U.S.
Vetoes U.N.'s Israel Condemnation,
Earthlink (from Associated Press), December
20, 2002
"The United States vetoed an Arab-backed resolution Friday that would
have condemned Israel for the recent killings of three U.N. workers. The
U.S. ambassador called the resolution one-sided and not conducive to Mideast
peace efforts. Twelve other council members - including close U.S. ally
Britain - voted in favor of the resolution. Bulgaria and Cameroon abstained.
The resolution expressed 'grave concern' at the killings by Israeli troops
and demanded that Israel 'refrain from the excessive and disproportionate
use of force in the Occupied Palestinian territories.' It also demanded
that Israel comply fully with its obligations under the Fourth Geneva
Convention, which deals with the protection of civilians during war. But
the veto by the United States - one of five permanent council members
with veto power - means that the resolution was not adopted. The last
U.S. veto, in December 2001, was also cast against a Mideast resolution.
Syria's U.N. Ambassador Mikhail Wehbe, the only Arab member of the council,
rejected U.S. attempts to amend the resolution to eliminate the reference
to Israel's disproportionate use of force. The United States also wanted
to drop the demand for Israel to comply with the Fourth Geneva Convention
... Three workers for the U.N. agency that provides relief for Palestinian
refugees, known as UNWRA, were killed in recent weeks. Israeli soldiers
shot and killed Iain Hook, of Britain, on Nov. 22 during a gunbattle with
armed Palestinians in the West Bank. The army said its soldiers mistook
a cell phone Hook was using for a weapon and that gunmen had entered the
walled U.N. compound. The U.N. relief agency denies that gunmen had entered
the compound. Two Palestinian school employees working for UNRWA were
among 10 Palestinians killed when Israeli troops conducted a raid into
a crowded Gaza refugee camp on Dec. 6 hunting for militants."
Illinois invests in Israel Bonds,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, December 20, 2002
[This item is in the pop-up box at the JTA home page, "Breaking
News" column]
"The state of Illinois invested $10 million in Israel Bonds. State
officials attended a ceremony in Jerusalem at which a symbolic check was
turned over. Also present were Israeli Finance Minister Silvan Shalom
and Israel Bonds President Joshua Matza. Matza called the investment a
vote of confidence in Israel’s future economic development."
Lieberman,
Moving Fast, Eyes a Staff, Political Team Honing Message,
[Jewish] Forward, December 20, 2002
"Despite his public ambiguity, Senator Joseph Lieberman seems
to be moving full steam ahead in his candidacy for president, assembling
the core of a campaign staff and trying to answer the concerns of those
who feel his centrist politics are too far to the right to excite the
usually liberal Democratic primary electorate. Democratic hands say he's
doing well in what they call 'the invisible primary' — the scramble to
gather the small number of experienced troops who know how to wage a national
campaign ... Smith said he does not think that Lieberman's Orthodox Judaism
will be an issue for voters. 'As I've traveled the country, the only people
who raise the issue are members of the Jewish community,' said Smith,
a native of Arkansas. 'Nobody else brings that up. Voters vote for the
man, not the religion' ... Lieberman's spokesman, Daniel Gerstein,
told the Forward that it's too early to say what kind of platform
Lieberman might run on ... Jewish donors, who supply
a major share of the contributions financing any Democratic presidential
bid, had mixed things to say about the Lieberman candidacy.
Chemicals magnate Jack Bendheim, an Orthodox Jew who shares a pew
with Lieberman when the senator visits his mother-in-law in the
Bronx, said he found it exciting that Lieberman had met with so
little prejudice during his vice presidential run and predicted that Lieberman's
religiosity would redound to his benefit as 'the country looks to become
more faith-based.'"
Former
Judge Says Congressman Maintains Anti-Israel Stances,
Metropolitan News Enterprise, December 20,
2002 Page 6
"Former Los Angeles County Bar Assn. president Sheldon D. Sloan
— who was reputedly influential with Republican Governors George Deukmejian
and Pete Wilson and is said to maintain strong GOP ties — is engaged in
efforts to dump Dana Rohrbacher, a seven-term Republican congressman from
Orange County. Sloan, a retired Los Angeles Municipal Court judge,
accuses Rohrbacher of maintaining an anti-Israeli and pro-Arab policy,
which the legislator denies. In a recent letter addressed 'Dear Friends,'
Sloan wrote:
I seldom get as exorcised about a public official as I am about Dana Rohrbacher,
the long term Member of the House of Representatives from Orange County.
Congressman Rohrbacher is an embarrassment to the Congress of the United
States, to the President of the United States, to the Republican Party,
and to his constituents ...
Rohrabacher wrote to Sloan: I was saddened by your accusatory
letter sent to our fellow Republicans. It was both factually inaccurate
and unnecessarily derogatory in its tone. Perhaps you are unaware of my
record or you would not have suggested in your letter that I have voted
against the President and against Israel in all matters. Whoever told
you that is a liar of the first order and in the future you should not
be passing on information from that source without verification. On the
vast majority of votes concerning Israel I have been on the side of that
country, including votes condemning terrorist acts against Israel and
supporting efforts to prevent Israel or Israeli citizens from being targeted
by hostile forces. The outrage that has been pointed in my direction derives
from my votes in opposition to legislation concerning Israel when that
legislation is not also in the interest of the United States. But yes,
sometimes what is in Israel’s interest is not in the interest of the United
States, although that is difficult for some people to grasp. Unlike many
other Members of Congress, I do not feel compelled by political pressure
to vote for every bill supporting Israel, especially when that legislation
may be harmful to our country, the long term cause of peace in the Middle
East and damaging to the prestige of our President. Contrary to your letter
it was my vote supporting the position of the President of the United
States that has created such a stir. Even though my overall voting record
concerning issues regarding Israel remains at a high level. Your suggestion
that I coddle up to Arab interests certainly does not take into account
my strenuous efforts and leadership to defeat Islamic extremism and the
Arab enemies of the United States ...
Sloan retorted: I received your email of 12/6/02 with some
mild surprise.… [I]n your letter to me I find no expression of support
for Israel nor repudiation of what is generally referred to as the 'moral
equivalency' line, used mostly by the liberal press in supporting the
Palestinian position of terrorism against the State of Israel. Perhaps
it was just an oversight; if so, I invite you to correct it ... Privately,
you are alleged to: Equate [Israeli prime minister Ariel] Sharon
with Arafat, and view Sharon as a terrorist; Be unwilling to meet with
Sharon; Display an uncooperative attitude towards those who seek
to arrange for you to go to Israel, in order to attempt to educate you
on the living conditions ... Stop coddling up to the Arabs and look at
the situation from the point of view of Israel. Israel is the best friend
the United States has in the world, and there are very few issues wherein
the interests of the United States and those of the State of Israel differ.
The choice is yours; if a five term Democratic Congresswoman from Georgia
can be defeated in a primary election, so can an eight term Republican
Congressman from California."
Frist
Likely to Lead Senate GOP; Lott Out,
Earthlink (from Associated Press), December
21, 2002
"It took Republicans little time to anoint Bill Frist as Senate majority
leader after Trent Lott's historic resignation over his apparent nostalgia
for segregation, and not long for critics to launch a scrutiny of Frist's
own history with race." [WHAT DOES FRIST THINK ABOUT ISRAEL?]:
Remarks
by U.S. Senator Bill Frist, M.D. to the Desert Caucus, U.S.
Senate, November 14, 1999, Speech Of Senator Bill Frist, M.D. US-Israeli
Relationship: "And there are few relationships more important to
America than the one we share with Israel. Friendship The United States
has shared a special bond with Israel almost from the moment of its founding.
America was the first country to recognize the new state of Israel – only
11 minutes after it was created. And over the last 50 years, that relationship
has blossomed into a strategic, economic, and political partnership that
is unique and precious. And there are good reasons for this: No people
in the world have more in common with Americans than the people of Israel
... And I believe every member of Congress should do all that he or she
can to ensure that nothing ever happens to change that relationship. These
things were never clearer to me than they were when I visited Israel in
1997. It was, in fact, my first foreign visit as a member of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee. What I learned and saw there will remain
with me for the rest of my life. Together with my wife, Karyn, I visited
Jericho, Haifa and Tel Aviv. I traveled to the Golan Heights, spent a
night on a kibbutz, and stood on the shores of the Sea of Galilee. I met
with diplomats and military leaders, visited industries and hospitals,
and throughout it all I was excited by Israel’s economy and impressed
with its commitment to technological excellence ... Israel is much more
than its collected history, as the last five decades have decidedly proven.
It is a demonstration of what can be accomplished when a people are determined
to overcome every obstacle to freedom and self-determination ... And I
think its important to note, that while America maintains about 135,000
troops in Europe and spends about $80 billion every year on its defense,
no US troops have ever been required to defend Israel. In fact, when compared
to our relationships with many other countries, the US-Israeli partnership
has been very cost-effective. We benefit from joint military exercises,
intelligence-sharing, and the pre-positioning of materiel that will enable
us to respond to any future conflict in the region. In other words, when
we support Israel's vital national interests, we also support our own."
Many
Tools of Big Brother Are Up and Running,
New York Times, December 23, 2002
"In the Pentagon research effort to detect terrorism by electronically
monitoring the civilian population, the most remarkable detail may be
this: Most of the pieces of the system are already in place. Because of
the inroads the Internet and other digital network technologies have made
into everyday life over the last decade, it is increasingly possible to
amass Big Brother-like surveillance powers through Little Brother means.
The basic components include everyday digital technologies like e-mail,
online shopping and travel booking, A.T.M. systems, cellphone networks,
electronic toll-collection systems and credit-card payment terminals.
In essence, the Pentagon's main job would be to spin strands of software
technology that would weave these sources of data into a vast electronic
dragnet. Technologists say the types of computerized data sifting and
pattern matching that might flag suspicious activities to government agencies
and coordinate their surveillance are not much different from programs
already in use by private companies. Such programs spot unusual credit
card activity, for example, or let people at multiple locations collaborate
on a project. The civilian population, in other words, has willingly embraced
the technical prerequisites for a national surveillance system that Pentagon
planners are calling Total Information Awareness."
Move
against Arab party could spark crisis in Jewish-Arab ties,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, December 23, 2002
"Nearly two years ago, in Israel’s last elections, members of Azmi
Beshara’s Balad Party spearheaded the public campaign among Israel’s Arab
citizens to boycott the elections. Now Balad has taken a U-turn: It is
launching an international campaign against Attorney General Elyakim
Rubinstein’s demand to ban the party from running in the upcoming
general elections. Rubinstein’s request to the Central Elections
Committee to disqualify Balad relies on a recent amendment to the Basic
Law: The Knesset banning parties that negate 'Israel’s existence as a
Jewish state and express support for the armed struggle against Israel.'
At stake not is only the status of one Arab party: The attempt could impact
the already-fragile relations between the Jewish state and its Arab citizens.
The Central Elections Committee will have to define the thin line between
the political rights of the Arab population and the possible challenge
to the very existence of the state. In other words, it will have to decide
how Arab an Arab party can be. Rubinstein came to the elections
committee with a thick portfolio of documents — many of them from the
Shin Bet security Service’s secret archives — designed to prove that 'Balad
is putting on a mask.' In other words, the party, which claims to be a
legitimate political organ of Israel’s Arabs, actually is a tool in the
effort to destroy Israel as a Jewish state, Rubinstein claims."
Passionate attachment
to Israel,
by James J. David, Media Monitors, December
24, 2002
"Is there any criminal act that Israel can do without being protected
from criticism from the United States? If there is I haven't seen it.
And I haven't seen it from the Bush Administration or from the Clinton
Administration or from any administration before them. But when you consider
the influence of Israel's lobby and its political action committees and
the more than $41 million they've given to Congress and the White House,
is it any wonder Israel is shielded from any shame? For more than 54 years
the Israelis have committed acts that no other nation would dare get away
with. But even here in America, where it is not yet illegal to publicly
ask the wrong questions, any public figure that does so is subjected to
smears, intimidation, and the attempted destruction of his career and
reputation by Jewish organizations and by the very cooperative news media
... Although September 11th brought the fight on terrorism to the front
burner, it seems that the United States protects Israel from any criticism
here too. An Israeli instant-messaging firm Odigo confirmed that two employees
received text messages warning of an attack on the World Trade Center
two hours before terrorists crashed planes into the New York landmarks.
(Ha'aretz, December 20, 2002.) Is it possible that Israel had foreknowledge
of the attack? Could this be the answer why the 4000 Israeli employees
at the World Trade Center never showed up for work that tragic September
morning? If this is the case then the fact that Israel's government had
prior knowledge of the pending attack and not warned the Americans makes
them as guilty as our enemy. Whatever the case, our government must make
a complete and thorough investigation without any threats from Jewish
and Israeli interest groups. Shielding Israel from criticism and supporting
the Jewish state no matter what crimes she commits has caused the United
States the loss of respect around the world. In addition, Israel has cost
American taxpayers more than $120 billion in the past 40 years. Our one-sided
unbalanced Middle East policy has created the hatred of millions and the
primary cause of terrorism that has landed on our own soil. Criticizing
our government's dangerous policies and its submissions to the Jewish
lobby doesn't make anyone less patriotic or any less of an American. George
Washington said it best when he stated that 'passionate attachment to
another nation produces a variety of evils...the illusion of common interests
where no real common interests exist; adopting the enmities of the other;
and participation in the quarrels and wars of the other without any justification.
Still another evil is that such a passionate attachment gives to ambitious,
corrupted or deluded citizens the facility to betray or sacrifice the
interests of their own country.'" James J. David is a retired
Brigadier General and a graduate of the U.S. Army's Command and General
Staff College, and the National Security Course, National Defense University,
Washington DC. He served as a Company Commander with the 101st Airborne
Division in the Republic of Vietnam in 1969 and 1970. 1967-1969
VIEWS:
US silent about Israeli nukes,
By Hassan Tahsin, Daily Times (Pakistan),
December 25, 2002
"International politics has a number of contradictions. At present,
we see the United States leading the world against Iran, Iraq and North
Korea because they allegedly possess weapons of mass destruction. We see
the United States at the same time approving the idea of Israel building
a new nuclear reactor. The new reactor will chemically process uranium
and will obviously increase the size of the Israeli arsenal. The world
is in general agreement with the United States about the necessity of
eliminating weapons of mass destruction. The existence of these weapons
which includes nuclear warhead threatens the entire world. It is not enough
to disarm the so-called “axis of evil.” All weapons of mass destruction
must be eliminated, including those of the superpower permanent members
of the UN Security Council ... If we look at Israel and its weapons of
mass destruction, we join many countries and governments which have wondered
why Israel is always an exception to rules that are scrupulously applied
to other countries. It is certain today that Israel possesses between
100 and 200 nuclear and hydrogen warheads of all sizes. This is confirmed
by published American satellite pictures and scientific reports. These
same reports also indicate that Israel is about to produce a neutron bomb.
Israel also has nuclear bombs which are designed for use from airplanes.
They can be used in battle without fears of side effects. Israel also
has spy satellites which can identify targets on the ground very easily.
In cooperation with the former racist government in South Africa, Israel
conducted nuclear tests in 1979 in the South Pacific. Further information
about Israeli weapons is not available though it is known that some were
used for the attempted assassination in Jordan of Khalid Meshaal, the
Hamas member. Closing the world’s eyes to Israel’s nuclear arsenal and
weapons of mass destruction can only lead to suspicion and rejection.
Since Israel was the first country in the region to possess these weapons,
it should be the first to get rid of them."
Overview of the Shank anonymous hate speech case,
American Civil Liberties Union of Florida,
"Lloyd Shank is a 73-year-old man who lives in Broward County. He
has a long history of arrests for distributing racist literature at the
Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. For years he has been
sending officials rambling letters decrying Jews and the federal government.
He served two years in federal prison for threatening President Ronald
Reagan. He served time in a mental institution. On August 23, 1999, Shank
sent an unsigned letter to six of seven Broward County commissioners –
all of whom are Jewish, except for one whose spouse
is Jewish – in which he made anti-Semitic comments and allegations.
In his letter, Shank attacked the Clinton administration and Christianity,
and he claimed that Jews promote hatred and murder. He blamed major terrorist
attacks on Jews, closing his letter: 'You Jews and puppets murdered 10,000
innocent people in those bombings. Federal, state, local judges are Jewish
gangsters and controlled by evil Jews. They are warmongers, terrorists,
hate-filled liars and perverts.' Recognizing Shank as the likely author
of the diatribe, detectives confronted Shank. He admitted writing the
letter, explaining that he left it anonymous because he thought he would
be prosecuted if he signed it. On September 8, 1999, Shank was arrested
and charged with a third-degree felony under Fla. Statute 836.11, punishable
by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine, for sending an anonymous
publication 'exposing persons to hatred, contempt or prejudicial ridicule'
... On September 10, two days after Shank's arrest, the ACLU of Florida
sent a letter to Broward State Attorney Michael J. Satz and Broward Sheriff
Ken Jenne, calling the statute "plainly unconstitutional" and urging them
to release Shank from custody. The State Attorney's office reduced the
charge against Shank to a first-degree misdemeanor on September 17. The
decision to charge Shank has opened a debate on whether the 1945 Florida
law is unconstitutional."
The
Role of Politics in Contemporary Anti-Semitism.
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. September
15, 1999
"That Jews control a disproportionately large share of the Russian
economy and Russian media certainly has some basis in fact. Between
50 and 80 percent of the Russian economy is said to be in Jewish hands,
with the influence of the five Jews among the eight individuals commonly
referred to as 'oligarchs' particularly conspicuous. (An
oligarch is understood to be a member of a small group that exercises
control in a government. The five oligarchs of Jewish descent are
Boris Berezovsky, Mikhail Friedman, Vladimir Gusinsky,
Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and Alexander Smolensky. The other
oligarchs are Vagit Alekperov, Vladimir Potanin, and Rem Vyakhirev.) Perhaps
the most famous (and simultaneously the most infamous) of the oligarchs
is Boris Berezovsky. In common with most of the other Jewish oligarchs,
Berezovsky controls industries in three critical areas: the extraction
and sale of a major natural resource, such as oil, as a source of great
wealth; a large bank (useful in influencing industry and transferring
assets abroad); and several major media outlets (useful for exerting influence
and attacking rivals). He also controls a significant share of the Aeroflot
airline and the Moscow automobile industry."
Fallen
Lott Urged Christians To 'Take Back' U.S.,
[Jewish] Forward,
December 27, 2002
"Senator Trent Lott told reporters this week that he had fallen into
the 'trap' of his political enemies who were happy to take aim at a conservative
Christian from Mississippi. But, according to a 1987 report in the Washington
Post, Lott eagerly compared his initial senate campaign to a religious
crusade. 'Conservative, God-fearing, hard-working Christian people make
a mistake by not being more aggressive,' Lott reportedly declared during
a Mississippi Right to Life convention in 1987. 'This is our country and
it's time we take it back.' The remark was brought to light last week
by the National Jewish Democratic Council, a day before Lott's resignation
as Senate Republican leader. 'Trent Lott's chronic problem of giving voice
to his exclusivist worldview is not just Trent Lott's problem — it's the
problem of many in the G.O.P., and especially its leadership,' said the
Democratic council's executive director, Ira Forman, in a December
19 statement on Lott's 1987 remarks. Forman also criticized incoming House
Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican, for urging a crowd of Christian
Coalition activists during a pro-Israel rally in October to 'put people
in office who stand unashamedly with Jesus Christ.' 'The real problem
with these Republican leaders is not the occasional slip of the tongue;
it's that they speak honestly about their beliefs,' Forman said. 'And
until their exclusionist views change, it's going to be increasingly hard
for large numbers of Americans to vote with the Republican Party.' The
same day that the Jewish Democrats issued their press release, B'nai Brith
International became the only major American Jewish organization to issue
a statement calling on Lott to resign from his GOP leadership post."
'Misuse
of Canada's identity' questioned Israeli spy operation,
by Stewart Bell, National
Post, December 24, 2002
"A senior Cabinet official questioned the head of Israel's security
service about allegations Israeli undercover agents posed as Canadians
during an operation to assassinate a Palestinian terrorist leader, newly
released documents show. Although Ottawa has said publicly it was convinced
all along the spy claims were false, internal documents obtained yesterday
show the matter has continued to concern the government and has been the
subject of behind-the-scenes diplomacy. In a confidential report, officials
said they were concerned about 'other countries' intelligence services
misusing Canada's identity' and that 'such misuse endangers Canadians
travelling around the world and undermines the integrity of Canadian passports.'
Ronald Bilodeau, the Privy Council Office security and intelligence co-ordinator
and Cabinet assistant secretary, met on Oct. 1 with the head of the Israeli
Security Agency, whose spies allegedly used false Canadian identities
during the operation in Gaza ... Israel has denied the claims. But the
papers show Ottawa was worried about being linked to a spy operation and
a botched assassination that killed 14 bystanders, nine of them children.
The allegations surfaced in August, when Mr. Zatmeh publicly detailed
how he was lured into becoming an Israeli informant by agents who told
him they were Canadians and could help him immigrate. Mr. Zatmeh said
he was recruited by three 'Canadian' agents who brought him to the Canadian
embassy in Tel Aviv before coercing him into helping them, with doctored
photos that showed him with naked women ... Sept. 4 they were satisfied
the claims were false. However, hours after the Post report on Sept. 5,
John McNee, assistant deputy minister for Africa and the Mideast, discussed
the matter with Haim Divon, Israel's ambassador to Canada."
Report: Rendell
Still Has Knack For Recruiting Big Donors. Former Mayor Of Philly Sets
Up Club For High Donors, NBC (Channel
10), December 29, 2002
"As chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 2000, Ed
Rendell set up a club for people who donated at least $100,000 to
the cause. That club was called the Jefferson Trust. Rendell, the
former mayor of Philadelphia, is now the governor-elect of Pennsylvania.
And it appears he hasn't lost his knack for fund raising. The Philadelphia
Inquirer reported today that Rendell appears to have had more
$100,000 contributors than all but two others who ran for office in the
United States this year. The Inquirer reported that at least 53 individuals
and organizations gave at least $100,000 to Rendell. Only California Democrat
Gray Davis and Texas Republican Rick Perry eclipsed that number. Both
were elected governor in their respective states."
[Enough kneeling to the Jewish Lobby. So where's the
"hate crime" legislation against the institutionalized oppression
of the Palestinians?]
VICE
PRESIDENT AL GORE REMARKS AT ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE, Welcome
to the White House ( http://clinton3.nara.gov ) May 9, 2000 (As
delivered)
"I thank you, Howard, for the warm introduction and also for the
tireless work that you do on behalf of the ADL. And to let me also be
quick to add, that I know that I speak for all of us here today when I
say that my hearts are with Abe Foxman (ph) and his wife, Golda.
I wish Abe -- now I don't know if I'm pronouncing this right. You
help me. Refua shalama (ph). Is that right? (APPLAUSE) A full and
speedy recovery. It's great to hear these inspiring stories and indeed
we have been allies and partners. One of the ways you can find that out
is by cataloguing the mutual enemies that we have. Some of the same groups
and people have condemned the ADL and me in the same breath and the same
sentence, which is one of the greatest honors I can possibly thank God.
(LAUGHTER) (APPLAUSE) And I am really grateful for it ... But we started
our family in Nashville, and, as many of you know, Nashville is the world
capital of country music and the capital of songwriting of all kinds.
And it's not just the music of the South, it is the music of America.
And to prove it to you, let me just share with you the latest hit list
from one of the many proliferating subgenres in country music, the latest
top songs on the Jewish country and western song title list. Number four
this week is: `I Was One Of The Chosen People Until She Chose Somebody
Else.' (LAUGHTER) Number three this week is: `The Second Time She Said
Shalom, I Knew She Meant Goodbye.' (LAUGHTER) And number two on the list
this week is: `I've Got My Foot On The Glass, Now Where Are You?' (LAUGHTER)
(LAUGHTER) ... I really am happy to be back with the ADL. I feel right
at home here. Since your founding in 1913, you have been an angel on America's
shoulder, summing us to our highest ideas. From your work to unmask klansmen
in the 1940s to your fight against McCarthyism in the 1950s -- and incidentally,
when my father went to the United States Senate, he had one request, Do
not assign me to any committee that has Joe McCarthy on it -- to your
efforts to monitor hate on the Internet today, in all these activities
and over all these years, you have kept a watchful eye on extremism in
every form ... Hate crimes are acts of violence, not just against the
person, not just against individuals, but against our ideals. It is long
past time for a national law to punish hate crimes and prevent them, once
and for all. I call for the passage of national hate crimes legislation...
(APPLAUSE) ... in this session of Congress. It is time. (APPLAUSE) There
is still time for Congress to take action this year and the lobbying that
you do on this issue can make the critical difference. We have to send
an unmistakable message: If you commit a hate-crime, we will find you,
we will punish you, that punishment will be swift, certain and severe.
So let us stand together and work together and tell Congress to make the
Hate Crimes Prevention Act the law of our land."
The
Neocons and Nixon's southern strategy,
by Pat Buchanon, World Net Daily, December
30, 2002
"Lear's reflection upon ingratitude comes to mind as one reads of
the squabble among neoconservatives over who among them was first to stick
his nail file in the back of Trent Lott. Charles Krauthammer enters
a claim for the Kristol-Bennett crowd, while Jonah Goldberg
of National Review and cashiered Bush speech-writer David Frum
insist they, too, played supporting roles. Whether Lott may have been
innocent of any hate crime, or whether they might have had a moral duty
to step in to stop a lynching of one of their own – even had Lott blundered
– seem to be thoughts that never once intruded upon these tiny minds.
Yet their collusion in ruining Lott, their relish in the pats on the head
they are receiving from the left, confirm the suspicion: Neoconservatives
are the useful idiots of the liberal establishment. With Lott gone, Bill
Kristol is now collaborating with the New York Times in its
rewrite of the history of the 1960s, a decade of liberal debacles, to
credit racism for the Republicans' success. 'Lott is really virtually
the last of the products of Richard Nixon's 'Southern Strategy' to be
in major positions of power in the Congress,' Kristol assures the
Times. 'With his leaving, you will have cleared out people who ... have
a somewhat compromised image to the country as a whole.'"
Breaking
the Silence on the Israel Lobby,
by Jeffrey Blankfort
itszone, December 31, 2002 (originally from
Anderson Valley Advertiser, February 2002)
"On a Saturday in mid-February a little less than a year ago, I had
two experiences, one very positive and encouraging --the other negative
and disturbing. The first was at the Marin Community Center in Mill Valley,
across the Bay from San Francisco, where more than 200 ( 210 signed in)
people, and not what we refer to as "the choir" or "the usual suspects,"
turned up to hear Palestinian legal scholar Raja Shehadeh, Palestinian
professor Jess Ghannam, Stanford-based Israeli scholar Yael Ben-Zvi and
myself speak on the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict ... All of the
presentations were well received but the enthusiastic reception for mine,
in particular, was significant because my subject was the pro- Israel
lobby and its negative influence on the American body politic. I placed
much of the blame for the escalation of violence in the Israeli- Palestinian
conflict on the actions of the organized American Jewish community and
by individual Jews working independently who over the years have successfully
stifled, intimidated, and marginalized critics of Israeli policies. I
expected an uproar from the audience because, from my experience, Marin
had always been another 'occupied territory,' but even among the many
Jews there, none challenged by premise or my evidence. What they heard
and saw was factual and visual evidence of the power of Israel's supporters
over Congress and politicians at every political level and. equally damning,
their effectiveness in preventing the various anti-war and anti-intervention
coalitions over the years from taking any position that might touch on
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, even one as mild as, 'US Out of the
Middle East." After I spoke and after the applause, a number of people,
Jews and non-Jews, and several students came up to me wanting more information
. Then I went over to Berkeley to the second day of a three-day conference
organized by Students for Justice in Palestine where the issue of the
Israel Lobby was nowhere on the agenda. I arrived during Phyllis Bennis's
presentation. Bennis, a fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies, a
Washington-based liberal think tank, is one of the left's more well known
talking heads on the Israel-Palestine conflict and can frequently be heard
on KPFA and other Pacifica stations. Over the years, like most of the
other 'experts, from the 'left,' with the notable exceptions of Columnist
Alexander Cockburn and Prof. Ed Herman, she has never recognized, let
alone been willing to discuss, the power of the Israel Lobby over US policy
in the Middle East, despite overwhelming and indisputable evidence of
its existence and of its influence. What happened when I arrived in the
auditorium was astonishing. Seeing me in the back of the auditorium where
I was sitting with a friend, totally out of the blue and raising her voice,
she interrupted her talk to blurt out, 'Congress is not Israeli Occupied
Territory!' ... Then I took the anti-war movement to task. Like every
other political sector of US society, I said that pro-Israel Jews within
its ranks and others who are fearful that raising the issue of the pro-Israel
lobby would provoke 'anti-Semitism, have not only kept the lid on that
issue, but have kepy the Palestinian cause isolated from the movement's
overall agenda. Whatever the reason, I emphasized, there are no excuses
for the silence of the movement on the issue of the lobby nor for it's
genuflecting to 'Jewish sensibilities' regarding the overall struggle.
Neither Bennis nor her co-panelist, a Jewish professor, said a word when
I finished. After the program, I went down to say hello to her, and jokingly
mentioned that she still had not yet understood the role of the Israel
Lobby. She was neither friendly or amused. 'The issue is dead and has
been dead.' End of conversation. What is disturbing is that her position
regarding the Israel lobby is that long held by Noam Chomsky, as well,
as by professors Joel Beinin of Stanford and Stephen Zunes of USF. Bennis's
position is puzzling since she is based in Washington, where, for the
politically aware, "the lobby's" power is a given.. To their credit, all
of them, and Chomsky in particular, have, through their writing and speaking,
have exposed American audiences to the history of the Israeli-Palestinian
struggle, but their refusal to acknowledge the critical domestic aspects
of the struggle are indefensible and can no longer be left unchallenged.
(In 1989, Zunes wrote an excellent piece on the power of the pro-Israel
lobby for The Progressive, but he soon changed his position, perhaps
when he realized that 'blaming the Jews' is the fastest way to get marginalized
in US academia. The facts and the quotes in his article, however, did
not change. In his recent book, Tinderbox, he writes that Arabs have mistakenly
blamed Israel for its problems and that Israel is actually a victim of
US policies. He would have us believe that Israel is forced to play the
same role for the United States that Jews played under feudalism when
they were the middlepersons between the lords and the serfs. This analysis
would have us believe that Israel and its Jewish supporters today are
somehow in the precarious position that European Jews found themselves
in several hundred years ago This is absurd. The first situation represented
Jewish weakness. Today, Jews have more than at any time in their history.
Zunes ignores the fact that Jewish supporters of Israel are far and away
the leading contributors to the Democratic Party and dominate every sector
of the media: movies, TV., radio, and the press. Since 1978, the amount
of money contributed by pro-Israel PACs alone is over $34 million, as
compared to Enron whose $6 million over 10 years given to many of the
same politicians is held up as an example of an abuse of the system ...
On the Mother Jones magazine website one finds the
leading individual contributors to both political parties in the 1999-2000
cycle. Eight of the top ten are Jews who contributed, with one exception,
exclusively to the Democratic Party ... Why is the Israel Lobby a taboo
subject among the left and the anti-war movements?"
Totalitarianism
nears. Without protest, Americans are giving up freedom,
by Glen T. Martin, roanoke.com, Thursday,
January 02, 2003
"Today, people of the United States have given up their rights through
the 'Patriot Act,' the 'Homeland Security Act' and the Pentagon's new
system of 'Total Information Awareness.' The astonishing thing about this
'land of the free' is that most Americans now have no effective rights
and do not care. As long as they are free to shop in department stores
and have traffic in the streets (with automobiles burning oil stolen from
dying Iraqi children), they do not care. And to a greater degree every
day, those few who do care about our liberties and rights are too terrified
of our government to speak out. The so-called 'Patriot Act' expanded our
government's secret search and wiretapping powers enormously. It empowered
racial profiling as a recognized police practice and allowed broad sweeps
of people of Middle Eastern or Asian origin. It effectively abolished
immigrants' rights, allowing noncitizens to be held in secret locations
on secret 'evidence,' without right to an attorney, for as long as the
government wishes. The government now has the power to enter your home
or your computer and secretly record whatever they find without ever having
to notify you. They do not even have to obtain a warrant from a publicly
accountable judge showing reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed
... The government will soon be amassing a file on every American that
includes every magazine subscription, credit card purchase, Web site visit,
medical record, library record, bank deposit or withdrawals, every airline
purchase, as well as judicial, divorce records, and so on. This will be
recorded in a central data base, not by a publicly accountable authority,
but by the Pentagon, which already operates in total secrecy from the
American public. Government intimidation for political reasons is real
and it has begun. Our government already is using its secret data bases
to harass American ... The government has begun harassing people maintaining
Web sites they consider politically objectionable. The Justice Department
announced a plan to use its newfound power to designate U.S. citizens
as 'enemy combatants' to place such people in concentration camps. Declaring
them 'enemy combatants' would strip them of their constitutional rights,
their access to the courts and allow the government to indefinitely hold
them without trial. This is identical in purpose to some of the Nazi concentration
camps. Do we citizens care at all about the future of our children or
the plight of the millions of citizens in this country of Arab descent,
or those who nonviolently oppose government policy? We have repeated for
so long the slogan 'it can't happen here.' But the darkness and terror
of totalitarianism is coming rapidly. Do we have the courage and integrity
to speak out now, before it is too late?"
Senator
Lieberman: Your Peace is Our Demise,
arabia.com, January 02, 2003
"US Senator and likely Presidential candidate Joseph Lieberman
is touring the Middle East. His visit will most likely be described as
a success. And why not? Lieberman conversed with Ariel Sharon and
top Israeli leaders. He vowed time and again to stand by Israel in its
war on terrorism, and its right to self-defense. He managed to completely
ignore the elected Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, meeting instead with
Saeb Erekat, the former head of the Palestinian negotiation team. When
asked about who was to blame for a bloody two years of occupation and
bloodshed, he uttered, the blame goes on the terrorists, the Palestinians
of course. With that said, Lieberman managed to squeeze in a few
statements about the need for peace, and Palestinian reforms, and a Palestinian
crackdown on terrorism, and Palestinian willingness to negotiation and
a new Palestinian leadership, etc. To be fair, Lieberman did briefly
address the humanitarian needs of the Palestinians. But of course, it
was not Israel who received the blame for the growing humanitarian catastrophe,
but the terrorists. But once again, the trip was a complete success if
one considers official American policy in the Middle East; scolding and
blaming the Palestinians, pretending that there is no such thing as a
deadly Israeli occupation, illegal settlements or even occupied territories
(For now, according to Donald Rumsfeld, they are known as so-called occupied
territories). I followed the news of Lieberman's visit to the Middle
East, although I expected nothing out of the ordinary, no surprises, until
he visited Saudi Arabia, another leg on his tour, one mainly aimed at
building war alliances against Iraq. In an interview with Saudi Arabias
English daily, Arab News, on Dec 26 ... Lieberman's statement appeared
to subscribe more to the official Israeli viewpoint, and that of pro-Israeli
lobby groups in the US, than that of the US administration itself ...
But again, why should I even raise such an issue as if I indeed held any
expectations of the pro-Israeli Senator? On May 2, 2002, as the bodies
of scores of Palestinians killed by the Israeli army in the West Bank
were decomposing in the streets of Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah and elsewhere,
Lieberman rushed to the Senate, co-authoring a resolution (S. Res.
247). The urgent resolution didn't call on Israel to allow the Red Cross
to collect the Palestinian corpses or to allow water supplies to reach
Jenin or Nablus. Instead, it equated the US fight against terrorism with
Israels ruthless attacks on heavily populated Palestinian centers. The
resolution passed quickly, yet Lieberman's fight for Israel is
yet to fade. He continues to blame the victim, to fight for security for
the occupier, he wants to attack Iraq and he blames the UN for being too
harsh on Israel. True, Lieberman's actions are no surprise. They
are very much in tune with his political philosophy. After all, it was
no coincidence that he was the top recipient of pro-Israeli PAC contributions
during the 2000 election cycle. I only wish, however, that Lieberman
didn't tell journalists in Israel that his visit was aimed at fostering
peace and reviving the stalled peace process between Israel and the Palestinian
leadership. Lieberman defended Israel, blamed Palestinians and
called for war on Iraq. Such an agenda can hardly be argued to be that
of a peacemaker, although one can hardly deny that according to todays
standards of American foreign policy, the Senators Middle East tour was
a great success."
Speaker
Cantor? Eric Cantor, the quick-rising Virginia Republican, may be angling
to become the first Jewish House speaker,
Jewish Week, January 3, 2002
"When Rep. Eric Cantor was appointed chief deputy majority
whip for the 108th Congress, which opens next week, the hopes of Jewish
Republicans across the country fell on his shoulders. It’s a burden Cantor
— now the only Jewish Republican in the House — acknowledges and welcomes.
He says he is a bridge builder who can help his party cross the chasm
of distrust that has kept Jewish voters out of the Republican ranks. That
won’t be easy, he concedes, but Cantor insists that logic — and
surging support for Israel among conservative Christians — will eventually
change Jewish voting behavior. 'What I see all round the country are ongoing
efforts to forge relations between religious conservatives and the Jewish
community,' he said in a recent interview. 'There’s so much common ground,
especially on the Israel issue' ... Cantor is still in the early
stages of his career, but friends and acquaintances wouldn’t be surprised
to see him become the first Jewish speaker of the House ... Cantor
said his new job will add to the punch of his pro-Israel activism
in Congress. In his first term, Cantor sponsored several bills threatening
sanctions on the Palestinian Authority, including the Temple Mount Preservation
Act, which would cut U.S. aid if Palestinian authorities don’t stop 'unauthorized
excavations' from the Temple Mount. Cantor has also emerged as
a leading congressional critic of the United Nations Relief Works Agency
(UNRWA), the agency that provides humanitarian aid to Palestinian refugees
— and which Cantor said has allowed refugee camps to become prime
breeding grounds for Palestinian terrorists. Cantor agreed that
Mideast-related legislation would remain a priority even though his new
leadership position will focus more on domestic matters. 'Obviously the
Israel issue has always been front and center of what I do politically,'
he said. “But this job is much broader than any single issue.'"
Israel
compared to Nazi Germany,
icwales, Wales, January 3, 2003
"A politician caused outrage today by comparing Israel to Nazi Germany.
Labour councillor Ray Davies condemned Israel's 'apartheid regime' and
likened it to Hitler's occupation of Europe. The councillor, from Caerphilly,
said: 'Hitler's Nazi regime occupied Europe for four years only. Palestine
and the West Bank have been occupied for 40 years.' Speaking on BBC Radio
Wales, Mr Davies, who is vice chair of CND in Wales, refused to withdraw
his controversial comments, adding: 'I do draw that comparison because
(this is) one group of people who should understand what oppression is
and what it is like living under occupation.' Mr Davies urged Welsh business
minister Carwyn Jones and Tory AM Alun Cairns to boycott a trip to Israel
next week. The pair have been invited as part of a visit organised by
the Israeli government. Mr Davies accused the Israeli government of treating
the Holocaust 'like an industry' to justify its actions against Palestinians.
The councillor has himself been on a fact-finding trip to the occupied
territories but he said he had 'utterly resisted' an invitation by the
Israeli government. 'When they go out there they will be treated like
Lords and taken to the Holocaust museum to try to engineer as much sympathy
as they can and shown the bright side and the pleasant side and the sort
of life the Israelis are enjoying,' he said."
Ariel Sharon's Shakedown,
by Patrick Buchanan, American Conservative,
January 2003
"May we now expect the [Wall Street] Journal to call on Mr. Bush to reject
the $10 billion in loan guarantees demanded by Ariel Sharon? Don't
bet on it. Yet, Sharon's demand is astonishing in its audacity.
California and New York face huge budget shortfalls. The U.S. Treasury
is running a deficit nearing $200 billion. Yet, Sharon, who ignored
Bush when the president publicly called on him to pull his army out of
West Bank cities, is demanding that U.S. taxpayers fork over $4 billion
in new military aid and agree to pay off $10 billion Israel intends to
borrow should Israel decide to default. Why should we do this? What does
America get out of this? What has all the $100 billion in aid we have
shoveled out to Israel bought us, other than ingratitude and the enmity
of the Arab world? While Israel has a first-rate military, it is of no
use to us. In Desert Storm, Bush I had to bribe Yitzhak Shamir with
$5 billion in aid, $400 million in loan guarantees, and Patriot missiles
to stay out of the fighting, lest Israeli intervention dynamite our coalition.
Journalists and diplomats alike, returning from the Mideast, attest that
our almost-blind support of Israel is a major cause of the anti-Americanism
that is sweeping the Islamic world. When the price of Israel could be
paid in dollars alone, $3 billion a year, most members of Congress chose
to pony up rather than face the retribution of an Israeli Lobby that has
in its trophy case the scalps of two chairmen of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, J. William Fulbright and Chuck Percy. But now the price of
the Israeli connection has begun to rise. U.S. weapons technology given
to Israel has been sold to China. Only direct U.S. intervention prevented
Israel from selling Beijing AWACS technology. The Patriot missile, the
Phoenix air-to-air missile, the Lavi fighter, based on the F-16, have
all been sold to Beijing. In the Reagan era, Israel had the loathsome
Jonathan Pollard, whom it suborned into treason, loot our innermost
national security secrets, some of which are believed to have been traded
to Moscow. Israel refuses to return the roomful of documents it stole
and has pressured presidents for Pollard's release so he can be
brought to Israel where he is a hero. Now Mr. Sharon has handed
us Israel's bill for abstaining from war with Iraq while President Bush
is at maximum political risk. Not since 1957, when Dwight Eisenhower ordered
Ben-Gurion to get his army out of Sinai, has a U.S. president faced
down an Israeli Prime Minister. To his credit, the president's father
tried. In 1991, having driven Iraq out of Kuwait, with his approval at
70 percent, Bush I was asked by Shamir for $10 billion in loan
guarantees to bring a million Russian Jews to Israel. Bush assented, on
one condition: Shamir must not settle them on the West Bank and
must stop expanding settlements. Shamir rejected the condition,
and the Lobby went to work. Bush warned he would veto the guarantees.
An Israeli minister called him an anti-Semite. While Shamir was
defeated in June of 1992, Bush, his own election in trouble, eventually
gave in and gave Israel the loan guarantees. Who was the Housing Minister
who announced new settlements even as Bush I was denouncing them? Ariel
Sharon. Sharon now wants to repeat Israel's victory over Bush's
father by making the son give Israel $4 billion in hardware and $10 billion
in new loan guarantees as Sharon's price for permitting us to crush
Iraq while he holds America's coat. It is a shakedown: Ariel Sharon's
big sting ... If members of the Knesset can refuse to follow the suicidal
path of Sharon & Netanyahu, why is Congress so cowardly?"
An
Invisible Aide Leaves Fingerprints,
By Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times, January
6, 2003
"Josh Bolten is the White House aide you've never heard of
who has his fingerprints all over President Bush's new $600 billion economic
plan, the legislation creating the Department of Homeland Security and
just about every other domestic policy concocted in his powerful little
corner deep in the West Wing. Mr. Bolten, 48, once made a lot of
money working for Goldman Sachs and grew up in northwest Washington
as the son of a Central Intelligence Agency officer who worked in the
directorate of operations, the agency's covert espionage arm. Perhaps
taking a lesson from his father, he declined to be interviewed for this
article, saying he liked his life undercover. Still, Mr. Bolten
can't hide his revealing title — White House deputy chief of staff for
policy — and a growing reputation as the hub of the administration's domestic
agenda, which is increasingly set by a small handful of West Wing aides
under the command of Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser,
and Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff ... Mr. Bolten
is the one who oversees the 45 minutes that Mr. Bush has scheduled for
'policy time' on most days the president is in Washington. Mr. Bolten
is in charge of parceling out those precious minutes, usually in the afternoons.
He decides what is discussed, when it is to be discussed and who is invited
... Mr. Bolten, who was the issues director of Mr. Bush's presidential
campaign, graduated from St. Albans, the exclusive private boys' school
in Washington, and Princeton and Stanford Law School. On Hanukkah, he
brought in dreidels and gold chocolate coins for the entire senior staff.
'He's the explainer of all things Jewish to the White House,' Mr. Rove
said ... When Mr. Bolten was growing up, he was instructed to tell
his friends that his father worked at the Defense Department, not the
C.I.A."
Letters [to the Editor],
Re: The Left and Israel, letter to the editor, Pat Martin, Jan. 3,
National Post (Canada), January 07, 2003
"I too am a socialist, a trade unionist and an NDP Member of Parliament,
but Mr. Martin does not speak for me. The starting point for any consideration
of the situation in the Middle East should be based on the principles
of international law. In this light, while the world's attention is focused
on Iraq's compliance with United Nations resolutions, the true double
standard is the fact that the Israeli government can repudiate and violate
United Nations resolutions on a continuous basis with impunity. The tragic
plight of the Palestinian people continues under the heavy weight of Israeli
military occupation. The imprisonment of a whole population denied food,
health care, employment and education is compounded by the daily killing
of civilians by Israel's military forces. And yes, it is plain to all
that oppression and occupation breed resistance and terrorism: Indiscriminate
killing of civilians on both sides must be resolutely condemned by all
of us looking for a peaceful resolution. Nor is the resistance only Palestinian.
The year 2002, according to Israel's former minister of education Shulamit
Aloni, 'was a year of moral degeneration during which we became an
apartheid state ... we transformed ourselves into barbarians, we turned
3.5 million human beings into hostages, we turned every town and village
into a detention camp' ... We are at a historical moment of crisis. Iraq
may be the focus but Palestine is the heart of the matter. The drums of
war are beating, and as usual, whole peoples are being vilified and targeted.
It is time for those of us who call ourselves democrats and defenders
of peace, justice and equality to act. Canada's entire reputation as 'the
peaceable kingdom' is at stake. Will history record that we were with
the warmongers or the peacemakers? Joe Comartin, MP, Windsor St. Clair."
Specter Junket
Fit for a Rock Star Tuesday,
Fox News, January 7, 2003
"Sen. Arlen Specter spared no expense on a junket last week
to Europe and the Middle East — ordering cases of Evian water, a driver,
a personal assistant, Boca Burgers and daily squash matches. During last
week's holiday tour, Specter's staff scrambled to rustle up people
for him to meet — even as they focused on plans for Specter (R-Pa.)
and his wife, Joan, to enjoy the finest dining, opera, theater and social
gatherings. Specter's team demanded that he get one meeting in
Berlin on Dec. 31 — but only one meeting so he could enjoy himself that
day. Joan Specter was to be shown parts of 'local cultural products'
and 'unique marketplaces & bazaars' wherever the couple went. Specter's
demanding travel needs surfaced this week after e-mails detailing his
Dec. 23 to Jan. 6 junket plans were obtained by the Washington Post.
One e-mail that said that when in Israel, Specter 'will want a
driver and escort — even for visit with his sister.' During the junket,
diplomatic types were warned never to schedule events in the evening,
since Specter and his wife 'like to do their own thing' at night, an e-mail
said. Specter also was to have a squash court reserved for him every evening
at 5 p.m. on the dot. 'This guy is a prima donna,' fumed David Williams,
vice president of Citizens Against Government Waste. 'This guy is no friend
of taxpayers.' After starting his trip in London, Specter's office
scheduled him meetings with Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, Syria's Bashar Assad
and others. Mrs. Specter 'will want an escort at each country and
will likely be interested in sightseeing or shopping,' according to one
e-mail." [Note: former President Bill Clinton named Specter's
wife Joan to the National Council of the Arts].
New
Congress Has More Hispanics,
Washington Post, January 7, 2002
"[Mario Diaz-Balart] is one of a record 22 Hispanics who will be
sworn into the House, a gain of three from last year. Sixty women will
serve in the House – the same as last year – and an unprecedented 14 women
will be in the Senate ... There are no blacks or Hispanics in the 100-member
Senate. The House will have 37 blacks, one more than last year but fewer
than the record 39 who served from 1993-1995. There are no black Republicans
in Congress since Oklahoma Rep. J.C. Watts retired last year. Only 8.5
percent of the House is black and only 5 percent is Hispanic, even though
Hispanics and blacks each make up 12 percent of the U.S. population."
[Hmmm. If it's complaint time, and ethnic numbers are getting tossed
around, where is the article that notes that Jews are only 2.5% of the
American population and yet 11 of our 100 senators are Jewish -- an overrepresentation
of about 450%? And if fair representation of ethnic groups is what's at
root in this article, and we need to get the percentages all straightened
out, how come THAT's not news?] (There are also 26 Jewish members
of the House of Representatives)
Schumer
vows filibuster to fight renomination of Miss. judge,
Newsday, January 8, 2003
"Sen. Charles Schumer on Wednesday vowed a filibuster if necessary
to block the White House's renomination of a Mississippi judge accused
by Democrats and civil rights groups of being racially insensitive. Charles
Pickering, a U.S. District Court judge in Hattiesburg, Miss., has been
renominated for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals after being rejected
10-9 in the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee last March.
Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters Wednesday he was willing to resort to
a filibuster to reject Pickering. 'To me, this is a moral issue,' said
Schumer."
Israel wants
more than total US foreign aid budget,
Financial Review, January 8, 2002
"A delegation from Israel, the largest recipient of US foreign aid,
has sought $US12 billion ($21 billion) in assistance at a meeting with
State Department and White House officials, Israeli officials said. The
request, covering the next three to five years, exceeds
the total $US11.6 billion budgeted last year by the US for
all countries. The request is to help Israel weather the Palestinian
uprising and a possible US war with Iraq ... Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's
office said Israel was asking for $US4 billion in direct assistance and
$US8 billion in loan guarantees. A US official indicated before the meeting
that the US was open to the request. 'We always try to do what we can
to help our friend and ally,' the official told reporters. The meeting
was intended to focus on "Israel's current economic situation and Israel's
expected request for supplemental assistance", he said."
Bush
Decides Against New Aid Grants for States,
Reuters, January 7, 2003
"President Bush has decided against offering grants to cash-strapped
states as part of a $674 billion economic stimulus package he is to unveil
on Tuesday, the White House said. The White House had been considering
providing $10 billion to states to reduce budget woes but White House
spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters that Bush had decided against
it. 'The goal of the package is to stimulate the economy, not transfer
money from one taxpayer-funded source in the government to another taxpayer-funded
source in a different government,' Fleischer said."
Israel: America's
Shame and Humanity's Stain,
by Mohamed Khodr, Media Monitors, January
9, 2003
"While the American people are fiercely proud, independent, and will
not submit to any nation or any person who dares stomp on the world's
sole superpower, they do submit willingly and unwillingly to the dictates
of a foreign nation, Israel, whose economy and political support is the
prime priority of Washington D.C., even at the expense of the needs and
lives of the American people themselves. Inquiring Minds Around the World
Want to Know: Why are the American people so loved and respected around
the world for so long (prior to Israel's founding in 1948) for their freedoms,
educational and technological superiority, their friendliness, generosity,
and respect for other people's beliefs and needs, are so naive to the
destructive influence of Israel's 'Jewish Power' upon their domestic and
foreign policies? Why are they so blind and uninformed despite having
the world's largest and most advanced educational system, the world's
largest media outlets, the ability to travel around the world freely,
the world's largest interdependent economy that sells to every nation
on earth, except to Israel where it loses on trade; a nation with more
military bases around the world than any other, a nation of immigrants
from around the world, a nation in possession of the wondrous law unavailable
to most of the world--the 'Freedom of Information Act--whereby a citizen
can seek governmental answers on policies, but doesn't when it comes to
foreign policy? WHY, WHY, WHY? Why has the world been engulfed in continuous
wars and conflicts in the Middle East ever since Israel was founded in
1948? Why did Islam suddenly become America's enemy immediately after
the collapse of Communism in 1991? Why 9/11? ... There is a reason that
Bush appointed Henry Kissinger, a powerful Pro-Israeli Jew to head the
Independent Commission but who later resigned rather than reveal his "conflict
of interest" nations. The reason is Israel and the answer as to WHY there
is new found HATE between the U.S. and the Muslim world is simple: Why
do THEY hate US? ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL Why do
WE Hate Them? ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL Despite the
fact that most Americans, including our Government understand this truth,
America is too fearful to admit that Israel is the barrier between the
West and Islam, between perpetual war and peace, and between the interests
of the American people and the Pro-Israel politics of our Government too
greedy for Jewish money and votes and too cowardly to face the Pro-Israeli
Media backlash should they ever so slightly oppose the 'Israel First'
policy. There is ZERO TOLERANCE in America’s Media for any criticism of
Israel. The Political Unemployment line is filled with politicians who
fought for America's cause and independence from Israel and who sought
peace in the Holy Land. Among them are former Senators William Fulbright,
Charles Percy, Reps. Paul Findley and Cynthia McKinney. The American Government,
Media, Wall Street, Hollywood, and 'experts' on television are ensuring
through daily bombardment of intimidating sound bytes that the American
TAXPAYER, who is the ultimate VICTIM in this charade of 55 years of Israel's
democracy and 'special relationship' with the United States, will never
know the truth about Israel's grip on this nation or if he/she does, that
they will never have the courage to ever speak out publicly. THE ANSWER
MY FRIEND AS TO WHY MUSLIMS ARE DYING EVERYDAY AND WHY AMERICANS HAVE
BEEN KILLED BY ISRAEL (USS Liberty in 1967, Marines in Beirut) and will
continue to die around the world for Israel’s interests, not America’s,
especially in Israel's push for America to attack Iraq, and not North
Korea, IS BLOWING IN THE WINDS OF 'JEWISH POWER'."
Israeli
at US loan talks is implicated in massacre,
by Robert Fisk, Independent (UK), January 12, 2003
"Israel is asking the United States for $8bn (£5bn) in loan guarantees
– and has sent to Washington one of the former army officers implicated
in the 1982 Sabra and Chatila massacre of Palestinian civilians to persuade
the Bush administration to grant the money. Amos Yaron, who is
now director general of the Israeli Ministry of Defence, was the Israeli
military commander in Beirut when Lebanese Phalangist militiamen entered
the refugee camps and slaughtered up to 1,700 Palestinian refugees. He
ordered flares to be dropped over the camps, at the request of the Phalange,
and Israeli soldiers blocked the exits to prevent civilians from leaving
the area. Israel is pleading for the money – along with an additional
$4bn in military aid – on the grounds that a US invasion of Iraq will
provoke further attacks against Israel. It argues that some of the aid
should be given to anti-missile defence systems for El Al airliners. Al-Qa'ida
members tried to destroy an Israeli civilian aircraft with missiles at
Mombasa last year, but narrowly missed it. The Israeli delegation to Washington
is led by Dov Weissglass, from the private office of the Israeli
Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, who was found 'personally responsible'
for the Sabra and Chatila massacre by the Israeli Kahan commission of
inquiry in 1983. Mr Yaron was appointed to the post of Defence
Ministry director by the former prime minister, Ehud Barak. The
two men are accompanied to Washington by the Israeli Ministry of Finance
accountant general, Nir Gilad. The Israeli team is negotiating
the new loan with Condoleezza Rice's National Security Council but little
has emerged about their visit in the American press. The US response is
likely to be made public within a month – before the expected invasion
of Iraq. The State Department spokesman, Richard Boucher, has refused
to talk about the negotiations, save for a passing remark that 'we always
try to help our friends and allies to the best of our ability'."
[Since the following article is obviously perceived as outrageous in
Boston and the U.S., how about a deal? The end to medievalism: a Jewish
Argentine governor for an Arab, Muslim, or Christian prime minister of
Israel. Or even mayor of Tel Aviv. Or even head of an Israeli
phone company. OK, OK. How about an Arab policeman in the Jewish
side of Jerusalem?]
Argentine politician tests a provision,
Boston Globe (from Los Angeles Times), January
12, 2003
"Jose Alperovich has the credentials to become the next governor
of the province of Tucuman. He is a federal senator, rising star in the
ruling Peronist party, and protege to the current governor. He also is
Jewish. And that, a number of prominent voices here say, disqualifies
him from becoming Tucuman's chief executive under Article 80 of the provincial
constitution, which requires the governor to take a Christian oath. 'I
never thought, in the 21st century, we'd see something like this,' said
Alperovich, who leads most polls here ahead of elections expected
in March or April. He is challenging Article 80 in the provincial Supreme
Court ... Article 80 says the governor must swear fealty to 'God, the
Fatherland and the Christian saints.' Monsignor Luis Villalba, Tucuman's
Roman Catholic archbishop, launched the controversy just before Christmas
when he said the constitutional provision means the governor must be Catholic.
'We have to start respecting the law,' Villalba said on a local television
program. 'We must follow the constitution to the last detail. Our country
is falling apart because no one follows or respects the law' ... For many
in Argentina's 200,000-member Jewish community, the controversy is just
another in a long line of incidents with anti-Semitic overtones in a traditionally
Catholic country, where many people are not yet comfortable with a cosmopolitan
society. challenge to Article 80 ... Alperovich, 47, is the grandson
of Lithuanian immigrants who fled the violence of World War II. A successful
businessman, he drifted to politics in the mid-1990s and was economy minister
in the provincial government before becoming a senator."
The Beltway Revue.
Some Actors Are Behind the Curtain,
by Jim Moore, The
Etherzone, January 13, 2002
"I was particularly disturbed by Elisabeth Bumiller's article 'An
Invisible Aide Leaves Fingerprints.' It's a revealing piece about
Josh Bolton, a White House aide who 'has his fingerprints all over
President Bush's new $600 billion economic plan, (legislation creating
the Department of Homeland Security)---and just about every other domestic
policy concocted in his powerful little corner deep in the West Wing'.
That's a big fingerprint-and getting bigger. Bolton, an alumnus
of Goldman Sachs, has a growing reputation as the hub of Bush's domestic
agenda, which is primarily set by a small handful of his West Wing aides.
That, my friends, is power. Now, there are three things that trouble me
about Bolton with his hands on that much power. First, his secrecy. According
to Bumiller's report, Bolton's views about America's economy and domestic
policies are a mystery, as is the kind of advice he gives the president.
Second, his authority. He is in charge of parceling out time for meetings
of the president's Domestic and Economic Councils. He decides what's to
be discussed, and who gets invited. He, himself, attends all meetings,
regardless of the topics. Third, his loyalty. By that I am not referring
to his patriotism. For all I know, Bolton may be as loyal to America
as was Patrick Henry. But according to his boss, Karl Rove, 'He's the
explainer of all things Jewish to the White House.' I'm not sure why,
but that sounded a bit ominous to me, so I began to wonder just how many
Jews were in Bush's administration, and why the Man in the White House
has to have 'all things Jewish' explained to him, and what he did with
that information when he got it. Being a nosey sort, I immediately contacted
my friend Google and asked it to give me the names of the Jews in the
Bush administration. I must say, the roster I received looked like the
contents of an Israeli businessman's Rolodex. There are least 17 Jews
in the Bush Administration. And I'm not talking about people who sit in
the back row at meetings and take notes. These are all people at the highest
levels of government. People in such powerful positions that they literally
influence the foreign and domestic policies of the president, and thus
of the United States of America.itself. I list them here, and where they
work, so that you'll see that these are not people on the way up, but
people who are already on top. Paul Wolfowitz - Deputy Sec'y.,
Department of Defense Richard Perle - Ass't Sec'y of Defense for
International Security Policy; Ari Fleischer, - White House Press
Sec'y; Ken Melman - White House Political Director; Josh Bolton
- Deputy Chief of Staff; Jay Lefkowiz - Ass't to the President
& Director of Domestic Policy Council; David Frum - Speechwriter;
Brad Blakeman - White House Director of Scheduling; Dov Zakheim
- Under Secretary of Defense (Controller); Lewis Libby - Chief
of Staff to the Vice President; Adam Goldman - White House Liaison
to the Jewish Community; Chris Gersten - Administrator for children
& families at HHS; Elliot Abrams - Ass't Sec'y, Human Rights, International
Operations; Mark Weinberg - Housing & Urban Development for Public
Affairs; Douglas Feith - Under Sec'y of Defense for Policy Michaek
Chertoff - Head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division; Daniel
Kurtzer - Ambassador to Israel. As I listed these names, it prompted
me to connect some dots I had never before felt the need to do. And the
picture that emerged produced more questions of a troubling nature. One
question is, how and why did so many Jews manage to get themselves into
top-level positions in the Administration? Another question, what if anything,
does the Jewish influence on American policy have to do with our lock-step
relationship, and over-generous support of, Israel? Last question, if
the Jewish influence on our government is beneficial, productive, and
promotive of America's principles, why did our founding fathers make the
following statements---more than 200 years ago?"
[Israeli green light to kill Americans].
Israel
to kill in U.S., allied nations,
by Richard Sale, UPI, January 15, 2003
"Israel is embarking upon a more aggressive approach to the war on
terror that will include staging targeted killings in the United States
and other friendly countries, former Israeli intelligence officials told
United Press International. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
has forbidden the practice until now, these sources said, speaking on
condition of anonymity. The Israeli statements were confirmed by more
than a half dozen U.S. foreign policy and intelligence officials in interviews
with UPI. With the appointment of Meir Dagan, the new director
Israel's Mossad secret intelligence service, Sharon is also preparing
'a huge budget' increase for the spy agency as part of 'a tougher stance
in fighting global jihad (or holy war),' one Israeli official said. Since
Sharon became Israeli prime minister, Tel Aviv has mainly limited
its practice of targeted killings to the West Bank and Gaza because 'no
one wanted such operations on their territory,' a former Israeli intelligence
official said. Another former Israeli government official said that under
Sharon, 'diplomatic constraints have prevented the Mossad from carrying
out 'preventive operations' (targeted killings) on the soil of friendly
countries until now.' He said Sharon is 'reversing that policy, even if
it risks complications to Israel's bilateral relations' ... A congressional
staff member with deep knowledge of intelligence matters said, 'I don't
know on what basis we would be able to protest Israel's actions.'"
Defender
of the Jews, wherever they may be,
By Yossi Shain and Ze'ev Segal, Semit
Times
"In the current tense discussions both in Israel and in the Jewish
Diaspora concerning the new wave of anti-Semitism, politicians and commentators
alike have overlooked the legal dimension of kinship responsibility (in
the sense of kol Yisrael arevim ze laze) that exists in the Israeli
penal code. Section 13 of this code, enacted in 1994, enshrines in law
an express Israeli commitment to the Diaspora-homeland security nexus.
Section 13, part of a wider reform of the code, granted Israeli courts
jurisdiction over what is termed 'extra-territorial crimes,' that is,
crimes committed outside Israel. Section 13 is unique in the way it relates
to what is defined in its title as 'crimes against the state or against
the Jewish People.' Section 13 states that: 'Israeli criminal law will
also apply to offenses committed outside Israeli territory against: 1.
The life of an Israeli citizen, Israeli resident or public servant, his
body, his health, his freedom, or his property, because he is one of the
above. 2. The life of a Jew, his body, his health, or his property, because
he is a Jew, or the property of a Jewish institution, because it is Jewish.'
In this section, Israel defined in explicit terms the connection between
the Diaspora and the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people
... By enacting the section on the 'Security of the Jews,' the State of
Israel expressed its commitment to protect all Jews regardless of their
citizenship and their countries of domicile, as if they were citizens
of the state and as if the crimes committed against them were committed
within Israel's state borders ... According to this (weaker) principle,
a state may apply its criminal laws to those who harm its citizens or
residents when they are outside its territorial bounds. This principle
rests on the state's obligation to protect its citizens, even when they
are outside its sovereign domain. It is also based on the personal (kin)
connection to the state ... In 1994, when the Knesset added the 'Security
of the Jews' clause, it established a new extraterritorial principle,
an additional connection that makes possible the application of Israeli
criminal norms outside the borders of the state. The significance of the
clause is that the State of Israel sees the protection of all Jews as
one of its supreme responsibilities and considers every Jew, wherever
he/she may reside, to be covered by its legal protection ... The explanatory
remarks said: 'Likewise it should be emphasized that special protection
is granted in Section 13(b)(2) to the life, health, freedom or property
of a Jew, because he is a Jew, and that this is without any other connection
to the State of Israel ... This is an expression of the State of Israel's
existence as the State of the Jewish people' ... The practical significance
of the 'Security of the Jews' clause is that Israeli courts have jurisdiction
over acts committed by foreigners against Jews because of their Jewishness.
This means that from the point of view of the State of Israel, there is
no substantive difference whether anti-Semitic offenses are committed
inside or outside of Israel. In other words, in contrast to every other
offense committed against Israeli citizens or Jews outside of Israel,
and for which the court is not ordinarily empowered to judge, when an
offense is motivated by anti-Semitism, the court has full jurisdiction.
In addition, the conferment of judicial jurisdiction on an Israeli court,
and the treatment of the offense as if it was committed within the borders
of Israel, provides the State of Israel the authority to demand the extradition
of the offender ... To the best of our knowledge, the 'Security of the
Jews' clause has yet to be activated. This in no way diminishes the declarative
and ideological importance of this law. It cannot be seen as beyond the
realm of possibility that in the future, in certain circumstances, the
law will cease to be merely words and will become a living and breathing
reality. At this time when a foul wave of attacks is raging against Jews,
their property, their symbols and their institutions, attacks that have
reached such worrisome dimensions, it seems to us proper to create awareness
of this unique clause in the Israeli penal code and to encourage public
debate, both in Israel and in the Diaspora, regarding it." Prof.
Shain and Prof. Segal are on the faculty of Tel Aviv University.
Prof. Segal is Ha'aretz's legal affairs editor. Prof. Shain
is also a professor of government at Georgetown University.
[This article is a natural for the one after it]
Two YULA
Students Picked as Scholars,
Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, January
17, 2003
"Having a conversation with Yeshiva University of Los Angeles (YULA)
students Debra Glasberg and Tzvi Smith is like chatting
with two political experts being interviewed on CNN. These two high school
students are among the five Jewish teens chosen for the exclusive Sen.
Joseph Lieberman Scholars Program. Now in its third year, the program
is a joint project of the Orthodox Union’s Institute for Public Affairs
(IPA) and the National Conference of Synagogue Youth (NCSY). The goal
of the Lieberman Scholars Program is to educate and cultivate future
leaders of the Jewish community ... [Glasberg] will learn at a
yeshiva in Israel for a year after high school and then go to college
to study political science. Her goal is to become a political activist.
'I’m concerned about issues that affect the Jewish community and how we
can help American Jews and world Jewry in the political process,' the
Beverly Hills resident said. 'I think it’s extremely important that Jews
have a say in American politics' Like Glasberg, [Smith]
plans to study at a yeshiva in Israel before attending college. In late
November, Glasberg and Smith attended the United Jewish
Communities (UJC) General Assembly in Philadelphia. The conference provided
an opportunity for Jewish community leaders from across North America
and from Israel to meet and exchange ideas. The purpose of the event,
which is one of three major seminars the scholars will attend this year,
was to foster leadership in the Jewish community and promote Jewish awareness.
'Coming from an Orthodox perspective, I was fascinated how the whole community
could come together,' Glasberg said. 'We all had this uniting factor
in supporting Israel and learning how to bring community together to help
Israel.'”
[Jews are obsessed with monitoring their neighbors. And it is
a measure of Jewish Lobbying expertise, Jewish influence in the mass media,
and Jewish censorial control of public discourse that all of the American
electorate is not concerned about Joe Lieberman's loyalty to Israel. Despite
all the Jewish propaganda and censorship, apparently 33% of Americans
still know what's going on. Expect an avalanche of Jewish spin doctors
and propaganda fraudsters to publicly distance Lieberman from his Israeli
root. ]
Lieberman
pooh-poohs poll saying voters worrying about split loyalties,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, January 16, 2003
"Nearly one-third of Americans are concerned that a Jewish president
may have split loyalties vis-a-vis Israel, according to a new poll. But
the results may not necessarily be bad news for Sen. Joseph Lieberman
(D-Conn.), an observant Jew who announced his bid this week for the 2004
Democratic presidential nomination. 'What it suggests is, the question
about whether or not Jews are totally accepted as complete loyal Americans
is still up for grabs in some American minds,' said Gary Tobin,
president of the Institute for Jewish & Community Research, which commissioned
the poll. Asked about the findings, Lieberman said Wednesday that
polls he has seen say voters would not be dissuaded from backing him because
of the dual loyalty issue ... Polls taken by the Anti-Defamation League
also have shown that about one-third of Americans believe American Jews
have conflicting loyalties. Tobin’s poll also showed that 37 percent
of Americans believe Jews are responsible for killing Jesus — and that
Democrats are more likely to have anti-Semitic attitudes than Republicans.
Tobin attributed some of the anti-Semitism to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. 'Traditional anti-Semitic stereotypes have been incorporated
into the language of anti-Israelis,' Tobin said. Tobin’s
solution is more education and outreach. The poll results suggest that
Jewish groups should work with leaders of other religions to improve education
about Judaism and Israel, he said. Other findings in the survey may be
more debatable. The poll asked respondents to answer such questions as
whether Jews have too much influence on Wall Street, whether Jews threaten
the morality of the United States and whether Jews control the media.
On many questions, the survey found that Americans aged 18-34 are more
likely to hold anti-Semitic attitudes than are older groups, reversing
a trend since World War II, Tobin said. For example, roughly 24 percent
of respondents under 35 believe Jews control the U.S. news media. 'In
the wake of the Holocaust, social norms in the United States and elsewhere
in the world were more prohibitive of most overt expressions of anti-Semitism,'
Tobin said. “The constraints against anti-Semitism are weakening, and
the rise in anti-Semitic beliefs is part of that trend.'"
Crafting
a legacy in Morocco: Jews, officials share same goal,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, March 24
"Morocco's Jewish community, which stood at a robust 250,000 in 1948,
has dwindled to approximately 5,000 today; most of its members are older
than 50 ... Moroccan officials, once unwilling to mention the State of
Israel, now speak of their readiness to establish a direct Tel Aviv-Casablanca
flight if peace is achieved. `What is important is to share business,
joint ventures, large cooperation together,' said Andre Azoulay,
a former banker and the chief economic adviser to
[King] Hassan. Azoulay is believed to be the only Jewish
minister in the Arab world."
Democracy, not terror, must win, Giuliani says as he stumps for Israel,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, January 22, 2003
"The former mayor of New York is drawing on his experience with terrorism
to help raise funds for Israel. Rudy Giuliani appeared Monday at two United
Israel Appeal fund-raising events aimed at the non-Jewish German public.
Israel’s is an 'outpost of freedom and democracy and the rule of law,'
Giuliani said Monday in a speech at Hamburg’s ornate town hall, and its
preservation is 'a key to world peace' ... Monday’s fund-raising events
in Hamburg and Berlin were organized by Keren Hayesod-United Israel Appeal
as part of a new campaign for the hearts — and pockets — of evangelical
Christians. Andreas Wankum, director of Keren Hayesod in Germany, told
the Hamburg audience that he had invited Giuliani 'because we wanted you
to meet someone who was directly affected by terrorism, who felt it in
his own body' ... Jewish leaders increasingly are willing to accept support
for Israel from Christian fundamentalist groups, said Rabbi Yechiel
Eckstein, founder of the Chicago- and Jerusalem-based International
Fellowship of Christians and Jews. The fellowship recently signed an agreement
under which Eckstein will assist Keren Hayesod’s efforts to reach out
to Christians in Europe. His first campaign in Germany is scheduled for
February. 'It has never been done before,' Eckstein told JTA, but it makes
perfect sense, since Christian groups gave $21 million to Israel in 2002.
During the past year, thousands of evangelical Christians demonstrated
for Israel in Berlin and in The Hague in the Netherlands. 'Jews have to
get it where they can,' said Israel Singer, president of the World
Jewish Congress and chairman of the Claims Conference. 'People don’t have
a choice when they are isolated. We need support from like-minded, Judeo-Christian
types.'”
An
Orthodox Powerhouse in D.C. Suburb,
[Jewish] Forward, January
10, 2003
"Neil and Fran Kritz are poster
children for Modern Orthodoxy. Fran, a reporter for the Washington
Post, won't take a call from any source on the Sabbath. Neil, who
is the director of the Rule of Law Program for the U.S. Institute
of Peace, travels to war-torn countries to help rebuild their legal systems,
yet he won't so much as drink a cup of coffee from a non-kosher restaurant.
Combining fast-track Washington careers with religious piety, the Kritzes
are models for a kind of Orthodox life that some observers have considered
to be on the wane. But the Kritzes are hardly anomalies in the
capital; they are part of a vanguard that includes the singles, young
marrieds and politicos at Georgetown's Kesher Israel Congregation and
the families, like the Kritzes, who are members of the suburban
Kemp Mill Synagogue. So successful have the two synagogues become in fostering
Modern Orthodox movers and shakers that some have even begun to talk about
the Washington area eclipsing New York as the incubator of Modern Orthodoxy's
national leadership. As proof, they point to the selection last month
of Richard Joel, international director of Hillel and an active
member of the Kemp Mill Synagogue, as the next president of Yeshiva University
... 'The people here are both Jewishly committed and really engaged in
the secular world — and not just as a place to make money," said member
Eliot Cohen, director of strategic studies at Johns Hopkins University's
School of Advanced International Studies. Last fall, President Bush let
it be known that he and his top aides were reading Cohen's latest
book, 'Supreme Command: Soldiers, Statesmen, and Leadership in Wartime.'
Indeed, the synagogue's membership list reads like a roster of boldface
names, including Dov Zackheim, the Undersecretary of Defense who
was also considered for the Y.U. position; Tevi Troy, special adviser
to the domestic policy council at the White House, and David Makovsky,
a contributing editor to U.S. News and World Report. Members work at the
State, Labor and Justice departments, high-end lobbying firms and Greenpeace,
the National Archives, Comptroller of the Currency and National Gallery
of Art. The synagogue, which was founded in 1990, functions according
to a mission statement whose cornerstone is an astonishingly quiet and
efficient — read: short — prayer service. Other
features included a passionate dedication to Zionism and an environment
that is unusually inclusive of children. A women's prayer group meets
regularly, classes are open to all and the rabbi only gives one sermon
a month — the other three sermons are given by lay members, both men and
women. One of the most significant parts of the mission statement, however,
is the mandate for active engagement with the non-Jewish world... In 1999,
a number of Modern Orthodox rabbis, including Rabbi Saul Berman
of New York and Kesher Israel Congregation's Rabbi Barry Freundel,
founded Edah, an organization intended to reinvigorate Modern Orthodoxy's
blend of religiosity and secular pursuits, deep-felt
Zionism and willingness to dialogue with non-Orthodox Jewish groups."
The
Half-Billion Dollar Shakedown. Record Amounts of Soft Money during the
1999-2000 Cycle,
Common Cause
"Special Interests Hand Over Record Amounts Of Soft Money To The
National Parties During 1999-2000 Election Cycle."
[REAL ESTATE: of the top five funders to Democratic and Republican
Parties, four were Jewish: Milstein Properties $1,084,389;
Stephen Bing, Real Estate Investor 685,000; Walter Shorenstein,
Shorenstein Co 675,698; Simon DeBartolo Group Inc 554,200; David
Steiner, Steiner Equities Group]
[It appears that the top seven Entertainment/Media political philanthropists
are Jewish, i.e., the Disney company, from Michael Eisner on down, has
become a significantly Jewish enterprise]]
Entertainment
and Media,
Common Cause
"Haim Saban, Saban Entertainment $1,551,363; Walt Disney
Co 1,205,033; DreamWorks SKG 873,000 News Corp 680,900; Vance
Opperman, West Publishing 596,712; Philip Levine, Onboard Media
567,665; Jeffrey & Jeanne Levy-Hinte, Post 391; 548,000 Michael
King, King World
The
Cheerful Giver. A businessman with a corner on publishing court documents
was also a master of political donations,
CNN, April 21, 1997
"Happy is the man who rules his market, especially one as lucrative
as Vance Opperman's. As president of West Publishing, the
quasi-official publisher of court decisions, he has earned a fortune.
And so when his empire was threatened in 1994 by potential competition
from, of all places, the Justice Department, he called in a little help
from his friends in Washington. Fortunately for him, he had a lot of those.
A major Democratic Party fund raiser, who with his father gave $195,000
in 1992-94, Opperman enjoyed a decades-old friendship with Al Gore
and served as campaign-finance co-chairman for California Senator Dianne
Feinstein in 1994. At a Democratic fund raiser that fall, Opperman
took the opportunity to collar Bill Clinton and, as Democratic officials
told TIME, asked him point-blank, 'Can you get the Justice Department
off my back?' Opperman recalls seeing Clinton but denies asking
for a favor. He remembers how agitated he was at the time over an announcement
by the Justice Department that it was exploring ways to help consumers
gain cheaper online access to court opinions--a form of legal research
that posed a threat to West's $800 million-a-year business. Clinton didn't
know the details but told Opperman he would have his counselor
Mack McLarty look into it. McLarty, who had had business dealings with
Opperman, met with him and White House lawyer Steve Neuwirth in
his West Wing office. The object, says White House special counsel Lanny
Davis, was to 'determine what if any response the White House might have'
to Opperman's concern. At McLarty's direction, Neuwirth made inquiries
at Justice, and learned of a complicating issue. The department's Antitrust
Division was investigating the online service industry West dominated
for alleged monopolistic practices. The White House quickly bowed out.
After years of cultivating politicians and federal judges -- West
regularly flew members of the judiciary to posh retreats -- Opperman
had other chits to call in. Judges, Congressmen and thousands of West
employees sent letters and made calls to Justice to plead Opperman's
case. In February the department formally abandoned any online plans that
would have undercut his company. Justice officials said cost and complexity,
not political influence, determined the outcome. West soon thereafter
won a $14.2 million contract to provide Justice with online legal research.
Not only that, but the department's antitrust investigation never seemed
to get off the ground. That wasn't West's only Washington coup.
Clinton had named Opperman in 1993 to an advisory panel that, among
its many tasks, would review the first government report to recommend
broad copyright protection for West's kind of reproduction of publically
available information. The idea was potentially a saving grace for Opperman,
whose franchise was considered to be threatened by a 1991 Supreme Court
decision stripping copyright claims from publishers who assemble nonoriginal
work, such as the phone book. By early 1996 the author of the report--Patents
commissioner Bruce Lehman--was promoting the Opperman-friendly
copyright measure and seeking to incorporate it in an international treaty.
The timing was terrific for Opperman, who was in the process of
making a deal to sell his Minnesota-based company for $3.4 billion to
Thomson Corp. of Canada. With its copyright protection more secure, West
would be able to preserve its bargaining position. The merger, like
others of its size, needed approval by the Justice Department. That decision
came amid an extraordinary convergence of events for West. In May
of last year, even as Lehman was presenting the U.S. treaty proposal
in Geneva, Opperman was co-chairing a $250,000 campaign event for
Gore in Minneapolis. The next month, Opperman attended a fund-raising
coffee at the White House with Clinton. Several weeks later he dined with
the Gores in Nashville, Tennessee. By that time, he had something to celebrate:
the Justice Department had conditionally approved the merger."
[What makes
the difference for the Jewish vote? Democrat? Republican? No. Jewish.]
Survey
Sees Historic Shift to the Right Younger Set Spurns Dems,
[Jewish] Forward, January 17, 2003
"American Jews may be poised on the edge of a historic shift to the
right in their political views, according to a new survey of Jewish opinion
released to the Forward this week. As they have for most of the past century,
Jews identify themselves overwhelmingly as Democrats, and liberals outnumber
conservatives two to one, according to the survey, which I conducted in
November and December. However, younger Jews are far more willing than
their elders to identify as Republicans and to approve of President Bush,
suggesting that the Democrats' advantage among Jews will shrink during
the coming decades. Republican identification also increases markedly
among the growing number of Jews who are in the highest income brackets,
something that has not been shown in previous surveys, including my own.
Most striking, almost half the Jews who voted in 2000 for Democratic presidential
candidate Al Gore over Republican George W. Bush are uncertain they would
make the same choice today. Jews in this sample supported Gore over Bush
in 2000 by a margin of 71% to 21%. The survey, conducted
when Gore was still considered the Democratic front-runner for 2004, showed
just 37% saying they would now vote for Gore, 22% backing Bush and 41%
uncertain. A Joseph Lieberman candidacy, however, would bring Jewish
support sharply back into the Democratic column. In a hypothetical Lieberman-Bush
match-up, 57% said they would vote for Lieberman and 14% for Bush,
with 29% uncertain ... The survey, conducted by a mail-back questionnaire,
included a statistically representative sample of 1,386 Jewish adults
nationwide, drawn from a consumer opinion panel of the research firm Synovate.
It was funded by the Jewish education department of the Jewish Agency
for Israel in cooperation with the Florence G. Heller/JCCA Research Center.
... There are indications, too, that much of the shift may be closely
associated with Bush's performance as a wartime president and ally of
Israel. Indeed, support for 'the way George W. Bush has been dealing with
Israel and the Middle East' was strong across the board, with 43% approving
and just 29% disapproving ... Indeed, this study showed almost no variation
in political measures as income rose from the poorest households to those
earning up to $150,000. However, at $150,000 a major break in political
preferences emerges. This most affluent group — amounting
to almost one-fourth of American Jews — expressed markedly more
support for Republicans, conservatives and President Bush."
[Power shift?:
Jewish Democrat out, Jewish Republican in.]
Coleman to lead
subcommittee that's rich in Senate history,
Star Tribune, January 18, 2003
"Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., was named chairman of the Senate's
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations on Friday, taking control of
a panel that has launched many political careers and provided some of
the most dramatic moments in Senate history. 'This is the premier investigative
subcommittee in all of Congress,' said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairwoman
of the Senate's Governmental Relations Committee, who appointed Coleman
... 'It's a wonderful venue, because it really is a license to investigate
just about anything,' said Donald Ritchie, associate historian with the
Senate Historical Office. Collins said it was 'a tribute to his talent'
that Coleman was given the job in his first year. She noted that
it has often been headed by members of Congress with decades of experience:
Coleman's predecessor, Democrat Carl Levin of Michigan,
was elected to the Senate in 1978. Collins, the last Republican to head
the panel, said that Coleman will have 'the strongest subpoena
power in the entire Senate' ... Coleman, 53, the 10th senator to
lead the subcommittee, will replace Levin, the panel's chairman
since 2001. Levin lost the position because Republicans took control
of the Senate in the November elections. That change in part resulted
from Coleman's victory over Democrat Walter Mondale, the former
vice president."
[In America,
the Jewish Lobby has covered all its bases -- it is illegal in the U.S.
to boycott Israeli goods]
Swedes
call for boycott of Israeli goods,
Ha'aretz (Israel) (from Associated Press),
January 19, 2003
"An archbishop, an ambassador and the leader of an ex-communist party
were among 73 Swedes calling for a boycott on Israeli goods from occupied
Palestinian territories Saturday. 'To buy and trade with Israeli goods
from occupied territories is to actively support the illegal Israeli occupation,'
said the authors of an opinion article in newspaper Dagens Nyheter.
The article was signed by Karl Gustav Hammar, archbishop of the Lutheran
Church of Sweden; Carl Tham, Sweden's ambassador to Berlin; Left Party
leader Gudrun Schyman and dozens of journalists, writers, economists and
politicians"
[Two-faced and loaded with Jewish "PAC" money,
Lieberman seeks to buy the Black vote]
The
Lieberman Coalition Guess who's coming to the support of his campaign?
by Stephen F. Hayes, Weekly Standard, 1/27/2003,
Volume 008, Issue 19
"It's odd to say the least --Joe Lieberman, first ever Jewish-American
presidential candidate, leading the Democratic field in support from black
voters. But according to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll asking
black Democrats who they liked best from a list that included Al Sharpton,
that's exactly what is happening today. The first explanation most political
observers give for this popularity is also the most obvious: name identification.
A former vice presidential candidate gets a head start from having his
name on the leftover blue and red bumper stickers that still decorate
the rear ends of cars across the country ... And since the 2000 campaign
ended, even before he knew for sure he would run in 2004, Lieberman
spent time cultivating support among African-American leaders in Washington
and around the country ... Last spring, as he waited for Al Gore to decide
whether to make another bid for the White House, Lieberman telephoned
Eddie Bernice Johnson, then head of the Congressional Black Caucus, to
ask which caucus members he might support with his PAC. She gave him a
list of the CBC members thought to be most vulnerable, and Lieberman
contributed to almost 20 of them. Among his contributions was a $1,000
check to the reelection effort of Rep. Earl Hilliard of Alabama. Hilliard
had a long record of hostility to Israel. He refused to sign a resolution
in support of Israel's war on terrorism, and sponsored a bill, after September
11, that would have lifted sanctions on states that sponsor terrorism.
Columnist Cynthia Tucker called Hilliard 'a loose cannon, a dimwit, and
perhaps a crook' who 'gained a reputation for trying to persuade his colleagues
to vote against pro-Israeli initiatives.' Hilliard lost in a nasty June
primary in which his opponent solicited and received large sums from Jewish
Democrats. After the race, he warned of a 'future with a great deal of
conflict between African Americans and Jews in this country' and suggested
African Americans would seek 'retribution' for his loss. Lieberman's
advisers point out that the money was given in late March, several weeks
before the primary turned into a bitter referendum on the Middle East.
But the senator's critics say the Hilliard contribution is one example
of just how far Lieberman is willing to go to win support among
black politicians and voters. Another, they say, came last week, when
Lieberman blasted the Bush administration for filing a brief with the
Supreme Court opposing the University of Michigan's affirmative action
program. 'I am deeply disappointed by the president's decision today,'
Lieberman said. 'This was an opportunity for the president to demonstrate
his commitment to achieving real equality in education. Instead, he sided
with the right wing of his party, and sent a signal that equal opportunity
in higher education is a low priority for his administration.' It's a
shot that might be expected from any of the other Democrats running for
president. But Lieberman's own views on racial preferences in the
mid-1990s put him arguably to the right of where President Bush is today
... Lieberman went further. He infuriated many in his own party
when he said he would support California's Proposition 209--a 1996 statewide
ballot initiative that banned racial preferences--taking a step then Governor
George W. Bush would not ... [African-American] Representative Maxine
Waters said Lieberman must be 'vigorously opposed' because 'what he's
doing is dangerous.' A local Connecticut Democratic party chapter circulated
a petition to oppose Lieberman's efforts, and Jesse Jackson teamed
with the National Organization for Women to sponsor an anti-Lieberman
rally at Yale University, Lieberman's alma mater. Jackson also
fired off a four-page letter to Lieberman calling the senator's
remarks 'particularly irresponsible,' later adding that on affirmative
action 'Lieberman and Jesse Helms are indistinguishable.'"
[Same theme: Jewish money and Blacks at its mercy. Jews own the Democratic
Party; march to the Israeli drum or you're history.]
Sharpton
Will Seek Jewish Dollars, Says an Aide,
[Jewish] Forward, January 17, 2003
"Reverend Al Sharpton is seeking campaign contributions from the
Jewish community like any other presidential candidate, according to his
political adviser. Former Bronx Democratic Party chairman Roberto Ramirez
told the Forward that Sharpton's 'progressive, populist and clear
message' would attract Jewish campaign dollars despite his often dicey
relations with the community. The civil rights firebrand is anathema to
many New York Jews because of conduct many Jews viewed as inflammatory
during two local racial incidents: the 1991 Crown Heights riots and the
demonstrations that preceded the 1995 torching of a Jewish-owned clothing
store in Harlem. Eight people died in those incidents ... 'I would hope
and argue that in there lies a wealth of support,' Ramirez said in an
interview in his New York office Monday. Jewish
donors supply a vastly disproportionate share of the millions raised by
Democratic presidential candidates; the amount has never been measured,
but political operatives say that it is more than half. Ramirez
said that Sharpton, who plans on creating a presidential exploratory committee
later this month, did not need as much money as some others would ...
Rabbi Marc Schneier, president of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding
and a Sharpton confidant, said the minister would have 'limited' support
in the Jewish community. 'He has sought rapprochement with the Jewish
community,' Schneier said, but "the Jewish community at large is very
suspect and remains very much on edge when it comes to Al Sharpton and
his candidacy.'"
McDonough
urges U.S. to stop funding Israeli army NDP leader seeks role for Canada
in brokering peace. Critics say party too sympathetic to Palestinian cause,
Toronto Star, January 17, 2002
"Amid a swirling perception that the NDP is becoming too sympathetic
toward the Palestinian cause, leader Alexa McDonough says the U.S. must
stop financing Israel's powerful military. 'People are desperate to see
Canada take more responsibility to pressure our American neighbours to
stop bankrolling the military heavy handedness here,' McDonough said in
a telephone interview from Jerusalem where she has just completed a 16-day
excursion into Israel and the occupied territories on a mission of peace.
'Canada needs to be far more vocal in efforts to try to persuade the Israeli
government that in the name of fighting terrorism and seeking security
you can't trample human rights, human lives and human dignity. You contribute
not to security but to an escalation of violence that fuels terrorism,'
she said ... Former Canadian ambassador to Israel and the Palestinian
Authority, Norman Spector, has scolded the NDP leadership candidates
for defending Burnaby MP Svend Robinson's April trip to Ramallah to see
Arafat, in which he wanted to 'demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinian
people' and was seen in an altercation with an Israeli soldier. Upon his
return, Robinson said Israel was guilty of 'torture and murder' and was
stripped of his duties as the party's Middle East critic. McDonough also
used the term 'terrorism,' referring to Israeli military aggression, before
softening her line and censuring Robinson."
Bush
wants Chertoff for appeals court,
Philadelphia Inquirer, January 18, 2003
"President Bush plans to nominate Michael Chertoff, a top
Justice Department prosecutor and former U.S. attorney for New Jersey,
to a seat on the Philadelphia-based federal appeals court, according to
the office of Sen. Jon Corzine (D., N.J.). The White House told the senator
that Bush intended to submit Chertoff's name to the Senate for the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ... Chertoff, 48, who was
New Jersey's top federal prosecutor from 1990 to 1994, took over the Justice
Department's criminal division in 2001. He has been a chief architect
of the criminal investigation into the Sept. 11 attacks and the government's
efforts to defuse the al-Qaeda network. Chertoff also took the
lead last year in shaping Justice's prosecution of the Enron Corp. debacle
and other corporate scandals. In that role, Chertoff and other
prosecutors at the department came under sharp criticism after indicting
the entire Arthur Andersen L.L.P. accounting firm for shredding documents
related to its Enron audits, rather than simply prosecuting the relative
handful of employees who actually destroyed documents. Critics said the
indictment caused thousands of people who had nothing to do with the Enron
audits to lose their jobs when the Andersen firm collapsed. Chertoff,
who has no prior judicial experience, could not be reached for comment
yesterday. The Third Circuit, which has jurisdiction for appellate matters
in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, is
one of the nation's most important appeals courts, and its legal scholarship
is held in high regard."
Bush's
Brainiest Hawk,
Time, January 19, 2003
"[J]ust four days after Sept. 11, [Deputy Defense Secretary Paul]
Wolfowitz urged Bush to go to war against Iraq. Wolfowitz's
presentation didn't persuade his colleagues. But he made a lasting impression
on Bush. After telling aides that the first phase of the war would be
limited to removing the Taliban, the President privately encouraged Wolfowitz—'Wolfie,'
as Bush calls him—to keep pressing his case. 'When he speaks, his intellect
is moving so fast that sometimes he's editing as he goes along,' says
a senior Administration official. 'But you always want to listen carefully
to what he's saying.' In public and behind the scenes, Wolfowitz
spent the following months laying out the case for taking the war to Baghdad.
In doing so, he cemented his reputation as the Administration's
most influential strategist. Since 1973, when he left his teaching
job at Yale to join the Nixon Administration, Wolfowitz has served
under every President except Clinton. Along the way, he has won some powerful
patrons—including Donald Rumsfeld, his current boss, and Dick Cheney,
who hired Wolfowitz as his No. 3 during the first Bush Administration.
Wolfowitz has built a following, thanks to his prescience. In the
1970s he advocated bolstering the U.S. military presence in the Persian
Gulf to deter Iraq from someday invading Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. He helped
shape the hard-line Reagan-era policies toward the Soviet Union that conservatives
credit with ending the cold war. In 1990 he called for pre-emptive strikes
against enemy states trying to obtain weapons of mass destruction—precisely
the shift in U.S. strategy that the Administration announced last fall.
But other proposals by Wolfowitz have been dismissed as reckless—such
as his suggestion during the first Bush Administration that the U.S. send
troops to Lithuania if Moscow tried to block the republic's secession.
Though often caricatured as Washington's most menacing hawk, Wolfowitz
is popular for his self-deprecating humor ... When Bush decided last fall
to push for the return of U.N. weapons inspectors, it was Wolfowitz
who insisted on the key U.N. demand that Iraq make its scientists available
for interviews outside the country. Bush, an aide says, 'wasn't totally
comfortable' when he first met his team's resident egghead. But like Bush,
Wolfowitz is driven by a belief that the U.S. should use its power
to promote freedom and battle tyrants ... Removing Saddam and building
a democratic Iraq would have a domino effect, he thinks, giving rise to
Arab democracies and defusing anti-American anger. It's a risky gamble,
but with each passing day, his boss appears more prepared to bet that
Wolfie is right."
Ari & I.
White House Press Briefing with Ari Fleischer,
Common Dreams, January 21, 2003
"Mokhiber: Ari, UPI reported last week that Prime Minister
Sharon of Israel has given the green light to Mossad, the Israeli intelligence
service, to engage in targeted killings in the United States and other
friendly countries. The report says that Mossad has in the past engaged
in assassinations in Belgium, Norway, and other European countries, but
never in the United States. Is the administration aware of this new Israeli
policy and has the administration agreed to it?
Ari Fleischer: That's the first I've heard of it, so I have no comment
to offer on it.
Mokhiber: Could we get comment from you?
Ari Fleischer: I'll see if there is something on it.
Mokhiber: You and the President have repeatedly said that Saddam Hussein
gassed his own people. The biggest such attack was in Halabja in March
1988, where some 6,800 Kurds were killed. Last week, in an article in
the International Herald Tribune, Joost Hiltermann writes that
while it was Iraq that carried out the attack, the United States at the
time, fully aware that it was Iraq, accused Iran. This was apparently
part of the U.S. tilt toward Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war. The tilt included
billions of dollars in loan guarantees. Sensing he had carte blanche,
Saddam escalated his resort to gas warfare -- graduating to ever more
lethal agents. So, you and the President have said that Saddam has repeatedly
gassed his own people. Why do you leave out the part that the United States
in effect gave Saddam the green light?
Ari Fleischer: Russell, I speak for President George W. Bush in the
year 2003. If you have a question about statements that were purportedly
made by the administration in 1988, you need to address those somewhere
other than this White House. I can't speak for that. I don't know if it
is accurate, inaccurate, but you have all the means to ask those questions
yourself."
Israel's New
Policy of Terrorism on American Soil,
Etherzone
"A recent UPI report outlined Israel’s new policy of assassinating
suspected terrorists on American soil. In other words, Israel is now going
to officially carryout terrorism on U.S. soil. Isn’t that what murder
is? As an American citizen you cannot murder, why should agents of a foreign
government have any such right in your country? The UPI report read, 'Israel
is embarking upon a more aggressive approach to the war on terror that
will include staging targeted killings in the United States and other
friendly countries, former Israeli intelligence officials told United
Press International.' UPI claims to have verified this information with
a dozen informants. The report goes on to say that Israel will go forward
with this policy, 'even if it risks complications to Israel's bilateral
relations.' Such a policy by Israel that has no regard for the national
sovereignty of the United States requires a reevaluation of an existing
allied relationship. It is a callous disregard for not only the laws of
the United States, but also the security, safety, and rights of its citizens.
What Israel terms as targeted assassinations is really the commencement
of a low-grade war against its enemies. By carrying out acts of war on
American soil, Israel will be committing acts of war against the United
States. Bringing its war to America, Israel is endangering the lives of
Americans, including American Jews. Surely, as Israel’s campaign of terror
is carried out against its enemies, there will be retaliatory action in
the United States by Islamic militants. Are synagogues and Jewish schools
immune from such horror? They will likely be the first targets. While
less than three percent of Americans are Jews, and respectively three
percent are Muslims, do we want them battling it out in our streets? By
proclaiming its license to kill on American soil, Israel places itself
on the list of rogue nations diametrically opposed to the United States.
Terrorism may be acceptable in the third world. It is not acceptable in
the United States. This policy by definition is state sponsored terrorism.
Maybe there should be weapons inspectors taking a look at Israel’s nuclear
program next? How exactly do we determine the innocence of the murdered
victims? Since Israel now has no regard for the nation where it murders
perceived terrorists, it is safe to say that they would also have no regard
for the nationality of the alleged terrorist. What if some of them are
American citizens? Are we going to allow a foreign nation to murder U.S.
citizens too? The UPI report also says, 'Israeli hit teams, which consist
of units or squadrons of the Kidon, a sub-unit for Mossad's highly secret
Metsada department, would stage the operations'. If Israeli hit teams
are in place in the United States, what will prevent them from targeting
U.S. officials that aren’t willing to send billions of dollars in foreign
aid to Israel? Far fetched, not really when we’re talking about a nation
that is openly planning terrorism in the United States. Yes, openly, because
a story this sensitive would have never leaked unless it was meant to
be leaked. If Israel is going to have a policy of terrorism on U.S. soil
then it is not only plausible that it will kill American citizens that
it considers to be enemies, but it is also likely that they will attack
American targets and try to blame it on the enemies of Israel. It’s bad
enough that according to a PBS Transcript Senator Graham of the Select
Committee On Intelligence said that classified evidence reveals that foreign
governments were involved in the September 11th attacks. Now another nation
is threatening to expand its terrorism to America."
Too Many
Smoking Guns to Ignore: Israel, American Jews, and the War on Iraq,
by Bill and Kathleen Christison, former CIA political analysts, Counterpunch,
January 25, 2003
"Most of the vociferously pro-Israeli neo-conservative policymakers
in the Bush administration make no effort to hide the fact that at least
part of their intention in promoting war against Iraq (and later perhaps
against Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, and the Palestinians) is to guarantee
Israel's security by eliminating its greatest military threats, forging
a regional balance of power overwhelmingly in Israel's favor, and in general
creating a more friendly atmosphere for Israel in the Middle East. Yet,
despite the neo-cons' own openness, a great many of those on the left
who oppose going to war with Iraq and oppose the neo-conservative doctrines
of the Bush administration nonetheless utterly reject any suggestion that
Israel is pushing the United States into war, or is cooperating with the
U.S., or even hopes to benefit by such a war. Anyone who has the temerity
to suggest any Israeli instigation of, or even involvement in, Bush administration
war planning is inevitably labeled somewhere along the way as an anti-Semite.
Just whisper the word 'domination' anywhere in the vicinity of the word
'Israel,' as in 'U.S.-Israeli domination of the Middle East' or 'the U.S.
drive to assure global domination and guarantee security for Israel,'
and some leftist who otherwise opposes going to war against Iraq will
trot out charges of promoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the
old czarist forgery that asserted a Jewish plan for world domination.
This is tiresome, to put it mildly. So it's useful to put forth the evidence
for the assertion of Israeli complicity in Bush administration planning
for war with Iraq, which is voluminous, as the following recitation will
show ..."
[First priority: American Jewry rides and/or influences the political
tide as it best benefits Israel:]
The
Jews and President Bush,
By Jamie Glazov, Front Page Magazine,
January 31, 2003
"In the last election, American Jews voted 80% for Al Gore and the
party that engineered the Oslo disaster. Since then, President Bush has
declared war on terrorism and identified Yasser Arafat and the Palestine
authority as terrorists. In the last year, moreover, there has been a
wave of anti-Semitism in the United States and abroad coming from the
left. One would think that these developments would affect the traditional
alignments of Jews with the left. Have they? And what is at the root of
the traditional Jewish attraction to the left? To discuss these and other
questions, Frontpage Symposium has invited Ken Weinstein,
Vice President and Director of Hudson Institute's Washington, DC office;
Mona Charen, a syndicated columnist whose new book Useful Idiots:
How Liberals Got it Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America
First will be published in February; Jeff Jacoby, an op-ed columnist
for The Boston Globe; Matt Brooks, the executive director
of the Republican Jewish Coalition, and Marc Rauch, a multi-award
winning TV/film writer, producer, and director ... Brooks: There
is no doubt that the principled and committed support for Israel that
President Bush has demonstrated since taking office is having a profound
effect in the Jewish community. The leadership of President Bush and the
Republicans in Congress with regard to Israel provides a stark contrast
to the support offered by the Democratic party recently. It is this strong
contrast that is causing many people in the Jewish community to take an
open-minded look at supporting the Republican party and this is one reason
why we believe that there is a significant political shift taking place
in the Jewish community today away from the Democratic party ... Jacoby:
Without a medical degree and a lot of clinical experience, I wouldn't
presume to explain the psychopathology of an anti-Zionist Jew. There is
something profoundly sad about a Jew who has so internalized the hostility
of anti-Semites that he joins them in demonizing Israel. Profoundly sad,
and potentially dangerous. Charen: Anyone who wants to see any
nation destroyed is a moral cretin. I don't think there are very many
Jews who actively wish Israel harm, but there are alas a great many who
are capable of deluding themselves about the nature of the enemies with
whom Israel must contend."
[So how come the U.S., like a puppet, must always come to the aid
of Jewish tribalism? How come the U.S. is even understood by so much of
the world community as an expression of Jewish tribalism? The Jewish Lobby
uses America as a shield, a tool, a beast of burden, to protect Judaic
ethnocentric interests.]
Backlash
Vs. Jews Seen In Iraq War. U.S. wants European capitals to do more to
thwart possible anti-Semitic surge,
Jewish Week, January 31, 2003
"Even as it prepares for a possible war with Iraq, the Bush administration
is working urgently to avert what it believes could be a widespread anti-Semitic
backlash in Europe triggered by a confrontation with Saddam Hussein. European
Jewish communities that already have been hard hit by waves of new anti-Semitic
incitement and violence could be early targets of an anti-Israel, anti-American
backlash, administration officials have told Jewish leaders. 'Going into
Iraq will likely produce an anti-American backlash on the streets of Europe,
and the Jews are likely to bear the brunt of it,' said Rabbi Abraham
Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. In recent weeks the State Department
has used a variety of diplomatic channels to send the same message: European
leaders have to do much more to prepare for and thwart the expected anti-Semitic
surge. But the results of those official efforts have been mixed, at best,
according to Washington insiders, in part because the expected anti-Semitism
surge will be closely linked to a fierce anti-American backlash that may
have the quiet acquiescence, if not outright encouragement, of European
governments. In recent meetings with leaders of the World Jewish Congress,
top administration officials indicated that they independently raised
the specter of a rising tide of anti-Semitism stemming from a possible
Iraq war with their European counterparts and urged them to develop pre-emptive
plans, said Avi Beker, secretary general of the World Jewish Congress
... 'There are extremists here who will try to portray the war as all
Israel’s doing, and we have to concerned about the growing anti-Israel
energy coming out of the anti-war movement,' said one community relations
activist. 'But it will probably be confined to the fringes. Under most
scenarios, there’s no real fear of widespread anti-Semitism.' If the war
proves difficult and costly, however, that calculus could change. Already
the nascent anti-war movement here is steeped in vehement anti-Israel
ideology. 'It’s a dangerous mix,' this source said. 'We have a bad economy,
a war that could go bad and an anti-war movement that seems willing to
tolerate real anti-Semitic expressions. So we’d be fools not to take seriously
the possibility of a backlash here."
[The field of "Jews" running for Democratic ticket is getting
crowded: Lieberman, Kerry, Clark. Any more championing a Jewish grandpa
or grandma and implicit Jewish "values" forthcoming?]
Gen.
Clark's Next War: Conquer the Democrats?,
[Jewish] Forward, Janury 31, 2003
"As President Bush beats the drums for war with Iraq and the Democratic
presidential candidates scramble to articulate their own foreign policy
visions, one figure on the national political scene is bringing military
credentials earned more recently than the Vietnam War era to bear on the
debate. That figure is General Wesley Clark, the supreme allied
commander of NATO during the Kosovo war and CNN military analyst, who
is increasingly mentioned as a 'draft pick' presidential candidate for
the Democrats. Clark prefers to refer to himself as a 'non-candidate,'
but in a wide-ranging interview with the Forward managed to touch
on the kinds of topics — his foreign policy stands, his views on the Middle
East and his little-known Jewish roots — that are bound to generate interest
in Democratic circles. An Arkansas-raised Rhodes scholar who ranked first
in his class at West Point, Clark is credited with helping stop the genocide
in the former Yugoslavia in 1999 by bombing Slobodan Milosevic's forces.
Since then he has emerged as one of the foremost military critics of American
unilateralism. He forcefully articulates a doctrine that boils down to
'in order to succeed against tyrants, you must have every ally on board,'
and casts a cold light on the actions of this and previous administrations
... Raised a Southern Baptist by his mother in Little Rock — his father
died when he was 4, and his mother remarried — Clark is the grandson of
a Jew, Jacob Nemerovsky, who escaped from the pogroms of Czarist
Russia in about 1894-95. He remembers his father, Benjamin Kanne,
a lawyer who served in Chicago's Corporation Counsel, as 'a happy man
who loved life.' Still, it wasn't until he was in his 20s that Clark learned
that he descends from 'generations of rabbis' from Minsk ... But he credits
his Jewish background with raising his consciousness to the civil rights
movement ... He also cited his Jewish background in relation to his feeling
'sick' that in 1994 the 'U.S. didn't encourage the U.N. to stop the genocide'
in Rwanda ... Clark would like to keep Israel out of the hostilities brewing
in Iraq. 'I don't think Israel needs to take any position in the war....
I would hope Israel does not get involved,' he said. 'I think Saddam Hussein
would like to widen the conflict but we'll be adroit enough militarily
to prevent him from striking Israel in any significant manner' ... Morton
Abramowitz, a State Department veteran with whom Clark worked in Kosovo,
called Clark 'a fighter, a determined battler' ... 'Undecided' is leading
the polls in the Democratic primary,' said David Pollak, chairman
of Democratic Leadership for the 21st Century, a political and public
policy organization for young Democrats in New York, under whose auspices
Clark spoke last month."
A
gift to criminal aliens,
Washington Times, February 1, 2003
"Doris Meissner, President Clinton's Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS) commissioner, used her last hours in office to issue a directive
reminiscent of Mr. Clinton's criminal pardons. But while Mr. Clinton's
pardons targeted a finite group of criminals and sparked national controversy,
Miss Meissner's directive targets an open-ended class of criminals
and has gone almost unnoticed. [Meissner left INS Nov. 17, 2000]. That
day, she sent a memorandum to INS field leaders, including the chief agents
in the Border Patrol's 22 sectors nationwide. Titled 'Exercising Prosecutorial
Discretion,' the memo provided 'guidelines' encouraging field officers
to forgo enforcing a 1996 immigration law against some criminal aliens
who, under that law, faced mandatory detention during immigration proceedings
and almost certain deportation as a result of those proceedings. Eleven
days later, the INS published a 'fact sheet' explaining Miss Meissner's
guidelines ... For whom did Miss Meissner seek relief? Certain
aliens convicted of crimes that the immigration law defines as 'aggravated
felonies' (a category including rape, sexual abuse of a minor, transporting
prostitutes and alien smuggling) ... But Miss Meissner's memo pointed
to a loophole through which INS could slip criminal aliens past the law."
[More "emotional" Jewish roots.]
Search
for Kerry's roots finds surprising history,
by Michael Kranish, Boston Globe, February
2, 2003
"For years, US Senator John Forbes Kerry had sought to know the true
story of his immigrant grandfather, Frederick A. Kerry, the patriarch
who established the family in Boston and then mysteriously took his own
life. The senator searched phone books and the Internet and quizzed his
cousins, but he was only able to learn fragments of family history. The
story, it turns out, began in a small town in the Czech Republic that
once was part of the Austrian empire. Birth records there show that Frederick
A. Kerry was born as Fritz Kohn to Jewish parents, according to
a genealogy specialist hired by the Globe. Kohn changed
his name to Kerry around 1902 and emigrated to the United States in 1905,
eventually moving to Boston. In 1921, Frederick Kerry went to the
Copley Plaza Hotel, entered a washroom, and shot himself in the head.
It was front-page news. His filing in Probate Court listed him as practically
broke. While Senator Kerry said he knew his grandfather had committed
suicide, he said he knew no details until he was shown a copy of a 1921
article last week. 'How many times have I walked into that hotel ...'
said an emotional Kerry, his voice trailing off. He said it was the first
time he had talked publicly about the suicide. Kerry said he learned about
15 years ago that his grandmother was Jewish. That led to years of unsuccessful
efforts to learn more about his grandfather's roots and his own. 'This
is amazing; that is fascinating to me,' Kerry said, in reference to the
ancestral records. 'This is incredible stuff. I think it is more than
interesting; it is a revelation.' 'It has a big emotional impact, because
it obviously raises [questions]: I want to know what happened, why did
they do this, what were they thinking, what was the thought process, and
why, once they got over here, why they never talked about it,' he said.
As Kerry runs for president, he is in many ways on a voyage of self-discovery.
He said he had expected there would be intense interest in his life, going
beyond the usual curiosity about his Boston Brahmin maternal roots in
the Forbes and Winthrop families, two of New England's most prominent
clans. Kerry acknowledged that some voters in Massachusetts, the nation's
most Irish-American state, may have had the impression that he had Irish
roots. He said that he knew of no Irish ancestry and that he had always
tried to correct misstatements whenever he learned about them. Numerous
publications, including the Globe, have stated that Kerry is Irish-American...
He said he learned from a relative about 15 years ago that his grandmother,
born as Ida Lowe, was Jewish, a fact, he said, that had intrigued
him and that he had shared with dozens of people. But he said he had no
knowledge about his grandfather's origin, other than the vague idea that
he was from Austria ... Felix Gundacker, director of the Institute for
Historical Family Research in Vienna, was hired by the Globe
[EDITOR'S NOTE: WHY?] to examine the Austrian records, which he translated
from the original German. He found that birth records for Bennisch include
a notation for a person named Fritz Kohn."
[As usual, all the highlighted names below are Jewish.]
You're Ariel Sharon
and Life is Good,
by William Hughes, CounterPunch, December
3, 2002
"You're Ariel Sharon, Israel's Prime Minister. Your troops,
on Nov. 23, 2002, shot to death a British subject, Iain John Hook. He
was the highly respected UN project manager at Jenin, where your army
had previously been accused of committing war crimes against the Palestinians.
Hook was inside the UN compound, at Jenin, when the murder occurred. The
Israeli killers said Mr. Hook appeared to have 'a gun' in his hand. It
was actually a cell phone! I'm sure it was just another of those darn
'Israeli mistakes,' like the IDF's massacre at Cana, Lebanon, on April
18, 1996; and, the IDF's murderous attack on the USS Liberty on June 8,
1967. British P.M. Tony Blair will surely understand. Anyway, isn't he
George W. Bush Jr.'s lackey? Meanwhile, you're Ariel Sharon! What's a
little 'mistake' between friends? You even had to smile to yourself, when
you issued your latest lame excuse for reoccupying Bethlehem, one of the
holiest sites in Christendom. Your storm troopers closed the town down
and even kept the Palestinian Christians from attending Sunday Mass at
the ancient Church of the Nativity. No need to worry. Who really cares?
... In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is endorsing a gargantuan
property tax hike of 18 % for its residents. Meanwhile, your accountants,
Slick, Slash and Burn, are preparing a $10 billion shakedown of the American
taxpayers. It supposed to be a loan guarantee, but we both know, Israel
never repays it loans to the dumb Yankee goyim. This $10 billion will
be in addition to the yearly $7 billion handout. But, don't worry. You're
Ariel Sharon. Thanks to one of your favorite political hack, Sen. Joseph
I. Lieberman (D-CT), the U.S. now has a 'Homeland Security Agency,'
to watch over the 'home of the brave.' And, to further curtail the possibility
of any genuine dissent in the 'land of the free,' two more of your senatorial
boy-ohs, Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Charles Schumer (D-NY),
pushed through, without a public hearing, the Bill-of-Rights'-shredding
'USA Patriot Act.' The duo are the godfathers of this scheme, which they
seeded in the mid-90s. They are so clever their fingerprints can't be
found on the law. You're feeling pretty safe now. Your name is Ariel Sharon.
In fact, on Oct. 3, 2001, when you barked at a Tel Aviv Cabinet meeting,
according to Israel Radio, (Kol Yisrael): 'I want to tell you something
very clear, don't worry about America. We, the Jewish people, control
America, and the Americans know it.' Well, you did go a little overboard
on that one. Even if you're right about the Jews controlling America,
I still think it was a real stretch to say, 'the Americans know it.' I
think if they did know it, you, and the other bad Zionists, too, would
be sent to your rooms, and forbidden to watch the 'Jerry Springer
TV Show!'"
[Jewish "dual loyalty" speads. Apparently wherever Jews
go -- including Israel -- sooner or later they think about slipping out
when reaction to their own exploitive deeds threaten them.]
Thousands
of Israelis seek European passports,
Jerusalem Post (from Associated Press), February
4, 2003
"Holding relatives' faded birth certificates and speaking a few choppy
words of Polish, dozens of Israelis line up daily at the Polish embassy
to reclaim the citizenship their parents and grandparents lost after fleeing
wartime Europe. Thousands of others are doing the same at German, Czech,
Hungarian and other embassies in Tel Aviv. They're not rushing to settle
in Europe, but want to obtain a second passport as an insurance policy
in troubled times. Worries about Israel's future have been fueled by more
than two years of fighting with the Palestinians. Some see the lines outside
the European embassies as a bad omen; the crowds are large, considering
Israel's population of 6.6 million. 'It is an indication that people don't
fully believe in the future of this country,' said Israeli author Tom
Segev. For decades, leaving Israel or applying for a foreign passport
was spoken about in whispers. Over the years tens of thousands of Israelis
did move abroad, but they were once widely scorned ... Exact totals are
not available, but the trend is clear: more than 2,300 Israelis sought
German citizenship in 2002, more than double the figure of a year before;
at the Polish embassy, which used to handle a few dozen citizenship applications
a year, as many as 400 people have showed up in a single day; inquiries
about Czech citizenship are up 75 percent. With
part of Europe's formerly communist east joining the European Union, Israelis
who reclaim citizenship in countries such as Poland will soon be able
to freely work and study throughout the continent."
[Jews love Israel, and despise France and Germany. Why? France is
moral and rational against the Jewish take-over of American foreign policy
and its "interests" on behalf of the Jewish state.]
Pentagon
adviser: France 'no longer ally',
UPI, February 4, 2003
"France is no longer an ally of the United States and the NATO alliance
'must develop a strategy to contain our erstwhile ally or we will not
be talking about a NATO alliance' the head of the Pentagon's top advisory
board said in Washington Tuesday. Richard Perle, a former assistant
secretary of defense in the Reagan administration and now chairman of
the Pentagon's Policy Advisory Board, condemned French and German policy
on Iraq in the strongest terms at a public seminar organized by a New
York-based PR firm and attended by Iraqi exiles and American Middle East
and security officials. But while dismissing Germany's refusal to support
military action against Iraq as an aberration by 'a discredited chancellor,'
Perle warned that France's attitude was both more dangerous and
more serious. "France is no longer the ally it once was,' Perle
said ... "It is now reasonable to ask whether the United States should
now or on any other occasion subordinate vital national interests to a
show of hands by nations who do not share our interests,' he added."
[Jewish Lobby's propaganda at work:]
A
Resolution (Georgia State House Resolution 50),
By: Representatives Wix of the 33rd, Post 1 and Teper of the 42nd, Post
1,
"... NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
that the members of this body support the State of Israel and its relentless
battle against terrorism and for all people suffering at the hands of
terrorism and realize that animosity stems against Israel for being representative
of western democratic values and urge President George W. Bush and the
governors of all of the states of the United States of America to remain
steadfast in support of the State of Israel and for all who battle and
are victims of senseless acts of evil and all forms of terrorism at this
critical time, not only as a continuing act of justice, but also as a
continuing and integral statement of principles for which we, as Americans
and Georgians, are now actively waging war."
race be the connection to Him, let the Asian side procreate. Delicious."
[Judeocentric, pro-Israel propagandists throughout modern governments:]
ISRAEL
IS THE NEW JEW,
Israpundit, (from National Post -- Canada)
February 2003
[This is an excerpt of a speech by the Canadian former Prime Minister
Brian Mulroney last night at the opening of a conference on anti-Semitism
at the University of Toronto]
"It was not until I entered law school at Université Laval in Quebec
City in 1960 that I really came to know Jews. I had two Jewish classmates,
Michael Kastner and Israel (Sonny) Mass, one from a wealthy family and
one working class like me. We became friends and remain so to this day.
I learned about the tiny but impressive Jewish community there, but little
of its history and challenges in Canada. It was when I moved to Montreal
to practise law in 1964 that I first came into contact with a large Jewish
community, which ignited my interest in and support of the Jews and Israel.
By this time, the horrors of the Holocaust and the systematic persecution
of Jews was fully documented. Why, I asked myself, would such evil be
visited upon anyone, and specifically the families of this vibrant community
I was getting to know? The Jews of Montreal were remarkable. Families
were close, values were taught, education was revered, work was honoured
and success was expected. How could it be, I often wondered, that the
progenitors of people demonstrably making such a powerful contribution
to the economic, cultural and political life of Montreal and Canada were
reviled over centuries and decimated in a six-year period, beginning in
the year of my birth? Thus began my first serious reflections on, and
encounters with, anti-Semitism. Following the Holocaust, the cry of "never
again" became both affirmation and promise. We expected that humanity
would forswear anti-Semitism forever. The founding of the state of Israel
in 1948 reinforced this hope. Unfortunately, today, Jewish communities
and the world's only Jewish state globally confront this re-emergent evil.
This latest anti-Semitism did not surface suddenly, in a vacuum. It forms
part of a historical continuum that was only briefly interrupted, if at
all, following the Second World War. Where did it all come from, what
makes it so resistant to suppression--and will it ever end? It all begins,
I think, in that transitional period from BC to AD, a time with a variety
of faiths vying for attention. This came abruptly to a halt in 70 AD.
The destruction by the Romans of Jerusalem's Second Jewish Temple was
the pivotal event of that era. Only Christianity and Judaism survived
the catastrophe. Originally, the people who followed Jesus considered
themselves Jews. Once a Christian Church evolved, however, it took up
an antagonistic position towards Judaism and its practitioners. Jews,
first and foremost, were branded with the most devastating of charges--Deicide.
They were accused of the stubborn refusal to accept Christ's Godhead and
His sacrifice. They were pictured as consumed with a detestation of Christianity
and defilers of its rituals and symbols, the agents of Satan and the future
allies if not the progenitors of the Antichrist, their ultimate aim to
destroy the one true faith. We can well imagine how ordinary men and women
would have felt about Jews as a result. Individuals in the medieval world
were overcome by fear of a world where so little was understood. Demons
lurked unseen, and therefore beyond retribution. There was, however, one
visible demon against whom one could retaliate--the Jew. It was the Jew
who was said to have poisoned the wells and who was responsible for the
Black Death. The disappearance of children, in what has become known as
the "Blood Libel," was readily and falsely blamed on alleged Jewish murderers
who required the blood of Christian children for nefarious rituals. All
this infected countless Christians with the soul-devouring virus of Jew-hatred.
The founding of the Inquisition in 15th-century Spain fully effected the
transition from religious to racial anti-Semitism. The issue in Christian-Jewish
relations was no longer God but genes. The Nazis, with their emphasis
on racial and ideological purity, were the natural inheritors of those
who for two millennia have been centrally motivated by anti-Semitism.
Nothing captures better the anti-Semite's single-mindedness than the account
of Hitler, just prior to his suicide as the Third Reich lay in ruins,
calling on Germans to maintain the "struggle against the Jews, the eternal
poisoners of the world." Contemporary anti-Semitism has added the state
of Israel to its list of targets, to deny the Jewish state its rightful
place among the community of nations. Israel has become the new Jew. Canadians
talk proudly of our tolerance and fair-mindedness. Often a tone of moral
superiority insinuates itself into our national discourse. But…we have
little to be smug about. In 1933, Toronto witnessed the Christie Pits
riot--anti-Semites terrorized a Jewish baseball team in a street battle
that went on all night. The next year in Montreal all the interns at Notre-Dame
Hospital went on strike to protest the hiring of a Jew who had graduated
first in his class at l'Université de Montréal. This man was forced to
resign because, as Le Devoir reported, Catholic patients would find it
"repugnant" to be treated or touched by a Jewish doctor. In 1938, the
Canadian Jewish Congress decided not to publish a study of the status
of Jews in English Canada because the findings were so profoundly unsettling.
Overt anti-Semitism was not limited to minor players in Canadian society.
On Feb. 10, 1937, prime minister Mackenzie King met an elderly Russian
immigrant who related that he had built a furniture and clothing business
on Rideau and Banks Streets, had three sons and a daughter and was now
retired--a true Canadian success story. King recorded in his diary: "The
only unfortunate part ... is that the Jews having acquired foothold ...
it will not be long before this part of Ottawa will become more or less
possessed by them." A few months later, King visited Germany to meet Chancellor
Adolf Hitler, and recorded: "My sizing up ... was that he is really one
who truly loves his fellow man ... There was a liquid quality about (his
eyes) which indicates keen perception and profound sympathy. Calm, composed,
and one could see how particularly humble folk would have come to have
profound love for the man. As I talked with him I could not but think
of Joan of Arc. He is distinctly a mystic." The following day, our PM
had lunch with the Nazi foreign minister Konstantin von Neurath, who "admitted
that they had taken some pretty rough steps ... but the truth was the
country was going to pieces ... He said to me that I would have loathed
living in Berlin with the Jews, and the way in which they had increased
their numbers in the city, and were taking possession of its more important
part. He said there was no pleasure in going to a theatre which was filled
with them. Many of them were very coarse and vulgar and assertive. They
were getting control of all the business, the finance, and ... it was
necessary to get them out to have the Germans really control their own
city and affairs." And how did Canada's prime minister react to these
diabolically racist and extremely ominous comments by one of the most
powerful leaders of the Third Reich? "I wrote a letter of some length
by hand to von Neurath whom I like exceedingly. He is, if there ever was
one, a genuinely kind, good man." The prime minister sets both the agenda
and the tone in Ottawa. Is it any wonder then that Canada was slammed
shut to Jewish immigrants before and during the war? Or that, when asked
how many Jews would be allowed into Canada, a senior immigration official
famously replied: "None is too many"? The government even refused entry
to a shipload of desperate Jews, who instead sailed back to Europe on
a voyage of the damned. This was a moment when Canada's heritage and promise
were betrayed. To this day, I cannot watch footage of the faces of Jewish
mothers, fathers and children consigned to the gas chambers without, as
a Canadian, feeling a great sense of sorrow, loss and guilt. Because of
Ottawa's abdication of moral leadership, countless Jews perished in Hitler's
death camps and we as a country were deprived of them, their children
and the glory of their lives. …The rise in the number of attacks on Jews
and Jewish institutions in Canada and the pathetic but startling ravings
of David Ahenakew testify to the intractability of the problem, and the
constant need for vigilance, consistency and strength in dealing with
the entire sweep of anti-Semitism. In Dante's Inferno it is noted that
"the hottest place in hell is reserved for those who in times of great
moral crisis, strive to maintain their neutrality." Prime ministers are
not exempt from this, and because I served in that office for almost nine
years, let me briefly recount some personal experiences: In 1967, while
a very young lawyer, I made my first (modest) contribution to the defence
of Israel. It was a moment of extreme peril for Israel and I simply wanted
to show my support. In 1976, at a Quebec Economic Summit chaired by premier
Lévesque, I was astonished to hear Yvon Charbonneau, then president of
la Corporation des Enseignants du Québec (now an MP from Montreal) denounce
Sam Steinberg and other Montreal Jewish leaders in a decidedly racist
manner. I demanded the microphone and denounced Charbonneau and his views
on the spot. When the government in 1984 invited the Palestine Liberation
Organization's United Nations representative to be heard in Parliament
(when the PLO was officially known as a terrorist organization), as leader
of the Opposition I summoned the Israeli ambassador so that we could jointly
excoriate both the government and the PLO. My government appointed the
Deschenes Commission of Inquiry on Nazi War Criminals who had escaped
to Canada… Much more could have been achieved had such a commission been
appointed decades earlier when the evidence was fresher and the suspects
much younger. But Ottawa had refused to act. I appointed Jews to my Cabinet
and to the highest reaches of the public service and judiciary. I appointed
three Jews in succession--Stanley Hartt, Norman Spector and Hugh Segal--as
chief of staff, perhaps the most sensitive and influential unelected position
in Ottawa. I appointed Norman Spector as Canada's first Jewish ambassador
to Israel, smashing the odious myth of dual loyalties that had prevented
Jews from serving in that position for 40 years. I invited Chaim Herzog
to make the first official state visit to Canada by a president of Israel.
On June 27, 1989, I had the high honour of introducing president Herzog
as he spoke to a joint session of the House of Commons and Senate. Senator
David Croll was an outstanding member of the Jewish community from Ontario,
elected to Parliament as a Liberal in 1945. He never made Cabinet for
no apparent reason other than his Jewishness. I elevated this remarkable
Canadian to the Privy Council on his 90th birthday. My view of Canada's
foreign policy in the Middle East was articulated as leader of the Opposition
when I said that Canada under my government would treat fairly with the
moderate nations in the region such as Jordan, but that, first and foremost,
Canada would make an "unshakable commitment" to the integrity and well-being
of Israel. And for nine years we did precisely that. We committed Canada
to participate in the Gulf War in 1991. The many reasons included the
security of Israel. History will record we did the right thing. In 1993,
I was the first foreign leader invited to meet with president Clinton.
At a joint news conference we were asked about the peace process. I said:
"I'm always very concerned when people start to lecture Israel on the
manner in which it looks after its own internal security, because for
very important historical reasons, Israel is of course better qualified
than most to make determinations about its own well-being." I believe
that to be true today. Canada is a marvellous country that has provided
sanctuary and opportunity to millions, but many groups of immigrants have
suffered injustice and discrimination. The story of the Jews, however,
remains markedly different. The Holocaust saw to that. So when I ceased
being prime minister, I continued publicly denouncing those that showed
hostility or malice to Israel or the Jews. History has taught us what
happens when we don't. This does not mean that Israel should be immune
from criticism. One can strongly disagree with policies of the government
of Israel without being called an anti-Semite. Nor does it mean that a
strong defence of Israel's right to security precludes the acceptance
of a Palestinian state whose citizens come to know the benefits of health
care, educational excellence, economic opportunities and growing prosperity
similar to those available in Israel. This should be the objective of
all who believe in justice."
Greenspan warns
over war uncertainty. Uncertainties over a possible war against Iraq are
weakening a major pillar of US economic growth, iconic banker Alan Greenspan
has warned,
BBC, February 11, 2003
"Mr [Alan] Greenspan, chairman of the US Federal Reserve,
has said that political instabilities have only acted as a further brake
on business investment, a significant prop to economic growth. The cocktail
of 'uncertainties' has created 'formidable barriers to new investment
and thus to a resumption of vigorous expansion of overall economic activity',
Mr Greenspan told US policymakers ... Stocks lost further ground
after the release of a tape said to be by Osama bin Laden was viewed as
raising the chances of war against Iraq."
Jer-ry,
Jer-ry. Ohio's trashiest TV icon is also its best hope for a progressive
senator,
By Michael S. Gerber, American Prospect,
February 11, 2003
"The idea of a [Jerry] Springer run for Senate has
triggered a wealth of media coverage, most of it focusing on his talk
show, currently in its 12th season, and its outrageous topics. (Tomorrow's
episode, for instance, is titled 'I'm Sleeping With My Uncle!') But Springer
was once a serious politician and an Emmy-winning local news commentator,
something the media has recently been glossing over in their coverage
of him. In fact, Springer's political record shows that he is very much
a candidate progressive Democrats could embrace ... Springer ran for Congress
on an anti-war platform in 1970, losing in a conservative district. He
didn't give up, though, and by 1971, the English native -- he was born
in London, where his parents arrived after fleeing the Holocaust, and
came to the United States at age 5 -- was a member of the Cincinnati City
Council. He was 27 ... Of course, Springer's stint on the city
council is now widely noted for one event, and one event only: In 1974,
a raid on a Kentucky prostitution ring turned up a personal check with
Springer's name on it. Soon after, he resigned from the council. But
a year later, he returned. Without the Democratic Party's endorsement,
Springer ran and won, demonstrating that while the prostitution
scandal might be a big issue today, Cincinnati voters three decades ago
weren't fixated on it above all else. In 1977, Springer won re-election
with the most votes any candidate in the city had ever received. At the
time, the council member with the most votes became mayor, and the job
was his for a term. In 1982, Springer ran for governor a... His campaign
also produced the nation's most talked-about political ad of the year,
in which Springer bluntly addressed his 1974 run-in with scandal.
('Some nine years ago, I spent time with a woman I shouldn't have. I paid
her with a check,' he said in the TV spot. 'I wish I hadn't done that.')
... Today his biggest liability, other than the prostitution scandal,
is his television show. But though it may cloud his image, it has also
provided him with two assets he did not have in his last statewide campaign:
celebrity and cash. His name will be recognized by almost every voter,
and his personal wealth could stock his campaign coffers."
[Two of the nine American Supreme Court justices are Jewish -- 22%.
Jews are 2.5% of the American population.]
Is
there a Jewish seat on the Supreme Court?,
Jewish Telegrpahic Agency, February 13, 2003
"Is there a Jewish seat on the Supreme Court? Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg contends that there once was, but that is no longer the case.
She explored the subject during the 2003 Louis D. Brandeis Lecture
on Tuesday, February 11, at the Seelbach Hotel. Immediately following
the lecture, the University of Louisville’s Louis D. Brandeis School
of Law Brandeis Scholars presented Justice Ginsburg with
the Brandeis Medal ... Although Brandeis [the first Jewish
Supreme Court justice] did not practice ritual Judaism, he
was an active Zionist and worked hard for a Jewish homeland. He
believed it would be a refuge for the persecuted Jews of Europe and that
it is the obligation of Jews in the U.S. to help build the land. While
Benjamin Cardozo served on the Court while Brandeis was
still sitting there, the subsequent appointments of Felix Frankfurter,
Arthur Goldberg and Abe Fortas had one Jew filling the seat
vacated by another. This pattern, Justice Ginsburg said, was broken
when President Bill Clinton appointed her and Justice Stephen Breyer."
[Subtext: the spreading revolt against JEWISH hegemony.]
The
spreading revolt against U.S. hegemony,
Gulf News, February 12, 2003
"[Russian President Vladimir Putin] declared that Russia's ambition
was to see the emergence of a multipolar, rather than a unipolar, world.
Putin's remarks signal that, beyond the trans-Atlantic dispute over Iraq,
we are witnessing a rebellion by major European states against the dominance
of the United States, a dominance which has characterized international
relations since the collapse of the Soviet Union a dozen years ago. The
notion that a single hegemony can dictate terms to the rest of the world
and make war on whomever it pleases is being categorically rejected. The
rebellion has spread beyond Europe, seeing that China has expressed its
support for the solemn joint February 10 declaration by Russia, France
and Germany (read out at the Elysée Palace by President Jacques Chirac
himself). It states that the disarmament of Iraq, in accordance with the
relevant UN resolutions, is the common aim of the international community,
but that 'We are sure there is an alternative to war' ... Volleys of insults
are being fired across the Atlantic. France, in particular, has been the
target of a barrage of abuse from American right-wing pundits and columnists,
who have accused it of ingratitude, of appeasement, and of a lack of moral
fibre. A New York Times columnist, Tom Friedman, wants France
voted off the Security Council, while Jonah Goldberg of the National
Review Online has depicted France as a nation of 'cheese-eating surrender
monkeys,' a phrase taken up with glee by many others. All in all, it is
the worst quarrel inside the 'West' for several decades. ... Who is driving
the rush to war? As most people have grasped by now, the 'war party' in
the United States is a coalition of three main forces. First are the so-called
'neo-conservatives' or 'neo-imperialists' who want to affirm America's
global domination, and see off any potential rival ... A second group
consists of right-wing American Jews, close to Ariel Sharon's Likud
party in Israel, who have achieved unprecedented power in the Bush administration.
Several of them are themselves 'neo-conservative' activists, but their
principal concern would seem to be Israel's security, expansion and regional
hegemony. One of the most prominent is Paul Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld's
deputy in the Pentagon, but there are many others in influential positions
inside and outside government, in think tanks, in the media and in lobbying
organisations. Almost as one man, they are baying for war. In Israel,
Prime Minister Sharon (and the brutal men around him such as defence
minister Shaul Mofaz, chief of staff Moshe Yaalon, Mossad
chief Meir Dagan, and air force commander Dan Halutz) make
no secret of their belief that the smashing of Saddam Hussain's regime
will change the Middle East balance of power in Israel's favour, allowing
them to complete the destruction of Palestinian society, of the Palestinian
national movement and of its leader Yasser Arafat, with the ultimate aim
of absorbing all, or at least a great deal more, of historic Palestine
into the Jewish state ... A third group are the so-called 'born again'
Christian fundamentalists, like Bush himself, Attorney General John Ashcroft
and many others in America's 'Bible belt', who profess to believe that
God gave the Holy Land to the Jews ... This is just one indication of
the way right-wing American 'Likudniks' have hijacked America's 'war on
terror' to promote Israel's criminal agenda in the Middle East. It is
a recipe for more violence against both America and Israel for years to
come."
The
Space Shuttle's Secret Military Mission Astronaut Ilan Ramon Spied on
Iraq with a Multispectral Camera. Were spectral emissions from the shuttle
powered by americium-242?,
by Yoichi Clark Shimatsu, The Laissez Faire Electronic
Times, (freedom.orlingrabbe.com)
"The only way to spot such 'smoking-gun evidence,' as in the case
of Iraq's alleged chemical weapons program, is to mount a beam-generating
technology, basically a souped-up version of night vision, on to a platform
circling over the suspect territory. Thus, for 16 days in orbit, Israeli
astronaut Ilan Ramon made earth observations with a cluster of
instruments, which NASA called 'a multi-spectral telescope.' Designed
to survey the air quality over the deserts of the Middle East, his 'telescope'
was built by a research team at Tel Aviv University and a U.S. company,
Orbital Sciences Corp. His research project was called MEIDEX (Mediterranean-Israel
dust experiment). According to Israel Line magazine, MEIDEX 'called for
Ramon to observe and take pictures of atmospheric aerosols in the
Mediterranean area using ultraviolet, visible and near-infrared array-detector
cameras.' The acronym seems disingenuous because the letters ME are usually
employed by Israeli research projects to stand for 'Middle East.' The
computer-controlled cameras were pointed earthward to detect desert dust
and 'pollution aerosols . . . to provide scientific information about
atmospheric aerosols and the influence of global changes on the climate.'
The data was directly transmitted to Tel Aviv University and, according
to investigative journalist Gordon Thomas, on to the Israeli Biological
Institute, the hub of Israel's nerve-gas and bioweapons programs ... It
turns out, however, that Ben-Gurion University's nuclear physics department
has produced an exotic type of fissionable fuel called americium-242 ...
A more immediate application of this exotic nuclear fuel is to provide
the kick for space-based weapons, including laser cannons and electromagnetic
pulse weapons. (Not by coincidence perhaps, Ilan Ramon and Commander
William McCool were both specialists in electromagnetic warfare.) Space
weaponry mounted on orbiting platforms, however, is illegal under several
United Nations treaties; international law is the major obstacle to their
deployment. Therefore, the anti-missile missiles developed by the U.S.
and Israeli militaries serve as a convenient ploy to sell the National
Missile Defense program to a technology-illiterate public. The Arrow and
Patriot series are hopelessly clumsy ground-based technologies. How then
can the Bush and Sharon administrations win public support for
space-based weapons? A cynical solution is to make martyrs of an Israeli-American
space shuttle crew. Show them to be victims of outmoded technology and,
more important, obsolete thinking in NASA and in Congress about keeping
space free of nuclear power and potential war-making technologies. Is
it conceivable that an American president would deliberately sabotage
the Columbia? If his agenda is to affect a shift of NASA from a hybrid
civilian-military space agency to an arm of the Pentagon's ballistic missile
defense program, then no sacrifice could be too great – especially if
Ilan Ramon's telescope had failed to detect any smoking guns over Iraq.
As for the Israeli leader, it must be recalled that the Likud movement
is built on the cult of martyrdom – from ancient Masada and the Warsaw
ghetto to the Irgun fighters killed in fratricidal violence by Haganah
militiamen at the birth of Israel, from Yonathan Netanyahu's demise
in Entebbe to – now – the death of Colonel Ilan Ramon, nonchalant bomber
of Iraq's nuclear plant repackaged as a hero of science. An Experiment
Gone Awry? Undoubtedly, the official investigation will determine the
Columbia disaster was not an accident by design. Blue-ribbon committees
will piously give their independent endorsements, even if martyrs were
made to order."
[Jewish "demands" are omnipresent. A country wants to join
NATO? It MUST jump through the requisite hoops of the powerful international
Jewish Lobby, which rules American foreign policy.]
NATO
and the Jewish question,
Ha'aretz (Israel), February 16, 2003
"After discussions and debates for nearly the entire 12 years since
the fall of the Communist bloc, several Eastern Europe countries have
recently made important decisions concerning their attitude toward the
Holocaust and, more especially on such sensitive subjects as Nazi collaborators
and the return of plundered Jewish property ... The 'Jewish demands,'
nearly all of which had to do with the Holocaust, were part of the price
exacted from the East European countries for entering NATO. Rabbi Andrew
Baker, director of International Jewish Affairs in the Office of Government
and International Relations of the American Jewish Committee, who coordinated
the Jewish lobby on this subject, explains, 'Even though this is a security
partnership, the terms of entry to NATO were not defined solely in security
terms. After all, a country such as Lithuania does not have much to offer
NATO from the military standpoint. The terms of entry were therefore defined
at the civil level as well, in terms of a 'partnership of values' - that
is, in the direction of democracy and a free economy, including a 'confrontation
with the past,' especially in the context of the Holocaust period. That
includes education to heighten awareness of the Holocaust, combating anti-Semitism,
putting a stop to the rehabilitation of war criminals and returning property,
at least community property [referring to buildings that belonged to the
Jewish communities, such as synagogues and ritual baths]. Baker was officially
invited to monitor the progress being made in the reforms and to report
on his findings at various forums convened to discuss the membership in
NATO of the aspirant countries such as the Prague conference and a previous
meeting in Bucharest in March 2002. It is important to emphasize that
even though the 'Jewish terms' were formally put forward by all the NATO
members, in practice the only country that took a substantive interest
in this subject was the United States. The U.S. administration set the
criterion of democratic values as one of the conditions for admission
to NATO. American ambassadors in Eastern European were instructed to monitor
the development of democracy in general and, within that framework, 'confrontation
with the past,' and some of them cooperated with Jewish representatives
on this subject."
Howard
a hero in Israel,
Herald Sun (Australia), February 17, 2003
"The speaker is a young Israeli, a tall lantern-jawed, friendly young
man, and his is a view I heard every day for a week in Israel. The [Australian]
Prime Minister may be having his troubles at home, but there is one country
where he would win a popularity contest in a canter. The Howard position
on Iraq, after decades of support for the Jewish state, has made him a
pin-up star in Israel. I didn't go to Israel looking for Howard, but he
was everywhere - on television with US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
with his parliamentary speech on Iraq used as an opinion piece, on TV
again with British Prime Minister Tony Blair - and his praises were sung
by government and opposition, conservative and liberal, young and old
... Israel may be the one place outside Washington and Whitehall where
Australia the nation, and Australia's Government, are widely popular."
Goy
vey! Now every presidential candidate is digging for jewish roots,
St. Louis Post Dispatch, Februray 17, 2003
"Despite terror warnings, Iraq, the French, the Germans, the Belgians
and the bizarre doings of the 'king of pop,' there is a bit of fun to
be had in the news these days, and for that we can thank the Democratic
candidates for president. Discovering one's Jewish
ancestry is suddenly all the rage in the Democratic Party. You
will recall that when she assayed the possibilities of winning a Senate
seat from New York, Hillary Clinton disclosed that some distant relation
had been Jewish. But that was nothing compared with former North Atlantic
Treaty Organization commander Gen. Wesley Clark. Clark, who has so far
merely showed a little ankle in the presidential sweepstakes, and who
was raised as a Baptist, has proclaimed that he descends from 'generations
of rabbis in Minsk.' Ah yes, the Minsker Clarks. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts
- that is, John Forbes Kerry - claims no mere distant relations but instead
an actual paternal grandfather. It seems that Frederick A. Kerry was born
Fritz Kohn in Czechoslovakia. In 1902, he changed his name to Kerry
and, in 1905, emigrated to the United States. Kerry, of course, was raised
Catholic and only recently discovered his Jewish heritage. On his mother's
side (which is the only side that really counts, from an orthodox Jewish
perspective), he is pure WASP. Sen. Joe Lieberman has first claim on Jewishness,
of course. And his press secretary clinched it by assuring The Washington
Post that only Lieberman had a genuine 'lox box.' Howard Dean,
the governor of Vermont and a declared presidential aspirant, proudly
points to his Jewish wife. It seems that President Bill Clinton's secretary
of state, Madeleine Albright, actually started a trend when she
revealed her Jewish roots, though one sensed, in her case, that she would
much prefer to have kept the matter under wraps. What goes on here? ...
There is real worry among Democrats that President George W. Bush's bold
and steadfast defense of Israel will sway Jewish voters in 2004. It already
has begun to show in the donations flowing into Republican coffers. If
you cannot match the president in support for the Jewish state or willingness
to confront terror all over the globe, you can always tell voters about
your great uncle Moishe."
What Did Hart
Mean? [in column: Yes to cloning research],
Washington Jewish Week,
"Once, and possibly future, Democratic presidential candidate Gary
Hart raised some eyebrows in the Jewish community this week with a line
in a speech he delivered Monday before the World Affairs Council and Council
on Foreign Relations in San Francisco. 'We must not let our role in the
world be dictated ... by Americans who too often find it hard to distinguish
their loyalties to their original homelands from their loyalties to America
and its national interests,' said Hart near the end of a speech outlining
what America's role in the world should be in the 21st policy. The quote
was first noticed by ABCNews.com's The Note. Was the statement
criticism of some Jewish Bush administration foreign policy officials
-- such as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz or undersecretary
of defense for policy Doug Feith -- who are known as strongly pro-Israel
and have reportedly been instrumental in developing a policy toward Iraq?
A spokesperson for Hart said that the former senator was not 'singling
out' or 'referring to any specific people' in his speech, but simply saying
that American foreign policy should always be based on U.S. interests.
Hart also cites 'ideologues,' 'militarists' and 'think-tank theorists'
as others who should not "dictate" America's role in the world. Hart's
speech argued that America's dealings with the world should be based on
'principles shaped by our democratic values and our republican form of
government.'"
LIBERATING AMERICA
FROM ISRAEL,
by Paul Findley, Media Monitors, September
11, 2002
"Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused
to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express
this conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe
the catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president during
the past 35 years had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid
until Israel withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli
war. The U.S. lobby for Israel is powerful and intimidating, but any determined
president-even President Bush this very day-could prevail and win overwhelming
public support for the suspension of aid by laying these facts before
the American people: Israel's present government, like its predecessors,
is determined to annex the West Bank-biblical Judea and Samaria - so Israel
will become Greater Israel. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful
role in Israeli politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until
Greater Israel is a reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are committed,
aggressive, and influential. Because of deep religious conviction, they
are determined to prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part
of the West Bank. In its violent assaults on Palestinians, Israel uses
the pretext of eradicating terrorism, but its forces are actually engaged
advancing the territorial expansion just cited. Under the guise of anti-terrorism,
Israeli forces treat Palestinians worse than cattle. With due process
nowhere to be found, hundreds are detained for long periods and most are
tortured. Some are assassinated. Homes, orchards, and business places
are destroyed. Entire cities are kept under intermittent curfew, some
confinements lasting for weeks. Injured or ill Palestinians needing emergency
medical care are routinely held at checkpoints for an hour or more. Many
children are undernourished. The West Bank and Gaza have become giant
concentration camps. None of this could have occurred without U.S. support.
Perhaps Israeli officials believe life will become so unbearable that
most Palestinians will eventually leave their ancestral homes. Once beloved
worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in most countries
because it provides unconditional support of Israeli violations of the
United Nations Charter, international law, and the precepts of all major
religious faiths. How did the American people get into this fix? Nine-eleven
had its principal origin 35 years ago when Israel's U.S. lobby began its
unbroken success in stifling debate about the proper U.S. role in the
Arab-Israeli conflict and effectively concealed from public awareness
the fact that the U.S. government gives massive uncritical support to
Israel. Thanks to the suffocating influence of Israel's U.S. lobby, open
discussion of the Arab-Israeli conflict has been non-existent in our government
all these years. I have firsthand knowledge, because I was a member of
the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee ... On Capitol
Hill, criticism of Israel, even in private conversation, is all but forbidden,
treated as downright unpatriotic, if not anti-Semitic. The continued absence
of free speech was assured when those few who spoke out-Senators Adlai
Stevenson and Charles Percy, and Reps. Paul 'Pete' McCloskey, Cynthia
McKinney, Earl Hilliard, and myself-were defeated at the polls by candidates
heavily financed by pro-Israel forces. As a result, legislation dealing
with the Middle East has been heavily biased in favor of Israel and against
Palestinians and other Arabs year after year. Home constituencies, misled
by news coverage equally lop-sided in Israel's favor, remain largely unaware
that Congress behaves as if it were a subcommittee of the Israeli parliament
... No one in authority will admit a calamitous reality that is skillfully
shielded from the American people but clearly recognized by most of the
world: America suffered 9/11 and its aftermath and may soon be at war
with Iraq, mainly because U.S. policy in the Middle East is made in Israel,
not in Washington. Israel is a scofflaw nation and should be treated as
such." ["Mr. Paul Findley ... served as a Republican congressman
from Illinois for 22 years ..."]
Jewish donors
back main political parties,
by Bernard Freedman, Jewish News (Melbourne,
Australia); posted here at Focal Point, February 20, 2003
"Jewish donors were among the biggest corporate and individual contributors
to party political funds in 2001 and 2002, the Australian Electoral Commission
revealed in its political donations return released last week. Westfield
shopping mall developer Frank Lowy topped the list of Jewish donations
with $624,200 - $311,900 to the Australian Labor Party (ALP) and $312,300
to the Liberals. The bulk came from Lowy's private company Croissy
Pty Ltd, supplemented by smaller donations under $10,000 from Westfield
Capital Corporation. Harry Triguboff's Meriton Apartments
gave $250,000 to the Liberals' fundraising front The Free Enterprise
Foundation. Another $27,917 went to the Liberals in NSW. The ALP's
NSW branch received $107,400 in two $50,000 donations and a number of
other smaller donations. Packaging magnate Richard Pratt, through
Pratt Holdings Pty Ltd, was also a major contributor to The
Free Enterprise Foundation with a $200,000 gift. Another $6000 went
directly to the Liberals and $2500 to the National Party in NSW. The ALP's
Victorian branch received $100,000 and the ALP in NSW $25,000. Both the
Liberal Party and the ALP benefited from the Gandel Group and another
Gandel company, Northgan. The ALP received $95,000, the Liberals $86,300.
Isador Magid gave $50,000 to the Victorian branch of the ALP."
Man
of Peace? As Joe Lieberman runs for president, one Hartford activist questions
his commitment to peace,
Hartford Advocate, February 20, 2003
" The [anti-war] activists found [Joseph] Lieberman
polite and cordial. He listened mostly. Then Allen-Doucot unveiled his
photographs of starving, bullet-riddled Iraqi children, gathered from
his repeated trips to sanction-plagued Iraq, and Lieberman found
himself face to face with the consequences of the policies he so vocally
supports. Since ascending to the U.S. Senate in 1988, Lieberman's national
security mindset has become central to his political reputation. He was
one of only 10 Democratic senators to vote for Operation Desert Storm.
In 1998, he banded with arch conservative Sen. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi)
to pass the Iraqi Liberation Act, making regime change there official
U.S. policy. As he now embarks on a presidential run, Lieberman is a leading
cheerleader for a full-scale U.S. invasion of Iraq, without the backing
of the United Nations if necessary. ... Lieberman's seal of approval
[of Bush administration pro-war policies] adds the aura of bi-partisanship,
and it garners more press attention because of his presidential ambitions.
In addition, the senator's well-known religious views -- he is an Orthodox
Jew -- are also a factor in justifying the war, El-Eid says, by providing
a sense of moral purpose."
Peretz to
Bush: Bomb Iraq You Call This Daring?,
Counterpunch, February 21, 2003
"The New Republic, the 89 year-old 'liberal' journal of politics
and the arts, has shifted its editorial stance recently by publishing
stories that supports a war with Iraq and criticizes the Democratic party
for its weakness, according to a story in Wednesday's New York Observer.
Moreover, the weekly magazine will unveil a new redesign with the publication
of Friday's issue. But putting the magazine through a makeover is a cheap
way to conceal from its subscribers Editor-in-Chief and co-owner Martin
Peretz's personal stance on Iraq. In a recent press release, The
New Republic says its coverage as of late represents 'several daring
political stances' on issues such as the U.S. going to war with Iraq without
the support of the United Nations. This is misleading. The only thing
that's daring about the 'new' New Republic is how Peretz
is fooling readers of the magazine into believing that The New Republic's
editorial stance does not represent the personal politics of its editors.
Many of The New Republic's readers are unaware that Peretz,
along with several other journalists and right-wing lawmakers, lobbied
President Bush nine days after the September 11 terrorist attacks to start
a war with Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein from power, claiming that Iraq
may be linked to the attacks, an allegation that the Bush Administration
has made many times without a shred of evidence to back it up ... What's
most troubling about the letter to Bush is that it was written by The
Project for the New American Century, a right-wing think tank that
has been instrumental in advising Bush what America's foreign policy should
look like. It's founder and chairman is William Kristol, editor
of the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard, and its former
members have included Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy
Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. Kristol also signed the letter
to Bush. It can be viewed at http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm
"
["You people have infested everywhere." There you have it.
The truth told. Now the Jewish Lobby's trick is to toxify daring to speak
this fact as the root of all evil: "anti-Semitism."]
It's
Back. The socialism of fools has returned to vogue not just in the Middle
East and France, but in the American left and Washington,
by David Brooks, Weekly Standard,
February 21, 2003
"After Joe Lieberman completed his unsuccessful campaign for
the vice-presidency, I pretty much concluded that anti-Semitism was no
longer a major feature of American life. I went around making the case
that the Anti-Defamation League should close up shop, since the evil they
were organized to combat had shrunk to insignificance. Now I get a steady
stream of anti-Semitic screeds in my e-mail, my voicemail, and in my mailbox.
It transpired that I couldn't have been more wrong. Anti-Semitism is alive
and thriving ... Lawrence Kaplan recently wrote an op-ed in the
Washington Post, gathering some of the highly questionable statements
politicians and columnists have made over the past few weeks, accusing
Jews of dual loyalty and worse ... Not long ago I was chatting with a
prominent Washington figure in a green room. 'You people have infested
everywhere,' he said in what I thought was a clumsy but good-hearted manner.
He listed a few of 'us': "Wolfowitz, Feith, Frum,
Perle' ... I mentioned that I barely know Paul Wolfowitz,
which is true. But I do admire him enormously, not only because he is
both a genuine scholar and an effective policy practitioner, not only
because he has been right on most of the major issues during his career,
but because he is now the focus of world anti-Semitism. He carries the
burden of their hatred, which emanates not only from the Arab world and
France, but from some people in our own country, which I had so long underestimated."
[Merely telling the truth, as always, is grounds for the charge of
"anti-Semitism."]
'JEWISH'
CRACK SPURS POLITICAL WAR OF WORDS,
By David Seifman, New York Post,
February 22, 2003
"A city councilman found himself in a firestorm yesterday by suggesting
an anti-war resolution hasn't been passed by the council because many
Jews feel it's 'not in the best interests' of Israel. Councilman Robert
Jackson (D-Manhattan) made the comment during an interview Thursday on
Brian Lehrer's popular WNYC radio show. 'New York City is the home away
from home for most Jews,' Jackson responded when Lehrer asked why the
council was lagging behind municipalities around the country in opposing
a war against Iraq. 'And this is seen by many members of the Jewish community
as a resolution that will go against Bush and, in the long run, will not
be in the best interests of the state of Israel.' Lehrer announced on
the air that irate Jewish listeners were lighting up his phone lines minutes
after those remarks were uttered. Assembly Dov Hikind, who represents
one of the city's largest Jewish communities in Borough Park, Brooklyn,
yesterday ripped Jackson as 'divisive.' 'It's sad he has to decline into
the mud of anti-Semitism,' said Hikind. 'It only does one thing.
It divides us.' Council Speaker Gifford Miller's office had no comment
on Jackson's remarks. Other colleagues defended Jackson - but called his
words poorly chosen. 'Bob Jackson is no anti-Semite, and not opposed to
the Jewish community,' said Councilman Oliver Koppell (D-Bronx),
who represents a large Jewish constituency in Riverdale. But Koppell
said the problem with Jackson's comments are that they suggest American
Jews would place Israel's interests before those of the United States."
IMPERFECT
JUSTICE Looted Assets, Slave Labor, and the Unfinished Business of World
War II. By Stuart E. Eizenstat. Illustrated. 401 pp. New York: PublicAffairs.
$30,
By SAMANTHA POWER, New York Times Review of Books,
February 23, 2003
"Stuart E. Eizenstat, an ambassador to the European Union
and an under secretary in the Clinton administration's State and Commerce
Departments, is the American official most responsible for drawing attention
to their [Holocaust survivor] fates, and for providing them a measure
of reparative justice. As an American Jew, Eizenstat was upset
by the Roosevelt administration's wartime denial of entry to Jewish refugees
and its refusal to bomb Nazi train tracks leading to the death camps.
He believed that like the Swiss bankers, German car manufacturers and
Austrian art dealers, he needed to make amends for the sins of his nation.
''For me, this was not just another public policy challenge but a chance
to help remove a cloud over the history of the United States,'' he writes
in ''Imperfect Justice,'' a dense but readable memoir on his experiences
negotiating the 'unfinished business' of the Holocaust. Eizenstat's
efforts began in 1995, when he was assigned the 'limited mission' of helping
bring about the return of Nazi-confiscated religious property in Eastern
Europe ... Eizenstat describes how Swiss bankers were pressed into
setting up a billion-dollar fund for holders of dormant bank accounts.
This precedent then helped him broker deals with the Germans, Austrians
and French ... Crucially, globalization was rendering European companies
with branch offices in the United States far more vulnerable than ever
before ... Just as Richard Holbrooke did with the Bosnian peace
negotiations in 'To End a War,' Eizenstat provides readers with
a look at how a gritty American negotiator can drive home a deal nobody
especially likes but all learn to live with."
[Insights into the Jewish government cartel:]
First
chapter of 'Imperfect Justice',
By Stuart E. Eizenstat, New York Times,
February 23, 2003
"On a typically dreary, wet winter day in Brussels in January 1995,
I was working in my office at the United States Mission to the European
Union. Carolyn Keene, my longtime assistant, told me that Richard Holbrooke,
assistant secretary of state for European affairs, was on the line. Dick
and I had been friends and colleagues for almost twenty years. I had brought
him to Atlanta in 1976 as a foreign policy adviser to Jimmy Carter's presidential
campaign, for which I was the chief policy adviser. After Carter's victory,
I helped Dick become the youngest assistant secretary of state
in modern history. I respected his boundless energy, creativity, and dedication
to public service. And I recognized his ambition for higher office. This
call would change my life. It would also help propel onto the world's
agenda many shameful events that had long been buried in memory, often
deliberately, and that only now were coming to light. Dick asked
if I would undertake a special 'limited mission' that he assured me would
take only a few months. He offered me the position, in addition to my
regular duties in Brussels, of the State Department's special envoy to
encourage the return of property confiscated from religious communities
by the Nazis and then nationalized by Eastern European Communist governments.
I would concentrate primarily on the Jewish communities facing the greatest
barriers ... There was a special twist to Holbrooke's call. The
previous spring, I had expected to be promoted to Holbrooke's position.
He had hosted a dinner for Fran and me at his residence in Bonn, where
he was serving as U.S. ambassador to Germany. Dick took pride in
showing us the small framed picture of his grandfather, a German Jew,
in full World War I military regalia, steel-pointed helmet and all, prominently
displayed on an end table in his living room. He wanted his German guests
to know that his grandfather had fought for the Kaiser-and by extension,
to recognize the contributions that Jews had made to their country before,
as he privately put it, 'they killed them all' in the Holocaust. As always,
Dick was one step ahead of the news. He startled me by saying the
post of assistant secretary of state for European affairs would soon fall
vacant and that I would be asked by his other guest of the evening, Undersecretary
of State Peter Tarnoff, to return to Washington and take the job.
Sure enough, Peter pulled me off in a corner after dinner and made
the offer ... Holbrooke's call did not arise from a sudden brainstorm.
He was under political pressure from Edgar Bronfman, a friend of
President Clinton's and the president of the World Jewish Congress; Israel
Singer, its flamboyant, creative general secretary; and Elan Steinberg,
a gifted publicist and the head of the congress's North American division,
who were already deeply involved in encouraging property restitution in
Eastern Europe. All three were leaders of the World Jewish Restitution
Organization (WJRO); Bronfman was also its president. Singer,
joined by Steinberg and Maram Stern, the World Jewish Congress'
European director, had met with Holbrooke to seek the administration's
support in restoring confiscated Jewish property. Holbrooke, whose
highly developed political antenna could not let him forget Bronfman's
close relationship with President Clinton, agreed and asked who should
lead the government's effort. Stern, based in Brussels, had already
briefed me on the problem. Without advising me in advance, he told Holbrooke
I was the right person. This is a perfect example
of a nongovernmental organization pushing its cause at the right time
and using the levers of power to influence government policy. The
leaders of the WJRO knew that they needed the U.S. government's help to
accomplish anything in the former Communist lands."
Israel
urges U.S. help to bolster economy,
Washington Times, February 24, 2003
"Israel is asking the United States for billions of dollars in direct
aid and loan guarantees to help prop up its stumbling economy and bolster
the Israeli Defense Forces as war looms in Iraq. Dov Weisglass,
a top aide to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, led a delegation
that met with Bush administration officials for three days last week to
lay the groundwork for congressional approval of about $12 billion in
aid, in addition to the $3 billion given to Israel each year ... Israel
reportedly is seeking $4 billion in direct aid — mostly for the military
— and $8 billion in loan guarantees to help lift the country out of a
two-year recession. A source at the Israeli Embassy said he is 'optimistic'
that Congress would approve the additional funds. If passed, the aid would
come on the heels of a request by Turkey of more than $6 billion in direct
aid and $20 billion in loans as U.S. forces prepare to use bases in that
country as a staging area for any attack on Iraq ... Duncan L. Clarke,
professor of international relations at American University, said 'Israel
tends to get what it wants from Congress.' 'The combination of Congress
being a yes man for Israel and a president who is the same way, I'd say
that bodes well for Israel and poorly for the American taxpayer,' Mr.
Clarke said. The question that he said probably is not being asked on
Capitol Hill is: 'Is it the appropriate role of the U.S. to pump up a
foreign country's economy?'"
Staff
change means Mideast policy shift,
Washington Times (from UPI), February 25,
2003
"A staff shake-up at the National Security Council is likely to mean
the United States will take a harder pro-Israel stance in the Middle East,
several serving and former intelligence officials tell United Press
International. According to these sources, Elliott Abrams,
the controversial former Reagan administration official who President
Bush last December appointed to the NSC to take charge of the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict, has removed several staff members who were regarded as even-handed
on the issue. Ben Miller, who was on loan from the CIA and who had the
Iraqi file at the NSC, was 'abruptly let go,' according to former long-time
CIA Middle East analyst Judith Yaphe. Yaphe, whose account was confirmed
by administration officials speaking on condition of anonymity, said two
other officials, Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann, have also been removed
from the NSC. Leverett, who was also seconded from the CIA, had worked
at the NSC since February 2002 and was appointed senior director for Middle
East initiatives on Dec. 3, 2002 -- the same day that Abrams took
up his post ... Josef Bodansky, the director of the Congressional
Task Force on Terror and Unconventional Warfare, confirmed that Miller
had been fired. He said Miller's leaving was very abrupt. He said Abrams
had 'led Miller to an open window and told him to jump,' adding, 'that's
his (Abram's) management style.' Bodansky confirmed that Mann and
Leverett had also been told to leave. He said that Abrams believes
'a strong Israel will prove to be the U.S. cornerstone in the Middle East.'
As a result, Abrams 'is not going to yield to those who want to
pressure Israel over the Arab-Israeli peace process." Bodansky
said Abrams will 'impose a policy and administer it very vigorously'
... In 1991, Abrams was indicted by the Iran-Contra special prosecutor
for giving false testimony before Congress in 1987 about his role in illicitly
raising money for the Nicaraguan Contras. He pleaded guilty to two lesser
offenses of withholding information to Congress in order to avoid a trial
and a possible jail term. He was pardoned by President George H. W. Bush
along with a number of other Iran-Contra defendants on Christmas night
1992. Cannistraro said that the shake-up means Abrams and the White
House, 'are getting rid of people willing to compromise on the Arab-Israeli
dispute.'"
New
head of House panel says she’ll go to mat on Israel Issues,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, February 25, 2003
"When Rep. Benjamin Gilman announced he was retiring from
Congress last summer, many on Capitol Hill speculated that the House of
Representative’s Middle East panel would go with him. After all, the subcommittee
was created in 2001 to give Gilman a forum for his Middle East
advocacy when tenure rules forced the New York Republican to turn over
the gavel of the House International Relations Committee. But the subcommittee
has been saved, thanks in part to Republican efforts to court the American
Jewish community. The panel’s new chair, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.),
says she is ready to come to the Jewish state’ s defense. 'I feel great
solidarity with the Israeli people,' Ros-Lehtinen told JTA last week,
after leading a congressional delegation to Israel. 'I treasure heading
this subcommittee and will take it on with a great deal of seriousness.'
Officially entitled the House International Relations Committee’s subcommittee
on the Middle East and Central Asia, in just two years the Mideast panel
has become one of the largest forums for lawmakers to express their pro-Israel
leanings. Contrary to most House subcommittees, attendance at hearings
by members of the Mideast subcommittee was impressive, with many touting
their ties to Israel. That’s the reason the subcommittee was maintained,
one Democratic congressional staffer said. 'I don’t think there’s any
question that the Republicans are working very hard on outreach to the
Jewish community,' he said. 'And this is a forum to highlight a principle
objective of the Republican Party to the Jewish community.' Democrats
also have said that the promotion of Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.),
the only Jewish Republican in the House, to the post of chief deputy whip
also was done to court the Jewish community. As Congress set up its structure
for this term, there was concern that the subcommittee could be turned
over to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), one of the strongest critics
of Israeli policy in the last Congress. But Rohrabacher has been kept
off the panel this year, and Jewish leaders are breathing a sigh of relief
that Ros-Lehtinen was chosen instead ... Ros-Lehtinen is an interesting
choice to lead the panel. A Cuban refugee in a Miami district with a large
Jewish population, she is considered a good soldier in the Republican
conference and a lawmaker with strong ties to AIPAC. She says she lobbied
hard to keep the subcommittee and to chair it, because there are so many
issues in the region that need to be tackled. Ros-Lehtinen’s priorities
coincide largely with those of the American Jewish community — including
securing additional foreign aid and loan guarantees for Israel; punishing
the Palestinian Authority and its president, Yasser Arafat; and investigating
U.S. funding of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which helps
Palestinian refugees. Ros-Lehtinen says she’s willing to go to the mat
on these issues, even when it means taking a stand against the White House
... If the Iraq war goes well, Ros-Lehtinen’s main job could be building
support for the $4 billion in military aid and $8 billion in loan guarantees
Israel is seeking from the United States after the war ... Ros-Lehtinen
replaces a lawmaker whose ties to the Jewish community often seemed stronger
than his ties to his own party ... While Ros-Lehtinen is not Jewish,
she is likely to do much of the work on issues of concern to the pro-Israel
lobby. That is not a new task for her, however. Since coming to Congress
in 1989, she has done much to further the Jewish community’s interests
in Florida and across the country."
NYC=JFK(24/7),
by Alan Cabal, New York Press, February 26,
2003
"My advanced age and sedentary lifestyle have condemned me to a regimen
of pot and booze, punctuated with the occasional dose of Immodium to stave
off the body’s natural reaction to having a Bush in the White House. I
used to laugh at the Aryan Nation Nazis with their addle-headed notion
of 'ZOG,' the 'Zionist Occupied Government.' But then Ariel Sharon
stood up in the Knesset and said, in front of God and everybody: 'We,
the Jews, control America, and the Americans know it.' The Mossad
is boasting of sending roving death squads around the world to whack the
'enemies of Israel' wherever they may be, including here. I feel like
I’ve stepped into some nauseating Nazi propaganda movie. The ADL sent
a cease and desist letter to the proprietors of rotten.com claiming that
their sensibilities were offended by a spoof involving the Pillsbury doughboy.
What the fuck were they doing at rotten.com? That site is the Sistine
Chapel of bad taste—it’s all pictures of deformed fetuses, monster turds
and people who have been decapitated by helicopters. If the ADL thinks
the folks at rotten.com give two flaming shits about offending the Holocaust
Cult, Foxman and his gang must be huffing solvents. Abe Foxman should
get a real job."
Israel's 'Use' Of Its
Nuclear Weapons Against US,
rense.com, February 26, 2003
Ari Gets
Laughed Out of the White House Briefing Room,
Buzzflash, February 26, 2003
"Although we didn't see this occur, we have received three separate
reader accounts indicating that the White House press corps finally laughed
at the absurdity of [Jewish White House Press Secretary] Ari
Fleischer's lies, at least once. The following is the account from
one of our BuzzFlash e-mail reporters about the White House news briefing
on Tuesday, February 25: ...A reporter asked about a French report that
says Bush is offering a bundle of concessions (and I think she actually
said 'buying votes') to Mexico and Colombia, granting worker amnesty and
so on. Ari tap-danced. Then she (the reporter) started to press the issue
by saying 'they (the French) are quoting two US State Dept. Diplomats
that Bush intends to give work permits to Colombia and Mexico.' WOW. WOW....
Ari just drew himself up with imperious indignation and said something
like 'you're implying that the President is buying the votes of other
nations and that's just not a consideration' or words to that effect.
And guess what happened? The whole press corps, normally sheep, broke
out in laughter... sweet, derisive laughter. They kept on laughing as
Ari turned on his heels and strode out. Sheesh. Go down to White
House Press Briefing (02/25/2003) and click on the video. After it buffers,
play from about 28 minutes forward for context, 30 minutes forward to
watch Press laugh at Ari's BIG FAT GOP LIE. http://www.c-span.org/
http://video.c-span.org:8080/ramgen/edrive/iraq022503_whpb.rm Addtional
Reader Note: Here is the excerpt from today's WH Press Briefing transcript
posted at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030225-9.html#18
to add to the discussion about him being laughed out of the room."
Israel's
Role: The 'Elephant' They're Talking About
[Jewish] Forward, FEBRUARY 28, 2003
"'It is the proverbial elephant in the room,' wrote liberal columnist
Michael Kinsley in the October 24, 2002, edition of the online
journal Slate. 'Everybody sees it, no one mentions it.' Kinsley
was referring to a debate, once only whispered in back rooms but lately
splashed in bold characters across the mainstream media, over Jewish and
Israeli influence in shaping American foreign policy. In recent weeks,
in fact, the Israeli-Jewish elephant has been on a rampage, trampling
across the airwaves and front pages of respected media outlets, including
the Washington Post, The New York Times, the American
Prospect, the Washington Times, the Economist, the New
York Review of Books, CNN and MSNBC. For its encore,
the proverbial pachyderm plopped itself down last weekend smack in the
middle of 'Meet the Press,' NBC's top-rated Sunday morning news program.
Many of these articles project an image of President Bush and Prime Minister
Sharon working in tandem to promote war against Iraq. Several of
them described an administration packed with conservatives motivated primarily,
if not solely, by a dedication to defending Israel. A few respected voices
have even touched openly on the role of American Jewish organizations
in the equation, suggesting a significant shift to the right on Middle
East issues and an intense loyalty to Sharon. Still others raise
the notion of Jewish and Israeli influence only to attack it as antisemitism.
The key moment on 'Meet the Press' came when host Tim Russert read from
a February 14 column by the editor at large of the Washington Times,
Arnaud de Borchgrave, who argued that the 'strategic objective' of senior
Bush administration officials was to secure Israel's borders by launching
a crusade to democratize the Arab world. Next, Russert turned to one of
his guests, Richard Perle, chairman of the Defense Policy Board,
a key advisory panel to the Pentagon. 'Can you assure American viewers
across our country that we're in this situation against Saddam Hussein
and his removal for American security interests?' Russert asked. 'And
what would be the link in terms of Israel?' It was a startling question,
especially when directed at Perle, the poster boy — along with
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Under Secretary
of Defense Douglas Feith — for antisemitic critics who insist the
United States is being pulled into war by pro-Likud Jewish advisers on
orders from Jerusalem. But Russert is no David Duke, nor even a Patrick
Buchanan. He is generally regarded as a balanced, first-rate journalist
in sync with the zeitgeist of Washington's media and political elite.
If Russert is asking the question on national television, then the toothpaste
is out of the tube: The question has entered the discourse in elite Washington
circles and is now a legitimate query to be floated in polite company
... The barrage of commentary on supposed Israeli interests in an invasion
of Iraq has triggered a powerful backlash of sorts: a parallel barrage
of commentary on the bounds of legitimate criticism of Jerusalem, American
Jews and Jewish officials working in the White House. Several Jewish commentators
have recently written articles warning that subtle and not-so-subtle antisemitic
undertones permeate the new wave of anti-war criticism. In turn, critics
have charged these writers with unfairly playing the antisemitic card
in hopes of silencing opposition to the war."
As
Lieberman runs for president, his Senate office focuses on war,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, March 3, 2003
"Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) may be spending his weekends
in the early primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire, but inside his
Senate office, the talk is all about war. As Lieberman, who is
running for president in 2004, prepared for a speech last week on the
post-Saddam agenda for Iraq, the phones rang off the hook in the front
office. Two staffers took call after call from opponents of a possible
U.S.-led war on Iraq, part of the Virtual March on Washington organized
for Feb. 26 by the Win Without War Coalition. By the end of the day, about
1,000 anti-war calls were logged But inside Lieberman’s inner Senate
office, with a mezuzah affixed to its door, Lieberman remains one
of the staunchest supporters in the Democratic Party of U.S. military
action against Iraq, even suggesting that the United States should act
without the aid of its allies if necessary ... Bush chose the evening
of Feb. 26, just hours after Lieberman’s speech to the Council
on Foreign Relations, to announce his vision of the Middle East after
Saddam has been swept from power. Lieberman learned of the confluence
of speeches only the night before, when a staffer saw an item announcing
Bush’s speech on The Washington Post’s Web site. But the Lieberman
camp quickly spun the story, arguing that 'Lieberman leads, Bush
follows.' The two speeches shared similar themes — calling for instillation
of democracy in Iraq, enhanced security and an increase in engagement
in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ... Lieberman is seeking the
Democratic nomination for president at a time when global anti-Semitism
is on the rise. While he experienced little bigotry on the campaign trail
as the first Jewish vice presidential candidate on a major party ticket
in 2000, the world is a very different place just two years later. But
Lieberman says he is confident that, if elected, the world will
accept him, largely because of the power and influence the U.S. president
holds, regardless of his religion."
Gerstner's
Surprise,
Business Week, November 21, 2003
"To the small universe that knows about it, Carlyle Group has an
image right out of a John Grisham novel -- a secretive firm of bigwigs
that buys up lucrative defense businesses, wins hush-hush military contracts,
and manipulates governments around the world to wring private profit out
of public policy. It doesn't help that Washington-based Carlyle's payroll
includes such formers as President George H.W. Bush, Secretary of State
James A. Baker III, British Prime Minister John Major, and Securities
& Exchange Commission Chairman Arthur Levitt Jr. Now Carlyle is
about to scramble the conspiracy theories. On Nov. 21, it announced that
Louis V. Gerstner Jr., the former CEO of IBM, will join Carlyle as chairman
in January. In the real world, Gerstner's appointment has little to do
with geopolitical intrigue. Instead, it's the clearest signal yet that
the firm has outgrown its old shell. From its roots in defense, Carlyle
has expanded rapidly into the world's largest private-equity manager.
Drawn by its 36% annual returns, wealthy individuals and big institutions
have committed $13.9 billion for the firm to manage. Carlyle has always
been more than a defense boutique, but now it is scooping up companies
in a wider range of businesses -- from the world's largest maker of artificial
Christmas trees to semiconductors. And it's in the midst of closing the
biggest buyout deal since RJR Nabisco Inc. in 1989 -- Qwest Communications'
$7.05 billion spin-off of its QwestDex Yellow Pages business .... Gerstner
won't be changing the basic direction set by Carlyle's co-founders: David
M. Rubenstein, a lawyer and domestic-policy adviser to President Jimmy
Carter; William E. Conway Jr., once the CFO of MCI; and former Marriott
executive Daniel A. D'Aniello. This triumvirate doesn't win much recognition.
But they, and not the famous ex-politicos they've recruited, actually
run the firm, heading a deep bench of 280 dealmakers in 21 offices worldwide."
[Israel, Jewish money, Lieberman, Jewish money, Israel, Jewish money,
Lieberman, Jewish money, ad nauseum ... Welcome to the New America.]
Democrats
Facing Fight for Jewish Soul,
Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, March
7, 2003
"The Democratic Party may be about to experience a battle for its
Jewish soul. Less than a year before the first primary, the field for
the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination has turned into a crowd, but
two names have special significance for Jewish voters and the politicians
who woo them: Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) and the Rev. Al Sharpton
— the cautious, conservative lawmaker and the rhetorical bomb thrower.
Sharpton’s presence could trigger the long-predicted reevaluation of the
Democrats by many Jewish voters, said Johns Hopkins University political
scientist Benjamin Ginsberg — especially if the civil rights leader
does better than expected in the polls and primaries. And since expectations
for Sharpton [who is Black] are minimal, any kind of positive showing
during the primary season could drive more Jewish voters and contributors
into the GOP orbit. Sharpton 'reminds a lot of Jewish voters about what
they’ve come to dislike about the Democratic Party,' Ginsberg said.
'It will sharpen longstanding concerns.' Any success by Sharpton could
have an especially significant impact on Jewish campaign contributors,
he added. That will be 'a real problem for party leaders; without
Jews there isn’t much of a Democratic Party, and they’d better
start saving their nickels and dimes, because they’re not going to get
as many Jewish dollars,' Ginsberg said. But Republicans shouldn’t
start celebrating yet, Ginsberg warned. A strong showing by Lieberman,
and the prospect of the first major party nominee for president, could
'cement Jewish ties to the Democrats.' Most analysts predict a Lieberman
candidacy would draw a record Jewish vote. But it’s not just the Jews
... 'There’s a tremendous amount at stake here,' said University of Richmond
political scientist Akiba Covitz. Sharpton is the 'public face' of rising
black anti-Semitism, he said. 'American Jews continue to see anti-Semitism
as the most pressing issue facing them today; to many, Sharpton represents
that' ... A recent study by Gary Tobin suggested there is more
anti-Semitism now in the Democratic Party than on the GOP side, reflecting
both changing attitudes among African Americans and anti-Israel bias in
some liberal circles ... But as 2004 approaches, he said, there is greater
receptivity to the Republican domestic agenda among Jewish voters, and
a growing feeling among voters who put Israel at
the top of their political agenda that the Republicans have been much
more supportive of the current Israeli government. Republicans
interested in Jewish outreach are licking their chops over the prospect
Sharpton will do well in a few early primaries and thereby tear the party
apart and drive Jews to the GOP side of the aisle."
In Crowded
Field, Candidates Are Scrambling for Big Donors,
[Jewish] Forward, March 7, 2003
"The turmoil in the Middle East and the heat of the political debate
over war with Iraq have complicated Democrats' efforts to attract the
major Jewish donors who traditionally form much of the backbone of their
finance system. The result is a race for Jewish donors that appears more
competitive than in the past. Democratic fundraisers are busily honing
their pitches and working their social networks — including their Jewish
connections — for the benefit of their candidates ... Some, however, pointed
to ideological and political reasons for the large numbers of Jewish Democrats
remaining on the fence. Foremost among these is
concern for Israel. 'The Jewish community as a whole is going to
take a fresh look at the Republicans, partly because of their support
for Israel,' [Stuart] Shorenstein said. 'Democrats should
be getting out in front of the Republicans on this, but they are not at
all. That's why the Jewish vote will re-examine.' It may be a sign of
that issue's sensitivity, as well as the growing acceptability of public
discussion about Jewish political activism, that those campaigns that
could supply names of Jewish supporters were quick to do so ... Candidates
Start Attracting Backers Below are the results of an informal survey of
how the various presidential campaigns are doing in their search for Jewish
backers. * * * Howard Dean. The former Vermont governor's
campaign sports a past president of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee and the Democratic National Committee, Massachusetts businessman
Steven Grossman, as a top adviser. Grossman named Wall Streeter
Roy Furman, who hosted an event Wednesday at New York's Harmonie
Club, as a major player in Dean's New York fundraising operation. Kenneth
Klothen, former executive director of the Presidential Advisory Commission
on Holocaust Assets in the United States, is spearheading Dean's efforts
in Philadelphia, while the co-chairman of Dean's California operation
is actor-producer Rob Reiner. John Edwards. The North
Carolina senator has the support of Manhattan fundraiser Laura Ross,
a former chairwoman of the DNC's Women's Leadership Forum, and Strauss
Zelnick, a top entertainment executive. Richard Gephardt.
The Missouri congressman is supported by St. Louis investment banker Lee
Kling, a former DNC finance chairman, who is serving as campaign treasurer.
Gephardt's campaign also touts the involvement of Missourians Steven
Stogel and Michael Newmark and New York heavy hitters Felix
Rohatyn, the financier credited with saving New York City from bankruptcy
in 1975; Loral Space Communications mogul Bernard Schwartz; financier
Elliot Stein; lawyer Martin Nussbaum, and real estate magnate
John Tishman. Others for Gephardt include Joyce Schecter
of Texas, Gene Pavalon and Jack and Sandy Gutman of
Illinois, Ira Middleberg of Louisiana and Bobby Sager of
Massachusetts. John Kerry. The Massachusetts senator has
the backing of Boston philanthropist Alan Solomont, a former DNC
finance chair and big supporter of Jewish charitable causes. Also for
Kerry: Boston real estate magnate Alan Leventhal, New York literary
super agent Mort Janklow and San Francisco real estate scion Darian
Swig. Joseph Lieberman. The Connecticut senator
has tapped Fort Lauderdale attorney Mitchell Berger, a top Democratic
fundraiser, as national finance co-chairman of the campaign. According
to Berger, Lieberman can also count on the efforts of such
Florida fundraisers as real estate developer Michael Adler, accountant
Richard Berkowitz and lawyer Jerry Berlin. In Los Angeles,
Lieberman has lawyer and former congressman Mel Levine. New York
chemicals magnate Jack Bendheim is also raising money for Lieberman."
[Yet another Jew who champions Israel in editorial power at
a newspaper --this one is Germany, of all places -- notes the widespread
international understanding of the foundation of modern America, that
the United States has been usurped by Jewish/Zionists interests in its
bid to fulfill all the old anti-Jewish stereotypes about dominating the
world. America, subservient to Jewish power and influence, has BECOME
Israel.]
Enemies,
a post-national story,
By Yair Sheleg, Haaretz (Israel),
March 7, 2003
Josef Joffe: "'Images that were in the past
directed against the Jews are now aimed at the Americans: the desire to
rule the world; the allegation that the Americans, like the Jews in the
past, are interested only in money and have no real feeling for culture
or social distress. There are also some people who connect the two and
maintain that the Jewish desire to rule the world is being realized today,
in the best possible way, by means of the `American conquest.'
This is one of the ways in which Dr. Josef Joffe, editor of the
German weekly Die Zeit, explains the link that certain circles
in Europe, and even more in the Arab world, see between hatred of America
and hatred of the Jews. Joffe spoke this week on the topic of 'anti-Americanism,
anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism' at the Center for German Studies at
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Be'er Sheva, inaugurating a two-year
series of lectures on Jewish-German relations. Joffe, who is Jewish,
is definitely an authority on this subject, both personally and professionally
... What happened, he said, is a complete transformation of American policy
[since 9-11]. According to Joffe, Bush said to himself that for
the past 50 years the West lived more or less reasonably with the pathology
of the Middle East. As long as the pathology did not spread to the outside
and did not endanger Israel's existence, the West could live with it and
even forge alliances in the region to counterbalance the Soviet Union
... But there is also another factor, he notes: 'The Europeans know the
U.S. guarantees Israel's security, so it is easy for them to play the
`Arab game.' If it were not for that American guarantee, I think they
would be far more cautious' ... Joffe, then, is the embodiment
of a European Jewish conservative; pro-American and pro-Israeli, he is
a modernist who believes in the advancement of democracy even at the price
of American neo-colonialism. So cogent was this thrust in his talk [in
Israel], that one of the students at the lecture told him that his comments
on the 'Arab pathology' were tainted by racism, and Prof. Yitzhak Nevo,
from BGU's psychology department, argued that he was being too easy on
Israel. Offended, Joffe refused to allow the full text of his lecture
to be published, for fear that what he said, with its reservations and
emphases, had not been understood properly."
[This kind of Jewish complaint by a major Jewish propaganda group
plays upon massive, socialized American ignorance about the organized
Jewry's endemic fraud and hypocrisy -- of which this complaint is a prime
example. What is "stunning" is these fraudsters dare to express
outrage over a single congressman saying something honest about this subject
for a change.]
Moran’s
Talk of Jewish Control is “Stunning”,
National Jewish Democratic Council, March
7, 2003
"According to a March 5th article published by The Connection
Newspapers of northern Virginia, Congressman James Moran (D-VA) –
speaking in Reston, Virginia on Monday night – '…blasted the Bush administration
for its rush to war but saved some of his harshest criticism for Jewish
leaders in the United States. 'If it were not for
the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq we would
not be doing this,'' he said. 'The leaders of the Jewish community are
influential enough that they could change the direction of where this
is going and I think they should.' 'It is simply stunning to hear
Representative Moran make such accusations,' said National Jewish Democratic
Council Executive Director Ira N. Forman. 'We can only hope that
in making these statements, the Congressman is unaware of the long and
tragic history of demagogic leaders who have singled out Jewish communities
around the world as being responsible for various unpopular policies.
Historically, such accusations have – wittingly or unwittingly – fed the
paranoia of the worst anti-Semitic elements in societies, often with very
tragic consequences."
Poll:
Springer Unfavorable in Ohio,
Earthlink (from Associated Press), March
10, 2003
"Talk show host Jerry Springer, who has said he might run
for the Senate, scored the highest unfavorable rating in the 14 years
that the Ohio Poll has been taking the state's political pulse. Springer,
a Democrat and former Cincinnati mayor, drew an unfavorable response from
71 percent of those surveyed in the Ohio Poll. Thirteen percent had a
favorable opinion, while 14 percent knew little about Springer and 2 percent
had not heard of him. Springer's unfavorable rating surpassed the 65 percent
logged in 2000 by real estate magnate Donald Trump, poll director Eric
Rademacher said Monday. The Ohio Poll began tracking such numbers in 1989.
The poll also found that Republican Sen. George Voinovich was favored
over Springer 77 percent to 16 percent in a head-to-head matchup. Springer,
whose nationally syndicated show is known for racy subjects, raunchy language
and on-air brawling, has said he might run against Voinovich next year."
[Israelis training in South Dakota? Isn't New York, Los Angeles, and
Washington DC enough?]
Janklow
wants Israel to use SD as training area against terrorism,
Aberdeen News (Southj Dakota), March 10,
2003
"Rep. Bill Janklow says that when he visited Israel last month, he
suggested Israel use South Dakota as a laboratory to help train the United
States to defend itself against terrorism. 'They thought it was a heck
of an idea,' Janklow said of high-ranking Israeli leaders he talked with.
'I know they are working on it.' He was in Mitchell on Saturday to help
judge the state high school debate tournament."
[Jewish double standards: as always. Note, in context to the article
about the French mayor after this piece, the fact that Jewish "Hollywood
publicist" Michael Levine is calling for a boycott of French
wine and no one gets too twisted about it. Jewish whining is kosher.
Further context to the following article: 1) A U.S. invasion of Iraq
enormously benefits Israeli political interests; 2) The Jewish American
Lobby has actually succceeded in making it illegal to boycott
Israel].
Hollywood
publicist calls for boycott of French wine,
Atlanta Journal-Constiution, February 25,
2003
"In response to a strong sense of disgust with France's lack of support
of America, prominent Hollywood publicist Michael Levine has agreed
to lead a nationwide boycott of French wine in an effort to send a strong
signal to both the French government and people. The boycott will be focused
on French wine and will begin immediately, he said. 'I am asking Americans
not to buy, drink, or give French wine at all until they recover from
their political amnesia. Nearly 200,000 American GI's died to liberate
France from World War II alone,' said Levine. Levine noted
that France's recent actions in opposition of America's U.N. efforts,
along with its continued flirtation with anti-Semitism, prompted his call
for a boycott. Levine said he has been frustrated with France's
'immeasurable ingratitude' for decades. 'I have turned my cheek probably
twenty times in the last decade alone but France's recent conduct and
continued indifference to anti-Semitism is, for me, like many Americans,
just beyond what I can support.'"
[Now this: Jews whine about everything and all the institutions they
control stand behind them. Anyone else whines about the Jewish Lobby and/or
Israel and they might face a Jewish lawsuit.]
Mayor of
Seclin, France brought to court for recommending boycott of Israeli products,
Alternative News, March 10th, 2003
"On March 12, 2003, Mayor Jean-Claude Willem (French Communist Party)
will appear in the high court in Lille following accusations of incitement
to anti-Semitism on account of his campaign of protest against Israeli
policies in the Palestinian territories. The accusations were filed by
representatives of the Jewish community in northern France. The matter
came up in October 2002, when Willem recommended at a municipal council
meeting that the school refectory catering service avoid purchasing Israeli
products, 'starting with fruit juices.' The mayor had visited a photo
exhibition devoted to the Occupied Territories and in an effort to raise
awareness about the Palestinian predicament, initiated a campaign to boycott
Israeli products. He condemned the 'crimes of the Israeli government and
of its army', notably in Jenin. 'Some Israelis supported me,' he added.
The president of the Israelite Cultural Association in northern France,
Jean-Claude Komar, wrote him a letter where he allegedly explained
'this gesture [boycott] is not conducive to peace and penalizes Palestinians
just as much since Palestinians supply for Israeli food industry, for
example growing oranges.' Willem answered, writing that Israeli crimes
in the territories were akin to genocide. 'It was a gut reaction,” the
Mayor explained himself later. Komar and a colleague, Guy Bensoussan,
then decided to file an official complaint against Willem, judging that
his initiative would favour the rise of anti-semitism in the region. The
Mayor of Seclin received convocation to court on January 7, 2003, for
'provoking discrimination and hatred toward a person or group of persons
on account of their origin, their affiliation to a particular ethnic,
national, racial or religious group, specifically because of the request
that catering services boycott Israeli products.' Willem’s lawyer, Daniel
Joseph, was surprised by the accusation. 'This is the first time I have
encountered a case that claims that economic boycott constitutes incitement
to racial hatred. I do not see how that is possible. It is absurd.'"
(From Le Monde, France 3 Regional Nord -- Pas de Calais -- Picardie
Newsletter, Seclin Council information service, and AIC partners in France.)
[As this article notes, "Mr. Perle is a director of Hollinger
International Inc., which is an investor in the (New York) Sun."]
PERLE
SUING OVER NEW YORKER ARTICLE,
New York Sun, March 12, 2003
"Richard Perle, the influential foreign policy hawk, is suing
journalist Seymour Hersh over an article he wrote implying that
Mr. Perle is using his position as a Pentagon adviser to benefit
financially from a war to liberate Iraq. 'I intend to launch legal action
in the United Kingdom. I'm talking to Queen's Counsel right now,' Mr.
Perle, who chairs the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, a non-paying
position, told The New York Sun last night. He said he is suing
in Britain because it is easier to win such cases there, where the burden
on plaintiffs is much less. Mr. Hersh's article, which appears
in the March 17 issue of the The New Yorker magazine, said Mr.
Perle met for lunch with two Saudi businessman in France in January
in an attempt to seek Saudi investment for a company Mr. Perle
is associated with, Trireme Partners L.P. ... Mr. Hersh writes
that Mr. Perle said that the meeting was convened only to talk
about a diplomatic alternative to war in Iraq. One of the meeting's participants,
Harb Saleh Al-Suhair, a Saudi born in Iraq, wanted to discuss averting
war with Mr. Perle. But according to the article, both Saudi businessmen
- Mr. Al-Suhair and Adnan Kashoggi - thought the purpose of the meeting
was to discuss Iraq as well as Saudi investment in Trireme. But the article
quotes all three participants saying that Saudi investment in Trireme
was not discussed at the lunch, because, as Mr. Al-Zuhair says, Mr. Perle
said 'he was above the money"and that he "stuck to his idea that 'we have
to get rid of Saddam.'' And to this day, according to the article, no
Saudi money has been invested in Trireme. When asked what part of the
article is incorrect, Mr. Perle told the Sun: 'It's all lies, from
beginning to end.' The editor of The New Yorker, David Remnick,
is sticking by Mr. Hersh's piece. 'It went through serious reporting,
with four members of the board talking to Sy [Hersh], and
rigorous factchecking, legal-checking and all the rest,' Mr. Remnick
told the Sun. He said he took issue with Mr. Perle's description
of Mr. Hersh on CNN Sunday as 'the closest thing American journalism
has to a terrorist.'' 'I would have thought after all this many years,
Mr. Perle would be a bit more refined than that,' Mr. Remnick
said. The Saudi Arabian ambassador to America, Prince Bandar bin Sultan,
is quoted in the article accusing Mr. Perle of 'blackmail.'"
[Kinsley, like so many media pundits, is of course Jewish. It's really
quite funny. The more Jews try to explain massive Jewish political manipulation
away, the more they are neck deep in advertising the truth of its existence.]
J'Accuse, Sort Of. You never
know where you're going to find anti-Semitic propaganda,
by Michael Kinsley, Salon.com, March
12, 2003
"Nevertheless, Moran is not the only one publicly exaggerating the
power and influence of the Zionist lobby these days. It is my sad duty
to report that this form of anti-Semitism seems to have infected one of
the most prominent and respected—one might even say influential—organizations
in Washington. This organization claims that 'America's pro-Israel lobby'—and
we all know what 'pro-Israel' is a euphemism for—has tentacles at every
level of government and society. On its Web site, this organization paints
a lurid picture of Zionists spreading their party line and even indoctrinating
children. And yes, this organization claims that the influence of the
Zionist lobby is essential to explaining the pro-Israel tilt of U.S. policy
in the Middle East. It asserts that the top item on the Zionist 'agenda'
is curbing the power of Saddam Hussein. The Web site also contains a shocking
collection of Moran-type remarks from leading American politicians. Did
you know, for example, that former President Clinton once described the
Zionist lobby as 'stunningly effective' and 'better than anyone else lobbying
this town'? Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has gone even further (as
is his wont), labeling the Zionists 'the most effective general interest
group … across the entire planet.' (Gingrich added ominously that if the
Zionist lobby 'did not exist, we would have to invent' it.) House Minority
Leader Dick Gephardt is quoted saying that if it weren't for the Zionist
lobby 'fighting on a daily basis,' the close relationship between America
and Israel 'would not be.' Sen. John McCain has said that this lobby 'has
long played an instrumental and absolutely vital role' in protecting the
interests of Israel with the U.S. government. There is a string of quotes
from leading Israeli politicians making the same point. According to this
Web site, the Zionist lobby is, like most political conspiracies, a set
of concentric circles within circles. The two innermost circles are known
as the 'President's Cabinet' and the 'Chairman's Council.' Members allegedly
'take part in special events with members of Congress in elegant Washington
locations,' 'participate in private conference calls,' and attend an annual
'national summit' ... And who is behind this Web site? Who is spreading
the anti-Semitic canard that Jews and Zionists influence American policy
in the Middle East, including Iraq? It is a group calling itself the America-Israel
Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, and claiming to be 'pro-Israel.' They
all claim that, of course. But in this case, AIPAC actually is considered
to be the institutional expression of the amorphous Zionist lobby. All
the foregoing quotes and assertions about the huge Zionist influence with
the U.S. government and the lengths to which Zionists go to protect and
expand it actually refer to AIPAC itself ... Just as African-Americans
can use the 'n' word when joshing among themselves and it sounds a lot
different than when used by a white person, talk about the political influence
of organized Jewry sounds different when it comes from Jewish organizations
themselves. Nevertheless, you shouldn't brag about how influential you
are if you want to get hysterically indignant when someone suggests that
government policy is affected by your influence."
[The Jewish Lobby takes aim at those who dare to notice them. Moran
has whimped out; he'd be better off standing up to them. They're set to
destroy him anyway.]
Pattern
of blame Jewish activists: Moran's remarks not surprising, but beyond
the pale,
Washington Jewish Week, March 13, 2003
"Six Jewish Democratic members of Congress are encouraging Rep. Jim
Moran not to seek reelection in 2004, and say that if he does run, they
'cannot and will not support his candidacy.' In a letter to House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), the legislators -- Reps. Henry Waxman
(Calif.), Martin Frost (Texas), Tom Lantos (Calif.), Sander
Levin (Mich.), Benjamin Cardin (Md.) and Nita Lowey
(N.Y.) -- say Moran's statements were not only 'offensive' and 'ignorant,'
but 'grossly irresponsible' and 'violate the basic standards we hold ourselves
to as Democrats.' Frost, Levin, Lantos and Cardin
were among 11 Jewish members of Congress who signed a letter calling Moran
a 'strong supporter' and 'friend' of Israel last October, a document that
the Virginia congressman used on the campaign trail in 2002 ... Other
comments made by the Virginia Democrat over the years dabble in the same
kinds of allegations of Jewish control over the government suggested by
his statements last week, portraying Israeli policies and leaders in viciously
hostile terms and raising questions about Jewish claims to Israel."
[The Washington Post -- long-owned by the Graham family (with
Jewish lineage) and with a top-heavy Jewish editorial hierarchy -- editorializes
what you'd expect: Readers, don't pay attention to the Jews everywhere
in positions of power. Their prominence everywhere means NOTHING.]
Blaming
the Jews,
Washington Post, March 12, 2003; Page A20
"Our view that Rep. James P. Moran Jr. is unfit to serve in Congress
is not new. Last July, citing Mr. Moran's ethical obtuseness, we urged
Democrats in Alexandria and surrounding neighborhoods to find another
candidate for the fall election. Now, by blaming American Jews for an
Iraq policy he opposes, the seven-term congressman has confirmed our opinion
about him. House Democratic leaders quickly dissociated themselves from
his remark; it will be interesting to see whether they, and Northern Virginia
Democrats, will make an effort to find a better candidate to run in 2004.
Meanwhile it may be useful to examine Mr. Moran's assertion, for he is
far from alone in his view. 'If it were not for the strong support of
the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this,'
Mr. Moran said, as reported first by the Reston Connection newspaper.
'The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they
could change the direction of where this is going, and I think they should.'
The comment perpetuates a stereotype of Jews as a unified bloc steering
the world in their interest and against everyone else's. Over the centuries
anti-Semites have used this libel to distract attention from their own
failings and to instigate violence and discrimination against Jews. In
the United States today, though anti-Semitism is far from eradicated,
such violence may seem a mercifully distant danger. But Mr. Moran's comment
will be used to concentrate the poison of anti-Semitism in many parts
of the world where it remains virulent and dangerous."
[Call in the Spin Doctors. We've got a serious leak in Thought Police
corridor #3.]
Foreign
Ministry mobilizes to confront 'theory' Jews behind push for Iraq war,
Israel Insider, March 12, 2003
"Representative James P. Moran of Virginia apologized for remarks
he made suggesting that Jewish leaders were influential enough to push
the nation toward war. Congressman Jim Moran Foreign Ministry officials
in Jerusalem are concerned over a widely disseminated theory suggesting
that American Jews are pushing the Bush administration to launch military
action against Iraq, in the belief that the removal of Saddam Hussein
from power would help Israel. The White House and Congressional leaders
yesterday joined Jewish groups in sharply criticizing a Democratic congressman
who said Jews were behind the buildup towards war. Army Radio reported
today that the Foreign Ministry has instructed Israeli embassies and consulates
around the world to report how widely spread the 'Jewish push for the
war' theory is in various countries ... Jewish groups have condemned attempts
by critics of the war to link military action against Iraq to the desires
of Israel or Jewish members of the Bush administration, the New York
Times reported."
State Jewish Republicans
Still Giddy,
Baltimore Jewish News, March 14, 2003
"Last November, when Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. was elected governor of
Maryland, David Blumberg cried. 'I shed tears of relief and joy,'
recalled Mr. Blumberg, a longtime Republican who chaired the Baltimore
City Republican Party for 16 years. Mr. Blumberg isn't the only
Republican who is still giddy over the election of the first GOP governor
in Maryland since 1966. But for Jewish Republicans, who have endured years
of abuse in a sea of Jewish Democrats, the victory is even sweeter. Almost
a year before the election, Mark Luterman organized a campaign
for Mr. Ehrlich in Northwest Baltimore. 'When people heard that I was
leading the effort among Pikesville Jews, they said, 'How can you support
a Republican? They don't help people in need,' said Mr. Luterman,
another longtime Republican and local businessman. In the end, Mr. Ehrlich
received 54 percent of the Jewish votes in northwest metropolitan
Baltimore, according to Mr. Luterman, not including the Orthodox
vote, which went 70-75 percent for Mr. Ehrlic ... The numbers [of
Jewish Republicans in Maryland] may be minimal but the influence is
not. David L. Cahn, an attorney who lives in Prince George's County,
said Mr. Ehrlich showed up at a meeting of Jewish Republicans and 'indicated
there's a place for them' in his administration."
Moran's
remarks on Jews stoke debate,
"Rep. James P. Moran's remarks on the influence of American Jews
on the Bush administration's hard line against Iraq have put a public
face on a bitter and intensely personal debate among policy-makers and
pundits over the motivations of those pushing a new war in the Middle
East. The Alexandria Democrat has apologized profusely for his March 3
comment that there would be no military strike against Saddam Hussein
'if it were not for the strong support of the [American] Jewish community.'
But some argue that Mr. Moran did not go far enough with his apology.
Both the White House and senior Democratic leaders in Congress were swift
to condemn Mr. Moran's comments. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer
called the remarks 'shocking. They are wrong, and they should not have
been said.' Charges of 'dual loyalty' and countercharges of anti-Semitism
have become common in the feud, with some war opponents even asserting
that Mr. Bush's most hawkish advisers — many of them Jewish — are putting
Israel's interests ahead of those of the United States in provoking a
war with Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. 'A stronger Israel is very much
embedded in the rationale for war," said Richard Stengel, a columnist
with Time magazine's online edition. 'It is a part of the argument
that dare not speak its name, a fantasy quietly cherished by the neoconservative
faction in the Bush administration and by many leaders of the American
Jewish community.' MSNBC talk-show host Chris Matthews said war supporters
in the Bush Pentagon were 'in bed' with Israeli hawks eager to take out
Saddam. That line of argument has spurred a furious counterattack, with
many saying that some of the criticism has crossed the line from legitimate
policy debate to classic anti-Semitism ... Sometimes the line between
legitimate and illegitimate criticism is difficult to see, said Shoshana
Bryen, special projects director for the Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs (JINSA), a small but influential Washington think tank
... JINSA's advisory board in recent years has boasted such prominent
Iraq hawks as Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Deputy Defense Secretary
Paul Wolfowitz and Pentagon adviser Richard Perle ... But both
sides say the debate has substantially broadened this time, in part because
of the strong influence of neoconservative hawks on the security policies
of the Bush administration and in part because many leftist protesters
in the anti-war movement have raised the same issue. Critics such as Mr.
Buchanan and many peace activists say that Israel and Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon will be the prime beneficiary of any move to oust Saddam."
[Watching a U.S. Congressman be roasted for telling the truth is a
pathetic sight. But Jewish domination of U.S. foreign policy -- even as
the Zionist peanut gallery rises in mass to deny the realities of the
U.S. Congress as a virtual Israeli satellite -- is gaining public forum.]
Congressman
Apologizes for Blaming War Push on Jews,
[Jewish] Forward, March 15, 2003
"Embattled Rep. James Moran is apologizing for claiming that the
Jewish community was pushing the country into war. But the Virginia Democrat's
apology failed to allay the increasing fears in some circles that Jews
will be blamed for a war against Iraq. Moran, a seven-term congressman
representing a heavily Muslim and Arab-American district in Washington's
northern Virginia suburbs, made his controversial remark March 3 during
a speech in front of 120 people. He was condemned by the White House and
several congressional Democratic leaders. Six area rabbis and a Washington
Post columnist called on him to resign. The controversy
comes at a time when Jewish community leaders are increasingly alarmed
by the willingness of mainstream media pundits to discuss the influence
of Israel and American Jews on the White House's Iraq policy. In particular,
pundits have highlighted the key role played by several Jewish hawks in
the Bush administration, the lobbying activities of Jewish groups and
the president's strong relationship with Prime Minister Sharon.
'Moran is symptomatic of a problem that we have been watching for several
weeks and months, and that is that the charge that the Jews are instigators
and advocators of military action has moved from the extreme into the
mainstream,' said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation
League. This shift, he added, is emboldening people such as Moran to 'have
the chutzpah to say such things.' 'It's out there and therefore
we are concerned,' Foxman said. 'If, God
forbid, the war is not successful and the body bags come back, who's to
blame?' Fueling such anxieties is the increasing media focus on
the White House's concern with protecting Israel and the views of Jewish
hawks in the administration, including Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas
Feith at the Pentagon and the recently appointed Elliott Abrams
at the National Security Council ... Later, in an interview with the
Washington Post, Moran denied that he was an antisemite, pointing
out that his daughter is in the process of converting to Judaism as part
of her plans to marry a Jew ... Six Virginia rabbis
called for Moran's resignation, as did Washington Post columnist Marc
Fisher, who compared the congressman's remarks to a speech
Adolf Hitler delivered to the German parliament in 1939, accusing
'Jewish financiers' of plunging Europe into a world war. The Republican
Jewish Coalition and the National Jewish Democratic Council both slammed
Moran over his remarks. The Washington Post
and Los Angeles Times ran editorials blasting the congressman.
Key Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle and House
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, strongly condemned Moran, as did the White
House. Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, a Republican, called on Democrats
to remove Moran from the House appropriations and budget committees ...
But while organizations have attempted to stay quiet on the issue, the
two most influential pro-Israel groups — the Conference of Presidents
of Major American Jewish Organizations and the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee — appeared to be working actively in favor of action
against Iraq. AIPAC, the most influential pro-Israel group in Washington,
lobbied last fall in favor of Bush's successful efforts to obtain congressional
authorization to use force against Iraq. Several other Jewish organizations,
responding to press queries at the time, expressed support for the president's
efforts to obtain a United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing
military action to disarm Iraq."
[Another pro-Israel Jew -- this one not even an American citizen --
was hired by a fellow Jewish speechwriter to writes George Bush's speeches
to Americans!]
Axis of Ego,
The American Conservative, March 24,
2002
[Review of :The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush,
by David Frum, Random House]
"Eyebrows were raised in Washington at the beginning of George W.
Bush’s administration when a prominent Canadian journalist named David
Frum was hired as bottom banana on the new president’s speechwriting
team. The reason for that surprise is supplied by Frum himself
in The Right Man. When chief Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson
first made his offer, Frum writes, I believed I was unsuited to
the job he was offering me. I had no connection to the Bush campaign or
the Bush family. I had no experience in government
and little of political campaigns. I had not written a speech for anyone
other than myself. And I had been only a moderately enthusiastic
supporter of George W. Bush … I strongly doubted he was the right man
for the job.' What’s more, as Frum explains, 'I
was a Canadian citizen when I entered the White House.' Nor did
he represent any wing of the Republican Party. While identifying himself
as a conservative, his first book, Dead Right (1994), expressed intense
dissatisfaction with supply-siders, evangelicals, and nearly all Republican
politicians. He had first attracted major American
attention in 1991 with a mean-spirited, unjustified accusation of Pat
Buchanan practicing 'sly anti-Semitism.' In a White House unusually
suspicious of outsiders, Gerson ushered in Frum apparently because
he regarded him as an insightful intellectual (M.A. Yale, J.D. Harvard)
and a stylish writer ... Insensibly, the book becomes a brief for Sharon’s
Israeli policy. Bush may have decided in favor of a Palestinian state,
but not Frum. 'One of my speechwriting colleagues put it nicely:
‘Let’s see: they kill six thousand Americans [the best estimate of the
casualties at that time], and we give the Palestinians a state. If they
kill six thousand more Americans, do we give Palestinians twice as big
a state?’' If Frum purported to present Bush warts and all, Sharon
was wart-less. Could Bush, Frum asked, 'condemn Israel for doing in the
West Bank exactly what he was doing in Afghanistan?' The climax of The
Right Man is what made David Frum a Washington celebrity. His
wife, writer Danielle Crittenden, sent e-mails to a wide circle of friends
saying, 'my husband is responsible for the [axis of evil] phrase' and
expressing “hope you’ll indulge my wifely pride” (though Frum’s
original words were 'axis of hate')."
[Note that every single name in this excerpt is Jewish (except the
guy who asks the questions), reflecting our times. The American political
world has become an in-house Jewish argument.]
Press
Briefing with Ari Fleischer,
White House, March 13, 2003
Q Ari, Richard Perle is the Chairman of the Defense
Policy Board and the lead public advocate for war on Iraq. In the New
Yorker Magazine this week, Seymour Hirsch reports that Perle
is also managing partner of a venture capital company, Trireme Partners,
and is positioned to profit from a war in Iraq. The Federal Code of Conduct,
which governs Perle in this matter, prohibits conflict of interest.
Henry Kissinger resigned from the 9/11 Commission because of similar
business conflicts. When asked on Sunday by Wolf Blitzer about
the New Yorker article, Perle called Hirsch 'the
closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist.' Two questions.
Given Perle's conflict of interest, and given the widespread public
belief that this war is being driven by corporate interests -- war for
oil, and war for defense contracts, war for construction companies --
does the President believe --
MR. FLEISCHER: Who's informed judgment is that?
Q Widespread public belief.
MR. FLEISCHER: Widespread? Or just that chair?
Q No, widespread. Does the President believe that Richard Perle
should resign from the Defense Policy Board? And second question,
do you agree with Richard Perle that Hirsch is the closest
thing American journalism has to a terrorist?
MR. FLEISCHER: Russell, there's absolutely no basis to your
own individual and personal statement about what may lead to war. If anything
leads to war, it's the fact that Saddam Hussein has refused to disarm.
And I think you do an injustice to people -- no matter what their background
-- if you believe that people believe that Saddam Hussein should be disarmed
for any reason that suggests personal profit.
Q Okay, what about the question, Ari? Should he resign and
is he a terrorist? MR. FLEISCHER: Russell, you've had your
-- you've made your speech.
Q You didn't answer the question.
MR. FLEISCHER: You've made your speech."
[Counterpunch is a left-wing journal that sometimes has some
prettty good stuff. But it also publishes drivel like this below (bizarrely
struggling in absurd PC fashion to portray the "Jew" and "the
Zionist" as entirely UNRELATED concepts) which heralds the classical
Marxist, Judeo-centric, Victim King apologetics: Zionism is decreed to
be an an extension of goyim capitalism/colonialism. Jews are victims,
again, as always. Jews (who dominate so much of American culture) are
declared to be "powerless!" Jews, we are also told, are manipulated
as always in a vast "anti-Semitic" conspiracy that has been
going on for CENTURIES to subvert Jewry's self-declared categorical, omnipresent
INNOCENSE. This article belongs on the Fairy Tales shelf, but it's a good
example of how neurotic Jewish self-delusion is afforded popular forum
as REALITY.]
An Open
Letter to Paul Wolfowitz To My Former Dean and Other "Court Jews",
by JOSH RUEBNER, Counterpunch, March
14, 2003
"Dear Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, I doubt
it if you remember me. That's okay though. I don't think that I did anything
to merit drawing the attention of the dean as a graduate student at Johns
Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) ...
The comfortable, accessible relationship that you had with your students
at SAIS makes it difficult for me to address you as the Assistant Secretary
of Defense of the United States of America ... I am not writing this letter
as a secular American critic of a unilateralist U.S. foreign policy that
has run amok. Instead, I decided to write to you as one fellow Jew to
another. And as Jews, we do share that intimate connection and shared
sense of destiny even if we do not really know each other. Perhaps in
Hebrew school you learned the dictum kol yisrael arevim zeh la'zeh-that
all Jews are responsible for and to each other. It is in this spirit of
mutual responsibility that I write to you. Brother, I am concerned about
you. I am concerned that you are being exploited and that you do not realize
it ... Lately I have come to the disturbing conclusion that the Bush Administration
is using you as its 'court Jew' par excellence ... Often, these ambitious
Jews were so eager to serve the interests of the rulers so that they could
ease their feelings of internalized self-hatred. They viewed serving the
power structure as a way to overcome the marginality and stigmas associated
with being Jewish which were built into the very fabric of society by
the power structure to begin with. The rulers understood this yearning
to enter the halls of power and took advantage of it by dangling a carrot
of illusional power before the hungry eyes of this wayward Jewish elite.
These "court Jews" were given politically unimportant, yet highly visible
positions within the regime. Why? So that when the subjected masses rose
up from time to time in justified outrage at the oppressive nature of
the regime under which they lived, there was a convenient, ready-made
scapegoat in place. The "court Jew," as a highly visible symbol of the
regime, served as the lighting rod to bear the brunt of the blame and
deflect criticism from where it belonged rightfully ... Your job is to
interact in the high-brow world of intelligence briefings and diplomacy.
My job is to interact with the people and mobilize them against the very
steps that you're taking. With all due respect, I think that I am in a
better position to hear what the people are saying. Do
you know what they're saying already? That the war in Iraq is being planned
by a cabal of extremist Jews. That it is the first part of a Zionist conspiracy
to redraw the map of the Middle East. That Israel stands to be the prime
beneficiary of this war. And it's not just the marginalized skinheads
who are saying this either. It's also mainstream folks who would swear
up and down that they don't have an anti-Semitic bone in their bodies.
I'm sure that you, like me, recoiled in horror when you heard Congressman
Jim Moran assert that it is the Jews who are advocating for this war and
that only the Jews have the power to stop it. It pains me that so many
of my fellow citizens are falling into this age-old trap of blaming the
powerless Jews who seem so powerful because of the existence of a handful
of "court Jews" who front for the power structur ... Take a few 'court
Jews' and give them unimpeded access to the mainstream media and, voila,
you create the impression among the masses that 'the Jews' are spoiling
for a war. Do you see brother how you are misrepresenting us? I wish that
we in the Jewish peace movement could have as much access as you do to
the mainstream media so that we could shatter the monolithic view of the
Jewish community which the 'court Jew' by definition is set up to propagate.
Of course, we are denied that access by the same power structure which
has an interest in making sure that yours is the only 'Jewish' voice heard.
I'm really afraid that we are heading for a calamity. If the people are
this incensed now my brother, how do you think they will feel when American
men and women start returning from the sands of Kuwait in body bags? Who
is going to be blamed if, God forbid, we are subjected to another terrorist
attack? Do these thoughts keep you awake at night? Are you scared like
I am that this imperialistic war in Iraq threatens the existence of the
Jewish people? My brother, I don't blame you for accepting the starring
role of 'court Jew' ... For the sake of your own dignity, you must refuse
to be exploited as the "court Jew." Step down and deprive the power structure
of its 'court Jew' and you will expose to the world the actors who really
motivate the Bush Administration. Please, before it is too late, tell
the world that it is not the powerless Jews who are pushing for this war,
but the greedy, venal barons of corporate America who stand to profit
while cowering behind the myth of the all-powerful Jew. Tell everybody
what you and I both know. That the real interests hawking for this war
are the defense contractors and the oil industry who will make billions
of dollars to first destroy Iraq and then 'rebuild' it under the protective
wing of American 'democracy' ... With love, Josh Ruebner."
Jim Moran
and the Dixie Chicks: Never Say "Sorry," It Only Makes Things Worse;
by Alexander Cockburn, Counterpunch, March
15, 2003
"At last the leaders of the Democratic Party have moved decisively,
hauling out their ripest comminations and hurling them at-no, not at George
Bush. The man at whom they've been leveling their fire this past week
is 7-term US Rep James Moran of Virginia. Moran, a former mayor of Alexandria,
Va., is in hot water over his head for having remarked in a March 3 town
hall session with his constituents that, as quoted in the Virginia-area
Connection newspapers, 'if it were not for the strong support of the Jewish
community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this The leaders
of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change
the direction of where this is going, and I think they should.' The House
and Senate Democratic leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Tom Daschle, promptly
denounced Moran's remarks, and six Jewish House Democrats have taken it
upon themselves to advise Moran that he not seek re-election in 2004.
Should he do so, 'we cannot and will not support his candidacy.' Moran
has been forced to give up on his positions as Democratic Party leader
in the mid-Atlantic region, though not as yet his committee posts on the
Hill. The game plan is clearly what it was with Hilliard of Alabama and
McKinney of Georgia, both evicted from Congress last year as conspicuous
acts of retribution against critics of Israel: Breathe a word about justice
for Palestinians, and you'll lose your seat. Moran says he'll certainly
run again, and the decision will belong to the voters of his district.
One reason Moran is getting whacked so hysterically is that Jewish nerves
are raw on precisely the point he raised, the role of Jewish opinion here
in pressing for the attack on Iraq. It's one thing for Pat Buchanan to
raise the issue of dual loyalty in the American Conservative (as
he has just done), but when Tim Russert starts pressing Richard Perle
to assure us that he's advocating an attack on Iraq in the interests of
the United States, not some other power, we know it's perched squarely
on the front burner. Suddenly researchers from Nightline (one called
me on the matter) and other mainstream outfits are rushing for copies
of 'A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,' the 1996 briefing
plan for Benjamin Netanyahu prepared by such pro-Israel hawks as
Perle, Douglas Feith and others now high in the Bush Administration,
advocating attack on Iraq. It's now OK for reporters (Robert Kaiser in
the Washington Post, for example) to describe the Jewish neocon
lobby for war, starting with Perle, Wolfowitz and Feith,
and heading on down the list to Elliott Abrams, now running the
Israel-Palestine portfolio at the National Security Council. The op-ed
pages are beginning to vibrate with predictable charges from people like
Lawrence Kaplan of The New Republic that all this talk of
dual loyalty and Israel's agenda is nothing but rank anti-Semitism. To
his credit, Michael Kinsley, editor of Slate, ran a piece (subtitle:
'If You're Going To Be Jewish And Powerful, You Can't Whine When Someone
Notices It') saying that uproar raised by American Jews was probably evidence
that Moran was on the money, and that when it came to testimonies to the
power of the Jewish lobby, none was more publicly boastful on the matter
than AIPAC. Moran is plummeting, whirling in the familiar downward spiral
of contrition and self-abasement.But does his remark about "strong support"
for attack on Iraq in the Jewish community have any basis in reality?...
Of course there are Jewish groups, not least in the big peace coalitions,
that are strongly and effectively antiwar ... Don't Blink Moran, now being
put through the never-ending rituals of self-abasement should take a leaf
from the songbook of the Dixie Chicks. The chicks are getting stick from
some in the country music crowd after lead singer Natalie Maines stuck
it to Bush in some remarks to a London audience last week. 'Just so you
know,' Mains said, 'We're ashamed the president of the United States is
from Texas.' The group later released a statement Thursday saying they
have been overseas for several weeks and 'the anti-American sentiment
that has unfolded here is astounding.'"
American
Teens Volunteer in Israeli Army,
Grand Forks Herald (Nebraska) (from Associated
Press), Mar. 15, 2003
"When Omer Friedman told his parents he was leaving California
to join the Israeli army for three years, they offered to buy the 18-year-old
a new car if he reconsidered. The bribe didn't work. Friedman joined
19 other Americans in a volunteer program that brings American Jews to
Israel for army service, and closer to a bloody conflict that has killed
thousands in just 29 months. He could see combat as early as July ...
Friedman's decision to leave the United States comes as many of his Israeli
counterparts dream of escaping the Jewish state's stagnant economy, brutal
conflict with the Palestinians and potential dangers associated with a
U.S.-led war with Iraq ... More than 200 soldiers have been killed during
29 months of fighting, and several of them have been Israeli-Americans.
More than 2,200 Palestinians have also been killed.
Yeela Porat, 18, from Sunnyvale, Calif., scrapped college plans
and her job at Starbucks to enlist in the Israeli army. Her fellow employees
didn't understand why she would want to leave. 'They think it has to be
political ... but it's not. It has to do with a feeling of where you belong,
and you can't explain that to them,' said Porat, who was born in Israel
but left as a child. More than 100,000 Americans
live in Israel, holding dual citizenship. The volunteer program,
which began four years ago, has brought dozens of Americans to the Israeli
army ... Many say they'll stay in Israel after their service, but some
are keeping their options open. Israel encourages Jews of all nationalities
to immigrate. Yossi Nachemi left his family in Chicago for the
Israeli army. For the 21-year-old, coming to Israel was a dream realized.
He changed his name from Joe Osgood to the name his grandfather
gave up decades ago, and signed up for the army. He initially hid his
plans from his parents. 'I feel like I'm fighting not only for Israel,
but for the Jewish people,' he said. Chen Bloom, 19, from Boston,
said she often received strange looks from Israelis when she told them
she'd volunteered. 'People say 'what were you thinking?'' she said, shrugging.
'I feel I'm making a difference.' Other acknowledge there's also the draw
of adventure, and the urge to escape the boredom of suburbia."
[Another influential Jew in government wants war.]
Goldsmith
will advise that war on Iraq is legal,
The Independent (UK), March 17 ,2003
"Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General, will advise Parliament
today that an attack on Iraq is justified under international law without
a second United Nations resolution. The Government's senior legal adviser
will bolster Britain's case for war by telling Parliament that UN resolution
1441 and previous UN resolutions allow for a military strike. His public
intervention will be interpreted as a sign that the momentum for war is
growing and of ministers' frustration at the chances of a second resolution
being passed by the UN Security Council. Lord Goldsmith, whose
advice to the Government is usually private, will tell the House of Lords
that 1441 warns of 'serious consequences' if Saddam Hussein does not comply.
Lord Goldsmith is believed to have told Tony Blair last week that
the legal case for war could be weakened if a second resolution was vetoed
or voted down by a majority of the Security Council. The latest advice
is expected to prove controversial. Last week Kofi Annan, the UN secretary
general, warned that military action would be outside the organisation's
charter."
Playing Ethnic Politics at Ground
Zero,
by Sam Smith, Progressive Review, March 17,
2003
" There is no doubt - if one considers the 'Jewish community' as
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and various large Jewish
campaign contributors - that Rep. Moran was quite correct in saying that
they could have a significant effect on the course of our policy in the
Middle East. For example, it took only three days for them to have a significant
effect on the course of Rep. Moran's career, getting his cowardly colleagues
to force out of his House leadership position. Earlier, they helped to
have a similar effect on Rep Cynthia McKinney, who went down to defeat
thanks in part to an influx of pro-Israel money. The fact that this Washington
leadership may not accurately reflect the diversity of its national constituency
is not uniquely a Jewish problem; it is part of the displacement of democracy
from the consensus of the many to the will of a select few that is speeding
the decline of the Republic ... In other words, what is considered anti-Semitic
when stated at a town meetings, becomes in another context just your standard
keen political analysis. When you look at the facts rather than the Washington
rhetoric, you find that Moran was even more right than it appeared at
first. A study by Belief Net found that only
Jewish groups and the South Baptist Convention supported the military
approach and every other major domination listed opposed it. True,
the Southern Baptists were unequivocally in favor of war while the Jewish
groups - Orthodox Union, Union Of American Hebrew Congregations (Reform),
and United Synagogue Of Conservative Judaism - wanted to exhaust other
alternatives first, but every other religion Belief Net checked
opposed the war including the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America,
Episcopal Church, Greek Orthodox Church in America, Mormons - Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Presbyterian Church (USA), Quakers
- American Friends Service Committee, United Church of Christ, United
Methodist Church, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Council
on American-Islamic Relations and the Unitarian Universalist Association.
The Catholics weren't included but the Pope has taken a clear stand against
the war. So why go to such efforts to deliberately conceal and prevaricate
concerning the role of key Jewish organizations in supporting the Iraq
invasion? Part of the answer can be found in none other than the hypocritically
outraged Washington Post, in an article written by its White House correspondent,
Dana Milbank, last November: 'A group of U.S. political consultants has
sent pro-Israel leaders a memo urging them to keep quiet while the Bush
administration pursues a possible war with Iraq. The six-page memo was
sent by the Israel Project, a group funded by American Jewish organizations
and individual donors. Its authors said the main audience was American
Jewish leaders, but much of the memo's language is directed toward Israelis.
The memo reflects a concern that involvement by Israel in a U.S.-Iraq
confrontation could hurt Israel's standing in American public opinion
and undermine international support for a hard line against Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein ... Thomas Dines, then executive director of AIPAC
and now head of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty - is a member of the
advisory committee of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq ... The
danger of the dishonest debate about the Middle East was well described
by Joan Didion in a recent New York Review of Books, quoted by
Bill and Kathleen Christison in Counterpunch: "[We need to] demystify
the question of why we have become unable to discuss our relationship
with the current government of Israel' ... The very question of the US
relationship with Israel, in other words, has come to be seen as unraisable,
potentially lethal, the conversational equivalent of an unclaimed bag
on a bus. We take cover. We wait for the entire subject to be defused,
safely insulated behind baffles of invective and counter-invective. Many
opinions are expressed. Few are allowed to develop. Even fewer change."
What we are facing is, in major part, a religious war in which bin Laden,
Bush and Sharon comprise a triptych of theological terror that is putting
everyone at great risk. They are each involved in a vicious heresy, falsely
defining their own immoral, sadistic ambitions as their religion's moral
faith. This is no time for politeness, politics or silence. And while
Jews are far from alone in needing to call their leadership back to sanity,
neither are they exempt."
James Moran: Questions
Remain,
by Sam Francis, VDare, March 17, 2003
"Does the Guinness Book of World Records have an entry for the politician
fastest to apologize for Thought Crimes about ethnic issues? I figured
Sen. Trent Lott held the world championship in the apology Olympics. But
now comes Rep. James Moran, who seems to have trounced even the Mississippi
senator in the belly-crawl competition. Mr. Moran's offense, as the world
now knows, was to say that American Jews have played a large role in pushing
the United States into the coming war with Iraq and thereby utter what
is supposed to be unutterable about Jewish power and Jewish loyalty. Specifically,
what he said at a rally of religious opponents of the war in response
to a Jewish woman who wondered why more Jews were not present, was 'If
it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war
with Iraq, we would not be doing this,' and 'The leaders of the Jewish
community are influential enough that they could change the direction
of where this is going, and I think they should.' Jewish leaders in and
around his own constituency at once denounced him and, despite his immediate
belly flop, demanded his resignation from office, as did the Washington
Post. Meanwhile, the Republicans, sniffing blood, paddled in to take
a bite of Mr. Moran's flesh. The world's only Jewish Republican congressman,
Rep. Eric Cantor, told a meeting of 150 Orthodox Jewish leaders
that what Mr. Moran said was 'reminiscent of the
accusations contained in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion,'
a classic anti-Semitic forgery. Of course Mr. Moran said nothing like
tha ... What Mr. Moran actually said is more or less (though perhaps not
literally) true. ... [A]s Michelle Goldberg noted in an article
on Salon.com last fall, 'mainstream Jewish groups and leaders are now
among the strongest supporters of an American invasion of Baghdad.' What
Mr. Moran said was close enough to the truth not to be so ruinously 'offensive'
as his enemies are claiming. And the Jewish leaders who started the stampede
for Mr. Moran's resignation aren't mainly concerned about 'anti-Semitism'
anyway ... If American Jewish leaders, inside or outside the Bush administration,
can't make that distinction and insist on using the charge of 'anti-Semitism'
simply to smear and silence all critics of Israel and our policies toward
it, then there may be good
reason to ask more and much harder questions about their real political
and foreign policy agendas."
Zionism Has Triumphed.
Commentary,
rense.com, March 18, 2003
"After only a single century, the political movement, Zionism, has
triumphed. All of its connivings have been fulfilled by Washington. ...
How did Zionism do it? First, a national animosity for Germany had to
be generated in America over decades by boycotts and propaganda (and corresponding
sympathy for Zionism). Done! (The super-merchandisers super-promoted the
slaughter of their own people into a Holocaust, ignoring the millions
of murdered Gentiles as inconsequential.) Next, a separate state of Israel
had to be approved by Washington. Done! Third, since Israel was not self-supporting,
the American people would have to support Israel each year by billions
in contributions, rising constantly. Done! Then, Israel had to subvert
the American electoral process by bribery and install 'friends of Israel'
in all important offices, elected and appointed, focusing on the Senate
which approved appointments. Done! (Look at the names in Washington today).
Fifth, the mass media had to be monopolized to propagandize and brainwash
the American people and influence their elections in favor of Zionism.
Done! Sixth, the American people must be forced to mindlessly support
Israel in its military expansion in the Middle East against a defenseless
Arab people by billions more in the latest weaponry and regime changes
as required by Israel. Done! Seventh, the American people must be rendered
utterly subservient in the manner of a conquered nation through Zionist
control of Washington. Done! Now, on the verge of World War III, Zionism
has totally triumphed. The American people are captive to this vile parasite
because of the perfidy of Washington."
[The spark is lit and growing. RARE courage in media-land: this is
an American newspaper editorial, not an individual opinion piece:]
Editorials
| Article published Tuesday, March 18, 2003. Whose national interest?,
Toledo Blade, March 18, 2003
"The Democratic Party’s shunning of Virginia Congressman James Moran
because of remarks some wrongly construe as anti-Semitic suggests a greater
fear of losing conservative American Jewish money in 2004 than an adherence
to honest, intelligent, political principles. Mr. Moran, an 11-term congressman,
was critical of U.S. Jewish leaders who, he felt, could alter war fervor.
He said many were swayed after talking with hawkish former Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. If he misrepresents their position, they
can say so. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is out of line to demand
Mr. Moran’s head. For half a century there has been a wrongheaded effort
to label anti-Semitic any criticism of anyone or anything Jewish, including
Israel. Fear of the hateful tag inhibits open discussion, minimizes honest
criticism, and blocks informed decisions. Mr. Moran isn’t alone in linking
White House policy makers to Israeli interests. He may be, sad for him,
the first elected official to be forthcoming. And he erred in alluding
to strong support for war in the Jewish community, which is diverse. Stanley
Heller, American and Jewish, has tried to keep his co-religionists
honest for 20-odd years. In a Feb. 20 article at www.antiwar.com,
he cited 'rabid neocons' - some of whom, 'like Richard Perle, Douglas
Feith, and David Wurmser, actually worked for Israeli think
tanks writing grand papers for (Likud) Prime Minister Netanyahu
on how the U.S. and Israel should take apart and reconstruct the Middle
East,' and who now hold key roles in shaping U.S. foreign policy Though
Mr. Heller ascribes most war zeal to oil, empire dreams, and weapons
testing, he says 'We owe it to Americans to tell them the whole truth,
that part of the war drive is being fueled by a wacko militarist clique
from Israel and its interlocking bands of American Jewish and Christian
supporters.' He’s not alone. In the Feb. 23 (London) Observer Ed
Vulliamy, and in the March 3 San Diego Union-Tribune, James O,
Goldsborough, speak in the same vein - of America’s first religious war
and proponents’ visions of empire. Mr. Vulliamy takes on the empire theme.
In 1992, he says Paul Wolfowitz wrote a blueprint for America’s
21st century foreign policy that seems a play book for this administration.
It talks of using 'nuclear, biological, and chemical weaponry, pre-emptively
‘even in conflicts that do not directly engage U.S. interests.’' Is this
what Americans want? Does Israel have too strong a hand in our foreign
policy, or do its interests merely coincide with ours? Americans won’t
know without open discussions free of political repercussions and stifling
accusations."
File: US - Feith, Perle, Wolfowitz and
Bryen, Israel's men at the DoD,
by Thomas Stauffer, Middle
East International, March 21,2003
"Inside the United States Department of Defence the war party around
Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld - commonly dubbed the 'chicken hawks"
- has a long history of working on behalf of Israel. They are typically
designated as 'neo-conservatives', but that is a misleading euphemism
for a small cabal with intimate links both to Israel and Israeli espionage
against the US. Knowing the backgrounds and histories of the key figures
in the war cabal is critically important in understanding the push for
war against Iraq. The three most widely cited are Paul Wolfowitz,
deputy secretary of defence; Douglas Feith, under-secretary of
defence for policy (number three in the department); and Richard Perle,
chair of the Defence Policy Board. The biographies of the three leading
warriors reveal the close connection between Israel and the war party.
We must differentiate between different roles which have been played.
One function in the intelligence business is that of the spy - who transfers
secret material to a foreign power. A second function, no less important,
is recruitment, i.e. arranging the placement of spies or agents of influence
in key positions. The third is that of the 'agent of influence', the operative
who may steal nothing but who steers policy. These are the fondest dreams
of any spymaster. The Mossad also draws a distinction between full-time
agents and people it calls 'sayyanim', committed Zionists prepared
to serve without pay who range from clerks in the Internal Revenue Service
to senior officials. The trio of 'chicken hawks' have changed their roles
from time to time over the 20-30 years during which they have held influence,
and those shifts are important in tracing their histories. Douglas
Feith He has played all three roles. In the early 1980s, when serving
on the National Security Council, Feith was reportedly caught transferring
classified materials to an Israeli contact. Colleagues are believed to
have passed on their suspicions to the FBI, which then gathered enough
evidence to have him dismissed from the NSC, although no formal charges
were filed. Feith was later appointed by Richard Perle (see
below) to a senior position in the DOD as deputy assistant secretary in
charge of international negotiations. Thereafter, on leaving government
service once more, he represented Israeli arms manufacturers in Washington
and Turkey, before being appointed by Paul Wolfowitz to the third-ranking
slot in the DOD in the present Administration. There, Feith was
in turn responsible for lower-tier, but senior appointments of other Zionist
sympathizers. Richard Perle has always managed to evade outright
charges of espionage, although, early in his career, working for Senator
Henry 'Scoop' Jackson, he was investigated by the Justice Department and
found to have violated US policies relating to unlawful transmission of
sensitive classified information to Israel. Again, no charges were filed.
Perle was subsequently active in recruiting Israeli sympathizers
into the DOD, such as Feith. In 1981, while Caspar Weinberger
[note: Weinberger was of partial Jewish heritage] was defence
secretary, Perle appointed a certain Stephen Bryen as assistant
deputy secretary of defence with the brief for trade security policy,
an office with broad responsibility for technology transfer and arms exports.
Bryen, then working for the Senate Armed Services Committee, had
been caught a few years earlier while delivering secret documents to an
Israeli officer in the coffee shop of the Madison Hotel. Paul Wolfowitz
appointed both Perle and Feith. He nominated Perle
as chairman of the Defence Policy Board, a position that involves access
to highly classified materials and which would almost certainly have entailed
fresh security clearance, in which case Wolfowitz would have been
advised of the thick dossier on Perle's activities. Also in the
present Administration, Wolfowitz appointed Douglas Feith
as deputy secretary for policy, a critical slot within the DOD. He did
so with full knowledge of the record, because Feith's previous
activities were the subject of a heated meeting between Wolfowitz
and his boss Secretary Rumsfeld, who is believed to have agreed to Feith's
appointment when persuaded by Wolfowitz. All three men appear to
share the same agenda: confrontation first with Iraq, and then, ultimately,
with Iran and Saudi Arabia. Their involvement in writing Middle East strategy
for Ariel Sharon and Likud is widely known; their task today is
to influence the Bush Administration to execute that strategy on behalf
of Israel and Sharon."
Swine Before
Perle – 'The National Review' Attack on LRC,
by Richard Cummings, lewrockwell.com, March
24, 2003
"But talk about bizarre. Richard Perle, the architect of the
war policies The National Review has backed and who is their darling,
is now a paid consultant to Global Crossing, to get the Defense
Department to lift its ban on its sale to Hong Kong billionaire Li Kashing
that would turn its fiber optic technology over to China, even as he continues
to serve as chairman of the influential Defense Policy Board, a position
that makes him, by law, a 'special government employee.' He denies any
conflict of interest even though he can’t remember what was in an affidavit
he signed. Perle spoke recently, as reported by The New York
Times, in a conference call sponsored by Goldman Sachs, the
firm that was headed by Bush’s current economic advisor, Stephen Friedman,
in which he advised participants on possible investment opportunities
arising from the war. The conference title was 'Implications of an Imminent
War: Iraq Now. North Korea Next?' There’s nothing like business as usual
according to The National Review, is there?" [Richard Cummings
taught international law at the Haile Selassie I University and before
that, was Attorney-Advisor with the Office of General Counsel of the Near
East South Asia region of U.S.A.I.D, where he was responsible for the
legal work pertaining to the aid program in Israel, Jordan, Pakistan and
Afghanistan.]
National Review’s
Anathema Corner,
by J.P. Zmirak, LewRockwell.com, March 26,
2003
"The spitball bombardiers of the imperialist 'right' aren’t satisfied
with imposing 'democracy' abroad – they also want to stifle it here at
home. The most serious attempt in recent weeks to silence discussion in
American politics is David Frum’s cover story in the current National
Review. If you haven’t slogged through it yet, it’s a compilation
of all the most unfortunate things ever said – or almost said, or never
said but possibly implied – by thinkers whom the ex-Canadian speechwriter
broadly labels 'paleoconservative.' Rather than refute his charges point
by point – that has been done extraordinarily well elsewhere, such as
here and here – I’d rather address what Frum is trying to do, and
why. I’ve a certain insight into this question, since, like Frum,
I was once a conservative columnist at Yale. I came in just after he graduated,
and made a lot of noise in the campus papers, just as he had, so inevitable
comparisons were drawn. And contrasts. You see, Frum had made himself
well-known among the amazingly intolerant leftist students of early 1980s
Yale by loudly espousing Reaganite foreign and budgetary policy ... The
few undergrads who advocated traditional Christian values made themselves
almost radioactive. Shunned and loathed, they would eat alone, or in tiny
groups of fellow thinkers, in the cavernous Gothic dining halls, as if
they’d contracted some contagious, incurable skin disease. (And no, they
didn’t get to date much.) As if to publicly proclaim his distance from
the misfits who were so despised, Frum led a public campaign to
close down a conservative literary magazine, The Yale Lit, because
– well, because 'he couldn’t stand that type of conservative,' as he told
a friend. Enlisting student opinion, and the Yale administration’s help,
Frum succeeded in quashing an exquisitely edited, beautifully produced
student magazine, which was promptly replaced, under the same name, by
a fourth-rate broadsheet that printed students’ trashy, confessional poems
about their drug experiences and tentative erotic fumblings. Frum’s
first purge of right-wing opinion was accomplished. No ostracism for David.
He went from Yale to swim among the suits at The Wall Street Journal,
and write a number of mildly interesting books, en route to rising smoothly
through the ranks of what was by now called 'neoconservatism.' He really
'arrived' (or 'made it' in the sense of Norman Podhoretz in his
revealing, appalling autobiography) when his commentaries began to appear
on that bastion of respectable opinion, National Public Radio."
CNI Action Alert: BUSH ASKING $10 BILLION IN AID FOR ISRAEL. National
Call-In Day, March 26th, 2003
"Despite the slumping economic conditions in this country, President
Bush's emergency war budget for the war on Iraq includes a special request
of $1 billion for Israel in supplementary military aid. In addition, he
will seek $9 billion in 'loan guarantees' at low interest rates to assist
the Israeli people through their economic slump - a slump provoked by
the Israeli suppression of the Palestinian intifada. Would that Americans
were so lucky! The "loan guarantees" allow the Israelis to borrow money
from American banks at special low interest rates, because they are guaranteed
by the federal government, and they are given generous grace periods in
which to repay the loans - as much as ten years. They are almost never
collected unless Israel "defaults" on its low interest payments. American
states and municipalities are not accorded such sweetheart deals. Call
your congressman with the clear message asking them to vote against any
further aid to Israel until they agree to rejoin the peace process and
to stop building Jewish colonies in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.
To e-mail members of Congress go to www.cnionline.org and link
to the "Act Now" and "CNI Action Center" connections. For those without
Internet connection, you can phone your members of Congress at the Senate
switchboard, 202 224-3121 or the House switchboard, 202 225-3121, To verify
the names of your senators and representatives, go to www.capwiz.com/cni
and enter your zip code under the section "elected officials."
Former
Pentagon official Richard Perle resigns as key Rumsfeld adviser,
Boston Globe, March 27, 2003
"Richard Perle, a former Reagan administration Pentagon official,
resigned Thursday as chairman of the Defense Policy Board that is a key
advisory arm for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. In a brief written
statement, Rumsfeld thanked Perle for his service and made no mention
of why Perle resigned. He said he had asked Perle to remain
as a member of the board ... Perle became embroiled in a recent
controversy stemming from a New Yorker magazine article that said
he had lunch in January with controversial Saudi-born businessman Adnan
Khashoggi and a Saudi industrialist. The industrialist, Harb Saleh Zuhair,
was interested in investing in a venture capital firm, Trireme Partners,
of which Perle is a managing partner. Nothing ever came of the
lunch in Marseilles; no investment was made. But the New Yorker
story, written by Seymour M. Hersh, suggested that Perle,
a longtime critic of the Saudi regime, was inappropriately mixing business
and politics. Perle called the report preposterous and ''monstrous.''
Perle, 61, was so strongly opposed to nuclear arms control agreements
with the former Soviet Union during his days in the Reagan administration
that he became known as ''the Prince of Darkness./''
[Global Crossing is controlled by Garry Winnick, who is also
Jewish].
Perle inquiry is
being urged,
International Herald Tribune (from The New
York Times), March 26, 2003
"A senior House Democrat has asked the Defense Department to investigate
the business dealings of Richard Perle, the head of an influential
Pentagon advisory board who is also an adviser to Global Crossing Ltd.,
the large telecommunications company that is seeking to overcome Pentagon
objections to its proposed sale to Asian investors. 'I am aware of several
potential conflicts that warrant your immediate review,' John Conyers
Jr. of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee,
said in a letter sent Monday to the Pentagon's inspector general. He urged
a broad examination of Perle's business dealings. Pentagon officials
declined to comment about the request. . Perle was appointed by Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in 2001 to head the Defense Advisory Board,
an influential group of unpaid advisers to the administration. By law,
Rumsfeld is ultimately responsible for deciding whether the Pentagon should
grant permission to Global Crossing to complete its sale ... Global Crossing
is trying to overcome opposition from the Pentagon and the FBI to its
proposal to emerge from bankruptcy by being sold to a group led by Hutchison
Whampoa Ltd., a conglomerate controlled by the Hong Kong billionaire Li
Ka-shing. Some Democrats pointed out Monday that during the Clinton administration,
prominent Republicans such as Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi criticized
the company for its ties to the Chinese leadership. Perle said last week
that he had violated no ethics rules, would not be lobbying anyone at
the Defense Department and would only advise the company about how to
structure itself so that it could satisfy the administration's concerns."
[What do most of these people below have in common too, that isn't
kosher to mention? They're Jewish. And they are molding
the United States to be a dumb attack dog for the racist, expansionist
state of Israel.]
All in
the Neocon Family,
By Jim Lobe, AlterNet, March 27, 2003
"What do William Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Elliot
Abrams, and Robert Kagan [Jewish too?] have in common?
Yes, they are all die-hard hawks who have gained control of U.S. foreign
policy since the 9/11 attacks. But they are also part of one big neoconservative
family – an extended clan of spouses, children, and friends who have known
each other for generations. Neoconservatives are former liberals (which
explains the 'neo' prefix) who advocate an aggressive unilateralist vision
of U.S. global supremacy, which includes a close
strategic alliance with Israel. Let's start with one of the founding
fathers of the extended neocon clan: Irving Kristol. His extensive
resume includes waging culture wars for the CIA against the Soviet Union
in the early years of the Cold War and calling for an American 'imperial'
role during the Vietnam War. Papa Kristol, who has been credited
with defining the major themes of neoconservative thought, is married
to Gertrude Himmelfarb, a neoconservative powerhouse on her own.
Her studies of the Victorian era in Britain helped inspire the men who
sold Bush on the idea of 'compassionate conservatism.' The son of this
proud couple is none other that William Kristol, the crown prince
of the neoconservative clique and editor of the Rupert Murdoch-owned Weekly
Standard. In 1997, he founded the Project for the New American
Century (PNAC), a front group which cemented the powerful alliance
between right-wing Republicans like Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, Christian
and Catholic Right leaders like Gary Bauer and William Bennett, and the
neocons behind a platform of global U.S. military dominance. Irving
Kristol's most prominent disciple is Richard Perle, who was
until Thursday the Defense Policy Board chairman, is also a 'resident
scholar' at the American Enterprise Institute, which is housed in the
same building as PNAC. Perle himself married into neocon royalty
when he wed the daughter of his professor at the University of Chicago,
the late Alfred Wohlstetter – the man who helped both his son-in-law
and his fellow student Paul Wolfowitz get their start in Washington
more than 30 years ago. Perle's own protege is Douglas Feith,
who is now Wolfowitz's deputy for policy and is widely known for
his right-wing Likud position. And why not? His father, Philadelphia businessman
and philanthropist Dalck Feith, was once a follower of the great
revisionist Zionist leader, Vladimir Jabotinsky, in his native
Poland back in the 1930s. The two Feiths were honored together
in 1997 by the right-wing Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). The AEI
has long been a major nexus for such inter-familial relationships. A long-time
collaborator with Perle, Michael Ledeen is married to Barbara
Ledeen, a founder and director of the anti-feminist Independent Women's
Forum (IWF), who is currently a major player in the Republican leadership
on Capitol Hill. Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and another
neo-con power couple – David and Meyrav Wurmser – co-authored
a 1996 memorandum for Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu outlining
how to break the Oslo peace process and invade Iraq as the first step
to transforming the Middle East. Though she doesn't focus much on foreign-policy
issues, Lynne Cheney also hangs her hat at AEI. Her husband Dick Cheney
recently chose Victoria Nuland to become his next deputy national security
adviser. Nuland, as it turns out, is married to Robert Kagan, Bill
Kristol's main comrade-in-arms and the co-founder of PNAC ... And
which infamous ex-Reaganite do the Kagans and another leading neocon family
have in common? None other than Iran-contra veteran Elliott Abrams.
Now the director of Near Eastern Affairs in Bush's National Security Council,
Abrams worked closely with Bob Kagan back in the Reagan era. He
is also the son-in-law of Norman Podhoretz, long-time editor of
the influential conservative Jewish publication Commentary, and
his wife, Midge Decter, a fearsome polemicist in her own right.
Podhoretz, like Kristol Sr., helped invent neo-conservatism
in the late 1960s. He and Decter created a formidable political
team as leaders of the Committee on the Present Danger in 1980, when they
worked with Donald Rumsfeld to pound the last nail into the coffin of
detente and promote the rise of Ronald Reagan. In addition to being Abrams'
father-in-law, Norman Podhoretz is also the father of John Podhoretz,
a columnist for the Murdoch-owned New York Post and frequent guest on
the Murdoch-owned Fox News channel. As editor of Commentary, Norman
offered writing space to rising stars of the neocon movement for more
than 30 years. His proteges include former U.N. ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick
and Richard Pipes, who was Ronald Reagan's top advisor on the 'Evil
Empire,' as the president liked to call the Soviet Union. His son, Daniel
Pipes, has also made a career out of battling 'evil,' which in his
case is Islam. And to tie it all up neatly, in 2002, Podhoretz received
the highest honor bestowed by the AEI: the Irving Kristol award. This
list of intricate, overlapping connections is hardly exhaustive or perhaps
even surprising. But it helps reveal an important fact. Contrary to appearances,
the neocons do not constitute a powerful mass political movement. They
are instead a small, tighly-knit clan whose incestuous familial and personal
connections, both within and outside the Bush administration, have allowed
them grab control of the future of American foreign policy."
Zionist
Influence On The US War Machine,
gooff.com, March 28, 2003
"The Israeli lobby has many 'thinktanks' that provide future advisors
to the various administrations, both Republican and Democrat. During the
Clinton Administration, the Israeli lobby provided officials from the
Washington Institute for Near East Policy like Martin Indyk. During
the Bush Jr Administration, many of the officials the Israeli lobby provided
are from their Republican 'thinktanks,' like the American Enterprise Institute
(AEI) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).
1). Richard Perle ---- One of Bush's foreign policy advisors, he
is the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. A very likely
Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's
office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him
passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli
Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle
came from one the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktanks, the AEI ... 2).
Paul Wolfowitz----Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle's
Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate
of Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military.
His sister lives in Israel. Wolfowitz came from the above mentioned
Jewish thinktank, JINSA. Wolfowitz is the number two leader within
the administration behind this Iraq war mongering. 3). Douglas Feith----Under
Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon. He is a close
associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle
and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated
anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist
group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that
don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at
ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and
Zell, which only has one International office, in Israel. The majority
of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm's own
website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith 'represents
Israeli Armaments Manufacturer.' Feith basically represents the
Israeli War Machine. Feith also came from the Jewish thinktank
JINSA ... 4). Edward Luttwak----Member of the National Security
Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak
is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently
writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals ... 5). Henry
Kissinger-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Kissinger sits
on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle. For detailed
information about Kissinger's evil past, read Seymour Hersch's
book (Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House) ... 6).
Dov Zakheim----Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, and Chief
Financial Officer (CFO) for the Department of Defense. He is an ordained
rabbi and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship. Zakheim attended
attended Jew's College in London and became an ordained Orthodox Jewish
Rabbi in 1973. He was adjunct professor at New York's Jewish Yeshiva University.
Zakheim is close to the Israeli lobby. 7). Kenneth Adelman-----One
of many Pentagon Advisors, Adelman also sits on the Pentagon's
Defense Policy Board under Perle, and is another extremist pro-Israel
advisor, who supports going to war against Ira ... 8). I. Lewis Libby
-----Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff. The chief pro-Israel
Jewish advisor to Cheney, it helps explains why Cheney is so gun-ho to
invade Iraq. Libby is longtime associate of Wolfowitz. Libby
was also a lawyer for convicted felon and Israeli spy Mark Rich,
whom Clinton pardoned, in his last days as president. 9). Robert Satloff----U.S.
National Security Council Advisor, Satloff was the executive director
of the Israeli lobby's 'think tank,' Washington Institute for Near East
Policy ... 10). Elliott Abrams-----National Security Council Advisor
... He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved
illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding
the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government.
He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement
and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty
in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and
100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior)
granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel
Jews in the Reagan Administration's State Department. 11). Marc Grossman-----Under
Secretary of State for Political Affairs. He was Director General of the
Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of State
... 12). Richard Haass-----Director of Policy Planning at the State
Department and Ambassador at large. He is also Director of National Security
Programs and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr)
Administration who sat on the National Security Council, and who consistently
advocates going to war against Iraq ...13). Robert Zoellick-----U.S.
Trade Representative, a cabinet-level position. He is also one of the
more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr) Administration who advocated
invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the country in order to set up
setting up a Vichy-style puppet government ... 14). Ari Fleischer----Official
White House Spokesman for the Bush (Jr) Administration. Prominent in the
Jewish community, some reports state that he holds Israeli citizenship.
Fleischer is closely connected to the extremist Jewish group called the
Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics, who follow the Qabala, and hold very extremist
and insulting views of non-Jews. Fleischer was the co-president
of Chabad's Capitol Jewish Forum. He received the Young Leadership Award
from the American Friends of Lubavitch in October, 2001. 15). James
Schlesinger-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Schlesinger
also sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and
is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supports going to war against
Iraq. Schlesinger is also a commissioner of the Defense Department's National
Security Study Group, at the Pentagon. 16). David Frum-----White
House speechwriter behind the 'Axis of Evil' label. He lumps together
all the lies and accusations against Iraq for Bush to justify the war.
17). Joshua Bolten----White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Bolten
was previously a banker, former legislative aide, and prominent in the
Jewish community. 18). John Bolton----Under-Secretary of State
for Arms Control and International Security. Bolton is also a Senior Advisor
to President Bush. Prior to this position, Bolton was Senior Vice President
of the above mentioned pro-Israel think tank, AEI ... 19). David Wurmser----Special
Assistant to John Bolton (above), the under-secretary for arms
control and international security. Wurmser also worked at the
AEI with Perle and Bolton. His wife, Meyrav Wurmser,
along with Colonel Yigal Carmon, formerly of Israeli military intelligence,
co-founded the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri),a Washington-based
Israeli outfit which distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers
portraying Arabs in a bad light. 20). Eliot Cohen-----Member of
the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist
pro-Israel advisor ... 21). Mel Sembler-----President of the Export-Import
Bank of the United States. A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National
Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import
Bank facilitates trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign
countries, specifically those with financial problems. 22). Michael
Chertoff ----Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division,
at the Justice Department. 23). Steve Goldsmith----Senior Advisor
to the President, and Bush's Jewish domestic policy advisor. He also serves
as liaison in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives
(White House OFBCI) within the Executive Office of the President. He was
the former mayor of Indianapolis. He is also friends with Israeli Jerusalem
Mayor Ehud Olmert and often visits Israel to coach mayors on privatization
initiatives. 24). Adam Goldman-----White House's Special Liaison
to the Jewish Community. 25). Joseph Gildenhorn-----Bush Campaign's
Special Liaison to the Jewish Community. He was the DC finance chairman
for the Bush campaign, as well as campaign coordinator, and former ambassador
to Switzerland. 26). Christopher Gersten-----Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Administration for Children and Families at HHS. Gersten was
the former Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Husband
of Labor Secretary, Linda Chavez, and reportedly very pro-Israel. Their
children are being raised Jewish. 27). Mark Weinberger-----Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury for Tax Policy. 28). Samuel Bodman-----Deputy
Secretary of Commerce. He was the Chairman and CEO of Cabot Corporation
in Boston, Massachusetts. 29). Bonnie Cohen-----Under Secretary
of State for Management. 30). Ruth Davis-----Director of Foreign
Service Institute, who reports to the Office of Under Secretary for Management.
This Office is responsible for training all Department of State staff
(including ambassadors). 31). Lincoln Bloomfield-----Assistant
Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs. 32). Jay Lefkowitz-----General
Counsel of the Office of Budget and Management. 33). Ken Melman-----White
House Political Director. 34). Brad Blakeman------White House Director
of Scheduling."
Hillel
Reports to Senate Republicans about Anti-Semitism on Campus,
Hillel, March 27, 2003 (Washington, DC —
March 26, 2003)
"Hillel's Director of the Center for Israel Affairs and the Israel on
Campus Coalition Wayne Firestone joined Rubin at the meeting
requested by senators to discuss the rise of anti-Semitism on campus with
major Jewish organizations and government representatives. Senators Rick
Santorum (PA), Robert Bennett (UT), Sam Brownback (KS), and Norm Coleman
(MN) all spoke in support of Senate efforts to eliminate anti-Semitism
on campus. Coleman encouraged the attendees to keep senators informed,
stressing 'This is not just a Jewish senator being concerned, but it's
about all of us.' Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (TN), and Senators
Lindsey Graham (SC) and George Voinovich (OH) sent staff representatives.
During the meeting, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the U.S. Department
of Education, Office for Civil Rights Louis Goldstein, said that
universities that receive federal funding cannot discriminate on the basis
of race, color, or national origin. Goldstein said that although
there are some cases of anti-Semitism on campus pursued by his office,
many fall through the cracks. He asked Jewish organizations to help by
reporting incidents of anti-Semitism ... Santorum announced a plan to
introduce an amendment to the upcoming review of Title IX legislation
requiring 'ideological diversity' at universities across the country.
Brownback said he would introduce a commission under Title IX to investigate
anti-Semitic incidents on campuses. 'We have to hold the universities
responsible when there are incidents and claims of intimidation or a student
feeling uncomfortable,' concluded Hillel's Wayne Firestone.
'Students in the classroom must feel comfortable to express their views.
American campuses are places where everyone can go to express their views
freely no matter where they may stand.'" [Hmmm. Except if they
stand on the other side of the powerful Jewish Lobby.]
[The pro-Israel Jewish Lobby owns California governor Gray Davis and
the Democratic Party. South African apartheid had no web of millionaires
and dual loyalists with a censorial stranglehold over so much of the American
political system:]
State
Fund to Keep Israel Investments: “California will not abandon its friends,”
Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, March
28, 2003
"The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), the
nation’s largest public pension fund, has decided to keep Israel on its
list of permissible foreign countries in which to invest, in spite of
campaigns spearheaded by groups on several University of California campuses
demanding that it divest itself of Israeli equity holdings. At the Feb.
18 meeting of the CalPERS Board of Administration, Israel was green-lighted
for its 10th straight year as an approved country for investment. Reacting
to calls for a CalPERS boycott of Israel, Byron Tucker, a Los Angeles
spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, told The Journal this week, 'We
will continue to stand side by side with our friends in Israel, both in
business and friendship. The people of Israel are going through tremendous
difficulties right now.' 'They live with daily unrest, violence and death,'
Tucker continued. 'California will not abandon its friends in their time
of need.' Campus activist groups — led by Arabs in Students for Justice
in Palestine and Jews for a Free Palestine — had been gaining ground in
their campaign for divestment from Israel, to the point where the UCLA
Daily Bruin editorially endorsed divestment last July. This prompted
a pro-Israel backlash, headed up by the UC Justice Campaign (www.ucjustice.org).
The Legislature formally rejected divestment in a joint Assembly-Senate
resolution in September. Until last month, Israel was the only Middle
Eastern country in which CalPERS was permitted to invest. Neighboring
Jordan has now been added to the list. Egypt was evaluated but did not
make the cut. In other action, the CalPERS board, which oversees a fund
with assets of approximately $131 billion, complied with its requirement
to report to the Legislature on equity holdings in companies that may
have benefited from slave labor during the Holocaust era."
Governors'
Trip Cemented Bush's Bond With Sharon,
[Jewish] Forward, March 28, 2003
"In November 1998, then-Texas governor George W. Bush did something
very unusual, at least for him: He traveled abroad. Together with fellow
governors Paul Celucci of Massachusetts, Mike Leavitt of Utah and Marc
Racicot of Montana, all Republicans, Bush spent three days in Israel as
a guest of the National Jewish Coalition, currently known as the Republican
Jewish Coalition. The trip, best remembered for Bush's helicopter ride
along the edge of the West Bank with then-foreign minister Ariel Sharon,
played a crucial if little-understood role in one of defining transformations
in recent geopolitical history: the dramatic emergence
of the 43rd president as one of the most
pro-Israel figures in American political history. The
trip is legendary among Bush-watchers as the moment America's current
president bonded with Israel's current prime minister.
Less noticed is the fact that the Bush-Israel bond was precisely the purpose
of the governors' mission. Although presented as a political junket
by four Republican governors eager to burnish their pro-Israel bona fides,
'Bush was clearly the objective,' said an official who participated in
the mission. The reason: unhappy memories of the tense relationship between
Israel and the elder George Bush, coupled with a growing sense among Washington
insiders that the younger Bush had an inside track to the Republican presidential
nomination. Accordingly, said the official, the mission was slapped together
in order to 'patch things up between Israel and the Bush family.' While
Israel obviously welcomed the trip, officials there said Israel did not
initiate the trip. The two key planners of the trip were Mel Sembler
— later nominated by Bush as ambassador to Italy — and Matthew Brooks,
executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition. Brooks told
the Forward that this was a "governors' trip" and stated flatly
that Bush was not the focus, though he attracted more media attention
because of his name. He acknowledged that the move has since paid off
handsomely. 'We brought Bush to Israel and he brought Israel back with
him,' he said, pointing to the strong bond between Bush and Sharon."
[More corrupt Jewish/Zionist in-house networking. The head of Loral,
Bernard Schwartz, is also Jewish.]
Adviser
to U.S. Aided Maker of Satellites,
New York Times, March 28, 2003
"While he led an influential Pentagon advisory board, Richard
N. Perle advised a major American satellite maker, Loral Space
and Communications, as it faced government accusations that it improperly
transferred rocket technology to China, administration officials said
today. Officials at the State Department said that the senior official
considering how to resolve the rocket matter, Assistant Secretary Lincoln
P. Bloomfield Jr., was contacted by Mr. Perle once or twice
in the second half of 2001 on behalf of the company. At the time, Mr.
Bloomfield, who heads the State Department's bureau of political-military
affairs, and other officials were investigating accusations that Loral
turned over expertise that significantly improved the reliability of China's
nuclear missiles ... Mr. Perle said this afternoon that he was
retained by Loral seven months before his appointment by Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld to head the Defense Policy Board and was given a one-time
retainer at the outset of his work ... Mr. Perle declined to say
how much he was paid by Loral. He said he did not file a lobbying disclosure
statement because he did no lobbying on behalf of Loral. After criticism
of his business deals, Mr. Perle announced on Thursday that he
would resign as chairman of the Defense Policy Board but would remain
on the board ... The case against Loral, which originated in 1997 with
a Pentagon finding that Loral and Hughes Electronics had improperly turned
over technical information to the Chinese, was settled in January 2002.
Loral, without admitting or denying that it had violated the law, agreed
to pay a $20 million penalty, the largest settlement of a technology transfer
case at the time. The government accused Loral of providing Chinese officials
with confidential materials from an American panel that investigated the
February 1996 crash of a Loral satellite, which was built for Intelsat,
the international consortium, and was launched by a Chinese Long March
rocket. The inquiry into Loral and other companies resulted in restrictions
that have prevented the industry from seeking new business with China.
The Defense Department declined to say what Mr. Rumsfeld knew about Mr.
Perle's work for Loral ... Jeanette Clonan, a spokeswoman at Loral,
said last week that she would ask Bernard L. Schwartz, the company's
chairman and chief executive, about Mr. Perle's role in the case.
Since then, Ms. Clonan has not replied to daily messages, including one
today, left at her office, seeking comment. Other people involved in the
case have said Mr. Perle was retained on the instructions of Mr. Schwartz,
who came under criticism by some Republicans during the Clinton administration
for being one of the largest political donors to Democrats. Mr. Schwartz
retained a prominent team to defend the company in the investigation.
Among those who worked on the matter were Douglas J. Feith, who
is now under secretary of defense for policy. Mr. Feith is also
an old friend and former colleague of Mr. Perle. When Mr. Perle
was an assistant defense secretary in the Reagan administration, Mr. Feith
was his special counsel. The Loral matter is the second instance in which
Mr. Perle was doing business on behalf of an American company encountering
government difficulties over ties to China. Mr. Perle had been
retained by Global Crossing, the communications giant, to overcome Defense
Department opposition to its proposal to be sold to a venture led by Hutchison
Whampoa, the conglomerate controlled by the Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing."
[Note how the "Anti-Defamation League" is really a shill
for the racist Israeli state, in league with the rest of the Jewish Lobby.]
The
battle for Washington,
by David Landau, Haaretz (Israel),
March 30, 2003
"Next Tuesday, about 3,000 activists of the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the pro-Israel lobby, will come to Capitol
Hill in Washington in an impressive display of support for Israel. They
have a complex mission this time, as the United States is at war, and
it's not a convenient moment to clash with the administration. Nevertheless,
prominent Jewish leaders told Haaretz correspondent Nathan Guttman
(March 26), they will not mute their criticism of the 'road map' that
is being drawn up in Washington. Abe Foxman, the national director
of the Anti-Defamation League, doesn't like the 'timing' of the map or
the fact that President George Bush has created a connection between the
war in Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Malcolm Hoenlein, executive
vice president of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations,
promises that if the Israeli government expresses reservations about the
road map, it will have the support of the Jewish community, and 'we will
not hesitate to make our voice heard.' Before their annual conference
concludes, the 3,000 AIPAC activists will undoubtedly be asked, upon their
return home, to encourage their friends and relatives to write to their
representatives in Congress and make known their concern about the road
map and about the linkage the administration is creating between the war
in Iraq and peace here. Senators and members of the House of Representatives
will duly receive stacks of letters and telegrams, along with faxes and
e-mails, from which they will conclude that the American Jewish community,
like the Israeli Jewish community, has fears and anxieties about the road
map that the administration officials are preparing. That's how it works.
AIPAC has plenty of influence and clout, and it tilts to the right. The
majority of the other Jewish organizations are also on the right when
it comes to the conflict. So sweeping is the success of the Israeli right
and its allies among the Jews (and Christians) in the United States that
an unchallenged political axiom has emerged, to the effect that if the
president decides to push ahead with the road map, he will generate hostility
among millions of voters. This is presented as an unassailable fact in
the political discourse and in newspaper commentaries. The only point
that remains unclear is whether Bush will accede to the urgings of British
Prime Minister Tony Blair and of his own State Department and adopt the
map despite the political risk that step entails. Other voices within
the American Jewish public, of a more moderate character, are shunted
to the margins of organized Jewish life."
Colin
Powell's speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The US
secretary of state made this speech to the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee's annual policy conference in Washington yesterday, Monday,
The Guardian (UK), March 31, 2003
"There are so many, many people here tonight who are friends of mine.
I can't see all of you, but there is one very dear friend that I can see
and I must acknowledge, and that's my dear friend Shimon Peres.
And I am very pleased to be sharing the stage this evening with my new
Israeli colleague, minister Silvan Shalom. The minister is a true
Israeli success story. He has distinguished himself in so many ways -
as a journalist, as chairman of the Israel Electric Corporation, as a
member of the Knesset, and as minister of finance. And now he brings his
many talents and all of his experience to the foreign ministry at a most
important time in the life of the state of Israel. So Mr Minister, I congratulate
you again on your appointment and I can't tell you how much I am looking
forward to working with you, sir. Congratulations. My friends, all of
us here tonight are brought together by a deep commitment to Israel's
security, prosperity, and freedom, and to the strongest possible relationship
between Israel and the United States. AIPAC came into being half a century
ago to help the young Israel state meet the challenges of independence.
Since then, AIPAC and its members have worked tirelessly and effectively
on Israel's behalf. You have a world-class reputation for being one of
the most effective such organizations in that regard. And at the same
time, it is America's commitment that also is long and enduring, a commitment
that stretches back to Israel's founding. From the very moment of Harry
Truman's historic decision, in war and peace, the United States has stood
proudly at Israel's side. Our two nations and peoples are bound together
by our common democratic values and traditions. So it has been for over
50 years. So it will always be ... We will drive Saddam and his regime
from power. We will liberate Iraq. We will remove the shadow of Saddam's
terrible weapons from Israel and the Middle East, and we will keep them
from the hands of terrorists who would threaten the entire civilized world
... While we deal with Saddam Hussein, we must not forget the burdens
that the conflict with Iraq has placed on our Israeli friends. I am very
pleased that President Bush has included in his supplemental budget request
that just went to Congress $1b in foreign military financing funds to
help Israel strengthen its military and civil defenses. And that's just
for starters. The president is also asking for $9bn in loan guarantees.
These loan guarantees will help Israel deal with the economic costs arising
from the conflict, and will help Israel to implement the critical economic
and budgetary reforms it needs to get its economy back on track. And I
am hopeful that Congress, with your encouragement will act quickly on
this request ... Continued terror and instability is having a terrible
effect on the Israeli economy. Tourism and investment are down. Breadwinners
are worried about their jobs. Young people are increasingly worried about
their economic futures. The people of Israel are coping. They always do.
They always have. But Israelis should not just cope, not just survive;
they should thrive. And with our help, they will ..." [Etc., etc.,
etc.]
["Neo-cons" -- those who have drawn up the war against Iraq,
Islam, and the Arab world on behalf of Israel -- are overwhelmingly Jewish
and/or in bed with the Jewish Lobby]
Neocons
like Goldberg, Reiland are imperialists,
by Bill Ravott, Pittsburg Live, March 31,
2003
"National Review’s Jonah Goldberg and his neoconservative
allies have not been shy about criticizing those on the Left who resort
to character assassinations against their opponents in an effort to stifle
debate. Yet, it is Goldberg & Co., whining like little schoolgirls, now
are using the 'anti-Semitic' card in an effort to intimidate those who
dare question the influence of Israel on U.S. foreign policy. Goldberg
has targeted four prominent Catholics — Robert Novak, Pat Buchanan, Chris
Matthews, and Rep. James Moran (one can only imagine his private thoughts
of the Pope) — who have suggested that one of the reasons the Bush administration
has targeted Iraq is for the benefit of Israel’s security interests. Wherever
one stands on this issue, it should at least be open for debate. While
attacking all, Goldberg’s ire is directed most toward Buchanan
and his so-called well-established 'Jewish problem.' Goldberg charges
Buchanan with blaming Jews for the war with Iraq with his attacks on 'neoconservatives,'
a phrase Goldberg described as a code word for 'Jewish conservatives'
... Yes, there are many neoconservative Jews (and non-Jews) inside and
outside the Bush administration who, as Buchanan says, 'harbor a passionate
attachment to a nation not our own that causes them to subordinate the
interests of their own country and to act on an assumption that, somehow,
what’s good for Israel is good for America.' Richard Perle is the
most passionate inside the administration and his ties to Israel have
been well known for over 20 years ... Norman Podhoretz, editor
of Commentary, seeks an 'imperial mission for America, whose purpose
would be to oversee the emergence of successor governments in the region'
and to 'find the stomach to impose a new political culture on the defeated'
Islamic world. Is this liberation? The neoconservatives have an utter
disdain for the sovereignty of other nations and believe they have been
granted the divine authority to utilize the U.S. military to tear down
and recreate the Middle East in their own image, as some sort of utopian
‘yes-man’ democratic colony. William Bennett, a day after 9/11, wanted
to invade Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and China. Goldberg,
who never got close to the military himself, thinks this of U.S. foreign
policy, 'Every 10 years or so, the United States needs to pick up some
small crappy little country and throw it against the wall just to show
we mean business.'”
For
Israel Lobby Group, War Is Topic A, Quietly At Meeting, Jerusalem's Contributions
Are Highlighted,
by Dana Milbank, Washington Post, April 1,
2003; Page A25
"This week's meeting in Washington of the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee has put a spotlight on the Bush administration's delicate
dance with Israel and the Jewish state's friends over the attack on Iraq.
Officially, Israel is not one of the 49 countries the administration has
identified as members of the 'Coalition of the Willing.' Officially, AIPAC
had no position on the merits of a war against Iraq before it started.
Officially, Iraq is not the subject of the pro-Israel lobby's three-day
meeting here. Now, for the unofficial part: As delegates to the AIPAC
meeting were heading to town, the group put a headline on its Web site
proclaiming: 'Israeli Weapons Utilized By Coalition Forces Against Iraq.'
The item featured a photograph of a drone with the caption saying the
'Israeli-made Hunter Unmanned Aerial Vehicle' is being used 'by U.S. soldiers
in Iraq.' At an AIPAC session on Sunday night, Israeli Foreign Minister
Silvan Shalom proclaimed in a speech praising Secretary of State
Colin L. Powell: 'We have followed with great admiration your efforts
to mobilize the international community to disarm Iraq and bring democracy
and peace to the region, to the Middle East and to the rest of the world.
Just imagine, Mr. Secretary, how much easier it would have been if Israel
had been a member of the Security Council.' A parade
of top Bush administration officials -- Powell, national security adviser
Condoleezza Rice, political director Kenneth Mehlman, Undersecretary
of State John R. Bolton and Assistant Secretary of State William
Burns -- appeared before the AIPAC audience. The officials won
sustained cheers for their jabs at European opponents of war in Iraq,
and their tough remarks aimed at two perennial foes of Israel, Syria and
Iran. The AIPAC meeting -- attended by about 5,000 people, including
half the Senate and a third of the House -- was planned long before
it became clear it would coincide with hostilities in Iraq."
Why the Left and
Right Must Unite and Fight. The View from the Left,
by Neil Clark, Anti-War.com, April 1, 2003
"As the world's greatest democracy unleashes the full might of its
military power on the people of Iraq, Mahatma Gandhi's words have a special
relevance. One thing is for sure. The war against Iraq will not be the
war to end all wars. It will be followed by others, all fuelled by the
insatiable appetite for profits and power. Three years ago, the same forces
now executing Shock and Awe were dropping cluster bombs and depleted uranium
on civilian targets in Yugoslavia. In 2001, it was the impoverished Afghans'
turn to get the B-52 treatment, with over 5,000 dying in the process.
And two years from now we will no doubt be reading in the Wall Street
Journal of the danger Syria poses to world peace and how President
Assad is the New Hitler. After that it will be turn of Iran, Belarus and
Libya. The neocons and their liberal imperialist
allies appear unstoppable. They have hijacked
the major parties on both sides of the Atlantic. Large sections of the
free world's media are in their hands, and they have a whole entourage
of journalists, eager and ready to peddle their lies, acting, in
the words of John Pilger, as 'handmaidens of a murderous power' ... After
some initial squeamishness, conservatives and socialists, right-wingers
and Trotskyites, have been marching together, united in their desire for
peace. But encouraging as all of this is, it will not be enough. To stop
the War Party much more is needed. The antiwar alliance has to be put
on a more permanent and formal footing. And that means the Left making
a bold and historic step. If we really do want to 'give peace a chance‚'
we need to take off our beads, remove Joan Baez from our turntables, and
start to embrace warmly those at whom we have been hurling insults for
the last forty years. I write as a committed, and totally unreconstructed,
Old Leftist. Yet if Pat Buchanan announced he was standing for president
again, I would be on the next plane out to join his campaign team. But
how many of my fellow socialists would join me? Until the Left is ready
in its hordes to link up electorally with the Old antiwar Right, the brutal
truth is that we have no chance of defeating the Bush/Blair axis. With
the black smoke clouds rising above Baghdad, I believe it is now or never
for the antiwar Left to answer the call. In order to do so, and to make
the 'Peace Party' work, the Left needs to jettison some baggage and spruce
up some of its thinking. Since the 1960s, we have picked up several false
friends, who have done our cause no good at all, lost us immeasurable
support, and who have prevented us from making the alliances it was in
our interest to make ... Political correctness, the biggest threat to
free speech of our time, has plenty to do with neo-liberalism, but precious
little to do with socialism. It is time once and for all to end what Eugene
Genovese has referred to as 'the irrational embrace by the Left of a liberal
program of personal liberation' and for the Left to stress, like [Pete]
Seeger did forty years ago, its positive conservatism. On the key issue
of globalization, there is much muddled thinking too. The anti-globalizers
of the Left correctly point out the destabilizing effects of unregulated
capital flows and rail against the nefarious activities of parasitical
currency speculators like George Soros. Yet at the same time, most
also welcome the unrestricted movement of people, which too can destabilize
societies, as well as leading to the unemployment and lowering of wage
rates of indigenous workers. Next up, the Left has to drop its traditional
antipathy to organized religion and, in particular, to the Catholic Church.
The Vatican has always been anti-Marxist-socialist, but it has, at least
in some teachings, occasionally been anti-capitalist too. Pope Pius XI
believed liberal capitalism and communism to be 'united in their satanic
optimism.' Under the present Pope, the Catholic social teaching has again
been pushed to the fore and the Vatican's criticism of hedonistic international
capitalism has intensified ... Last, but certainly not least, the Left
needs loudly and unequivocally to declare its support for the increasingly
endangered concept of national sovereignty ... The War Party of course
sees national sovereignty very differently. If there is one issue that
clearly demonstrates this and that demarcates who exactly the Peace Party's
enemies are, it is that of Kosovo. The 'humanitarian' intervention, in
which a sovereign state that threatened no other was bombed for 78 days
and nights for the way in which it prosecuted its own "war against terrorism"
brought all the imperialists out of the woodwork for us to see in broad
daylight ... For the War Party, national sovereignty is a tiresome, outdated,
and disposable notion that gets in the way of their plan to globalize
the entire world and, in the name of democracy and human rights, eliminate
all known dangers to the freedom of operation of Goldman Sachs.
The steps outlined above are ones I believe the Left must take if an alliance
with the Old Right is to stick ... My instinct on passing any branch of
McDonalds or Starbucks to search for the nearest brick, however, is one
I believe many conservatives would share. On the most important issues
of the day though, the issues that really matter: globalization, war,
the threats to national sovereignty, and the seemingly relentless march
of transnational capitalism, the Old Right and Old Left are already, by
and large, singing from the same hymn sheet. The world of 2003, with its
standardised shopping malls, skinny lattes, and stealth bombers, is not
the world any of us wanted ... By allying ourselves with the Old Right,
the Old Left has nothing to lose and much to gain. Far from giving up
our identity, we will, I believe, be reclaiming parts long lost to liberalism.
We will be able to get back to basics and start to reiterate our core
beliefs. Our opposition to the international rule of money power and the
idolatry of market forces. Our unequivocal rejection of all forms of imperialism,
whether they fly under a military, financial, or human rights banner.
And above all, our denunciation of war as the primary method of solving
international disputes. For the moment, the imperialist bandwagon appears
unstoppable. But if we on the Left can conjure up enough courage to step
into the unknown and embrace an old enemy, then the days of the War Party
will be numbered. What is lacking today is a permanent, populist, broad-based
political force to challenge the worldview of the serial globalizers and
the advocates of endless war. The Peace Party can be that force."
Can
We Talk?,
by Eric Alterman, The Nation, April
3, 2003
"This war has put Jews in the showcase as never before. Its primary
intellectual architects--Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and
Douglas Feith--are all Jewish neoconservatives. So, too, are many
of its prominent media cheerleaders, including William Kristol,
Charles Krauthammer and Marty Peretz. Joe Lieberman,
the nation's most conspicuous Jewish politician, has been an avid booster,
going so far as to rebuke his former partner Al Gore and much of his own
party. Then there's the 'Jews control the media' problem. It's probably
not particularly relevant that the families who own the Times and
the Washington Post are Jewish, but let's not pretend this is so
in the case of the Jewish editors of, say, U.S. News & World Report
and The New Republic. Mortimer Zuckerman is head of the
Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, and Peretz
is unofficial chair of the American Arab Defamation Committee. Neither
is shy about filling his magazine with news Jews can use. To make matters
worse, many of these Jewish hard-liners--'Likudniks' in the current parlance--appear,
at least from a distance, to be behaving in accordance with traditional
anti-Jewish stereotypes. Much to the delight of genuine anti-Semites of
the left and right, the idea of a new war to remove Saddam was partially
conceived at the behest of Likud politician Benjamin Netanyahu
in a document written expressly for him by Perle, Feith and
others in 1996. Some, like Perle, apparently see the influence
they wield as an opportunity to get rich. What's more, many of these same
Jews joined Rumsfeld and Cheney in underselling the difficulty of the
war, in what may have been a ruse designed to embroil America in a broad
military conflagration that would help smite Israel's enemies ... A really
good conspiracy theorist would begin to wonder if the Jews are being set
up to take the fall when things go badly. A big
part of the problem in addressing the 'Jewish war' conspiracy thesis is
the reticence of almost all sides to broach the issue of Israeli and American
Jewish influence on US foreign policy. A few writers, most notably
Stanley Hoffmann, Robert Kaiser and Mickey Kaus, have raised the question
gingerly. But writing on the Washington Post op-ed page, New Republic
editor Lawrence Kaplan insists that even raising 'the specter of dual
loyalty' is 'toxic.' Kaus noted accurately in Slate that the dual loyalty
taboo is 'quite openly designed to stop people from raising the Likudnik
issue.' And it works. This is all very confusing to your nice Jewish columnist.
My own dual loyalties--there, I admitted it--were drilled into me by my
parents, my grandparents, my Hebrew school teachers and my rabbis, not
to mention Israeli teen-tour leaders and AIPAC college representatives.
It was just about the only thing they all agreed upon. Yet
this milk- (and honey-) fed loyalty to Israel as the primary component
of American Jewish identity--always taught in the context of the Holocaust--inspires
a certain confusion in its adherents, namely: Whose interests come first,
America's or Israel's? Leftist landsmen are certain that an end
to the occupation and a peaceful and prosperous Palestinian state are
the best ways to secure both Israeli security and American interests.
Likudniks think it's best for both Israel and the United States to beat
the crap out of as many Arabs as possible, as 'force is the only thing
these people understand.' But we ought to be honest enough to at least
imagine a hypothetical clash between American and Israeli interests. Here,
I feel pretty lonely admitting that, every once in a while, I'm going
to go with what's best for Israel. As I was lectured over and over
while growing up, America can make a million mistakes and nobody is going
to take away our country and murder us. Israel is nowhere near as vulnerable
as many would have us believe, but it remains a tiny Jewish island surrounded
by a sea of largely hostile Arabs ... Our inability to engage the question
only forces the discussion into subterranean and sometimes anti-Semitic
territory. If the Likudniks played an unsavory role in fomenting this
war (and future wars), and further discussion will help illuminate this
unhappy fact, then I say, 'Let there be light.' If something is 'toxic'
merely to talk about, the problem is probably not in the talking, but
in the doing."
In Congress,
sharp debate on foreign aid Some lawmakers want to punish nations like
Turkey and France while aiding Israel,
Christian Science Monitor, April 3, 2003
"Unlike the aid to Turkey, the president's request for Israel - $1
billion in military assistance and $9 billion loan guarantees - will likely
zip through the congressional process without a hitch. As Congress began
its deliberations, the most influential pro-Israel lobby in the country
was meeting in Washington. Fully half the Senate and a third of the House
joined more than 2,000 delegates of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee (AIPAC) for its annual policy dinner on Monday evening. And
the message from the top Republicans and Democrats, was the same: Support
for Israel is a given. 'We will never abandon Israel. We will never abandon
Israel,' said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, who addressed the
AIPAC conference on Tuesday. Still, speakers and delegates openly worried
that the diplomatic dangers for Israel will come after the war, when the
Bush administration begins patching up relations with the Arab world and
the rest of the 'unwilling.' Already, British lawmakers are pushing Prime
Minister Tony Blair to use his clout with Washington to secure concessions
from Israel in the peace process and demonstrate an 'evenhanded' approach.
'When we see the hysterical anti-Americanism being whipped up in the Middle
East, we fear that the way to patch up relations with the Arab world will
be for the US to force concessions from Israel,' says Herzl Melmed,
an AIPAC delegate from California. Other speakers warned of 'great danger'
for Israel at the end of this conflict and urged AIPAC members to provide
the seed money to build up pro-Israeli groups in Europe. While congressional
support of the aid package for Israel passed virtually without comment,
the $1 billion for Turkey raised more of a challenge."
[The Jewish Lobby's plan for further invasion in the Middle East.]
Israel,
Activists Train Sights on Syria Lobby To Focus On Preventing Missile Transfer,
[Jewish] Forward, April 4, 2003
"Openly pleased with the Bush administration's recent warnings to
Syria not to aid Iraq, Israel and its supporters here have begun ratcheting
up their accusations against its radical neighbor in apparent hopes of
widening the rift between Damascus and Washington. Senior officials with
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee told the Forward that
combating Syrian and Iranian involvement in terrorism and their pursuit
of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction was likely to be
a major focus of Aipac lobbying efforts in 2003. Aipac's executive director,
Howard Kohr, said the group intends to put pressure on the Bush
administration to take steps to stop the transfer of missile technology
from Russia and North Korea to Iran and Syria. The administration, which
until recently had courted Syrian neutrality in its campaign against Iraq,
began directing threats against Damascus last week, citing evidence that
Syria was lending support to the Iraqi war effort. Administration officials
have also leveled accusations in recent weeks against Iran's nuclear program,
despite hopes that Iran could assist in the anti-Iraq effort. The administration's
new accusations focused on Syrian supplies of relatively low-level weaponry,
including night-vision goggles and jamming systems for satellite-locator
devices. Israel this week raised the ante, charging that Syria might be
helping Iraq to hide weapons of mass destruction ... [D]elegates to the
annual Aipac conference in Washington were surprised — and, many said,
pleased — to hear Rumsfeld's warning repeated publicly by his more dovish
colleague, Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell told Aipac that Syria
was now facing 'a critical choice' ... Powell also received a standing
ovation when he called on the international community to intensify its
efforts to curb Iran's support of terrorist groups and its efforts to
acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. The
following day, Israel upgraded the accusation by charging that Syria was
possibly hiding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction ... Itamar Rabinovich,
a former Israeli ambassador to Washington who is now president of Tel
Aviv University added, 'you already have all those accusations that Israel
is driving U.S. policy in the Middle East, so the Jewish lobby shouldn't
be pushing for U.S. action against Syria and Iran' ... In a rare interview
last week with the Lebanese daily As-Safir, Syrian ruler Bashar Assad
said he had warned Arab leaders at an Arab League meeting in Cairo last
month that several of their countries could be next. 'You can be sure
the Syrians will be worried about potential U.S. intervention," said Richard
Murphy, a former ambassador to Syria who is now a senior Middle East fellow
at the Council on Foreign Relations."
DIVISIONS
DEEP OVER CLAIMS OF JEWISH INFLUENCE,
by James Rosen, Sacramento Bee, April
6, 2003
"On paper, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell and national security
adviser Condoleezza Rice run U.S. foreign policy and are responsible for
the war in Iraq. But in some circles Bush and his senior aides -- white
and African American Christians, one and all -- stand accused of having
been duped into attacking Saddam Hussein by a group of Jewish advisers
whose ultimate loyalties are said to lie with Israel instead of the United
States. The claim that an influential Jewish cabal is behind the war,
made in recent weeks by some mainstream politicians and columnists, has
prompted countercharges of anti-Semitism by prominent Jewish organizations.
Rep. James Moran of Virginia lost his Democratic leadership post last
month after telling supporters that 'the Jewish community' was responsible
for the war. Former Sen. Gary Hart of Colorado, who is mulling a presidential
run, outraged many Jews by raising the specter of divided loyalties. Columnists,
from Robert Novak to Georgie Anne Geyer, have made similar claims, while
left-wing protesters and liberal magazines such as the Nation and
the New Republic have followed suit. A sign at an anti-war demonstration
in San Francisco last month read: 'I want YOU to die for Israel. Israel
sings 'Onward, Christian Soldiers.' The assertions that the Bush administration
is waging war for the sake of Israel thanks to the influence of Jewish
advisers created a buzz last week at the annual convention of the American-Israeli
Political Action Committee, the country's most powerful pro-Israel lobby
group ... 'The idea that this war is about Israel is persistent and more
widely held than you may think,' New York Times columnist Bill
Keller wrote. 'It has interesting ripples in our domestic politics. It
has, like many dubious theories, sprouted from a seed of truth. Israel
is part of the story.' At the center of the controversy are a handful
of Jewish men: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas
Feith, Elliott Abrams, David Wurmser. All the men are
longtime leaders of the neoconservative movement, which was founded on
the idea, championed by Reagan, that the United States had to confront
the Soviet Union aggressively -- and in recent years has changed its target
to radical Islam. All of the key figures hold senior positions in the
Bush administration -- at the Pentagon, in the State Department, at the
White House and, in Perle's case, on the Defense Policy Board,
a key group of Pentagon advisers. Most of the controversial Bush aides
are strong supporters of Israel's conservative Likud Party, now headed
by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, and several have past ties either
to Likud or to Israeli companies. Perle, in fact, resigned as chairman
of the Defense Policy Board last week -- though he remained a member --
after published claims by New Yorker magazine reporter Seymour
Hersch, himself a Jew, that a venture capital firm in which Perle
is managing partner might profit from the war ... In 1996, as Likud Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prepared to take office, eight Jewish
neoconservative leaders sent him a six-page memo outlining an aggressive
vision of government. At the top of their list was overthrowing Saddam
and replacing him with a monarch under the control of Jordan. The neoconservatives
sketched out a kind of domino theory in which the governments of Syria
and other Arab countries might later fall or be replaced in the wake of
Saddam's ouster. They urged Netanyahu to spurn the Oslo peace accords
and to stop making concessions to the Palestinians. Lead writer of the
memo was Perle. Other signatories were Feith, now undersecretary
of defense, and Wurmser, a senior adviser to John Bolton, undersecretary
of state. Fred Donner, a professor of Near Eastern history at the University
of Chicago, said he was struck by the similarities between the ideas in
the memo and ideas now at the forefront of Bush's foreign policy. Donner
noted that the memo urged Netanyahu to move toward 're-establishing the
principle of pre-emption rather than retaliation alone.' Pre-emption --
confronting perceived threats to the United States before they attack
instead of afterward -- appeared last year as the centerpiece of a new
strategic defense policy advanced by Bush. Donner said the ideological
similarities, along with the senior posts in the Bush administration now
held by some of the memo's authors, cannot be overlooked. 'There is a
natural line of connection here,' Donner said. "These people have prevailed
upon other people in the administration that this is the policy we should
follow in the Middle East." James Colbert, one of the eight men
who signed the 1996 memo to Netanyahu, is now communications director
of the Jewish Institute for National Security Studies, an influential
neoconservative think tank in Washington."
The
Israelization of America,
By Gideon Samet, Haaretz (Israel),
April 8, 2003
"The events in Iraq can be seen as the Israelization of America.
Close your eyes for a moment, and you can imagine that the Marines in
Karbala are Golani infantry in Tul Karm. And it's not surprising that
two political camps in Israel with diametrically opposite views think
something good will come out of the war. For example, they look on with
curiosity as American soldiers there are blown up in suicide attacks and
observe the reaction of the army. After a taxi blew up, killing the soldiers
who were coming to check it, the Marines blasted the next vehicle, liquidating
its civilian occupants. Left and right are not especially interested in
what the American military is learning from the war. What intrigues them
is the political and diplomatic lesson that the White House will learn.
Never has there been a war in which Israel did not participate but which
is expected to impact so forcefully on its future. The reason for this
does not lie in the comparison Israelis typically like to make between
their fate and the new American effort in our tough neighborhood. The
impact derives, of course, from the Americans' need to operate intensively
in the region after the shooting stops ... Moreover, it is rash to conjecture
that the attitude in America toward embattled Israel will be improved
in the wake of the war's lessons. Even after its bitter experience, it
will not coddle up, eyes moist, to the Israeli generals who are pounding
the territories. It is also too early to believe that the enmity toward
the Jews of the world, who support the campaign, will soon fade. Politically,
though, the United States will emerge from the war as a different place
... Those who sent America into war with Iraq - officials such as Donald
Rumsfeld, for example - have always snorted contemptuously at Palestinian
national aspirations (in what the defense secretary likes to call the
'so-called occupied territories'). So there is an internal contradiction,
whose overall results are still hard to gauge, between the administration's
aim to impose a new order in the region, and the ideology of powerful
figures in it who have no love for the Palestinian cause. It is not too
soon therefore to be concerned about the possibility that the Sharon-Netanyahu-Rumsfeld-Cheney
school of thought will come out on top in the fierce struggle over an
Israeli-Palestinian settlement. It will be sufficient for the Sharon government
if success is achieved in the initiative - which is now being pursued
vigorously under the clouds of war - to obtain political backing from
Congress for the Israeli interpretation of the road map. This Israelization
of the American initiative seeks to replay the foot-dragging that has
delayed any progress toward renewed negotiations. Don't bet your money
that it will fail."
[Massive (and successful) Jewish efforts to drive out politicians
who criticize Israel are well documented (read former Congressman Paul
Finley's works about this subject, for instance. But to the Jewish Lobby,
if you dare to expose their efforts under the light, you're a "bigot."]
Israel
Comments Dog Virginia Congressman,
Fox News, April 10, 2003
"Rep. James P. Moran, who suggested last month that American Jews
had nudged the nation into war, has offended some Jews again by suggesting
a pro-Israel lobbying group will finance an effort to unseat him. The
Virginia Democrat suggested at a recent party meeting that the lobbying
group will raise $2 million in an effort to defeat him next year. Moran,
a seven-term incumbent, said the American Israel Public Action Committee
(AIPAC) has begun organizing against him and will 'direct a campaign against
me and take over the campaign of a Democratic opponent,' The Washington
Post reported Thursday. AIPAC spokeswoman Rebecca Dinar called Moran's
comments 'ridiculous' and said the organization 'had no idea' what the
congressman was talking about ... David Friedman, Washington regional
director for the Anti-Defamation League, said of Moran's reported remarks,
'This only confirms what we already knew: that Jim Moran is a bigoted
man who perpetuates age-old canards and stereotypes about Jews.' Moran
has acknowledged saying at a public forum March 3 in Reston that Jewish
influence had swayed the decision to invade Iraq. 'The leaders of the
Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction
of where this is going and I think they should,' he said."
[Jewish pro-Israelism exapands throughout government: in this case,
more fraud for "peace."]
Foreign
Policy Scholars Criticize Pipes Nomination,
by Ori Nir, [Jewish]
Forward, April 11, 2003
"Foreign policy hands and Middle East pundits responded with surprise
and disbelief this week to the presidential nomination of Daniel Pipes,
an outspoken Middle East hawk, to the board of the United States Institute
of Peace, a federal institution dedicated to preventing, managing and
peacefully resolving international conflicts. Some scholars say that there
is talk of organizing an effort among academics to oppose the nomination,
either through a letter-writing campaign or congressional testimony. Pipes,
who heads a Philadelphia-based think-tank, the Middle East Forum, is known
as a sharp critic of American-backed efforts at Israeli-Palestinian peace,
including President Bush's 'road map' to peace. He espouses a theory of
conflict resolution that rests on the assumption that peace usually is
achieved only by one side defeating the other with military force or other
pressure, and only rarely through reconciliation or negotiation. He has
also drawn criticism for his calls for increased surveillance of Muslim
Americans, particularly soldiers and government officials. 'The U.S. Institute
of Peace is a federally funded institution based on American democratic
values, which is known for treading the middle ground,' said Judith Kipper,
senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a
Washington-based think tank. Pipes, Kipper said, 'has very extreme
views' 'They could definitely get a more objective person for the job,'
said the veteran Middle East scholar Don Peretz, professor emeritus
of political science at the State University of New York at Binghamton.
'I don't think his views are conducive to the objectives of the U.S. Institute
of Peace, which are to work toward peaceful resolution of conflicts.'
Arab-American and Muslim-American organizations are urging the White House
to withdraw the nomination and, failing that, urging the Senate to vote
it down. One organization called on the institute to reject the nomination,
a suggestion institute spokesmen dismissed. Peretz's and Kipper's
views were echoed by numerous scholars in the academic and think-tank
community. When asked about the nomination, many experts on Middle East
and international conflict resolution used adjectives ranging from 'bewildering'
to 'preposterous.' Most declined to speak for attribution, however, variously
citing an unwillingness to engage in ad hominem attacks, reluctance to
criticize a presidential appointment and fears of souring ties with the
institute, an important source of research grant money ... Pipes
recently launched Campus-Watch, an initiative dedicated to monitoring
college campuses for alleged pro-Arab academic bias. Some pro-Israel activists
welcomed the initiative, while critics described it a modern-day form
of McCarthyism. Pipes enjoys the backing of several major Jewish
organizations. David Harris, the executive director of the American
Jewish Committee, said that his organization 'wholeheartedly supports
the nomination of Daniel Pipes' ... Pipes has achieved prominence
in recent months with his frequently stated contention that America's
real enemy in the current struggle is not Islamic terrorism, but militant
Islam as the ideology that spawns terrorism. His positions on extremism
in Islamic culture, religion and politics have provoked outrage among
Muslim-Americans, who often label him a 'Muslim-basher' and 'Islamophobe.'
No less contrary to liberal convention are Pipes's views on conflict resolution,
the core mission of the U.S. Institute for Peace. Peace, Pipes
explained to the Forward this week, is possible 'when one side
gives up its goals.' And that, he argues, almost always comes as a result
of utter defeat ... The institute is a federal agency, established in
1986 to serve as America's academy of peace. It has an annual operating
budget of $16.2 million, wholly funded by taxpayer funds ... The position
is largely symbolic. Pipes will be one of 15 members of the board,
which meets six times a year, mainly to approve applications for fellowships
and grants for research in the field of conflict resolution. Three members
of the panel are ex-officio representatives of the secretary of defense,
the secretary of state and the National Defense University. The Pentagon
is represented on the board by Douglas Feith, undersecretary of
defense for policy affairs, who is considered ideologically close to Pipes
on Middle East-related issues. Another board member is Harriet
Zimmerman, a vice president of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee ... Some commentators see the nomination of Pipes as
a sign of the growing influence that pro-Israel hard-liners wield in Washington.
Hussein Ibish, communications director of the Arab American Anti-Discrimination
Committee, blasted the nomination as a 'sad, Orwellian, symbolic' gesture
of an administration that is heavily influenced by 'far-right, pro-Likud
neo-conservatives and other extremist'" in the White House and Pentagon.
Similar criticisms of the administration have appeared in the Arab and
European press, most recently over the appointment of retired Army general
Jay Garner as the civil administrator of postwar Iraq. In 2000, Garner
went on a 10-day visit to Israel, organized by the Jewish Institute for
National Security Affairs, after which he endorsed a statement by the
hawkish group praising the Israeli military for showing 'remarkable restraint'
in dealing with Palestinian violence. Left-wing critics have cited the
statement as evidence that Garner is an ally of the pro-Israel lobby.
Sources close to Garner say the link is more tenuous than critics assert.
Similarly, liberals and Muslim leaders were critical of the appointment
last December of Elliot Abrams, another outspoken critic of the
Israeli-Palestinian peace process, to direct the Near East and North Africa
branch of the National Security Council."
Think
Tank Deliberates 'World War III',
[Jewish] Forward, April 11, 2003
"Senior politicians, academics and intelligence and law enforcement
officials gathered Sunday at the Waldorf Astoria in New York for the launching
of the Strategic Dialogue Center, a think tank affiliated with Netanya
College in Israel. The center organized a conference on global terrorism
and asked the panelists to provide an answer to the question: 'If this
is World War III, how do we win?' The privately funded center will be
opened officially in June and is planning to hold similar conferences
and publish policy papers. Formers The center's executive board is stacked
with 'formers.' There are former heads of state — Mikhail Gorbachev of
the former Soviet Union, Abdurrahman Wahid of Indonesia, Frederik de Klerk
of South Africa — and former prime ministers: Ehud Barak, Carl Bildt of
Sweden, John Major of England and Mustafa Khalil of Egypt. There's even
a former crown prince — Hassan of Jordan — as well as an array of former
top intelligence and security officials such as former FBI director Louis
Freeh and former CIA chief James Woolsey. Professor
Moshe Amirav, former adviser on Jerusalem to Barak at the Camp
David summit, will direct the center. The president of the board is former
Mossad boss Danny Yatom — although, to be fair, Yatom was
recently elected to the Knesset ... Israel is worried that Libya
has a nuclear program as advanced as Iran's. 'We are watching Libya and
Iran for nuclear programs,' a former Israeli minister at the conference
told the Forward. 'Libya and Iran are as advanced, and Libya even
maybe more than Iran.' The Israeli assessment is that Iran will have a
nuclear device by 2005 and a nuclear weapon shortly thereafter. The official
said the United States had privately conveyed intelligence information
on Libya to Israel a year and a half ago according to which Muammar Gadhafi's
regime was well advanced in developing a nuclear weapons program. 'The
Americans asked us to keep quiet about it, and only three or four people
in Israel knew about this,' he said. 'Then [Assistant Secretary of State]
John Bolton said it publicly and Sharon repeated it.'"
Jews
relieved as separatists lose to liberals in Quebec provincial vote,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, April 15, 2003
"Quebec Jews are breathing a collective sigh of relief with the defeat
of the Parti Quebecois following nine years of the separatist party’s
rule. The Liberal Party swept Monday’s provincial election in a landslide,
taking 76 seats to the Parti Quebecois’s 45, with the Action Democratique
du Quebec party taking the remaining four. Canadian Jews tend to support
the Liberals, who they believe are more supportive of ethnic rights and
more appreciative of the Jewish community’s role in building Quebec economically.
Liberal leader Jean Charest, a lawyer who was raised in a bilingual household,
has many friends in the Jewish community. In contrast, the community has
had a problematic relationship with the Parti Quebecois. After a referendum
on Quebec independence was defeated in 1995, party leader and provincial
premier Jacques Parizeau blamed 'ethnics and the money vote,' which was
seen as a particular slap at the Jewish community. Parizeau resigned the
next day. His successor, Lucien Bouchard, resigned two years ago after
an incident where a PQ political candidate cast doubts on the Holocaust
and claimed that Jews were always whining about their lot in life. Institutionally,
however, the Jewish community has learned to adapt to whichever party
has been in power, even the PQ, according to the two major Jewish organizations
in Canada."
White
House hopeful with Jewish ties advocates anti-war, Middle East ideas,
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, April 14, 2003
"On a recent trek around the U.S. capital seeking support from pro-Israel
lobbyists and Reform movement activists, Democratic presidential candidate
Howard Dean may have been the only non-Jew in the room. But Dean, the
former governor of Vermont, should be used to that. It’s the same way
in his own home. Dean, a Congregationalist, has a Jewish wife, and both
his children, 17-year-old Paul and 18-year-old Anne, have chosen to identify
as Jews ... But Dean, considered a long shot when he first entered the
race, has made a splash as of late, exceeding expectations in fund-raising
in the first quarter of the year. He has been aided by a key figure in
Democratic and Jewish politics, Steve Grossman, the former president
of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the main pro-Israel lobby,
and national chairman of Democratic National Committee. Dean has also
helped distinguish himself by speaking out against the war in Iraq, a
view that has not changed even with the U.S. military successes. 'I believe
this is the wrong war at the wrong time, and I’ve said that repeatedly,'
he said. 'I think that Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria are all more dangerous
to Israel than Iraq. I also think that North Korea and Iran are more dangerous
to the United States than Iraq.' Dean said he believed that U.S. oil policy
is directly linked to the terrorism and anti-American and anti-Israel
sentiment in much of the Arab world. He says oil-rich countries such as
Saudi Arabia are supporting terrorist groups like Hamas and preaching
hate in the classroom, but the United States is turning a blind eye\ ...
At a meet-and-greet session after the official festivities one night at
the annual AIPAC policy conference, Dean spoke to a capacity crowd in
a small room, shaking hands for several hours and progressing slowly to
the exit, encircled by well-wishers ... Dean believes the Bush administration
should be giving Israel $4 billion in military aid to fight terrorism,
not the $1 billion it proposed last month. And he says he is wary of international
participation in the 'road map' for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, but would not 'reject out of hand' the United States partnering
with the United Nations, European Union and Russia. Dean’s name first
made national headlines in 1999, when he signed a law making Vermont the
first state to recognize civil unions for gay and lesbian couples."
Supreme
Court reprimands judge,
Orlando Sentinel, April 15, 2003
"Broward Circuit Judge Sheldon M. Schapiro, notorious among
lawyers for using a push-button prop that sounds like a flushing toilet
and scolding them in a back room known as 'the woodshed,' will receive
a public reprimand next month from the Florida Supreme Court. The Judicial
Qualifications Commission, which monitors the conduct of state judges,
recommended disciplinary action after investigating complaints from local
attorneys. The judge admitted 'engaging in inappropriate behavior,' the
Supreme Court said in an eight-page opinion handed down Thursday. Such
behavior is 'unbecoming a member of the judiciary, brings the judiciary
into disrepute, and impairs the citizens' confidence' in the bench, the
court said. The reprimand is less severe than other disciplinary action
Schapiro faced, including removal from the bench. 'Were it not
for Judge Schapiro's efforts to participate in behavioral therapy, this
Court could have sanctioned [him] in a substantially more severe manner,'
the court found. If he doesn't continue with therapy and other terms of
his reprimand, the court added, it 'will severely sanction Judge Schapiro's
misconduct.' Schapiro, who has been on the bench for a decade,
acknowledged his rude and intemperate behavior and agreed to seek counseling
in a letter to the Supreme Court in November. He apologized to Broward
County residents, expressed regret, and blamed his actions on stress and
personal problems. Under terms of the reprimand, the Supreme Court also
requires Schapiro to mail letters of personal apology to several
lawyers he was accused of mistreating."
Calls
to Attack Syria Come from a Familiar Choir of Hawks,
by Jim Lobe, Project Against the Present Danger,
April 16, 2003
"Many of the same people who led the campaign for war against Iraq
signed a report released three years ago that called for using military
force to disarm Syria of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and to end
its military presence in Lebanon. Among the signers are several senior
members of the administration of President George W. Bush, including the
chief Middle East aide on the National Security Council, Elliott Abrams;
Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith; Undersecretary
of State for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky; and senior consultants to
both the State Department and the Pentagon on Iraq policy, Michael
Rubin and David Wurmser. Also signing were Richard Perle,
the powerful former chairman of the Defense Policy Board (DPB); Jeanne
Kirkpatrick, former United Nations ambassador; Frank Gaffney, a former
Perle aide who heads the Center for Defense Policy; Michael Ledeen,
another close Perle collaborator at the American Enterprise Institute
(AEI); and David Steinmann, chairman of the Jewish Institute for
National Security Affairs (JINSA). The study, Ending Syria's Occupation
of Lebanon: The U.S. Role, was co-authored by Daniel Pipes, who
has just been nominated by Bush to a post at the U.S. Institute of Peace
(USIP), and Ziad Abdelnour, who heads a group founded by him called the
United States Committee for a Free Lebanon (USCFL). The study was released
by Pipes' group, the Middle East Forum. The USCFL, whose 67 'Golden
Circle' members include virtually all of the 31 signatories of the report,
has been a major force behind the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty
Restoration Act that was just reintroduced in the House of Representatives
last Friday by Reps. Eliot Engel, a USCFL member, and Ileana
Ros Lehtinen. The legislation, which had 150 cosponsors in the House
last year, would impose far-reaching economic and diplomatic sanctions
against Syria until the president certified that it has stopped all support
to Lebanon's Hezbollah militia and other groups that Washington considers
'terrorist,' the government withdraws its estimated 20,000 troops from
Lebanon, and takes other measures long demanded by Washington. 'Now that
Saddam Hussein's regime (in Iraq) is defeated,' Engel said April
11, 'it is time for America to get serious about Syria. The United States
must not tolerate (its) continued support of the most deadly terrorist
organizations in the world, its development of weapons of mass destruction,
and its occupation of Lebanon.' He said a companion measure, cosponsored
by Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer and Republican Sen. Rick Santorum
will soon be introduced in the Senate. The action comes amid a two-week-old
flurry of threats by top administration officials against Syria over its
alleged failure to cooperate with Washington's military campaign against
Baghdad. Those threats culminated Sunday when Bush himself accused Syria
of having chemical weapons, although he did not specify whether they were
home-grown or received from Iraq for safe-keeping, as alleged by Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon earlier this year and repeated by senior
Pentagon officials. Last week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld accused
Syria of harboring members of Hussein's regime, and, asked whether Damascus
was 'next' after Iraq, replied that 'it depends on people's behavior.'
Intelligence officials told reporters last week that Rumsfeld had ordered
the drawing up of contingency plans for a possible invasion of Syria and
that Feith, the Pentagon's number three official, had begun work
on a policy paper about Syria's support of terrorist groups. 'There's
got to be a change in Syria,' said Deputy Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz
last Sunday on a TV network news program ... The USCFL, which lists Amin
Gemayel--who as Lebanon's president signed an aborted peace treaty with
Israel in 1983--as the top figure in the Lebanese opposition on its website,
appears to enjoy strong backing from both the Christian Right and far-right
Jewish neoconservatives, such as Perle, Ledeen, Steinmann,
Pipes, and Gaffney. While a handful of the Lebanese-Americans listed
in its 'Golden Circle' are Muslim, most, including Abdelnour, an investment
banker, are Christian. A plurality of 'Golden Circle' members appears
to be Jewish-Americans."
NYC Cuts
Workers, While Israel Grows Richer,
by William Hughes, Media Monitors, April
17, 2003
"In a 'doomsday' budget, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg plans
to cut 10,000 city employees, and close 30 to 40 firehouses, unless state
lawmakers bail out the municipal government. His draconian contingency
plan calls for $1 billion in cuts. Hardest hit will be police, fire, and
sanitation workers, after school programs, and even the closing of two
of the city's fabled zoos, one located in Queens, and the other in Brooklyn.
Meanwhile, the extreme right wing regime of Israel's Ariel Sharon
is rolling in greenbacks, thanks to the deep pockets of the heavily duped
American taxpayers. In the 'Omnibus Appropriation Bill,' passed on Feb.
13, 2003, the U.S. Congress gave the Likudnik-dominated government $600
million in economic aid, $2.1 billion in military aid, plus $60 million
for something called, 'refugee resettlement'. These freebees don't include
the $10 billion in loan guarantees and $4 billion in additional military
aid, that the Sharonists demanded in January, 2003. It's possible that
even more moneys for Israel could be filtered to it, via the $79 billion
Iraqi War budget, in a 'supplemental' anti-terrorism appropriation, or
some other covert budgetary device. Bloomberg is hoping to squeeze
financial aid from the state government in Albany to avoid the more drastic
budget cuts. This could prove extremely difficult, since New York State
is running a $12 billion deficit. In order for the state to help out,
it would itself have to raise even more taxes. U.S. military loans to
Israel, according to Congressional researchers are 'converted to grants,'
and eventually 'forgiven by Congress.' This is why the Israelis can boast
that they have never 'defaulted on a U.S. government loan.' Aid to Israel
is also given in a 'lump sum' at the start of the fiscal year, which leaves
the U.S. to borrow from future revenues to pay it off. Other countries,
less favored, receive their aid in quarterly payments. In fact, Associate
Professor Stephen Zunes of San Francisco U., pointed out, that 'Israel
even lends some of the money back through U.S. treasury bills and collect
the additional interest'. Despite all the aid to Israel over the years,
Zunes said, (01/26/01), 'We are less secure than ever, both in terms of
U.S. interests abroad and for individual Americans. There is a growing
and increasing hostility of the average Arab towards the U.S. In the long
term, peace and cooperation with the vast Arab world is far more important
for U.S. interests than this alliance with Israel. This is not only an
issue for those who are working for Palestinian rights, but it also jeopardizes
the entire agenda of those of us concerned about human rights, concerned
about arms control, concerned about international law' (WRMEA.com). Keep
in mind that Professor Zunes was writing all of this before 9/11 and the
U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Ironies abound here. No one suffered more from
the 9/11 terrorist attack than New Yorkers, especially its brave police,
firemen and rescue workers, and their families. And, as Professor Zunes
correctly predicted, the increased Arab 'hostility' to the U.S., as a
result of our one-sided favoritism towards Israel, has made all of us
'less secure.' On top of that, we now have the mayor of NYC, ready to
layoff police and firemen and to close fire houses in order to balance
the municipal budget. Yet, federal largess to Zionist Israel, in the billions
of dollars annually, continues unabated, without any real consideration
of its justification, or its consequences to our national well-being.
Actually, things are worse than they appear. According to Thomas Stauffer,
a consulting economist, aid to Israel has really cost U.S. taxpayers,
from 1956-2002, about $1.7 trillion. This is more than $5,700 per person.
... Question: How much longer are the American people going to put up
with this gross distortion of priorities that mocks our Republic?"
The Bum Frum,
By Taki, The American Conservative, April
21, 2003
"So you can imagine my surprise when in NR’s [National Review's]
last issue I found myself and my colleagues Pat and Scott listed as 'unpatriotic
conservatives' in 'a war against America.' Mind you, I was in excellent
company. Others accused were people like Tom Fleming, Llewellyn Rockwell,
Robert Novak, Sam Francis, Justin Raimondo, Joe Sobran, and Eric Margolis.
I was flattered until I saw the writer’s name. One David Frum.
Now let’s get one thing straight. Unlike Pat and Scott, and despite the
advice given to me by an NR higher-up, I will not take the high road.
If this bum Frum thinks he’s the only one who cannot see a belt
without hitting below it, he’s got another thing coming. From what I’ve
heard, Frum is a climber who fouls everyone and everything that
takes him in, with the White House being just one example. This buffoon
was fired by the Bushies, then went around threatening to sue if someone
hinted that he didn’t quit on his own. (You were fired Frum, and
I welcome your lawsuit.) He is a cheap Canadian careerist who jumped on
the neocon bandwagon and is now using anti-Semitism as a stick to beat
us with. Mind you, to be called 'unpatriotic' and an 'anti-Semite' by
this shameless publicity hound has to be a compliment. I only met Frum
once, at a Conrad Black party, where he came up Uriah-Heep-like, actually
looking more like the oily Peter Lorre in 'The Maltese Falcon.' I know
his kind. He will use anyone—including his wife, which he did in spreading
the claim that he invented the phrase 'axis of evil'—in order to advance
his career. Like his icon Sammy Glick, Frum tries to make
it by stepping on bodies, but he will end up like Glick, a marginal
fellow who tells tall tales about himself. He reminds me of another David—Brock—both
of them being ugly pipsqueaks who specialize in telling without having
kissed. We are now in a senseless war that was promoted by the neocons.
They have tried to shut down debate by charging
anti-Semitism. It is the oldest as well as the cheapest trick in the book.
The reason I’m so adamantly against the war is because I believe it will
have terrible consequences in the long run for America. We should be looking
inward and going after the Asan Akbars of this world, most likely financed
by the Saudi rulers. The rest is bunk, and a punk like Frum can
rant from here to Baghdad. It will not change the truth."
Greenspan
Says He Would Accept 5th Term,
Earthlink (froim Associated Pres), April
23, 2003
"Alan Greenspan, expressing appreciation for President Bush's
confidence, said Wednesday he would accept a fifth term as chairman of
the Federal Reserve. In a brief statement, Greenspan, who is now
in his 16th year as head of the nation's central bank, said he would accept
a nomination for another four-year term. Bush in a surprise announcement
on Tuesday had said he planned to nominate Greenspan for a new
term when his current one expires next year. 'If President Bush nominates
me and the Senate confirms his choice, I would have every intention of
serving,' Greenspan said Wednesday. 'The president and I have not
discussed this, but I greatly appreciate his confidence,' Greenspan
said in his statement. 'I have been privileged to be appointed by five
presidents to various positions.' Greenspan, who took over as Fed
chairman on Aug. 11, 1987, after being picked for the post by Ronald Reagan,
had previously served as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
under Gerald Ford. Greenspan was renominated for the Fed position
once by Bush's father and twice by Bill Clinton."
[Here we have defined -- in David Horwitz's Front Page journal --
the Jewish Israelization of America. America is increasingly hated because
of its Israel-based foreign policy and Judeocentric arrogance.]
Americans:
The Jews of the World,
by Daniel Jennings, FrontPageMagazine.com, April
23, 2003
"The popular 20th Century Jewish American novelist Edna Ferber
once wrote 'the United States seems to be the Jews among nations. It is
resourceful adaptable, maligned, envied and feared... its peoples are
travelers and wanderers by nature, moving shifting, restless.' Sadly enough,
recent events have proven that Ferber was right. The Jewish people
and the United States have a lot in common, both are successful, resourceful,
adaptable, highly creative, inventive and hated. Like the Jews, Americans
are increasingly the objects of hatred, fear, jealousy, bigotry, prejudice,
violence and terror from all corners of the globe and the political spectrum.
In particular, America and Americans are now the target of a vicious,
irrational, destructive, well-organized, well-defined, popular and widespread
campaign of hatred, prejudice and hysteria similar to that directed against
the Jews before World War II. Anti-Americanism has become as popular and
as widespread as anti-Semitism was in the 1920s and 30s and its effects
could be just as destructive and as tragic as the wave of anti-Semitism
that gave rise to Adolph Hitler and the Final Solution. The historical
analogies between anti-Semitism in the first half of the 20th Century
and anti-Americanism today are absolutely bone chilling. In the early
1920s, all of the world's problems were blamed on the Jews. The Jews had
somehow started World War I, Jewish bankers had financed the Russian Revolution,
Communism was a Jewish conspiracy to enslave the world, the Jews had somehow
engineered Germany's defeat in 1918, Jewish artists and intellectuals
were responsible for the decline of culture and morality, Jewish businessmen
were responsible for all the problems of capitalism and the troubles of
the poor. This was nonsense but it was widely believed even by the most
educated and respected of people. Today, the problems of nations and peoples
all over the world are blamed upon America."
Campaign
Confidential,
By E.J. KESSLER, [Jewish] Forward,
April 25, 2003
"Does the presidential candidacy of Connecticut Senator Joseph
Lieberman have a Jewish problem? Some folks seem to think so. The
Hartford Courant took its home-state senator to task last week for what
it called his 'dismal' first-quarter contribution filing, saying there
was a 'Jewish wrinkle' to Lieberman's lackluster showing: The senator's
centrist values are out of step with the liberal Jews who give to Democratic
candidates, the paper reported. Problem is, many of the more conservative
Jewish Democrats who might give to Lieberman appear not to be reaching
for their checkbooks, either. 'Joe's natural big constituency is sitting
on their hands,' said one New York fundraiser and Lieberman supporter
who spoke on condition of anonymity. 'Many, many Jewish people do not
want a Jewish president.' The fundraiser said that many politically conservative
and centrist Jews 'are big fans of George Bush right now,' especially
because 'the Israelis are telling people that he's their best friend'
and "people do not want a Jewish president when relations with Israel
could become very tense." Lieberman also has caused some of his
own problems, the fundraiser said. 'People did not love Joe's last campaign,"
the fundraiser said, referring to Lieberman's 2000 vice-presidential
run. 'He's not 'good old Joe' anymore. He seems more like a politician.'"
Headline:
US subservience to Israel,
By Fauzia Qureshi, Hi Pakistan, May 2003
"The Americans may seem to be winning the war against Iraq but they
have already lost on the political, strategic and moral fronts. Was this
war necessary? Is it for the liberation of the Iraqi people or their subjugation?
How can a nation be liberated by being bombed indiscriminately? Is a nation
which is humiliated and devastated just a few years ago by the same invaders
suppose to welcome them? How unscrupulous a state can get to farther its
aims and goals? Is there a hidden agenda, a greater war design and by
whom? These are some of the questions asked by all. What the Americans
have failed to realize is not only the response of the Iraqi people but
the vital fact that they have triggered a sense of renewed nationalism
among the Muslims and an urge to unite as Muslim Ummah. The Americans
have basically done what years of labour by different Muslim Organizations
couldn't achieve ... The American aims in the Middle East seem economic
in nature. Not many Americans fully understand the
Jewish connection and the fact that their foreign policy has been 'hijacked'.
Presently, Iraq stood as the strongest neighbouring Arab state and its
disunion was absolutely necessary for the survival and continuation of
Israel. This war on Iraq is part of the greater plan masterminded by Jews
in order to achieve the ultimate goal of becoming the World Power
... The current team of the so called "think-tanks" around Mr Bush include
Richard Perle (a Jew), who regarded "war on terror" as "total war".
He has pretented to be the first casualty of war and has resigned. Though
mission accomplished. Others include Dick Cheney (VicePresident), Donald
Rumsfeld (Defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Defence secretary),
Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff), William Bennett (Reagan's
education secretary) and Zalmay Khalilzad (Bush's ambassador to Afghanistan).
All these are modern chartists of American terrorism. The list also includes
Douglas Feith (Under secretary for Defence), David Wurmser (Special
assistant to the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control, John Bolton,
who dutifully echoes the Perle-Sharon line), Edward Luttwak
(Member of Pentagon's National Security Studies), Dov Zakhein (Assistant
Secretary of Defence), Folbert Satloff (National Security Adviser),
Eliott Abrams (National Security Adviser), Mark Grossman
(Assistant Secretary of state for Political Affairs), Lewis Libby (Personnel
Manager of Dick Cheney), Kenneth Adelman (Pentagon Adviser), Henry
Kissenger (Pentagon Adviser), James Schlesinger (Pentagon Adviser),
Michael Chertoff (Assistant Attorney General, Justice Department),
Joshua Bolten (First Political Adviser to Bush), Steve Goldsmith
(Senior Adviser to Bush), Richard Haass (Ambassador and Director,
Political Planning at the State Dept), Robert Zeollick (A government-level
trade representative), Ari Fleischer (Spokesman for the White House),
Mel Sembler (President of US Export and Import Bank), Bonnie
Cohen (Assistant Secretary of State for Administrative Affairs), Lincoln
Bloomfield (Assistant Secretary of State for Military-Political Affairs),
Adam Goldman (Link between White House and Jewish community), Samuel
Bodman (Assistant Secretary of Trade), Ruth Davis (Director,
External Corps), Joseph Gildenhorn (Ex-ambassador and financial
director and coordinator of Bush's electoral campaign), and Christopher
Gersten (Top official at the Children and Families Department). These
are the so called 'War Party Group' or 'Neoconservatives'. All of them
claim that US-Israeli interests are the same but it is not so. But who
are the neoconservatives? Neoconservatives: The first generation of neoconservatives
were ex-liberals, socialists, and Trotskyites, boat-people from the McGovern
revolution who rafted over to the GOP at the end of conservatism's long
march to power with Ronald Reagan in 1980.All are intrventionists who
regard Stakhanovite support of Israel as a defining characteristic of
their breed. Thus a passionate attachment to Israel is a key tenet. Another
name for them is 'Jewish conservatism.'"
Jews'
Role Murky As Rebel Banner Drops in Georgia,
By JEFF ZELL, [Jewish] Forward, May
2, 2003
"Thanks to a last-second compromise reached by lawmakers last week,
the state flag of Georgia is about to drop the notorious Confederate battle
emblem for the first time in nearly 50 years.. The deal — widely seen
as a rebuke of Republican Governor Sonny Perdue — came quickly, catching
most observers by surprise. But for Tyrone Brooks and other black state
legislators, it has been a long fight to remove the Confederate emblem
— the Rebel Cross — from the flag. Some black leaders have questioned
why the Jewish community has not taken a more public stand in that fight,
but Jewish leaders said they were working 'behind the scenes' on the issue
... What's not as clear, it seems, is the role played by the Jewish community
in the debate. During recent months, some black leaders have observed
that the Jewish community generally stayed on the sidelines. But Judy
Marx, associate director of the American Jewish Committee's Atlanta
chapter, said her group was working against any efforts to bring back
the 1956 flag. 'We fought hard behind the scenes,' Marx said. 'We
wrote every state legislator making our opinion known, but we were not
out in front in the media.' AJCommittee helped create the local Black-Jewish
Coalition in 1982 and underwrites Project Understanding, a retreat for
black and Jewish leaders."
[This apologist author -- Robert J. Lieber -- is Jewish, veiling again
the Israeli hand:]
The Neoconservative-Conspiracy
Theory: Pure Myth,
By ROBERT J. LIEBER, Chronicle of Higher
Education, May 2, 2002
"The ruins of Saddam Hussein's shattered tyranny may provide additional
evidence of chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, but
one poisonous by-product has already begun to seep from under the rubble.
It is a conspiracy theory purporting to explain how the foreign policy
of the world's greatest power, the United States, has been captured by
a sinister and hitherto little-known cabal. A small band of neoconservative
(read, Jewish) defense intellectuals, led by the 'mastermind,' Deputy
Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz (according to Michael Lind,
writing in the New Statesman), has taken advantage of 9/11 to put
their ideas over on an ignorant, inexperienced, and ;easily manipulated'
president (Eric Alterman in The Nation), his 'elderly figurehead'
Defense Secretary (as Lind put it), and the 'dutiful servant of power'
who is our secretary of state (Edward Said, London Review of Books).
Thus empowered, this neoconservative conspiracy, 'a product of the influential
Jewish-American faction of the Trotskyist movement of the '30s and '40s'
(Lind), with its own 'fanatic' and 'totalitarian morality' (William Pfaff,
International Herald Tribune) has fomented war with Iraq -- not
in the interest of the United States, but in the service of Israel's Likud
government (Patrick J. Buchanan and Alterman). This sinister mythology
is worthy of the Iraqi information minister, Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf,
who became notorious for telling Western journalists not to believe their
own eyes as American tanks rolled into view just across the Tigris River.
And indeed versions of it do circulate in the Arab world. (For example,
a prominent Saudi professor from King Faisal University, Umaya Jalahma,
speaking at a prestigious think tank of the Arab League, has revealed
that the U.S. attack on Iraq was actually timed to coincide with the Jewish
holiday of Purim.) But the neocon-conspiracy notion is especially conspicuous
in writing by leftist authors in the pages of journals like The Washington
Monthly and those cited above, as well as in the arguments of paleoconservatives
like Buchanan and his magazine, The American Conservative ...
Alterman writes that 'the war has put Jews in the showcase as never
before. Its primary intellectual architects -- Paul Wolfowitz,
Richard Perle (former aide to Senator Henry M. 'Scoop' Jackson;
assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration; now a member
of the Defense Policy Board, an unpaid body advising Secretary of Defense
Donald H. Rumsfeld), and Douglas J. Feith (the No. 3 official at
Defense) -- are all Jewish neoconservatives. So, too, are many of its
prominent media cheerleaders, including William Kristol, Charles
Krauthammer, and Marty Peretz. Joe Lieberman, the nation's
most conspicuous Jewish politician, has been an avid booster' ... Even
in its less fevered forms, the neocon-conspiracy theory does not provide
a coherent analysis of American foreign policy. More to the point, especially
among the more extreme versions, there are conspicuous manifestations
of classic anti-Semitism: claims that a small, all-powerful but little-known
group or 'cabal' of Jewish masterminds is secretly manipulating policy;
that they have dual loyalty to a foreign power; that this cabal combines
ideological opposites (right-wingers with a Trotskyist legacy, echoing
classic anti-Semitic tropes linking Jews to both international capitalism
and international communism); that our official leaders are too ignorant,
weak, or naive to grasp what is happening; that the foreign policy upon
which our country is now embarked runs counter to, or is even subversive
of, American national interest; and that if readers only paid close attention
to what the author is saying, they would share the same sense of alarm."
Pax
Americana's cheerleaders. Canadian chorus urging Bush onward,
by DAVID OLIVE, Toronto Star, May 4, 2003
"David Frum recalls that on his last day as a Bush administration
speechwriter in 2002, he felt sad about leaving the White House. But 'I
could not deny it any longer,' he wrote in his memoir, The Right Man.
'My work here was done.' That went down in Frum's hometown of Toronto
as one of the more self-important career assessments of a native son.
But then, Frum did co-author the 'axis of evil' centrepiece of
the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive intervention in the affairs of 'rogue
states.' Two things characterize a preponderance of intellectuals urging
the United States to embrace a gussied-up version of Pax Americana. In
the main, they are wholly untutored in real-world diplomacy and military
strategy, except for what they glean from each other's think-tank papers
and broadsheet jeremiads. And many are not native-born Americans. A surprising
number hail from Canada, a member of the 'coalition of the unwilling'
in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. Or spent their formative years in other
outposts of the defunct British empire, the glory of which they seem determined
to have the U.S. revive under its flag. 'Our best hope is in American
strength and will, unashamedly laying down the rules of world order and
being prepared to enforce them,' says Charles Krauthammer, a prominent
Washington Post columnist and TV commentator who was raised in
Montreal and obtained his undergraduate degree in political science and
economics at McGill University. Other Canucks in the chorus include British-born
Barbara Amiel who, from her perch at the Times of London,
condemns the 'cowardice' of Europe and Canada in questioning White House
war aims in Iraq. Mark Steyn, also from Canada, and a columnist
at several U.S. and U.K. papers and Canada's National Post, cheers
the Pentagon's apparent rejection of a United Nations role in post-war
Iraq ... In a controversial New York Times Magazine cover story,
Canadian human-rights historian Michael Ignatieff implored Americans
to acknowledge that they have imperial duties that may be, 'in a place
like Iraq, the last hope for democracy and stability alike.' ... In a
Slate essay last week, war hawk David Plotz concurs with Ferguson
that a lingering, disciplining force is required in Iraq to make a success
of regime change there. 'It's not too late to enforce the occupation ruthlessly,'
Plotz writes, arguing that brute force is the only thing Iraqi
looters and other troublemakers will respect."
Neoconservatives.
They emerged from behind the scenes politically to change American foreign
policy. But they've always been there, and Iraq is only one of their goals,
By Dick Polman, Philadelphia Inquirer, May
4, 2003
"For seven long years, Bill Kristol agitated for a U.S. coup
against Saddam Hussein, and argued that America should remake the world
to serve its own interests. Few bothered to listen at the time. So how
does he feel now? In his office the other day, he grinned without smirking.
That's how most of the hawkish defense intellectuals - better known as
neoconservatives - are behaving these days ... The neocons - think-tank
warriors and commentators, all of whom cite Ronald Reagan's moral clarity
- are hot these days because they emerged from the political wilderness
to alter the course of American foreign policy. And Iraq is just the beginning,
as Kristol cheerily contended: 'President Bush is committed, pretty
far down the road. The logic of events says you can't go halfway. You
can't liberate Iraq, then quit.' The neocons care little about domestic
policy; they think globally. They don't believe in peaceful coexistence
with hostile, undemocratic states; rather, they want an 'unapologetic,
idealistic, assertive' America (in Kristol's words) that will foment
pro-democratic revolutions around the world, if necessary at the point
of a gun ... Others talk darkly about a 'neocon cabal' that includes a
media empire (Murdoch also owns Fox News), policy shops (notably
the American Enterprise Institute, home to many neocon scholars and Kristol's
Project for a New American Century), and revenue sources (particularly
the Bradley Foundation, which has helped finance the policy shops). In
a sense, it is tight-knit. The institute, Kristol's Project
for a New American Century, and the Weekly Standard are all
housed in the same Washington office building ... In 1998, the Project
for a New American Century sent an open letter to President Bill Clinton,
urging that he overthrow Hussein; 10 of the signatories now work for Bush.
And when Bush spoke in February at the institute (Lynne Cheney, the vice
president's wife, is a board member), he said that his team had borrowed
20 of its scholars. Neocon Richard Perle, a Pentagon adviser, was
an institute scholar; so was John Bolton, who now has a key undersecretary
post in the State Department. Today, the institute still has hawks who
were hawks before the neocon label became hip; witness ex-Reagan Pentagon
adviser Michael Ledeen, who, while puffing on a fat cigar the other
day, said: 'Americans believe that peace is normal, but that's not true.
Life isn't like that. Peace is abnormal ..."
[Even a prominent member of the British Parliament who dares to criticize
the Jewish "cabal" is not immune from the Thought Police Squad
and its legal wrangling to veil the truth:]
Anger
over Dalyell's 'Jewish cabal' slur,
by FRASER NELSON, The Scotsman (Scotland),
May 5, 2003
"Tam Dalyell, the Father of the House, may be referred to the Commission
for Racial Equality after claiming a 'Jewish cabal' operating in both
the United States and Britain is driving the governments of both countries
into a war against Syria. Eric Moonman, the president of the Zionist
Federation in London, has said he believes Mr Dalyell’s remarks constitute
a formal offence - and that he is considering a formal complaint to the
commission. Mr Dalyell said that he now expects to be victimised because
he raised 'a whisper of criticism' about the influence which Jewish advisers
hold on Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, and George Bush, the president
of the US. The outrage was prompted by Mr Dalyell’s comments in Vanity
Fair magazine, where he said the ideas of hardline Jewish White House
advisers are being embraced by men of equivalent stature in London. He
has named Peter Mandelson, Jack Straw and Lord Levy
as the trio which influences Mr Blair in his foreign policy - and are
ensuring that Britain follows a "Zionist agenda" in the Middle East. When
asked to explain his comments, Mr Dalyell told The Scotsman yesterday
he was not anti-Semitic but felt the need to lay out his fears that Zionist
ministers may make Syria the 'next stop' after Iraq. 'A Jewish cabal have
taken over the government in the United States and formed an unholy alliance
with fundamentalist Christians,' he said. The members of this cabal, he
said, are Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defence secretary, Elliott
Abrams, a member of the national security council, Ari Fleischer,
the White House spokesman, and John Bolton, the undersecretary
of state. 'I was asked [by Vanity Fair] what effect this has had
on Britain and I said it has fallen on fertile ground here. I mentioned
Mandelson, Straw and Levy as being fertile ground.
They have all encouraged Blair to go through with this terrible war' ...
Mr Dalyell said he is aware about the opposition his remarks caused. 'One
is treading on cut glass on this issue and no one wants to be accused
of anti-Semitism, but if it is a question of launching an assault on Syria,
then one has to be candid.' David Garfinkel, the editor-in-chief
of the London Jewish News, said Mr Dalyell’s remarks introduced
an anti-Semetic dimension into the debate - and would send shock waves
through the community ... Mr Wolfowitz and Mr Abrams are
usually named with Douglas Feith and David Wurmser as members
of the 'cabal.' All men are prominent figures of the US neo-conservative
movement."
Dalyell
remarks on Jewish cabal may face scrutiny by watchdog,
By Benedict Brogan, Telegraph (UK), May 5,
2003
"Tam Dalyell, Labour's most senior MP, faces being referred to the
Commission for Racial Equality over remarks he made to an American magazine
which suggested Tony Blair was unduly influenced by Jewish figures in
his inner circle. Prof Eric Moonman, a former Labour MP and current
president of the Zionist Alliance, said he had consulted lawyers about
comments published yesterday that he described as 'highly inflammatory'.
Mr Dalyell, MP for Linlithgow and Father of the House, was alleged to
have accused the Prime Minister of 'being unduly influenced by a cabal
of Jewish advisers'. The remark, which was not a direct quote but claimed
to describe his attitude, appeared in the current issue of Vanity Fair
magazine in an article to mark Mr Blair's 50th birthday. Mr Moonman
who is a former senior vice-president of the Board of Deputies of British
Jews, described himself as a long-standing friend of Mr Dalyell but said
his views were unacceptable. 'It's the sort of insidious thing I would
expect to see in a poorly produced BNP pamphlet,' he said. 'It is bad
enough for an MP to start to use this language but it is much worse when
he is Father of the House. If he were to point out a cabal of black people,
he would be referred to the CRE.' Mr Moonman said he did not believe
Mr Dalyell was anti-Semitic. But he added: 'This sort of language is quite
wrong and ultimately will do him a great deal of harm. We will look very
closely at what he says in the future. I have taken advice from several
lawyers and will have further consultations on whether there is a case
for a referral to the CRE. I believe there is' ... Mr Dalyell, an opponent
of the war against Iraq, is said to have identified Lord Levy,
the Prime Minister's special envoy to the Middle East, Mr [Jack]
Straw [Foreign Secretary] and Peter Mandelson, whose father
was Jewish. He denied he was anti-Semitic. 'I am fully aware that one
is treading on cut glass on this issue and no one wants to be accused
of anti-Semitism, but, if it is a question of launching an assault on
Syria or Iran . . . then one has to be candid,' he said. Last night Mr
Dalyell said he was worried Mr Blair was being 'led up the garden path
on a Likudnic-Sharon agenda', a reference to Ariel Sharon,
the hard-line Israeli prime minister and his Likud party. He said he only
used the word "cabal" in reference to figures in the Bush administration.
'The cabal I referred to was in the US. That is the Jewish Institute for
National Security Affairs,' he said."
Fury
as Dalyell attacks Blair's 'Jewish cabal',
by Colin Brown & Chris Hastings, Telegraph (UK)
, May 4, 2003
"Tam Dalyell, the Father of the House, sparked outrage last night
by accusing the Prime Minister of 'being unduly influenced by a cabal
of Jewish advisers.' In an interview with Vanity Fair, the Left-wing
Labor MP named Lord Levy, Tony Blair's personal envoy on the Middle
East, Peter Mandelson, whose father was Jewish, and Jack Straw,
the Foreign Secretary, who has Jewish ancestry, as three of the leading
figures who had influenced Mr. Blair's policies on the Middle East. Yesterday
Mr. Dalyell, the MP for Linlithgow, told The Telegraph: 'I am fully
aware that one is treading on cut glass on this issue and no one wants
to be accused of anti-Semitism but, if it is a question of launching an
assault on Syria or Iran . . . then one has to be candid.' He added: 'I
am not going to be labeled anti-Semitic. My children worked on a kibbutz.
But the time has come for candour.' The Prime Minister, Mr. Dalyell claimed,
was also indirectly influenced by Jewish people in the Bush administration,
including Richard Perle, a Pentagon adviser, Paul Wolfowitz,
the deputy defense secretary, and Ari Fleischer, the president's
press secretary."
[British Foreign Minister Jack Straw is of Jewish heritage.]
Straw
under fire for ignoring Israeli attacks on UK nationals,
by Chris McGreal, The Guardian (UK), May
7, 2003
"The father of a British peace activist left in a coma by an Israeli
army bullet has accused the Foreign Office of showing more concern at
the killings of Israeli citizens than investigating Israeli responsibility
for the shootings of Britons. Anthony Hurndall said he would press for
a meeting with the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, next week to
express his dissatisfaction at the government's failure to apply serious
pressure to Israel for an open investigation into the shooting of his
son, Tom, 21, in Gaza and two other UK citizens by the Israeli army in
recent months. In November, Iain Hook, who was working for the UN, was
killed in the Jenin refugee camp. Last week, a British cameraman, James
Miller, was shot dead in the Gaza Strip. In all three cases, the Israeli
army has claimed the victims were in the presence of Palestinian gunmen
or caught in crossfire, despite compelling evidence to the contrary. Mr
Hurndall said Britain was allowing an Israeli cover-up, despite having
promised there would be a full inquiry into the shooting of his son. He
contrasted the UK's statement of support for Israel after a British suicide
bomber murdered three people in a Tel Aviv bar with its reaction to the
shooting of UK nationals by Israeli soldiers. 'I have expressed to the
embassy strongly my unease at the fact that immediately following the
bombing at the bar in Tel Aviv and the killing of three Israelis, the
British government jumped to give a statement of support for Israelis
and to freeze funds and make arrests. 'In contrast, the almost passive
reaction of the British government at the shooting of three of its nationals
in Israel is very disturbing,' he said. Mr Hurndall, who is in Israel
where his son is in hospital, also criticised the Israelis for lack of
reciprocity. The army has refused to allow him to meet officers in command
of the unit responsible for shooting his son. 'There's an enormous difference
between how the British reacted to British citizens' involvement in killing
Israelis and the complete lack of cooperation and a complete silence over
what happened to British nationals here,' he said. Mr Hurndall is not
alone in criticising the Foreign Office's failure to vigorously pursue
inquiries into the shooting of unarmed Britons. Six months ago, Mr Straw
and Clare Short, the international development secretary, promised a full
investigation into the killing of Iain Hook. But the Israelis have since
all but buried the inquiry and some of Mr Hook's British colleagues have
accused the Foreign Office of being less concerned with exposing the circumstances
of his killing than with not further straining relations with Israel at
a time when Tony Blair is viewed with increasing suspicion for his promotion
of Palestinian statehood. UN workers complain that 'trigger happy' Israeli
troops are rarely called to account for the killing of civilians. Most
victims are Palestinians, many of them children. But critics say that
it is a reflection of a lack of accountability within the army that soldiers
apparently believe they can shoot foreigners with impunity."
[More Jewish "analysts" pushing the U.S. government to decide
what Iranian citizens want: coziness with Israel.]
Analysts
weigh options for change in Iran,
By Christian Bourge, UPI, May 7, 2003
"Analysts at key think tanks in Washington say the U.S. foreign policy
community is actively debating what steps should be taken to promote liberalization
and regime change in Iran following the Iraq war. Meyrav Wurmser,
director of the Center for Middle East Policy at the conservative Hudson
Institute, said there is a sense of urgency surrounding the future of
Iran because of the wide impact the Iraq war has had upon the region.
Speaking Tuesday at a conference on the issue co-sponsored by Hudson and
the conservative American Enterprise Institute and Hudson, Wurmser
said U.S. policy for the region must focus on ridding it of the regimes
that aim to do harm to the United States and its allies ... Bernard
Lewis, an emeritus professor of Near Eastern studies at Princeton
University and a well-known expert on Islam and the Middle East, said
that a major fear among the ruling theocratic regimes in the Middle East,
such as Iran, is that the American effort to bring democracy to Iraq will
be successful and spread liberal ideas to their countries ... Daniel
Brumberg, a visiting scholar at the liberal-centrist Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace, told United Press International that although
this would be a huge embarrassment for Iran's mullahs, the drain on their
power would not be immediate. 'That long-term erosion (of power) will
reinforce the moderates but that is a long term project in five, 10 or
15 years,' said Brumberg ... Many analysts as well as external
and internal reformers within Iran have already become impatient with
the country's slow drive toward political liberalization. They argue that
the United States must take a more proactive role in the process. Lewis
said that the fear of more direct American influence in the region is
already resulting in the kind of militant behavior toward the United States
that occurred in Lebanon. 'There is now a really serious threat, the beginnings
of which we already see,' said Lewis ... Judith Kipper, senior
fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and director
of the Middle East Forum at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that
the United States must do whatever it can to reconnect with Iran and get
its government to the table."
Dems face
ethnic rift in California,
By Peter Savodnik, The Hill ("the Newspaper
for and about the U.S. Congess"), May 7, 2003
"Hispanic voters, a cornerstone of California’s Democratic coalition,
are increasingly challenging liberal Jewish incumbents to turn over the
reins and make way for a new generation of leaders. The rift pits one
of the California Democratic Party’s fastest-growing groups against one
of their most influential and threatens party unity in that state and,
possibly, in Texas, Arizona, Colorado and elsewhere, Democratic Party
officials say. The split, as they see it, stems from an unfortunate confluence
of events. First, in the 1990s, term limits were imposed on elected officials
in the state Assembly and Senate. Many state legislators forced out by
those limits decided to seek higher office. Then, in 2001, the state Legislature
redrew California’s 53 congressional districts. The new political map
channeled many Hispanic voters into districts represented by Jewish officeholders.
In the view of some Democratic insiders, the problem
was further compounded by the large number of Jewish members of Congress
from Southern California districts. Seven of the 17 Democrats from the
Los Angeles area to the Mexican border are Jewish, seven are Hispanic
and three are African-American. 'I can see Republicans using the accident,
as it were, of many Jewish congresspeople to create a wedge issue against
the Democrats,' said Rep. Bob Filner, whose newly drawn 51st District
includes 340,000 Latinos, 53 percent of the electorate. 'That is,' the
Jewish Democrat continued, 'to try to get Hispanic support by claiming
there’s a Jewish conspiracy or something against them.' A California Republican,
one of 20 in the state’s congressional delegation, buttressed Filner’s
contention. 'In the Democratic Party you have the potential for fratricide,
because people are starting to kill each other off — Jewish liberals and
black liberals versus the immigrant Hispanics,' said the member, who declined
to be identified by name. Referring to such longtime Jewish incumbents
as Reps. Howard Berman and Henry Waxman, the Republican
member added: 'They’re keeping themselves and their allies in power. All
of them were … [given] districts to make sure they were not replaced by
someone whose name is Hernandez.' Raoul Contreras, a San Diego-based GOP
political consultant and columnist, added that poor
Mexicans who have recently immigrated to California often harbor anti-Semitic
feelings that stem from their antipathy toward wealthy Jewish Mexican
businessmen. Further heightening Hispanic suspicions of a Jewish
conspiracy, both Republicans and Democrats said, is the fact that Democratic
consultant Michael Berman, brother of Howard Berman, oversaw
the highly contentious redistricting plan. Those suspicions were reflected
in a lawsuit filed by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational
Fund. The suit, thrown out last June by a three-judge federal panel, argued
that the redistricting plan diluted Hispanic strength to protect Democratic
incumbents from Hispanic challengers. Berman, an 11-term congressman
whose district includes much of the San Fernando Valley, called talk of
a conspiracy 'nonsense.' Some Democrats said the redistricting entailed
shifting thousands of Latinos from Berman’s 28th District next
door, to Rep. Brad Sherman’s 27th. Democrats pointed out that Sherman,
like Berman, is a Jewish Democrat but, unlike Berman, a relative
newcomer, in only his fourth term ... But, as some Democrats said privately,
tension between Hispanics and Jews has been festering for years — or,
at least, since 1998, when Latino Richard Alarcon narrowly defeated Jewish
former Assembly leader Richard Katz in what was widely reported
to have been a particularly ugly contest in the state Senate’s 20th District,
also in the San Fernando Valley."
GOP Uses Remarks to Court Jews. Moran's Comments Cited in New Appeal,
The Washington Post, May 13, 2003
"Republicans have seized on the assertion of Rep. James P. Moran
(D-Va.) that Jews are determining American policy toward Iraq as a new
weapon in the GOP's long-term effort to attract traditionally Democratic
Jewish voters and donors. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) told
a group of more than 150 Orthodox Jewish leaders from around the country
yesterday that the Democratic Party 'appears to countenance remarks like
those made by Representative Moran in the past few weeks.' DeLay has been
the driving force in the Republican effort to capitalize on President
Bush's strong support of Israel and his leadership in the war on terrorism
to weaken Democratic support and financial backing from Jews. 'There are
only a few key pillars left holding up the Democratic coalition, especially
financial pillars, and if we can fracture one of them, they [Democrats]
are going to go into 2004 in big trouble,' a GOP strategist said. In states
such as Florida and New York, Jewish voters are a large enough percentage
of voters to play a crucial role in election outcomes. In presidential
elections, Democratic candidates depend on Jewish
supporters to supply as much as 60 percent of the money raised from private
sources. Any significant reduction in the financial support will
weaken Democratic candidates and the Democratic Party organizations. While
Bill Clinton was president, he received strong support from Jewish voters,
many of whom backed his efforts to negotiate a peace settlement in the
Middle East. But with the collapse of the peace process and the outbreak
of violence between Israelis and Palestinians, the GOP has sought to win
support from more right-leaning Jews who no longer view the Palestinian
Authority as a legitimate negotiating partner. Joining DeLay yesterday
in his meeting with representatives of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations
of America was another key figure in the Republican effort, Rep. Eric
I. Cantor (R-Va.). Cantor said Moran's comments were 'reminiscent
of the accusations contained in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion,'
a notorious Czarist forgery that fomented pogroms against Jews in 19th-century
Russia. Cantor, the chief deputy whip and the only Jewish Republican in
the House, said in an interview, 'Jews in this country may not be able
to afford to be Democrats. . . . One party [the GOP] is absolutely resolute
in its commitment to Israel.' The remarks by Cantor and DeLay drew
sustained applause and a standing ovation from the Orthodox Jewish leaders.
'On many issues that are very important to the Jewish community, and especially
the Orthodox community that I represent, the Republicans are striking
chords that ring very true, and that's going to be reflected in future
elections,' said Harvey Blitz of New York, president of the Orthodox
Union. There is evidence that Republicans are winning defections among
some moderate and liberal Jews, as well. Late last year, two prominent
Jewish leaders who strongly supported Democrats in the past -- Jack
Rosen, chairman of the American Jewish Congress, and Michael Sonnenfeldt,
former chairman of the moderate Israel Policy Forum -- gave $100,000 and
$10,000, respectively, to the Republican National Committee. Dawn Arnall
of California, who has donated primarily to Democrats, gave the RNC $1
million on Oct. 24, 2002. Polling data are more ambiguous ... Rosen
said that as long as the political agenda is dominated by terrorism and
threats to the survival of Israel, Republicans will have a strong chance
to make gains in the Jewish community. But if the agenda returns to domestic
issues, including abortion, prayer in school and minority rights, Democratic
strength among Jews will revive, he said. At a church forum in Reston
earlier this month, Moran said, 'if it were not for the strong support
of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing
this.' His comments were more ammunition for the GOP's contention that
Democrats who oppose a war in Iraq are insufficiently concerned about
Israel's security. For the past three days, Democrats have put on a full-court
press to try to limit the damage from Moran's comments, with a parade
of Democratic congressional leaders and presidential candidates denouncing
his comments. Six Jewish Democrats in the House, including Henry A.
Waxman (Calif.), Benjamin L. Cardin (Md.) and Sander M.
Levin (Mich.), yesterday called on Moran to retire in 2004, and if
he runs again, 'we cannot and will not support his candidacy.'"
Economist
tallies swelling cost of Israel to US,
By David R. Francis, The Christian Science Monitor,
December 9, 2002
"Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion.
If divided by today's population, that is more than $5,700 per person.
This is an estimate by Thomas Stauffer, a consulting economist in Washington.
For decades, his analyses of the Middle East scene have made him a frequent
thorn in the side of the Israel lobby. For the first time in many years,
Mr. Stauffer has tallied the total cost to the US of its backing of Israel
in its drawn-out, violent dispute with the Palestinians. So far, he figures,
the bill adds up to more than twice the cost of the Vietnam War. And now
Israel wants more. In a meeting at the White House late last month, Israeli
officials made a pitch for $4 billion in additional military aid to defray
the rising costs of dealing with the intifada and suicide bombings. They
also asked for more than $8 billion in loan guarantees to help the country's
recession-bound economy. Considering Israel's deep economic troubles,
Stauffer doubts the Israel bonds covered by the loan guarantees will ever
be repaid. The bonds are likely to be structured so they don't pay interest
until they reach maturity. If Stauffer is right, the US would end up paying
both principal and interest, perhaps 10 years out. Israel's request could
be part of a supplemental spending bill that's likely to be passed early
next year, perhaps wrapped in with the cost of a war with Iraq. Israel
is the largest recipient of US foreign aid. It is already due to get $2.04
billion in military assistance and $720 million in economic aid in fiscal
2003. It has been getting $3 billion a year for years. Adjusting the official
aid to 2001 dollars in purchasing power, Israel has been given $240 billion
since 1973, Stauffer reckons. In addition, the US has given Egypt $117
billion and Jordan $22 billion in foreign aid in return for signing peace
treaties with Israel. 'Consequently, politically, if not administratively,
those outlays are part of the total package of support for Israel,' argues
Stauffer in a lecture on the total costs of US Middle East policy, commissioned
by the US Army War College, for a recent conference at the University
of Maine. These foreign-aid costs are well known. Many Americans would
probably say it is money well spent to support a beleagured democracy
of some strategic interest. But Stauffer wonders if Americans are aware
of the full bill for supporting Israel since some costs, if not hidden,
are little known. One huge cost is not secret. It is the higher cost of
oil and other economic damage to the US after Israel-Arab wars. In 1973,
for instance, Arab nations attacked Israel in an attempt to win back territories
Israel had conquered in the 1967 war. President Nixon resupplied Israel
with US arms, triggering the Arab oil embargo against the US. That shortfall
in oil deliveries kicked off a deep recession. The US lost $420 billion
(in 2001 dollars) of output as a result, Stauffer calculates. And a boost
in oil prices cost another $450 billion. Afraid that Arab nations might
use their oil clout again, the US set up a Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
That has since cost, conservatively, $134 billion, Stauffer reckons. Other
US help includes:
• US Jewish charities and organizations have remitted
grants or bought Israel bonds worth $50 billion to $60 billion. Though
private in origin, the money is "a net drain" on the United States economy,
says Stauffer.
• The US has already guaranteed $10 billion in commercial
loans to Israel, and $600 million in "housing loans." Stauffer expects
the US Treasury to cover these.
• The US has given $2.5 billion to support
Israel's Lavi fighter and Arrow missile projects.
• Israel buys discounted,
serviceable "excess" US military equipment. Stauffer says these discounts
amount to "several billion dollars" over recent years.
• Israel uses roughly
40 percent of its $1.8 billion per year in military aid, ostensibly earmarked
for purchase of US weapons, to buy Israeli-made hardware. It also has
won the right to require the Defense Department or US defense contractors
to buy Israeli-made equipment or subsystems, paying 50 to 60 cents on
every defense dollar the US gives to Israel. US help, financial and technical,
has enabled Israel to become a major weapons supplier. Weapons make up
almost half of Israel's manufactured exports. US defense contractors often
resent the buy-Israel requirements and the extra competition subsidized
by US taxpayers.
• US policy and trade sanctions reduce US exports to
the Middle East about $5 billion a year, costing 70,000 or so American
jobs, Stauffer estimates. Not requiring Israel to use its US aid to buy
American goods, as is usual in foreign aid, costs another 125,000 jobs.
• Israel has blocked some major US arms sales, such as F-15 fighter aircraft
to Saudi Arabia in the mid-1980s. That cost $40 billion over 10 years,
says Stauffer. Stauffer's list will be controversial. He's
been assisted in this research by a number of mostly retired military
or diplomatic officials who do not go public for fear of being labeled
anti-Semitic if they criticize America's policies toward Israel."
This
is only a taste of the story of Jews and government. The bigger picture
may be found HERE.
See also articles about the Jewish Lobby and the U.S.
invasion of Iraq. And here.
|