Frank Weltner Presents...
This Scholarly Library of Facts about Domestic & Worldwide Zionist Criminality

The Jew Watch Project Is The Internet's Largest Scholarly Collection of Articles on Zionist History
Free Educational Library for Private Study, Scholarship, Research & News About Zionism
We Reveal Zionist Banksters, News Falsifiers, PR Liars, Neocons, Subversives, Terrorists, Spies & More
The Jew Watch Project's 1.5 Billion Pages Served Demonstrate Our Focus on Professionalism
An Oasis of News for Americans Who Presently Endure the Hateful Censorship of Zionist Occupation
 

Bush and Kerry dance to the tune of Ariel Sharon,
by Simon Tisdall, The Guardian (UK), October 20, 2004
"In the Middle East maelstrom, all parties acknowledge one fixed point: forceful US diplomatic engagement is essential if the central Israel-Palestine conflict is ever to be resolved. But far from taking the lead over the past four years, the Bush administration has been mostly led by the nose. The man responsible for this extraordinary feat is Israel's prime minister, Ariel Sharon. Mr Sharon was running a "war on terror" when George Bush was still running a baseball team in Texas. So not surprisingly, perhaps, it is Mr Bush who, since 9/11, has followed Mr Sharon's example rather than the other way round. In his many visits to the Bush White House, Mr Sharon has exerted telling influence on America's post-9/11 agenda. Knowing Mr Bush was bent on war in Iraq, he helpfully highlighted Saddam Hussein's links to terrorist groups and financial aid to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Now he eggs on the US in its confrontations with Israel's enemies, Iran and Syria. It was Israel that, as far back as 1967, perfected the concept of pre-emptive war. It is Mr Sharon, not Mr Bush, who is the present master of the targeted assassination and mass detention without trial. It is Israeli military tactics that the US now apes in places like Falluja and Najaf. Deeming him unreliable, Mr Sharon refused to deal with the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat - and Mr Bush followed suit. His insistence on absolute security as a precondition for negotiations and his contemptuous dismissal of contrary UN and European views won support - and a broader, damaging emulation - in Washington. Most of all, Mr Sharon's basic contention, that the homeland is under attack by ruthless forces bent on its utter destruction, has been adopted wholesale by Mr Bush and applied to the US itself. These politics of fear now form a central plank in his re-election platform. Brent Scowcroft, the national security veteran, recently described Mr Bush as "mesmerised" by Israel's leader. And for the most part, it does indeed appear that Sharon policy is Bush policy, rather than vice versa. Whether the issue is Israel's illegal security fence, unilateral disengagement from Gaza, expanding West Bank settlements, the fate of the moribund road map for peace, or US vetoes at the UN, Mr Sharon calls the shots. He has the world's only superpower dancing to his tune. Unless Mr Sharon loses office - a not impossible scenario given the rebellion in his Likud party over Gaza - this well-established dynamic is unlikely to change during a second Bush term. Dismayingly for the Palestinians and others opposed to Mr Sharon's policies, it also seems unlikely that a John Kerry presidential victory would make any significant difference. Like Mr Bush, Mr Kerry in theory supports a viable Palestinian state. "The conflict will not be an afterthought but a priority," he has said. But he also wants a new Palestinian leadership as a precondition for progress. He backs Mr Sharon's Gaza withdrawal plan, rejects the right of return, and says it is "unrealistic" to try to reinstate the 1949 armistice lines. These positions coupled with his strongly pro-Israel Senate record hardly suggest an even-handed approach - or the forceful US engagement so lacking under Mr Bush. "When I am president of the United States, my promise to the people of Israel will be this," Mr Kerry told the Anti-Defamation League in May. "We will never pressure you to compromise your security. We will never expect you to negotiate for peace without a credible partner. And we will always work to provide political, military and economic help for your fight against terror. "Building a stronger Israel and a stronger America means working together to combat the terror that threatens us all." Not much wiggle-room there; and no corresponding list of promises for the Palestinians. Mr Bush could not have said it better. As for the guileful Mr Sharon, he must be laughing all the way to the West Bank."

Ginsburg Celebrates Role of Jewish Faith,
Las Vegas Sun, October 18, 2004
"Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday celebrated the role religion plays in her work as judge, noting that a "demand for justice runs throughout the Jewish tradition." In a 10-minute speech to Jewish women philanthropists, Ginsburg described the artworks in her Supreme Court chambers that are inscribed with a command from Deuteronomy translated as "Justice, justice shall you pursue." She also has a large, silver mezuzah mounted on her door post. "They are ever-present reminders of what judges must do," Ginsburg told more than 1,000 attendees at the United Jewish Communities' International Lion of Judah Conference. Later this term, the Supreme Court will decide whether displaying the Ten Commandments on government property such as the Supreme Court is an unconstitutional separation of church and state. Ginsburg, who made no mention of the pending case, said she and Justice Stephen Breyer are mindful of their Jewish heritage but don't consider that the reason why President Clinton named them to the court more than 10 years ago. "I am a judge, born, raised and proud of being a Jew. The demand for justice runs throughout the Jewish tradition," she added. "I hope ... in the years I continue to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States, that I have the strength to fulfill that demand."

Gilad Atzmon is Jewish. He was born and raised in Israel.
On Anti-Semitism,
By Gilad Atzmon, Al-Jazeera, October 15, 2004
Editorial Note: Gilad Atzmon published this article first on December 12, 2003. The reason it is republished by Al-Jazeerah today is that it represents an excellent analysis of the Zionist tactic of anti-Semitism, which is used to attack those who criticize the Israeli occupation atrocities in Palestine. It's also relevant to the new law that President Bush signed US To Rate Its Allies On Their Treatment Of Jews.]
"In the light of the growing discussion initiated by Israeli politicians and Zionist enthusiasts regarding the eruption of new anti-Semitism I am here to announce as loudly as I can: there is no anti-Semitism any more. In the devastating reality created by the Jewish state, anti-Semitism has been replaced by political reaction. I am not suggesting that Jewish interests are not being mutilated and vandalized. I am not saying that synagogues aren't being attacked, that Jewish graves are not brutally smashed up. I am saying that these acts, that are in no way legitimate, should be seen as political responses rather than racially motivated acts or 'irrational' hate crimes. If Israel is the state of the Jewish people and the Jewish people themselves do not stand up collectively against the crimes that are committed on their behalf, then every Jewish person, Jewish symbol and Jewish object becomes an Israeli interest and a potential terrorist target. It is up to the Jewish people to take a stand against their Jewish state and to disassociate themselves from their zealous national movement. If, for instance, we woke up tomorrow morning to find that another American so-called 'soft target' had been blown to pieces, no one would think to suggest that it was a 'racially motivated anti-American attack'. We would be naturally inclined to view the incident as an 'act of terror' against 'American interests'. Our political analysts would probably tell us that it was a form of retaliation against 'American colonialism', 'expansionism', 'support of Zionism' and so forth. Since Zionists want Israel to be seen as 'a nation among nations' we should not treat them as a unique case. We should treat them as we do the Americans and the British who have already realised that their various expansionist interests around the world are under severe threat. If we go along with the Zionist call to regard Jewish-ness as a nationalistic category rather than a religious one, we should be consistent and regard any act against Jews as a political reaction rather than an irrational racist attack. In other words: the success of Zionism drains away any possibility of anti-Semitism. The last statement is perplexing because it is the Zionists who tell us all the time that anti-Semitism is on the rise. Zionism is fuelled by anti-Semitism. The Zionists need anti-Semitic acts in order to justify the state of Israel as the only viable option for Jewish existence. Zionists have long understood that it is anti-Semitic acts that push Jews to support the idea of a Jewish state. Accordingly, in order to promote Zionist interests, Israel must generate significant anti-Jewish sentiment. Cruelty against Palestinian civilians is a favourite Israeli means of achieving this aim... Let's review some current typical Zionist arguments:
a. The 'Elders of Zion' syndrome: Zionists complain that Jews continue to be associated with a conspiracy to rule the world via political lobbies, media and money. Is the suggestion of conspiracy really an empty accusation? The following list is presented with pride in several Jewish American websites.
Jews in Bush's Administration:
Ari Fleischer White House Press Secretary
Josh Bolten Deputy Chief of Staff
Ken Melman White House Political Director
David Frum Speechwriter
Brad Blakeman White House Director of Scheduling
Dov Zakheim Undersecretary of Defense (Controller)
Paul Wolfowitz Deputy Secretary of Defense
I. Lewis Libby Chief of Staff to the Vice President
Adam Goldman White House Liaison to the Jewish Community
Chris Gersten Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families at HHS
Elliott Abrams Director of the National Security Council's Office for Democracy, Human Rights and International Operations
Mark D. Weinberg Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs
Douglas Feith Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
Michael Chertoff Head of the Justice Department's criminal division
Daniel Kurtzer Ambassador to Israel
Cliff Sobel Ambassador to the Netherlands
Stuart Bernstein Ambassador to Denmark
Nancy Brinker Ambassador to Hungary
Frank Lavin Ambassador to Singapore
Ron Weiser Ambassador to Slovakia
Mel Sembler Ambassador to Italy
Martin Silverstein Ambassador to Uruguay
Jay Lefkowitz Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council
Let me assure you, in Clinton's administration the situation was even worse. Even though the Jews only make up 2.9 per cent of the country's population, an astounding 56 per cent of Clinton's appointees were Jews. A coincidence? I don't think so.
We have to ask ourselves what motivates American Jews to gain such political power. Is it a genuine care for American interests? Soon, following the growing number of American casualties in Iraq, American people will start to ask themselves this very question. Since America currently enjoys the status of the world's only super power and since all the Jews listed above declare themselves as devoted Zionists, we must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously. It is beyond doubt that Zionists, the most radical, racist and nationalistic Jews around, have already managed to turn America into an Israeli mission force. The world's number one super power is there to support the Jewish state's wealth and security matters. The one-sided pro-Zionist take on the Israeli­-Palestinian conflict, the American veto against every 'anti-Israeli' UN resolution, the war against Iraq and now the militant intentions against Syria, all prove beyond doubt that it is Zionist interests that America is serving. American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the elder of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy. So far they are doing pretty well for themselves at least. Whether the Americans enjoy the deterioration of their state's affairs will no doubt be revealed soon."

Jewish Supporters for John Kerry,
Democratic Store

Separation of "Church" and state...
City helps Jews observe Sabbath safely,
by Jen Stone, Kansas City Jewish Chronicle, October 22, 2004
"It's Friday night, and the sun has begun to set. Members of Congregation Beth Israel Abraham & Voliner are making their way to shul on foot, as Orthodox tradition prevents them from driving or operating any electronic device. Thanks to the City of Overland Park, they will no longer have to worry about breaking Jewish law by pushing the crosswalk button, or scurrying across the street before the signal changes. Several years ago, BIAV leadership contacted the Overland Park Traffic Division. According to Andrew Ernstein, president of BIAV, the division programmed the traffic light at 99th Street and Antioch to automatically cycle through "walk" modes on Saturday mornings, so the congregants could "safely cross the street within the bounds of their religious observance." Ernstein said congregants frequently told visitors how thrilled they were that the city had responded to their request. "It's an example of our wonderful Overland Park community," said Ernstein. Last month, the department went even further to ensure that the needs of the BIAV community needs were being met. Guy Alon of the Overland Park Traffic Division contacted the congregation to see if there was anything else he could help with. Ernstein said that as a result of Alon's caring communication "balancing our needs and automobile traffic considerations ... the 'automatic walk' settings have been adjusted to more closely match all our needs." Rabbi David Fine said that the adjustments made included programming a longer "walk" signal interval, an increase in the number of "walk" cycles and increasing the number of days the light is programmed that way to include Fridays, Saturdays and Jewish holidays."It's an excellent example of local government working with groups or individuals to make life better," said Rabbi Fine. "We're very fortunate to live in a society that takes the religious needs of the community so seriously." He also said that the most impressive fact is that even though those who don't use electricity on Shabbat here in Kansas City are a minority, the city still cares about such a small detail. "I'm proud to live in such a community," said Rabbi Fine."

Daily Press Briefing, Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman,
Washington, DC, October 22, 2004
U.S. State Department
"QUESTION: I have something a little bit off the beaten track, but I think you might have something on Hezbollah TV. There has been a lot written about Hezbollah TV lately and the kind of U.S. concern about its anti-American, anti-Semitic broadcasts, and apparently it's able to be seen in the United States right now. Is there anything the U.S. can do about that, the State Department, for instance? Because the FCC is saying that if the State Department says to shut it down, they'll stop broadcasting it.
MR. ERELI: I'm not sure that's how it works, frankly. Al Manar Television is a TV station in Lebanon, which is broadcast through satellite TV here that is funded and run by Hezbollah, which is a designated terrorist organization. Al Manar Television regularly has programs that perpetuate intolerance and can be viewed as inciteful, but at this point, I'm not in a position to speculate about what steps may or may not be taken as a result of that. I'd say Al Manar Television and its relationship with Hezbollah is something that we note and follow carefully, but I'd leave it at that.
QUESTION: Is there anything the U.S. can do to pressure Lebanon or Syria to stop these broadcasts? Is there anything that's being done on that front?
MR. ERELI: Well, you know we make it very clear to both Syria and Lebanon that we consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization. It has been implicated in terrorist attacks against civilian targets and it has a history of assassination and kidnapping. And we certainly take action by listing it as a Foreign Terrorist Organization; that is designed to isolate and work against that organization. And we consistently call upon countries that provide support to Hezbollah -- Iran and Syria -- to take action that is consistent with their professed policies of not supporting terror."

Could the Associated Press (AP) Rig the Election? Asks Journalist Lynn Landes,
PR Newswire, October 22, 2004
"The Associated Press (AP) will be the sole source of raw vote totals for the major news broadcasters on Election Night. However, AP spokesmen Jack Stokes and John Jones refused to explain to this journalist how the AP will receive that information. They refused to confirm or deny that the AP will receive direct feed from voting machines and central vote tabulating computers across the country. But, circumstantial evidence suggests that is exactly what will happen. And what can be downloaded can also be uploaded. Computer experts say that signals can travel both to and from computerized voting machines through wireless technology, modems, and even simple electricity. Computer scientists have long warned that computer voting is an invitation to vote fraud and system failure. An examination of Diebold election software by several computer scientists, including Dr. Avi Rubin and his staff, proved that secret backdoors can be built into computer programs that allow votes to be easily manipulated without detection. ES&S, the nation's largest voting machine company that will reportedly count 50% of all votes, describe on their webpage how "accessible" their results are, "At ES&S, we know election administrators and the public want fast and accurate election results. That is why we have developed several election management system software solutions to make the reporting process easier, more reliable, and more accessible." Diebold, the second largest voting machine company, advertises a similar service. Both ES&S and Diebold have close ties to the Republican Party. But, can't the AP be trusted? Isn't it an objective non-partisan news organization? Some say no. The AP is batting for a Bush presidency."

Jewish ideology says this: EVERYONE is at least a latent "anti-Semite."
The Anti-Semitic Labor Party. Former ALP minister minister Barry Cohen used to proud of his party becuase it fought prejudice. Not any longer, by Barry Cohen, The Age (Australia), October 25, 2004
"Australia is probably the least anti-Semitic country in the world, but what happened to my family made a deep impression on me. I became obsessive about discrimination; be it fighting for civil rights in the US, or against apartheid or the appalling treatment of our indigenous people. I was, however, an armchair critic mouthing off endlessly about what the government should do. Then a friend hit a sensitive nerve. "What are you doing about it?" he asked. It wasn't difficult to decide. I knew the enemy was on the political right: Nazis, fascists, conservatives, whether from the extreme right that led to the Holocaust or the social exclusion practised by the genteel middle class. In 1964 I joined the ALP. Not that the Labor Party of the early 1960s was a beacon of light, for there were many ALP members still steeped in the White Australia philosophy and indifferent to the suffering of Aborigines. But those who spoke up about such injustices were almost all from the ALP. By the time I arrived in Canberra in 1969 as the MP for Robertson I felt at home in the company of those led by Gough Whitlam, who forced the Labor Party to change I was accused of being obsessive on the question of racism and to that charge I plead guilty. I became deeply involved in the fight for Aboriginal rights and to this day one of the proudest moments of my life was to be one of a small group of "yesterday's heroes, looking frail and aged", who were brought on stage at the Reconciliation Conference in Melbourne in 1997 to be honoured for our work in the 1967 referendum. Ihave often been asked if my being Jewish was ever an issue during my 20 years in Federal Parliament. Not to the best of my knowledge. I cannot recall a single anti-Semitic remark from either side of the House. That did not mean that everyone agreed with my views on Israel. Nor did I expect them to. However, while my views remain the same, the Labor Party's these days are very different. The Labor Party has always had Palestinian supporters but they used to have little influence on the party's policy. They were more than counter-balanced by the influence of then ACTU president Bob Hawke. In the immediate aftermath of the Yom Kippur War and before my first visit to Israel I attended a meeting he addressed in Sydney. I have not heard a more passionate, nor better informed, defence of Israel or more scathing indictment of its opponents Convinced that MPs could understand Israel's problems better if they went there, I organised a series of delegations. By the time I retired in 1990 more than half the ALP caucus had visited Israel But gradually, Labor's Left and more extremist elements, such as the Greens and Democrats, became increasingly shrill in their denunciation of Israel ... That trend has infected the ALP. The handful of pro-Palestinian supporters has grown steadily as the party has become dominated by the education mafia; former public servants and party union apparatchiks Plenty will say: "Why shouldn't the Labor Party support the Palestinians?" No reason, providing the case they put is not based on the lies spouted by the Palestinian propaganda machine ... There are Labor MPs who are vigorous supporters of Israel but their numbers are diminishing and they are being drowned out by the more vociferous members of Labor's hard Left. When Australian Jews respond to the grotesque exaggeration about Israel, we are accused of being part of the "Jewish lobby". Israel's opponents in Australia now include those who support the Palestinians not for ideological reasons but because of the increased number of Arab voters in their electorates ... Anyone who believes that "reining in the Israelis" will bring peace and prosperity to the Middle East should change their medication. The ranting and raving, common among the extreme right, has been taken up with gusto by the left. When it started to infect the social democratic wing of the Labor Party I became extremely worried. There will be those in the ALP who will say "our policies support Israel's right to exist, so what are you complaining about?" That's not good enough. Not for me. I'm sick of the calumny heaped on Israel - most of which is a pack of lies. I'm sick of Labor leaders making all the right noises to Jewish audiences while an increasing number of backbenchers launch diatribes at Israel. When the likes of Labor MP Tanya Plibersek rise in the House of Representatives and call Ariel Sharon "a war criminal" and Israel a "rogue state", or Opposition whip Janice Crosio makes the absurd claim that Israeli forces had destroyed Bethlehem, Nablus and the Jenin refugee camp, I want to hear more than stony silence from those in the Labor Party who say they support Israel. Some do. Most don't. How long is it since any Labor leader gave the sort of passionate and accurate defence of Israel we used to hear from Hawke or Kim Beazley? I don't want even-handedness when it ought to be obvious to all but the blind that there is no moral equivalence between a country that seeks to defend its citizens from thousands of terrorist attacks, and the terrorists themselves. I want to hear Labor MPs stand up and be counted. I want to see an end to well-known Labor identities marching behind banners equating Israel with Nazism ... There will be some who will argue that I am exaggerating; that the evidence is sparse; that this typical Jewish paranoia. Not at all. It came from the horses' mouths, and the head horses at that. Before the Iraq war one of the most senior NSW right-wing MPs told me: "I understand and support Israel's position, but in my group, I'm the only one. Soon after I told a Labor legend: "Anti-Semitism is now rampant in the Labor Party." I expected a vigorous denial. His response confirmed my worst fear: "I know," he said."

What if there's a Terrorist Atack on Election Day?,
Bisnow on Business, October 11, 2004
"In this exclusive interview with Bisnow on Business a week before the Presidential election, Norm Ornstein, one of America's leading experts on electoral process and politics, warns that if a polling place is bombed on election day and in the ensuing panic virtually no one votes across the country, “We have no plan in place to do anything other than have that pass as election day.”  With members of Congress scattered outside of Washington , and the air system possibly shut down in response to acts of terrorism, he sees extreme difficulty in the federal government's dealing with an electoral crisis.  He also sees potential conflict between state, local, and federal officials. Ornstein, a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a CBS news analyst, also says that if terrorists were to assassinate the President and Vice-President Elect immediately prior to the meeting of Electors on December 13, there would be no time for a political party to present replacement candidates to Electors; and he also notes the possibility that if assassinations occurred after the Electors meet (either before or after Congress meets on January 6 to validate the electoral vote), a Presidential vacancy as of inauguration day on January 20 could result in the elevation of the Speaker of the House to the Presidency for an entire four year term, since there is no provision for a special election. He urges Congress even at this late date to establish contingency plans and to move the Electors meeting to a later date."

Bush, Aides Court Jewish Votes in Tight Race,
by Adam Entous, Yahoo! News, October 25, 2004
"A speech by President Bush's national security adviser to a powerful pro-Israel lobbying group in Florida eight days before the election caps a concerted Republican drive for Jewish votes that has so far yielded minimal results. Seemingly undeterred by a probe into whether the AIPAC lobbying group passed classified information to Israel -- an allegation it denies -- the White House has given the organization almost unparalleled access to top officials, from Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney on down. Bush addressed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, in May, and declared that it was "serving the cause of America. Now his national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, who described AIPAC as "a great asset to our country," will address the group on Monday in Hollywood, Florida, in one of the most hotly contested battleground states in the Nov. 2 race. Though Jewish-Americans, who make up about 2 percent of the population, overwhelmingly backed Democrat Al Gore in 2000, polls show support for Republicans is slowly growing. That could have an impact in states like Florida -- where roughly 4 percent of the population is Jewish -- as well as Pennsylvania and Arizona, all won by slim margins in the last presidential election, pollsters say. Jews could also make a difference in an unexpectedly close race for the traditionally Democratic-leaning state of New Jersey, where they represent close to 6 percent of the population Administration officials say Rice will not mention Democratic presidential rival Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry by name. But she is expected to tout the president's steadfast support for Israel and the policies of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, while defending the invasion of Iraq as a boost to the security of the United States and Israel ... AIPAC does not rate or endorse candidates, and says it is a bipartisan organization. But when Bush addressed the group in May, the Jewish audience cheered on the Republican president, chanting: "Four more years." Rice and other White House officials were informed more than two years ago of the investigation into whether AIPAC was relaying information collected from the administration and Congress to Israel, officials said. Since then, nearly 40 high-level administration officials and top Bush advisers -- among them campaign manager Ken Mehlman -- have spoken at AIPAC meetings, not including informal sessions and briefings by phone. Undersecretary of State John Bolton recently spoke to its members about threats from Iran and Syria. Administration officials defended their close contacts with the group, saying AIPAC is innocent until proven otherwise. Asked why Rice was addressing the group so close to the election, a senior administration official said: "AIPAC is a well-known and well-established organization with a wide membership that attracts speakers from both political parties and across the political spectrum. Kerry is sending his foreign policy adviser, former U.N. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, to the AIPAC meeting. Like Bush, Kerry has been reaching out to Jews in Florida, even sprinkling a few words of Hebrew into a stump speech last week ... The Bush campaign has set up a "Jewish Team." Its Web site features photos of Bush at an AIPAC conference and meeting with rabbis in the Oval Office. Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matthew Brooks is also rallying Jews for Bush -- noting that Kerry has the support of Arab and Muslim groups."

Jews, Israel and America,
by Thomas Friedman, International Herald Tribune (from New York Times), October 25, 2004
"I was speaking the other day day with Scott Pelley of CBS News's '60 Minutes' about the mood in Iraq. He had just returned from filming a piece thee and he told me something disturbing. Scott had gone around and asked Iraqis on the street what they called U.S. troops -- wondering if they had nicknames for Americans in the way U.S. soldiers used to call the Nazis 'Krauts' or the Vietcong 'Charlie.' And what did he find? 'Many Iraqis have so much distrust for U.S. forces we found they've come up with a nickname for our troops, "Scott said. "They call American soldiers 'The Jews,' as in, 'Don't go down that street, the Jews set up a roadblock.' I have no idea how widespread this perception is, but it does not surprise me that some Iraqis would talk that way. Communications in Iraq have been so inept since we Americans arrived, many Iraqis still don't know who the United States is or why it came. But such talk is also indicative of a trend in the Arab media where if you want to brand someone as illegitimate, you just call him a 'Jew.' Indeed, this trend has widened since 9/11. Now you find a steadily rising perception across the Arab-Muslim world that the great enemy of Islam is JIA - "Jews, Israel and America,' all lumped together in a single threat. This wider trend has been fanned by Arab satellite TV stations which deliberately show split-screen images of Israelis bashing Palestinians and U.S. forces bashing the Iraqi insurgents."

Navy approves first ever Satanist,
BBC (UK), October 24, 2004
"The British Armed Forces has officially recognised its first registered Satanist, a newspaper reports. Naval technician Chris Cranmer, 24, has been allowed to register by the captain of HMS Cumberland, based at Devonport Naval Base in Plymouth. The move will mean that he will now be allowed to perform Satanic rituals on board the vessel. According to the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Cranmer realised he was a Satanist nine years ago. Religious values Mr Cranmer said that was when he stumbled across a copy of the Satanic Bible, written by Church of Satan founder Anton Szandor LaVey. He said: "I then read more and more and came to realise I'd always been a Satanist, just simply never knew." Mr Cranmer, who is from Edinburgh, is now lobbying the Ministry of Defence to make Satanism a registered religion in the armed forces. Former Tory minister Ann Widdecombe said she was "utterly shocked" by the Royal Navy's decision."

US anti-Semitism law perturbs Arab press,
BBC (UK), October 20, 2004
"Many Arab newspapers have condemned the new US law authorising the State Department to monitor anti-Semitism worldwide and produce annual reports critical of those countries where it is seen to be prevalent. President George W Bush announced a few days ago that he had signed into law the bill authorising the US to rate countries on the way they treat Jews. Most commentators believe it panders to the Jewish lobby in the US and is aimed against Arabs and Muslims. However, one dissenting voice considers it a positive move in the battle against racism. The London-based pan-Arab daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi considers the law "basically racist legislation which is anti-Arab and Muslim under the guise of outlawing anti-Semitism". Accusations of bias "President Bush does not want to acknowledge that Arabs are also a Semitic people who have suffered a great deal from wars launched by him alongside his friend [Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon." Saudi Arabia's Al-Jazirah argues that the promulgation of the law "shows the extent to which the US is prepared to go to protect such an aggressive and renegade state" as Israel. It accuses Washington of "abandoning the principles of international law and justice to put its weight behind such a pariah entity". For another popular pan-Arab daily, Al-Hayat , "this law affirms once again that whatever is in Israel's interest is in America's interest and vice-versa". A commentary in the paper is headlined "God's chosen people". The Palestinian paper Al-Ayyam is convinced that any State Department list of states where anti-Semitism is considered to be a problem will "be a 100% Israeli". 'Foolish policies' Al-Arab al-Alamiyah, a pan-Arab daily with a pro-Libyan stance, argues that the issue "should not be about anti-Semitism but about Israel's racist policies". "Israel refuses to accept this truth and Washington accepts Israel's argument in its entirety when it comes to the definition of anti-Semitism." No wonder, Al-Arab al-Alamiyah believes, that "enmity towards America and its foolish policies in the world is growing". However, another influential pan-Arab daily, Al-Sharq al-Awsat , is convinced the law could turn out to be a force for good."

Support for Israel is winning Bush Jewish votes,
BY E.A. TORRIERO, Mercury News (from Chicago Tribune), October 24, 2004
"Beginning with their votes for Harry Truman in 1948, Judith and Milton Weinberg have never cast their ballots for a Republican presidential candidate. But this year, the traditional Jewish Democrats will vote for President Bush. Democratic challenger John Kerry, some say, isn't strong enough in support of Israel and has too many political allies who are not friends of the Jewish state. "Some people in my neighborhood treat me like I am a pariah," said Judith Weinberg, 77, who lives here in one of the highest concentrations of Jewish retirees in the nation. "But I don't care. I know that Bush is better for the Jewish people." Weinberg is not alone. As Election Day nears, Democrats long banking on the liberal Jewish bloc are frantically trying to woo back defectors who are convinced that Bush is better for Jewish interests. In swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and here in Florida - where the election hinges on razor-thin margins - a slight shift among Jewish voters could tilt the outcome. The Republicans may be eroding the traditional 80 percent backing nationally of Democratic presidential candidates, Democratic leaders here say. "If they get 40 percent, it would devastating," Charles Glick, a Kerry aide leading the Jewish vote efforts here told a crowd of supporters recently. "If they get 30 percent they could win the election. We need to keep them under 20 percent." Nationally, the Jewish vote is small but influential, representing about 3 percent to 4 percent of the electorate and concentrated in a handful of states. In 2000, Jews turned out 4-to-1 for Al Gore and his Jewish running mate, Joe Lieberman. Bush garnered about 19 percent of the Jewish vote. Since the mass arrival of Jewish immigrants beginning early in the last century, being Jewish and a Democrat has gone mostly hand-in-hand. As new Americans, Jewish voters saw the Democrats as the party that championed the underdog while promising freedom and equality. This year, though, Republicans are tapping into a soft spot among the Jewish constituency: Israel. While admittedly wildly optimistic, Republican leaders are hoping that Bush can pull in numbers equaling Ronald Reagan's record 39 percent of the Jewish electorate in 1980. But a poll taken last summer for the American Jewish Committee shows Bush with about 24 percent of the Jewish vote nationally. In recent weeks, the percentage is likely to have grown incrementally, political observers say, especially in the swing states. "There are no solid numbers, but every percentage tick for the Republicans spells big trouble for the Democrats," said Robert Watson, a political scientist at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton. "I am seeing more and more support out there for Bush," said Watson, who is not Jewish but speaks often to local Jewish groups. While strongly siding with the Democratic platform on domestic issues such as Social Security and health care, key segments of the Jewish community are becoming convinced that Bush will be tougher than Kerry on terrorism - and stronger for Israel. Bush is drawing broader support nationally from younger Jewish voters and middle-class professionals than was received by many previous Republican presidential candidates. Republicans also enjoy traditional backing among Orthodox Jews, who are 10 percent of the Jewish American population. Both Kerry and Bush voice the same broad support for Israel, but the Bush camp's highly funded effort appears to be winning the political fight of perception among undecided Jewish Democrats. "It's a strategic strike by the Republicans, and I don't think the Democratic Party saw this coming," Watson said. Even in heavily Democratic Illinois, some Jewish voters are turning to Bush ... In his many campaign visits to Florida, Kerry chose to mostly emphasize domestic issues such as health care because they appeal to older voters. But in an appearance at a retiree community in West Palm Beach last Monday, Kerry hammered home his support for Israel. It came after aides in Florida signaled alarm over Jewish voter defections ... "Whoever thought it would come to this: a fight for the soul of the Jewish voter?" said Ken Rosenblatt, who heads a Democratic club in south Palm Beach County. A political war of ads and lobbying for Jewish votes is rippling across South Florida, where both campaigns offer buttons written in Hebrew. The Republicans have trotted out former New York Mayors Ed Koch and Rudolph Giuliani. Koch, a Jew and a lifelong Democrat, supports Bush's policies on the war on terror. "Israel has never had a better friend than George W. Bush," former Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer told several hundred Jewish voters, mostly Republicans, this week ... Kerry supporters are fanning out to synagogues, Jewish delis, golf courses and neighborhoods. They are reaching out to "Jews who have forgotten who they are," as one local Kerry adviser put it. They want, too, to emphasize Kerry's Jewish roots: his paternal grandparents were Jewish before they converted to Catholicism. His brother Cameron became a devout Jew some 21 years ago. Kerry is planning more appearances in Florida. Aides promise that he will show a passion for Israel as he did last Monday when he talked of flying a jet over Israel and yelling from the mountaintop of Masada the Jewish cry "Am Yisrael Chai" - the people of Israel live."

Recent Kerry-Edwards ads in the Jewish American newspaper, The Forward
Ad number one
Ad number two
ihr.org (pdf file)
Ad #2: "At this time of great challenge and change, one thing will always remain constant: our committment to a safe and secure Jewish state of Israel. Particularly in uncertain times like these we must reaffirm and indeed strengthen our special relationship with Israel, our most steadfast friend and ally. Israel's cause must be America's cause [Emphasis in the original advertisement.] ... L'shanah Tovah Tikatevu V'techatemu."

Will There Be A War Against The World After November 2?,
By John Pilger, Z-Mag (ZNet), October 27, 2004
"There is a surreal quality about visiting the United States in the last days of the presidential campaign. If George W Bush wins, according to a scientist I met, who escaped Nazi-dominated Europe, America will surrender many of its democratic trappings and succumb to its totalitarian impulses. If John Kerry wins, according to most Democrat voters, the only mandate he will have is that he is not Bush. Never have so many liberal hands been wrung over a candidate whose only memorable statements seek to out-Bush Bush. Take Iran. One of Kerry's national security advisers, Susan Rice, has accused Bush of 'standing on the sidelines while Iran's nuclear programme has been advanced'. There is not a shred of evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, yet Kerry is joining in the same orchestrated frenzy that led to the invasion of Iraq. Having begun his campaign by promising another 40,000 troops for Iraq, he is said to have a 'secret plan to end the war' which foresees a withdrawal in four years. This is an echo of Richard Nixon, who in the 1968 presidential campaign promised a 'secret plan' to end the war in Vietnam. Once in office, he accelerated the slaughter and the war dragged on for six and a half years. For Kerry, like Nixon, the message is that he is not a wimp. Nothing in his campaign or his career suggests he will not continue, even escalate, the 'war on terror', which is now sanctified as a crusade of Americanism like that against communism. No Democratic president has shirked such a task: John Kennedy on the cold war, Lyndon Johnson on Vietnam. This presents great danger for all of us, but none of it is allowed to intrude upon the campaign or the media 'coverage'. In a supposedly free and open society, the degree of censorship by omission is staggering. The New York Times, the country's liberal standard-bearer, having recovered from a mild bout of contrition over its abject failure to challenge Bush's lies about Iraq, has been running tombstones of column inches about what-went-wrong in the 'liberation' of that country. It blames mistakes: tactical oversights, faulty intelligence. Not a word suggests that the invasion was a colonial conquest, deliberate like any other, and that 60 years of international law make it 'the paramount war crime', to quote the Nuremberg judges. Not a word suggests that the American onslaught on the population of Iraq was and is systematically atrocious, of which the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was merely a glimpse. The coming atrocity in the city of Fallujah, in which British troops, against the wishes of the British people, are to be accessories, is a case in point. For American politicians and journalists - there are a few honourable exceptions - the US marines are preparing for another of their "battles". Their last attack on Fallujah, in April, provides a preview. Forty-ton battle tanks and helicopter gunships were used against slums. Aircraft dropped 500lb bombs: marine snipers killed old people, women and children; ambulances were shot at. The marines closed the only hospital in a city of 300,000 for more than two weeks, so they could use it as a military position. When it was estimated they had slaughtered 600 people, there was no denial. This was more than all the victims of the suicide bombs the previous year. Neither did they deny that their barbarity was in revenge for the killing of four American mercenaries in the city; led by avowed cowboys, they are specialists in revenge. John Kerry said nothing; the media reported the atrocity as 'a military operation', against 'foreign militants' and 'insugents', never against civilians and Iraqis defending their homes and homeland. Moreover, the American people are almost totally unaware that the marines were driven out of Fallujah by heroic street fighting. Americans remain unaware, too, of the piracy that comes with their government's murderous adventure. Who in public life asks the whereabouts of the 18.46 bn dollars which the US Congress approved for reconstruction and humanitarian aid in Iraq? As Unicef reports, most hospitals are bereft even of pain-killers, and acute malnutrition among children has doubled since the 'liberation'... Neither does he nor anybody else with a public profile ask why the people of Iraq have been forced to pay, since the fall of Saddam, almost 80m dollars to America and Britain as 'reparations'. Even Israel has received an untold fortune in Iraqi oil money as compensation for its 'loss of tourism' in the Golan Heights - part of Syria it occupies illegally ... Americanism, the ideology, has meant democracy at home, for some, and a war on democracy abroad. From Guatemala to Iran, from Chile to Nicaragua, to the struggle for freedom in South Africa, to present-day Venezuela, American state terrorism, licensed by both Republican and Democrat administrations, has fought democrats and sponsored totalitarians. Most societies attacked or otherwise subverted by American power are weak and defenceless, and there is a logic to this. Should a small country succeed in breaking free and establish its own way of developing, then its good example to others becomes a threat to Washington ... It has nothing to do with the ordinary people of the United States, who now watch a Darwanian capitalism consume their real and fabled freedoms and reduce the 'free market' to a fire-sale of public assets. It is remarkable, if not inspiring, that so many reject the class and race based brainwashing, begun in childhood, that such a class and race based system is called 'the American dream'."

The Israeli economy includes inventing and manufacturing gear useful to spying.
Israeli companies tout security gear,
By Sharon Behn, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, October 25, 2004
"Chemical-detecting cameras and imaging gear that instantly can map out an area of nuclear contamination will be among the goods offered at an extraordinary trade conference in Washington this week. Sixty top Israeli security-related companies will be displaying their latest technology for American companies and agencies responsible for patrolling U.S. borders and protecting against terrorist threats. Some of the most exciting equipment is suitable for customs, border patrol, and detection, said Rob Hartwell of the American Business Development Group (ABDG), which helped organize the Oct. 28-29 conference for invited guests only. "The Israelis excel at combining photo optics, sensing devices, cameras and also water-acoustical instruments, capable of detecting any intrusion and identifying whether it is human or animal," Mr. Hartwell said. The conference also will help Israeli firms connect with like-minded American companies interested in satellite tracking, security systems, firearms, ammunition, maritime security, armor and bulletproof glass. The United States and Israel already cooperate in the military arena, and several skilled Israelis have clearances to work in the U.S. military sector. This week's symposium is designed to expand that cooperation into the homeland-security arena. Israel's government must approve the transfer of any sensitive technology, and several companies will not disclose their most advanced technologies. But many companies are ready to show off equipment that is more advanced or more competitive than anything made in the United States ... ABDG, a consulting group, traveled to Israel with more than 20 experts, including former military members, program managers, potential clients and Capitol Hill defense staff, to vet the companies invited to the program."

To the conspiracy theory born,
By Arnaud de Borchgrave, Washington Times, October 18, 2004
"The Middle East Media Research Institute reminds us the price of America's benign neglect of the peace process is a grotesque caricature of the U.S. and its Israeli protege. Israel bombed Sinai, said Egypt's Al Ahram Research Center expert Dhia Rashwan, "to convince the world Egypt is not a stable country, thus opening the door for external involvement, specifically Israel and America, for the so-called preservation of security and eradication of terrorism in the region [which gives] Sharon a green light to strike Palestinians in the occupied territories under the pretext of fighting terrorism." It takes roughly one news cycle for preposterous theories to become received ideas before they become incontrovertible facts in the Middle East corridors of power. Palestinian Security Chief Jibril Rajoub said matter-of-factly, "Bush is facing elections and I believe he needs operations like this to justify his aggression in Iraq and to justify his defense of the Israeli aggression in Palestine." Next, an Egyptian spokesman took up the refrain on national TV. The only reference to the Middle East by either John Kerry or President Bush in the presidential debates was to mention Israel — and the imperative need to protect and enhance its security. John Edwards piled on with a new justification for the Iraq war. Stretching credulity, he said removing Saddam Hussein from power had reduced terror attacks against Israel. This played right into the hands of those who argue the U.S. is incapable of being an honest broker between Palestinians and Israelis. Growing anger in Arab American and Muslim American ranks — several million votes — appears not to bother the candidates. The possible loss of Jewish votes haunts both political parties ... In the West Bank, Ma'ariv [an Israeli newsppaer] reported, Israeli settlers are not worried about the Arab demographic threat as they nurture the vision of a "mega-occupation," or expanding the Kingdom of Israel to the borders promised in the covenant with Arbaham. The Committee of Rabbis in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, writes, "Everyone who has faith in his heart ... will not countenance betrayal of the divine promise of the Jewish people." Professor Hillel Weiss, said Ma'ariv, spelled out what this meant: "The purpose of the armed struggle is to establish a Jewish state in all the territory that will be captured, from the River Euphrates [in Iraq] to the Egyptian River [Nile]." For good measure, Rabbi Haim Steinitz, writing on behalf of the rabbis of the Beit El settlement, explained, "In general, the Euphrates and the Nile are the main points of reference, as well as the Mediterranean and the Red Sea." That takes care of the western border. There is some dispute about the eastern border. Most West Bank rabbis say the Kingdom of Israel "should rest on the upper Syrian stretch of the Euphrates. Others, wrote Ma'ariv, "take a broader view with a border that runs down to the mouth of the Persian Gulf." One rabbi calls for the military conquest of all Arab countries. Even this was not enough for Rabbi Zelman Melamed, who wrote: "It is not impossible that the Jewish people will have the ability to threaten and put pressure on the entire world to accept our way. But even if we acquire the power to seize control of the world, that is not the way to realize the vision of complete redemption." Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg says he knows in the near future the Land of Israel is about to expand. "It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not — they will be killed." Imams do not have exclusive rights on loony tunes. Palestinian state anyone? Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large of The Washington Times and of United Press International."

As in this case, news stories in the controlled press focuses on the numerical ability of Jewish communities to affect swing votes, but rarely if ever mention their disproportionate level of candidate funding due to their hegemony over commerce and banking.
Clinton wows Florida Jews, says Kerry 'loyal friend of Israel',
by Nathan Guttman, Haaretz (Israel), October 27, 2004
"Former U.S. president Bill Clinton continued his support for the Democratic presidential hopeful Tuesday, telling an election meeting at a synagogue in Boca Raton, Florida that John Kerry is "a loyal friend of Israel." "There is no doubt in my mind that the security of Israel will be safe with John Kerry as president," Clinton said. Recovering from emergency heart surgery, Clinton hit the campaign trail on Monday and Tuesday made his second public appearance in the Bnei Torah Synagogue in Boca Raton, addressing 2,000 enthusiastic Jews. Wearing a white kippa and flanked by Israeli and U.S. flags, Clinton greeted the audience with "shalom" in Hebrew, winning long, loud applause. He promised that the close relations between the United States and Israel would continue if Kerry is elected president ... "We can't pretend this is an election between one person who'll stand up for the state of Israel and one who won't," said Clinton. Escorted by several rabbis, Clinton applauded Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan from the Gaza Strip. Clinton was introduced to the crowd by Cameron Kerry, a brother of the Democratic candidate, who has converted from Catholicism to Judaism. "President Clinton shares the love of Israel with John," he said, noting that Kerry saw Israel as "our most steadfast ally. On this he will never waver ... In the year 2000 the elections were determined in Florida by a mere 500 votes and the Jewish vote is considered especially significant in this state due to their high voting turnout."

Libertarians Face Off on Intervention,
by Jon Basil Utley, anti-war.com, October 27, 2004
"Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation and Robert Higgs of the Independent Institute put forth the hardline libertarian views. Hornberger said the attacks on America were because of Washington's blind support for every Israeli government and because of what was done to Iraq after the first Gulf war. He said a Lexis-Nexis search about former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's statement on 60 Minutes to the effect that, yes, it was worth the death of half a million Iraqi children to blockade Iraq, revealed not a single comment in the major media decrying the policy. Hornberger said many surveys of Arab public opinion show there is strong admiration for American values and our freedom, but Washington's policies engender fear and hatred, the war in Iraq was all about installing a friendly regime and establishing American air bases, and that is why there is no trust in American motives."

Kerry tries to out-Sharon Bush,
by Ron Chepesiuk, anti-war.com, October 20, 2004
"Friday, Israel said it was ending a two-week offensive in the Palestinian Gaza strip, in which Israeli soldiers killed over 100 Palestinians, many of them noncombatants. Palestinians killed at least five Israelis during the same time period, two of whom were civilians, in a rocket attack that preceded and was used as the rationale behind Israel's incursion into northern Gaza. The recent violence once again underscored the ineffectiveness of the Bush administration's policy toward Israel and the occupied territories. Yet, the bloody events halfway across the globe have not made their way into the pre-election political discussion in any significant way. Some analysts say that is because there is little to talk about between the two major candidates, as President George W. Bush and challenger John Kerry both hold very similar positions on the conflict. "As Ralph Nader said, it's been Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee" on the issue, said Yiraf Susskind, Associate Director of MADRE, a New York City-based international women's rights organization. "What Kerry has done at every stage [of the presidential campaign] is essentially back each of Bush's most hawkish right-wing positions on the issue. Whatever Bush has said, Kerry has been there saying, 'Me too! Me too!'" MADRE helps support a trauma counseling program for children and families who have survived military violence and a mobile health team to provide care under Israeli-imposed curfew in the D'heisha refugee camp in the West Bank. The strong likelihood that a Democratic White House would continue the Bush administration's unquestioning support of Israeli policy under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon disappoints and angers experts on the Middle East who want to see a more evenhanded U.S. policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "It's true that Kerry has tried to out-Sharon Bush," explained Stephen R. Shalom, a political science professor at William Paterson University in Wayne, N.J., who has written extensively about U.S. foreign policy and the Middle East. "That's ironic because, historically, Democrats have felt more comfortable supporting the Israeli Labor Party than the Likud Party, as the Republicans have. But Kerry has followed Bush's lead during the campaign." Under President Bush, the U.S. has taken a position on the Israeli-Palestinian issue that many analysts say is biased toward Israel. They say Bush says and does very little as Sharon's military indiscriminately bulldozes Palestinian homes and regularly shoots civilians in what the prime minister refers to as responses to terrorist attacks against Israelis. Last May, Bush threw into doubt his previously proposed 2005 target date for the establishment of a Palestinian state. He has also rejected the long-standing Palestinian claim that refugees have the right to return to their native lands, guaranteed by the Fourth Geneva convention, because much of that land lies inside the currently recognized borders of Israel. "Since 2000, Sharon has pursued a policy of driving Palestinians off their land and pushing them into enclaves that are like prisons," said Tanya Reinhart, a professor of linguistics at Tel Aviv University in Israel and the University of Utrecht in Holland. "By doing nothing about that policy, the Bush administration is showing its support for it" ... During the massive spring 2002 incursion into the West Bank, during which Israeli troops committed the infamous "Jenin massacre," Bush praised Sharon as a "man of peace." Bush later backed Sharon's disengagement plan for the Gaza Strip. When the Israeli prime minister returned home from a recent White House visit requesting that and other support, the Israeli Yediot Aharonot newspaper proclaimed, "Sharon got everything!" Meanwhile, Bush received a solid political endorsement from Abraham Foxman, a prominent American Jewish leader, who praised Bush's "strong statement of support" for Sharon's withdrawal plan. Stephen Zunes, the San Francisco based author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism, agrees that the Bush administration has been biased toward Israel, but he added that it would be a mistake to conclude Bush's bias is pro-Israel. "Bush has given Sharon the excuse to commit outrages against the Palestinians, but that hasn't made Israel safer or improved its position in the world community," Zunes explained. Last April, 50 former U.S. diplomats wrote an open letter to President Bush that supports Zunes' analysis. "You have proved that the U.S. is not an evenhanded peace partner," the letter read. "Your unqualified support of Sharon's extra-judicial assassinations, Israel's Berlin-like barrier, the harsh military measures in occupied territory, and now your endorsement of Sharon's unilateral plan are costing our country its credibility, prestige and friends. This endorsement is not even in the best interests of Israel' ... In contrast to Bush and Kerry, two other presidential candidates, the independent Ralph Nader and Green Party candidate David Cobb, have been highly critical of U.S. policy in the Middle East and want to see it change dramatically. The Association of State Green Parties has passed a statement that reaffirms the Palestinian refugees' "inalienable right of return" to their homes and right to receive material compensation for their losses. As for Ralph Nader, Kevin Zeese, a spokesperson for the Nader for President campaign, explained: "Ralph has a big problem with both Democrats and Republicans and the way they support Israel no matter what it does. Israel is our biggest foreign aid recipient and whatever Israel wants from us, it gets. It's gotten to the point where Ralph now describes the U.S.-Israeli relationship as that of a puppet and puppeteer, with Sharon playing the role of puppeteer." Many activists working for peace in Israel and Palestine suggest that the U.S. government should discontinue its policy of providing large sums of military and economic aid to the Israeli government. During Bush's term, Israel has received a total of $9.2 billion in military aid and $2.6 billion in economic aid. During Clinton's last four years as president, the U.S. gave Israel almost $8.6 billion in military and $4.4 billion in economic aid. Professor Shalom agrees. "It's sometimes warranted to give aid to bad governments when the people are in desperate need," he said. But, he said, Israel is not one of those cases. Given that Israel is in plain violation of international law and is supporting an "unjust" occupation, Shalom would favor cutting off U.S. aid to Israel."

Zionists work to push Islam out of the way for their colonial imperialism as in the material Franklin stole for AIPAC which details US intentions and plans to destabilize Iran for Israel.
Cloak and Swagger.The Larry Franklin spy probe reveals an escalating fight over control of Iran policy,
by Laura Rozen and Jason Vest, The Prospect, November 2, 2004
"The classified document that Franklin allegedly passed to AIPAC concerned a controversial proposal by Pentagon hard-liners to destabilize Iran. The latest iteration of the national-security presidential directive was drafted by a Pentagon civilian and avid neocon, Michael Rubin, who hoped it would be adopted as official policy by the Bush administration. But in mid-June, Bush’s national-security advisers canceled consideration of the draft, partly in response to resistance from some at the State Department and the National Security Council, according to a recent memo written by Rubin and obtained by The American Prospect. No doubt also contributing to the administration’s decision was the swelling insurgency and chaos of postwar Iraq. Rubin, in his early 30s, is a relative newcomer to the neoconservative circles in which he is playing an increasingly prominent role. Once the Iraq and Iran desk officer in the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans and later a Coalition Provisional Authority adviser in Iraq, these days the Yale-educated Ph.D. hangs his hat at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and serves as editor for controversial Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes’ magazine, The Middle East Quarterly.
In an article published in the Republican-oriented quarterly Ripon Forum in June, Rubin suggests that the administration resolve its Iran waffling by turning against the current regime. “In 1953 and 1979,” he wrote, “Washington supported an unpopular Iranian government against the will of the people. The United States should not make the same mistake three times.” In other words, President Bush should step up his public condemnation of the Iranian regime and break off all contact with it in hopes of spurring a swelling of the Iranian pro-democracy movement. In short, Rubin, like his fellow Iran hawks, urges the administration to make regime change in Iran its official policy. This invocation of “moral clarity” has a long intellectual pedigree among neoconservatives. It’s the same argument they made to Ronald Reagan about the Soviet Union more than 20 years ago. “If we could bring down the Soviet empire by inspiring and supporting a small percentage of the people,” Michael Ledeen, a chief neoconservative advocate of regime change in Iran and freedom scholar at AEI, recently wrote in the National Review, “surely the chances of successful revolution in Iran are more likely.” Was it to this end that Franklin was allegedly observed by the FBI passing the draft NSPD on Iran to AIPAC? Was he trying to inform AIPAC, or Israel, about the contents of the draft NSPD? Or rather, and perhaps more plausibly, was he trying to enlist the powerful Washington lobbying organization in advocating for a Iran-destabilization policy? In other words, is the Franklin case really about espionage, or is it a glimpse into the ugly sausage-making process by which Middle East policy gets decided in Washington and, in particular, in the Bush administration?"

Zionists putting the screws to Canada's Foreign Ministry,
by Greg Felton, Media Monitors, October 29, 2004
"Like any subversive group, Canada’s Israel lobby conducts its nefarious doings out of the public eye. If Canadians had regular reports on how this cabal and their MP sock-puppets try to control our foreign policy a furour would erupt, or at least I hope it would. Look what happened in the U.S. after the media reported that Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin passed a classified report on Iran to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Even though AIPAC’s control of U.S. policy is an open secret that nobody dare mention, the fact that Franklin was caught red handed was highly embarrassing.The Lobby went into damage control; its senators and congressmen jumped to attention and defended its honour [sic]; and Israel uttered the predictably absurd statement that it does not spy on the U.S. Well, Canada’s Israel lobby is facing its own crisis. On Oct. 15 and 21, Globe and Mail columnist John Ibbitson reported that a “storm” was brewing within the ministry of foreign affairs because of the Martin government’s “major but surreptitious shift in this nation’s foreign policy.” Ibbitson’s imagery begs allusion to a coup-in-progress, which is not the kind of image the Lobby wants to project. Nevertheless, a McCarthyite climate of fear has spread throughout the ministry. After the first of his two columns appeared, a vigorous search ensued to find the individual or individuals who spoken to him. Ministerial officials are now so afraid for their jobs, that none would agree to comment for this column. Not too long ago, Canadians were proud that their prime minister refused to jump on board the Texecutioner’s Maniacal Misery tour to Iraq. Jean Chrétien also refused to roll over for the Lobby. Now with Paul Martin as the prime minister of a minority government, the zionists have become offensive. To get an idea of how zionized Canada’s Middle East policy is becoming, the ministry’s Middle East file has been sent out of Ottawa for the first time and is being overseen by senior diplomat Jill Sinclair in our embassy in Tel Aviv. When Sinclair was stationed at the embassy in Cuba, she married David Miller, son of the leader of Cuba’s Jewish community in 1988. During her tenure there, and for many years before, the Canadian embassy in Havana maintained a hush-hush relationship with Israel to facilitate the emigration of Cuban Jews. After the 1973 War, Cuba broke off relations with Israel, and it soon became known to Cuba’s Jews that Canada was the new conduit. This 25-year relationship only came to light in 1999. Officials at foreign affairs, therefore, have good reason to charge Sinclair with having a pro-Israel bias and a disregard for Arab interests. Thanks to Ibbitson, this bit of zionist chicanery has come to light quickly, and this “surreptitious shift” has been exposed as a subversive power grab. Let us speak plainly: Zionists are agents of Israel; they do not speak for Canada; they do not represent our democratic principles; they have no regard for international law; and they are intellectually dishonest. Take the comments of Anita Neville, co-chairman of the government’s “Little Knesset,” which now boasts 18 pro-Israel MPs, most of them from heavily Jewish ridings: “We’ve looked at a large number of [UN] votes and Israel has been the only country to be singled out,” she said. “We want a more balanced approach at the UN' ... A lot of the blame for this coercion is being directed at Israel’s main man in Ottawa—Irwin Cotler, although his office refused to comment on his involvement with foreign policy. Among his other odious achievements is his membership in the World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries. Founded on Jan. 25, 1976, WOJAC is based on the bogus notion that Jews in Israel are “refugees” from Arab lands, and therefore entitled to compensation. This is the “Double Exodus” myth by which Zionists try to draw a false equivalence between the forced depopulation of 750,000 Arabs in 1947–48 with the unforced migration of Jews to Palestine over a 20-year period. The very idea of “Jewish refugee” is ridiculed and denigrated even in Israel. As Tel Aviv University professor Yehouda Shenhav wrote: “WOJAC was not formed to assist Mizrahi Jews; it was invented as a deterrent to block claims harbored by the Palestinian national movement, particularly claims related to compensation and the right of return… [It] infuriated many Mizrahi Israelis who defined themselves as Zionists. As early as 1975, at the time of WOJAC's formation, Knesset speaker Yisrael Yeshayahu declared: ‘We are not refugees. [Some of us] came to this country before the state was born. We had messianic aspirations' ... After a couple of calls to Tel Aviv, I got a hold of WOJAC chairman Oved ben-Ozer, who enthusiastically confirmed that Cotler is still a member. So much for honesty. A full-scale investigation of Cotler is long overdue, as is his dismissal from cabinet."

Kerry and Bush send in top guns to woo AIPAC,
by Nathan Guttman, Haaretz (Israel), October 26, 2004
"Senior advisers to both U.S. presidential candidates have appeared over the past two days before a American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) meeting in Florida in a last-ditch attempt to influence the votes of American Jews. "People are going to have to draw together and say to Yasser Arafat, 'All right, the game is up. You really need to do the things you agreed to,'" National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice told several hundred people at the meeting Monday. "There also has to be - finally - a conversation, a discussion with Yasser Arafat by those who still talk to him - we're not among those - ... to say 'All right, land is now being returned to the Palestinian people,'" Rice said. "You said that's what you wanted all these years. Now it is time to step aside." Richard Holbrooke, John Kerry's foreign policy adviser, took a similar tone when he spoke to AIPAC on Sunday. Holbrooke, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, noted that Kerry is in complete agreement with President Bush on disengagement and not negotiating with Arafat. However, he stressed that Kerry would be more involved than Bush and would send a special envoy to the Middle East. Holbrooke is touted as Kerry's possible choice for secretary of state or as the Middle East special envoy. Aware of the sensitivity of the Jewish community to attempts to force Israel to agree to concessions, Holbrooke made it clear that Israel would not be pressured into concessions when there is no Palestinian partner. As Kerry has stated previously, Holbrooke highlighted the difference between the Democratic candidate and Bush in dealing with Saudi Arabia. He noted that Saudi Arabia boycotts Israel and its children study from maps on which Israel does not appear, and that the Bush administration had not done enough in this regard. The appearance of the candidates' senior advisers at the AIPAC meeting shows both a desire to prove their friendship to Israel on the eve of the elections and that AIPAC wields power. Only two months after a Pentagon analyst was suspected of handing information to AIPAC activists, neither of the candidates' two senior advisers had any qualms about appearing publicly before the organization, and AIPAC officials said the relationship with the administration had not been harmed."

Israel Bonds lobbying US states on foreign bonds ban,
State of Israel Bonds chief Joshua Matza: Four states have changed their laws,
by Ran Digani, Globes (Israel's Business Arena), October 24, 2004
"State of Israel Bonds (Israel Bonds) in the US is intensifying its lobbying of state legislatures to change laws banning state pension funds from buying bonds of foreign countries, State of Israel bonds president and CEO Joshua Matza told "Globes". Louisiana has been the latest success in this campaign. Louisiana state treasurer John Kennedy announced last week that three state pension funds would buy $5 million of Israel Bonds, following a change in state law permitting state pension funds to invest up to 5% of their investment portfolios in the bonds of foreign governments. Israel Bonds were the first, and so far the only, bonds of a foreign country bought by Louisiana. Matza said, "Many states ban investment by state entities in risky bonds, bonds of foreign countries, and bonds without an AAA rating. Israel Bonds are not AAA, but decision-makers in Louisiana and other states realized that not only are they among the best bonds in the world, but that they are also a practical expression of support for Israel." Besides Louisiana, Israel Bonds has persuaded the legislatures of three other states to change laws, all of which have subsequently bought Israel Bonds in the past year: New Jersey ($20 million); New Mexico ($10 million); and Indiana ($5 million). "The legislative changes have not only increased the distribution of Israel Bonds, they have also expanded support for Israel among state legislatures, which are exposed to information about Israel's economic strength and the close ties between Israel and US federal government," said Matza. Pro-Israeli sources in the US believe that the Israel Bonds initiative at the state level is one of the most effective tools available to Israel to foil initiatives by Presbyterians and other organizations to apply financial pressure against Israel, similar to the boycotts used against Apartheid-era South Africa. These sanctions were a key factor in ending Apartheid in South Africa. Matza said 24 US states have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in Israel Bonds. He added that Israel Bonds was now trying to promote legislative amendments in three states, whose names he did not disclose. He said states liked buying Israel Bonds as a way of showing their support for Israel to their residents. Israel Bonds' sales target in the US for the current fiscal year is $125 billion."

Target Iran - Countdown Timeline,
Globalsecurity.org
"2001. The Coalition for Democracy in Iran was formed in 2001 to mobilize the efforts of a variety of groups and individuals across the United States supporting the aspirations of the Iranian people for freedom, democracy and respect for human rights in Iran. The CDI strongly supports President Bush's designation of Iran as part of the deadly "axis of evil." Michael Ledeen [of the American Enterprise Institute], Morris Amitay [a former director of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC], and James Woolsley [former CIA director] formed the Coalition for Democracy in Iran, which has strong ties to the exiled Reza Pahlavi, the deceased shah's son."

Kerry is concerned for Israelis, but may have forgotten tens of thousands of Israeli maimed, tortured, and slaughtered Palestinians.
Statement by John Kerry on the Terrorist Bombing in Tel Aviv,
Yahoo! News, November 1, 2004
"Senator John Kerry released the following statement today: "I strongly condemn today's terrorist bombing in Tel Aviv, Israel. My deepest sympathies and prayers are with the families of those killed and wounded. Our commitment to Israel's safety and security will never waiver."

NOTE: Are these Canadian government officials Canadian or Israeli? It's impossible to tell.
Liberal MPs work to change UN voting pattern on Israel,
By RON CSILLAG, Canadian Jewish News, October 28, 2004
"Influential Liberal members of Parliament, including potentially seven cabinet ministers, promise to redouble their efforts to change Canada’s voting pattern on Israel at the United Nations, says one MP who co-chairs a pro-Israel caucus. Liberal Parliamentarians for Israel, composed of up to 18 MPs, including several members of cabinet, launched its work Oct. 18 in Canada’s new minority government. High on the agenda is “the need to alter Canadian votes at the United Nations General Assembly,” says a caucus statement. “We’ve looked at a large number of [UN] votes and Israel has been the only country to be singled out. We want a more balanced approach at the UN,” said Winnipeg Liberal MP Anita Neville, who returns as caucus co-chair, along with new co-chair Senator David Smith. Neville was original co-chair of the group with former MP and cabinet member Art Eggleton. The caucus is not to be confused with the Canada-Israel Parliamentary Friendship Group, an all-party entity designed to bring together MPs from across the political spectrum to demonstrate non-partisan support for Israel. Liberal Parliamentarians for Israel has not fully gelled yet, but Neville told The CJN it will comprise from 15 to 18 members, including at least five cabinet ministers. They are Justice Minister Irwin Cotler; Joe Volpe, minister of human resources and skills development; Stephen Owen, minister of western economic diversification; Public Health Minister Carolyn Bennett; and Jim Peterson, minister of international trade. All have significant Jewish constituencies. Presumably, the list will include two other Jewish members of cabinet, as well as Senator Jack Austin, leader of the government in the Senate, and Jacques Saada, minister responsible for the Francophonie, an association of French-speaking countries. Lucienne Robillard, minister of intergovernmental affairs, was a member in the last Parliament. It’s not known whether she will return. While the presence of a half-dozen or so cabinet ministers with strong support for Israel might seem like a victory, it’s been pointed out that cabinet ministers are, by tradition, forbidden from speaking out against government policy or even advocating change outside of the secrecy of cabinet meetings, and are bound by cabinet solidarity. An official caucus committee, Liberal Parliamentarians for Israel was founded in early 2003 to sway what some lawmakers and many Jewish Canadians felt was Canada’s increasingly cold relations with Israel, especially when it came to this country’s voting record at the UN ... The issue has long been a sore point in the Jewish community. Many still angrily recall Canada’s support in 2000 for UN Resolution 1322, which condemned Israel for using excessive force in putting down Palestinian violence. Also bedevilling many in the community is the number of Canadian abstentions at the UN on Arab-sponsored anti-Israel measures. This summer, Canada opted for neutrality on a vote that called on Israel to comply with demands to dismantle its security fence. Canada has traditionally defended its abstentions as a reflection of its role as a neutral broker in the Middle East dispute ... Neville, who is Jewish, said her group is not out to make Canada’s Middle East policy one-sided, but to ensure fairness ... Neville was one of 15 MPs and senators to submit a report to the Department of Foreign Affairs last year, imploring Canada to “improve and refresh” its Mideast policy, in effect shifting to a more pro-Israel stance. Among the key recommendations of the 25-page report was that Canada should sign a comprehensive “friendship agreement” with Israel that would strengthen Canadian-Israeli links “in virtually all aspects of society and government' ... Neville pointed out that Israel is the only country outside North America to have a free trade deal with Canada, one that generates just under $1 billion in two-way trade a year ... A third priority for the caucus is to explore ways in which government efforts at combatting racism could be strengthened. Neville said the group hopes to build on the wide-ranging anti-racism education initiative unveiled by Cotler earlier this year ... The allegation that government officials are favouring Israel of late surfaced earlier this month, involving an unlikely target: NDP leader Jack Layton, considered a friend by many Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians. Layton was forced on the defensive after the publicization of a letter to him from Mississauga lawyer Arif Raza, who wrote, “We have been deeply hurt and angered by this sudden lurch towards Israel.” The letter was signed by 26 other party supporters who accused Layton of falling under the “undue influence” of the Canadian Jewish Congress, causing the NDP to stifle its criticism of Israeli policies."

Appeasing Israel. Bush and Kerry put Israel first – and ignore the rise of fascism in the 'Promised Land',
by Justin Raimondo, anti-war.com, October 29, 2004
"The Israelis have been on a rampage since 9/11: it was as much of a green light for them as it was for our own War Party. They didn't waste much time before unleashing their U.S.-armed and amply subsidized military on the largely helpless civilian population in the occupied territories. Whereas before the U.S. had often acted as a restraining force, chiding the Israelis when their brutality reached a fever pitch and cooling them down with threats of a (temporary) reduction in aid (or, more accurately, a reduction in the annual increase they feel is owed to them), the post-9/11 era saw George W. Bush in the role of practically egging them on. Brent Scowcroft, George H. W. Bush's former national security advisor, told the Financial Times that Bush II is "mesmerized" by Sharon, and that, as a consequence, the U.S. stance toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is skewed ... Today, the word "fascist" is the political equivalent of the "f"-word, rendered virtually meaningless on account of its degeneration into pure epithet. Yet, Israel in its present trajectory fits the classic definition of fascism to a tee: a State that is not only thoroughly militarized and aggressively expansionist, but also one in which the government effectively controls or outright owns the commanding heights of the economy. Add to this the fulminations of the militant rabbis, and you have a nuclear-armed fanaticism that poses a potentially deadly threat to Europe as well as the entire Middle East. Israel, far from being our faithful ally, is potentially an enemy: after all, why were they running a spy ring in the Pentagon, if they claim they can get any information they want? What, really, is going on beneath the smooth surface of Israeli-American relations – and why do top U.S. government officials continue to treat AIPAC as anything other than a sophisticated spy operation?"

Congress to welcome some new Jews,
Jerusalem Post (Israel), November 3, 2004
"Barring any unforeseen changes, there will be 11 Jews in the Senate and 26 in the House next year, the same numbers as the last two years ... Jewish representation in each chamber is important to Jewish organizational officials, who feel some Jewish lawmakers are more interested in their issues and more willing to trumpet their agenda.
"Members of Congress with a Jewish background have a certain affinity for our community, and our community has a certain affinity for them," said Richard Foltin, legislative director of the American Jewish Committee ... [Tom] Daschle worked well with Jewish leaders as the Democratic leader, but Jewish activists say his possible successors all have good track records as well. Daschle lost to former Rep. John Thune. Florida State Sen. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a rising star in the Democratic Party, won the seat vacated by another Jewish congressman, Rep. Peter Deutsch, her mentor. Wasserman Schultz said she is excited to represent south Florida and would focus on homeland security as well as other domestic issues. "I'm a reflection of my district," Wasserman Schultz told JTA from her election headquarters Tuesday evening. "This is a community that is passionate about Israel and human services issues. Wasserman Schultz was heavily favored to win her seat in a highly Democratic area. She defeated Margaret Hostetter. At age 38, Wasserman Schultz has served in both houses of the Florida legislature, is on the regional board of the American Jewish Congress and helped to form the National Jewish Democratic Council. Pennsylvania State Sen. Allyson Schwartz also won Tuesday, defeating Melissa Brown ... In the Senate, [Arlen] Specter won his fifth term Tuesday, defeating Hoeffel, one of his strongest challengers since first winning his seat in 1980 ... Specter's victory is important because he is one of the few Jewish Republicans in Congress, and he has the most seniority among them. He is expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year, which could play a pivotal role in approving federal and US Supreme Court judges. Four other Jewish senators won re-election handily – Sens. Charles Schumer (D-New York), Barbara Boxer (D-California), Russell Feingold (D-Wisconsin) and Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) ... Several of the new Republican members of the Senate are considered strong friends of Israel, such as Rep. Jim DeMint in South Carolina, Rep. Johnny Isakson of Georgia and Rep. Richard Burr in North Carolina. The same is being said about the new Colorado senator, Democrat Ken Salazar ... Jews are also watching the return of Cynthia McKinney, a former congresswoman who made headlines with anti-Israel statements. McKinney won her heavily Democratic district Tuesday. Democrats said they hope McKinney will moderate her anti-Israel rhetoric."

MS anthropologist. In the future, do not be afraid to tell the full truth. Feith, Wolfowitz, and Perle are all Jews, all "neo-cons," and all fanatic Zionist supporters of Israel. Jewish tribalism and networking is nakedly the heart of this shady operation. To be scientific, anthropologists must say the obvious.
Neocon 'Flex Players' Await Bush's Second Term,
by Janine R. Wedel, Pacific News Service, Nov 3, 2004
"As a social anthropologist I observed the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the rise of powerful, close-knit circles that filled the leadership vacuum and seized large chunks of state-owned wealth. These exclusive groups resemble the neoconservative or "neocon" core of 10 or so players who helped push the United States into Iraq. The rise of this neocon power circle -- and its continued prominence within and without the second-term Bush administration -- signals troubling changes in American governing and policymaking. The Eastern European former apparatchiks and the American neocons share many characteristics. They specialize in blurring state and private interests and spheres. They are skilled at skirting both the government's rules of accountability and business codes of competition. They have created new norms that make bureaucracy more like business and business more contingent on government. In "The Power Elite," written a half century ago, C. Wright Mills noted that three interlocking prongs of power -- corporations, the military and the political elite -- were diminishing the authority of elected officials. That trend is stronger today. The outsourcing and privatization of government functions in the name of efficiency and cost savings have led to the delegation of more authority to private entities and new opportunities for strategically placed groups of actors to co-opt public policy agendas ... Consider the ties among three members of the neocon core: Richard Perle, former chairman of the Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense; and Douglas Feith, undersecretary for policy in the Defense Department. In 1973, Perle helped his friend Wolfowitz find work in the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. In 1982 Perle, as assistant secretary for international security policy in President Reagan's Defense Department, hired and later promoted Feith after the latter was fired as Middle East analyst from the National Security Council. A couple of years after leaving the Pentagon, Perle became a highly paid consultant for the lobbying firm International Advisers Inc., which Feith set up in 1989. By serving as a consultant to the firm, Perle-who had just finished a seven-year stint at the Pentagon, during which he supervised U.S. military assistance to Turkey-was able to bypass federal regulations that prohibited officials from serving foreign interests right after leaving government. The "mutual aid society" of these three central figures continues to this day. In 2001 Perle and Wolfowitz (as deputy secretary of defense) saw to it that Feith was appointed undersecretary for policy in the Defense Department. Feith, in turn, selected Perle for appointment as chairman of the Defense Policy Board. (Perle resigned as chairman in March 2003 amid allegations of conflicts of interest, and from the board altogether a year later.) Flex players are not necessarily engaged in unethical activity, but they always help each other out in furthering their careers, livelihoods and mutual aims. Even when some players are "in power" within an administration, they are flanked by people outside of formal government. Flex groups have a culture of circumventing authorities and creating alternative ones. They operate through semi-closed networks and penetrate key institutions, revamping them to marginalize other potential players and replacing them with initiatives under their control. The neocon core has set up its own duplicative entities in government that often enable them to bypass or override the input of otherwise relevant bodies. Two secretive units in the Pentagon were created under Feith and staffed in part by people recruited by Perle from neocon circles. The core empowered shadow hubs of decision-making, including the "mini National Security Council," a small circle of influence within the NSC, and a similar group in the vice president's office. The blurring and overlapping public and private roles and offices enable players to avoid accountability. Perle, for example, surfaces at the epicenter of a head-spinning array of business firms, consultancies, lobbying and ideological initiatives, consistently evading accusations of impropriety that have been leveled against him. Today's most successful players have gone beyond the revolving door, in which executive-branch officials and members of Congress become industry lobbyists upon leaving office, or industry leaders become officials who help regulate their own industries. Revolving-door careerists are now joined by flex players, who may be on both sides of the door at the same time -- or for whom the door itself has vanished."

Guidestar is paid-subscriber based, but will give out basic information on IRS-recognized nonprofit organizations. It will give a financial snapshot for very large organizations. Try using the following keywords and see what information appears: Jewish, Jewry, Judaism, Israel, Zionism, etc."
http://www.guidestar.org/index.jsp

An Interview with Dov Weisglass, Sharon's Lawyer. He Talks to Condi Rice Every Day,
By ARI SHAVIT, CounterPunch, October 11, 2004
"So that over the years the rural commander developed a growing dependence on his Tel Aviv lawyer who became a personal advocate, a family advocate, a policy advocate. The advocate who for the past 30 months has represented Ariel Sharon vis-a-vis the American mega-authority, the advocate who in the past 30 months, in his official capacity as a senior adviser to the Prime Minister , has almost single-handedly conducted the delicate relationship between the White House and Sycamore Ranch. Which is to say, between the United States of America and the State of Israel ... [WEINGLASS:] "I am in ongoing and continuous contact with Rice. In complex times it could be every day, by phone. In less complex times it's a phone call a week. On average, I meet with her once a month. Since May 2002 I have met with her more than 20 times. And every meeting is a meeting. The shortest one was an hour and a half ... When my conversation with Rice ends, she knows that I walk six steps to Sharon's desk and I know that she walks twelve steps to Bush's desk. That creates an intimate relationship between the two bureaus and prevents a thousand entanglements."

Unspoken here, some people, especially scholars, say President Bush has been consumed by the Jewish Lobby on behalf of Israeli apartheid and its world subjugation of Islamic liberation movements. How convenient of this author. Below George W. Bush is blamed, solely, for everything, as if the Zionists in the White House who have taken him prisoner and make American foreign policy are completely invisible.
The re-election of Israel's enemy,
by Gideon Levy, Haaretz (Israel), November 7, 2004
"The United States has re-elected an enemy of Israel as its president. If George W. Bush's next four years in office are anything like the first four, the damage he will do Israel will be all but irreversible. The headlines in the mass circulation papers here screamed, "The friend stays" and "Bush is good for Israel," but from Israel's point of view he is one of the worst presidents ever. An American president who will give Israel four more years of freedom to act as it pleases in the territories is not a friend of this country. A true friend would save Israel from itself, as some European leaders are trying to do by means of the criticism they hurl at Israeli government policy. In a situation in which Israel is not restraining itself, restraint imposed from the outside is a supreme national interest, even if it involves exerting pressure that at times can be brutal. Moreover, a determined American president who really and truly wants to put an end to the century-old conflict would discover that precisely now it is far easier than may at first appear to be the case. To begin with, the present Israeli prime minister is in awe of America and genuine pressure applied by the world's superpower would have an immediate effect on him. If America wanted, it could bring about a dramatic withdrawal from the occupied areas and thus make a true contribution, not only to Israel and peace, but also to the struggle against regional and world terrorism. If Bush were really concerned about Israel's fate, he would have long since pushed it to the negotiating table. At the very least he could, if he wanted, bring about a reduction in the scale of the killing of Palestinians and the damage to their property. Remember when Israel used to weigh carefully every violent move it made in the territories because of its fear of America? That period ended four years ago. The leader who is responsible for the killing of 100,000 Iraqi civilians is not moved by the deeds of the Israeli occupation. And, himself being familiar only with the language of force, he identifies completely with a country where that is also the only language. In our case, though, damage is being done not only to the population that is under occupation, whose fate is certainly of no interest to the American president, but also to the occupying society, whose secure future he purports to guarantee. From this point of view, Bush's first four years will go down in history as a calamity, as a period in which Israel discovered that there are no limits to the force it is allowed to exercise. It will take a great many years before Israel is weaned from this. If the United States brought about the end of the Israeli occupation in the territories, its international status would also be enhanced, especially in the Arab and Muslim world. Europe would take a different view of an America that resolves conflicts instead of fomenting useless wars. The Middle Eastern conflict nourishes much Islamic terrorism and gives it a triumphant cause. The re-election of the person who on the one hand made it possible for the entire Palestinian people to be pushed into the cycle of violence by the infliction of collective punishment and the use of unrestrained force, and on the other hand allowed Israel to continue expanding the settlements, is bad news not only for peace but also for the global battle against terrorism. The resulting damage is long-term and both Israel and the United States will ultimately pay the full price."

We're all Israelis Now,
by Mark Levine, Dissident Voice, November 5, 2004
" Three years ago, as the pungent odor of what was left of the World Trade Center slowly pervaded my neighborhood, I wrote a piece called “We’re all Israelis Now.” I didn’t invent the idea; in the hours since the attacks I had heard several commentators say essentially the same thing, although our meanings were in fact diametrically opposed. For them, the September 11 attacks had constituted a tragic wake up call to America about the mortal threat posed by Muslim terrorism, which Israel had been living through for decades and whose methods the US would now have to copy if it wanted to “win the war on terror.” For me, however, the attacks suggested a more troubling scenario: That like Israelis, Americans would never face the causes of the extreme violence perpetrated against us by those whose oppression we have supported and even enforced, and engage in the honest introspection of what our role has been in generating the kind of hatred that turns commuter jets into cruise missiles. Instead, my gut told me that we’d acquiesce to President Bush’s use of the war to realize the long-held imperial, even apocalyptic visions of the neoliberal Right, ones that find great sympathy with its Israeli counterpart. As I watch George W. Bush celebrate his reelection I realize I never could have imagined just how much like Israelis we would become. Think about it: in Israel, the majority of Jewish citizens support the policies of Ariel Sharon despite the large-scale, systematic (and according to international law, criminal) violence his government deploys against Palestinian society, despite the worsening economic situation for the lower middle class religious voters who constitute his main base of support, despite rising international opprobrium and isolation. Sound familiar? As for the country’s “liberal” opposition, it’s in a shambles, politically and morally bankrupt because in fact it was a willing participant in creating and preserving the system that is now eating away at the heart of Israeli society. Aside from occasional plaintive oped pieces by members of its progressive wing, the Labor Party can and will do nothing fundamentally to challenge Sharon’s policies. Why? Because they reflect an impulse, nurtured by the Labor movement during its decades in power, that is buried deep in the heart of Zionism: to build an exclusively Jewish society on as much of the ancient homeland as possible, with little regard for the fate of the country’s native inhabitants. As any native American will remind us, America was built on a similar holy quest. So it shouldn’t surprise us that the parallels between Israel’s mini-empire and America’s Iraq adventure are striking. It’s not just that America’s occupation is faring as terribly as Israel’s. In the last week--with more than enough time to influence the election--doctors from America’s leading research hospitals published a study demonstrating that US forces have killed upwards of 100,000 Iraqis, the majority of them women and children killed by American bombs. Yet before November 2 Americans could at least say they weren’t directly responsible for the disaster that has unfolded there in Iraq, since an unelected President had taken the country to war under false pretenses. No more. As of today, American society has declared its support for the invasion, and as such is morally and politically culpable for every single one of those 100,000 dead, and every single one of the tens of thousands of deaths that are sure to follow ... America, in short, has become a criminal nation, and it must be stopped. (Yes, there are many other criminal nations, but aside from Israel how many even have the pretense of democracy? Russia? The Sudan? China? India is perhaps one; and given its sordid occupation of Kashmir it shouldn’t surprise that a US-India-Israel axis of occupation and Islamophobia is one of the most prominent features of the world’s geo-strategic post-9/11 landscape.) ... This situation reveals something dark, even frightening about America’s collective character."

Scholars of rhetorical methods have said that "anti-Semitism" may be defined as anything Jews don't like. The Department of Education has apparently become a Judeo Centric operative that enforces acceptable Zionist Think and clears the way for unchallenged Jewish Apartheid Tribalism.
Education Dept. to fight anti-Semitism, [scroll down page]
Cleveland Jewish News, September 29, 2004
"The U.S. Department of Education says it will now prosecute cases of anti-Semitism on college campuses and in public schools. In a letter to schools received this week, the department's Office of Civil Rights said it had jurisdiction over matters of racial and national-origin discrimination, and therefore could investigate cases of harassment of Arab Muslims, Sikhs and Jewish students. Previously, anti-Semitism cases were deemed discrimination based on religion, and forwarded to the Justice Department. Now, the Education Department can take cases to an administrative law judge. "I have heard anecdotally that they think it is happening and people don't know where to turn," said Kenneth Marcus, who oversees the department's Office of Civil Rights. "People don't know they have an opportunity to get protection from the federal government." Marcus said harassment of Jews or other religious minorities may have ethnic or cultural components, which would put it under his purview."

Another war? For Israel's sake,
by Justin Raimondo, antiwar.com, November 10, 2004
"The stakes, in short, are much higher, the situation far more volatile, and behind it all is a factor that has so far managed to remain largely hidden: Israel. Kurdistan is where the Israelis have recently sent their agents – loaded down with plenty of cash – as Seymour Hersh reports, egging on Kurdish nationalists in their bid for a de facto independent state. According to Hersh, the Israelis have quietly informed the administration that the war against the insurgency in Iraq is hopeless, and their plan – "Plan B," as Hersh dubs it – is to provoke a wider war ... The Zionization of Kurdistan is the first step in an Israeli effort to confront Iran – not directly, of course, but wielding the U.S. military as its instrument. Pro-Israeli officials in the U.S. government are actively seeking a policy of "regime change" in Tehran, and one of them – Larry Franklin, a Pentagon analyst and Iran specialist – was caught by the FBI handing over sensitive U.S. government documents to a coven of Israeli government officials and two top employees of the American Israeli Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC). On the ground in Iraq, and in Washington, the Israelis and their agents are working overtime to provoke another war – and, now that Bush is president, and a Republican majority in both houses of Congress is firmly in place, who will stop them?"

Arafat Dies: No More Excuses; Press Conference 11 to 11:30 am Friday, November 12,
U.S. Newswire, November 11, 2004
"News Advisory: In front of PLO Mission to the USA, Suite 200, 1320 18th St NW, Washington, DC (phone: 202-974-6360) Speakers Offer Condolences and Challenge U.S. to Be an Honest Peace Broker. PLO Representative to the United States - Hassan Abdul Rahman. Ambassador Andrew Killgore, publisher of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs And other speakers will remember Arafat and consider the future. President Yasser Arafat will be remembered as the father of the Palestinian people's struggle for justice and freedom. His death should prompt all those who seek peace with justice to work even harder to end Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. We call upon the United States to reexamine its Middle Eastern policy and become a truly honest peace broker. We call upon Israel to permit Palestinians to hold democratic elections to choose their new leader. Arafat always yearned to return to Jerusalem--a wish Ariel Sharon has denied him even in death. In fact, Israel has taken advantage of the tense situation to place under house arrest nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu, recently freed after 18 years in prison. President Arafat, a Nobel Peace Laureate, recognized Israel's existence. He negotiated peace agreements and shook hands with Israelis and Americans, who then broke their promises and allowed Israeli settlements to expand and flourish on Palestinian territory. Prime Minister Sharon continues to demolish Palestinian homes, orchards, lives and dreams. Who is the real terrorist? For more information contact the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs 1902 18th St NW, Washington, DC 20009 (202) 939 6050 http://www.wrmea.com "

Mehlman to chair Republican National Comm.,
Washington Times (from UPI), November 11, 2004
"Ken Mehlman, campaign manager for Bush-Cheney '04, will be named head of the Republican National Committee, a source close to the White House told UPI Thursday."

NATO offers closer ties with Israeli army,
Washington Times (from UPI), November 17, 2004
"NATO has invited Israel to join its military exercises and anti-terror activities such as patrols in the eastern Mediterranean, Haaretz reported. In a report from Brussels, published Tuesday, the newspaper said NATO is considering also the possibility of sending forces to the Gaza Strip, after Israel pulls out of there, if Israel and the Palestinian Authority agree on the pullback and ask for NATO's help. A senior Israeli officer, Chief of Operations Maj. Gen. Yisrael Ziv will -- for the first time -- attend a military summit in Brussels of the chiefs of staff of the 26 armies that are members, or have ties with the alliance. The newspaper said the invitations are part of NATO's plans to upgrade the "Mediterranean dialogue" it is conducting with Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and Mauritania. Seven exercises were proposed to the Israel Defense Forces, including training in Ukraine in June, the report said."

Specter Wins Support for Chairmanship,
Earthlink (from Associated Press), November 18, 2004
"Arlen Specter on Thursday won the backing of Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans to be their new chairman, surviving complaints from abortion opponents after submitting an extraordinary statement underscoring his support for Bush judicial nominees. "I have assured the president that I would give his nominees quick committee hearings and early committee votes," Specter said at a news conference during which outgoing chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said the panel's Republicans were unanimous in backing the Pennsylvania moderate. The nine Judiciary Republicans agreed they would stand behind Specter in January's vote for chairman despite his statement after this month's elections that anti-abortion judges would have a difficult time gaining Senate confirmation, given Democratic opposition. That comment infuriated abortion opponents, and Senate conservatives - during meetings arranged by GOP leadership - subjected Specter to an exceptional grilling on his views and intentions. Anti-abortion activists said they were disappointed that Senate Republicans had decided not to block Specter ... Abortion opponents lobbied hard to keep Specter out, holding a "pray-in" at the Capitol on Tuesday and burying GOP senators' offices with e-mails, faxes and telephone calls."

Top court is asked to rule on conspiracy theory. Judges to consider whether Cotler abused powers by facilitating Abella appointment,
By RHÉAL SÉGUIN, Globe and Mail (Canada), November 17, 2004
"The Supreme Court of Canada is being asked to rule on a conspiracy theory that calls into question the impartiality of the country's highest court. Quebec City lawyer Guy Bertrand alleges that Justice Minister Irwin Cotler was in a conflict of interest and abused his powers by bowing to pressure from the Canadian Jewish Congress to have Madam Justice Rosalie Abella appointed to the top court as part of the effort to have Mr. Bertrand's client, former Rwandan political activist Léon Mugesera, deported. Mr. Mugesera, who is alleged to have incited genocide and racial hatred in his home country, has been fighting deportation for 10 years. In 2003, he appeared to have won that battle when the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed allegations that a 1992 speech given by Mr. Mugesera, a Hutu activist, incited violence against Rwanda's Tutsi minority. But the federal government appealed that decision and a hearing is scheduled for Dec. 8. Mr. Bertrand is asking the court to reject the appeal before the hearing by ruling that the Justice Minister had a personal agenda in seeking Mr. Mugesera's deportation. The brief contains sweeping allegations suggesting that Mr. Cotler was involved in a conspiracy with the Canadian Jewish Congress to appoint Judge Abella to the top court to prevent an unbiased and impartial ruling in Mr. Mugesera's case ... Mr. Bertrand contends that Mr. Cotler, a former president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, made statements that supported Mr. Mugesera's deportation. The brief also alleges that Mr. Cotler has close ties with Judge Abella's husband, historian Irving Abella, also a past president of the CJC. Mr. Bertrand states that Mr. Cotler and Judge Abella participated in public forums where Mr. Mugesera's alleged hate crimes in Rwanda were denounced. The CJC, in its role as a public advocate, seeks to intervene in cases of alleged hate crimes."

CIA has 'new guidance' on interrogation,
Washington Times, November 18, 2004
"A senior CIA official says the agency has received new guidance from government lawyers on its detention and interrogation policies.CIA acting General Counsel John Rizzo told a lawyers conference that since the repudiation earlier this year of memos arguing President Bush could lawfully order captured terrorists to be tortured, the agency had received new legal advice. "We do not operate under repudiated guidance," he said. He told the conference the CIA's policy on detention and interrogation -- which he declined to discuss in any detail -- was carried out "pursuant to the U.S. law and constitution" as interpreted by administration lawyers. "We have operated, are operating under very specific and helpful Justice Department guidance," he said."

Some scholars of recent history may claim "neo-conservative" is the code word for "Jew" (Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, etc. ad nauseum -- who some say have pulled off a Zionist coup in American government). What Gentiles detest is the hidden Zionist nature of the American government, and its arrogant, materialist, aggrandizing Judeo Centric component. This "professor" below might it completely wrong. Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, et al have long held deep allegiance to Israel, and this is well-documented in the press. Where is the mass media article that has the courage to say :"Yes, these guys support Israel BECAUSE they are Jewish, and other considerations follow after that." If this professor wrote THAT, he wouldn't have a job anymore and he KNOWS that. This article, however, opens these questions for scholarly scrutiny.
'Crying Wolf' over the neoconservatives,
by Beth R. Alexander, Interest Alert! (UPI), November 22, 2004
"Portrayed as the big bad wolf of U.S. foreign policy, Paul Wolfowitz and the supposed "neo-con cabal" continue to inspire deep suspicion and fear among both the liberal left and the conservative right. But Cambridge professor and author Brendan Simms has different ideas about why we should be afraid.The "near-demonic hatred" of the neoconservatives today represents a "veiled expression of anti-Americanism that is almost without parallel," the history professor said in an interview with United Press International."It tends to bring out even among people who don't see themselves as particularly anti-American a very strong animus;" an animus that hints to a widening schism in trans-Atlantic relations, and according to Simms, "enables people to say I'm not anti-American, it's just the neo-cons I don't like." Speaking at the inauguration of The Henry Jackson Society at Cambridge University earlier in the week, Simms analyzed the neo-con quandary: why all the hatred surrounding them and who exactly are the neo-con werewolves we are all so quick to vilify? A familiar portrait painted of the neo-cons is one of a radical Republican Jewish band of conspirators who have "hijacked" the Bush administration as a means of self-aggrandizement while pursuing their own interests on a "Middle East agenda." Talking to this dispassionate academic in a book-cluttered office in Southeast England however, a very different picture emerges. "Critics make great play of the fact that so many of the neo-cons are Jewish or linked to Israeli organizations and lobbies in the U.S.," Irish-born Simms told UPI. "I think they see the whole issue back to front. They support Israel not because they are Jewish but because they see Israel as the only democratic state in a region of theocracies and dictatorships' ... Democrats such as Joe Lieberman and Madeleine Albright may occupy as much of a neoconservative platform as hard-line Republicans Wolfowitz, Perle and Douglas Feith, Simms said."

Human rights a political tool for the West: Rafsanjani,
Tehran Times (Iran), November 22, 2004
"Expediency Council chairman, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani in a meeting with the Dutch ambassador to Tehran, Henry Yurian on Sunday morning said that the Netherlands, as the rotating head of the European Union can play a key role in boosting Iran-EU ties. Rafsanjani said that the Paris agreement between Iran and the EU trio (Britain, Germany and France) is aimed at confidence-building between the two sides adding that Iran should expand its relationship with Europe for this purpose. He further emphasized the necessity for EU countries to remain committed to their obligations adding that Iran is serious and honest in its stances. The Islamic Republic considers the peaceful use of nuclear energy as a right for all countries including Iran, Rafsanjani stressed. He went on to say that the Westerners use the issue of human rights as a tool to achieve their political goals by supporting countries that pay no attention to this issue. The EC chairman further referred to the West’s double standard policies toward terrorist groups including Al Qaeda and the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO), Israel’s inhuman behavior toward the Palestinians and the Zionist regime’s access to nuclear weapons as some clear examples that showed the Westerners were not honest in their words. On the issue of Iraq, he said "we should all try to transfer power to the Iraqi nation,” and expressed hope that the world would not witness more atrocities against the Iraqi people especially the people in Falluja."

Scholars know that economics is controlled by those with the most money.
France reaches out to Israel,
by Jocelyn Gecker, Sacramento Bee (from Associated Press), November 25, 2004
"Barely two weeks after its VIP treatment for a dying Yasser Arafat, France reached out to Israel on Wednesday, hosting a delegation of Israeli economic officials. Speeches and roundtables at an all-day seminar with French business leaders were dominated by a heavy sales pitch: Come invest in Israel. But, on the sidelines, officials and experts underscored another message - that closer trade ties could ease political tensions between Israel and France aggravated by anti-Semitism and other issues. "Obviously, if the economic ties are getting stronger and there is more exposure on the economic front ... it will improve the politics also," said Dan Catarivas, the Israeli Finance Ministry's deputy director general of international affairs. For France to get a greater role in Mideast politics, it needs to overcome a perception among Israelis of having a pro-Palestinian bias, several people interviewed said. "Maybe economics is a good way to do that," Catarivas told The Associated Press. "Maybe more economic involvement can create a more balanced view and balanced position of France in the Middle East." It certainly can't hurt, noted Henri Cukierman, president of the French-Israeli Chamber of Commerce. "It's very important to improve economic ties, because if we don't do that, Israel and France will grow more and more apart," he said. Anti-Semitism in France prompted a very public spat between the countries' two leaders this summer, when Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon urged French Jews to emigrate to Israel. French President Jacques Chirac castigated Sharon and said he would not be welcome in France until he explained his remarks. Sharon then tried to repair the damage by praising France for its efforts to crack down on anti-Jewish acts ... [French] foreign Minister Michel Barnier has also made a priority of reaching out to Israel. "The time has come to renew our relations," he said in a speech at Tel Aviv University last month. "My ambition as the head of French diplomacy is to multiply the occasions for our societies to get to know each other and understand each other." Political analysts say France's red-carpet treatment of Arafat - dispatching a plane to fly the Palestinian leader to a top Paris-area military hospital - was also a gesture to Israel. Arafat died at the hospital on Nov. 11. "It certainly made life easier for them," Francois Heisbourg, director of the Paris-based Foundation for Strategic Research think-tank, said of France's decision to treat Arafat. "If he had died in Ramallah, people would have said it was because the Israelis didn't let him out." "I think the Israelis were quite happy that it happened this way," he said.

Critics question state's investment in Israel bonds,
By Leonora LaPeter, St. Petersburg Times (Florida) , November 26, 2004
"State officials say the bonds make fiscal sense, but it means putting public funds at the center of a polarizing conflict. Some 300 people gathered at the Renaissance Vinoy Resort last March as Attorney General Charlie Crist, Mayor Rick Baker and business leaders toasted Jimmy Aviram as businessman of the year. Between the kind words and the cauliflower and sun-dried tomato crusted salmon, an Israeli Embassy official stepped to the podium and talked about terrorism and suicide bombings against Israel. An Israel bond sales representative encouraged guests to fill out cards at their plates to purchase $1-million in bonds, an investment in the country that would also net a financial return. Bank reps were on hand to provide financing. For more than 50 years, the Development Corporation for Israel has pitched that country's bonds at thousands of dinners like these, drawing millions upon billions of U.S. dollars for roads, rail lines, airports, shipping, immigrant absorption and desalinization plants in Israel. Florida is one of the biggest investors in the bonds. The state pension fund owns some $108-million of them, and the state treasury has $25-million invested. Gov. Jeb Bush personally owns $13,000 of them. Critics question whether states that represent hundreds of thousands of state and local government workers should be investing public money in a country at the center of one of the world's most polarizing military conflicts. What if you don't agree with Israel's actions in its conflict with the Palestinians? ... As the Aviram dinner shows, the company's hard-sell pitch producesresults. After the videos of family and friends in Israel and the presentation of a framed Israel independence plaque to Aviram, the dinner's net rolled in. At least three people bought $1-million each. Other guests pledged a combined $2-million. And state Chief Financial Officer Tom Gallagher, a last-minute no-show, sent word that the state would commit $5-million. Total take for the evening: $10-million. The Development Corporation for Israel began operating in 1951 ... Today, the Development Corporation for Israel sells $1.5-billion a year, most of it in the United States. The corporation is owned by a New York nonprofit company called American Society for Resettlement and Rehabilitation in Israel. It has 21 American offices, each staffed with representatives who ply mostly Jewish residents with dinners honoring their friends and getting them to buy the bonds. The bonds pay a higher return than U.S. Treasury bonds, but bond experts say most people purchase them primarily to support Israel. Many Jews say they feel good about signing a check over to the state of Israel that is not charity, but a bona fide loan to a country that needs their help ... A dinner this month at the Tampa International Airport Marriott honoring four families from four Jewish synagogues began with videotaped appearances by the rabbis of all four synagogues; each extolled the virtues of Israel bonds ... On Jan. 23, Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will attend the company's annual kickoff dinner in Boca Raton. Last year's event generated sales of $120-million. Twenty-four states now own Israel bonds. In the last year, the Development Corporation for Israel persuaded four states to change laws banning the purchase of foreign bonds and sold those states - Louisiana, New Jersey, New Mexico and Indiana - a combined $40-million in bonds. Florida was among the first states to get into Israel bonds - back in 1988 - and the state is a leading purchaser, said Rothstein, the corporation spokesman. The state changed its law to allow the retirement system - which now covers 850,000 employees from state workers and schoolteachers to police officers and some city employees - to invest in foreign securities, namely Israel bonds. Individuals who buy the bonds must pay taxes on the interest, but states do not. The bonds are not without critics, among them the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, which wants the U.S. government and U.S. companies to cease financial support for Israel. "Israel bonds are a financial instrument that is issued by the government of Israel, the proceeds of which help fund Israel's general budget," said Josh Ruebner, a Jewish man who is grass roots advocacy coordinator for the organization. "So the sale of Israel bonds in the U.S. helps Israel come up with the funds to build illegal settlements on Palestinian land and to protect its military occupation of these areas." What of the Development Corporation for Israel's assertion that the money never goes to the military? Ruebner said it doesn't matter. "We know that the expenditures Israel makes in the Palestinian occupied territories comes from its general budget, and the proceeds of Israel bonds go to the Israel budget," he said. "It may not be a direct dollar-for-dollar type relationship, but certainly it indirectly provides Israel with the funds it needs to pursue these policies." Stephen Zunes, a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco who researches U.S.-Israeli relations, said Israel should face added scrutiny due to its large bond campaign in the United States. "One should make a distinction between what somebody might decide to do, an individual investing money, and getting the state to invest other people's money," Zunes added ... Mark Yaffe, a numismatist from Tampa who has invested enough money in Israel bonds for his two kids' college educations, said it provides his family with an important connection to Israel. "It's a good investment, but I do it more for my affinity to \Israel," Yaffe said. "I could leave the money in my own business and get a better rate of return. You're doing a good deed but also being reimbursed for helping out." Gallagher said Florida's decision to buy the bonds is made by a team of 23 outside money managers and ultimately approved by him.

Former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer is pushing for funds for an Israeli Project below.
The president's man,
by Dan Goldberg, Australian Jewish News, November 26, 2004
"REWIND to March 2002, the bloodiest month of the Palestinians’ intifada in which more than 125 Israelis were killed in a spate of bombings, including the infamous “Pesach massacre” at a Netanya hotel. As press secretary for US President George W Bush, Ari Fleischer had fronted the press time and again to convey the president’s reaction. Then, on April 12, after six more people were killed by a female bomber in Jerusalem, Fleischer again took the podium in the White House briefing room. “The president... convened a meeting of the National Security Council, at which point, in the middle of the meeting, the president was informed about this morning’s homicide bombing in Jerusalem...” At face value it was an unremarkable statement. But two of his words — “homicide bombing” — have slowly wormed their way into the lexicon of the Middle East conflict. In Sydney this week to launch the Jewish National Fund’s Yarkon River rehabilitation project, Fleischer, 44, says he made a conscious decision to use those words. “At a meeting that morning I said to Dr [Condoleezza] Rice: ‘I’m going to call it a homicide bombing, do you have any objection?’” Dr Rice did not object, although Fleischer says he does not recall consulting the president. “It struck me as I was watching one attack after another attack in 2002 if this is suicide why are so many others dying? Innocents don’t die from suicide. They die from homicide. To me it was a plain matter of speaking English.” Although the term “suicide bombers” is still used by most media outlets, “homicide bombers” has been adopted by Fox News and the New York Post, along with a string of politicians, diplomats and others. During Fleischer’s tenure at the White House from January 2001 until July ’03, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon visited the US president more times than any other world leader — evidence of an ideological meeting of the minds between the pair. Fleischer says that 9/11 brought the two leaders closer together because Bush was more able to empathise with Sharon’s own war on Palestinian terror. But according to Fleischer their relationship was rock solid even before 9/11. “I think it was good to begin with because President Bush entered office as someone who saw Israel as a friend of the US, as a democracy in an unstable area and also because President Bush never trusted Yasser Arafat' ... [When George Bush was at an elementary school and the jets smashed into the World Trade Center] Fleischer says he then walked behind the TV cameras and held up a sign on the back of a pad for the president to see. The sign read: “Don’t say anything yet.” “Until he could get a briefing I didn’t think he should talk to the American people about it because everyone else was watching TV except him,” recalls Fleischer ... Fleischer’s time in the White House was indeed historic — and not just in terms of 9/11. He was with Bush last year when he became only the second US president after Gerald Ford to visit Auschwitz. And it was also at the White House that he met his future wife, Rebecca Davis. Today they have a young daughter, Elizabeth — part of the reason Fleischer resigned last July."

Some scholars say that everywhere it is the same in that there is disproportionate Jewish power. They also have said there exists a hidden undercurrent of trans-world Zionism.
Ukraine's Jewish community wonders: Is Viktor Yushchenko good for the Jews?,
by Lili Galili, Haaretz (Israel), November 29, 2004
"The 100,000 Jews living in Ukraine lack any real impact on election results in a country with 50 million inhabitants. But like other places in the world, Jewish strength is not measured in numbers only, but in terms of its economic and political power. At present, there are 15 Jewish representatives in the Ukrainian parliament, a number much greater than their proportion in the population, and Jewish tycoons can be found in the political camps of both challenger Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich. According to sources following the election in Ukraine, most Jews supported the liberal Yushchenko, because of his links to the West, but also out of concern that the reelection of Yanukovich, with his ties to Russia, would force isolation on Ukraine and nudge it closer to the Arab world. However, Yushchenko's Jewish supporters are not without concerns over the strengthening of the Ukrainian nationalist elements in his party, which they believe could bring about an increase in anti-Semitism in the country. "The present government, with its ties to Russia, is good for the Jews," said one Jewish activist in western Ukraine who asked to remain anonymous. "There were only short periods of independence in Ukraine. Objectively speaking, the struggle here now can be seen in a positive light as the beginning of the flourishing of a civil society. But from the Jewish perspective, I'm not sure it's good. The freedom heralded by Yushchenko's party strengthens nationalist elements around him. So far in western Ukraine [where most of whose residents supported Yushchenko], there have been fewer anti-Semitic incidents than in Western Europe. Here and there, swastikas were painted, sometimes tombstones were smashed. The present government is fighting this. So there is fear of change."
This attitude trickled down to an article published last week in the British daily The Guardian, which noted Yushchenko's ambivalent position on closing down an opposition paper after it published a stinging anti-Semitic article. The article in Selskie Vesti ("Village News"), stated that Jews had joined the German army in invading Ukraine. Senior Ukrainian officials, among them Yanukovich, called for the closing of the paper. Yushchenko, however, wavered in his response. In the midst of the election campaign, the most widely read opposition paper, which had supported him, was too important to give up easily. Only after initial confusion did Yushchenko criticize the article and join the call to shut down the paper. "I am convinced the article was commissioned to blacken the name of Yushchenko and sabotage a source of support for him," said Leonid Finberg, director of the Judaica Institute in Kiev and chairman of a publishing house. "Presenting him as a person who supports anti-Semitism is a terrible distortion. His father was in Auschwitz, and it is known that his family saved Jews during the Holocaust. The Ukrainian intelligensia, including the Jews, supports him completely. He had made a great contribution to constructive dialogue between the Jewish and the Ukrainian intelligensia." Finberg also told of the strong position Yushchenko took at a conference on anti-Semitism in Sweden and about an appearance he made before a group of Ukrainian Jews."

Scholars might ask, "Can we trust a man named Bodansky?" Who knows for sure. In the story below, however, this powerful Jewish Zionist (and former head of a Congressional Task Force on terrorism!) explicitly outlines 50 million Islamic enemies of Zionism (and America's submission to it). Note how Mr. Bodansky's own battle plans are being drawn: with that number of alleged financiers for terrorism, Israel's modern arch-nemesis -- Islam -- is now America's proposed enemy. And 500,000-750,000 prospective suicide bombers? That's quite a force. Scholars might debate whether the world owes the Jewish Lobby and Israel a big thank you for a looming apocalypse. They may contemplate what is inferred in Bodansky's world view to win the war against "terrorism," the war he says the U.S. is so terribly losing bodes ill for the direction we have taken.
Expert: Massive WMD attack 'inevitable. Yossef Baodansky says U.S. losing war on terrorism,
World Net Daily, November 29, 2004
"The United States is losing the war on terrorism and faces an "inevitable" al-Qaida attack with weapons of mass destruction that will be worse than 9-11, according to a counter-terror expert. "All of the warnings we have today indicate that a major strike – something more horrible than anything we've seen before – is all but inevitable," said Yossef Bodansky, former director of the U.S. Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, in an interview yesterday with the Jerusalem Post. Bodansky said "the primary option" for the next al-Qaida attack on American soil would be to employ weapons of mass destruction. "I do not have a crystal ball, but this is what all the available evidence tells us; we will have a bang," Bodansky told the Post, adding al-Qaida is "tying up the knots" for an attack. Bodansky, author of "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America," and "The Secret History of the Iraq War," said the jihadist movement is gaining strength as Osama bin Laden's call to arms draws an increasing number of recruits throughout the Muslim world. Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bodansky said, the number of people trained and willing to die has more than doubled to an estimated 500,000 to 750,000. Intelligences estimates say another 10 million are willing to support them actively while another 50 million would provide financial assistance. Bodansky was in Israel for the second annual Jerusalem Summit, an international gathering of conservative thinkers, the Post said. Al-Qaida has not carried out a second major attack, Bodansky explained, because the first one sufficiently sent the message to the Islamic world that the U.S. could be penetrated, and a second attack necessarily would have to be more grandiose. Now, however, the re-election of President Bush has set the stage for a massive attack with non-conventional weapons, Bodansky believes. There has been a debate between bin Laden allies and some Islamic leaders over the propriety of such a large-scale attack on U.S. citizens, he told the Jerusalem paper. But, according to bin Laden's mindset, that has been resolved by the American electorate backing Bush and thus "choosing" to be enemies of Islam. Though some debate and doubt may linger, the planning for an attack is finished, Bodansky believes. "They got the kosher stamp from the Islamic world to use nuclear weapons," he said.

Understanding Jewish Influence III: Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement,
by Kevin MacDonald, Occidental Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 2
"Over the last year, there has been a torrent of articles on neoconservatism raising (usually implicitly) some difficult issues: Are neoconservatives different from other conservatives?  Is neoconservatism a Jewish movement? Is it “anti-Semitic” to say so? The thesis presented here is that neoconservatism is indeed a Jewish intellectual and political movement. This paper is the final installment in a three-part series on Jewish activism and reflects many of the themes of the first two articles. The first paper in this series focused on the traits of ethnocentrism, intelligence, psychological intensity, and aggressiveness. These traits will be apparent here as well. The ethnocentrism of the neocons has enabled them to create highly organized, cohesive, and effective ethnic networks. Neoconservatives have also exhibited the high intelligence necessary for attaining eminence in the academic world, in the elite media and think tanks, and at the highest levels of government. They have aggressively pursued their goals, not only in purging more traditional conservatives from their positions of power and influence, but also in reorienting US foreign policy in the direction of hegemony and empire. Neoconservatism also illustrates the central theme of the second article in this series: In alliance with virtually the entire organized American Jewish community, neoconservatism is a vanguard Jewish movement with close ties to the most extreme nationalistic, aggressive, racialist and religiously fanatic elements within Israel. Neoconservatism also reflects many of the characteristics of Jewish intellectual movements studied in my book, The Culture of Critique3 ... Conclusion The current situation in the United States is really an awesome display of Jewish power and influence. People who are very strongly identified as Jews maintain close ties to Israeli politicians and military figures and to Jewish activist organizations and pro-Israeli lobbying groups while occupying influential policy-making positions in the defense and foreign policy establishment. These same people, as well as a chorus of other prominent Jews, have routine access to the most prestigious media outlets in the United States. People who criticize Israel are routinely vilified and subjected to professional abuse. Perhaps the most telling feature of this entire state of affairs is the surreal fact that in this entire discourse Jewish identity is not mentioned. When Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, Michael Rubin, William Safire, Robert Satloff, or the legions of other prominent media figures write their reflexively pro-Israel pieces in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, or the Los Angeles Times, or opine on the Fox News Network, there is never any mention that they are Jewish Americans who have an intense ethnic interest in Israel. When Richard Perle authors a report for an Israeli think tank; is on the board of directors of an Israeli newspaper; maintains close personal ties with prominent Israelis, especially those associated with the Likud Party; has worked for an Israeli defense company; and, according to credible reports, was discovered by the FBI passing classified information to Israel—when, despite all of this, he is a central figure in the network of those pushing for wars to rearrange the entire politics of the Middle East in Israel’s favor, and with nary a soul having the courage to mention the obvious overriding Jewish loyalty apparent in Perle’s actions, that is indeed a breathtaking display of power. One must contemplate the fact that American Jews have managed to maintain unquestioned support for Israel over the last thirty-seven years, despite Israel’s seizing land and engaging in a brutal suppression of the Palestinians in the occupied territories—an occupation that will most likely end with expulsion or complete subjugation, degradation, and apartheid. During the same period Jewish organizations in America have been a principal force—in my view the main force—for transforming America into a state dedicated to suppressing ethnic identification among Europeans, for encouraging massive multiethnic immigration into the U.S., and for erecting a legal system and cultural ideology that is obsessively sensitive to the complaints and interests of non-European ethnic minorities—the culture of the Holocaust. All this is done without a whisper of double standards in the aboveground media. I have also provided a small glimpse of the incredible array of Jewish pro-Israel activist organizations, their funding, their access to the media, and their power over the political process. Taken as a whole, neoconservatism is an excellent illustration of the key traits behind the success of Jewish activism: ethnocentrism, intelligence and wealth, psychological intensity, and aggressiveness. Now imagine a similar level of organization, commitment, and funding directed toward changing the U.S. immigration system put into law in 1924 and 1952, or inaugurating the revolution in civil rights, or the post-1965 countercultural revolution: In the case of the immigration laws we see the same use of prominent non-Jews to attain Jewish goals, the same access to the major media, and the same ability to have a decisive influence on the political process by establishing lobbying organizations, recruiting non-Jews as important players, funneling financial and media support to political candidates who agree with their point of view, and providing effective leadership in government. Given this state of affairs, one can easily see how Jews, despite being a tiny minority of the U.S. population, have been able to transform the country to serve their interests. It’s a story that has been played out many times in Western history, but the possible effects now seem enormous, not only for Europeans but literally for everyone on the planet, as Israel and its hegemonic ally restructure the politics of the world. History also suggests that anti-Jewish reactions develop as Jews increase their control over other peoples. As always, it will be fascinating to observe the dénouement."

FBI searches pro-Israel group's office
Possible espionage probed; employees subpoenaed,
CNN, December 1, 2004
"FBI agents searched the offices of a pro-Israel lobbying group Wednesday as part of an espionage probe, two government sources told CNN. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, said the government also subpoenaed four senior staff members to appear before a federal grand jury. The probe involves allegations that a Pentagon analyst passed classified information to Israel through two employees of the organization, the sources said. Government officials previously told CNN the information that allegedly was passed included a draft presidential directive on U.S. policy toward Iran. Government sources refused to give a reason for Wednesday's search -- the second of the AIPAC offices -- because the search warrant is under seal. "It's just a normal investigative procedure," one official said. The investigation of AIPAC, which became public in late August, has been going on for many months. An FBI spokeswoman refused to comment on the search. In a statement released late Wednesday afternoon, AIPAC said it "learned in August that the FBI was investigating two AIPAC employees when the authorities visited the AIPAC offices and requested and obtained computer files related to these two employees. "Today, the FBI returned and requested and obtained additional files relating to the same two AIPAC staff members and delivered subpoenas requiring the appearance of four senior AIPAC staff before a grand jury." The group said it has done nothing wrong. "Neither AIPAC nor any member of our staff has broken any law," it said in the statement posted on its Web site. "We are fully cooperating with the governmental authorities. We believe any court of law or grand jury will conclude that AIPAC employees have always acted legally, properly and appropriately. "Despite the false and baseless allegations that have been reported, AIPAC will not be distracted from our central mission of supporting America's interests in the Middle East and advocating for a strong relationship with Israel." In August, AIPAC said it was assisting the government's investigation, including providing documents and information and making staff members available for interviews. Sources have told CNN that two AIPAC employees were previously interviewed by the FBI. The Pentagon analyst's lawyer told The Los Angeles Times his client did not engage in any espionage activities. CBS News, which first reported the story in August, said the FBI had developed evidence that included photographs and conversations recorded through wiretaps. The network said the Pentagon analyst has ties to two senior Pentagon officials: Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. A spokesman at the Israeli embassy in Washington denied in August that the country had spied on the United States."

Subpoenas issued for officials of pro-Israel lobby group,
By Warren P. Strobel and Shannon McCaffrey, Knight Ridder Newspapers, December 1, 2004
"FBI agents executed search warrants Wednesday at the headquarters of a leading pro-Israel lobby and delivered grand jury subpoenas in an ongoing probe of alleged espionage for Israel, federal officials and the lobby group said. The search and the subpoenas for four top officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee indicate that the politically charged investigation remains active. No criminal charges have been filed in the case. AIPAC, one of Washington's most influential lobbies, said in a statement that neither the group nor its employees have broken any law. "We are fully cooperating with the governmental authorities. We believe any court of law or grand jury will conclude that AIPAC employees have always acted legally, properly and appropriately," it said. The lobby group said that the FBI, which in August obtained computer files related to two AIPAC employees, returned Wednesday "and requested and obtained additional files relating to the same two AIPAC staff members and delivered subpoenas requiring the appearance of four senior AIPAC staff before a grand jury." U.S. officials previously have identified the two staff members as Steven Rosen, AIPAC's director of foreign policy issues, and Keith Weissman, his deputy and an Iran expert. The two men have hired prominent Washington lawyer Abbe Lowell to represent them. Lowell's firm, Chadbourne & Park, had no comment."

Schröder: Germany Must Help Israel,
Deutsche Welle (Germany), December 3, 2004
"Germany must help guarantee the existence of the state of Israel, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder said Thursday on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem. Schröder declared that "the existence of a state of Israel within secure borders was an historic and political responsibility that is a pillar of our foreign policy." Speaking at a concert in Berlin held on the occasion of the anniversary and as work on Germany's own Holocaust memorial continues apace, Schröder hailed the work of Yad Vashem to keep history alive, insisting such memories should not be allowed to fade away. He said the memorial helped contribute to a world in which everyone could live "in mutual respect, humanity and especially, peace."

As leaders of Al Qaeda have repeatedly made clear, it is U.S. foreign policy, in particular those policies made to further the interests of Israel at Muslim expense, that motivates Jihad. For example, here is what al-Zawahiri had to say in 2003 after the U.S. invasion of Iraq: After dividing Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, and Pakistan will come next. They would leave around Israel only dismembered semi states that are subservient to the United States and Israel. O Muslims, these are the facts that have been made clear to you.'
Reasons for concern at the CIA. A wake-up call to the Jewish and pro-Israel communities by the former director of the Office of Special Investigations in the Justice Department,
By Neal M. Sher, Jewish World Review, November 30, 2004
"Recent headlines scream that the CIA is in disarray, beset by high level resignations and open warfare between various factions along the Potomac. Porter Goss certainly has his hands full, although the smart money is on the side of new Director. For those who live and die "inside the Beltway" this is drama of the highest order, generating delicious fodder for the cocktail party circuit. While such intrigue should be of little interest to the Jewish and pro-Israel communities, recent events suggest that there is indeed reason to be concerned about the thinking at the Langley headquarters — or at least in parts of it. Last year, in a very unusual development, a CIA official was granted permission to publish a book detailing his work as a counter-terrorism expert and setting forth his highly critical analysis of U.S. policy. There was one caveat imposed by his employer: his identity could not be revealed. Hence, the book "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror" was officially penned by "Anonymous". Having just resigned from the Agency, the author is now "out" and Michael Scheuer (who headed the bin Laden desk at the CIA) has been making the rounds of all the TV studios (including 60 Minutes) and granting interviews to countless newspapers and magazines. In his book and recent media fest, major emphasis is placed on Scheuer's negative views of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and of our failure to eliminate Osama bin Laden. But there is another significant theme which surprisingly has not generated the level of concern it deserves. Central to his thesis is the notion that bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the terrorist attacks and threats against us are to some degree a function of America's support for Israel. Reminiscent of the famous charge by a well known pundit that Israel is an albatross around America's neck and that Capitol Hill is "Israeli occupied territory", Scheuer contends that U.S. policy towards Israel is 'the tail leading the dog" and that pro-Israel activists have undue and dangerous influence over foreign policy ... It's not that Scheuer is raising something new. He isn't. We've heard it before from Israel's detractors and we'll certainly hear it again. It comes with the territory. We can recall commentators saying in the immediate aftermath of 9-11 that Americans now know what Israelis live with on a daily a daily basis. Some predicted, however, that such sympathy would eventually wane and that anti-Israel crusaders would push the view that America's pro-Israel stance was the root cause of terrorism directed against us. This is precisely the sort of thinking our enemies want us to embrace. Surely, no reasonable person can believe for a moment that if the U.S. were to throw Israel overboard tomorrow all terrorist threats would miraculously evaporate. The raw truth is that they hate the U.S and the West for reasons having nothing to do with Israel. What is terribly distressing is that Scheuer's view of the U.S.- Israel relationship was given a Tenet-led CIA seal of approval when publication was authorized. Make no mistake, a book like this, approved as it was at the highest levels of the Agency after scrutinizing every last word, was meant to send messages. Whatever the other ones might have been, the one regarding Israel could not have been clearer. For whatever reason, the hostility towards Israel in Imperial Hubris, which should have raised a host of red flags, seems to have flown under the Jewish community's radar screen. To be sure, Scheuer is careful to throw out the obligatory protestations that he is not anti-Israel, arguing that he merely seeks a "re-examination" of U.S. policy in the middle east. But we all know what that really means and one would have thought that officially sanctioned Israel bashing — and that's precisely what Scheuer's views represent — would have come under fierce attack. I don't know which is worse: that he actually believes this nonsense, or that a person of that mindset actually oversaw the campaign against an enemy and movement which perpetrated the worst crime ever on U.S. soil. The CIA is now under new management; the role Goss intends to play regarding Israel and the region remains to be seen. But it is essential that we keep a watchful eye on the situation. To date, we have seen nothing from Langley to repudiate Scheuer's provocative comments. Given his high public profile and his eagerness to perpetuate his views about Israel, the Agency's silence is troubling; and Goss himself is at best a question mark on this issue. This is especially so in light of the fact that as chairman of the House Committee on Intelligence he was not at all sympathetic to the plight of a CIA employee who had been subjected to blatant anti-Semitism and scurrilous accusations of dual loyalty, even though Agency improprieties were established by irrefutable documentary evidence. I know this because I represented the aggrieved employee during his travails at the Agency. Scheuer's charges — which have been given seeming legitimacy by a backdoor CIA imprimatur — must not be taken lightly. We have every right to demand that Mr. Goss and his Agency squarely repudiate the views of the man formerly known as Anonymous."

The EU, US, Israel and Iran. The Good, the Bad, the Ugly and the "Mullahs,"
By SASAN FAYAZMANESH, CounterPunch, December 3, 2004
"Instead of the "good-cop bad-cop" scenario, it would have been more apt for Mr. Armitage to use the good, the bad and the ugly scheme, since Iran faces not two characters, but three. The third character, the "ugly," is played by Israel. Mr. Armitage conveniently left out the important role of this last character. But this is quite expected. Israel, as the late Edward Said used to say, is the last taboo. It is sacrosanct. No mention of it in the context of the US foreign policy is possible. It is the Teflon state. Nothing sticks to it, not even the charge of spying. It was only a few months ago-to be exact, late August 2004-when it was first reported that the FBI had discovered a spy network in the Department of Defense which passed confidential documents, particularly those detailing the Bush Administration's policy toward Iran, to the main Israeli lobby group in the US, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). AIPAC-whose website proudly states that through "more than 2,000 meetings with members of Congress - at home and in Washington - AIPAC activists help pass more than 100 pro-Israel legislative initiatives a year" - brought out its heavy artillery. All the AIPAC men and women, including its top leadership, the leadership of other Israeli lobby groups, Congressmen, Israeli officials, and even the officials in the current Administration, went to work and used the O.J. Simpson defense- i.e., anti-Semitism of the FBI agent involved-to put an end to the whole sordid affair in a few days. Indeed, the representatives of both Presidential candidates, namely, Condoleezza Rice and Richard Holbrooke, appeared at AIPAC's "Largest-Ever National Summit" on October 24-25 in Hollywood, Florida, to pay homage to an agency that was accused of involvement in spying. Soon after, AIPAC's usual website, which was temporarily halted by the cries of we are "loyal U.S. citizens," went back to what it does best, i.e., trying to lead the US to wage another war in the Middle East, this time against Iran: Today, AIPAC has 65,000 members across all 50 states who are at the forefront of the most vexing issues facing Israel today: stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, fighting terrorism and achieving peace. And above all, ensuring that Israel is strong enough to meet these challenges. (AIPAC website) As I have shown in CounterPunch and elsewhere, Israel, its lobby groups, its Congressmen, its friends in the Administration-both the cons and the neocons-as well as its Chalabi-like mercenaries, who are in the business of fabricating lies, have been trying for sometime to repeat in Iran what they did in Iraq. That is, by accusing Iran of developing nuclear weapons, they have attempted to get the UN to pass economic sanctions against Iran. Once the sanctions are imposed, Israel and its cohorts believe, Iran will be weakened sufficiently to make a military operation against it succeed. That would destroy yet another supporter of the Palestinians and would make Israel's rule over the entire land between "the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates" possible. Smelling blood, in recent months Israel and the gang increased their attacks. As the above quotation from Silvan Shalom shows, Iran was said to have "replaced Saddam Hussein as the world's number one exporter of terror, hate and instability," and Iranian missiles were ready to reach "London, Paris, Berlin and southern Russia." Similarly, Ariel Sharon said on October 25, 2004 that "Iran is making every effort to arm itself with nuclear weapons, with ballistic means of delivery, and it is preparing an enormous terrorist network with Syria and Lebanon." This was, of course, the same Sharon who as far back as February 5, 2002, had told The Times of London that "Iran is the center of 'world terror,' and as soon as an Iraq conflict is concluded, he will push for Iran to be at the top of the 'to do list'". Even though the "Iraqi conflict" is not yet concluded, Sharon was doing his best to push the US in the direction of destroying Iran. In other words, the tail was once again trying to wag the dog."

Top: Jewish Occupied Governments: United States

JEW$ AND GOVERNMENT
12 FILE FOLDERS OF NEWS & REPORTS

File 1 | File 2 | File 3 | File 4 | Part 5 | File 6 | File 7 | File 8 | File 9 | File 10 | File 11 | File 12