Archive for the ‘Judaism’ Category

Vanessa Hudgens Not Converting to Judaism for Zac Efron

Vanessa Hudgens is not converting to Judaism to win over the mother and father of boyfriend Zac Efron. A representative for the Blondie of “Sucker Punch” has denied the claim she is hoping to “score point” with the “Charlie St.

Full Story and Source…

Vanessa Hudgens Not Converting to Judaism for Zac Efron
Thu, 21 October 2010 03:13:48 ET
Share

Vanessa Hudgens Not Converting to Judaism for Zac Efron

© AXELLE WOUSSEN/Bauer-Griffin
Shooting down the rumor the ‘Sucker Punch’ star is hoping to ‘score point’ with her actor boyfriend’s Jewish family, her representative insists that the converting to Judaism claim is ‘not true’.
Vanessa Hudgens is not converting to Judaism to win over the mother and father of boyfriend Zac Efron. A representative for the Blondie of “Sucker Punch” has denied the claim she is hoping to “score point” with the “Charlie St. Cloud” actor’s family with the conversion, telling Gossip Cop the story holds no truth.

Bringing up the conversion to Judaism story in the first place was the National Enquirer. The tabloid recently suggested that the 21-year-old actress, who starred alongside Zac on the “High School Musical” series, is “willing to do whatever it takes to become Mrs. Zac Efron”, including converting to Judaism. It was said that Zac is “flattered” by the fact that his girlfriend would make such a commitment, and knows that “Vanessa is dead serious about making a life with him.”

Vanessa and Zac began dating when they filmed “High School Musical” together. In a previous interview, she admitted that she loves the Tobacco Vanille scent on her man. While revealing she never picks out cologne for him, Vanessa told Hollywood Life, “One that I think is amazing for either sex is Tom Ford Tobacco Vanille. It’s really interesting.”

© Celebrity-Mania.com

See the original post here:
Vanessa Hudgens Not Converting to Judaism for Zac Efron

Fair Usage Law

October 21, 2010   Posted in: Judaism  Comments Closed

O, Palestine! – Grendel Report

Concern for Palestine among a few Arab intellectuals, as Columbia University Professor Rashid Khalidi shows in his book on the subject, did not exist until Zionists began settlements at the turn of the century.

October 6, 2010
O, Palestine!

September 01, 2010
O, Palestine!

By Moshe Dann

The notion of a Palestinian people and Palestinian identity, although taken for granted today, has neither a long nor a distinguished history. Understanding its origins and what it represents explains why the peace process between Israel and the Arabs has failed and will continue to fail.

Inherent in Palestinianism, from its origins, is the rejection of a Jewish state in any form. That opposition is not negotiable and not open to compromise; it is essential.

Palestinianism was never for anything; its raison d’être was to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state. That purpose has never changed.

Concern for Palestine among a few Arab intellectuals, as Columbia University Professor Rashid Khalidi shows in his book on the subject, did not exist until Zionists began settlements at the turn of the century. Most weekly newspapers from that period which he surveyed were not even from Palestine and had scant distribution.

“Palestinian identity” then, as now, was negative, focused entirely on opposition to Zionists rather than a positive self-definition. Arab Palestinian leaders, like the mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husayni, an ardent supporter of the Nazis, and arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat — both “fathers” of Palestinianism ignored by Khalidi — rejected Zionism and promoted terrorism.

Local Arab uprisings against British rule were anti-colonial and anti-Zionist, not directed toward another independent Palestinian state. Arab riots and pogroms, like those in 1929 and 1936, for example, were not motivated by Palestinian nationalism; there were no calls for a Palestinian state. The battle cry was, “Kill the Jews.”

In 1937, Arab leader Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi told the Peel Commission, “There is no such country as ‘Palestine’; ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented!”

The riots of 1936 were whipped up by the newly created “Arab [not Palestinian] Higher Committee,” the central political organ of the Arab community of Mandate Palestine, organized by a group of elites led by Amin al-Husayni. In 1948, the Arab League organized the All-Palestine Government, the first attempt to establish an independent Palestinian state. Led by King Abdullah of Jordan and nominally Amin al-Husayni, who had returned from Berlin, where he spent the war, it called for the union of Arab Palestine and Transjordan. Husayni later arranged Abdullah’s assassination.

A Palestinian National Council convened in Gaza in 1948, under Amin al-Husayni’s leadership, passed resolutions calling for an independent state over all of Palestine, with Jerusalem as its capital. Adopting the flag of the Arab Revolt that had been used by Arab nationalists, it called for the liberation of Palestine. But it had no following.

In 1946, Arab historian Philip Hitti testified before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry that “there is no such thing as Palestine in history.” In 1947, Arab leaders protesting the U.N. partition plan argued that Palestine was part of Syria and “politically, the Arabs of Palestine [were] not [an] independent[,] separate … political entity.”

In 1947, the U.N. proposed a “Jewish” State and an “Arab” — not Palestinian — State.

The womb of Palestinianism was war, the Nakba (catastrophe) in the Arab narrative, the establishment of the State of Israel. Five well-armed Arab countries invaded the nascent state, joining local Arab gangs and militias in a genocidal war to exterminate the Jews. Yet this was not seen as a war for Palestinian nationalism, or Palestinianism; it was an all-out Arab war against Jews, Zionism, and Zionists.

Arab gangs that attacked Jews in 1948, composed of locals and Arabs from the region, were called the “Arab — not Palestininian — Army of Liberation.” The reason is that prior to Israel’s establishment, the notion of a “Palestinian people” simply did not exist, or was irrelevant, because Arab affiliations are primarily familial and tribal — not national. And because “Palestinian” then meant something else.

Before 1948, those who were called (and called themselves) “Palestinians” were Jews, not Arabs, although both carried the same British passports. In fact, only after Jews in Palestine called themselves Israelis, in 1948, could Arabs adopt “Palestinian,” as theirs exclusively.

The idea of an “Arab Palestinian people” was formed and enshrined in UNRWA “refugee camps” — today, large, developed towns — where its residents are indoctrinated with hatred, the “right of return” to Israel, and Israel’s eventual destruction. Except in Jordan, which granted them citizenship, the residents of these UNRWA towns in Lebanon and Syria are severely restricted and denied basic human and civil rights.

UNRWA’s controversial definition of “Arab refugee” includes anyone who claimed residence in Palestine since 1946, regardless of origin; this date is important because it marks the high point of a massive influx of Arabs from the region into Palestine, primarily due to employment opportunities and a higher standard of living. This category of “refugees,” moreover, was different from all others in that it included not only those who applied in 1949, but all of their descendants, forever, with full rights and privileges. This is one of the core issues preventing any resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. UNRWA’s existence, therefore, perpetuates the conflict, prevents Israel’s acceptance, and breeds violence and terrorism.

Ironically, only when Israel took control of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza could the residents of UNRWA towns in those areas move and work freely, obtain decent education and health care, and express a newly designed Palestinianism — albeit often dedicated to violence and Israel’s destruction.

With an annual budget of over a half-billion dollars, UNRWA supports about one-and-a-half million “refugees” in 58 “camps” and 5 million “registered refugees” (throughout the world) — who can claim their “rights” as “refugees” at any time. The total population is expected to reach 7 or 8 million next year, and it keeps growing.

Were it not for the policies of Arab countries and UNRWA, the “Arab refugees” might have followed the example of Jewish refugees who were expelled from Arab countries, came to Israel, and went on to live normal lives. Given the same chance, perhaps, Arab Palestinians might have established a state of their own. The desire to destroy Israel, however, trumps state-building, and it is fundamental to Palestinianism.

The first attempt to define Palestinianism was in 1964, in the PLO Covenant, during Jordan’s occupation of “the West Bank” (a Jordanian reference from 1950 to distinguish the area from the East Bank of the Jordan River) and when Egypt held the Gaza Strip. On behalf of the “Palestinian Arab people,” the Covenant declared their goal: a “holy war” (jihad) to “liberate Palestine,” i.e. destroy Israel. There was no mention of Arabs living in “the West Bank” and Gaza Strip, since that would have threatened Arab rulers. Arab “refugees” were convenient proxies in the war against Israel, not their hosts; Palestinianism became a replacement nationalism for Zionism, a call to arms against Jews.

This balancing act was no longer necessary after 1967, when Israel acquired areas that had been originally assigned to a Jewish State by the League of Nations and British Mandate — Judea, Samaria, eastern Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip — and the Golan Heights, all rich in Jewish history and archeology. A year later, the PLO Covenant was amended to cover both “occupations” — in 1948 and 1967.

Dedicated to armed struggle, their goal has never changed; unable to defeat Israel militarily, however, the Arab strategy is to demonize and delegitimize, creating yet another Arab Palestinian state in addition to Jordan. In order to accomplish this, they concocted a narrative, an identity, and an ethos to compete with Zionism and Jewish history: Palestinianism.

Presented in the PLO Covenant and Hamas Charter (1988), the purpose of Palestinianism is to “liberate Palestine” and destroy Israel; neither reflects any redeeming social or cultural values. Moreover, Palestinianism is moving towards Islamist extremism.

According to Palestinian Basic Law (Article 4), ratified by PA President Mohammed Abbas in 2005:

1. Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect for the sanctity of all other divine religions shall be maintained.

2. The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be a principal source of legislation.

3. Arabic shall be the official language.

http://muqtafi.birzeit.edu/mainleg/14138.htm

“Palestinianism” lacks the basic requirements of legitimate national identity: a separate, unique linguistic, cultural, ethnic, or religious basis. It is nothing more than a political-military construct, currently led by Fatah and Hamas terrorist organizations. Yet it became legitimized by the U.N.

Despite PLO mega-terrorist attacks, and backed by the Arab League, Muslim and “non-aligned” countries, the PLO was accepted by the United Nations in 1974. The following year, the U.N. passed its infamous “Zionism is Racism” resolution, sanctioning Israel’s demonization and setting the U.N. on a course of Israel’s destruction.

The myth of Palestinianism worked because the media accepted Arab and PLO claims and their cause. Nearly all media, for example, use the term “Palestinian” or “Israeli-occupied West Bank,” reinforcing Palestinian claims, rather than the authentic designation which appears on earlier maps, Judea and Samaria, which refer to the regions’ Jewish history. The use of “West Bank” is a political, not a geographic statement.

Eventually, by the early 1990s, Palestinianism was accepted by some Israeli politicians, Left-dominated media, academia, cultural elite, and some jurists as a way of expressing their opposition to “settlements” and hoping for some sort of mutual recognition with the PLO. Their efforts culminated in the Oslo Accords (1993), which gave official Israeli sanction to Palestinianism.

Anti-Israel academics around the world promote “Palestinian” archeology, society, and culture as a brand name and a political message. Advertising works; every time someone uses the term “Palestinian,” it acknowledges and reinforces this myth.

Palestinianism, however, regardless of its lack of historical, cultural, and social roots, is now well-established and here to stay as a political identity that demands sovereign rights and a territorial base. The question seems to be not if, but where.

The solution is regional. Arab Palestinians are entitled to civil and human rights in their host countries, where they have lived for generations. A second Arab Palestinian state, in addition to Jordan, which was carved out of Palestine in 1921 — whose population is two-thirds “Palestinian” — will not resolve any core issues at the heart of the conflict. The conflict is not territorial, but existential; recognition of a Jewish state — i.e., Israel — is anathema to the Palestinian cause. That explains why Palestinian Arab leaders refuse to accept it in any form.

The problem for Palestinianism is not “the occupation” in 1967, but Israel’s existence; seen as an exclusively Arab homeland, Palestine is an integral part of the Arab world, completely under Arab sovereignty. This is axiomatic; there are no exceptions and no compromises.

Promoted in media, mosques, and schools, anti-Jewish incitement, denial of the Holocaust and Jewish history, and rejection of the right of Jewish national self-determination, by definition, Palestinianism is the greatest obstacle to peace.

The author is a writer and journalist living in Israel.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/o_palestine.html at October 06, 2010 – 05:27:16 PM CDT

More here:
O, Palestine! – Grendel Report

Fair Usage Law

October 6, 2010   Posted in: Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Palestine  Comments Closed

The Lynching of Leo Frank in 1915 and the Murder of Mary Phagan in 1913

The Lynching of Leo Frank in 1915 and the Murder of Mary Phagan in 1913

If you want to know what really happened in the Leo Frank Case you can read the following books.

The best books on the subject –

1. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan, By Mary Phagan Kean
http://www.archive.org/details/TheMurderOfMaryPhaganByLeoFrankIn1913

2. The Abridged Trial Testimony of the Leo Frank Murder Trial (1918)
http://www.archive.org/details/TheLeoFrankExtractFromAmericanStateTrialsVolumeX1918

3. The Leo Frank Case (Mary Phagan) Inside Story of Georgia’s Greatest Murder Mystery 1913
http://www.archive.org/details/TheLeoFrankCasemaryPhaganInsideStoryOfGeorgiasGreatestMurder

And The man the Jews blame for causing Leo Frank to be Lynched, five works by Tom Watson.

Five Books on the Leo Frank Case by Tom Watson (MUST READ)

1. The Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (January 1915) Watson’s Magazine Volume 20 No. 3. See

page 139 for the Leo Frank Case. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

http://www.archive.org/details/TheLeoFrankCase

2. The Full Review of the Leo Frank Case By Tom Watson (March 1915) Volume 20. No. 5. See

page 235 for ‘A Full Review of the Leo Frank Case’. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson,

Ga.

http://www.archive.org/details/TheFullReviewOfTheLeoFrankCaseMarch1915

3. The Celebrated Case of The State of Georgia vs. Leo Frank By Tom Watson (August 1915)

Volumne 21, No 4. See page 182 for ‘The Celebrated Case of the State of Georgia vs. Leo

Frank”. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

http://www.archive.org/details/TheCelebratedCaseOfLeoFrank

4. The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew Pervert By Tom Watson (September 1915)

Volume 21. No. 5. See page 251 for ‘The Official Record in the Case of Leo Frank, Jew

Pervert’. Jeffersonian Publishing Company, Thomson, Ga.

http://www.archive.org/details/TheOfficialRecordInTheCaseOfLeoFrankJewPervertSeptember1915

5. The Rich Jews Indict a State! The Whole South Traduced in the Matter of Leo Frank By Tom

Watson (October 1915) Volume 21. No. 6. See page 301. Jeffersonian Publishing Company,

Thomson, Ga.

http://www.archive.org/details/RichJewsIndictTheStateOfGeorgia

Fair Usage Law

August 13, 2010   Posted in: Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Jewish, Jewish Heritage, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank  Comments Closed

Calling all Debunkers, and anyone who thinks Holocaust Denial is …

Discusion about Calling all Debunkers, and anyone who thinks Holocaust Denial is offensive, debunk this! in the AboveTopSecret.com website alternative topics discussion forum General Conspiracies.

Holocaust Denial Videos
9 hours of free web video about how the holocaust is a hoax.
Billy Wilder. His Secret Work On A Holocaust Myth Movie
The Wilder Memorandum. My favorite holocaust myth document

One Third of the Holocaust

Explains how Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec were not death camps, thereby debunking 1/3 of the holocaust. Asks questions like, “Would the Germans have really put a fence made out of tree branches around a deathcamp?” Answer: “Uh, no, that’s silly.” Banned at Youtube. 30 episodes. 4 hours 15 min. Click the above image to view.

Buchenwald

The liberation of Buchenwald presented an opportunity for a Psyche Warfare operation meant to denazify the Germans via atrocity stories. But it ‘blew back’ into USA media which is why Americans remember growing up hearing stories of human skin lampshades. 22 episodes. 2 hours 22 min. Click the above image to view.

Phil Donahue Holocaust Denial

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

In 1994, two gas chamber deniers, Bradley Smith and David Cole went on a talk show. The maker of One Third Of The Holocaust points out witnesses’ lies, like where everyone (including a famous skeptic) believes an obviously fraudulent phone caller.

Auschwitz David Cole

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

The David Cole Video. A young Jewish holocaust denier, posing as a believer, puts some hard questions to the senior curator of the Auschwitz State Museum. After making this video, a “hit” was put out on Cole, and a reward for information on his whereabouts was issued by Irv Rubin (who years later, was arrested by the FBI for planning to kill a Lebanese-American Congressman.) Fearing assassination, Cole went into hiding. He never surfaced again publicly. (1992, 52 minutes)

Nazi Shrunken Heads

A Look At Lies Which Justify War.

Explains how media and politicians manipulate the masses to be pro-war by using myths. Discusses not only the holocaust myth, but also myths promoting Western aggression toward Africa and the Middle East. Makes the bold assertion that Idi Amin of Uganda was probably the victim of a Public Relations/Psyche Warfare campaign, and not someone who thought he was the “Last King of Scotland.” 25 minutes. Click above image to view.

Written Work:

Morgenthau Plan in the Holocaust Myth

Flyers (for you to send out)

Little Boy Photo Fraud

Thomas Blatt Sobibor Fraud

Manifesto

Donate

Blog

Stroop Report Forgery

Contact

Rebuttals and Censorship

Nazi Shrunken Heads Transcript

A great book on Treblinka

A great book on Belzec

CODOH.com

Robert Faurisson Interview

Konrad Morgen

Manifesto

I advocate kindness and good vibes toward all Jewish people. I like black people and people of all races, nationalities, religions; and I like gay people. It goes without saying but due to the stigma associated with holocaust denial, it needs to be said. I feel that it was Hitler’s belief in military solutions that was primarily responsible for the European disaster that was World War II. I just believe the holocaust is a hoax. Today it is the holocaust myth that props up militarism. Here’s why:

Of the many terrible things about World War II, the single worst thing wasn’t the holocaust, because that’s a myth. The worst thing was German soldiers fighting Soviet soldiers because millions of young men on both sides died horrible deaths. That war was started by Hitler and, rather than the crude concept of “fighting communism,” it galvanized Stalin’s power and made void the internal workings within the USSR that might have deposed him. The young men put between Stalin and Hitler and being conscripted to fight, was the worst thing about WWII. And the lesson from that is militarism and military solutions are always a disaster. That lesson is obscured when the worst thing about World War II is considered to be the holocaust because then the opposite conclusion is drawn: militarism seems good. Righteous militarism to defeat Hitler. Fighting intolerance. Americans largely see World War II as the “good fight” against Evil. The holocaust myth props up that assertion and obscures the truth: World War II was a European disaster.

The holocaust myth gives a “fighting for tolerance” theme to World War II, and the “fighting for tolerance” theme continues to justify military aggression up to recent times: it was used to justify the US invasion of Serbia/Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. The wrong conclusions about World War II based on the false information that is the holocaust, reverberate into militaristic solutions creating disasters today.

Because the holocaust myth was never exposed, the masses never lost their gullibility and are easily manipulated for pro-war purposes. Here’s an example: before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, not only did most Americans believe Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, many also believed he had killed millions of his own people.

The good/evil narrative of WWII is a blur with the good/evil narrative of so many bad movies, t.v. shows, and reportage. Things become more and more like the movie Idiocracy, and fitting that the ending of that movie involves a dumbed-down explanation of World War II. In reality people aren’t really “evil” –there’s just the challenge of understanding why people do what they do. The holocaust myth holds up the conception of Evil itself.

Christianity is a proud and interesting cultural heritage. But as a present-day belief system it can hold people back intellectually and culturally. A fundamental of Christianity is it’s dumb portrayal of evil. But consider the possibility that a modern dumb portrayal of evil is the holocaust. So like Christianity, could the holocaust also hold people back intellectually and culturally? A fundamental of both being a worldview of good and evil? And could this hold society back, ping pong-ing, or reinforced with, media capitalism? We see news reporting and television shows, movies promoting righteous violence to take on “evil people.” On a global level the “evil people” are often resistant to capitalism like North Korea; or resistant to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians (Iraq, Taliban, Al-Qaeda) Again the movie Idiocracy comes to mind when it had a stadium sports-like media spectacle of the USA using overwhelming force on it’s enemies. The stadium spectators playing electric guitars while monster trucks ran over the enemies.

Not to mention that the false postulate that is the holocaust is the cornerstone of European Jewish colonialism in Israel and all the problems which have come from it. Iran’s Ahmadinejad is right about that. We have the horrible bookends of European Colonialism: European Christian colonialism (The Crusades) 850 years ago, and European Jewish colonialism (Zionism) from the early 1900’s till today. These bookends of colonialism had European laws associated with them: Heresy then, and denying the holocaust today. The laws keep people from debunking the intellectual/emotional basis of the colonialism, of the militarism of the colonizers.

In Germany the myth has ridiculously warped the general personality of the people. But it’s not just Germany: The longer European and American intellectual thought has in its foundation this false postulate that is the holocaust, the weirder, dumber (and more aggressive toward other nations) things are going to get.

It’s time to move beyond the myth.

http://www.holocaustdenialvideos.com/

See more here:
Calling all Debunkers, and anyone who thinks Holocaust Denial is …

Fair Usage Law

July 8, 2010   Posted in: Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Jewish, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism  Comments Closed

Vanessa Hudgens Not Converting to Judaism for Zac Efron

Vanessa Hudgens is not converting to Judaism to win over the mother and father of boyfriend Zac Efron. A representative for the Blondie of “Sucker Punch” has denied the claim she is hoping to “score point” with the “Charlie St.

Fair Usage Law

October 21, 2010   Posted in: Judaism  Comments Closed

O, Palestine! – Grendel Report

Concern for Palestine among a few Arab intellectuals, as Columbia University Professor Rashid Khalidi shows in his book on the subject, did not exist until Zionists began settlements at the turn of the century.

Fair Usage Law

October 6, 2010   Posted in: Jewish, Jewish American Heritage Month, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism, Palestine  Comments Closed

The Lynching of Leo Frank in 1915 and the Murder of Mary Phagan in 1913

The Lynching of Leo Frank in 1915 and the Murder of Mary Phagan in 1913If you want to know what really happened in the Leo Frank Case you can read the following books. The best books on the subject – 1. The Murder of Little Mary Phagan, By Mary Phagan Keanhttp://www.archive.org/details/TheMurderOfMaryPhaganByLeoFrankIn19132. The Abridged Trial Testimony […]

Fair Usage Law

August 13, 2010   Posted in: Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Jewish, Jewish Heritage, Jews, Judaism, Leo Frank  Comments Closed

Calling all Debunkers, and anyone who thinks Holocaust Denial is …

Discusion about Calling all Debunkers, and anyone who thinks Holocaust Denial is offensive, debunk this! in the AboveTopSecret.com website alternative topics discussion forum General Conspiracies.

Fair Usage Law

July 8, 2010   Posted in: Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semitism News, Holocaust Denial, Holocaust Revisionism, Jewish, Jewish Heritage, Jewish History, Jews, Judaism  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."