Connect with us

Is Russian Gay Activist Nikolai Alekseev Anti-Semitic?

Published

on

Russian gay activist Nikolai Alekseev, (photo, above,) touring the United States to discuss the state of LGBT equality in Russia, spoke Tuesday evening at Columbia University and was pointedly asked to respond to an allegation — based upon an entry he wrote on the blogging site Livejournal — that the thirty-three year-old celebrated activist, journalist, and lawyer was, indeed, anti-semitic.

The allegations were first made by Scott Long, formerly of Human Rights Watch, who, apparently, last summer was forced to apologize to U.K. gay rights activist Peter Tatchell for five years of personal attacks. Shortly thereafter, Long was “dismissed,” according to veteran journalist and gay activist Michael Petrelis, who added that Long’s, “official explanation for moving on would have delighted the editors of Pravda in Brezhnev’s day.”

Human Rights Watch also offered Tatchell an apology.

Calling their apology “unprecedented,” Doug Ireland of Gay City News detailed the story in July, 2010, writing, “Human Rights Watch (HRW), the world’s largest and most prestigious human rights organization, has made a stunning public apology to Britain’s iconic gay and human rights activist, Peter Tatchell, for attacks heaped on him by HRW’s Scott Long, who directs the organization’s LGBT program.

“Long made numerous public statements about Tatchell that were ‘inappropriate… disparaging… inaccurate… condemnatory… intemperate personal attacks,’ HRW acknowledged.

“In the June 30 apology to Tatchell, head of the militant British gay rights group OutRage!, HRW’s executive director, Kenneth Roth, acknowledging the falsehoods circulated by Long, said, ‘We recognize that personal attacks have no place in the human rights movement.’”

Ireland added that “The HRW statement included an admission from Long that he’d made false statements about Tatchell.”

(That’s the background. Now, here’s how Long’s recent accusation of anti-semitism against Russian gay activist Nikolai Alekseev comes into play.)

Ireland continues, writing, “for some, HRW’s apology to Tatchell raises more questions than it answers.”

“Nikolai Alexeyev (Alekseev,) the lead organizer of the Gay Pride events repeatedly banned in Moscow Gay Prides and founder of GayRussia.ru, is among those who have been objects of Long’s attacks. An attorney, Alexeyev — who has brought 168 lawsuits against Russia for outlawing gay demonstrations and for officially encouraging homophobia — responded via email to a Gay City News request for comment, saying, “The problem of HRW’s LGBT programs is that it turns around the personality of Scott. I’d be happy to work with HRW on monitoring in Russia, especially because my group is the most experienced in Europe in dealing with LGBT cases at the European Court of Human Rights — but not as long as the leadership is what it is. I think Peter is very kind to forgive all this dirt that was put on him. This can only be to his credit.”

Fast forward to now.

As reporter Karen Ocamb at LGBT POV wrote Tuesday, “[t]he specific offending quote, captured by Scott Long, formerly of Human Rights Watch and now a Visiting Fellow, Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School was:

“The Israeli Prime Minister urged Western leaders to support Egyptian dictator Mubarak … And who after this are the Jews? In fact, I always knew who they were.”

Note that the above quote was translated from the original Russian and provided by Long.

Tanya Domi

Tanya Domi

Last night, Adjunct Assistant Professor Tanya Domi, of Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs (and a frequent contributor to The New Civil Rights Movement,) pointedly posed the question to a subsequently surprised Alekseev.

“You’ve been accused of being anti-semitic, and I’d like you to respond to the charge,” Domi said, adding, “we’re in a university setting and so we want to have an open discussion.”

Alekseev, who throughout the evening’s ninety-minute presentation spoke excellent English, upon answering this question stammered, but said, “To call me an anti-semite is like to say I burned the Reichstag.”

“Burning the Reichstag,” is similar to the American saying, “the pot calling the kettle black” — but a lot worse. As the story goes, Hitler was responsible for burning the Reichstag — the German Parliament — then accusing the Communists of the evil deed as a pretext to gain power.

Essentially, Alekseev seems to be accusing Long, or those who responded negatively to his Livejournal post, of being the anti-semites, or, at least, evil-doers.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Mwp2dT1IkvI%3Ffs%3D1%26hl%3Den_US

In his speech, Alekseev, “outlined the oppression and even violence he and other Moscow Pride organizers have faced since they first held the event in 2006,” as Michael Lavers wrote. He continued his defense for over three minutes, detailing that he has Jewish friends, and adding that his mother’s stepmother was Jewish, and people he works with are Jewish. This is an unfortunate line of defense as the irony is clear. Who hasn’t heard as a defense of bigotry, “Some of my best friends are (insert oppressed minority name here)”?

But Alekseev denies, emphatically, and for over three minutes, that he is anti-semitic. In the end, he feels it’s lost in translation — “probably there was a semantic in the translation,” Alekseev says, after having accused the Israeli government of saying “all the world should unite around Mubarak… I’m sorry but it pissed me off completely.”

Others have been pissed off completely too, namely Equality California and Robin Tyler, who say, “Our broad coalition of California organizations including Congregation Kol-Ami, Jewish Community Relations Council, Metropolitan Community Church, Los Angeles, Harvey Milk Foundation, SF LGBT Community Center, National Center for Lesbian Rights, Imperial Court of Canada, USA, and Mexico, Gays Without Borders, San Diego LGBT Center, Bayard Rustin LGBT Coalition, Jordan Rustin Coalition, Alice B. Toklas Democratic Club, City of West Hollywood Lesbian and Gay Advisory Committee, Christopher Street West, WEHO, and Get Equal,” “have decided to cancel sponsorship of the California speaking tour of Russian LGBT Activist Nikolai Alekseev.”

“The California sponsors [of Alekseev’s west coast leg of the tour] were unaware of this when they agreed to sponsor Alekseev,” writes Ocamb. “In fact, EQCA’s Andrea Shorter chided Julie Dorf, Senior Advisor for the Council for Global Equality, for not warning EQCA about possible problems with Alekseev when they were having email discussions about international issues.”

But Alekseev beat EQCA to the punch, and canceled the west coast portion of his tour first. And then changed his mind — going, but without the sponsorship — writing on Facebook, “IT IS TIME TO SHAKE CASTRO! AND I WILL DO IT! SO THAT THOSE WHO FORGOT WHAT IS GAY ACTIVISM SWITCH ON THEIR BRAIN AGAIN AND NOT CONCEAL BEHIND THE NAME OF HARVEY MILK!”

(Alekseev apparently uses Facebook a lot. I friended him and was friended me back almost immediately, just hours before his talk at Columbia. I checked his Facebook page and he had written he had just landed in New York only nineteen minutes earlier. When I introduced myself to him at the Columbia event, I referenced the Facebook friendship and he said, “Let’s keep in touch by Facebook.”)

In an earlier Facebook posting, Alekseev acknowledges the Scott Long accusation as the impetuous for his sponsors’ cancelation of his California trip. “Someone called Scott Long decided to run a campaign against me in the last 48h and harassed the sponsors of the events asking them to pull out and cancel,” he writes.

(The obvious question is, why did EQCA and Robin Tyler take Scott Long’s accusation over Alekseev’s reputation? Do we now live in a world where one accusation — albeit unresponded by Alekseev — is grounds for disassociation?)

Alekseev adds, “The bullying campaign by Scott Long made its effect and I got a large pressure which people where not even able to make directly. They understood they were behaving improperly and decided to pressure me indirectly. This is just amazing. This is too much. This campaign has absolutely no reasoning and there is no ground for it.Honnestly, I cannot say that I am disappointed in America. This would be totally untrue.”

It’s apparent that the “bullying campaign by Scott Long” indeed “made its effect” on Alekseev as well. Just two hours after he wrapped up his discussion at Columbia, Alekseev wrote in yet another Facebook message the following very, very long missive:

In the light of the controversy concerning the cancellation of my speaking engagements in California, sponsored by a group of local LGBT organizations, I would like to make the following statement, the essence of which was addressed tonight during my speech at Columbia University.

I would like to state that I am a strong believer in human rights and equality for everyone, irrespective of any personal characteristics, whether it is sexual orientation, race, gender, national or ethnic origin, religion or any other basis.

I did publish in my blogs the comments which were addressed against the Israel Government after Israeli Prime Minister called the world to support Egypt dictator Mubarak and to unite around him, disregarding popular public efforts to oust him. I was angry that anyone could support this dictator as he was killing his own people. My comments appeared to blame all Jews for the actions of the Israeli government and its supporters.

The accusations of me distributing anti-Semitic statements on blogs were initiated by notorious human rights campaigner Scott Long who had to quit his position at Human Rights Watch (HRW) due to his involvement into slandering British human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell for which both Mr Long and HRW had to make a public apology.

(I’d like to draw your attention to this next paragraph, which, if true, says it all.)

Mr. Long was intentionally waiting for my trip to the US to start this campaign against me, which he started the day I arrived in Chicago, a month after this comment were made by me and already long ago after it was removed and address directly with the few who read them and contacted me to discuss it. If Scott Long was truly interested in stopping anti-semitism, why did he wait a month to raise an objection, but instead wait until I landed in the US to start this tour? One can doubt Mr Long would have ever distributed this information if I did not have any speaking engagement in the US. I regret this personal vendetta which goes on between the 2 of us for years might have hurt other people.

I would like to say that I have several Jewish friends who I treasure, including one Jewish American who played a significant role in Moscow Pride movement for years, helping to organize all our events in Russia. I adore her and I consider her as one of the most outstanding people I met in my life. Without her Moscow Pride campaign would not be as successful as it was.

My mum’s stepfather was a Jew who immigrated to Israel from Soviet Union.

I am one of the only persons who always defended Jewish people against the hypocrisy of Switzerland during World War II. This is the topic which almost noone is courageous enough to raise neither in Switzerland itself, nor elsewhere. Just as noone was courageous enough to challenge Gaddafi regime from within Libya and I already did it in 2002 during my trip there risking problems to exit this country.

My grandfather died in World War II fighting the regime which is responsible for killing of millions of Jews. He was fighting for freedom and liberation aged younger than me now. I don’t even know where he found his resting place.

Every time I am in Berlin, and a few weeks ago was not an exception, I visit a massive monument to millions of Jews who died under Nazi devastating rule.

I always dreamt to visit Jerusalem and I am sure I will do it very shortly.

I am a great believer in justice and a great opponent of all injustice. I am always very direct in what I say and sometimes people interpret it the way they want to use it against me.

It is true that I had to cancel my appearances in California due to enormous pressure from the organizers of the tour there. I always said in the last 48h that I would answer any question anyone might have about this issue after my speeches and make them public. And so, I did it tonight at Columbia University in New York., an institution which I admire for not surrendering to the harsh pressure Mr Long put on them in the last day to cancel my appearence. But I still plan to come to California as I know many people are waiting for me there and I have no right to punish them or disregard them.

Closing this statement I would like to stress that I was not personally contacted by any organizers of my tour in California with questions concerning my statements on policy of the Israeli Government. I was not invited in the several conference calls Californian organizers held in the last 48 hours on this issue.

So, is Russian gay activist Nikolai Alekseev anti-semitic? Only Alekseev can know for sure. Was the wording of his Livejournal statement unfortunate, assuming nothing was “semantic in the translation,” as Alekseev puts it? Definitely. Has he responded to the charges sufficiently to exonerate himself? Only you can decide.

But America should know that Alekseev, who is credited by The Advocate as being “the most visible crusader in his country,” patently denies that he is anti-Semitic. And America should also know that his accuser apparently “was intentionally waiting” to make his accusation, and has, as Alekseev said, been “burning the Reichstag.”

The Reichstag, it seems, has been burned a lot.

All photos © Caleb Eigsti, taken March 1, 2011 at Columbia University

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is mocking House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer over a CNN report revealing the embattled Kentucky Republican who has been alleging without proof President Joe Biden is the head of a vast multi-million dollar criminal bribery and influence-peddling conspiracy, has given up trying to impeach the leader of the free world.

CNN on Wednesday had reported, “after 15 months of coming up short in proving some of his biggest claims against the president, Comer recently approached one of his Republican colleagues and made a blunt admission: He was ready to be ‘done with’ the impeachment inquiry into Biden.” The news network described Chairman Comer as “frustrated” and his investigation as “at a dead end.”

One GOP lawmaker told CNN, “Comer is hoping Jesus comes so he can get out.”

“He is fed up,” the Republican added.

Despite the Chairman’s alleged remarks, “a House Oversight Committee spokesperson maintains that ‘the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and impeachment is 100% still on the table.'”

RELATED: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Last week, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) got into a shouting match with Chairman Comer, with the Maryland Democrat saying, “You have not identified a single crime – what is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?” and Comer replying, “You’re about to find out.”

Before those heated remarks, Congressman Raskin chided Comer, humorously threatening to invite Rep. Moskowitz to return to the hearing.

Congressman Moskowitz appears to be the only member of the House Oversight Committee who has ever made a motion to call for a vote on impeaching President Biden, which he did last month, although he did it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

It appears the Moskowitz-Comer “bromance” may be over.

Wednesday afternoon Congressman Moskowitz, whose sarcasm is becoming well-known, used it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

“I was hoping our breakup would never become public,” he declared. “We had such a great thing while it lasted James. I will miss the time we spent together. I will miss our conversations. I will miss the pet names you gave me. I only wish you the best and hope you find happiness.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Published

on

Hours before his attorneys would mount a defense on Tuesday claiming he had not violated his gag order Donald Trump might have done just that in a 12-minute taped interview that morning, which did not air until later that day. It will be up to Judge Juan Merchan to make that decision, if prosecutors add it to their contempt request.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told Judge Juan Merchan that the ex-president violated the gag order ten times, via posts on his Truth Social platform, and are asking he be held in contempt. While the judge has yet to rule, he did not appear moved by their arguments. At one point, Judge Merchan told Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche he was “losing all credibility” with the court.

And while Judge Merchan directed defense attorneys to provide a detailed timeline surrounding Trump’s Truth Social posts to prove he had not violated the gag order, Trump in an interview with a local television station appeared to have done so.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

The gag order bars Trump from “commenting or causing others to comment on potential witnesses in the case, prospective jurors, court staff, lawyers in the district attorney’s office and the relatives of any counsel or court staffer, as CBS News reported.

“The threat is very real,” Judge Merchan wrote when he expanded the gag order. “Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well. Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.”

Tuesday morning, Trump told ABC Philadelphia’s Action News reporter Walter Perez, “Michael Cohen is a convicted liar. He’s got no credibility whatsoever.”

He repeated that Cohen is a “convicted liar,” and insisted he “was a lawyer for many people, not just me.”

READ MORE: ‘Old and Tired and Mad’: Trump’s Demeanor in Court Detailed by Rachel Maddow

Since Cohen is a witness in Trump’s New York criminal case, Judge Merchan might decide Trump’s remarks during that interview violated the gag order, if prosecutors bring the video to his attention.

Enter attorney George Conway, who has been attending Trump’s New York trial.

Conway reposted a clip of the video, tagged Manhattan District Attorney Bragg, writing: “cc: @ManhattanDA, for your proposed order to show cause why the defendant in 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 should not spend some quiet time in lockup.”

Trump has been criminally indicted in four separate cases and is facing a total of 88 felony charges, including 34 in this New York criminal trial for alleged falsification of business records to hide payments of “hush money” to an adult film actress and one other woman, in an alleged effort to suppress their stories and protect his 2016 presidential campaign, which experts say is election interference.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.