From irimland@zundelsite.org Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:35:00 -0700 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:35:00 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 8/31/2001 - "Statistics tell a story" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny August 31, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I am submitting to my readers some amazing statistics - all the more amazing because the American media are so heavily dominated by Jewish columnists and feature writers like Krauthammer, Blitzer, Blumenthal, Rosenfeld etc. and their useful idiots like George Will, supposedly a Gentile - if that is, indeed, what he is. Television network owners and, especially, the behind-the-scenes operating researchers and producers all have a heavy hand in selecting not only the topics for broadcasts but also which guests will be heard or seen live as commentators, which foreign correspondents will be heard, which ones will be censored etc. Thus, the American public in general - subtract the internet audience! - can only base its likes and dislikes, its approval or rejection of causes or leaders on the one-sided information filtered down to them through largely Jewish eyes and brains. Remember also that Israeli embassies and consulates now pay professional PR agencies a pretty penny to sell their murderous policies. That's why these statistics are really quite amazing. They show common sense and a gut feeling revealing some fairly sound instincts. It looks like Americans are increasingly seeing through all that relentless vilification propaganda that has saturated America against the Palestinians in favor of the Israelis. The following poll statistics tell a compelling story, sent via press release from the ADC (American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee: [START] ADC Press Release: American Views on Israeli-Palestinian Issues: A Public Opinion Survey Washington, DC, August 29 -- The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) commissioned Zogby International to conduct a public opinion survey of American voters nationwide to determine current public attitudes regarding the situation in Palestine. The calls to 1,007 likely voters nationwide were made from Zogby International headquarters in Utica, New York, between July 5th and July 15th, 2001. The margin of error is +/-3.2 %. The results of the survey point to.the following general trends: _____While support for Palestinian statehood has increased over the past ten years, Palestinians continue to be viewed unfavorably by American voters. However, Palestinians are viewed much more favorably than the Palestinian Authority or Yasser Arafat. _____Despite the elaborate public relations campaign by Israel and its supporters in the US over the past 11 months, American public opinion has not shifted radically one way or the other as a result of this campaign and the biased media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. _____It is quite clear that the Palestinian narrative is neither known nor appreciated by a large sector of the American public. For most Americans, the Israeli version still defines the conflict in the Middle East. _____(While) Israelis are viewed favorably by a majority of Americans, the Israeli government is not viewed as favorably. By the same token, the Palestinian Authority is viewed quite negatively; American opinion is divided on the Palestinians. _____An overwhelming majority of Americans support the Palestinian right to independent statehood and see the Palestinians as the equal people entitled to full rights as the Israelis. _____American support for the Palestinians increases when the issue is presented in purely humanitarian terms. _____Conversely, support for the Palestinians tends to decrease when the issue is presented in legal, religious or historical terms. _____A plurality of American voters agrees that the Palestinians rejected the Israeli offer at Camp David because it failed to provide them with freedom of movement and contiguous land capable of producing a viable state. _____American sub-groups who are inclined to support the Palestinians include the Democrats, liberals, Catholics, Hispanics and African-Americans. _____More than three-quarters of U.S. voters generally blame both Israelis and Palestinians for the breakdown of the Middle East peace process. KEY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS FROM THE SURVEY: Do you agree or disagree that there should be an independent Palestinian state? Agree 73% Disagree 12% Not sure 15% Do you agree or disagree that Israelis and Palestinians are equal people entitled to equal rights? Agree 96% Disagree 3% Not sure 2% What happened at Camp David in July 2000? 27% - Israel made the Palestinians a generous offer for peace but the Palestinians rejected. The offer included more than 90% of the West Bank plus Palestinians neighborhoods in Jerusalem. Israel kept only small parcels of land heavily populated by Jewish settlers. 44% - the Palestinians rejected the Israeli offer because it left them with separate parcels of land that could not form a viable state. The offer did not provide them with freedom of movement or freedom to conduct commerce. The Palestinians were also denied the right of return and sovereign control over their natural resources. 29% - Not sure. 4. Generally speaking, whom do you blame for the breakdown of the Middle East peace process? Both sides 78% Palestinians 12% Israelis 4% Other 3% Not sure 4% 5. Favorable/Unfavorable names: Favorable Unfavorable Not familiar Colin Powell 85% 9% 6% George W. Bush 65% 33% 1% Israelis 60% 24% 13% Israeli government 43% 38% 16% Palestinians 39% 42% 16% Ariel Sharon 29% 20% 48% Shimon Peres 26% 19% 53% Hosni Mubarak 21% 14% 63% Yasser Arafat 18% 67% 14% ===== [END] ===== PLEASE NOTE: There is a worldwide effort to gain signatures on a petition to indict Ariel Sharon for war crimes at the web site below. More than 50,000 have already signed it. Sharon has already been indicted in Brussels. This petition goes to Mary Robinson at the Hague ... who just a few hours ago revealed she is a Jewess. Sign anyway! A statement is a statement! http://www.PetitionOnline.com/warcrime/ ===== Thought for the Day: "Yes, the South African speech [of the UN Conference} was beautiful. I wish I could have heard her deliver it. I'm getting all kinds of email describing the Jews screeching about rampant anti-Semitism at the conference. :--)" (Letter to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sat, 1 Sep 2001 19:05:16 -0700 Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 19:05:16 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/1/2001 - "I bet you didn't know..." Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 1, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Another Oldie but Goodie which I have seen pop up in various places. Unfortunately, I don't know the source, but it clearly originated out of the Revisionist Camp: [START] Although it is largely forgotten today, in October 1919 (!) New York Governor Martin Glynn gave a speech in Albany, New York reporting on the "holocaust [of] six million Jewish men and women" who were dying due to the "awful tyranny of war and a bigoted lust for Jewish blood" during World War I. (!) Glynn's speech, entitled "The Crucifixion of Jews Must Stop" was printed in the October 31, 1919 (!) issue of the "American Hebrew Magazine," published by the American Jewish Committee. The truth is that six million Jews did not die during World War I -- and no serious historian believes today that they did. But during World War I the myth of "six million Jews" was very emotional and effective war-time propaganda indeed. However, shortly after World War II, the thesis of "Six Million Jews" took on a new life. Yet if you look back in history, Jewish lore is rife with multiple legends of mass Jewish slaughter. The story of "the Holocaust" [0f World War II] that you hear so much about today is a variation on a very old theme. The Talmud - the very foundation of Jewish religious teaching - tells of four BILLION Jews killed by the Romans under Emperor Hadrian. The Talmud describes a tidal wave of blood that plunged down to the sea, carrying large boulders along with it, staining the sea a distance of four miles out -- the bodies of the martyred Jews used to build a fence around Hadrian's vineyard, with the blood saved over from the tidal wave used to fertilize the grapes of Hadrian's wrath and of the 64 million Jewish school children of the town of Bethar, wrapped in their religious scrolls and burned alive by the Romans. [Note: the population of the Roman Empire at the time is estimated to have been between 55 and 60 million. The world's population is believed to have been less than 300 million.] Do you really believe that the Roman's killed four billion Jews? If you don't, You must be a "Holocaust denier." In recent years more and more media attention has been devoted to the supposed Danger of "Holocaust denial" in relation to Jewish suffering during World War II. Politicians and the media warn about the growing influence of those who question various aspects of the Holocaust story. In several countries, including Canada, France, Germany and Austria, "Holocaust denial" is against the law. Heretics who are guilty of this thought crime are punished with stiff fines long prison sentences, serving side-by-side with paedophiles, rapists and murderers. If you think that those accused of "denying the Holocaust" are only charged with raising questions about what Adolf Hitler did - or didn't - do to the Jews of Europe during World War II, prepare yourself for a shock. The fact is that the term "Holocaust denier" means much more than that, at least according to Deborah Lipstadt, authoress of the widely-touted book, "Denying the Holocaust," which is said to be the last word on the subject. Many people mistakenly believe that Lipstatdt and others who purport to be fighting "Holocaust denial" are only concerned with preventing public debate about the historical details relating to the subject of what we remember as "the Holocaust." This is not the case at all. In fact, according to Lipstadt, if you believe - as Revisionist historians do: That the seeds of World War II were planted in the unjust treatment dealt Germany following World War I - you are a "Holocaust denier." That Adolf Hitler did not want to go to war with Poland in 1939 - - you are a "Holocaust denier." That Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were secretly maneuvering to bring the United States into the war in Europe [despite the opposition of some 90 percent of the American public at the time] - you are a "Holocaust denier." That FDR deliberately set the stage for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to force the United States into the war against the Axis powers - you are a "Holocaust denier." In ""denying the Holocaust." Lipstadt says these historical views outlined in 1952 in Georgetown University historian Charles Callan Tansill's monumental Revisionist study "Back Door to War" -- which had nothing whatsoever to do with the the subject of whether or not Adolf Hitler killed six million Jews - are "a number of arguments that would become ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF HOLOCAUST DENIAL." [Emphasis added.] So don't kid yourself. Even if you have never raised any questions about "the Holocaust" per se, you are still subject to being smeared as a "Holocaust denier" if, by chance, you dare to run counter to the politically correct stance dictated by those who decide what one may - or may not - say about events of history including, but not limited to, the Holocaust. And note this: You are also subject to being accused of being a "Holocaust Denier" if you point out that Soviet dictator Josef Stalin killed more people than Adolf Hitler. According to Lipstadt, there is an important distinction: "Whereas Stalin's terror was arbitrary, Hitler's was targeted at a particular group...In fact, Stalin killed more people than did the Nazis. But that is not the issue...To attempt to say that all are the same is to ENGAGE IN HISTORICAL DISTORTION ." [emphasis added.] In other words, in Lipstatdt's judgement, the Jews who died during World War II are more important than the estimated 55 million non- Jews who died during the War, not to mention an estimated 200 million other non-Jews slaughtered by the Soviet and Red Chinese butcher regimes. Or, note this: if you dare to point out - as did famed German historian Ernst Nolte - that however wrong the American internment of the Japanese following Pearl Harbor, it was not dissimilar to the German internment of the Jews following Jewish leader Chaim Weizmann's September 1939 declaration that the Jews of the world would join the Allies in fighting Germany, you are responsible for "the blurring of boundaries between fact and fiction" and although not outright "Holocaust denial" per se, the result is the same. Lipstadt says that pointing out such historical facts as these "fall into the gray area between outright denial and relativism" and that "in certain respects it is more insidious that outright denial" because it nurtures "a form of pseudohistory whose motives are difficult to identify." In short if you question any of the "official" history of the Holocaust or World War II [or for that matter World War I] - no matter how false or even preposterous - you are by definition, an anti-Semite or a potential anti-Semite, the facts be damned. The truth is that the facts about the Holocaust - Lipstatdt's protests notwithstanding - do suggest that the term "Holocaust denier" is not just a misleading semantic misnomer, but a deliberate fraud. ===== Thought for the Day: "U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan called on Israel Friday to stop using the Holocaust as a reason to continue what he said were policies of occupation, displacement, and extra-judicial killings of Palestinians." (Hot off the cnsnews wire today, Saturday, September 1, 2001, 11:31 AM) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:34:30 -0700 Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 14:34:30 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/2/2001 - "Revisionist Week in Review" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Revisionist Week in Review September 2, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: All this week, the havoc at the United Nations' Anti-Racism Conference in Durban, South Africa was dominating the news. CNN ran one of its quick Internet polls on August 29, 2001, asking: "Should the U.S. participate in the U.N. conference on racism if conference documents condemn Israel?" Yes 58% 1306 votes No 42% 941 votes Total: 2247 votes ===== Thousands have taken to the streets of Durban in solidarity with the Palestinian cause. Around 10,000 mainly Muslim demonstrators brandished placards and shouted anti-Zionist slogans. ''It was awful,'' Keith Landy, president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, told The Canadian Press from Durban. ''The conference has been hijacked by certain interest groups and the atmosphere has become oppressive and anti-Semitic.'' A coalition of Jewish groups had called a news conference to complain about harassment and discrimination, but before the groups could complete their presentation, Arab activists became unruly, shouting, singing and pushing in front of the speakers. The news conference was aborted in haste. For his part, Frank Dimant, executive vice-president of B'nai Brith Canada said in a press release: ''The events of the last few days shame and dishonour the United Nations. ... It is very difficult to respect UN decisions relating to Israel when its silence on Jewish human rights issues is so complete that a UN conference is allowed to degenerate into such a blatantly anti-Semitic circus.'' It is no secret to the sparrows on the roof that Israel has consistently refused to act on or honor UN resolutions demanding that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders, stop the settlements in the occupied areas etc. The US has seen fit to protect Israel through numerous vetos. No wonder there is anger. ===== The Toronto Star of August 30, 2001 reports that Landy, president of the Canadian Jewish Congress would quit the World Conference on Racism "...because of the anti-Semitism he says he has faced since arriving in South Africa. ``The level of antagonism and downright hatred is pervasive,'' Landy said in a telephone interview from Durban. "We would not have come if we had known the extent to which the conference has been taken over by this agenda.'' Landy objected to "offensive material", including a T-shirt with a swastika superimposed on a Star of David, and a booklet of caricatures depicting Jews with hook noses and fangs dripping blood. A proverb comes to mind, of course: He who sows the wind shall reap the whirlwind! ===== "I feel besieged, there's anti-Semitism and hate literature . . . It couldn't get much worse,'' agreed Anne Bayefsky, a professor from New York's Columbia Law School. "`Some of the Jewish delegates are hiding their accreditation badge because it identifies them as from Israel or as Jewish." May we assume the love affair with things Israeli or Jewish is over? ===== The issue of Zionism as a form of racism has been the subject of fierce debate in preparatory sessions. Deutsche Presse-Agentur of August 27, 2001 reports that an Israeli delegation at an international youth summit in Durban on Monday "... walked out of a working session after participants accepted a Palestinian motion declaring Israel an occupying force." What do we have here? Israel itself calls these areas "occupied areas" and troops serving there as "occupation forces"! ===== Triggered by a pamphlet distributed at this conference equating the Star of David with a swastika, Mary Robinson, the UN Human Rights Commissioner, declared at an official dinner: "I am a Jew". That news was all over the place! Later reports, however, quickly modified that statement, claiming that the sentence had been taken out of context. Supposedly Robinson merely said in response to an anti-semitic cartoon. "When I see something like this, I am a Jew." Now rumors are flying every which way! Is she or isn't she? Perhaps only her hairdresser knows for sure! ===== Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister, John Manley, decided to pass on the conference, sending controversial multiculturalism minister, Hedy Fry, instead. Let's not forget: This is the very same B.C. multi-cult minister who managed to get herself into a fix a few months back by fabricating some politically expedient, non-existent Ku Klux Klan cross burnings to artificially create a "racist" danger in her province. The local police and media said such cross burnings never took place. To this day, Fry hasn't explained herself - and we aren't left to guess what might have been her motive. ===== Here is one juicy headline for you: "U.N. Chief Tells Israel To Stop Using Holocaust To Justify Its Policies" by CNSNews Correspondent Mark Klusener, August 31, 2001. Klusener tells us that U.N. Secretary General, Kofi Annan, did some symbolic fingershaking at Israel on Friday, admonishing the bandit statelet to "stop using the Holocaust as a reason to continue ... policies of occupation, displacement, and extra-judicial killings of Palestinians." Hastily he added that "the ultimate abomination - the Holocaust - should never be forgotten or diminished". Now here is one smart politician for you. Will the Pavlovian reflex be enough to assure his re-election as UN Secretary General? Not likely. ===== ZGram readers are invited to set a statement by chief rabbi and political leader of Britain's Jews, Jonathan Sacks, against 60 years of unrelenting global brainwashing telling us that "anti-semitism" is the most abominable feeling human beings could possibly experience: "The survival of anti-Semitism," intoned Sacks, "has made it the most successful ideology of the 20th century." Sacks calls anti-semitism "the world's oldest hatred" and claims, not too surprisingly, that it has "...resurfaced within the UN". That 'anti-semitism' could be directly related to Jewish-Israeli behavior in Israel against the Palestinians - and in the Diaspora in bludgeoning governments into forking over billions and billions in extorted reparations - never occurs to Rabbi Sack or to his tribal brethren. ===== And speaking of Sacks, this clever rabbi prudently bowed out of attending the conference because, according to Associated Press releases, the gathering "...risks succumbing to anti-Israeli bias." Among other sins, some conference delegates suggested in preliminary drafts one should always refer to the "Jewish holocaust" with a small "h". For his part, Sacks stated he would not endorse the conference with his presence "...until the equation of Zionism with racism, denigration of the Holocaust and the singling out of Israel for condemnation is removed from the draft.'' ===== Elsewhere on the planet: Raoul Wallenberg, a somewhat murky Swede who, it is claimed, tried to save Swedish Jews during World War II from incarceration by getting them phony Swedish passports or visas, finally received his very own memorial monument. Wallenberg allegedly helped thousands of Jews escape deportation by moving them to Hungary - before he mysteriously vanished. He has long been eulogized by folks with high stakes in the Holocaust myth. However, less than 24 hours after the monument was formally inaugurated, it was spray painted by unnamed vandals. Police stated that they had no clues as to who might have done this. ===== The German Foreign Ministry is checking out whether allegations that development funds from Germany had been used to finance Palestinian textbooks with anti-Semitic content is true. A few days ago, German newspapers reported that Palestinian textbooks, partly paid for by Germany and the European Union, called for the destruction of Israel and described Jews as "deceitful" and "disloyal." Germany had planned to contribute DM92 million ($43 million) to the kitty to boost UN efforts in the Palestinian region, but then let it be know that money is in jeopardy. ===== Germany is to get yet another museum to help the Germans remember the Holocaust, which they might otherwise forget. Designed by architect Daniel Liebskind, this one will open in about a week. It can accommodate more than 2,000 visitors a day. It will be closed only three days a year: the Jewish holidays of Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah - and Christmas Eve. Organizers let it be known that they "... do not want the vibrant past and the present to be overwhelmed by the Nazi massacre of 6 million Jews under Hitler." What vibrant past? Whose vibrant past? :) ===== Release of "The Grey Zone" has been announced. Rated R for "...strong holocaust violence, nudity and language, this film is described as "the tale of Dr. Miklos Nyiszli (Keitel), who worked for 'the Angel of Death', Dr. Mengele. The ever-more-stale topic: A Sonderkommando, composed of Jewish prisoners, was forced to work in the crematoria at Auschwitz - and their traumatic experiences forced them into a moral 'grey zone'." Nyiszli's notes turned into a book after 1945 in Communist Hungary. It was referred to at that time as a "novel". (Like Schindler's List!) So here we have one more film based on a novel by a Jewish novelist with a Marxist background! ===== Agence France Presse in its International News Section of August 27, 2001 commented on a government ban in Romania to sell "the Nationalist", a book with subheadings such as "What Holocaust?" The title includes chapter headings like "These Jews who run our lives" and "The Jews' Inferiority Complex." Government prosecutors have sternly announced they are investigating the matter. ===== The president of the German Parliament, Wolfgang Thierse, has worries as well. When he traveled through eastern Germany and Poland earlier this year, "neo-Nazis" posted his schedule on the Internet so they could follow him. "The extreme-right is more self-confident, more offensive and better organized than ever," Thierse said in a recent interview with Die Zeit weekly. "The collapse of communism created a kind of vacuum which is being filled with all sorts of ideas," said Rafal Pankowski, a board member of "Never Again", a Polish anti-hate group. What kind of ideas? That Zionism is racism? That the persecuted of yesterday have become the persecutors of today? ===== New York's top cop is heading for Israel to trade advice about NYPD anti-terrorism tactics in exchange for help in cutting off the Big Apple's supply of the club drug "ecstasy." The visit includes a state dinner with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. The ecstasy issue is on the agenda because Israel is a major port of origin for huge shipments of the drug into the United States. In July, the NYPD busted two Israelis trying to deal $40 million worth of the drug. Never missing a beat, Israeli officials will take Kerik to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem. This is revealing! So a top cop, whose police force represents more men than the armies of Switzerland or Denmark, has to wine and dine with the Prime Minister to stop Israel's illicit export of drugs? Do they fly to Colombia and do the same there with the prime minister - or do they go straight for the crooks? What does this story tell the world? ===== Finnish Foreign Minister, Erkki Tuomioja, was quoted as saying Israel's intent in its clashes with Palestinians is "to suppress, humiliate, subdue and impoverish the Palestinians," as quoted in Suomen Kuvalehti magazine on Aug. 24, 2001. Foreign Minister Shimon Peres immediately chastised his Finnish counterpart, stating: "The statement is shocking and outrageous, not only to every Israeli and every Jew, but also to every enlightened person in the world." Once again Peres, totally incapable of seeing other people's viewpoint, is denying the very reality staring him in the face in Palestine - a reality created by his very own government's policies! ===== According to Ha'aretz, Jonathan Pollard, the Israeli spy, will be getting $1 million from the Israeli government to help pay for his and his wife's legal expenses. (Incidentally, Pollard hotly denies it.) "Israel is America's staunchest ally and friend in the Middle East" - isn't that the oft-repeated mantra by Israel's Fifth Column in the US? One ZGram reader writes: "At least a tiny portion of the annual $3 billion in US aid to Israel will be returned. however circuitously..." don't be so sure. It might well land in yet another Jewish lawyer's pockets! ===== It now turns out that "60 Minutes" fabricated out of whole cloth the widely quoted story of "...seventy virgins, seventy wives and everlasting happiness" supposedly awaiting a Palestinian suicide bomber in the Beyond. Koran scholars say that there is no such passage in their Holy Book - that the Koran is not about having sex with virgins in heaven. Knight-Ridder, the agency that broke the story, heard "60 Minutes" officials "explain" they could not explain how the distorted translation occurred. ===== You will be astonished (or perhaps not) by this one: Yeshiva University classics professor Louis Feldman has announced that the Coliseum may have been "built with Jewish loot" from the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in 70 AD. Expect another reparations bonanza. How much could the Temple be worth in today's money? Plus interest? ===== And, finally, a faithful ZGram reader sent me this: "Here is a piece of news from Denmark that may be of interest to your readers. A revival of the medieval debate about the existence of universals can soon be expected. The Holocaust is 'the most well-documented' genocide ever, celebrated historian Otto Ruhl stated. "But a profound philosophical/theological problems remains, and its solution is the topic of a conference for all Danish high-school teachers. "The question that will be discussed on Oct. 2 2001 is: 'Is the Holocaust unique or universal? Or - why not - both?'" Just when you said there was relief from Holocaustomania around the corner! ===== From irimland@zundelsite.org Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:54:27 -0700 Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 16:54:27 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - September 3, 2001 - "Doug Collins: On Orwell and Israel" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 3, 2001 I urge all of my readers to use their search engines for news about the Durban, South Africa Conference on Racism. Amazing things are going on! Perhaps the situation is best summarized by this little excerpt sent out by Israel Shamir: "Even the US walkout, together with Israel, rather proves the thesis of the abnormal Jewish influence on the US. In a way, ***these two Jewish supremacist states were isolated in the important international forum."*** Emphasis added! What a disgrace for the United States to be so snubbed and cold-shouldered! The US would do well to remember an old Indian saying: "When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount." Now to today's ZGram, borrowed from the incomparable Doug Collins: [START] THE COLLINS COLUMN | September 2, 2001 ON ORWELL AND ISRAEL | Doug Collins Sorry about this. But it's time to be anti-Semitic again, what with that "anti-racism" conference going on in South Africa and the frenzied cries from our pols and press that there's nothing racist about Israel and Zionism. The matter is really puzzling. I therefore crave enlightenment. But I don't think I'll get it from Hedy Fry, our multicult minister who has gone to Durban looking for burning crosses. Take the expression "ethnic cleansing", of which our lot in Ottawa say the IsraeIis are innocent. It first saw the light during that little war in the Balkans. There was nothing new about it, however. It has been going on since Paleolithic times.and the Israelis are expert at it. It started in what used to be Palestine the moment Israel was created. Three-quarters of a million Palestinians were chased out, and they and their children have been refugees ever since. Take terrorism. President Bush apparently blames the dispossessed for it. Perhaps he has never heard of Menachem Begin, who in 1948 filled wells with murdered Palestinians of all ages at a place called Deir Yassin. Begin later become the prime minister. And he had no difficulty in coming to Canada on fund-raising trips. How about Ariel Sharon? He was the guy who as the Israeli defence minister in 1982 gave the green light to the massacres at the Sabra and Chatilla refugee camps in which at least a thousand Palestinians ended up dead. It caused such a scandal, even in Israel, that he was forced to resign. But I suppose all has been forgiven, since he is now the prime minister. In the U.K., though, a BBC program concluded that Sharon could be put on trial for war crimes. More anti-Semitism! Begin, Sharon, Yitzak Shamir, and Yitzak Rabin, prime ministers all, have each deserved the title of terrorist. But they are never named as such in our media. That sort of thing is reserved for Yasser Arafat & Co. You don't get much of the Palestinian side of the story but last year PBS did get around to telling some of it in a documentary called The People and the Land. It showed how the Palestinians are still being thrown out of their homes and land to make room for Jewish "settlers". And how Israel takes not the slightest notice of U.N. resolutions condemning such things. At the time the program was aired, 140,000 Jews had been moved in and thousands of Palestinian homes had been destroyed. They are now, as the commentator put it, "100 per cent segregated communities" that are in effect "dozens of little South Africas". Palestinians are not even allowed to walk in those districts. Also in Israel, ethnicity is a factor in what sort of number plate you get for your car. If you are a Jew, it's yellow. If you are a Palestinian, it's white, or blue if you live on the occupied West Bank. That isn't racist, of course. But if it isn't, what is? And what do you call a system in which race and religion determine whether you can go to Israel to live? Any Jew from anywhere in the world can become an Israeli citizen, but Palestinians who have emigrated cannot go back to the country that was once theirs. In view of all this I was perplexed to read a piece from the Calgary Sun in which the Palestinians were compared to the Nazis. It seems that they are oppressing the Jews, not the other way round. The writer was associate editor Paul Jackson, and at first I thought he was putting his readers on. But then it dawned on me that he was off his rocker. "Living in Israel today is like living in Nazi Germany," he wrote. "It's open season on the Jewish people and, as in Nazi Germany, the world apparently doesn't care." In his view, the suicide bombers and other acts of desperation by Palestinians is a Nazi-like activity. So, presumably, is the rock throwing by Palestinian kids against Israelis armed with guns. Pardon me if this gets confusing, And yes, I know about concentration camps. But I never heard of the Nazis stacking themselves with explosives and blowing themselves up, etc. Jackson must be looking over his shoulder at Izzy Asper & Co., who own the Herald. He's probably looking for promotion and I'm sure he'll get it, IzzyPress being pro-Zionist to the extent of ordering its minions to run editorials from the Jerusalem Post. Racism? Of course Israel is a racist state. It's just that no western leaders want to admit it, there being far more Jewish power in the West than Arab. Why do you think that at last count the U.S. had given $77 billion in aid to Israel? Which, as that PBS program reported, is seven times as much as it has given to the whole of Black Africa? As George Orwell put it, two and two make five, war is peace, and freedom is slavery. [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "Diversity doesn't include diversity of thought or opinion. Diversity really means conformity." (Letter to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:36:43 -0700 Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 17:36:43 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/4/2001 - "Escerpted from the Zundel Power Letter" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 4, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I thought I might send you an excerpt from Ernst Zundel's September Power letter which goes to his supporters in 43 countries: [START] For Westerners to think the Middle East situation can be solved by talks and more talks, or for the Israelis to delude themselves that they can bomb, bulldoze or beat the Palestinians into even greater submission is frankly unrealistic, to say the least. It reveals a strange mindset in most of the Israeli population, since according to surveys 72% of Israelis of all factions support Sharon and his policies openly. That does not augur well for the future of both the Israelis and the Palestinians. A circle of violence on every level, from the psychological to the reality of guns and suicide bombers has developed, from which no one can negotiate a way out. The Israelis, like every colonial power before them, in Africa, India, the Middle East, like the French first in Indochina and the Americans later in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos found out to their utter dismay and consternation: You cannot control or govern people unless these people are comfortable with or allow in their minds, hearts and souls to be governed by that authority. The American white settlers in the early colonies, themselves land grabbers and invaders of Indian lands, who fought with the natives for centuries over the land grabs, felt arrogantly and unfairly dealt with and treated by their own King and the King's government in distant England where many of them had come from, the King's tax collectors and in the end by the King's soldiers, and they rebelled in a very similar fashion to the Mau Mau which rose against the British in Kenya and as other groups did in other colonies. Forget the influence of the Communists there; they only exploited the situation for their ends. The Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories have been far, far more cruelly dealt with by the ruthless Israelis than any American colonists ever were by the British. The Kenyan or Rhodesian or Vietnamese, or even the South African Blacks under the apartheid regime, suffered not one-tenth or one-hundreds of the hurts, humiliations, tortures, beatings and dispossessions of the Palestinians at the hands of the Israelis and their powerful friends and protectors overseas. These people all rose eventually to throw off and expel their foreign dominators and installed governments - ironically very often far more incompetent, corrupt and brutal than their former white colonial masters, giving them chaos where there had been order, civil wars where there had been peace, squalor and illness where there had been orderliness and health. But they accepted those governments because they had the feeling, apparently satisfying to them, that they had a government of their own. Blacks were ruling Blacks. Palestinians will before long be ruled by Palestinians. The masses of India, Africa or Indochina have not risen up against their "own" governments, incompetent as they may be, and asked their former colonial governments to return to rule over them! Not in a single case! That's the way it will be in Palestine in the end, mark my word! The ruins of the crusader castells topping the mountains and dotting the landscape in Libanon, Palestine and elsewhere bear mute witness to this inevitable end. This area is the graveyard of defeated and retreated Imperialist dreams. Sharon and his religious zealots and fanatics, suffused with an ancient Jewish mysticism, following the genocidal dictums of ancient, 2000 year old "wise men", might well, in the short run, bomb, beat and bulldoze the Palestinians with one more vicious military campaign by unleashing their enormous fire power against the dispossessed, even against the Syrians, the Lebanese, the Iraqis, the Jordanians and the Egyptians - and militarily humiliate them singly or collectively and defeat them on the battle fields. They in their single-minded fanaticism and bloodthirsty will to power, driven by a messianic, cabbalistic, self-bestowed "God's Chosen People" syndrome, can and will, if they so decide, go on a rampage and "smite their enemies" with Old Testament-like ferocity. They can do it - at the cost of their ultimate survival as a people! The sons of Israel, although victorious in every battlefield overt and covert, even in the political process of buying the support of foreign nations through bribes, PACs, and the sexual favors of their Monica Lewinskys and Chandra Levis in every area of society, will in the end succumb - for it is one thing to conquer an inferiorly armed, poorly led, unorganized tribe, or smaller nations of bushmen or nomadic shepherds, or corrupt oil sheiks who would rather gamble their people's money away in the casinos of Europe and play with their harems than set up efficient governments for their people. It is quite another to govern efficiently, supply the garrisons troops, military hardware, the fuel, the administrators and all that is necessary to occupy a large geographic area. The British learned that in their far-flung empire. The Germans learned that in Russia and in the Balkans. The French learned their lessons in Indochina, Algeria and Morocco. And I predict that a victorious Israel would very quickly learn the same painful lessons as the strutting sons of Zion, thinly spread in a hundred South Lebanons, would slowly bleed to death or succumb to the sweet loins of their conquered maidens. And there goes Israel - God's Chosen fantasy and all! [END] ===== Thought for the Day: Talking about putting all your eggs in one basket and hoping for the best. Comment sent by an Arab to the Zundelsite From irimland@zundelsite.org Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:12:15 -0700 Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:12:15 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/5/2001 - "Relentless agitation against Germany - 1933" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 5, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Somebody sent me a series of quotes, somewhat haphazardly organized and with slight irregularities. I have taken the liberty of rearranging and updating them a bit. I want to illustrate a different point of view of World War II - how it came about and why the Fifth Column, comprised of some Marxist-Socialist German Jews within the German Reich, was seen as dangerous and, thus, necessary to be neutralized by emigration and, later, as security risks through internment in places like Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau etc. for the duration of the war. Massive, systematic, repetitive media hype of World War II atrocity propaganda, familiar to the Western world, has claimed the following: * The Jews living in Europe prior to WW II were innocent and loyal citizens of the nations in which they lived - * ***Without cause***, Hitler and the Germans hated them and made them scapegoats for Germany's problems - * Hitler and the National Socialists designed a systematic and institutionalized program to exterminate all the Jews in the world, beginning with German-occupied Europe - * Homicidal gas chambers were built and used by the Germans specifically for this purpose - * Six million Jews and five million non-Jews were exterminated, mainly by gassing, and their bodies were completely consumed in large crematory facilities and outdoor cremation pits and ovens, to dispose of the "evidence of genocide." =46ew people who read and can think for themselves now accept this simplisti= c view of the "gassings". Important Jewish leaders have admitted as much - as did Arno Mayer (?) who counseled his tribal brethren to tone down the silly gassing rhetoric because "...they can count, you know! They can count!" What people still believe is that Germany's "maniacal F=FChrer" declared war in 1939 for no better reason than to satisfy his expansionist cravings. There is another view: Here is the smorgasbord of media defamation and systematic global Jewish sabotage against the Third Reich and its people: As a largely overpopulated country, Germany was dependent on export. It could not exist and survive without export. Adolf Hitler's election to chancellorship marked the beginning of the end of presumptuous and unregulated Jewish influence in many areas of German affairs, including banking matters. To the Jewish Diaspora, the world's most powerful trading and political bloc, Hitler's election meant interruption and interference with the world's commercial and political cohesion in which Jews were heavily involved. Furthermore, Hitler stood alone and defiant against the tidal wave of Jewish organised Communism then sweeping all before it. The Communists had seized Russia and were at the bottom of civil unrest and revolution throughout eastern Europe; Britain, France, - the Spanish Civil War -, the British dominions and the United States. Germany alone repelled and held in check this tidal wave of subversion and insurrection. Just so my readers understand why so many European countries ***knew*** the bloodshed that had befallen Russia - a fact still largely hidden from the average American - consider these statistics, as stated in Elmer Elmhurst's classic "World Hoax", published 1938 in the USA, stated on page 40: "Altogether, the percentage of Jews in the Commissariat were as follows - In 1917-18, of 316 Commissars, 300 were Jews In 1920, of 457 Commissars, 322 were Jews In 1921, of 550 Commissars, 447 were Jews In 1922, of 525 Commissars, 445 were Jews Therefore, when Hitler came to power, global Jewish organizations were quick to organise economic warfare against Hitler's Germany as a means of bringing the vibrant National Socialist state to its knees. Hitler was democratically elected Chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933. That year was notable in the number of boycotts organised throughout the world, most if not all provoked by Jewish interest groups. The first Jewish declaration of war was pronounced on March 24, 1933. Below are some very descriptive quotes from various sources worldwide: "JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY." _______ "Judea Declares War on Germany! Jews of all the World Unite! Boycott of German Goods! Mass Demonstrations!" - (Headlines in the Daily Express on March, 24th, 1933.) _______ "March, 24th, (1933) Reich leaders realised that boycott agitation was accelerating, especially in Great Britain. Placards proclaiming 'Boycott German Goods' spread infectiously throughout London, and were now in the windows of the most exclusive West End shops. Automobiles bannering boycott placards slowly cruised through the retail districts alerting shoppers. Everywhere, store signs warned German salesmen not to enter. British Catholics had been urged by the Archbishop of Liverpool to join the protest. "London's Daily Herald carried an interview with a prominent Jewish leader who admitted, 'The leaders are hanging back,' but the Jewish people are 'forcing its leaders on.' Already the boycott has damaged 'hundreds of thousands of pounds of German trade'." - (Edwin Black, Jewish author. The Transfer Agreement, p.34 ) _______ "Fifty-thousand were gathered (March,27th,1933) in and around Madison Square Garden, supportive rallies were at that moment waiting in Chicago, Washington, San Francisco, Houston, and about seven other American cities. At each supportive rally, thousands huddled around loudspeakers waiting for the Garden event, which would be broadcast live via radio to 200 additional cities across the country. At least 1 million Jews were participating nationwide. Perhaps another million Americans of non-Jewish descent heritage stood with them." - (Edwin Black, Jewish writer and author. The Transfer Agreement, p.42 ) _______ "Mass meetings throughout Poland - co-ordinated to the Congress rally - had voted to extend the Vilna boycott to all of Poland. The three most important Warsaw Jewish commercial organisations - passed binding resolutions to 'use the most radical means of defence by boycotting German imports.' "In London, almost all Jewish shops in the Whitechapel district were displaying placards denying entry to German salesmen and affirming their anti-Nazi boycott. Teenagers patrolled the streets distributing handbills asking shoppers to boycott German goods....." - (Edwin Black, Jewish Writer and Author, The Transfer Agreement, p.46/47 ) _______ "War in Europe in 1934 was inevitable." - (H. Morgenthau, Hearst Press, U.S. September, 1933 ) _______ "The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany. Fourteen million Jews stand together as one man, to declare war against Germany. The Jewish wholesaler will forsake his firm, the banker his stock exchange, the merchant his commerce and the pauper his pitiful shed in order to join together in a holy war against Hitler's people." - (Daily Express, March,24th, 1933 ) _______ "Germany is our public enemy No.1. It is our object to declare war without mercy against her." (Bernart Lecache, President, Jewish World League ) _______ The next official declaration of war was issued in August, 1933, by Samuel Untermeyer, newly elected to the Presidency of the 'International Jewish Federation to Combat the Hitlerite Oppression of the Jews.' The declaration of (Jewish) war was disseminated throughout the world by the New York Times, on August 7th, 1933. _______ "This declaration called the war against Germany, which was now determined a 'holy war'. This war was to be carried out against Germany to its conclusion, to her destruction." - (Dr. Scheidl, Geschichte der Verfemung Deutschlands ) _______ The International Jewish Boycott Conference assembled in Holland to discuss ways by which Jewish interests in Germany might be protected. Referring to the Jews as 'the aristocrats of the world', Samuel Untermeyer, the President of the World Jewish Economic Federation, said: "Each of you, Jew and Gentile alike, who has not already enlisted in this sacred war should do so now and here. It is not sufficient that you should buy no goods made in Germany. You must refuse to deal with any merchant or shopkeeper who sells any German-made goods or who patronises German ships or shipping.... we will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends." - ( C.B.S, August,7th, 1933 ) _______ Joining with Samuel Untermeyer in calling for a war against Germany, Bernard Baruch, at the same time, was promoting preparations for war against Germany. 'I emphasised that the defeat of Germany and Japan and their elimination from world trade would give Britain a tremendous opportunity to swell her foreign commerce in both volume and profit." - ( Samuel Untermeyer, The Public Years, p.347 ) _______ "Hitler will have no war, but he will be forced to it, not this year, but later on." - ( Les Aniles, 1934 ) _______ By June, 1938, the American Hebrew was boasting that they had Jews in the foremost positions of influence in Britain, America and France, and that these "three sons of Israel will be sending the Nazi dictator to hell." _______ "The fight against Germany has been carried out for months by every Jewish conference, trade organisation, by every Jew in the world.... we shall let loose a spiritual and a material war of the whole world against Germany." - (M. Jabotinsky, founder of Revisionist Zionism, Natcha Retch, January, 1934 ) _______ "We Jews are going to bring a war on Germany." - ( David A. Brown, National Chairman, United Jewish Campaign ) _______ "The world should cut off all relations with Germany; trade, social and diplomatic." - ( Sunday Express ) _______ "He (J.E Marcovitch, Egyptian newspaper magnate) had 'converted the whole Egyptian Press into a real battlefield against Hitlerianism'." ( Jewish Chronicle, 22nd, February, 1935 ) "There is only one power which really counts. The power of political pressure. We Jews are the most powerful people on earth, because we have this power, and we know how to apply it." - (Jewish Daily Bulletin, July,27th, 1935 ) _______ "Before the end of the year, an economic bloc of England, Russia, France and the U.S.A will be formed to bring the German and Italian economic systems to their knees." - ( Paul Dreyfus of Mulhausen, 'La Vio de Tanger' May, 15th,1938 ) _______ "A boycott throughout Europe of their export products by way of the retailer may undermine the present uncertain economic stability of several of the anti-Semitic countries." - ( Sunday Chronicle, January,2nd, 1938 ) THE EFFECT ON THE GERMAN ECONOMY Between January and April, 1933, Germany's exports dropped by 10%. As the boycott organised by world Jewry spread, German trade was hit particularly hard and during the first quarter of 1933, Germany's vital exports were less than half its 1932 trade. _______ "When the Reich could no longer pay its obligations, Germany would go bankrupt." - ( Edwin Black, Jewish writer/author, The Transfer Agreement, p.185 ) _______ "... if exports fell too low, Germany as a nation would again be faced with starvation ... How many months could Germany survive once the boycott became global, one commerce was re-routed around Germany? The boycotters adopted a slogan, 'Germany will crack this winter'." - (Edwin Black, Jewish writer/author, The Transfer Agreement, p.188 ) CONCLUSION These declarations of war against what was undeniably a friendly state and a democratically elected government in its very infancy, caused the German people to react by calling for a ***one day boycott*** (April,1st, 1933) of Jewish businesses and goods. Almost 70 years later, discerning readers can still see the writing on the wall. The power of the media to distort events is there for all to see, in every bookshop throughout the land. We are all familiar with the repetitive stories and pictures of this German boycott of Jewish goods; but the reasons for it are never mentioned, nor is the fact that it was ***a mere one day event***. _______ "It (National Socialism) was condemned to war because it was a system which inevitably made enemies of Bolshevism and world capitalism." - ( Louis Marschalko; Hungarian writer-journalist and playwright ) _______ "The Jews, taken collectively, view this war as a holy war." - (The Daily Herald, No.7450, 1939 ) _______ "Even if we Jews are not physically at your side in the trenches, we are morally with you. This war is our war and you fight it with us." - (Schalom Asch, Les Nouvelles Litterairres, February,10th, 1940 ) _______ "This war is our business." - (Rabbi Dr. Stephen Wise, Defence in America, June, 1940 ) _______ "A few days after the British Declaration of War, Weizmann offered the British Government 2,000 men for use in the near East, altogether, an army of 100,000 Jewish fighters against Germany." - Dr. Scheidl, Geschichte der Verfemung Deutschlands _______ "Jewish brothers of the whole world: Let the holy flame of vengeance burn more and more brightly in your hearts with every hour! Be ready to act at any minute! You must do everything in your power to destroy the economic resources of the fascists, no matter in what part of the world you live. Go among the most vital sections of the death-bringing industries of the Hitlerian hangmen and cripple them with every means at your disposal. Boycott their products everywhere! Struggle together with the noble, self-sacrificing partisans! Develop everywhere a fully effective propaganda for solidarity with, and an active support for the Soviet Union. Mankind wants to be freed of the brown plague. Do your duty in this holy war." - (International Conference of the Jews, Moscow, 1941 ) And these people were surprised that the German government of Adolf Hitler undertook steps in areas under their control - first in Germany proper and later in occupied Europe - to put an end to this security threat to the people of Germany and later Europe? The right of self-defense, one of the most basic and instinctual human rights dictated such a course! (Source for the quotes: http://www.ety.com/HRP/booksonline/witnesstohistory/withis_ch09.htm) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Thought for the Day: "The worldwide boycott against Germany in 1933 and the later all-out declaration of war against Germany ***initiated by the Zionist leaders and the World Jewish Congress*** enraged Hitler so that he threatened to destroy the Jews ..." (Emphasis added)=0B (Rabbi Schwartz, New York Times, Sep. 30, 1997. From irimland@zundelsite.org Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:30:35 -0700 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 19:30:35 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/6/2001 - "Thank "Holocaust" reparations precedent for this Pandora's Box!" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 6, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: The following was forwarded to me by a Zgram reader with the words: "It is obvious the Bush administration has failed to represent American people and US interests at the UN Conference in Durban. (Bush) has failed in his obligation to this country by supporting Israel, walking out of the conference, and not defending and representing the USA. It's as impeachable as Clinton's activities, in my humble opinion." Naturally and rightly so, the Israeli racism issue has overshadowed all the other interests at this conference. However, below is a glimpse of what the coddling of the Jewish interests and, specifically, the precedents of the Holocaust reparations have wrought. We thank Dr. James Sanchez for compiling and condensing the following: [START] Because the World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) has received no meaningful news coverage in the United States, I thought I would pass on some files I have prepared on the conference. This first file is a summary of the September 1 afternoon session, a session simply selected at random. Although the news media pretends that the conference is all about the scapegoating of entirely innocent Jews by the all-powerful Palestinians, there is a lot of real hatred toward and immense demands for money being made against European peoples. While the US delegation and the media have relentlessly defended Israel and Zionism and the Jews and Jewish rights, the deadly racism of the attacks on European peoples have been met by no defenders at all. The WCAR provided a summary of this session, which emphasized only the requirement for reparations to African countries for the slave trade, but it is a biased summary that tries to make it appear that there is complete worldwide support for reparations for slavery and no other significant issues, so I thought it would be handy to have a short summary of each speaker in the session There were 29 national representatives, and 2 international organization representatives, who spoke at modest length, after a general summary. At about the midpoint in the statements there is a moment of "responses" that provide a particularly surreal interlude. Press Release: Acknowledgment Of Past, Compensation Urged By Many Leaders In Continuing Debate At Racism Conference. Plenary: PM And Night. RD/D/24. Durban: World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) [UN Conference on Racism], September 1, 2001. (source: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/racism/) In summary: (1) Black countries want massive (maybe infinite) reparations from White countries (African countries demand reparations for Africa; Jamaica wants Jamaica included among the recipients of the reparations). Black suffering is unique in history, and unique in being uncompensated. (However, Angola seems to want reparations from South Africa; Congo wants war crimes trials against Burundi, Rwanda and Uganda.) (2) Black countries with significant slave trades today blame White countries for that slave trade even as they fail to admit to engaging in the slave trade (e.g., Ivory Coast says commodities traders are the real slave traders today). Major African slaveholding countries claim to be really tolerant and multicultural (Ivory Coast, Sudan and Burkina Faso.) (3) China thinks Whites are racist, and often neo-Nazis. Japan conceded some imperfections in its conduct of ethnic relations with Ainus and ethnic Koreans. (4) White countries with a major role in the ancient slave trades (UK, Netherlands, EU) denounce their own citizens as racists and boast about being multicultural in order to be exempt from paying reparations. No one talks about the role of Jews in the slave trade. (5) There are a lot of issues that don't have much to do with racism (e.g., Mexico defends handicapped rights). India is not too concerned by the caste system, but thinks other countries need to implement Affirmative Action. (6) Countries that generate a lot of economic refugees (Mexico, Sudan) want the rights of their emigrants to be respected by their respective targets (USA, Europe). (7) The Internet enables racism and should be censored (Malawi, European Commission, Netherlands); or maybe the Internet could promote understanding (Jamaica). (8) Netherlands rejects any criticism of Israel, while Luxembourg is worried about the Jews being exterminated in the 1940s. (This latter seems to be a time-machine related issue.) (9) There are some tepid expressions of support for the Palestinians, but only Syria and Saudi Arabia seem to be aware of any details of the problem. (10) Whites (European peoples worldwide) are denounced by almost everyone in Africa (Angola, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Lesotho, Namibia, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, and Jamaica: all demanding money), including anti-White European regimes (European Commission, Luxembourg, Netherlands, UK), and China too, excepting only some countries with other issues (Cyprus--Turks, Eritrea--development, India--caste, Malawi--Internet, Saudi Arabia--Muslims, Syria--Zionism). While Russia stands up for Russian rights, no European countries or European Diaspora country (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United States) supports the human rights of any European peoples anywhere, with as much as a single word. They are all to busy fighting for Jewish rights to do what they want to do in Palestine. ===== ===== Statements: Juan Somavia, Director General of the International Labour Organization (ILO). Racism is everywhere; unemployment is largely racism. Statements: Enoch Kavindele, Vice President of Zambia. Racism is everywhere; tribalism remains a problem in Africa; Black slavery requires reparations since while "we agree that many other peoples and races have been victims of discrimination and intolerance, the cry on the continent is that while every one of those groups have been adequately redressed for wrongs committed in the past, Africans continue to suffer." Statements: Arthur Khoza, Deputy Prime Minister of Swaziland. Black slavery requires reparations. Statements: Lydie Polfer, Vice-Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and External Trade of Luxembourg. Racists tried to exterminate the Jews. Everyone is guilty of racism. Statements: Jakaya Kikwete, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the United Republic of Tanzania. Black slavery requires reparations since the Jews received payment for the Holocaust. Statements: Christopher Obure, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Kenya. Racism is everywhere; Black slavery requires reparations. Statements: Motsoahae Thomas Thabane, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lesotho. Racism is everywhere; Black slavery requires reparations; slave trade in women and children by rich countries today requires reparations; all problems in Africa are a product of slavery and colonialism. Statements: Omar Abdullah, Minister of State for External Affairs of India. Caste problems have been solved and criticism of caste is "propaganda, highly exaggerated and misleading, often based on anecdotal evidence"; nations other than India should implement Affirmative Action. Statements: Han Myeong-Sook, Minister for Gender Equality of Republic of Korea. Women's rights must be respected; mass rape in Bosnia and Japanese use of Comfort Women must be punished; Japanese textbooks must emphasize Japanese war crimes. Statements: Nicos Koshis, Minister of Justice and Public Order of Cyprus. Cyprus victimized by Turkish racism. Statements: Ali Mohamed Osman Yassin, Minister of Justice of Sudan. Minorities, indigenous people, migrants, asylum seekers and refugees [fleeing Sudan] face racism; Black slave trade requires reparations; Palestinians face human rights violations. Statements: Luis Alfonso Davila Garcia, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Venezuela. Venezuela is multicultural; there are some kind of problems in Palestine. Statements: Lilian Patel, Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of Malawi. Racism is not scientific; the Internet must be censored. Statements: Farouk Al-Shara, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Syria. Israel is massacring and assassinating Palestinians in order to create a racially pure Jewish state. ===== ===== Rights of Reply (a brief period of responses to earlier statements): Turkey denounces the Armenian claim of genocide and claims the invasion of Cyprus was necessary to defend Turks. Azerbaijan denounced Armenian aggression and genocide of Azeris. Armenia denounced Turkey for genocide and denounced Azerbaijan as racist. Turkey denounced Armenia for falsification of history ("He still hoped that Armenians would find a way to find their identity, other than through the distortion of their past.") ===== ===== Statements: Georges Chikoti, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Angola. Portugal enslaved Angola: South Africa owes reparations to Angola under Security Council resolutions; Black slave trade requires reparations. Statements: Stafford Neil, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Jamaica. Racism is everywhere; Black slave trade requires reparations, including to Jamaica; Internet could promote understanding. Statements: Gilberto Rincon Gallardo, President of the Citizen Studies Commission against Discrimination of Mexico. Some discrimination persists in Mexico; Black slave trade requires reparations; Mexican migrants in the United States must have greater rights; women's and handicappeds' rights must be protected. Statements: Odile Quintin, Director General of the European Commission. Racism is everywhere; EU fights racism and will censor the Internet; everyday there are racist attacks in the EU. Statements: Baroness Amos Of Brondesbury, Minister for Africa in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the United Kingdom. Racism is almost everywhere; Whites in England make racist attacks on Blacks; the British involvement in the Black slave trade was bad but having said that, it is time to move on. Statements: Roger Van Boxtel, Minister for Urban Policy and Integration of Ethnic Minorities for the Netherlands. Racism is everywhere and everyday it must be fought indefatigably; in code, rejects criticism of Israel ("It is a democratic duty to stand for respect, justice, dignity and equality for all. Therefore, I reject some expressions of racism and intolerance around this Conference."); ...the Internet must be censored. Statements: Ali Said Abdella, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Eritrea. Racism is now more subtle but it is everywhere; Eritrea has suffered from racism, but economic development based on equal opportunity is the best way to a better life for the people of Eritrea. (...) Statements: Ernest N. Tjriange, Minister of Justice of Namibia. Africa suffers from the dumping of arms left over from the cold war; Black slave trade requires reparations; the rights of the Palestinians must be respected. (...) Statements: Ntumba Luaba Lumu, Minister for Human Rights of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. War crimes trials must be held for invaders of Congo: Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi. Statements: Monique Olboudo, Secretary of State for the Promotion of Human Rights of Burkina Faso. Black slave trade requires reparations; "More than 60 ethnic groups live in our country and a spirit of tolerance reigns." (...) Statements: Wang Guangya, Vice-Foreign Minister for Foreign Affairs of China. Racism is everywhere; Palestinians are being deprived of their rights; neo-Nazi violence against immigrants is a major problem. Statements: Kaori Maruya, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan. Japan has remorse for past errors, and admits imperfect conduct with respect to the Ainu and ethnic Koreans: "We should endeavor to accept those who are different from us, respect difference and live together in harmony. Then eventually, reconciliation will be achieved. To that goal, every one of us should ask ourselves critically whether we are truly free from any sentiment of discrimination." Statements: Ivan Baba, State Secretary for Foreign Affairs of Hungary. Human rights are important. Statements: Torki Bin Mohammed Al-Kaber, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Saudi Arabia. Israel violates Palestinian rights; anti-Islamic hatred and association of Islam with terrorism is racism. Statements: Serguei Ordzhonikidze, Deputy Minster for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. [Chechen] terrorists manipulate public opinion; Serb refugees should be allowed to return to Kosovo; (he mentions) the human and linguistic rights (of) Russians in former Soviet Republics (Estonia, Lithuania); new technologies should be viewed with suspicion. [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "Did Israel's spin doctors, Jewish leaders and Jewish media sources in the Diaspora deliberately create the bogey man of all the alleged "anti-semitism" at the conference to deflect the delegates away from massive Jewish involvement in the slave trade by bringing the African slaves to the New World in largely Jewish-owned fleets of slave ships?" (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:20:06 -0700 Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:20:06 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/7/2001 - "Slowly the tables are turned..." Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 7, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Today, three dissimilar and yet related items. One is a yammering letter to the National Post | September 7, 2001 by Leo Adler, national affairs director, Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies, about the rage directed at him and others like him in Durban, South Africa. For once, this dishonest organization that has made a cushy living by vilifying, criminalizing and bankrupting people they don't like have gotten a taste of what it feels like to be themselves exposed and held up for hatred and contempt. The letter speaks for itself. [START] Disaster in Durban | Leo Adler The World Conference against Racism is becoming a farce. As Arab nations demonize Israel, other issues are ignored. It is as if the whole world were in a state of blissful tolerance -- except Israel. The failure and hypocrisy on display in Durban was foreseen by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. As a UN-accredited non-governmental organization, it was involved in every preparatory meeting leading up to the WCAR -- except for the Asian regional conference that took place earlier this year in Tehran. The Center's representative, Dr. Shimon Samuels, had been active for three years in the European Network Against Racism, an umbrella group for over 860 anti-racist NGOs in the European Union. Yet he was deliberately blocked from going to Teheran. It was at that meeting that objectionable language castigating Israel was originally put forward. Despite the gloomy outlook, the Simon Wiesenthal Center decided to come to Durban and fight for human rights. Unfortunately, a majority of NGOs took the Arab nations' lead and focused their attention on Israel. Some NGOs gave out pamphlets containing anti-Semitic cartoons, blocked Jewish delegates from speaking and helped create what one European delegate described as "a feeling [of] racism." To their credit, at least a dozen major international human rights groups, some of whom have at times criticized Israel, had the courage to disassociate themselves from a NGO Forum resolution declaring Israel to be a "racist apartheid state." But they were in a minority. We refuse to give up on the idea that nations and NGOs can meet in good faith to address the problems of racism and intolerance. Hopefully, when governments see the shambles that has unfolded in Durban, they will ensure that future conferences are not dominated by narrow-minded partisan interests. [END] ===== The second Letter to the Editor was written by Ian Macdonald, a retired Canadian diplomat and trade expert on the Middle East for years. Macdonald refers to an article by Corinna Schuler ("Fry defends decision.." Sept. 5, 2001, Globe and Mail) who makes reference to "Canada and other allies of Israel". [START] Canada may well be a vassal of Israel, as is the United States, but it is certainly not an ally, not politically, not militarily and not spiritually. Most knowledgeable Canadian Christians and Muslims, because of Israeli desecration of the Holy Land and unforgivably cruel subjugation of the native Palestinians, on the contrary, see Israel as the enemy. The media, of course, in the service of their co-religionists and with heads well into the sand, fastidiously conceal or ignore the ominous reality of growing Gentile resentment. If history is any guide, they do so at their peril. Ian V. Macdonald [END] The third item comes from the opposite end of the world - from a courtroom where, for the first time in postwar history, an accused murderer and torturer of Germans stands trial. Here is one brief account: POLAND: WHEN GERMANS WERE MALTREATED Witnesses recount postwar atrocities in Polish camps Calgary Herald June 14, 2001 Roger Boyes Times of London OPOLE, POLAND -- German women were drowned in latrines and prisoners were buried alive during postwar internment in Poland, according to witnesses at the trial of a Polish camp commandant. Czelaw Geborski, a stooped, snowy-haired pensioner of 76, is accused of murdering German women who, after the Second World War, were herded into deportation camps prior to being expelled from Silesia. His trial is the first to be held in post-communist Europe for crimes committed against Germans. About 14 million of them [German people] were expelled from territory that is now part of Poland and the Czech Republic; two million [German people] died mainly of hunger, exhaustian [sic] and disease as they trekked westward. The revelations, coupled with the disclosure that Polish villagers took part in a bloodthirsty massacre of Jews during the war, have forced Poland to reassess its image of itself as one of the primary victims of Hitler. The Silesian atrocities occurred in 1945 and 1946, after the end of the war. The Soviet Union laid claim to what was once eastern Poland and, in return, Poles gained territory in the west. Germans living there were thrown out. Once resettled in Germany, they formed powerful political associations that kept alive memories of camps such as Lamsdorf (now known as Lambinowice) 30 kilometres from Opole. [The German town of Oppeln] Geborski, sitting in the dock next to his often embarrassed lawyer, interrupted loudly as the witnesses tried to reconstruct everyday life in the camp. "It was like a holiday camp!" he barked out, banging his stick on the floor. "They all had their own beds and three modest meals." [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "We are not to expect to be translated from despotism to liberty in a featherbed." (Thomas Jefferson) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:23:24 -0700 Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:23:24 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/8/2001 - "Israel, Zionism, and the Racial Double Standard" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 8, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I have decided to give you this restrained, yet well-argued revisionist article in one great swoop, even though I usually cut heavy-duty content into bite-size chunks. This article would lose in power if I were to do so. Sit back, relax, and start reading. [START} Israel, Zionism, and the Racial Double Standard By Paul Grubach I Austrian political leader J=F6rg Haider favors a virtual ban on immigration into his nation, and he campaigned against the European Union's eastward expansion out of fear that migrants will flood into Austria, the end result being (so he believes) the disruption of Austrian culture. This is one of the primary reasons he was widely condemned in the mainstream media of the United States and Europe as a racist. With this in mind, consider the following statement by Jewish Middle East analyst, Mitchell Bard, made in Ohio's most important newspaper, The Plain Dealer. "Most Israelis have argued that Israel cannot remain a Jewish state or a democracy if it incorporates the occupied territories, because Palestinians would alter the nations demographic balance. The result would be a binational state in which Arabs would wield substantial power."1 In more straightforward terms, most Israeli Jews view Palestinians from the occupied territories as a threat to Israeli society. For a more recent statement of similar sentiments, we have the claims of Dan Ashbel, Israeli consul-general for the mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Describing his views, The Plain Dealer noted: "Ashbel said Israel fought its wars to repel attackers bent on Israel's destruction. Even though many Arab states and the Palestinian authority now recognize the Jewish state's right to exist, he said the idea that millions of Palestinians are entitled to return [to Palestine-Israel] could be a backhanded way to destroy Israel."2 The feelings for Palestinians expressed by most Israeli Jews and Israeli consul-general Ashbel are very similar to those Haider has expressed in regard to Eastern European and non-white immigrants. Whereas the former look upon Palestinian Arabs as unassimilable aliens and a threat to Israeli society, the latter views non-Germanic immigrants as a disruptive force within the Austrian nation. Yet, Haider is roundly condemned as a racist while Israeli Jews and Ashbel have their beliefs publicly enunciated with no outcry or editorial condemnation. Indeed, the American mass media openly encourages Jewish separatism and racialism in Israel. One of the most important and influential newspapers in the United States is The Wall Street Journal. In regard to allowing Palestinian refugees to return to Palestine-Israel, they opined that the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees would result in the "demographic destruction of the Jewish state."3 Imagine if a respected Western newspaper opined that, if Jewish refugees from the former Soviet Union are allowed to migrate to a predominantly non-Jewish nation, this would result in the demographic destruction of that society. This newspaper and its editorial staff would be swiftly and incessantly condemned as "evil racists." They could be even charged with a crime in those Western nations that have "hate crimes" laws in effect. Adel Qa'adan is an Israeli Arab who wanted to move his family into the Jewish town of Katsir, Israel. He was told that Katsir does not accept Arabs into the community, and the Katsir local council informed him that they will not sell homes or land in Katsir to non-Jews.4 In an attempt to remedy this injustice, Mr. Qa'adan took his case to the Israeli Supreme Court where he attained a judgment in his favor. The Jewish state's highest court ruled the Arab family could not be barred from living in a community built solely for Jews, overturning a 52-year-old state policy of excluding Arabs from Jewish communities. Nevertheless, the kibbutzim, or communal farms, would remain closed to Arab residents, and the government may introduce legislation that circumvents the Supreme Court ruling.5 Although the seemingly anti-racist, anti-segregationist New York Times (NYT), America's most important newspaper, carried a short article and letter on this affair (possibly solely in order to maintain an image of "journalistic fairness"), they never issued an editorial hailing this victory against racial segregation, nor did they condemn Israel's other racist practices or the fact that the kibbutzim would still exclude Arabs. A little over a month later however, NYT editorialized the Confederate flag should be removed from South Carolina's Statehouse dome because it "symbolizes racism and segregation."6 The Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is widely held to be one of the premier civil rights organizations in the world. On a regular basis they issue public, high profile condemnations of acts and statements of alleged racism and bigotry that occur worldwide. However, when this writer requested (in a letter sent by certified mail) that ADL Director Abraham =46oxman condemn anti-Arab discrimination in Israel and publicly support the Qa'adan family in their attempt to move into the Jewish neighborhood of their choice, he waffled. Writing me a short and vague letter that repeats worn out clich=E9s, Foxman never did issue a high-profile statement in support of Adel Qa'adan that condemns Israeli racial discrimination, nor did the ADL ever (to this writer's knowledge) make any public pronouncements cheering the Arab family's victory over Israeli racism--strange behavior for an organization that claims to be in the forefront of the fight against racial discrimination worldwide.7 What these examples suggest is there is a racial double standard that haunts American society. On a regular basis the mainstream media and public officials condemn anti-immigrant sentiment, xenophobia, racial discrimination, apartheidism and anti-Semitism-the notable exception being Zionist racism. Not only does the U.S. government, many "civil rights" advocates and the mass media usually remain silent about Zionist racism, they actively support the Israeli state which embodies it. II Zionism is a political philosophy which is firmly grounded in the anti-integrationist racial thought of the past and present.8 In the words of Zionist political thinker Moses Hess, "Jews are not a religious group, but a separate nation, a special race, and the modern Jew who denies this is not only an apostate, a religious renegade, but a traitor to his people, his tribe, his race."9 In a similar vein, the founder of modern Zionism, Theodore Herzl wrote: "I referred previously to our [Jewish] assimilation [with gentiles]. I do not for a moment wish to imply that I desire such an end. Our national character is too glorious in history and, in spite of every degradation, too noble to make its annihilation desirable."10 Although it may raise eyebrows, it is no exaggeration to say that political Zionism and German Nazism bear some distinct similarities.11 Joachim Prinz, a former Vice-President of the World Jewish Congress, in 1934 praised the Nazi revolution (1933) in Germany: "The significance of the German revolution for the German people will ultimately be revealed only to those who have undertaken to achieve it, and have themselves shaped its form. Its significance for us [Jews] will be stated here=8AWe want to posit instead of assimilation [into Gentile communities] something new; undertaking the yoke of joining the Jewish people and the Jewish race. Only a state based on the principle of the purity of the nation and the race can possibly endow dignity and honor on=8Athose Jews who themselves subscribe to this priniciple."12 Stephen S. Wise, a former president of the American Jewish Congress and the World Jewish Congress, told a New York rally in June 1938: "I am not an American citizen of the Jewish faith, I am a Jew=8AHitler was right in one thing. He calls the Jewish people a race and we are a race."13 Although these passages were composed over 60 years ago, the beliefs they contain still are part and parcel of Zionist ideology and practice. In an attempt to shed light upon the biological history of the Jewish people and how the latter differ from the non-Jewish world, Israeli and American scientists have conducted studies which show that Jewish communities differ significantly from gentile communities in a genetic-biological sense.14 As we shall soon see, this information is apparently going to be used to define into existence a "Jewish race" and discriminate against non-Jews. What is even more interesting about these research projects is that they highlight the hypocritical double standard that is so deeply ingrained in certain segments of society. It's socially and morally acceptable for Jews to conduct such research projects. Anthropologist Roselle Tekiner suggested that queries into Jewish genetics may be motivated by a desire to "justify" and bolster Zionist nationalism; the idea of a "Jewish race" with a special set of "Jewish genes" could serve to unite world Jewry.15 There is no highly visible, widespread public condemnation of these inquiries, which there would be if others were to conduct similar studies. Indeed, Jewish Zionists and their gentile supporters would probably be the most vocal of all protestors if, for example, it were found that German and British scientists were attempting to determine how Nordics differ from Jews and Blacks in genetic-biological sense, and this information would be used to implement racially discriminatory policies. Enter Dr. Jared Diamond, a prominent Jewish scientist and well-known opponent of alleged "racism." He hailed Genes, Peoples, and Languages, the book by Professor Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, a population geneticist, for allegedly dismantling the idea of race. In the New York Review of Books, Diamond saluted Cavalli-Sforza for "demolishing scientists' attempts to classify human populations into races in the same way that they classify birds and other species into races."16 According to this thinking, the classification of humans into races has proved to be a futile exercise; because the popular assumption of clearly defined races has allegedly been discredited, this will lead to the elimination of so-called "racism." Apparently, Diamond operates with a hypocritical double standard. In an article that appeared in the prestigious Natural History, Diamond discussed the genetic studies on how Jews differ from non-Jews. He made this astounding statement: "There are also practical reasons for interest in Jewish genes. The state of Israel has been going to much expense to support immigration and job retraining of Jews who were persecuted minorities in other countries. That immediately poses the problem of defining who is a Jew."17 The implication here is obvious. The Zionist elite is planning to refuse a person the right to settle in Israel if they do not have "Jewish genes." With this in mind, consider point 4 of the Nazi Party Program of May 25, 1920. It reads: "None but members of the nationality may be citizens of the state. None but those of German blood, irrespective of religion, may be members of the nationality."18 In contemporary terms, only those with "German genes" could be citizens of Nazi Germany. I can't emphasize enough that this is similar to the type of Israeli policy that Diamond describes. Diamond, a prominent "anti-racist," opposes classifying human populations into races-except of course populations of Jews and non-Jews. He apparently has given his silent assent to the proposed Israeli-Zionist policy of defining and classifying Jews and non-Jews on the basis of whether or not they possess "Jewish genes." In May 2000, another major study of Jewish genetics was published in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. According to the New York Times, the analysis provided genetic witness that the Jewish communities in Europe and the Middle East "retained their biological identity separate from their host populations, evidence of relatively little intermarriage or conversion into Judaism over the centuries."19 What is most interesting is that the results of this study are apparently going to be used to define into existence a "Jewish race." Dr. Lawrence H. Schiffman, chairman of the department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies at New York University, said that the findings would be used to answer the question of "who is a Jew."20 We live in a society in which any manifestation or hint of racism brings forth numerous and high profile condemnations-except of course when the racialist ideas and practices serve the interests of organized Jewry and its Zionist ideology. =0C In the winter-spring 2000 in London, British historian David Irving brought a high-profile libel suit against Jewish activist and historian Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Books. Irving was labeled a "racist" because he was accused of opposing the intermarriage between whites and non-whites. Even D.D. Guttenplan, an anti-Irving journalist who covered the trial, hinted at the racial double standard at work here. He wrote: "=8Ait was hard not to feel queasy listening to Rampton [the defense attorney for Lipstadt] quiz Irving about his attitude to 'intermarriage between the races'-on behalf of a defendant who has written, 'We [Lipstadt and her fellow Jews] know what we fight against: anti-Semitism and assimilation [of Jews and non-Jews], intermarriage [between Jews and non-Jews] and Israel-bashing."21 In her famous book, Denying the Holocaust, Lipstadt specifically condemned white gentile Holocaust revisionists who oppose the integration of Europeans with non-whites. She wrote: "These [revisionist] publications constitute vivid examples of the relationship between Holocaust denial, racist nationalism, and antisemitism." She then goes on to discuss a specific example of "this evil, white racist nationalism," the work of Richard Harwood: "Harwood echoed the familiar extremist charge that the Anglo-Saxon world faced the gravest danger in its history: the presence of 'alien races' in its midst. Linking Holocaust denial and the defense of the 'race,' he argued that unless something was done to halt the immigration and assimilation of non-Caucasians, Anglo-Saxons were certain to experience not only 'biological alteration' but the 'destruction' of their European culture and heritage."22 So let's get this straight. According to Lipstadt and a large segment of the Western academic establishment, it is "extremist and evil" for European gentiles to oppose the intermarriage and integration of whites with non-whites, but it is "right, good, and moral" for Jews to oppose the intermarriage and integration of Jews with non-Jews. Two experts on political extremism, John George and Laird Wilcox, pointed out that one characteristic of an extremist is that he promotes double standards and feels no guilt for so doing.23 Lipstadt apparently feels no guilt for openly promoting a racial double standard. German Nazism and political Zionism are akin in another way. Their respective leaders believed they had a "right" to forcibly deport ethnic minorities. ...Yet, has anyone in the mass media or halls of Congress ever publicly condemned David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, for claiming: "I am for compulsory transfer [of Arab people from areas under Israeli control]; I don't see anything immoral in it."24 The practical implications of the Zionist goal to transform Palestine into a Jewish state were made perfectly clear by one of the architects of Zionist settlement, Joseph Weitz, a former Deputy chairman of the Board of Directors of the Jewish National Fund (JNF), an organization which controls much land in Israel. "Among ourselves it must be clear that there is no place in the country for both peoples together [Jews and Arabs]=8Athere is n= o other way but to transfer the Arabs from here [Israel] to the neighboring countries, transfer all of them, not one village or tribe should remain, and the transfer must aim at Iraq, Syria and even Transjordan. For this purpose money will be found, much money; and only with this transfer could the country absorb millions of our brothers. There is no other alternative=8A"25 Some years ago Rabbi Avahram Toledano, head of the Jewish-supremacist "Kach" movement founded by the late Meir Kahane, conducted a lecture tour in the U.S. and Canada. Toledano advocates the forcible mass expulsion of Arabs from "greater Israel." He told a Heights Jewish Center (Cleveland, OH) meeting on November 14, 1991, that Arabs would be forced out of Israel. In response to the question, "What would the nations of the world say to Israel's expulsion of Arabs?, " Toledano said: "I don't know and I don't care. We are proud to be Jews and to have a Jewish state."26 In spite of his intolerant views, Toledano was given a respectful public forum in prominent Jewish synagogues throughout North America. In Cleveland, for example, his lecture was announced beforehand in the city's main Jewish community paper, Cleveland Jewish News.27 This is nothing new. While still alive, this same paper also routinely announced the lecture appearances of Kahane, who also promoted an anti-Arab program. Neither the ADL, which is so alert to every expression of real and imagined racism, nor the mainstream Cleveland media publicly protested the appearances of Toledano and Kahane. Nor did these pro-Zionist groups ever make a high profile condemnation of Rabbi Toledano's message of hate, which they would have done if, for example, a right-wing Christian minister who advocates a similar policy of forced deportation of Jews would have been scheduled to speak at mainstream Christian churches. In Toronto, Toledano told an enthusiastic crowd of more than 300 at the Shaarii Tefilah synagogue: "The Jewish state, the Jewish land, belongs only to the Jewish people. There is no room for a people that doesn't recognize Jewish sovereignty."28 Imagine the outcry if, for example, a white Christian minister would have told a mainstream Canadian church: "The Canadian state, Canadian land, belongs only to white Canadians. There is no room for a people that doesn't recognize white sovereignty." The very church that sponsored his speech would have been ostracized and castigated to this day. Furthermore, Toronto is the same city where German-born publisher Ernst Z=FCndel was put on trial for publishing a booklet that questions the Holocaust extermination story. Consider the utter hypocrisy here. It was legal in Canada for a militant Rabbi to openly call for the expulsion of Arabs from Israel, an action that would cause horrible hardship and suffering for millions of people. Yet, it was a crime for a Gentile to present valid evidence showing that the "Holocaust" is not all it's cracked up to be. =0C One of the reasons that J=F6rg Haider was so widely condemned is because some of his beliefs bear similarities to Nazi beliefs. But lo and behold, the racial double standard strikes again! This writer can find no mainstream American media source that criticizes Jewish Zionists for adopting a political ideology that bears similarities to Nazi ideology. The pro-Israeli ADL ardently promotes the following beliefs: 1) "Modern Israel is an open, democratic, multi-racial society."29 2) "In keeping with Israel's democratic principles, the Arab citizens of Israel are afforded all the rights and privileges of Israeli citizenship."30 3) " Today, Israel's Arab citizens are accorded full civil and political rights, entitled to complete participation in Israeli society."31 As we shall soon see, this is false propaganda, designed to mask the profound anti-Arab discrimination that exists in the Zionist state. Israel is not a democracy in the ADL's sense of the term. Where different ethnic groups coexist in the same area or nation, ADL is a strong advocate of an integrated society in which all ethnic groups function as social and political equals. ADL promotes racial integration, racial equality and multiculturalism-everywhere outside Israel of course. Dr. Oren Yiftachel, an Israeli professor at Ben-Gurion University, pointed out that Israel is not a democracy in the sense in which it is currently understood in the West. Rather, it is an "ethnocracy"-a land controlled and allocated by ethnicity. In his own words: "The Israeli regime is ruled by and and for one ethnic group in a multi-ethnic reality." Factors that make Israel an "ethnocracy" include the facts that 1) immigration to the Jewish state is restricted to Jews only. Some 2.5 million displaced Palestinians who would like to return are not allowed to migrate to Israel; 2) military service is according to ethnicity; 3) economic control is based on race, religion, and ethnicity; 4) The country's land regime entails transfer of land ownership in one direction, from Arab to Jewish control, but never back again.32 Dr. Uri Davis is a Jewish scholar and activist who has written extensively on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He has developed the foregoing ideas in great detail. The title of one of his thorough studies says it all; Israel: An Apartheid State. All factions of the Zionist movement-socialist Zionism, religious Zionism and right-wing Zionism-share a common goal; a commitment to the establishment and continued existence in Palestine of a state for the benefit of the world's Jewish communities. Ultimately, Israel's founders transformed their beliefs in apartheidism into concrete reality. Israel was established as a state that would benefit Jews only, not as a state that would benefit all its citizens, Arab and Jew alike.33 The UN Partition Plan For Palestine of 1947 stated that each proposed state, Arab and Jewish, would be required to draft a democratic constitution which would guarantee equal human rights for all, Jew and non-Jew. Because Israel never fulfilled the requirement for a democratic constitution, its government was able to act without constitutional legal restriction; they enacted apartheid legislation that favors Jews and discriminates against Arabs on a grand scale. Indeed, apartheid in Israel-applied under the categories of "Jew" vs. "non-Jew"-is an overarching legal reality that determines the quality of everyday existence for everyone who resides in the Zionist state.34 In Israel, racial discrimination begins at birth. The law is set up in such a manner that a Jewish infant is registered as having Israeli citizenship at birth, whereas an Arab newborn is stateless at birth, his citizenship status being indefinite.35 In order to comprehend the racist import of Israeli apartheid laws, one must first realize that as a result of the 1948 armed conflict in Palestine, the majority of the Arab population that resided within the areas coming under Israeli rule and occupation either fled during the hostilities, or were forcibly expelled by the Israeli army. Israel has never allowed these people to return to their homeland.36 The Law of Return is one of the fundamental laws of Israel. It legalizes an alleged right that is inherent by virtue of being a Jew. Davis notes one of its consequences: "=8Aunder Israeli law, any Jew throughout the world has the right of immediate immigration into, settlement in and citizenship of the state of Israel after an alleged forced absence of 2,000 years. On the other hand, the displaced Palestinian Arab refugees of 1948 and their descendants-some two million people-are denied the same right in violation of international law and United Nations resolutions, although their forced absence is less than forty years."37 Israeli law divides non-Jewish potential applicants for residency and citizenship into two broad categories: applicants who, in view of the law, exist and are "present," versus applicants who, in view of the law, DO NOT EXIST, that is, are "absentees." As a consequence of this legal artifice, all of the Palestinian Arabs (and their descendants) who fled or were forcibly expelled in 1948 are simply denied Israeli citizenship. So declares Israeli law: since they are "absent and do not exist," there is no need to grant them citizenship. This law does not apply to numerous Palestinian Jewish families who also fled during the hostilities. Their citizenship is guaranteed through the Law of Return.38 The Absentee Property Law (1950) was passed before the Law of Return (1950). In essence, this enabled Zionist legislators (1) to define the displaced Palestinian Arab out of legal existence as an "absentee," and (2) to guarantee every Jew throughout the world access to the land and property which this hapless Arab refugee left behind. Once again, the effect of this law does not apply to the Palestinian Jews who fled during the 1948 war, as their property rights are guaranteed through an alleged Biblical title.39 The 1947 Partition plan for Palestine of the UN General Assembly stipulated that all the 1948 Palestinian Arab refugees and their descendants are constitutionally entitled without qualification to Israeli citizenship. In violation of this agreement, the net effect of the Law of Return and the Absentee Property Law is to literally denationalize millions of Palestinian Arabs who are entitled to Israeli citizenship. Davis cogently observes: "The Absentee Property Law (1950), having defined the mass of Palestinian Arab refugees from the territories that came under Israeli rule and occupation in 1948-1949 out of existence as "absentees," not only denies them the right of citizenship in the Jewish state as stipulated by the 1947 UN Resolution, but at the same time denies them the right to their vast properties inside Israel. It is important to note that the status of "absentee" is inherited. Children of "absentees" whether born inside or outside the state of Israel, are similarly classified as "absentees."40 For the Palestinian Arabs who, after the armed conflict of 1948, remained within the borders of Israel, second-class citizenship is their lot. The mechanics of land ownership in Israel is a complicated matter that is beyond the scope of this article. What concerns us here are the apartheid consequences of Zionist land policies. Non-Jews, first and foremost Palestinian Arabs, were (until the March 2000 Supreme Court decision) excluded by law from leasing or cultivating land in 92.6% of the territory of Israel.29 In some localities, Arabs were confined to ghettoes, unable to live in communities built solely for Jews.42 Regarding the allotment of agricultural land in Israel, Knesset Member Shulamit Almi summed up the situation: "=8Aany person who is non-Jewish, eve= n if he (or she) is the spouse of a Jew, cannot be a farmer here in this country, even if he (or she) is a citizen."43 This is the reality that remains hidden behind the ideological fa=E7ade of "Zionist socialism," and i= t still holds true, despite the aforementioned Israeli Supreme Court ruling of March 8, 2000. The Histadrut, in addition to being a federation of Zionist trade union organizations, is the second largest employer in Israel (second to state employment), controlling a good portion of Israel's economy: holding corporations, companies, banks, industrial concerns, agro-industries, etc. The kibbutzim and moshavim, which are mainly agricultural settlements, are also under its auspices.44 Prior to 1960, membership in the Histadrut was restricted to Jews only. In 1960 legal provisions were made permitting membership in the Histadrut for Palestinian Arab workers who hold Israeli citizenship. Subsequently, at the Tenth Histadrut Convention in 1966, the name of the Histadrut Federation was changed from "The General Federation of Hebrew Workers in the Land of Israel" to the "The General Federation of Workers in the Land of Israel." Presumably in the response to external pressure in the form of "what will the world say?", other companies within the hierarchy of the Histadrut also made changes that made them appear more racially inclusionary and multicultural.45 As Davis shows however, these were merely cosmetic changes, designed to make the public falsely believe the Histadrut is a democratic organization where Arabs and Jews function as equals. The Zionists had to maintain effectively the apartheid structure presented abroad as an advanced form of egalitarian democracy.46 Davis explains that the principle of legal exclusion of non-Jews is clearly a constitutional unifying norm that pervades the hierarchy of Histadrut institutions, corporations and enterprises. Non-Jewish membership in the moshavim and kibbutzim (which are mainly agricultural settlements), for example, is legally barred by two insurmountable obstacles. First, moshavim and kibbutzim land is legally defined as land that is under the sole ownership of the "Jewish people." Second, moshavim and kibbutzim membership require endorsement of NIR (Cooperative Company for the Settlement of Hebrew Workers Ltd.). All kibbutzim and moshavim agricultural settlements in Israel are incorporated as daughter companies of NIR. NIR is constitutionally restricted to the promotion of the settlement of Hebrew workers only.47 Jewish scholar Ian Lustick has pointed out that the Israeli military is, by and large, a segregated institution. Most Muslim Arabs, who constitute the overwhelming majority of Israeli Arab citizens, do not serve in the armed forces-they are not conscripted, nor are they permitted to volunteer for service. This has important social consequences. In Israel, participation in the armed services is a prerequisite to social advancement and mobility. Cut off from the military, they are cut off from access to one of the main avenues of social advancement.48 The Labor party of Israel espouses an egalitarian socialist ideology. Yet, never told to Western readers is its apartheid practice of separating Israeli Jews and Arabs into different "sectors." Jews and non-Jews are thus confined on an ethnic basis. As Jewish scholars Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky so rightly noted, such a proposal for operation of political parties in the U.S. would be branded as "anti-Semitic."49 All of the Israeli apartheid laws and practices that discriminate against Arabs violate the letter and spirit of the Balfour Declaration and UN Partition Plan of 1947. Both documents made it perfectly clear that no law should be passed or practice be established which would violate the civil, political, economic and religious rights of non-Jewish communities of Palestine. Furthermore, all of the aforementioned discriminatory practices are part and parcel of official Zionist policy, thus falsifying ADL claims which attempt to downplay Israeli racism and apartheidism. On their Website we read this falsehood: "Israeli Arabs do face discrimination, not as a result of official policy but in practice."50 In February 2000, President George W. Bush spoke at Bob Jones University, a South Carolina institution that opposed interracial dating and marriage. Widely criticized by those who consider such a practice as an example of racial intolerance, Mr. Bush eventually expressed regret for not publicly criticizing the college's policy. Christians and Muslims cannot marry Jews in Israel, and if they are married elsewhere, the marriage is not recognized by the rabbinical court in Israel.51 Opposition to ethnic intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews is common in pro-Zionist Jewish communities throughout the U.S. In a major study of Judaism, California psychology professor Kevin MacDonald concluded: "The organized Jewish community is the only ethnic or religious community in the United States that continues to attempt to limit outmarriage or discourage conversions and intermarriage [between Jews and non-Jews]."52 The Conservative movement of Judaism, the largest branch of the faith, is on record as being officially opposed to intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews.53 This Jewish-Zionist opposition to intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews is, in many cases, racially motivated. According to the chief rabbi of =46rance (in 1987), Rene Samuel Sirat, "=8Athe racial disappearance of Frenc= h Jews is the greatest threat to the community=8A" Rabbit Sirat also claimed that "there are two ways to exterminate the Jews: the radical method, concentration camps and terrorist attacks, or the slow method through mixed marriages=8A" In keeping with his desire to preserve the racial makeup of =46rench Jews, Rabbit Sirat refuses the religious conversion of non-Jewish spouses.54 But here is where our society's hypocritical double standard comes into play. President Bush was widely criticized for speaking at a white Christian college which opposes interracial dating and marriage, but what mainstream media source or politician would dare castigate any public figure for speaking in Israel (where intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews is not recognized) or at a Conservative Jewish synagogue where it is official policy to oppose intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews? The racial double standard even plagues one of the holiest shrines of contemporary American society, the U.S. Memorial Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. Director of the Research Institute of the Museum, Michael Berenbaum, affirmed that one of the museum's purposes is to highlight the evolution of absolute Nazi evil, "from the infamous Nuremberg laws to the introduction of segregation, economic confiscation and apartheid=8A"-Stop here!55 Previously, we saw that such practices as segregation of Jews and Arabs, economic confiscation of Arab property and apartheid practices are an integral part of Israel's past and present. Nevertheless, the Holocaust Museum hails Israel as a "great triumph." In this vein, Berenbaum writes: "The birth of the state of Israel was the most significant positive consequence of the Holocaust."56 III We return to the original question of this article. Why the racial double standard in regard to Zionism and Israel? Prominent Jewish writer I.F. Stone acknowledged the hypocritical double standard which plagues contemporary Jewish values: "For Israel is creating a kind of moral schizophrenia in world Jewry. In the outside world, the welfare of Jewry depends on the maintenance of secular, non-racial, pluralistic societies. In Israel, Jewry finds itself defending a society in which mixed marriages cannot be legalized, in which non-Jews have a lesser status than Jews, and in which the ideal is racist and exclusionist. Jews might fight elsewhere for their very security and existence against principles and practices they find themselves defending in Israel."57 In his classic work on the sociology of knowledge, Ideology and Utopia, Karl Mannheim noted that in any society a large part of the prevailing ideologies, world-view, and "moral" judgments reflect the sociopolitical interests of that society's power elites and controlling elements.58 One of the most powerful and influential of these elements in American society is the Jewish political and cultural establishment.59 Definite forms of social consciousness derive from the fact that the Jewish-Zionist elite possesses the power and authority to impose its values-inclusive of the racial double standard in regard to Zionism-upon the American people. Most people never think to question these preformed patterns of thought, and thus, remain locked in a dogmatic slumber. But why has the Jewish-Zionist power elite been so successful in imposing the racial double standard on American society? Why don't Americans realize and reject this hypocrisy? The reasons are many and complicated, too numerous and complex to discuss in this brief essay. Nevertheless, Israel: An Apartheid State does provide us with one of the reasons. Israeli civil rights activist Davis has pointed out: "=8Athe Jewish state avoided [directly copying the former South Africa's apartheid structure] and took a different route so as not to lose international support and sympathy and not to flaunt the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. The ideological predisposition of the Zionist leadership was to pursue rights for Jews only=8Abut it needed to appear democratic while making sure discrimination was not immediately visible on the surface."60 Indeed, since Israel's welfare is dependent upon how it is viewed in the West, Davis explains it was never possible for Zionist legislators to pass openly explicit apartheid legislation. It was necessary to present Israel to the world as an advanced form of democracy and social progress. Thus, duplicitous legal structures were devised which effectively mask the racial discrimination and apartheid.61 By implication then, U.S. society is generally silent about Israeli racism and apartheidism because the majority of people aren't aware it exists. They have been fooled into believing that racial equality exists in the Jewish state. This explanation-which holds true when applied to certain segments of society-is only part of the answer to our question. It breaks down when applied to "people in the know," such as political figures and news media executives. A study of Israeli and South African apartheid published in the 1980s made the observation that "The parallels between South Africa's system of legalized racism and that of Israel are well-known in academic circles but rarely discussed in the mainstream media, peace community or halls of Congress."62 Former Congressman George W. Crockett, Jr. noted back in 1985 that the U.S. Congress turns a blind eye to apartheid in Israeli-occupied territories. He observed that "Here in Congress we are fighting against South Africa's repressive measures, and yet closing our eyes to the institutional repression and the brutality that is daily being conducted against the Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied Arab territories."63 Indeed, the former editor-in-chief of the Rand Daily Mail (the Johannesburg newspaper that fought against South African apartheid), Raymond Louw, claimed that the situation in the Israeli occupied territories is worse than the way things were under the South African apartheid regime. He was quoted as saying: "It's depressing. This is a city [Avraham Avinu area] under military occupation without any rights for the occupied. There was never a situation like this with apartheid [in South Africa]. The control in the black areas was not so forceful. I don't think you can compare the two situations. Under apartheid, there was a recognition that the blacks would continue to live in these areas. Here the impression is that the objective is to push the Palestinians out."64 Clearly, the racial double standard in regard to Israel and Zionism is evident most everywhere in American society, even among non-Jews who would be in a position to know about Israeli racism. Take former President Clinton for example. He warned Americans of "the dangers of racial separation and pleaded with them not to give up on the idea of integration." He has stressed that we must all "reject [racial] separation and isolation," and that racial equality was a driving obsession of his life.65 Mr. Clinton's driving obsession for racial equality ends where Israel begins, for he has been the most pro-Zionist president in U.S. history, ardently supporting the apartheid Israel at just about every turn. No one can say he doesn't know about racial inequality in Israel. We live in a society in which racial integration, multiculturalism, and racial equality are looked upon as the "supreme good." One would think that Uri Davis's vision of the future for the occupied Palestine/Israel would be what Western governments and the mass media would want for the resolution of Arab-Israeli conflict. It is desirable, he writes, "that all 1948 Palestinian Arab displaced persons (refugees) return to localities as close as possible to their original places of residence, thereby transforming almost every Jewish settlement, urban or rural, from an exclusively, or next to exclusively, Jewish locality, into a mixed Jewish/Arab/Arab-Jewish locality; and thereby transforming the exclusively Jewish state of Israel into a binational Arab-Jewish/Jewish-Arab state as originally envisaged by the United Nations in 1947 in the vote to adopt the Plan for Partition and Economic Union."66 This type of plan is precisely what Western governments, Zionist groups and the mass media work against. Jewish-Zionist organizations generally promote racial integration and racial equality in all societies outside Israel, where Jews are a minority, but oppose it in Israel, where they are a majority. This strongly suggests they push for racial equality and integration only when there are benefits to be gained for themselves.67 It is highly likely that world Zionism in collusion with Western governments will (at least for the foreseeable future) be able to prevent Davis's vision from coming into being. A more likely outcome is the "two-state" solution, a separate Jewish and Palestinian state. But one should not indulge in self-deception, for even this solution is plagued with the racial double standard. As leading Palestinian Christian, Rev. Dr. Raim Ateek, has pointed out, the powers that be would be forcing Jews and Arabs to live in pockets based on ethnic identity, similar to the condemned South African apartheid policy of separating blacks and whites into various homelands. In addition, the "independent" Palestinian state would probably end up under the domination of Israel.68 In other areas of the world the former Clinton administration fought against the "separate-ethnic-states" solution because it bespeaks of racial segregation. In regard to the Bosnian conflict, it was reported that "heading off demands of ultra-nationalist politicians for ethnicity-based independent states is a key goal of U.S. brokered Dayton peace accords that ended the war."69 Yet, ethnicity-based independent states in the Middle East are exactly what Forward, one of the premier Jewish newspapers in the U.S., has demanded. They opined: "Two nations, Israel and Palestine must step apart. The notion that one could claim the entire land and the other might acquiesce is now utterly bankrupt. The two peoples must permit each other to live separate national lives, separated by clearly marked boundaries."70 Western governments, the Western media and the world community in general condemned the South African apartheid policy of separating blacks and whites into separate homelands. The world community demanded that blacks and whites live in a racially integrated state with black majority rule. Yet, Western governments and the Western media in general seem to be more than willing to separate Jews and Palestinians into separate, apartheid states. If the world community accepts the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, they are granting to Jewish-Zionists the right to racially segregate themselves from others, something that has been denied to other non-Jewish ethnic groups. The racial double standard will be alive and well. NOTES 1. The Plain Dealer, 19 January 1989, p.3-E. 2. The Plain Dealer, 23 October 1999, p.6-A. 3. The Wall Street Journal, 7 February 2001, p.A26. 4. See Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July/Aug. 1999, pp.14, 20. 5. The New York Times, 9 March 2000, p. 3-A; The Plain Dealer, 9 March 2000, p.4-A. 6. The New York Times, 17 April 2000, p.24-A. 7. For the exchange of letters between Abraham Foxman and Paul Grubach, see the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2000, pp.73-74. 8. Roselle Tekiner, Samir Abed-Rabbo, Norton Mezvinsky, eds., Anti-Zionism: Analytic Reflections (Amana Books, 1988); Uri Davis, Israel: An Apartheid State(Zed Books, LTD, 1987); The International Organization for the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, Zionism and Racism (North American, 1979); Francis R. Nicosia, The Third Reich and the Palestine Question(University of Texas Press, 1985); Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators (Lawrence Hill, 1983); Regina Sharif, Non-Jewish Zionism: Its Roots in Western History (Zed Press, 1983). 9. Quoted in Dr. Robert John, Behind the Balfour Declaration: The Hidden Origin of Today's Mideast Crisis (Institute for Historical Review, 1988), p.35. 10. Arthur Hertzberg, The Zionist Idea(Greenwood Press, 1959), pp.219-220. 11. Francis R. Nicosia,The Third Reich and the Palestine Question, pp.16-21= =2E 12. Quoted in Uri Davis, Israel: An Apartheid State, pp.1-2. 13. New York Herald Tribune, 13 June 1938, p.12. 14. Nature, 21 March 1985, p.208; See the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 9 May 2000, as reported on in Nicholas Wade, "Y Chromosome Bears Witness to Story of the Jewish Diaspora," New York Times, 9 May 2000. 15. Tekiner, Abed-Rabbo, Mezvinsky, pp.63-89. 16. See New York Review of Books, 13 April 2000, p.61. 17. Natural History, November 1993, p.12. 18. See Robert Vexler's Germany: A Chronology and Fact Book: 1415-1972, p.129. 19. Nicholas Wade, "Y Chromosome Bears Witness to Story of the Jewish Diaspora, " New York Times, 9 May 2000. 20. Ibid. 21. D.D. Guttenplan, The Holocaust on Trial(W.W. Norton & Company, 2001), p.209. 22. Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (The Free Press, 1993), p.106. 23. See Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman, Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It? (University of California Press, 2000), p.88. 24. Quoted in Simha Flapan, The Birth of Israel: Myths and Realities (Pantheon Books, 1987), p.103. 25. Quoted in Uri Davis, Israel: An Apartheid State, p.5. 26. Cleveland Jewish News, 22 November 1991. 27. Cleveland Jewish News, 8 November 1991, p.12. 28. Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 1991, p.58. 29. "Israeli Society," online: www.adl.org/Israel/Record/society.html 30. "Minorities in Israel," online: www.adl.org/Israel/Record/minorities.html 31. Ibid. 32. The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July/August 1999, p.120. 33. Uri Davis, Israel: An Apartheid State, p. 9. 34. Ibid., p.22. 35. Ibid., p.27-30. 36. Ibid., p.17; Simha Flapan, The Birth of Israel: Myths and Realities, pp.81-118. 37. Uri Davis, Israel: An Apartheid State, p. 34. 38. Ibid., pp.34-36. 39. Ibid., pp.34, 36. 40. Ibid., pp.25, 35. 41. Ibid., pp.39-40. 42. Ibid., p.17. 43. Ibid., p.49. 44. Ibid., p.50. 45. Ibid., pp.50-51. 46. Ibid., p.53. 47. Ibid., p.55. 48. Ian Lustick, Arabs in the Jewish State; Israel's Control of a National Minority, pp.93-94. 49. Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel (Pluto Press, 1999), pp.151-152. 50. "Minorities in Israel," online: www.adl.org/Israel/Record/minorities.html 51. Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, June 1993, p.75; Roselle Tekiner, Samir Abed-Raboo, Norton Mezvinsky, eds., Anti-Zionism; Analytical Reflections, pp.86-87, note 21. 52. Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (Praeger, 1988), p.266. 53. Religious News Service Press Release, 3 December 1991, printed in Christian News, 16 December 1991, p.15. 54. The Plain Dealer, 26 October 1987, p.9-A. 55. Michael Berenbaum, "The Growing Assault on the Truth of Absolute Evil, Los Angeles Times, 28 January 2000. 56. Michael Berenbaum, The History of the Holocaust as told in the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: The World Must Know (Little, Brown and Company, 1993), p.214. 57. Quoted in Moshe Menuhin, The Decadence of Judaism in our Time (Beruit: Institute for Palestine Studies, 1969), p.210. 58. Ideology and Utopia (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1936), p.10, passim. 59. The following is a small sample of the many works that document the power and influence of the Jewish political and cultural establishment. J.J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1996); Andrew Hurley, One Nation under Israel; Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements (Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 1998); Neal Gabler, An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood(New York: Crown Publishers, 1988); Paul Findley, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby(Westport, Conn.: Lawrence Hill & Co., 1985). 60. Quoted in Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (July/Aug. 1999), p.14. 61. Uri Davis, Israel: An Apartheid State, pp.4, 25, 44,49,53, 55, 58, 60. 62. Louise Cainkar, ed., Separate and Unequal: The Dynamics of South African and Israeli Rule(Chicago: Palestine Human Rights Campaign, 1985), see Preface. 63. Ibid., p.49. 64. Quoted in Ha'aretz (Israel), 24 May 2001. 65. The Plain Dealer, 26 September 1997, pp.1-A, 10-A. 66. Uri Davis, Israel: An Apartheid State, pp.78-79. 67. For a discussion of this phenomenon, see the works of California psychologist Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents: An Evolutionary Analysis of Anti-Semitism (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 1998). 68. Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (Jan./Feb. 2000), p.52. 69. The Plain Dealer, September 1, 1998. 70. Forward, 6 October 2000, p.8. =A9 Copyright 2001, Paul Grubach From irimland@zundelsite.org Sun, 9 Sep 2001 19:06:38 -0700 Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 19:06:38 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/9/2001 - "Revisionist Week in Review" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 9, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: All week long, there was news piled on news describing how shell-shocked Jews and Zionists faced the wrath of not only the enraged Arab world but many other countries during and after the Durban condemnations. The incidents of hostility were too numerous to count, activists say. Fliers were even found with a photo of Hitler and the following question: "What if Hitler had won? There would be no Israel, and no Palestinian bloodshed." Jews complained of being constantly under threat and attack, verbally if not physically. In a Palestinian-led march with thousands of participants, a placard was held aloft that read "Hitler Should Have Finished the Job!" Just how bad for the Israelis and Diaspora Jews the atmosphere was at this conference can be deduced from the fact that Elie Wiesel, invited to speak, thought better of it and declined. "I do not believe I can dialogue with hatred," squirmed Wiesel. "Hatred stops dialogue, and there was so much hatred there that I got frightened." Wiesel the Hypocrite! Isn't he the one who said in his book, Legends of our Time, Page 142: "Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate - healthy, virile hate, for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German."? ===== This headline will melt on your tongue! "U.N. Chief Tells Israel To Stop Using Holocaust To Justify Its Policies" - written by Mark Klusener for CNSNews.com August 31, 2001. I will simply give you the first paragraph of this article: "U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan called on Israel Friday to stop using the Holocaust as a reason to continue what he said were policies of occupation, displacement, and extra-judicial killings of Palestinians." Haven't we handful of Revisionists said that all along - that political crimes were being committed with the sword and under the shield of what is wrongly called the "Holocaust"? ===== On Sept 2 , thousands of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) adopted a resolution Sunday accusing Israel of genocide and crimes against humanity. Israeli President Moshe Katsav earlier described some of the declarations being made in Durban as "clearly racist and anti-Semitic". The NGOs' text declared Israel "a racist, apartheid state in which Israel's brand of apartheid as a crime against humanity has been characterised by separation and segregation, dispossession, restricted land access ...". "This is the worst anti-Jewish document since the end of Nazi Germany," sniffed Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean at the Simon Wiesenthal Center. "NGOs are the oxygen of civil society; that oxygen has been poisoned, polluted." It must be particularly galling to Israel and its Fifth Column worldwide, because they were the very ones instrumental in setting up these Useful Idiot Fronts to screech "Nazi!" "Racist!" etc. at anyone whom the Israeli Firsters did not like! ===== After an Iranian (Jewish?) woman yelled at the conference: "Six million dead and you're holding the world hostage!" a German journalist, Thomas Knemeyer, reporting for Die Welt, found words that summarized precisely: "That's when the bullshit ends, the camouflage is lifted," he wrote. "That's when you see it's not about Israel, but about the Jews." ===== As all the world now knows, after a hasty and secret pow wow, The US and Israeli delegates dramatically stalked out of the South African UN conference, hoping that this gesture of disapproval would soften the fierce accusations against Israel for their treatment of the Palestinians. It was a disgraceful show of subservience to the Israeli Lobby by the once proudly independent USA. ===== To its eternal credit, the American Lutheran church has been the first big denomination that gathered its courage and came out in a powerful statement on behalf of the Palestinians, chastizing the Israelis for their brutality. As reported on August 31, 2001, the good Lutherans soon discovered the "Never forgive, never forget" code the Israelis practice, while Christians dutifully turn the other cheek. "Lutheran church officials around the world have decried the invasion by Israeli army troops into a Lutheran church boarding school in the Palestinian-controlled village of Beit Jallah earlier this week," reported several papers. The Rev. Jadallah Shehade, pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Reformation and principal of the church's boarding school, has claimed that the children were being used as "human shields" by the Israelis, who had positioned themselves on the rooftop of the church compound. ===== The Holocaust Lobby has suffered another defeat, this time caused by the passage of time. Mr. Gecas, an alleged "Nazi war criminal" who was one of the latest victims of this never-ending "Nazi hunt" through the geriatrics wards of the world, has been found to be too ill to stand trial in Lithuania. After resisting Jewish pressure for years, the Lithuanian authorities finally gave in and requested the extradition from Scotland of Mr Gecas earlier this year. But police have been unable to serve the warrant because Mr Gecas, who has lived in Edinburgh since 1947, suffered two strokes in May and has been in the hospital since. ===== Undaunted by negative publicity worldwide, a group of Holocaust survivors are suing the French railway in the United States, after previous attempts were aborted in France. Nicole Silberkleit, a 74-year-old widow who survived the Holocaust and moved to New York from France in the 1950s, said she and other survivors launched the action because the French had never apologised for their actions. "One of the things I want to do with this is that the Germans apologized. They paid reparations," she told the New York Daily News. "The French act like they never did anything wrong." ===== More newspeak to soften the struggle in Israel's favor. Robert Fisk, that indefatigable Middle East Correspondent writing for the Independent, told his readers on September 3, 2001 that BBC brass have ordered their reporters to speak of "a Jewish neighborhood" instead of "Jewish settlers". Two steps forward, one step back? So the BBC's airing of that documentary on Sharon the War Criminal remains a lone, isolated act of courage? ===== After Pope Pius XII has been thoroughly posthumously trounced for years for not having done more for the Jews when they were being rounded up under Hitler, a rabbi has come to his defense. Rabbi Dr. David Dalin has told the annual meeting of an international Catholic organization that "...[Pope] Pius XII saved more Jewish lives than any other person, including Raoul Wallenberg and Oskar Schindler." Expect a movie next! ===== Censorship encroachment is coming ever closer to America - exactly as we predicted in the 1996 cyberwar around the Zundelsite. AOL Time Warner, not exactly a user-friendly ISP - as many revisionists found out to their dismay - is facing a lawsuit that accuses AOL of allowing "hate speech" to be published in its Muslim chat rooms. Remember how often AOL has kicked revisionists out of its chat-rooms? ===== The same French judge who last year made headlines by ruling that Yahoo must block access to US-based auctions of Nazi memorabilia, launched another set of hearings into whether Internet service providers should censor portals accessible on their networks to stop French citizens viewing links to neo-Nazi Web sites. ===== In the United States, meanwhile, a judge is to hear Yahoo's challenge to Gomez's ruling of last year. Some observers feel that this move effectively sets the stage for a legal showdown over whether foreign courts can be used to intimidate U.S. publishers and internet providers and ignore U.S. law, which guarantees and protects freedom of speech. ===== On September 5 in a rather dramatic raid, some 50-75 FBI agents, fortified with agents from the State Department, U.S. Customs and U.S. Secret Service agents stormed a Muslim web hosting business with a clientele of more than 500 companies, including several major Muslim American organizations such as the Council on American Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, the Islamic Association for Palestine and the Holy Land Foundation. Government agents seized massive amounts of company records. The FBI declined to specify the target of the search warrant, which is under seal in a federal court. The Arab world's leading independent news channel called the raid an "anti-Muslim witchhunt." ===== In a long-overdue switch, Russian and German culture ministers will shortly meet in Berlin to discuss the restitution of German art objects looted by the Soviet Army at the end of World War II. For the last 55 years, the world only heard about "Nazi art looted"! One wonders when the US authorities will return the aircraft hangers' full of German art confiscated after the war - and if the seven watercolors painted by Adolf Hitler, hanging in the War Room of the Pentagon, will also be returned, and to whom. ===== Not unexpectedly, a Belgian judge has suspended an investigation into alleged war crimes by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for the Sabra and Shatila massacre nearly 20 years ago. The judge is not sure "...whether the matter fell within his jurisdiction." He called a temporary halt to the proceedings after Belgian lawyer Michele Hirsch, hired by Mr Sharon's office, argued the investigations "violate the judicial sovereignty of the State of Israel". How about Israeli, Canadian, British, American, Australian, Austrian, French war crimes investigations into alleged Axis war crimes? Do they not violate the judicial sovereignty of the German state? Once again a glaring double standard! ===== A politically correct row has erupted after the University of Bonn advertised leading Nazi Joseph Goebbels as a "famous old boy". Goebbels' name was used in an advertising drive for new students. Jewish organizations and student were outraged and complained that the university was exploiting the issue by playing down his role "in the genocide of six million Jews." That Karl Marx and Konrad Adenauer were also featured doesn't bother them a bit. ===== From irimland@zundelsite.org Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:43:33 -0700 Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 07:43:33 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/10/2001 - "What if?" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 10, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Ian Macdonald, a Canadian columnist par excellence and former Canadian diplomat, has brilliantly summarized another "...what if..." This brief but poignant Letter to the Editor of the Canadian National Post is for non-ostriches only - ostriches are welcome to take themselves to the sands of the Sinai Desert: [START] When Lord Janner, with your cooperation, exposed the issue raised at the Durban Conference of "What if Hitler had won?" ( NP, Sept. 4, p.1.) no doubt he hoped to evoke shivers of horror among his audience. Inadvertently, however, he provided useful food for thought. If Germany had won, arguably the world would now be a much better and safer place. And the "what if" is not as far fetched as Allied and Zionist propagandists would have us believe. Germany certainly would have won if Britain and France and eventually America had acted in their own obvious best interests and remained neutral or even entered the war on Germany's side, a not-so-implausible "what if" given that the immensely popular pro-German Prince of Wales would have been King had it not been for the fateful intervention of Wallis Warfield Simpson (described as a "god-send" by the pro-war lobby) . As King, Edward VIII could have kept war-weary Britain from declaring war on Germany and, following German success on the Eastern Front against the hated Stalin dictatorship, could have brought Britain into a NATO-style alliance of anti-communist European nations (as took place in any case a few years later). In such circumstances, a grateful, friendly Germany could have guaranteed the integrity and survival of the British Empire, which Hitler much admired. What if then our German ally had liberated the Soviet Union and reconstituted its components as semi-autonomous states under German hegemony. Certainly, the Stalinist threat to freedom would then have been eliminated for the foreseeable future. Had events followed such a favourable course - almost a certainty had the ambitious American divorcee not come on the scene - the outlook for Western Civilization would now be decidedly less ominous than is now the case. Control of our destiny would have remained securely in our own hands. Had Britain not been hoodwinked into war by Germany's vengeful enemies, there would have been no World War, tens of millions of lives would have been spared, priceless European architecture would not have been destroyed, Europe would have been united under German leadership, international communism would have become a footnote in history, trillions of dollars and man-hours could have been used for the betterment of mankind, the environment would have been protected, the communist occupation of eastern Europe and the Cold War would have been forestalled (along with the Korean and Vietnamese wars and Communist-sponsored revolutions elsewhere), Six Million or more Jews would have been happily and harmlessly ensconced in a tropical paradise, there would have been peace and justice in the Middle East, China would have evolved along Taiwanese lines under capitalism, sharing with Japan and the Colonial powers influence over S.E. Asia; there would be no UN meddling, no Third World turmoil, no "refugee" migrations, no racism campaigns, no deprivation of freedom in the name of "human rights", no "lost" generations and above all, there would have been no subversion and corruption of Western society and the democratic political process by a cunning and treacherous alien minority. It does not speak well for Establishment historians and journalists that they refuse to address squarely what is probably the most crucial and perplexing issue of our time, namely, the real purpose of WWII and why politicians (notably Churchill and Roosevelt) knowingly acted and continue to act against their countries' best interests. Significantly, honest, unbiased historians who have studied and attempted to discuss these issues have been viciously denounced as "Anti-Semites", or worse and their findings viciously suppressed. Definitely food for thought. [END] Thought for the Day: "Regardless of one's opinion on who started the war between Germany and Russia, no on ever thanked Germany for trying." (A Giwer Gem) From irimland@zundelsite.org Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:59:00 -0700 Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:59:00 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: *** Urgent Message from the Zundelsite *** ===== This is urgent! Please act - and pass this on to your lists! This is urgent! Please act - and pass this on to your lists! This is urgent! Please act - and pass this on to your lists! ===== Jack Kelley of USA Today wrote a cover story called "Vigilantes take up arms, vow to expel 'Muslim filth'" In it, he exposes Israeli extremists and terrorists and their effect on the turbulent situation. Mr. Kelley came under attack, receiving over 300 emails from "settler friends" worldwide. He has received only 5 positive emails. A pro-Palestinian organization received a phone call from a distraught Mr. Kelley telling of the overwhelming Jewish criticism. You might want to know that in 1948 (!), officials of the American Communist Party bragged that they could send ***50,000 letters in three days to any source on any issue***, relying on what they called the "Synagogue Circuit"! This same Jewish letter writing system is exactly the same and is in place today! We Gentiles and the Arabs have nothing remotely like it - we need to get our act together and organize a powerful letter writing tree as well!!! For now, I URGE you not to let this one courageous journalist down. The full text of the article he wrote can be found at: http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20010904/3599125s.htm [also in end of this message] I don't want to run it in full for copyright reasons. I I am only giving you a flavor of this article by this bone-chilling paragraph: As they [the Jewish settlers] crouched in a ditch beside the road, Shapiro, the leader of the group, gave the settlers orders: Surround any taxi, ''open fire'' and kill as many of the ''blood-sucking Arab'' passengers as possible. ACTION REQUESTED: Email USA Today editor@usatoday.com as well as Jack Kelley, jkelley@usatoday.com thanking them for their insight into the matter. Refrain from any abuse - just show that we are classy, well-informed people, and that we detest the one-sided reporting of most mainstream media. Express your gratitude for the courage of Jack Kelley! Simply state your feelings - and SEND! Please do this - RIGHT NOW! Ingrid From irimland@zundelsite.org Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:23:39 -0700 Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 22:23:39 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/11/2001 - "The end of a world that we knew" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 11, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: This is not the end of the world - but it is the end of the world as we have known it in America. Today's terrorist attack not only buried thousands of Americans in a fiery grave of twisted metal, concrete, wires and debris - it buried America's innocence. This horrific attack will signal an erosion of freedom as Americans have enjoyed it for 225 years. It will usher in a curtailment of the rights to privacy, to personal freedom, to the freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom to travel etc. This day will be the beginning of an Orwellian world of surveillance, wire tappings, letter openings, fax interceptions and computer hacking by all manner of "security" agencies the likes of which the world has never seen before. It will all be done ". . . in the interest of national security." America, the last bastion of freedom, took a direct hit to its core, its nerve center, this morning. Will the America of yesterday survive this direct attack on its cherished traditions - hitherto constitutionally protected and taken for granted for so long? The shrill and emotional voices for new restrictions, draconian laws allowing all manner of internal and advocating external spying are already being heard. Huge budget increases are already being demanded for hiring an army of "human sources" which can infiltrate any and all organizations, coupled with vastly increased numbers of intelligence analysts to process this avalanche of information gathered. An orgy of paranoia, fanned by an irresponsible press, will end in a witch hunt that will pale the McCarthy era into insignificance. Emergency will be the cloak the tyrant will be wearing. State power will increase in direct proportion to the decrease in personal freedom. Who was behind today's attack? The culprit may well be found - and punished. The policies which created the culprit, however, will not be examined - and thus will not be addressed. Take Communist East Germany. It had the most sophisticated, all-pervasive internal and external spy system in Europe. One out of seven East Germans had Stasi (Secret Police) connections. They knew the most intimate details of the lives of their citizens. And yet, in the end, it was their faulty policies - and the terrible results of these policies - which swept the regime away. All the intelligence gathered by all these spies, analyzed by all their intelligence analysts, could not save the East German regime - because the political leaders refused to correct the problems caused by their faulty policies. Here is a personal note: Both Ernst and I were children in a war and at a time when planes careened down from the clouds, sent from America, death tucked beneath their wings, to bury our loved ones, our friends and family and neighbors, in fiery graves of twisted metal, concrete, wires and debris. I still remember playing in the ruins of a small village near Berlin in 1945 all summer long that had little crosses on practically every heap and along the rims of many, many craters. In a strange and eerie way, that made me shiver all day long, a circle has come to a close. ===== From irimland@zundelsite.org Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:09:14 -0700 Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:09:14 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/12/2001 - "Some thoughts on sanity" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 12, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: The following is an excerpt from Legion News & Views - a thoughtful Catholic publication. It was sent by legion.bulletin@verizon.net - and presumably posted at www.legionofstlouis.com The article itself is a very long, calmly argued essay of great complexity and eloquent power which I intend to read when yesterday has retreated a bit. All day long I have been surfing the net, collecting bits and pieces of the voices that try to "explain" what has happened - and why. This article, by contrast, asks us to explain ourselves. [START] Readers will notice that we didn't begin todays's special issue on yesterday's remarkable events with "America is attacked." America wasn't attacked. America isn't the World Trade Center, nor is it the Pentagon. At least those things don't represent our America, nor should they for our readers. The media spin masters would have us think that those things represent America, only to encourage a misuse of our Patriotic sentiments...a misuse which has been going on for far too long and which is bound, unfortunately, only to continue as a result of yesterday's intentional plane crashes. In the following Special Bulletin we intend to present some of our own views and reprint some very interesting articles from around the world. Numerous are the thoughts that come to mind as a result of incidents like these. Let's try to take just a few in a logical order. Some thoughts on Sanity. Ours is an age of insanity. What's black passes for white, what's bad passes for good, and what's ugly passes for beautiful. So what we should keep in mind as we attempt to analyse a few of the elements of today's events is that insanity is the norm, and sanity is the exception to the rule. No possibility is too outlandish in our day and age, no silliness beyond that which can and should be expected. The first insanity is that people should live and work in buildings that are 1500 feet high. And an insanity that follows close on the heels of that one is that our degree of adjustment to that first insanity is such that instinctively our hearts are broken, our ire is provoked, and our sense of reality is replaced with a sensation of the surreal when we witness and then contemplate the complete destruction of a 110 story skyscraper. If we lived in a sane world, the thought that 12 million people would choose to live and work on an 11 mile by 1 mile Island, piled on top of each other 1500 feet into the air, just to keep the world's financial fiction spinning and steaming and churning, just to keep the pockets of the relatively very few wealthy stuffed ever more and more to capacity while the rest of the world's men and women remain enslaved as wage-earners and deprived of the liberty of property ownership...that thought would be surreal. And a visit to Manhattan by a man who was familiar with the countryside and who knew the land and who was intimately aquainted with God's creation because he received his sustenance from the land and not from a supermarket or a vending machine...that Manhattan visit would throw him into a heart-breaking, anger-producing, surreal funk from which he could recover only by an escape back to the land. If we lived in a sane world, the thought that thousands of people stuffed into a 1500 foot tower controlled or managed or micromanaged the fictional (and yet all-too-real in the destructive and opressive sense) financial transactions of millions upon milions of people, who never set foot on Manhattan Island let alone visit the Tower...that thought would be mystifying, mind-blowing, and dis-orienting to the common man, much as today's events were so for so many "viewers" and "listeners." Unfortunately, in our world all these things are normal and what sends us into shock is the disruption of these silly activities and the collapse of this crazy icon of modernity. But in a sane world, assuming the tragic issue of the loss of many innocent lives could be set aside for just a moment...in a sane world, the elimination of most of the center of the world's usurious financial system would and should bring a breath of fresh air, a sigh of relief, and a hope for a better day. But, obviously, in this, our insane world, none of those things are to be, at least not in the immediate future. Most certainly, none of them will come to pass if we allow ourselves to be mesmerized by the constant bleating of the spin doctors and mind-control experts on the evening news who will sigh and sympathize with all those who are suffering emotional shock over the destruction of, as dear Peter Jennings put it several times last night, the "icon of American Capitalism." As long as we allow our natural emotions of sympathy for the victims of the airplane crashes, a distinct and separate issue, to be mixed up with notions of defending "our way of life," we will remain unable to objectively fix what it is that is wrong with our insane world. One thing's for sure. What's essentially (as opposed to incidentally) wrong with our insane world is not the crashing of airplanes into the World Trade Center. That is a symptom. The disease is far worse. >From the perspective of the natural law, the domination of the world by money is criminal and illicit. And the concentration of the world's real wealth (land, machines, factories and other means of production) into the hands of a few such that most are deprived of any substantial property ownership, is as criminal and as illicit. [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "The first question you should ask about your enemy is why he is your enemy in the first place." (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Thu, 13 Sep 2001 10:12:56 -0700 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 10:12:56 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/13/2001 - "Orient Express" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 13, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I spent about 16 hours yesterday surfing and reading the Internet, trying to cull the most concise and comprehensive condensation of the tragedy and its message!) out of September 11, 2001. This morning it was given to me in this essay. It says what needed to be said. I believe it says it all - in ways we need to understand if we want to survive what is coming. Again, it was written by the Russian-Israeli journalist, Israel Shamir, who has tried to talk sanity into the madness ever since the intifada began. [START] Orient Express Like the Four Riders of the Apocalypse, the unknown kamikaze rode their giant crafts into the two visible symbols of American world domination, Wall Street and the Pentagon. They vanished in flames and smoke, and we do not yet know who they were. They could be practically anybody: American Nationalists, American Communists, American Fundamentalist Christians, American Anarchists, anybody who rejects the twin gods of the dollar and the M-16, who hates the stock market and interventions overseas, who dreams of America for Americans, who does not want to support the drive for world domination. They could be Native Americans returning to Manhattan, or Afro-Americans who still have not received compensation for slavery. They could be foreigners of practically any extraction, as Wall Street and the Pentagon ruined many lives of people all over the globe. Germans can remember the fiery holocaust of Dresden with its hundreds of thousands of peaceful refugees incinerated by the US Air Force. Japanese will not forget the nuclear holocaust of Hiroshima. The Arab world still feels the creeping holocaust of Iraq and Palestine. Russians and East Europeans feel the shame of Belgrade avenged. Latin Americans think of American invasions of Panama and Granada, of destroyed Nicaragua and defoliated Colombia. Asians count their dead of Vietnam war, Cambodia bombings, Laos CIA operations in millions. Even a pro-American, Russian TV broadcaster could not refrain from saying, =EBnow Americans begin to understand the feelings of Baghdad and Belgrade=ED. The Riders could be anybody who lost his house to the bank, who was squeezed from his work and made permanently unemployed, who was declared an Untermensch by the new Herrenvolk. They could be Russians, Malaysians, Indonesians, Pakistanis, Congolese, as their economy was destroyed by Wall Street and the Pentagon. They could be anybody, and they are everybody. Their identity is quite irrelevant, but the Jews already decided: it has to be Arabs. One would think, after Oklahoma, we should become less hasty with our conclusions. But my countrymen, Israeli politicians are impatient folk. The flames in Manhattan did not die out yet, they started political profit taking. Mr Ehud Barak came live on BBC, and said =EBArafat=ED within three minutes flat. On CNN, his twin Bibi Natanyahu appropriated the blame to Arabs, Muslims, Palestinians. Shimon Peres, an old wizened wizard, spoke against suicide as a psychiatric adviser, reminding his audience of Palestinian attacks. He looked worried: it is hard to enslave people who are not afraid to die. This old killer of Kana even mentioned Gospels. Density of Israelis on the air approached the saturation point. They insinuated and incited, pushing their shopping list into a chalk-white face of shell-shocked America: please, destroy Iran! And Iraq! And Libya, plees! The first twenty four hours of maximal exposure were utilised by the Jewish propaganda machine to its utmost. Not a single fact was yet known, but racist anti-Arab slurs became a commonplace. While we Jews quite reasonably object to any reference to the Jewishness of a bad guy, we really do not mind producing revolting racist drivel of our own. A good Jewish-American activist, James Jordan, warned in al-Awda: =ECMaking broad, all-inclusive statements and insinuations about "Jews" completely marginalizes and discredits your organization=EE. But how come the endless stream of 'broad, all-inclusive statements and insinuations', about 'the Arabs' did not 'completely marginalized and discredited' the Jewish organisations and media who practice it? Apparently, it is a Jewish right to decide who will be marginalized in America and who will not. The connection was in the minds. The American Jewish supremacists want to turn all the world into Palestine, where the natives will enjoy harsh local rule and limited local rights, while the master race will have a rather different level of life. Israel is just a small-scale model of their new brave world of globalisation. As there were no hard facts against Palestinians, the Israelis made their damnedest from the scenes of joy shot in East Jerusalem. It is a rather weak point, and I=EDll tell you why. In Agatha Christie=EDs Murder = on the Orient Express, her favourite detective M. Poireau encounters an unusual complication: all passengers on board the train have had a good reason to bump off the unpleasant old lady. My dear American friends, your leaders placed your great country into the old lady=EDs shoes. Israelis used the event to the max. They even killed some ten Palestinians and destroyed five Goyiish houses in Jerusalem. The reports were rather gleeful, in the style =EBwe told you=ED, and the experts of Israeli TV concluded by one o=EDclock, the attack =EBwas good for the Jews= =ED. Why? It would strengthen American support of Israel. The kamikaze attack could do exactly that. America could enter a new cycle of violence in its troubled relations with the world. Revenge will follow revenge, until one of the sides will be obliterated by nuclear blast. It appears president Bush prefers this course. He declared war on his and Israel=EDs adversaries. Bush did not even understand that the war was declared by the US many years ago, only now it started to come home. So many people are sick of America=EDs ham-fisted approach, that the countdown for the next attack began. Alternatively, America could see this painful strike at her Wall Street and her Pentagon, as the last call to repent. She should change her advisers, and build her relations with the world afresh, on equal footing. Probably she should rule in [reel in?] the domination-obsessed Jewish supremacist elites of Wall Street and media, part company with the apartheid Jewish state. She could become again the universally loved, rather parochial America of Walt Whitman and Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Abe Lincoln. Jaffa, 12.9.01 - www.IsraelShamir.com - shamiri_@netvision.net.il [END] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Thought for the Day: "There is no military solution to a political problem." (Ernst Z=FCndel) From irimland@zundelsite.org Fri, 14 Sep 2001 22:19:14 -0700 Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 22:19:14 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/14/2001 - "America in mourning - and rage" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 14, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Since Tuesday morning I have been glued to my screen. Words fail me to describe my emotions. Those of us who have experienced first hand what wars are like have a different perspective on things than those who only know "war" from sanitized news clips and Hollywood films. Let me tell you - war is hell! I remember my childhood friend who I'll call Lara. We were twelve-year-olds when we met. Lara was a full orphan, World War II having martyred her parents. Lara did have a grandmother, though, a fierce little woman who sat on a milk stool and kept a sharp eye on my friend while trying to teach us some lessons about what war was like and how to avoid it by living a godfearing life. I remember that I was a bit afraid of her; her stories were scary to me; her lessons were uncomfortable and often outright boring; I hardly ever spoke to her; I thought that she was ancient and I, of course, was young. And strong. And brimful of a cocky confidence that springs from innocence and inexperience. Of her life and her times, I knew next to nothing and didn't care to know - and it took more than 40 years until I learned her story. In one dark night of satanic brutality preceding World War II, she lost six members of her family while she herself hid in the bushes and watched - her father, her mother, her husband, her husband's mother, her husband's father, and her son. How did she lose them? To swarthy bandits who came with shovels, axes and machetes and silenced whatever still moved. And, no, the bandits weren't Nazis. They were called Communists. These days, they've re-christened themselves. One of this woman's sons who managed to survive the slaughter, Lara's father, was marched off to Siberia in years to come, a veritable Gulag slave. A few weeks later, Lara's mother was caught in the crossfire of fiercely contesting armies and bled to death, age 24, but not before she willed her little daughter, Lara, to the woman who, some years hence, sat hunched and wrinkled on her milk stool and tried to speak of things we didn't want to hear. I so often think of this woman. In those young years, I felt no curiosity. Whatever she experienced in a war that was long past was boring history - or so I thought - and of no interest to me. Today I wished that I'd listened. I could have learned from her. This afternoon Ernst and I went into town to buy an American flag to display as a symbol of mourning and to honor those who lost their lives in that horrific event on September 11. They didn't deserve what happened to them - any more than Lara's kin deserved to die in unspeakable horror so many years ago in distant Russia. Some of my readers have chided me that, since the disaster, they thought that I didn't express enough grief. They do me wrong and read me wrong - I feel sorrow and grief and fear and dismay and even choking anger that so many innocents died in the flames not at all of their making. But did you notice: Nobody spoke of Holocaust? Those of us who lived in war and saw our loved ones die in war, who saw the knives cut through raw flesh, feel different. We know the war today is simply an extension of the brutal, bloody war of yesterday. It will still be the same old war exacting the blood of a new generation of innocents in some distant battlefield. Many of those now itching for war and "lucky enough" to return from that war will come back without eyes, without limbs, broken in body and spirit - to end their lives in some Veterans Hospital, forgotten! Can't we do better than that? America is young. She has been badly wounded. But she knows nothing of the costs of real war. How it originates. On what it feeds. How it connives and deceives. How it devours the innocent and spits them in the gutter. Although I'm not nearly as old and as wrinkled as Lara's grandmother was, I feel as though now it is I who sits on a milk stool in front of my computer, trying to speak of the lessons I learned - while a whole world is roaring to slay an as yet unidentified villain so as to please a bully whose hands are also blood-stained - and cause bloodshed on top of more bloodshed, more pain piled on top of more sorrow. When I first took to cyberspace in 1995, one of my very first supporters and correspondents was a man some ten years older than I am. I'll call him Gregory. >From the beginning, I was touched by Gregory's simplicity and basic decency. We have corresponded a lot, and I would like to honor Gregory today by sending his words to the farthest corners of a world now girding itself for revenge. He expresses the feelings of many: [START] The recent events have changed the world. I support and understand the need to go after those that attacked us. But nobody is asking why. If we begin attacking Arab nations we will have to kill every Arab to be certain we are free of future attacks. Nobody, except a few in the media are suggesting the root of the hatred toward us is our one sided support of Israel. American people get little unfiltered news and a slanted history favoring Israel. Despite this, the root cause of why Arabs hate Americans is so obvious, one would think Americans could see the obvious and understand [that] to be free of fear of attack we must change our foreign policy. I am sickened in sorrow for those lost and their families and those who will be affected in the future. I am utterly disgusted that this nation has allowed itself to be the tool of another and has paid such a horrific price in the blood of its innocent and trusting citizens. Our political process has been poisoned and free information and discussion censored by those whose interests are alien to these United States in favor of a foreign nation. Our elected representatives equally caused these events by placing personal and political gain above the nation's true interests. I am so sad that the efforts of so many fine people to alert the nation to its danger did not prevent this awful tragedy. As we gather ourselves in the aftermath we must find the courage and strength of dedication to fearlessly affirm our patriotic devotion to the truth and the ideals of Duty, Honor and Country. [END] ===== Two Thought for the Day: "Nothing is settled permanently unless it is settled equitably." (Abraham Lincoln) and: "The terrorists behind Tuesday's attack want war. By all means we should punish those directly involved, but we must not give them the war they want." (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sat, 15 Sep 2001 18:07:32 -0700 Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 18:07:32 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/15/2001 - "A Call to Sanity: An Essay by Robert Jensen" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 15, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Among the many war whoops and frenzied calls for revenge about the horrid terrorist attack, I hope to run a number of Internet essays I will title "A Call to Sanity". I will repeat over and over again the words of Abraham Lincoln - which I believe should be our dictum: "Nothing is settled permanently unless it is settled equitably." As another writer said: To let massive terror rain from the sky on the guilty and the innocent alike will only create 10,000 Osama bin Ladens. Here is your first essay, written by an academic from the State of Texas: [START] "War is not the only option" - by Robert Jensen "We have to do something." In the face of the unimaginable horror of the past week, it is easy to understand why people all across the United States are crying out for action. But we must remember that military action -- violence and more death -- is not the only action available to us. Making peace is an action. Seeking justice is an action. "But we have to show the terrorists that we are strong." Is the use of force -- especially when the force being called for is likely to be so massive and indiscriminate as to bring more civilian death -- asign of strength? Or can people, and a nation, show strength through thewisdom to not repeat tragic mistakes of the past? Although we may not like the label, the United States is an empire. And like empires of the past, the United States is quick to try to solve problems with its overwhelming military power. But this problem will not be solved by force, by the "global campaign towipe out terrorism" that officials are calling for. We should not forgetthe wiping out terrorism inevitably will mean wiping out many innocent people, which will only deepen the resentment of the United States around the world -- especially the Third World -- and strengthen the resolve ofterrorists. It will not end terrorism but create new terrorists. The problem of terrorism will be solved by making peace and seeking justice. That will not be achieved at the end of a gun, but by changing the posture of the United States in the world. We must move from claiming the right to make unilateral demands to truly multilateral engagement. If the United States were to announce its intention not to avenge this attack with violence but with a new approach -- one based in a commitment to a real peace in the Middle East based on real justice -- the world would not see it as weakness. Such a declaration would be the ultimate sign ofstrength. There is a difficult truth about the United States that we must come to terms with if we are to understand why we were targeted for this cruel attack: For more than three decades, the United States has been the biggest obstacle to peace in the Middle East, and until we reverse that position we will be the target of the frustration and anger of many people there. Israel's illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza since 1967 is at the heart of the conflict in the Middle East, and that occupation has been possible because of support the United States -- through Republican and Democratic administrations. We call ourselves the architects of the "peace process," but in truth we have for decades blocked the international consensus for peace, which has called for Israel to give up the occupation and demanded basic rights for the Palestinian people. Since 1991, when the Bush administration made sure that a U.S.-led war would be the only response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the resentment of the United States among the people of the Middle East has only deepened. Our willingness to use massive and indiscriminate violence in that war, and our eagerness to establish what has become a permanent military presence in the region, has made us few friends. Yes, we need to do something -- but something to shift our policy in theMiddle East from rule-by-force to the quest for justice. Nonviolence is not simply about refusing to make war; it also is about creating justice in the world so that war is not necessary. The appeal of war is that it seems strong and promises results quickly. It makes us feel safe. But if we are to fight a global war against terrorism, we will show the world our weakness and trade the promise of peace and justice for the illusion of victory. [END] Robert Jensen is a professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin. ===== Thought for the Day: "I thought that my Vietnam experience was enough bloodletting to last this man a lifetime. Evidently it was not. I now join a select group of people who have experienced the horrors of war on their own doorsteps. "I hope that through this painful saga, I will be more able to empathize with the survivors of W.W.II. I never took the time to stop and think about how devastating an experience it was for you Europeans. You experienced the reign of terror from the skies on a nightly basis. (Letter to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sun, 16 Sep 2001 12:34:35 -0700 Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 12:34:35 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/16/2001 - "A Call to Sanity: An Essay by Allan Savory" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 16, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: It seems almost irreverent to write my customary Sunday summary of "Revisionist Week in Review" in light of what has happened with the attack on New York and Washington. Therefore, I am skipping my usual task and send you instead a very thoughtful summary by a man who shows by example what happened to Rhodesia when guerrilla motives and tactics were misunderstood by entrenched traditional warfare specialists. The source of this article is an organization called general@lists.holisticmanagement.org . The date is Saturday, September 15, 2001. Its author is Allan Savory, in exile from Rhodesia. [START] I am posting this to our general conference via Jody as I am not routinely on our listserve due to email overload. I am venting my deep feelings of sorrow and frustration by writing to you who I know care and think deeply. I also write because Holistic Management is more important than ever if peace is to prevail as we all wish. As the events of the 11 September unfolded I found myself so overwhelmed that for an hour or two I simply pulled out of the important planning meeting in which we were engaged. I needed to sit quietly with my thoughts. In my youth, growing up in Rhodesia after World War II, I somehow recognized that guerrilla warfare would be the future form of warfare and I began studying and later fighting for over twenty years in such a war. I mention this past briefly because as this week unfolded, having gone through much of my life in senseless guerrilla warfare, I began to see the past floating before my eyes. What I saw was not the endless showing of the towers being hit and then crumbling, followed by the anguish of family and friends of the dead but something sinister and frightening. I felt an emptiness not because of the tragic loss of life of so many Americans and others, including we think five of my countrymen, but because of the television interviews of leaders and public figures. I could not help but notice that all talked of America's strength and resolve, war and revenge. Not one leader replied in the manner I would have found myself responding in my anger and grief. The President has called it a new form of war and named it the =46irst War of the 21st Century. He has pledged to win it at a time and plac= e of our choosing. Although this pledge is understandable in terms of prevailing emotions, it is about as meaningful in real terms as the many pledges to win the war against drugs. America and the western nations, whose way of life is under attack, will need far deeper understanding for peace and what we all value in our way of life to be safeguarded. This is not a new form of warfare it is one of the oldest forms of warfare that, due to technological advances, is capable of wrecking unbelievable damage. Nothing I write should be construed as not having feelings for the dead and suffering I only risk writing at such a sensitive time because my feelings run deep, and after living so much of my life with violence I want desperately to see an end to such suffering. America will be called upon for international leadership in this hour of need. Is America up to that responsibility and what does that leadership entail? Let me make a few basic points. People waging guerrilla warfare try to undermine their enemy by actions designed to cause a spread of terror, over-reaction, economic damage, etc. Commonly they hit soft (not military) targets that will inflame emotions simply because they do not have the military strength to do otherwise. If skillful they strike in such a manner that their more powerful opponent will fan the flames and spread terror, lack of confidence in the economy, etc., and do the job for them. A mistake made by most governments is to call their opponents "terrorists'. The constant use of the word "terrorist' while televising dramatically the damage and suffering makes their action several million times more damaging. If you want to spread terror use the word terrorist repeatedly, associated with terrifying pictures, and low and behold you do spread terror. I watched Ian Smith do this repeatedly in Rhodesia's long struggle for independence. Long ago in that struggle I said publicly that if I was a guerrilla I would pray that my opponents would call me a terrorist to further my aims. The Smith government made that mistake and repeatedly attacked me as an army officer and Member of Parliament for using the name guerrillas instead of trying to understand the form of warfare they faced. Smith, his generals and media gurus, through ignorance about guerrilla warfare guaranteed their own political defeat.=20 I am not indulging in hindsight as many times on the public platform I said that Mugabe's greatest allies were Ian Smith and his generals who, while waging a "war against terrorists', were winning political victory for Mugabe and ensuring the end of democracy for years to come. Secondly I see in America floating before my eyes once again something I lived through. Our strength is our greatest weakness. What do I mean by this? In Rhodesia we had an extremely capable and efficient army for bush warfare. We knew it and were intensely proud of our army. We never lost a single encounter or battle no matter what the odds, but that, as I pointed out many times during the conflict, guaranteed we would lose the "war'. I say this simply because these situations are not "wars' requiring military solution, but situations requiring civilian policies that deal with the root cause of people's frustrations and suffering.=20 Because we white Rhodesians were so strong our government, under a political leader rather than statesman, was unwilling to even contemplate seeking the necessary solution that would preserve the democracy we valued. That, after all, would appear "weak' to the bulk of the electorate who wanted tough-talking generals and politicians. When, as leader of the opposition in Parliament, I said (to Smith) "You are going to have to talk to the guerrilla leaders" =1D I was branded a coward and traitor in public. When I said on one occasion "If you want to win this 'war' you need to understand your opponents and to understand why someone like me would say 'If I had been born a black Rhodesian, instead of a white Rhodesian, I would be your greatest terrorist'" =1D I lost the suppor= t of even my own party and ended up in exile.=20 I use the similarities with Rhodesia because only the scale differs.=20 America's leaders would be wise not to treat this as a "war' but rather as a serious wake up call to look at an extremely broad and comprehensive strategy involving our foreign and domestic policies as well as our education and business systems. Right now there is a need to motivate people to unite. And there is a need, that the President and his advisors are tackling well, to collaborate with other nations and go after the perpetrators determined to bring them to justice. However, this should be done without setting our people up for war and retaliation. There is a need, while unity and determination still hold, to initiate the moves to bring about a civilian strategy to win the peace we all seek. If we rely solely on our military strength in retaliating, far from ending the war "in a place and time of our choosing, =1D we will bring about counter retaliation at some time. Thi= s has been the most massive guerrilla attack ever staged, but it will pale into insignificance with future nuclear or biological attacks unless our leaders act with understanding and wisdom as well as determination. There have always been evil people and will continue to be such people. We need of course to share intelligence between nations and root them out. But at the same time we need also to address the causes to which they attach themselves and to dry up their source of recruits. I am sorry that many in this nation are focused only on America and seeing this as an attack on this nation and on democracy. It is not a war in which "they' are trying to conquer America or defeat democracy. Public memory can be short. It was but months ago that thousands of peace-loving people (including prominent Americans) brought the World Trade Organization Conference in Seattle to a halt. Now, this strike at the World Trade Center as the principal target by ruthless people exploiting grievances for their own ends should have conveyed a message to all developed nations - America, Britain, France, Germany, Japan and others. If America is to provide the leadership the world is crying out for, we would be wise to try to understand how and why the Bin Laden's of the world can have such a pool of angry young people to call on who are prepared to give their lives so readily. We need to understand and heed the cries of people displaced by massive dam construction in India or Africa, or the bulk of the Mexican population who deplore the loss of their way of life and all they value most dearly as we pursue policies like NAFTA. We need to understand that we cannot call on people in poor countries to be good capitalists and then go to war against them for supplying our people with drugs they seek at any cost. We need to understand that when we ban chemicals because they are known to be damaging to humans that we should not allow multi-national corporations to increase their manufacture and sale to third world countries so we can profit. We need to understand that we cannot take thousands of years of careful nurturing of genetic material by simple people and patent the genes for the profits of our corporations and shareholders. We need to understand that in many ways it is not democracy that is under attack but rather certain aspects of our lives that others see as causing their poverty and suffering.=20 I know many Americans, including good friends of mine, will immediately say, "but our policies are not harming them. =1D I am afraid if others even perceive our policies as harmful to their culture and way of life that becomes the political reality in such situations. It is essential that we look at our policies in our own enlightened self-interest as they affect our environment and other people as we do with Holistic Management policy formation. I am not a politician. I only went into politics in my country as a junior army officer with a deep knowledge of guerrilla warfare to try to end a senseless war of self-destruction. But over the twenty years that I have been a "political has-been' I have never ceased to try to think of ways nations might end such violence. And I have never ceased to work on the causes underlying most worldwide violence. I don't know who originally said it, but I have long believed that "Until all people feel secure and well governed, none are =1D. No nation can be an island unto itself in the modern world. In America we may feel secure and well governed but are we? Clearly by this definition we are not. When the towers were first hit and blame started to fly, more than one person raised the question are we sure this time that it is not Americans?=20 Looking at our government I do not see representation of many Americans.=20 We don't even have a Parliamentary opposition in the sense I understand- we have a government formed from alternatively one or other of two wings - left and right - of the same corporate party, managed by a mature and often insensitive bureaucracy. As a consequence, millions of Americans are politically emasculated and apathetic, feeling a deep sense of hopelessness. The present catastrophe will unite all Americans as never before and that is good. But the unity will not last. If our leaders cannot see what is happening in our own country, what hope have we of understanding the frustrations of millions who are daily affected by the policies of the US, and our fellow western powers that support corporations with economies and powers greater than whole nations. The focus will be on America as the single super power, but Britain, France, Germany and other countries are as much part of what many millions of people see as the ugly side of capitalism. Focus is on us because we are seen as having a small percentage of the world's population consuming a very high percentage of the world's resources resulting in vast impoverishment for others. It cannot be repeated too often- poor land leads to poverty, disease, social breakdown, abuse of women, increasing violence and genocide and ultimately war. One has only to look holistically at the many resource management policies of America, or the World Bank and other governments and organizations heavily influenced or dominated by American money and university graduates, to see that we are guaranteeing an increasingly violent future for our children and our allies.=20 As I write, the President is sitting with his National Security Council to decide how to respond. They are intelligent people who will advise on all aspects of security within the comprehension of their professions=20 military, economic, political analyst or whatever. Probably the President could not put together a more competent team if we were at war. However if one understands the nature of how wholes function I would wager a bet that the same NSC with its heavy regular military bias will be ill-suited to forming a strategy to win the peace. Building our response on a war analogy is dangerous in the extreme. While the President will politically have to respond with force in some form right now, it would be wise to look beyond starting right now. I believe to win the peace the NSC should be expanded to include men and women who understand the effects on millions of ordinary peace-loving people of such things as our agricultural policies and NAFTA as well as the actions of not only American but also multi-national corporations. Conventional economists have almost no comprehension of the effects of for instance agricultural policies on rural American families let alone families in India, Pakistan, Mexico and Africa. When faced with situations of such enormous magnitude, where it is always easy to be a critic but never as easy if actually having to handle the full responsibility, I have a habit of asking myself "If faced with this responsibility what would I do?' In this instance I would do the following. No one has the answers, least of all me, but these actions would lead us toward finding solutions, I believe: =B7 I would recognize the need for statesmanship rather than gut-leve= l politics. =B7 I would do all in my power, working with our allies, to bring the perpetrators of the current violent actions to face international justice. =B7 I would not call it a war but rather focus on this as a struggle for worldwide peace involving our leadership of all nations. =B7 I would treat it with the utmost urgency, as this horrifying act has been a bigger blow than was the strike at Pearl Harbor. =B7 I would recognize that failure of the developed nations to addres= s worldwide biodiversity loss, desertification and global climate change and social injustices will result in ever more horrifying events involving nuclear and biological weapons. =B7 I would put the situation on a "war footing' in terms of seriousness and allocation of funds and people no price is too high to pay and, as in war, I would go beyond using only establishment bureaucrats and experts. =B7 I would task an expanded NSC with developing a comprehensive civilian and military strategy and monitoring system to address over time the root cause of most worldwide violence.=20 =B7 I would, as my duty to the nation, insist that this expanded NSC have free reign to investigate all aspects of our political, economic, educational, trade and business systems there would be no sacred cows. =B7 To the expanded NSC I would appoint people who have a track recor= d of understanding the underlying problems, social and economic ramifications of destructive agricultural and land management policies, trade policies, and more that lead to poverty, frustration, displacement, disease and violence (there are many such people in America and Europe consistently ignored at present). And I would include people with a sound knowledge of guerrilla warfare as well as conventional warfare. =B7 I would urge all politicians to accept the recommendations of suc= h a strategic group in a non-partisan manner so that implementation could proceed rapidly in the interests of all nations. In short, I believe the surest way to guarantee Americans a future of severely restricted liberties and fear of violence is to treat this as a war that can be won with economic and military might. The war analogy focuses on what the enemy is doing when we need to focus on what we are doing to ourselves. The possibility of even more horrific acts is increased when rogue religious groups such as the Taliban (most Muslims, as well as the Koran, preach peace and harmony), and individuals like Bin Laden, can recruit people willing to commit suicide and align themselves with genuine grievances for their own ends. To let such evil people put up a smoke screen that clouds our vision and draws our attention away from addressing the real grievances of millions of peace-loving people would be the greatest tragedy and play into the hands of future Bin Ladens. This is a battle for peace that can be won by statesmanship that ensures that while containing present violence to the best of our ability we at the same time start to address the things needed to ensure that all people feel secure and well governed. [END] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Thought for the Day: "Now that the government has declared War on Terrorism, it appears that we are headed for really big trouble. Why? Because when the government declared War on Poverty we got more poverty, when they declared War on Illiteracy we got more illiteracy, when they declared War on Crime we got more crime, and when they declared War on Drugs we got more drugs. Brace yourself for more terrorism." (Letter to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Mon, 17 Sep 2001 20:54:16 -0700 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 20:54:16 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/17/2001 - "A Call to Sanity: Learning from the September 11 Attacks" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 17, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: This press release is the third voice in my ZGram series, "A Call to Sanity". [START] LEARNING FROM THE SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS Mark Weber Director, Institute for Historical Review weber@ihr.org September 15, 2001 With thousands of victims and riveting images of death and destruction, war has come home to America with terrible, devastating suddenness. Together with our fellow citizens, we mourn the many victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon building. But beyond the feelings of grief and fury must come clarity and understanding. President George W. Bush said on national television that "America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world." The next day he said that "freedom and democracy are under attack," and that the perpetrators had struck against "all freedom-loving people everywhere in the world." But if "democracy" and "freedom-loving people" are the targets, why isn't anyone attacking Switzerland, Japan or Norway? Bush's claims are just as untrue as President Wilson's World War I declaration that the United States was fighting to "make the world safe for democracy," and President Roosevelt's World War II assurances that the US was fighting for "freedom" and "democracy." In the wake of the September 11 attacks, speculation has been rife about who the perpetrators may have been. That itself is an acknowledgment that so many people hate this country so intensely that one cannot easily determine just who may have mounted these well-organized attacks of suicidal desperation. These shocking attacks were predictable. In 1993 Islamic radicals set off a bomb at the World Trade Center that claimed six lives. In August 1998 the United States carried out missile attacks against Afghanistan and Sudan, strikes that senior Clinton administration officials said signaled the start of "a real war against terrorism." In the wake of those attacks, a high-ranking US intelligence official warned that "the prospect of retaliation against Americans is very, very high'." (The Washington Post, Aug. 21, 1998, p. A1) Our political leaders and the American mass media promote the preposterous fiction that the September 11 attacks are entirely unprovoked and unrelated to United States actions. They want everyone to believe that the underlying hatred of America by so many around the world, especially in Arab and Muslim countries, that motivated the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks is unrelated to this country's policies. It is clear, however, that those who carried out these devastating suicide attacks against centers of American financial and military might were enraged by this country's decades-long support for Israel and its policies of aggression, murderous repression, and brutal occupation against Arabs and Muslims, and/or American air strikes and economic warfare against Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq and Iran. America is the only country that claims the right to deploy troops and war planes in any corner of the globe in pursuit of what our political leaders call "vital national interests." George Washington and our country's other founders earnestly warned against such imperial arrogance, while far-sighted Americans such as Harry Elmer Barnes, Garet Garrett and Pat Buchanan voiced similar concerns in the 20th century. For most Americans modern war has largely been an abstraction -- something that happens only in far-away lands. The victims of US air attack and bombardment in Vietnam, Lebanon, Sudan, Libya, Iraq and Serbia have seemed somehow unreal. Few ordinary Americans pay attention, because US military actions normally have little impact on their day-to-day lives. Just as residents of Rome in the second century hardly noticed the battles fought by their troops on the outer edges of the Roman empire, residents of Seattle and Cleveland today barely concern themselves with the devastation wrought by American troops and war planes in, for example, Iraq. Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General, has accused the United States of committing "a crime against humanity" against the people of Iraq "that exceeds all others in its magnitude, cruelty and portent." Citing United Nations agency reports and his own on-site investigations, Clark charged in 1996 that the scarcity of food and medicine as a result of sanctions against Iraq imposed by the United States since 1990, and US bombings of the country, had caused the deaths of more than a million people, including more than half a million children. Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State in President Clinton's administration, defended the mass killings. During a 1996 interview she was asked: "We have heard that half a million children have died [as a result of sanctions against Iraq]. I mean, that is more children than died in Hiroshima...Is the price worth it?" Albright replied: "...We think the price is worth it." ("60 Minutes," May 12, 1996). President Bush is now pledging a "crusade," a "war against terrorism" and a "sustained campaign" to "eradicate the evil of terrorism." But such calls sound hollow given the US government's own record of support for terrorism, for example during the Vietnam war. During the 1980s, the US supported "terrorists" in Afghanistan -- including Osama bin Laden, now the "prime suspect" in the September 11 attacks -- in their struggle to drive out the Soviet invaders. American presidents have warmly welcomed to the White House Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, two Israeli prime ministers with well-documented records as terrorists. President Bush himself has welcomed to Washington Israel's current prime minister, Ariel Sharon, whose forces have been carrying out assassinations of Palestinian leaders and murderous "retaliatory" strikes against Palestinians. Even an official Israeli commission found that Sharon bore some responsibility for the 1982 massacres of Palestinian civilians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Jewish and Zionist leaders, and their American servants, have predictably lost no time exploiting the September 11 attacks to further their own interests. Taking advantage of the current national mood of blind rage and revenge, they demand new US military action against Israel's many enemies. In the weeks to come, therefore, we can expect the US government, supported by an enraged public, to lash out violently. The great danger is that an emotion-driven, reactive response will aggravate underlying tensions and encourage new acts of murderous violence. What is needed now is not a vengeful "crusade," but coherent, reasoned policies based on sanity and justice. In the months and years ahead, most Americans will doubtless continue to accept what their political leaders and the mass media tell them. But the jolting impact of the September 11 attacks -- which have, for the first time, brought to our cities the terror and devastation of attacks from the sky -- will also encourage growing numbers of thoughtful Americans to see through the lies propagated by our nation's political and cultural elite, and its Zionist allies, to impose their will around the world. More and more people will understand that their government's overseas policies inevitably have consequences even here at home. In 1948, as the Zionist state was being established in Palestine, US Secretary of State George C. Marshall, along with nearly every other high-level US foreign affairs specialist, warned that American support for Israel would have dire long-term consequences. Events have fully vindicated their concerns. Over the long run, the September 11 attacks will encourage public awareness of our government's imperial role in the world, including a sobering reassessment of this country's perverse "special relationship" with the Jewish ethnostate. Along with that, rage will grow against those who have subordinated American interests, and basic justice and humanity, to Jewish-Zionist ambitions. For more than 20 years the IHR has sought, through its educational work, to prevent precisely such horrors as the attacks in New York and Washington. In the years ahead, as we continue our mission of promoting greater public awareness of history and world affairs, and a greater sense of public responsibility for the policies that generated the rage behind the September 11 attacks, this work will be more important than ever. [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "Reason, not rage, should guide our foreign policy." (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Tue, 18 Sep 2001 16:14:50 -0700 Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 16:14:50 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/18/2001 - "A Call to Sanity: An Essay by Ian Macdonald" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 18, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: One ZGram reader wrote in a Letter to the Zundelsite, expressing the feelings of many: "The shock has not worn off yet and even the most unsophisticated citizen of our country knows in his heart and gut that some rich Arab did not engineer this very complicated operation. They are too small - and what happened was too big." As Ernst and I were listening to the first network broadcasts of the September 11 tragedy, we were horrified at the sappy, insipid, inconsequential voices that came on the air. Very little of substance was being conveyed beyond "...ain't it awful!" and "...let's hit 'em hard!" By shining contrast, there are so many penetrating analyses and thought-provoking articles appearing on the Internet or forwarded directly to me via e-mail or fax that I find it very hard to pick, choose and file. There are still thinking people out there who know exactly what's what and who's who. There are two items I want to share with you before I come to today's "Call to Sanity" ZGram. One is that I want my readers to understand that the struggle for truth and sanity in the current climate of suspicion, hate and revenge - and now sorrow - is claiming some notable casualties. As many undoubtedly know, writer and news analyst Israel Shamir lost a prestigious job at the Israeli daily, Ha'aretz. Veteran columnist Charley Reese lost his Florida job and had the syndication of his much-beloved articles severely curtailed. Phil Reeves walked out on the Murdock empire rather than be censored. And it must be the Eighth Wonder of the World that the very courageous Robert Fisk is still with the Independent. I mention this because I want my readers to understand that some of us have to make a choice between staying on the air or saying everything we know or feel. Realities are such that *some* truth getting out via alternative media is better than having no alternative media at all to contrast and offset lapdog media. The second item of much interest is a rather telling item you can read in its entirety at http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=75266&contrassID=2&su bContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y The gist of that article is that five Israeli citizens were illegally in the US for months if not years and were arrested by the FBI four hours after the attack on the WTC for "puzzling behavior". They were iterrogated for up to 14 hours, held communicado, and quickly transferred to INS holding centers waiting for deportation. Thanks to Ha'aretz, here we have at least one piece of evidence that American law enforcement personnel are not easily fooled by that odd and ever-so-convenient "Arab language flight instruction manual" supposedly left in a seized rental car. At least some of our cops are keeping a jaundiced eye at some Israelis as well. Now to today's essay, written by occasional Zundelsite columnist Ian Macdonald: [START] While Canadians and Americans grieve over the loss of several thousand innocent lives in New York, they should not allow Israeli media propagandists to blind them to the killing of much larger numbers of innocent victims in the Middle East and other atrocities by the Israeli-U.S. coalition that made some kind of violent retaliation almost inevitable. President Bush now pretends that the September 11 attack was little more than mindless terrorism and threatens to increase the death toll manyfold by making war on any and all Muslim countries seen to support the Palestinian cause. Such a move would be massively counterproductive. It would provoke Muslims and other victims throughout the world to resort to further acts of vengeance probably more ingenious and certainly more catastrophic than the initial attack. Since the possibilities are unlimited, the methods unpredictable and the potential perpetrators mostly unidentifiable, there would be no defense compatible within maintenance of a democratic society. The logical and eminently preferable solution of course is to eliminate the impetus for terrorism as opposed to the President's historically-invalidated proposal to "root it out wherever it is found". Since Israeli wrongdoing, especially the cruel dispossession and subjugation of the indigenous Palestinians, is the cause of the problem, it is self evident that the prerequisite to the elimination of terrorism is the neutralization of the Zionist state and her forced compliance with the norms of civilized behaviour. This solution would require Israel to disarm itself of all weapons of mass destruction, to withdraw completely to the 1967 borders leaving all improvements intact, to return all former Palestinian-owned property within Israel proper to its original owners, to pay compensation for loss of Palestinian lives and livelihoods (similar to that demanded by Jews for alleged losses during WWII), to end legal ethnic or religious discrimination and to extend the Law of Return to the Palestinian diaspora. Failure to comply should be answered by the imposition of sanctions, no less stringent than those imposed on Iraq, accompanied by rigorous inspection and a UN military presence if required. As for the origin of the World Trade Centre/Pentagon attack, Iraq and others have speculated that the attack was triggered by Israeli agents provocateurs to deflect the attention of the American public from Israeli crimes while at the same time prompting U.S. military action against Israel's perceived enemies. If indeed Israel played a role in the attack (by no means inconceivable in view of her record of cunning duplicity and deep penetration of her enemies' ranks) it risks horrendous consequences, not only for Israel but also for Zionist collaborators, Jewish and Gentile, who would bear the blame for having betrayed their host nations into disrepute and unnecessary, painful sacrifices - moral, material and human. [END] Thought for the Day: "The question no one in America has yet dared ask, except rhetorically, is "Why?" Unless the country's rulers try to get some understanding of the answer to that, the danger to all humanity is going to be terrifying. (The Guardian, September 17, 2001) From irimland@zundelsite.org Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:19:32 -0700 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:19:32 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/19/2001 - "Press Release: How Palestinians react to the September 11 attack" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 19, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: News has reached the Zundelsite that at least 200 Arabs and Muslims living in America have encountered hostility and, in some cases, serious and even deadly violence. Palestinians, who were winning the public relations war for the hearts and minds of Americans, feel particularly threatened because a controversial video was repeatedly shown on CNN that seemed to indicate that Middle East Palestinians were wildly celebrating in the streets in response to the terrorist attack on the United States. It helps to know the facts, as per this press release sent out by a Palestinian agency, Al-Awda, The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, the largest network of grassroots activists dedicated to Palestinian human rights: [START] 14 September 2001 After the horrific tragedy on September 11, media outlets in the US repeatedly aired a clip of a few Palestinians rejoicing. However, there was hardly any reporting in the news of the following items. - The terrorist act was strongly condemned by every single Palestinian organization including Fatah, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Hamas, Workers Unions and Committees, Human Right Organizations (AlHaq, Law, Palestine Center for Human Rights), student associations, municipalities, mosques and churches, etc. - The attack was also condemned by every single Arab American, Muslim American, and countless other human rights organizations who support and/or work for Palestinian human rights - Palestinian Americans living in Palestine issued a statement in which they reported that all messages they received from other Palestinians were of sorrow and concern. - Palestinian lawmaker Hanan Ashrawi told a news conference the celebrations were "misguided" and "aberrations" motivated by a feeling among Palestinians that they have been victims of U.S. backing for Israel. Palestinian analyst Ghassan al-Khatib said the ``human tragedy'' in the United States should not be exploited for political gains by making Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims look like the "bad guys.'' The vast majority of Palestinians condemned and were horrified and shocked by the terrorist attacks and identified with the victims (as victims themselves). - We won't know the exact numbers for sometime but there are likely dozens if not hundreds of Muslim and Arab Americans killed in these despicable terrorist attacks. Many are still missing and we pray that they will be found safe. - The US Consul General in Jerusalem reported that he has received a huge stack of faxes from Palestinians and Palestinian organizations expressing condolences, grief and solidarity. He himself was pained to see that the media chose to focus on the sensational images of a few Palestinians rejoicing. - The Palestine Legislative Council condemned the terrorist attack on the United States and sent an urgent letter of condolences to Mr. J Dennis Hasterd, Speaker of the House of Representatives. - Palestinians in occupied Jerusalem held candle-light vigils on 12 and 14 September to express their grief and solidarity with the American families struck by this tragedy. - Jerusalem University students, along with the president of the university and the deans of the various faculty, began a blood donation drive in occupied Jerusalem. Students and professors went to hospitals in the occupied city, in order to donate blood for the American victims who need it. - One million Palestinian students in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, stood five minutes in silence to express their solidarity with the hundreds of American children who have been struck by this tragedy, which resembles in its shocking effects their daily sufferings. - Throughout the US, Arab and Muslim Americans joined other American in solidarity vigils and prayers even when some of those members were attacked and/or frightened by rhetoric being espoused in the media Meanwhile: - Georgia Senator Zell Miller's stated "I say bomb the hell out of them. If there's collateral damage, so be it. They certainly found our civilians to be expendable." [NY Times 9/13/01]. - "Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied: 'It's very good.' Then he edited himself: 'Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.' New York Times, 12 September 2001, p. A22: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/12/international/12ISRA.html - While the media's attention was diverted by the tragedy, Israeli forces stormed the Palestinian cities of Jenin and later Jericho killing scores of people, injuring over 120, and demolishing many homes and other buildings. For more information contact: Al-Awda, Palestine Right to Return Coalition P.O. Box 1172 Orange, CT 06477 Fax: (717) 832-1123 E-mail: prrc@mail.com WWW: http://al-awda.org Press Room: http://al-awda.org/pressroom.htm For your information and convenience, the factsheet below is now posted at http://al-awda.org specifically at http://al-awda.org/s11_factsheet.htm. [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "Do you think Israel will face a backlash if the United States attacks Muslim targets?" Yes 79 % No 21 % Total Votes: 5570 (Poll taken on Sep 17, 2001 by the Jerusalem Post) ===== From irimland@zundelsite.org Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:54:55 -0700 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:54:55 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - September 20, 2001 - "Suspension of habeus corpus" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 20, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: I am experiencing inordinate problems getting my ZGram out for reasons I cannot explain. Yesterday I was facing an additional problem: Whereas usually I am swept with an avalanche of mail, for the past 24 hours it was only a trickle. I do not know what's going on, but if you don't hear from me, it will not be for lack of trying. This was supposed to be yesterday's ZGram, consisting of two letters written by the parents of a WTC victim - followed by an announcement that habeus corpus has been suspended in the United States, and that we are now one step closer to dictatorship. If you are like me, you probably will ask: Just what does suspension of "habeus corpus" mean? Ernst put it very simply: "It was a provision the British wrangled out of their rulers in the 13th century, forcing the rulers to bring an arrested person before a judge within a short period who would look at the accusation or charge with an impartial eye. As part of the habeus corpus tradition, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Without it, you are guilty and have to prove that you are innocent." In one of my novels, I describe such a scene, reconstructed here from memory: A simple farmer of German background in the Ukraine in the early 1930s is arrested on the accusation that he acted as a spy for Germany. He is interrogated by one of the notorious Kommissars: Farmer: "But I am innocent. You cannot prove my guilt." Kommissar, while fingering his pistol: "You have that wrong. You do not understand. I do not have to prove your guilt. I can sit here all day, pick my nose, twiddle my thumb, clean my fingernails, and wait for you to prove your innocence to me." This suspension of habeus corpus is a very serious act of citizen infringement and curtailment of basic human rights. Will Americans understand what it means? Now to the two letters by grieving parents, Phyllis and Orlando Rodriguez, whose son Greg became one of the Trade Center victims. [START] Copy of letter sent to NY Times: Not in Our Son's Name Our son Greg is among the many missing from the World Trade Center attack. Since we first heard the news, we have shared moments of grief, comfort, hope, despair, fond memories with his wife, the two families, our friends and neighbors, his loving colleagues at Cantor Fitzgerald / Espeed, and all the grieving families that daily meet at the Pierre Hotel. We see our hurt and anger reflected among everybody we meet. We cannot pay attention to the daily flow of news about this disaster. But we read enough of the news to sense that our government is heading in the direction of violent revenge, with the prospect of sons, daughters, parents, friends in distant lands dying, suffering, and nursing further grievances against us. It is not the way to go. It will not avenge our son's death. Not in our son's name. Our son died a victim of an inhuman ideology. Our actions should not serve the same purpose. Let us grieve. Let us reflect and pray. Let us think about a rational response that brings real peace and justice to our world. But let us not as a nation add to the inhumanity of our times. ===== Copy of letter to White House: Dear President Bush: Our son is one of the victims of Tuesday's attack on the World Trade Center. We read about your response in the last few days and about the resolutions from both Houses, giving you undefined power to respond to the terror attacks. Your response to this attach does not make us feel better about our son's death. It makes us feel worse. It makes us feel that our government is using our son's memory as a justification to cause suffering for other sons and parents in other lands. It is not the first time that a person in your position has been given unlimited power and came to regret it. This is not the time for empty gestures to make us feel better. It is not the time to act like bullies. We urge you to think about how our governement can develop peaceful, rational solutions to terrorism, solutions that do not sink us to the inhuman level of terrorists. Sincerely, Phyllis and Orlando Rodriguez [END] Here is the announcement of the suspension of Habeus Corpus: [START] Bush Suspends Habeas Corpus: Legal Immigrants May Be Held Without Cause Washington, DC--The Bush Administration today announced it is using its powers under the National Emergency Act to suspend the right of habeas corpus for all immigrants in the country, including legal immigrants, meaning that any immigrant in the United States right now can be held indefinitely by the police or government without trial or demonstration of cause to hold them. In short, all immigrants in the country are now subject to summary arrest. The declaration by the Bush administration is being followed by a move in Congress to grant the Justice Department the power to summarily detain any immigrant in the United States, citizen or not, as a matter of law, and not just in exceptional circumstances. Though no one has yet suggested infringing the rights of US citizens, the move is a frightening first step to a national tyranny, based on perpetual suspension of the Constitution in the name of fighting perpetual war. The US lived under such tyranny during the Civil War and World Wars I and II. [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "We will cite the well-known exchange between a Catholic missionary and an African tribal chief. The missionary asked the native chief: "Tell me, what is good and what is evil to you?" The chief thought carefully and then responded: "Good is when we attack a neighboring tribe and steal their women and cattle; bad is when they do the same thing to us." (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:59:09 -0700 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:59:09 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: Zgram - 9/21/2001 - "Lessons of Holocaust Compensation" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 21, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Believe it or not, some of us are still in the Revisionist mode. It is somewhat difficult to return to the pedestrian aspects of that discipline, with so much else going on and relevant to our struggle, but much has changed in the last ten days - and as that bird said through gritted beak while carrying a bit of straw to help rebuild the huge, destroyed cathedral: "...one does what one can." Here is the almost forgotten-in-the-havoc Dr. Norman Finkelstein, still doing his scholarly thing and keeping us abrest of the abuses of the Holocaust Lobby - with a nice politically incorrect touch on behalf of the Palestinian as well. As you read this, just remember that Dr. Finkelstein, otherwise a very shrewd observer of the antics of his tribe, hangs on to the "gas chamber" myth with white knuckles. [START] Lessons of Holocaust Compensation From: Naseer Aruri ed., Palestinian Refugees and their Right of Return (London: Pluto Press, 2001). Lessons of Holocaust Compensation Norman G. Finkelstein Soon after the Nazi Holocaust, Jewish organizations and the government of Israel negotiated substantial compensation agreements with Germany. In the past decade, new compensation agreements have been negotiated with Germany as well as with other European governments. These agreements constitute an important precedent for Palestinian material claims against Israel. In the early 1950s Germany entered into negotiations with Jewish institutions and signed a series of indemnification agreements.1 With little if any external pressure, it has paid out to date some $60-80 billion. The German government sought to compensate Jewish victims of Nazi persecution with three different agreements signed in 1952. Individual claimants received payments according to the terms of the Law on Indemnification (Bundesentsch=E4digungsgesetz). A separate agreement with Israel subsidized the absorption and rehabilitation of several hundred thousand Jewish refugees. The German government also negotiated at the same time a financial settlement with the Conference on Jewish Material Claims against Germany, an umbrella of all major Jewish organizations including the American Jewish Committee, American Jewish Congress, Bnai Brith, and the Joint Distribution Committee. The sums paid out by the postwar German government significantly affected Jewish life. During the first ten years of the agreement (1953-63), the Israeli historian Tom Segev reports: the reparations money funded about a third of the total investment in Israel's electrical system, which tripled in capacity, and nearly half the total investment in the railways, buying German diesel engines, cars, tracks, and signaling equipment. Equipment for developing the water supply, for oil drilling, and for operating the copper mines ... was bought in Germany, as well as heavy equipment for agriculture and construction - tractors, combines, and trucks.2 Germany earmarked the Claims Conference monies (approximately one $1 billion in current values) for victims of Nazi persecution who were not adequately compensated by the German courts. As it happened, the Claims Conference used the monies mostly for other purposes, for example, subsidizing Jewish communities in the Arab world and Jewish cultural institutions such as the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Israel. Beginning in the early 1990s mainly American Jewish organizations cooperating with Israel opened a new round of 'Holocaust compensation' negotiations with various European countries. The first target was Switzerland.3 The Swiss stood accused of directly and indirectly profiting from the Nazi persecution of Jews. Acting at Israel's behest, the World Jewish Restitution Organization mobilized officials at the federal, state and local levels in the United States to press Switzerland for Holocaust compensation. A senior official in the Clinton administration, Stuart Eizenstat, conscripted twelve federal agencies for this initiative. A major international conference was convened in London. The House and Senate banking committees held multiple hearings. Class action lawsuits against Switzerland were filed in American courts. State and local legislatures across the United States implemented economic boycotts. In the end, Switzerland agreed to pay some $1.5 billion in compensation. For our purposes, the merits of the case against Switzerland (dubious at best) are less important than the legal and moral precedents it set. The chairman of the House Banking Committee, James Leach, maintained that states must be held accountable for injustices even if committed a half-century ago: 'History does not have a statute of limitations.' Eizenstat deemed Swiss compensation to Jewry 'an important litmus test of this generation's willingness to face the past and rectify the wrongs of the past.' Although they couldn't be 'held responsible for what took place years ago,' Senator Alfonse D'Amato of the Senate Banking Committee acknowledged that the Swiss still had a 'duty of accountability and of attempting to do what is right at this point in time.' Publicly endorsing the Jewish demand for compensation, President Clinton likewise reflected that 'we must confront and, as best we can, right the terrible injustice of the past.' 'It should be made clear,' bipartisan Congressional leaders wrote in a letter to the Secretary of State, that the 'response on this restitution matter will be seen as a test of respect for basic human rights and the rule of law.' And in address to the Swiss Parliament, Secretary of State Albright explained that economic benefits Switzerland accrued from the plundering of Jews 'were passed along to subsequent generations and that is why the world now looks to the people of Switzerland, not to assume responsibility for actions taken by their forbears, but to be generous in doing what can be done at this point to right past wrongs.' Noble sentiments all, but nowhere to be heard - unless they are being actively ridiculed - when it comes to Palestinian compensation for the dispossession of their homeland. In negotiations with Eastern Europe, Jewish organizations and Israel have demanded the full restitution of or monetary compensation for the pre-war communal and private assets of the Jewish community.4 Consider Poland. The pre-war Jewish population of Poland stood at 3.5 million; the current population is several thousand. Yet, the World Jewish Restitution Organization demands title over the 6,000 pre-war communal Jewish properties, including those currently being used as hospitals and schools. It is also laying claim to hundreds of thousands of parcels of Polish land valued in the many tens of billions of dollars. Once again the entire US political and legal establishment has been mobilized to achieve these ends. Indeed, New York City Council members unanimously supported a resolution calling on Poland 'to pass comprehensive legislation providing for the complete restitution of Holocaust assets', while 57 members of Congress (led by Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York) dispatched a letter to the Polish parliament demanding 'comprehensive legislation that would return 100% of all property and assets seized during the Holocaust'. Testifying before the Senate Banking Committee, Stuart Eizenstat deplored the lax pace of evictions in Eastern Europe: 'A variety of problems have arisen in the return of properties. For example, in some countries, when persons or communities have attempted to reclaim properties, they have been asked, sometimes required ... to allow current tenants to remain for a lengthy period of time at rent-controlled rates.' The delinquency of Belarus particularly exercised Eizenstat. Belarus is 'very, very far' behind in handing over pre-war Jewish properties, he told the House International Relations Committee. The average monthly income of a Belarussian is $100. To force submission from recalcitrant governments, those seeking Jewish restitution wield the bludgeon of US sanctions. Eizenstat urged Congress to 'elevate' Holocaust compensation, put it 'high on the list' of requirements for those East European countries that are seeking entry into the OECD, the World Trade Organization, the European Union, NATO and the Council of Europe: 'They will listen if you speak ... They will get the hint.' Israel Singer, of the World Jewish Restitution Organization, called on Congress to 'continue looking at the shopping list' in order to 'check' that every country pays up. 'It is extremely important that the countries involved in the issue understand,' Congressman Benjamin Gilman of the House International Relations Committee said, 'that their response ... is one of several standards by which the United States assesses its bilateral relationship.' Avraham Hirschson, chairman of Israel's Knesset Committee on restitution and Israel's representative on the World Jewish Restitution Organization, paid tribute to Congressional cooperation. Recalling his 'fights' with the Romanian prime minister, Hirschson testified: 'But I ask one remark, in the middle of the fighting, and it changed that atmosphere. I told him, you know, in two days I am going to be in a hearing here in Congress. What do you want me to tell them in the hearing? The whole atmosphere was changed.' 'Were it not for the United States of America,' Eizenstat aptly observed in his paean to Congress, 'very few, if any, of these activities would be ongoing today.' To justify the pressures exerted on Eastern Europe, he explained that a hallmark of 'Western' morality is to 'return or pay compensation for communal and private property wrongfully appropriated.' =46or the 'new democracies' in Eastern Europe, meeting this standard 'would be commensurate with their passage from totalitarianism to democratic states.' Yet, judging by the claims of Palestinians, it would seem that a main US ally has yet to make the transition. Apart from the moral link joining Jewish claims against Europe, on the one hand, and Palestinian claims against Israel, on the other, a direct material link potentially joins the respective demands. When Israel first entered into negotiations with Germany for reparations after the war, the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe reports, Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett proposed transferring a part to Palestinian refugees, 'in order to rectify what has been called the small injustice (the Palestinian tragedy), caused by the more terrible one (the Holocaust)'.5 Nothing ever came of the proposal. A respected Israeli academic, Clinton Bailey, recently suggested using part of the funds from the Holocaust settlements with Switzerland and Germany for the 'compensation of Palestinian Arab refugees'.6 Given that almost all survivors of the Nazi holocaust have already passed away, this would seem to be a sensible proposal. One cautionary note should be entered. Elsewhere I have documented that Jewish organizations misappropriated much of the monies earmarked for the Jewish victims of Nazi persecution.7 It would be regrettable should monies earmarked for the Palestinian victims of Israel's establishment also end up in undeserving hands. Indeed, if only to avert yet another injustice befalling the refugees, it is vital that Palestinians set up accountable democratic institutions. Notes 1. For background, see especially Nana Sagi, German Reparations (New York, 1986), and Ronald W. Zweig, German Reparations and the Jewish World (Boulder, 1987). 2. Tom Segev, The Seventh Million (New York, 1993), p. 241. 3. For details, see Norman G. Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry (New York, 2000), chapter 3. 4. Ibid. 5. Ilan Pappe, The Making of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 1947-51 (London, 1992), p. 268. 6. Clinton Bailey, 'Holocaust Funds to Palestinians May Meet Some Cost of Compensation', International Herald Tribune; reprinted in Jordan Times (20 June 1999). 7. Finkelstein, Holocaust Industry. [END] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Thought for the Day: "When we challenge the allegations of holocaust supporter's with forensic evidence or pointing out absurdities of the claims we are denounced as 'holocaust deniers'. The reciprocal, then is fair for us, to denounce them in retaliation as 'Truth deniers.'" (Letter to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:14:52 -0700 Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:14:52 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/22/2001 - "Who's monitoring our e-mail?" Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 22, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Yesterday I alerted my ZGram readers that I was experiencing extraordinary interference in my computer work - of a nature I had never experienced before. For one, I could not get my ZGrams out. Secondly, and much more suspiciously, my usual avalanche of e-mail was reduced to a trickle. Since I am unsophisticated computer-wise, Copyright (c) 2001 - I had no explanation, but my inner radar started beeping when I realized that other people, and not just in the Revisionist field, were experiencing similar problems. Here is one typical letter - NOT from a Revisionist: [START] Like many of you ...I get between 20-50 messages a day. Beginning on Tuesday, I was getting just one or two messages only each day. I thought maybe I've been unsubscribed from the lists, but then a friend who called said my posts to one list were indeed showing up. (...) Then a friend sent me the following item today, after I wrote to her yesterday about an academic conference panel we are organizing. She indicated she'd sent me four messages between Tues. and Thursday, none of which have shown up in my inbox yet. The conference is about reconciliation and truth and justice committees in the Middle East, and why have they not been attempted there yet. The following item from AlterNet news should give all of us pause. All that we are writing here is being monitored. This morning, my inbox was suddenly full of over 70 new messages; most of them were dated Tues. and Wed. So somehow and somewhere, someone seems to have been holding up my mail. [END} Here is this article from Alternet.org - apparently an anti-war website: [START] TECHSPLOITATION: How 9-11 Will Change Cyberspace Annalee Newitz, AlterNet September 17, 2001 After last week's terrorist attacks, government and FBI officials immediately began chipping away at our digital privacy in the name of national security. "Encryption" was blamed for our lack of intelligence about the attack, and Sen. Judd Gregg subsequently called for a prohibition on encryption products that don't provide back doors for government surveillance. As if terrorists are going to use government-compliant forms of encryption software anyway. Meanwhile, Wired News reports that anonymous techs at major ISPs like AOL and Earthlink describe how the FBI came calling last week with Carnivore devices (also called DCS1000), surveillance hardware that sits on an ISP's backbone and monitors every data packet that comes and goes. And the ISPs let them install the devices without protest. Carnivore monitors network traffic, which means that even if you use PGP or some other encryption on your e-mail, the system will still be able to figure out where you're sending data. If, for instance, you're e-mailing your friends in the Middle East, Carnivore will take note. And this kind of information could be enough to make you a target for greater surveillance. A lot of this hysteria grows out of long-standing fears of "cyberterrorism," which a series of 1990 Pentagon studies claimed could bring the country to a standstill. Major utilities like water, power, and gas are run by centralized computing facilities that could be hacked and controlled remotely. No one seems to have noticed that this problem could be solved by implementing heterogeneous, decentralized computing systems, which handle many forms of information on different kinds of computers. It might be difficult, but no more so than putting spook-ridden back doors into all of your encrypted crap and regulating the traffic at all major ISPs. People are also freaking out because rumor has it that bad guys like terrorist poster boy Osama bin Laden have been hiding their battle plans using steganography. With steganography, cryptographers hide data in the pixels of a photograph or image. Allegedly, bin Laden was using steganography to hide his nefarious plans in innocuous photos posted on sports and porn Web sites. All of this is technically possible. Terrorists could be communicating covertly online every day. But why are security experts lobbying for brute-force surveillance methods that have little chance of working effectively anyway? It will be impossible to crack every code, to keep track of every message online, no matter how much surveillance we implement. As social critic Slovaj Zizek pointed out in a brilliant editorial posted on a socialist listserv last week, the nation is caught in that surreal, amorphous moment between our recent trauma and its symbolic impact. Zizek compared this period to "the brief moment after we are deeply cut, and before the full extent of the pain strikes us." In the absence of control, in the throes of fear and pain, we experience a vacuum in meaning itself. Nothing makes sense. As if we were drowning, we reach for any meanings we can to buoy us, to keep us afloat. And inevitably, deprived of rationality and meaning, we return to the safe confines of infantile paranoia. Kill them all! Trust no one! Monitor their every move! But the creepy thing is that this breakdown in reason is swaddled in the warm, communitarian rhetoric of protection and strength. Again and again we are exposed to images of destruction and loss; we are sent into a morass of meaninglessness; and then we are "rescued" by authority figures who promise better security and swift retribution. The process works something like steganography. We're presented with a picture of security and strength, but it hides very dark data indeed. To restore our freedom, we will be deprived of it. To recover from senseless murder, we will need to perpetrate more of it. (...) Personally, I'm most disgusted by what can only be called the aggressive sentimentalism in so many government and media responses to the terrorist attack. Commentators are using the sad stories of victims to whip the public up into a blood lust. We're being pushed to assign an ugly and violent meaning to our recent national trauma: that cruelty should beget cruelty; that an incredibly tragic loss of control should be met with an even greater loss of our personal liberties. (...) [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "I find it laughable that the agency notorious for its inability to find a bleeding elephant in a snowbank suddenly (within hours of the attack) has the culprit pinpointed!" (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sun, 23 Sep 2001 12:11:08 -0700 Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 12:11:08 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/23/2001 - "The New World Order: Then and Now" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 23, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: In the wake of the WTC attack, there has been understandably very little Revisionist news since everybody is still glued to the Internet and to their other electronic gadgets. I feel compelled to return to my niche, yet it is difficult to do so since our world has changed and nobody knows or can even imagine what truly lies ahead. So let me today simply send you this nugget of a thought, because I believe - no, I know! - that World War II was merely an extension of World War I, and if war comes tomorrow, it will be an extension of World War II, with chances being high that the variables haven't changed much. If I can go by Internet consensus, most people would say: "Bin Laden is merely the fall guy." Yet few will know the kind of war their sons, brothers, husbands or fathers might have to fight. It could be nuclear or biological war. It might last a very long time, as President Bush has forewarned. One thing is sure: It won't be a war to bring freedom and democracy to downtrodden, underprivileged people. The two paragraphs below were sent to me by a ZGram supporter who wrote: "I agree; Ian Macdonald's Letter to the Editor was indeed 'brilliant'. On reading it, I recalled the following excerpt from Simpson's book which squarely addresses the issue framed by Macdonald; i.e., "...the real purpose of WWII...." Perhaps you can use this excerpt in some way. [START] "Hitler began his rule by breaking with the international bankers. He believed that Germany could never be a sovereign and really independent state so long as she had to live on borrowed money. Instead of going to the bankers for money to buy what she had to procure from abroad, she bartered (that is, swapped) some of her surplus to obtain what she needed from the surplus of other nations -- without debts being incurred on either side. And with this approach Germany was soon crowding out all competitors. Moreover, for the money required to finance her vast programs for a complete regeneration of the life of the German people and for making Germany the most powerful state in Europe, he simply issued what money was needed, on the authority of the German government, and based it not on gold, of which he had none, but on the productive wealth of the land within German confines, combined with the productivity inherent in German brains and German labor. "And it proved sound. It worked. In less than ten years Germany became easily the most powerful state in Europe. It worked so magically and magnificently that it sounded the death knell of the entire Jewish money system. World Jewry knew that they had to destroy Hitler's system, by whatever means might prove necessary, or their own would necessarily die. And if it died, with it must die their dream and their hope of making themselves masters of the world. The primary issue over which World War II was fought was to determine which money system was to survive. At bottom it was not a war between Germany and the so-called allies. Primarily it was war to the death between Germany and the International Money Power." =97 William Gayley Simpson, 'Which Way Western Man' (p.642) [END] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Thought for the Day: "The man who claims he can foresee and direct the future is a fool. The only greater fools are those who trust him enough to give him power." (Joseph Sobran) From irimland@zundelsite.org Mon, 24 Sep 2001 15:10:22 -0700 Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 15:10:22 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/24/2001 - "Churchill in the historical revisionist light" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 24, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: One of the by-products of the September 11 tragedy is that it helps to percolate to the top all kinds of revisionist comparisons. Now that the war drums are droning over all the networks and polls tell us that more than 80 % of people polled are roaring to go to war, perhaps this writer below can give us a moment's reflection. Here are ZGram columnist Ian Macdonald's comments: [START] Ingrid - this is my response to some Churchill quotes on the aol message board today ("we shall fight on the beaches" etc as if 9/11 were equivalent to the Battle of Britain) Dear Phyllis - I see that you are an admirer of Winston Churchill. Good Old Winnie was once my Hero but I now realize that, aside from his highly quotable oratory, he contributed nothing of value to Western civilization, in fact was the chief architect of its demise. He betrayed his country into third class status (and ultimate oblivion) when he rejected Germany's offer of an honourable peace in 1940 thus condemning millions of worthy Christian servicemen and civilians on both sides to unnecessary death and hardship and precipitating the loss of Britain's overseas assets accumulated over centuries of enterprise, investment and sacrifice. Much worse, by advocating and continuing the war against our natural ally Germany when clearly Stalin was the real enemy, Churchill facilitated not only the victory of atheistic communism over all of Eastern Europe, China, Indo-China etc but also the Zionist conquest of Palestine - major tragedies for the millions who lost their freedom, property and in many cases their lives, as a result. Furthermore, it was Churchill who ordered the terror bombing of civilian targets in Germany, incinerating almost a million innocent Christian women, children and elderly persons on the sordid pretext that the barbaric slaughter would demoralize the soldiers at the front (most of whom were struggling courageously to defend Europe from the most bloodthirsty tyrant who ever walked the earth, namely Stalin). It would be comforting to think that Churchill had acted in good faith and sincerely believed in what he was doing, however it is well known from his public statements in the 'twenties and 'thirties that he recognized communism as the major threat to Western democracy. Why he actively campaigned for war against Germany may be explained by his close relationship with Bernard Baruch, the Jewish American tycoon and Presidential advisor who rescued Churchill from bankruptcy and loss of his family estate. The Jews, having been expelled from Germany, had already declared war on their former hosts and were thirsting for revenge, prefersably without risk to themselves, if it could be arranged. It is not inconceivable therefore that the financial bailout had some serious strings attached. In retrospect the best that can be said of Churchill is that he was a magnificent orator who inspired his listeners to acts of self-sacrifice and courage, albeit in a lost cause. The worst that can be said is that he was a self-aggrandizing megalomaniac and charlatan who consciously betrayed his country in the service of an alien anti-Christian minority and was thus a traitor to all the values he pretended to defend. He is credited with winning the war when in fact we lost virtually everything we sought to preserve, not least of all our peace and security, as recent events clearly confirm. [END] ===== Thought for the Day: "It appears from the TV coverage that Americans go blank when others are being bombed and cannot believe it when they are." {Letter to the Zundelsite) hought for the Day: acdonald'si From irimland@zundelsite.org Tue, 25 Sep 2001 21:07:05 -0700 Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 21:07:05 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/25/2001 - "Let's play let's pretend" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 25, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: The column below was one of the last Charley Reese columns in the Orlando Sentinel. I saved it for a pensive evening like tonight after a very long and hard day. Put yourself in the shoes of a people helpless and abused for more than two generations : [START] In 1947-48, Palestinians became victims Charley Reese July 26, 2001 Let's play let's pretend. Pretend you live in Miami-Dade County, Fla., and you evacuate the area because a bad storm is bearing down on it. After the storm passes, you drive back but are met by military roadblocks. "You can't come back," you're told. "What do you mean I can't come back? I have a home and business there," you say. "Not anymore," the soldier says. "All of your property and possessions have been declared abandoned property and now will be used by us. So turn around. You've got 49 other states you can live in, but you're never going to the home you abandoned." Now, let's pretend that after NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia, the Yugoslavian government said it was willing to negotiate a cease-fire, but the Albanian refugees could not return to Kosovo. Do you think the United States would have agreed to that? I don't think so. I think the United States would have said to Yugoslavia the right of refugees to return to their homes is non-negotiable and, if you try to stop them, you'll have to get through us first. Well, this is exactly what happened to 700,000 Palestinians in 1947-48. By what one journalist called a "psychological warfare campaign punctuated with some well-timed massacres," the Israelis drove these people out of their homes and villages with nothing much but the clothes on their backs. Then, at a peace conference, the Israelis said first off that no refugees would be allowed to return nor would they be compensated for any property lost. That was Israel's original sin. It was also our original sin because the United States government did nothing and it should have insisted on the refugees' return. Zionists, however, were not acting in an arbitrary manner. The Zionist ideology, on which the current state of Israel is based, demands a Jewish state defined as a state with a Jewish majority, a Jewish government and Jewish laws. Small, non-Jewish minorities can be tolerated, though in practice in Israel they have been treated like second-class people. But a plural state is out of the question. The problem the Zionists faced in 1947-48 was this: Despite their best efforts, they had not succeeded in persuading a sufficient number of Jews to emigrate to Palestine. Consequently, even in the territory allotted by the partition of Palestine to the Jews, there were so many Palestinian Arabs that the early Zionists knew they should soon equal or exceed the Jews in number. In 1919, there were 57,000 Jews and 533,000 Arabs in Palestine. The Jews owned about 2 percent of the land. In 1946, the imbalance remained. There were 608,000 Jews and 1.2 million Arabs. In 1946, Jews owned only 7 percent of Palestine. An Arab majority was unacceptable to Zionist ideology, so they practiced ethnic cleansing. So, for the same reason they drove them out in the first place, they could not let them back in. The Arab governments said if the refugees could not return, then they would not sign a peace treaty. This original sin -- the disposition of 700,000 Palestinians -- bred the conflict which rages to this day and will continue to rage until the Palestinians get justice or everybody on both sides are dead. I know that it's difficult. The Israelis have done a superb job of creating a racist stereotype of Palestinians in the minds of most Americans. But try, for a moment, to put yourself in their shoes back in 1947-48. You had a family, a farm or a business or shop. You had friends and relatives in a village where your ancestors had lived for centuries. Then, in the blink of an eye, you are torn from your roots and cast into a foreign country with no possessions, no money and no state you can call your own. These people and their descendants still live in those camps, at least those the Israelis haven't killed during their periodic bombing and shelling. These are the people Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak told Yasser Arafat that he must agree can never return or be compensated for their losses. That alone would have prevented Arafat from signing the agreement. It is this expulsion, not the establishment of the state of Israel, that Palestinians mean when they speak of the "Catastrophe." It was not only a cruel act of ethnic cleansing, but it was one of the greatest robberies in the history of mankind. Imagine if you could suddenly gain ownership of Miami-Dade, with all its businesses, inventories, bank accounts, houses, farms, and crops. Palestine was no Miami-Dade County, but the Palestinian possessions were nevertheless quite a pile of loot for the Israelis. This happened, by the way, before Jews left the Arab countries. It most defintely was not a population transfer. The Palestinian victims of ethnic cleansing had nothing to do with what happened to Jews in other Arab countries later. ===== (Credits: Source: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/columnists/orl-opd-reese072601.colum n) ===== Thought for the Day: "In Jerusalem there was over 1000 Palestinians standing in front of the American Embassy holding lighted candles for the victims. Hanan Ashrawi was one of them. People here are shocked in disbelief in what is happening. After all they look at America with sympathy and they are not happy whatsoever." (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Wed, 26 Sep 2001 20:48:55 -0700 Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 20:48:55 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram 0 9/26/2001 - "Truth as the first casualty in war" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 26, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Today's Zgram is a Letter sent to Arizona Republic, 9/21/01 by one of my diligent researchers who surfs the Internet for me: --------------------------------------------------------------- To the editor, In his article "We didn't do anything wrong," that appeared in the Thursday, Sep. 20th edition of the Arizona Republic, columnist Leonard Pitts wrote: "...we don't willfully rain carnage on civilians... When forced to take up arms, we attempt to limit our military actions to military targets. Yes, innocents sometimes die regardless of our best intentions. But for all our transgressions, we don't sanction the murder of those who have neither the capacity nor the intention to harm us." Can Pitts actually believe what he wrote? Good heavens, Leonard, have you never heard of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Civilians did not die there incidental to the destruction of military targets. They WERE the target. ...And this after Japan's willingness to accept our basic surrender terms was well known to our leadership. Sir Basil H. Liddell Hart, in his "History of the Second World War," wrote: In the Tokyo fire bombing of Mar. 9, 1945, "The civilian casualties were approximately 185,000 - whereas the American attackers lost only 14 aircraft. In the next nine days the cities of Osaka, Kobe, and Nagoya were similarly devastated." It is worth mentioning that the loss of only 14 aircraft clearly shows that the attack was made on a virtually undefended city. In Germany things were even worse. Some estimates place the German deaths caused by Allied bombing at well over two million. Almost all of these were civilian deaths. Almost all were women, children, and men unfit for military service because of age or infirmity. And that number does not include the wounded, disfigured, maimed for life, etc. Every highly populated city in Germany became a target of what was called "saturation bombing" or "carpet bombing" (the allies' own terms). Benjamin Colby in his "'Twas a Famous Victory", Arlington House, 1974, wrote: "On March 15 (1944), the air columnist for the New York Herald-Tribune laid allied bombing on the line: 'The destruction of Germany - all of Germany - has begun... It is a total war against the German people. It is a war on plants, houses, churches, public buildings, parks, hospitals, orphanages... civilian and soldiers alike. When we finish with Berlin, we must move on to the next city.'" The city of Dresden was the pi=CBce de r=C8sistance. An estimated quarter = of a million people died there in the firebombing raids of February 13 & 14, 1945, most of them women and children - most burnt alive with incendiary bombs intended for that purpose. In the light of our own recent WTC disaster in which many firefighters and rescue workers lost their lives, consider the following: At Dresden... "The second bombing attack, chiefly with thermite incendiary bombs, was set for three hours later, so that fire-fighting brigades and relief suppliers which might arrive from other cities would themselves become victims... The city was methodically carpeted by incendiary bombs, and a master bomber directed the attacking planes to peripheral areas that were not yet in flames. The resulting firestorm was of indescribable immensity. Returning bombers could see the glare for 150 miles." - Benjamin Colby, op.cit. MUCH more could be written on this and other allied atrocities, compared with which, those of our 'enemies' seem quite mild in comparison (after one blows away the perennial propaganda smoke screen). ...And I haven't yet mentioned the more recent atrocities such as our embargo and bombing of Iraq which have left hundreds of thousands dead, most of them civilians, most of them children. Let us indeed mourn the terrible loss of life in the WTC attack. Let us indeed seek retribution against the perpetrators of that outrageous crime. But, in the process, let us not become sanctimonious hypocrites, claiming a moral high ground we do not possess. It is said that, in war, truth is the first casualty. Does it have to be? =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Thought for the Day: There is not darkness enough to put out the light of one candle. (Sent to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:42:11 -0700 Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:42:11 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/27/2001 - "Hate crimes committed against Arabs" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 27, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Although President Bush, Attorney General Ashcroft and other government officials have urged Americans not to take vengeance into their own hands, and have specifically asked people not to blame or target individual Muslims for what happened on September 11, disturbing reports keep reaching the Zundelsite of hate crimes, including murder, against Arab-Americans - just for their looks and ethnicity. There is an ugly mood out there in some quarters. Please ask all your friends and neighbors, whatever their race, nationality or religion, to follow President Bush's lead. Let no one feed the fires of bigotry with loose, unsubstantiated accusations of collective Arab guilt or responsibility. We Germans can certainly identify with what it feels like to be under constant, unrelenting accusation spanning now more than half a century for something that WE didn't do. Here is a fairly recent ADC Press Release: Anti-Arab Hate Crimes, Discrimination Continue - Killing in Detroit, Passengers Expelled from Airplanes [START] Washington, DC, Sept 21- A number of troubling new instances of hate crimes and discrimination against Arab Americans and Muslims, or those perceived to be, unfolded across the country today. In seven separate instances in cities including Tampa, Orlando, Minneapolis, and San Antonio, pilots or passengers caused Arab American or Muslim passengers, who had passed through rigorous security checks and been seated, to be expelled from the aircraft simply on the grounds of their apparent ethnicity. And an Arab American was killed in Michigan in an apparent act of vengeance for the Sept. 11 attacks. In one instance, three Arab American men were expelled from Northwest flight 673 from Minneapolis to Salt Lake City at the insistence of other passengers, because of their ethnicity. When the other passengers refused to fly if the three remained on board, Northwest expelled the Arab Americans from the plane. A Northwest spokesman has been quoted as saying, "Under FAA security rules, the airline has no choice but to re-accommodate a passenger or passengers if their actions or presence make a majority of passengers uncomfortable and threaten to disrupt normal operations of flight.=94 In other cases, such as that in Orlando, where two businessmen from Pakistan were expelled from a flight they had boarded, it was the pilots who insisted on passengers' expulsion due to perceived ethnicity. ADC appealed to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Justice Department to promptly issue guidelines clarifying that neither pilots' authority nor passenger sentiments could be grounds for excluding passengers simply on the basis of ethnicity or religion. ADC President Ziad Asali said =93when the FAA regulations were promulgated they were not intended as a vehicle for the arbitrary exclusion of passengers due to race, ethnicity or religion. Clearly it is unacceptable that passengers are expelled from aircraft because someone, even the pilot, just doesn't like the way they look. The FAA needs to clarify its rules regarding the expulsion of passengers based on perceived ethnicity.=94 Elsewhere, what is at least the third hate crime murder since Sept. 11 occurred in Lincoln Park, Michigan, just outside Detroit. The victim, a 45 year old US citizen originally from Yemen, was shot 12 times in the back by his girlfriend's former lover. According to the suspect's own police confession and the girlfriend's statements, as the two were sleeping, her former boyfriend broke in and dragged the Arab American out of bed, saying "I'm going to kill you for what happened in New York and DC." The victim ran outside and was killed. The attacker is in custody and has made a full confession. ADC has received assurances >from the FBI and Justice Department that anti-Arab hate crimes will be vigorously investigated. ________ ______ American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee /\ |_ ___ \ / ____| 4201 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 300 / \ | | \ | | | Washington, D.C. 20008, U.S.A. / /\ \ | | | | | | Tel: (202) 244-2990, Fax: (202) 244-3196 / ____ \ _| |_ / | | |____ E-mail: adc@adc.org /_/ \_\________/ \______| Web : http://www.adc.org Be Active, Become A Member: http://www.adc.org/membership.html [END] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Thought for the Day: "During WWII my mother had to accompany (relatives on our street to the) doctor and shopping as they spoke with a German accent. They were afraid to talk as they were insulted and assaulted as a result of the fires of anti-German sentiment created by our government with knowingly false atrocity stories." (Letter to the Zundelsite) From irimland@zundelsite.org Fri, 28 Sep 2001 19:38:43 -0700 Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 19:38:43 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/28/2001 - "One Year into the Second Intifada" Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 28, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: ADC, the largest Arab-American grassroots organization in the United States, put out this press release today: [START] One Year into the Second Intifada Washington, DC, Sept. 28 -- Today marks one year since the beginning of the second Palestinian Intifada. Commenting on the anniversary, ADC President Ziad Asali said: "The brutal attacks of September 11 on New York and Washington, DC and their aftermath are rightly preoccupying the whole world. Even during this time of crisis, however, the one-year anniversary of the Palestinian uprising should not be ignored." He continued: "Now is the time to move towards a just and lasting peace, which means an end to the occupation and the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital." The al-Aqsa Intifada was triggered by the provocative visit of Ariel Sharon, who has since become Israel's Prime Minister, to al-Haram al-Sharif. Since then, Palestinians have been denied free access to the Holy Places in Jerusalem. In the past year, 692 Palestinians were killed and 15,833 injured by Israeli security forces and settlers. 52 were assassinated (assassinations are considered to be war crimes under the Hague Treaty of 1907). 166 of those killed and 6000 of those injured were under the age of 18. According to reports, 809 Palestinian homes were demolished, including 25 in Jerusalem. At last count, 112,900 olive trees were uprooted from Palestinian land. 1,026 people were arrested or detained, among them 170 children, ten women, and two doctors. Israel has attacked defenseless Palestinian towns with F-16 jets and used heavy equipment, including tanks, against civilians. The daily loss to the Palestinian economy is estimated at $12.7 million. The unemployment rate is now 50-60%. Two million Palestinians (two-thirds of the total population) are now living below the poverty line. The total economic loss is $6 billion. The Beit Jala Government Hospital, the Dibs Hospital, the Malta Hospital, and the Yamama Hospital in Bethlehem; the Beit Sahour Medical Center in Beit Sahour; the Alia Hospital in Hebron all received direct hits. In Ramallah, rockets hit the Early Childhood Center and a school for the blind. Several private clinics were fired at with live ammunition. Israeli settlers, using automatic weapons, attacked the Augusta Victoria Hospital in Jerusalem, wounding the hospital security guard. The West Bank and Gaza have been cut off from the outside world. The so-called safe passage between Gaza and the West Bank has been closed for the year. Almost all cities and villages are separated from each other. Twenty-nine towns and villages are completely isolated. The Israeli army illegally seized control of the Orient House on August 10. Israel continues to pursue its demographically motivated exclusive policies toward the Palestinian civilian population in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, especially East Jerusalem. Settlement construction is on the rise. Last March, the Israeli government approved 2830 housing units in the Ras Al-Amud and Jabal Abu Ghneim (Har Homa) areas of Jerusalem. [END] ===== Thought for the Day - titled "High-flying chickens cause a flap in Eilat "Police and security forces in Eilat were on high alert yesterday when a light aircraft flew low over the city and did not respond to the police's calls to identify itself. Soldiers were put on high alert and prepared to launch an air strike. Eilat's airspace was closed off to civilian aircraft. When the plane finally landed, Shimon (Kushi) Rimon and Rabbi Shimon Eisenbach, rabbi of the city's Shahmon neighborhood, descended from the craft along with a cage holding two chickens. The rabbi explained to the security forces that they wanted to perform the kaparot ritual (the symbolic transfer of sins to a chicken) for the whole of Eilat to absolve residents of their sins ahead of Yom Kippur." (Revital Levy Stein - Ha'aretz, September 27, 2001) From irimland@zundelsite.org Sat, 29 Sep 2001 13:27:49 -0700 Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 13:27:49 -0700 From: Ingrid Rimland irimland@zundelsite.org Subject: ZGram - 9/29/2001 - "THE BLOODY JORDAN RIVER NOW FLOWS THROUGH AMERICA " Copyright (c) 2001 - Ingrid A. Rimland ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny September 29, 2001 Good Morning from the Zundelsite: Today I offer you MER WEEKEND READING: "WHY DID IT HAPPEN?" Not that I agree with everything that's being said in this remarkably measured and balanced article by Gary Kamiya, Executive Editor of Salon Magazine, but 85% or so of seasoned reasoning, well expressed, makes you forgive the rest of standard Jewish Victimhood to be forever subsidized, if enough suckers can be found. I say this is an article you can pass on without evoking shrieks of "Anti-Semite!" "Nazi!" "Racist!" from your politically correct surroundings. Read it and pass it on! =============================================== THE BLOODY JORDAN RIVER NOW FLOWS THROUGH AMERICA "There will be no peace for the U.S. until we convince Israel to make peace with the Palestinians. By Gary Kamiya Sept. 17, 2001 | Americans are preparing for the long, arduous and necessary task of bringing the perpetrators of Tuesday's unspeakable horror to justice. But as we do so, we must also ask ourselves why this happened -- and why it might happen again. Striking back at those who have viciously attacked us is a first step. But if we don't address the underlying reasons why we were attacked, we will invite more hatred, and in the end more attacks. We can turn our country into Fortress America, but no fortress can defend against zealots willing to die. In the end our best, our only real defense will be winning the hearts and minds of those who hate us. Of course, some of those minds neither can nor should be won. Some people from less fortunate nations hate America because it is the world's only military and economic superpower. Others detest us because of our all-conquering culture. Others see us as godless infidels simply because we don't subscribe to their psychotic version of Islam. There is nothing we can or should do about any of these things. Those who carried out Tuesday's attacks were clearly driven, in large part, by religious fanaticism. The perpetrators were Arab terrorists, linked to the Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden and his followers are zealous Muslims who regard America as the enemy of Islam, and therefore an entity of essentially metaphysical evil. There is nothing we can or should do to lessen the medieval fury of such monomania. Bin Laden's zealots' hatred for America is an article of faith: nothing will change it. But as we look down the long, dangerous road that lies ahead, we must remember that there is one specific grievance that rankles in the breasts of millions of Arab and Islamic people in the world. And until that grievance is resolved, there is a greater possibility that one of those people will decide to strike a terrible blow at the United States. The critical issue is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- a conflict in which the United States plays a reluctant central role. Until a just resolution of that conflict is realized -- one that provides a homeland for the Palestinian people and security for Israel -- it will be far more difficult for America to put together a truly committed coalition to fight terrorism, one that is not simply held together by coercion. And there is a far greater chance that military action against Islamic states will backfire, inflaming a significant portion of the world's population against us and breeding thousands of terrorists where there once were dozens. This is bin Laden's master strategy. We cannot allow it to succeed. To ensure that it does not, America must boldly take the lead in the Middle East. We must pressure Israel to take the concrete steps necessary to provide justice for the Palestinian people. The Israeli government is incapable of taking such steps. The latest evidence came Friday, when, incredibly, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon cancelled scheduled peace talks with Palestinian Authority president Yassir Arafat at the same time that he was launching Israel's most aggressive military action in the last year against Palestinians. These are the actions of a man more interested in scoring political points by letting his adversary twist in the wind than in searching for peace. The Bush administration, which in the aftermath of the attacks had asked Sharon to get the peace talks moving again, was left in the usual American posture -- wringing its hands impotently. It's time for this to change. It is legitimate to ask whether shifting America's Mideast policy, in the aftermath of a horrific terrorist attack, would not signal to terrorists that they had won. The answer is no. This is not appeasement, nor a surrender to our enemies. Moving toward a just resolution of the Middle East crisis, one that preserves Israel's security while providing a nation for the Palestinians, is simply the right thing to do -- as it was before Black Tuesday, and as it will be after we hunt down and bring to justice the evil men who made a cold-blooded decision to kill thousands of innocent people. The difference is that after Tuesday, doing the right thing has acquired a different urgency. For far too long, the United States has pretended to stand on the sidelines of a conflict in which we are not neutral, passively endorsing a situation in which bottled-up Palestinian rage has grown and grown until it has exploded in a terrible paroxysm of violence, bringing horror to Israelis and Palestinians alike. And every day that the situation remains unresolved plants the seeds of more Arab and Islamic hatred -- of Israel, and of Israel's best friend, the United States. Tuesday's horrific attack might have taken place even if Israel and the Palestinians were at peace. Nor would Mideast peace assure us that no more terrorist attacks would take place. But this we know: as long as millions of Islamic and Arab people hate America because of its Mideast policies, we will be in danger. The plight of the Palestinians is the single most important issue to most Arabs. Professor Shibley Telhami of the University of Maryland conducted a poll in which citizens of five nations -- Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Lebanon and the United Arab Emirates -- were asked how important the Palestinian issue was to them personally. In four nations, 60 percent said it was the most important. In Egypt, reviled throughout the Arab world as the state that made peace with Israel, 79 percent said it was. Nor are such sentiments confined to the Middle East. In small anti-U.S. demonstrations Sunday in Rawalpindi, Pakistan -- the Muslim nation that is the key to our diplomatic and military efforts to apprehend bin Laden -- demonstrators chanted slogans attacking the U.S. over the Palestinian issue. What does this have to do with America? Everything. It is difficult for Americans, thousands of miles away from a conflict for which they feel no responsibility, to realize how people in the Middle East -- indeed, in much of the Third World -- view us. For many, perhaps most Arabs -- including those in the moderate states, as well as that vast majority of the Arab world that is well disposed to the American people -- America is virtually indistinguishable from Israel. The bitter joke in the region is that Israel isn't a client state of the United States -- the United States is a client state of Israel. The refugees in the squalid camps in Gaza may not know that Israel is the primary recipient of our foreign aid, receiving $2 billion annually in military aid, but they know Israel could not do what it's doing without us. The jets that fire missiles into Palestinian buildings, the tanks and helicopter gunships that enforce Israeli control of the occupied territories in the West Bank and Gaza, might as well have big pictures of Uncle Sam painted on the side. And people ask, "Why do they hate us?" If this were a case of good vs. evil, the righteous Israelis fighting for their survival against the evil Arabs, it would be a cause worth America enduring the hatred of millions of people. But it is not. No one in the world, aside from some segment of the Israeli public and, apparently, the U.S. government, believes this. The Third World doesn't believe it. The United Nations doesn't believe it. Our European allies don't believe it. And most Americans don't believe it -- although in the horrifying spasm of mindless anti-Arab sentiment that is gripping the country now, who knows if that will continue to be true. Let us be absolutely clear: if Israel is not a moral exemplar, neither are the Palestinians or the Arab states. There are no heroes and villains here. Nothing can condone the Palestinian terror attacks against Israel, any more than anything can condone the intransigence on both sides that has led to them. The day has long passed when anyone could seriously look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as anything but a train wreck, a horrifying collision in which every noble impulse and belief immediately runs into its opposite. A people persecuted for thousands of years, subject to the most horrifying act of genocide visited upon any group in human history, finally finds a homeland where they can be free -- only to discover that another group of people, with equal claim to the land, was already there. Another impoverished and oppressed group of people, driven from their ancestral homes by an occupying force into wretched refugee camps, or left on the margins of the society created by that occupying force, turning in their desperation to religious fanaticism and suicidal violence. On both sides, leaders without the courage to make peace. Decent men and women on both sides driven to hopelessness and hatred. And endless blood. That is the situation. But it may still be possible to find a way out of this tragic deadlock -- if America has the courage to step in. Only the United States has the power to broker a deal that will provide lasting peace between Israel and Palestine. Hitherto, we have lacked the will to do so. Perhaps Tuesday's horrific events will provide the impetus to find that will. Exactly what the final form of a peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinians should or will take is impossible to say. Nor is ultimate success assured. The hatred and mistrust is deeper than ever; perhaps a point of no return has been reached. But the effort must be made. And the crucial initial step is obvious, as it has been for many years: Israel must immediately stop building new settlements in the occupied territories. Freezing construction of new settlements is the critical step called for in this spring's Mitchell Report on Mideast violence -- a reasonable, even-handed document that assigned blame to both Israel and the Palestinians and was completely ignored by all parties, most glaringly the only one that had the power to make it happen, the United States. Israel's construction of settlements in the occupied territories taken in the 1967 war violates international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, which, in the language of the Mitchell report, "prohibits Israel (as an occupying power) from establishing settlements in occupied territory pending an end to the conflict." U.S. administrations from Reagan to the present have opposed the settlements. Their existence is the first point brought up by Palestinians in conversations about Israel. It is true, as the Mitchell Report acknowledges, that the Palestinians bear their share of the blame for continuing to launch attacks against Israel. But playing the blame game at this point is a sterile exercise, and the stakes are Israeli and Palestinian lives. To break the cycle of violence a bold step must be taken. A freeze -- or, better still, a freeze combined with a dismantling of existing settlements -- would be the single most positive step Israel could take toward restoring trust between itself and the Palestinians. As an editorial in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz said, "A government which seeks to argue that its goal is to reach a solution to the conflict with the Palestinians through peaceful means, and is trying at this stage to bring an end to the violence and terrorism, must announce an end to construction in the settlements." There should be no illusions that this by itself would bring peace. Although most Israelis agree that no new settlements should be built, months of bloody terror have eroded their trust in the Palestinians. And they are led by Ariel Sharon, a hard-liner who knows no response to terror but counter-terror. Sharon has refused to stop building the settlements, saying he does not want to reward Palestinian violence and citing security concerns. But until the Palestinians are given genuine hope, there will be no security for Israel. Faced with this stalemate, the Bush administration has done nothing -- not only on the settlement issue, but on anything relating to the Middle East. Fearing it will humiliatingly fail as the Clinton administration failed before it, it skulks haplessly on the sidelines. The mightiest country in the world is reduced to mumbling earnestly, "The cycle of violence must stop," as bombs keep exploding and people keep dying. It's time for America to start throwing its weight around -- not just with the Islamic states like Pakistan that offer second-hand harbor to terrorists, but with Israel. There should be no great difficulty in getting the Israelis to do what we want: Just tell them that if they don't, we won't give them any more money. It's remarkable how persuasive $3 billion a year can be, the total amount of military and civilian aid we lavish on our Mideast partner. At the same time as we lean on the Israelis, we also must squeeze Arafat. The Palestinian leader and those who follow him must be told that further outbreaks of violence will abrogate the whole deal. And he must also be told that at the end of the day (and it's going to be a very short day) the Palestinian people are not going to get significantly more than what they almost got at Camp David -- that tragic missed opportunity for whose failure, as incisive articles in the New York Times and the Aug. 9 New York Review of Books have demonstrated, Arafat, Barak, and Clinton must all shoulder the blame. The U.S. must give the Palestinians muscular assurance that their basic needs as a sovereign state will be met. Those needs are summed up by Rob Malley and Hussein Agha in the New York Review of Books: "a viable, contiguous Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza with Arab East Jerusalem as its capital and sovereignty over its Muslim and Christian holy sites; meaningful sovereignty; and a just settlement of the refugee issue." But just as the Israelis must give something up, so too must the Palestinians. There is no other realistic path to peace. They will not get everything they want. They must be told that they will not get universal right of return for all those Palestinians who were displaced by the creation of the state of Israel, or control of all of the West Bank or Jerusalem. Arafat is a gravely flawed leader, torn between realism and maximalist mythology. After he failed to embrace the imperfect but viable solution offered by Barak and Clinton at Camp David, even many liberal Israelis concluded that he was not seriously interested in making peace. But he is a better partner than anyone else on the horizon. And a bold American move at this crucial moment -- with Arab leaders realizing that after Tuesday, the rules of the game have changed forever -- could shake Arafat, and the moderate frontline Arab states, out of their anti-American posturing and into constructive action. Neither the PLO nor any Arab state wants a future in which a deadlocked Israeli-Palestinian conflict breeds endless terrorism, which in turn unleashes the full might of American military force against the Arab world. As for the Israelis, the deal would also guarantee that America would stand behind their core demands. Those are, again in Malley and Agha's words, "its continued existence as a Jewish state; genuine security; Jewish Jerusalem as its recognized capital; respect and acknowledgment of its connection to holy Jewish sites." Would America be putting Israel at risk by, in effect, forcing it to blink first? Not if America stood behind its words. If the Palestinian Authority in the interim period towards full statehood proved unable or unwilling to control radical rejectionists, America would stand behind Israel in its retaking of the occupied territory previously ceded to the Palestinians. In effect, everything would return to the previous, bloody status quo. And if there is some risk in the deal -- so what? The situation now is intolerable. There is, of course, no guarantee that this plan would succeed. But it would be a way of breaking the bloody deadlock in the region. It would offer hope. And, crucially, it would take place in the context of a broader diplomatic initiative to the Islamic world, a mission in which we will need every card we can play. It would make a clear and emphatic statement to the Islamic states -- at precisely the moment when we might be taking military action against Islamic regimes that harbor terrorists, a move that could inspire a new generation of terrorists with an implacable hatred of America -- that it is a new day, that Israel is not the tail that wags the American dog. No one can say that stepping into the Middle East quagmire will stop future terror attacks against the United States. The world is full of angry zealots with a laundry list of grievances. Bin Laden and his maniacal ilk might continue to plot mayhem against us no matter what we do. But it could help, and it is the right thing to do. It is also the wise thing to do. Enraged politicians, pundits and citizens are calling for America to lash out indiscriminately, to bomb states that harbor terrorists even if innocent people are killed -- rabid reactions epitomized by columnist Ann Coulter, who wrote, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." That way madness lies. As we move into uncharted territory of extraordinary difficulty, hunting down the elusive and bloodthirsty foes responsible for history's worst act of terrorism, we must ensure our efforts do not ignite a conflagration of anti-American hatred throughout the Arab world. To do this we must convince that world that we are genuinely interested in brokering a fair and comprehensive peace between Israel and the Palestinians. There will be those who point to the televised images of Palestinians celebrating the attacks as proof that these people hate us too much to ever be partners in peace. Such a reaction is understandable, but it is wrong. No one can condone celebrating the murder of innocent people. But hopeless, desperate people are driven to do ugly things. In their hearts, the Palestinians, like the Israelis, like Americans, like all the people of the world, want the same things. Peace. A country. A decent life. The little girls in Nablus lighting candles in memory of those who died in New York City are the real face of the Palestinian people. Our goal must be to act in such a way that some day, if an earthquake rocks Tel Aviv, those little girls will light candles for its victims, too. On Tuesday, America turned into Israel. The sudden, obscene horror. The nightmarish images. The anguish of families torn apart, of cherished lives suddenly snuffed out. On Tuesday, America also turned into Palestine. The same horror. The same images. The same anguish. Today, the Jordan river runs through the center of every city in America. Palestinians and Israelis have waded through that river of blood and tears for decades: On Tuesday, we received our terrible baptism. Like the human beings who live in Jerusalem and Ramallah, we know we are not safe, not any more. We must finally accept that what happens in Ramallah and Jerusalem on Monday will happen in New York and Washington, or San Francisco and Chicago, on Tuesday. If America succeeds in unifying the world against terrorism, while helping bring peace to the world's most dangerous and intractable conflict and draining the venom from old hatreds, the unthinkable tragedy that has befallen us might yield a lasting good. [Salon Magazine] ===== COMMENTS? SUGGESTIONS? MER's website is http://www.MiddleEast.org/ Salon Magazine's website is , (http://www.salon.com/) ===== Thought for the Day: "The psychological shock has been profound. The attitude used to be that our government could do whatever it wanted to do against the people of other countries, and Americans could enjoy the spectacle on TV from the comfort of their living rooms, watching the bombs falling and buildings burning while sipping their beer and munching potato chips. Americans felt invulnerable, and the feeling of invulnerability led to a diminished sense of responsibility. We could kick other people in the teeth all day long, kill other people's wives and children, burn other people's homes, and they couldn't do a thing about it. We didn't have to worry about the consequences of our behavior." (Source accidentally swallowed by the Zundelsite hard drive - sorry!)