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.