It appears that after the legal action Jews for Jesus took against the Google over the Jews for Jesus Blogspot site, Jackie Mason has taken them to court for using his likeness on their gospel tracts.
Seems like Jackie doesn't like his likeness and mannerisms (his trademark if you will) being used.
With the rise of the blogs, they'll get more attention for this "controversy" than from their many previous attention maneuvers. Unfortunately, it wont be the good kind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
I hope Jackie Mason gets every penny and then some from JFJ and that JFJ finally realize that they are just plain old Christians. What JFJ did in their pamphlet is not only stupid it is disgusting.
Just because you want to have a seder doesn't mean you should pretend you're something you're not.
Believe Jesus is messiah = Christian
Um ... you seem to think that Jews for Jesus denies that they are Christians. That might just indicate you haven't actually talked to one of them or read anything by them, because they will be the first to tell you that they're 100% Jewish and 100% Christian. Are you maybe just parroting something someone else told you, or that you read on a website?
Other Anonymous,
"you seem to think that Jews for Jesus denies that they are Christians"
You must be a JFJ staffer. This person said that JFJ are just plain Christian. Look at what was actually said:
"JFJ finally realize that they are just plain old Christians."
JFJ, IMO does more to harden people to the Gospel than attract them.
Although I don't agree with the first commenter on the Messiahship of Jesus, your attacking them on words you put in their mouth is wrong.
I must be a JFJ staffer? LOL. It's so sad that your collective grudge against Jews for Jesus seems to make you abdicate your brains. I don't work for JFJ and never have.
It's super that you are buying the line that JFJ does more to harden Jews against the Gospel then attract them. I bet the UMJC is proud of you. Show something other than anecdotal evidence of it, and it might be credible
It's super that you are buying the line that JFJ does more to harden Jews against the Gospel then attract them.
Buying the line? Cute. I've observed it myself.
I bet the UMJC is proud of you.
Actually, I believe the whole Messianic movement is immature.
The many Messianic congregations I've been to or studied show a strange similarity with control issues.
JFJ is Moshie Rosen's cult of personality. The level of control and leadership by whim is pure poison.
something other than anecdotal evidence of it, and it might be credible
Please bear in mind I owe you absolutely nothing. But if you want to follow the link to the Huffinton post, look at how many of the commenters are hostile to Jews for Jesus and not Christianity itself.
I don't know much about what is going on but from reading posts doesn't this group boast about how many tracks they hand out? Don't they get more money because they hand out more than anybody else?
Wouldn't Jackie have a good chance of winning if he shows the group is making money off of his back rather than letting the argument be about free speech and parody?
I'm no lawyer, but the connection to their income isn't directly tied to the amount of tracts they pass out.
It might be a hard case to make.
Most of the commenters on the Huffington post aren't talking about Jews for Jesus at all. They're mostly anti-Semites or those responding to them.
Believe Jesus is messiah = Christian
Christian is the Greek word for Messiah so Christian = Messiah.
The Jews who wrote in Greek before the destruction of the temple also believed that it was the father who determined who was Jewish.
So are you saying that it is Jewish not to believe in Messiah or that if you translate a word into Greek, you are no longer Jewish?
Should we re-write the Torah to read we are children of Sarah so it fits our modern day understanding too?
At Work, 'Nice' Is on the Rise
By Marilyn Gardner
More From the Monitor
Rethinking a Shunning Sin
Tax Cuts Do Work -- For Awhile
Voters Seek Action on Immigration
Move to Single Sex Classes Fans Debate
Cage Diving for a Cause
Oct. 17, 2006 -- Patrick Morris could call it "a tale of two companies." As a new college graduate beginning his first job in public relations at a major cosmetics firm in New York, he knew he would be the proverbial low man on the totem pole.
"You feel you're going to get put upon and crunched and tossed around," he says. But instead of the huge egos and "attitude" he expected, he found himself surrounded by good, caring people. "It made all the difference in the world and helped to shape me into the professional I am today."
By contrast, his next job at a television shopping channel proved to be "an environment full of finger-pointing and backstabbing," he says. "It became a nightmare to go into the office."
In comic strips and movies, tyrannical bosses produce plenty of laughs. Think of Mr. Dithers, Dagwood Bumstead's nemesis in "Blondie," or Miranda in "The Devil Wears Prada." But in real life, managers like these are hardly funny.
Today, in a competitive age that sometimes takes a "nice guys finish last" approach to business, a quiet cultural change appears to be under way. "Nice" and "kind" are becoming operative philosophies in some companies, among them Mr. Morris's first employer. Those adjectives are also showing up in titles of books and organizations. They stand in sharp contrast to the 1980s, when a "greed is good" attitude prevailed in some quarters and business books carried titles such as "Corporate Combat" and "Office Warfare."
"There's a huge shift we've observed," says Russ Edelman, one of the founders of Nice Guy Strategies, a consulting firm in Newburyport, Mass. "Companies are fundamentally saying, 'We need to employ more ethical practices as well as create an environment that supports a nicer mind-set.' Organizations are asking, 'How can we create an environment that is friendly, welcoming, and warm, but also ensure that people in the company are held accountable and can achieve success?' There's a balance people are struggling with."
Workplace observers attribute some of the changes to a reaction against corporate scandals at Enron and Tyco. "In the past decade there have been a lot of egomaniacal bosses," says Tim Hiltabiddle, one of Mr. Edelman's business partners. Sept. 11 also heightened the yearning for a kinder workplace, he says.
Yet that approach is "not about everything being nicey-nice," Mr. Hiltabiddle emphasizes. Nor does it mean being wimpy and naive, lacking backbone, or serving as a doormat. Being too nice, in fact, carries its own perils. "People might take advantage of your good nature," he says.
As one way of framing the issue, Hiltabiddle and Edelman sat down in a restaurant and drew up a Nice Guys Bill of Rights on napkins. Those rights include speaking up, setting boundaries, taking risks, valuing your time, and being accountable.
Studies show that niceness can also produce bottom-line rewards, such as increasing productivity and reducing turnover, says Robin Koval, an advertising executive in New York and coauthor, with Linda Kaplan Thaler, of "The Power of Nice: How to Conquer the Business World With Kindness" (Doubleday). Being nice, she adds, can mean "having the courage and creativity to stand up for what you want, but doing it in a way that is not ugly or threatening."
Women, Ms. Koval finds, are typically taught the importance of being nice. That can produce stereotypes. Noting the popularity of the book, "Nice Girls Don't Get the Corner Office," she says, "We take issue with that. We think we're nice girls, and we have corner offices."
For men, nice is a more liberating idea, Koval adds. "They're the ones who have been socialized to think, 'I've got to be a tough guy, never show my emotions, it's a dog-eat-dog world out there.' "
But "dog eat dog" isn't the only modus operandi. "To be successful in business, you need to have a certain threshold of knowledge of your industry and techniques," says Peter Handal, CEO of Dale Carnegie Training in New York. "But it's not enough just to be good at what you do. In my experience, the people who reach the top are nice. They're people-friendly. They're ones who can communicate with people around them, up and down."
They're also the ones who avoid what Duane Boyce, author of "The Anatomy of Peace," calls "false niceness." He explains the term this way: "If I'm not focused on results, I'm just expecting my friendliness, my politeness to get me by. That's not nice."
In the political arena, this is shaping up to be another season filled with harsh campaign ads as candidates trade jibes and paint negative images of their opponents.
"It's so disheartening that election after election becomes about tearing down the other person," Hiltabiddle says. "It's not constructive in building something; it's tearing down."
Yet politics creates unique challenges. Assuming the role of a politician, Mr. Handal says, "The way I get ahead is either I sell people on me, or I knock you. There's only a binary choice. In business or nonprofits, there are lots of choices.
"Who moves up in organizations? People who are liked."
Customer service is another field filled with negative images. "People are tired of the indifference that we're receiving from so many companies these days in the name of customer service," says Ed Horrell, author of "The Kindness Revolution: The Company-wide Culture Shift That Inspires Phenomenal Customer Service." He notes that consumers want service "peppered with some respect and dignity and kindness."
Mr. Horrell praises companies known for excellent service, such as Nordstrom, FedEx, L.L. Bean, and Chick-fil-A. Their emphasis on core values — dignity, respect, courtesy, kindness -- begins at the top and requires commitment from the CEO and managers all the way down to front-line workers. "The way they treat their employees is virtually always the way they'll treat their customers."
For Morris, the publicist who tells the tale of two very different companies, the positive examples set by his bosses and co-workers at the cosmetics firm continue to influence his work as public relations director of his firm in Troy, N.Y.
"If you want people to perform, and you want people to do a good job, you have to treat them nicely," he says. "It's not to say you don't lose your cool sometimes. But if somebody makes a mistake, what's not going to help them is to have an intensely negative reaction to it. What's going to help is to say, 'How do you think this happened? What do you think we should do to fix it? What steps should we take next time that this doesn't become a problem?' That's the way I was taught."
That kind of approach can pay big dividends. Pamela Gregg of the University of Dayton Research Institute in Ohio praises her bosses for "going out of their way to be nice to those around them." In addition to being fair and expressing appreciation for jobs well done, she says, they give employees "free rein to take risks and make what we can of our jobs."
Everyone works hard, Ms. Gregg says, so her bosses often lighten the mood with levity. One employee will soon celebrate 45 years with the institute. For others, 20, 30, and 40 years of service are not uncommon. Last year the Dayton Business Journal rated it one of the Top 10 winners in its "Best Places to Work in the Miami Valley" contest.
In an era of corporate downsizing, even cutbacks offer an opportunity for companies to soften their approach. "The act of laying someone off does not mean you're unkind," Horrell says. "A kind person does not want to do that, but there's a kind way to do it."
Making a case that "nice is very powerful," Koval says, "We all have to network with each other. We all work in teams. Unless you're a chemist in a lab bent over a test tube, nobody works alone. The old command-and-control way of doing business is clearly over." She adds, "Meanness is so last millennium. Niceness is the future."
Copyright © 2006 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/blog/20061108jackiemasondenied
Jackie Mason Charges Against Jews For Jesus Denied By U.S. District Court
Click here for a transcript of the A decision by U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman was reached today in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York denying a preliminary injunction to Mr. Jackie Mason who sought to stop the distribution of one of the Jews for Jesus gospel pamphlets, entitled, "Jackie Mason, A Jew for Jesus?!"
In the eleven-page finding the Judge ruled that the pamphlet was protected speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Religious pamphlets with pop culture themes like the Mason one have been freely distributed by the organization for over 34 years and while this is a small win for Jews for Jesus, it is a big victory for gospel protected speech.
Judge Berman also addressed the two other contentions in the Mason injunction and could not find merit in them, ruling that a reader of the pamphlet could reasonably see that Jews for Jesus was not asserting that Jackie Mason was a Jew for Jesus and that the Jews for Jesus did not look to gain any commercial benefit from the pamphlet.
David Brickner, executive director of Jews for Jesus, said ‚"We never intended to hurt Jackie Mason's feelings. To many of us Jews for Jesus, Jackie Mason is an icon who reminds us of our Yiddish-speaking grandfathers. We appreciate his good-natured humor. We thought that he would appreciate ours and were surprised by this lawsuit. Nevertheless we felt we had to defend ourselves and are gratified by the court's decision upholding our 1st amendment rights. It is our hope that this can now be ended amicably." A further court date is scheduled for November 16th.
HELL HAS FROZEN OVER.
Brickner provided a written apology that was read in open court and had Jews for Jesus stop using the Jackie Mason tract.
Jews for Jesus Victory Strut Short-lived
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Privacy Claim Against Jews For Jesus Survives On Appeal In Florida
Yesterday a Florida state appellate court decided Rapp v. Jews for Jesus, Inc., (FL 4th Dist. Ct. App., Nov. 29, 2006). In the case, plaintiff Edith Rapp, a traditional Jew, claimed that Jews for Jesus (JFJ) falsely portrayed her in an online newsletter as a convert to the group's beliefs. The article was written by Rapp's stepson who is a member an employee of JFJ. The appellate court's decision rejected the trial court's holding that the the First Amendment barred it from deciding plaintiff's tort claims. According to the appeals court, the publication of false statements about a non-member of a religious group does not implicate a tenet of religious belief. Nevertheless, the court found that Rapp's complaint did not allege facts that would support either a defamation claim or a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. However, the court reversed the trial judge's dismissal of Rapp's "false light invasion of privacy" claim-- a tort that involves a major misrepresentation of a person’s character, history, activities or beliefs.
The court of appeals invited review by the state Supreme Court of whether Florida recognizes a claim for false light invasion of privacy, and, if it does, whether it would follow the Restatement (Second) of Torts in defining the elements of the claim. It did so by certifying this question as one of "great public importance", thereby giving discretionary jurisdiction for review to the Supreme Court pursuant to Fla. Rules Appellate Procedure , Rule 9.030.
The court of appeals also upheld the trial court's decision to strike numerous paragraphs in Rapp's complaint, describing the paragraphs as redundant and bellicose descriptions of Rapp's theological animosity toward JFJ. [Thanks to Brian D. Wassom for the lead.]
posted by Howard Friedman @ 8:14 AM
HELL HAS FROZEN OVER.
Brickner provided a written apology that was read in open court and had Jews for Jesus stop using the Jackie Mason tract.
Hmm ... the very thing that the Ex-Jews for Jesus cult has claimed for years would never happen -- a public apology for wrongdoing by David Brickner on behalf of Jews for Jesus. Looks like the Ex-JFJ cult was wrong, but I'm betting they'll still keep flogging the deceased equine.
Fortunately for Mr. Mason, our model of grandfatherliness, he had big bucks and a lawyer willing to proceed for a jury by trial.
Jews for Jesus has thrived on "matters of principle" and using public figures in parody has always been defended as their right.
Rather than a change of heart, or an admission of wrongdoing, (Brickner does not admit wrongdoing, but rather apologizes if Mr. Mason had his feelings hurt), something else must have been motivating Mr. Brickner.
One suggestion: the specter of large lawyer fees and facing a jury trial in New York. This settlement also comes on the heels of Edith Rapp's win in the court of appeals reinstating her case against Jews for Jesus. Why doesn't Mr. Brickner apologize to Mrs. Rapp for publishing a story of her supposed conversion? If he were to do that, one might be more inclined to think a real change of heart has taken place.
You ex-jews for jesus cult have some nerve. You can hide behind anonymity and do whatever you want without any accountability.
In the ministry we know our limitations and the need to submit to those wiser and older in the faith than we. That is why we willingly enter into a covenant entrusting our lives to the executive director of Jews for Jesus. God working through the Holy Spirit anointed top leaders in our organization with the wisdom to unanimously recommend to the Board of Directors to have David lead us.
We are fortunate to know we have a leader handpicked by God and can trust that God is working through him for all matters in our lives, both personal and professional.
If David chose to apologize to Jackie Mason we are sure that he received wisdom from God to do so. If David chooses to pursue an appeal of Edith Rapp's case to the Florida Supreme Court, we will know that God himself is directing David to do so.
God continues to bless the ministry in many ways, both spiritual and tangible providing evidence of His approval.
David has made it clear that he is willing to listen to your apologies. Maybe you could finally admit your mistakes in asserting your independence and tell David you are sorry to God for being disobedient. Maybe then you could be restored to the loving, caring, nurturing environment that is Jews for Jesus.
This Jews for Jesus cult is very adept at word twisting, mind twisting. The fact is people are still being messed up by this group, their supposed "change of heart/strategy" is a simple whitewashing. We all know what Yeshua said about whitewashed tombs. Just last week I met a woman here in Israel who worked for the JFJ cult, she has been dismissed for some perceived infraction. Then there was a guy who used to work for them who was also dismissed for another. They all attest to the fact that this group is anything but changed.
They still are full of themselves and trying to ride on the success that once did happen for them, sadly, they stagnated in their own traditions and didn't go with the flow.
it's funny how Anonymous said… "You ex-jews for jesus cult have some nerve. You can hide behind anonymity…"
let's have a public debate, (like Dr Michael Brown had with Rabbi Shmuel Boteach) the subject being, "has JFJ really changed or are they becoming more like a cult each day"?
I'll forgo any anonymity to speak in that.
To continue readin about these things of JFJ just shows how unhealthy and toxic this group is. May God have mercy on us all.
As usual you don't know what you are talking about.
The woman you met in Israel was not "fired" for any wrongdoing. Some people are simply not cut out for the high demand, high pressure work of making the messiahship of Jesus an unavoidable issue. We try to identify those for whom the work will be too difficult, but we err on the side of giving people an opportunity. People support us with their donations wanting us to be bold with the gospel message. We take the charge seriously. If someone can't perform their duties to the level expected, they can trust the Lord to get them other employment.
As for some unnamed "guy" dimissed for another, you might be referring to someone who violated the covenant. We enter into the covenant freely, without coercion or mental reservation. We are an apostolic band that has freely interwined our lives with each other. When one of our own violates trust the discipline is determined by David. Unfortunately sometime people, by their own actions, have chosen to put themselves outside the community. We know we get criticism for our strict community boundaries, but that is a price we are willing to pay. Would you criticize the Amish for their community standards? Please give us the same courtesy.
as usual I dont' know what I am talking about no, thanks for your generalisations, I'm so sorry to criticise the cult of brickner you are quite clearly inducted into. May God have mercy on you, whitewashed tomb.
In the ministry we know our limitations and the need to submit to those wiser and older in the faith than we. That is why we willingly enter into a covenant entrusting our lives to the executive director of Jews for Jesus. God working through the Holy Spirit anointed top leaders in our organization with the wisdom to unanimously recommend to the Board of Directors to have David lead us.
We are fortunate to know we have a leader handpicked by God and can trust that God is working through him for all matters in our lives, both personal and professional.
All this in the comment that calls Ex Jews for Jesus a cult!
Do you have a sense of irony or this this pure parody?
The thing about Jews for Jesus is that they expect unquestioning loyalty of their staff and often use that authority to chew people up and spit them out.
I was with these people in a full-time capacity for 4 years. At the time I could not understand how anyone could leave "God's handpicked team", but as time went on, the amazing abuses of authority took place, they still take place today, so much for their changed and caring nature.
I also was party to this abuse both as "abusee" and "abuser", may God forgive me for forcing my team to stay on their spot (under financial penalty) to preach the "gospel" even when it was raining badly. In turn, I was afraid of what my leader would say had I allowed them to go to somewhere dry. The chain of abuse runs through the very veins of this group.
Why are you all so insistent to focus on how you were treated?
The most important act anyone can do is accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior, because that is the only way to escape eternal torment in hell and bask for all eternity in the presence of God.
Time is short and we must make the most of it. We do not have time to build and nurture relationships; that time is better spent warning people of the Christless eternity that awaits them if they do not accept Jesus.
Thank God we have thousands upon thousands of Christian donors who agree with us and obviously place the emphasis on proclamation. They are giving us their hard earned money to preach the gospel, not to nurture relationships.
Maybe if you saw the movie, The Devil Wears Prada" you would have a better understanding of what was expected of you while you were on staff.
It really doesn't matter how many Christian donors you have and how time may be short but it would be better for the tree to bear no fruit than for it to become rotten to the core. The ends never justify the means.
We do not have time to build and nurture relationships;
You'll have to show me in either Testament where Jesus says that.
I've seen many times how after a JFJ missionary "banked" the JBD (Jewish Believer Decision) they dropped the contact like a hot potato.
Missionaries are pressured to make the numbers. Jesus invested in people.
I recall the time I was with this cult, I got a JBD - did my leader or coworkers rejoice? NO, I got into trouble that I didn't fulfil my "meeting goals" for the week (I was one short).d
Jewish sacrifices, because of the blood that needed to be shed. Because of the blood, it's in the blood. So, because you believe in Christ, and you are "Christian", then, you are no longer Jewish, even if you were born, Jewish and the same blood runs through your veins? Is this why they are being attacked? Because, of fear?
ABSOLUTELY! I agree completely, and I am a Christian.
Post a Comment