on the Quigleys' cordless phone, which the Aronsons claimed they inadvertently overheard through their police scanner. They said they heard the Quigleys talking about sticking pictures of oven doors on their house, burning their children and wishing they had been blown up in a terrorist attack in Israel.
The ADL, after consulting with the district attorney, suggested that the Aronsons tape another six weeks' worth of conversations. None of the parties reportedly knew that Congress had outlawed such wiretaps on October 25.
In December, the Aronsons filed a federal suit against the Quigleys, accusing them of ethnic intimidation and violation of their civil rights. The following day, at a press conference, Mr. Rosenthal of the ADL labeled the Quigleys anti-Semitic and said they were planning attacks against the Aronsons. The district attorney's office also filed felony criminal charges of ethnic intimidation.
At that point, the case began to unravel. The Quigleys accused the Aronsons of waging a smear campaign against them. In January 1996, they sued the Aronsons and the ADL for violating their rights under the Federal Wiretap Act.
In the meantime, the district attorney, who realized that the tapes were illegal, dropped the ethnic intimidation charge and agreed to pay compensation to the Quigleys. In February 1998, an out-of-court settlement was reached between the couples. But the settlement did not include Mr. Rosenthal and the ADL.
Mr. Horowitz said he tried to settle numerous times with the ADL, but was rebuffed.
The Quigleys accused the ADL of libel, false light invasion of privacy, invasion of privacy and violation of the Federal Wiretap Act. In April 2000, a jury accepted nearly all the charges and awarded them $10.5 million in damages, one of the largest defamation awards ever in Colorado.
In reply, the ADL and Mr. Rosenthal called for a reduction of the judgment, or a new trial.
Judge Nottingham, ruling on the ADL's motion to overturn the verdict, accepted none of the league's arguments. He pointed to evidence that Mr. Rosenthal and the ADL had not bothered to listen to the tapes, read the transcripts or investigate in-depth before publicly leveling the charge of anti-Semitism. He criticized what he called the selection of isolated comments from thousands of pages of transcripts to build the anti-Semitism accusation "in what could otherwise be regarded as mere sarcastic, banal and tasteless remarks uttered in a garden-variety dispute among neighbors."
To support his argument, the judge cited an internal ADL memorandum written by Mr. Rosenthal in January 1995, in which the league official said he wanted "to be sure we are maximizing all opportunities that are available from the Aronson case and arrests.... In short, 'make hay while the sun shines' — graciously of course."
Mr. Quigley, a New York native, was a chief financial officer at Paramount pictures and president of Vestron Pictures. There he produced the movies "Dirty Dancing" and "The Dead." He moved to Denver in 1993 to head the United Artists' theater chain in the region.
As a result of the anti-Semitism charge, said his attorney, Mr. Horowitz, "He has become a pariah in the business."
The judge concurred, repeatedly underlining what he called the "catastrophic impact" of the accusations on Mr. Quigley's career. He said the issue was actually raised in discussions within the Denver ADL. "In that respect, Rosenthal's conduct could be perceived as even more egregious, given his awareness of the stigmatizing consequences attached to accusations of anti-Semitism."
Regarding the large damage award, the judge wrote that "it will, at a minimum, provide a deterrent effect against the ADL from engaging in future conduct involving the use of intercepted telephone conversations to pursue a civil lawsuit against persons perceived to be anti-Semitic."
Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of Fascists.
Well, bowl me over with a matzo ball.
I;m surprised the ADL didn't sue the cordless phone company for making an anti-semitic phone.
In December, the Aronsons filed a federal suit against the Quigleys, accusing them of ethnic intimidation and violation of their civil rights
I don't get this. Don't you have the right to be a bigot as long as you don't hurt anyone? Can you really sue someone for saying nasty things about your race or creed?
Typical ADL BS. Perhaps, Foxman wants to give back some of Rich's donation, which paid for lobbying Clinton for Rich's undeserved pardon. What a bogus agency!
I don't get this. Don't you have the right to be a bigot as long as you don't hurt anyone? Can you really sue someone for saying nasty things about your race or creed?
I don't like the tone of your voice mister, sounds anti-semitic to me. < /sarcasm>
Can you imagine if these extortionists got away with this? half of the jokes I tell would get me 20 years...
Growing up in NY Jewish people routinely assumed I was MOT and I had to listen to them say things like, "Shiksas are for practice." When the subject of my background came up and I said I was Irish/Puerto Rican they always thought it was a joke and that I was really Jewish. If you listen to anyone behind closed doors and compare these private statements to the simon-pure public statements of others they will always look bad.
"Shiksas are for practice."
They aren't just for breakfast anymore. I married one. :)
"Shiksas are for practice."
They aren't just for breakfast anymore. I married one. :) -------------------------------------------------< They are not for any Afternoon Delight either. I also married one.
WTF is a shiskas or what ever it is your talking about. This is America. At least talk bad english.
A shiska is a female goy.
Now you know.
I;m surprised the ADL didn't sue the cordless phone company for making an anti-semitic phone.
No, you read the package wrong.
That was an anti-STATIC phone.
They are not for any Afternoon Delight either. I also married one.
You married the wrong goyim. ;^)
The ADL has nothing to do with Jewish issues, but only to do with issues related to liberalism, and the furtherance thereof.
Oy Gevald!
Damn Statics are trying to take over the world. They've taken control of my television.
I hear tell the Statics rule the banking system. They cling to the money like.... um, static.
And those ANTI-CLING drier sheets.... just more ANTISTATICISM!!! What about those GROUNDING WIRES you wear on your wrist when you work with memory chips? Antistatic.
"They aren't just for breakfast anymore. I married one. :)"
Some people like practicing.
WTF is a shiskas or what ever it is your talking about. This is America.
Shiksa is an amusingly derogatory Yiddish term for a non-Jewish female. The word has been used frequently here on FR.
Speaking of language and its proper use, I assume you meant "you're" - the contraction of "you are" - and not "your", possessive.
This IS America, as you point out, so the occasional non-English word should not be a surprise or a cause for angst (a German word).
"Shiksas are for practice."
LOL!!!
And girls like Monica Lewinsky are for keeps. LOL
"Based on its position and history as a well-respected civil-rights institution, it is not unreasonable to infer that public charges of anti-Semitism leveled by the ADL will be taken seriously and assumed by many to be true without question," the judge wrote on March 31 in a 46-page order and memorandum of decision obtained by the Forward. "In that respect, the ADL is in a unique position of being able to cause substantial harm to individuals when it lends its backing to allegations of anti-Semitism."
Oh, and how they realize it!!!
The ADL has nothing to do with Jewish issues, but only to do with issues related to liberalism, and the furtherance thereof.
You're right Laz, and I don't even mind that (pursuing one's ideology)....but the tactics they employ (flirting with the "by any means necessary" approach) are scarey and must be fought.
Also, Foxman must go.
So what's next for the ADL? Will they label this ruling "anti-semetic"? This may come as a shocker to the ADL, but there really is such a thing as anti-semetism out there; however, it's kinda hard to convince people that you've found an example of it when you bandy the word about so casually. (Think little boys crying "wolf".)
I don't get this. Don't you have the right to be a bigot as long as you don't hurt anyone?
It depends on who you are being a bigot about. You can be a bigot about blacks and homos as long as you are a liberal. However, nobody can be a bigot in private if the subject is jewish.
On the other hand, if you are jewish, you can make all the goyim jokes that you want, and everyone is just supposed to think that it is cute and funny.
One thing that you are not allowed to do if you are jewish is to assault whites or blacks. Blacks, however, are allowed to assualt whites, and, if in a city, Jews. It used to be that when they did such(like at Crown Heights, where they killed they murdered the jewish student in cold blood) they did receive some sort of group guilt. Now, however, like in Cincinatti, it is not even ok to call their rioting rioting, but merely civil unrest.
Is that clear?
Check out their website. They have a book called "Hate Hurts"
What amazies me about liberals is how they have turned the most basic concepts upside down. For example:
Sticks and stones will break my bones... is now replaced by "Hate Hurts"
Fair used to mean treating everybody by the same standard, now it means the exact opposite i.e. treating everybody by a different standard.
A mothers standard response to "that's unfair" used to be "well, lifes unfair". Now it is "There should be a law against that, lets sue"
Courage also used to mean something, it used to be reserved for people who stormed enemy bunkers etc. Now, it means "victim". There are some courageous victims, but is is never applied to them. It is generally reserved for people who did absolutley nothing but become victims. Watch the news, you'll pick up on it. Oh, also, any politician who introduces a liberal initiative is "courageous".
This couple (Quigley) were reportedly taped making plans to intimidate and drive the Jewish couple out of their neighborhood, using gross antisemitic language. This is an open and shut case of anti-semitism. It is outrageous that the government forbids the introduction of open air taped cell phone communications in court. The truth was disregarded in this case, obviously. It is a sad reflection on the low state of Justice on this nation and not on the ADL.
On the other hand, if you are jewish, you can make all the goyim jokes that you want, and everyone is just supposed to think that it is cute and funny.
Well, it is!
That's 'cause you goyim are so cute and funny.
(Rubbing your head)
On the other hand, if you are jewish, you can make all the goyim jokes that you want, and everyone is just supposed to think that it is cute and funny.
We also are scathing in mocking ourselves, both in public and private.
On the other hand, if you are jewish, you can make all the goyim jokes that you want, and everyone is just supposed to think that it is cute and funny.
We also are scathing in mocking ourselves, both in public and private.
This couple (Quigley) were reportedly taped making plans to intimidate and drive the Jewish couple out of their neighborhood, using gross antisemitic language. This is an open and shut case of anti-semitism.
Reported by whom? How easily you make the leap from "reportedly" to "open and shut!"
You'll forgive us if we reserve judgement on your "open and shut" case until we learn who "reported" the plans.
Regarding the large damage award, the judge wrote that "it will, at a minimum, provide a deterrent effect against the ADL from engaging in future conduct involving the use of intercepted telephone conversations to pursue a civil lawsuit against persons perceived to be anti-Semitic."
How outrageous of the Judge to say that citizens do not have the right to PROVE that their tormentors are anti-semites by taping cell phone conversation via the airways. Yet the government has unlimited right to invade our privacy, and record every conversation and email communication, and prosecute us based on those interceptions. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE.
The govt, by definition, has a monopoly on the legal use of force, in all its manifestiations.
Yet another argument to limit its scope.
"$10 million defamation suit against the Anti-Defamation League..."
We'd be hard pressed to make-up something more ironic than this. Heheheheh.
Copycat: Apparantly the case was thrown out not because antisemitism could not be proven, but because all of the tape recorded evidence was tossed out. How can a citizen protect his right under those rules. In this case I would give the potential victim to benefit of the doubt, and not protect the tormentor who is stupid enough to discuss his antisemitic plans on a cell phone.
Im not complaining, I don't care what anybody says, I just don't like the double standard.
"all the goyim jokes"
I've never heard one. Tell me one.
If you haven't noticed, all the Shiksa jokes concern Jews making fun of themselves. The woman is not the target of the joke. It is the panting Jewish male.
Shiksa is an amusingly derogatory Yiddish term for a non-Jewish female.
What are the "amusingly derogatory" terms for jews? Won't those words get you accused of a hate crime?
I've never heard one. Tell me one.
If you haven't noticed, all the Shiksa jokes concern Jews making fun of themselves. The woman is not the target of the joke. It is the panting Jewish male.
Well, i guess I have mistakenly mixed goyim and shiska jokes together, but I was referring to the shiska joke above. I have absolutley know problem whatsoever with Shiska jokes. What I have a problem with is that if I were to say "Jewish chicks are just for practice, but not for marrying" I think that there are many jews who like the Shiska jokes that would go banannas. Or what if I said, "Jewish chicks give good head"? which is something that I have heard a lot of people say. Do you think that the ADL types would think it is funny?
It is the double standard that I have a problem with.
If you haven't noticed, all the Shiksa jokes concern Jews making fun of themselves. The woman is not the target of the joke. It is the panting Jewish male.
You may think that, and it may be true. However, many would assume that there is somthing derogatory about not being jewish if it means that jewish guys shouldnt marry shiskas.
Somehow, I don't think that I could get away with walking around saying "Kike chicks give good head, but don't marry one" and then saying "Well, I am not making fun of them, I'm making fun of my insatiable desire for getting head from jewish girls".
The suspicions were based partly on a conversation on the Quigleys' cordless phone, which the Aronsons claimed they inadvertently overheard through their police scanner.
Hmmm... I don't suppose they have one of these in their car also. Remember the people that just happened to catch Newt Gingrich's cell phone conversation?
Are there a bunch of libs around the country monitoring phone conversations? Normally I'm not paranoid, but I'm starting to wonder.
Or what if I said, "Jewish chicks give good head"? which is something that I have heard a lot of people say. Do you think that the ADL types would think it is funny?
Did they ever issue a press release on the apparent endorsement of that statement by the actions of x42? :)
What are the "amusingly derogatory" terms for jews?You want a list, maybe?
The characterizations/labels in that list are almost always directed at Jews by Jews.
"Do you think that the ADL types"
What are ADL types?
They are liberals of any religion.
You're getting excited by a straw man. Trust me, or not, I don't know anyone who is now or has ever been a member of ADL. And even if someone joins, after getting bombarded with mail solicitation for a donation to join what on paper seems like a good idea, so what? What power does ADL have? In this case someone felt wronged by ADL and they fought them and won. Can you name one instance where ADL did anything but complain? Like NAACP, PETA, AI, Council of Churches, other Liberal organizations.
"Somehow, I don't think that I could get away with walking around saying "Kike chicks give good head, but don't marry one" and then saying "
Really? You couldn't get away? Who would stop you?
"Kike chicks give good head, but don't marry one"
They do, and I didn't. :)
I ws trying to be polite and not name names, by ADL types I meant people like you who have a double standard.
Now then, why don't you answer the question. You beleive it is ok for jews to say that "Shiskas are for practice" because the jews are making fun of themselves and not the shiskas even though it is implicit that it is implicit by that statement that their non-jewish religion makes them-good for marriage.
Do you beleive it is ok for me to walk around and say "kike women give good head"?
Is it? Or do you have a double standard whereby jews can say deregoatroy jokes about non-jews but not vice-versa.
Really? You couldn't get away? Who would stop you?
You know what I mean. However, you refuse to answer the question. You sir, are a prejudiced man who holds double standards when it comes to racial matters. You had an easy opportunity to clear up the matter but instead you chose to avoid it.
Jokes are fine. Note this as I tried to explain above. The Shiksa jokes are with absolutely no malice. Such as the Rabbi, Minister, and Priest jokes.
If you've got a kike joke without malice, have at it.
OK, you ansered during my last post, I apologize for calling you prejudiced.
Apparantly the case was thrown out not because antisemitism could not be proven, but because all of the tape recorded evidence was tossed out.
Sorry, that is not apparent to me, since I long ago learned not believe everything I read...
In this case I would give the potential victim to benefit of the doubt, and not protect the tormentor who is stupid enough to discuss his antisemitic plans on a cell phone.
Apparently, the judge WHO HEARD THE TAPES said they DID NOT constitute anti-semitism, but typical ugly statements made during an ordinary squabble between neighbors.
Your "open and shut" case for anti-semitism is far from being proved so far...
Something funny about a group whom call themselves the Anti-Defamation League that defames people, but I can't quite put my finger on it.
The characterizations/labels in that list are almost always directed at Jews by Jews.
So as long as it is on a list and used between people of one ethnic group it is OK? I notice a lot of the words on your list are used in public discussions. Not the case with some other words. Oh well, no one ever said all things were equal.
COPYCAT: The judge made no such assertion. He simply said that the tapes are inadmissable. I think that is wrong. If the government has the right to constantly monitor our cell phones and email communications, and prosecute us on the basis of such information, I sure as heck want the right to record the cell phone threats made by my tormentors.
Put yourself in the shoes of the Jewish couple. If someone was threatening you, wouldn't you need and desire to record their threats, and then be able to prosecute them based on the recorded threats. That is the issue here. The judge said: tough luck-you are not allowed to record their threats and present it in court. I find it chilling.
Hey guys--this is getting too heavy. Try this:
Abie and Isaac were walking down the street and passed a church that had a sign outside saying: "We will pay $200 cash to convert to Christianity. All welcome."
So Abie says to his friend: "Y'know, times have been hard lately, I could sure use the cash. I'm going in. You wait here."
So Abie goes in and Isaac waits across the street. An hour later Abie emerges. "So," Isaac excitedly asks, "did they give you the money?"
Abie looks at Isaac sideways and says: "Is that all you people ever think about?"
LOL, thats a good one.
COPYCAT:They said they heard the Quigleys talking about sticking pictures of oven doors on their house, burning their children and wishing they had been blown up in a terrorist attack in Israel.
The ADL, after consulting with the district attorney, suggested that the Aronsons tape another six weeks' worth of conversations. None of the parties reportedly knew that Congress had outlawed such wiretaps on October 25.
For your information note that the ADL and the jewish couple even consulted with the DA who gave them the go ahead to record the vicious conversations of paragraph 1 above. I believe that the ADL will win this case on appeal.
Recall that blacks can refer to each other as "niggers", but it is anathema for a white to do so.
There are aspects of language that are essentially tribal in nature.
The list I cited is simply a quick-and-dirty phrasebook of the more common Yiddish phrases one is likely to hear.
Chutzpa is the classic example of a Yiddish word that has migrated over, and is often used alongside English. Putz is another.
56: EXCELLENT!
Wrong, the broke the law by making the tapes. Open and SHUT.
bribriagain: I am glad you like all the laws of this land. I guess we don't need the legistlatures anymore to review the laws and change them when necessary.
Judge Nottingham, ruling on the ADL's motion to overturn the verdict, accepted none of the league's arguments. He pointed to evidence that Mr. Rosenthal and the ADL had not bothered to listen to the tapes, read the transcripts or investigate in-depth before publicly leveling the charge of anti-Semitism. He criticized what he called the selection of isolated comments from thousands of pages of transcripts to build the anti-Semitism accusation "in what could otherwise be regarded as mere sarcastic, banal and tasteless remarks uttered in a garden-variety dispute among neighbors."
I was merely pointing out that you, like the ADL, assumed the charges of anti-Semitism to be true without verification.
IMHO, the Aronsons are just as likely to have fabricated or exagerrated the anti-Semitism as the Quigleys are to have committed it.
It seems Judge Nottingham agrees...
For more abuses of American laws by the extortionists and parasites at the ADL, see:
The Jewish community has it all wrong. They seem to think that antisemitism will be defeated by yelling about it. Actually, what the Jews should do, is launch a massive effort to get the Jewish community to exercise its Second Ammendment rights. All Jewish children should be raised with the knowledge and ability to shoot. And the Jewish community should use their considerable lobbying power to ease the already onerous gun restrictions. Then, next time the antisemites of any color, decide to launch another Crown Heights, the Jewish community will be ready for them. Than and only then will violence against Jews cease.
66 Posted on 03/01/2002 23:08:07 PST by LarryLied
And based on what they CLAIM to have heard, the ADL jumped into the fray. Idiots.
67 Posted on 03/01/2002 23:12:05 PST by xm177e2
1) It is corrosive to privacy to always have to operate under the assumption that what a husband and wife say to each other in a private phone conversation may be being monitored
2) If people were put into the habit of being careful what they say over the phone, governmental surveillance would become less interesting (the real main reason)
In general, governments don't like the idea of private parties spying on each other. They want that to be a govt monopoly
68 Posted on 03/02/2002 06:57:17 PST by SauronOfMordor
The ADL has been defaming people for years because their conception of an "anti-semite" is anyone that criticizes the sacred cows of modern Judaism: political liberalism and Israel.
69 Posted on 03/02/2002 07:03:18 PST by Blade
The three main objectives of ADL is promotion of pederasty, making Jews look bad (to justify organisation existence) and to extract money from Jews.
70 Posted on 03/02/2002 07:09:08 PST by A. Pole
And based on what they CLAIM to have heard, the ADL jumped into the fray. Idiots.
Interesting observation. You point out that the ADL jumped into the fray based on mere claims.
Remember, however, that the claims in question were leveled by Jews against non-Jews.
For Jewish advocacy groups like the ADL and JDL, that's often all it takes, as this court case shows.
71 Posted on 03/02/2002 07:12:02 PST by Blade
So it's just the double-standard that bothers you folks?
So you wouldn't be offended if I said, 'sorry if you get lousy head from your shiksa wife', and offered my condolances?
72 Posted on 03/02/2002 07:20:55 PST by veronica
They are too Liberal for me, but Laura seems to support their agenda, if not their Liberal views.
73 Posted on 03/02/2002 07:30:55 PST by veronica