James Stenzel Presents...
This Scholarly Library of Facts about Domestic & Worldwide Zionist Criminality

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

More Jews are filling Bush’s campaign war chest,
Jewish News Weekly, October 24, 2003
"When Fred Zeidman raised money in the Jewish community for George W. Bush´s presidential run in 2000, several Jewish supporters asked to give their donations in cash, afraid of having a public record of their transaction. But this time around, Zeidman is not encountering timid Jews. He said many Jewish donors are eager to leap onto the Bush-Cheney bandwagon. “The difference is night and day,” said Zeidman, whom Bush appointed as chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council in 2002. “You can´t believe how easy it is.” Zeidman, a Houston resident who bills himself as a coordinator of Bush support in the Jewish community, said he and other Jewish fund-raisers for Bush say they have had little trouble raising the $200,000 needed to join the “Rangers club” — the top ranking of Bush´s financial backers. While all accounts seem to suggest that Bush is getting unprecedented financial support in the Jewish community, it is still unclear whether that financial support will translate into votes come November 2004. Jews traditionally have voted largely for Democratic candidates in national elections, but Republicans are hoping that support for Bush´s foreign policy will mean a much stronger showing than the 19 percent he garnered in 2000. In the fund-raising realm, several big Republican donors, who contributed millions of dollars in “soft money” before new campaign finance laws were put into effect, also were leaders of the organized Jewish community. This time around, Bush is raising funds outside the normal Republican Jewish circle, finding a new crop of donors willing to contribute to a candidate they see as fervently pro-Israel. “I think that Israel, the war on terrorism and homeland defense are all coming together right now,” said Matthew Brooks, executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition."

President Bush lied, says Mahathir Malaysian. PM dismisses claims US leader rebuked him over Jew remark,
Straits Times (Malayasia), October 29, 2003
"THE President of the United States lied. That was Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's latest riposte in the continuing exchange over whether he was ticked off by the American leader over his remarks that Jews ruled the world. 'It's the biggest lie. If he had rebuked me, I'm quite sure I would have rebuked him also,' the combative Malaysian leader told reporters here after arriving home from Papua New Guinea yesterday. 'I think he wants to support his officer,' he added, alluding to White House spokesman Scott McClellan. Mr McClellan told reporters last Monday that President George W. Bush had pulled Dr Mahathir aside at a Bangkok summit to rebuke him for his anti-Semitic remarks. A day later the Malaysian PM insisted it did not happen. But Mr Bush told reporters afterwards that he had indeed put the point across to Dr Mahathir personally that he thought the comments about Jews were 'reprehensible'. Yesterday, Dr Mahathir not only accused Mr Bush of having told the 'biggest lie', he also noted pointedly that someone who could have lied about the existence of weapons of mass destruction could also lie about what was said to him. This was a clear reference to Mr Bush's statements about Iraq's cache of banned weapons, which are yet to be found. Despite the exchanges, Dr Mahathir brushed off the controversy as a minor issue. What was important, he said, was the opportunity to present his views during the Apec meeting on the need for the restructuring of the international financial regime. He reiterated earlier remarks that the international outcry proved his point that Jews controlled the world. 'I think it is true that the Jews control the world through proxy and if you say anything against the Jews, then they are going to accuse you of being anti-Semitic and will try to stop investment from coming into this country,' he told reporters. But he said Malaysia would not be blackmailed into silence. 'I don't think we should allow ourselves to be blackmailed by them, 'If you do not say nice things, I will not invest in your country, I'll pull out my investment'. That is blackmail. 'This is the kind of pressure they put (on us). I don't see why people should get annoyed with what I said, which is absolutely true,' he said. Following Dr Mahathir's remarks - made at the recent Organisation of Islamic Conference Summit in Kuala Lumpur - a US-based Jewish lobby group, the Simon Weisenthal Centre, called for a boycott of tourism and investment in Malaysia."

Hanan Ashrawi and the Price of Dissent,
by Antony Loewenstein, ZNet, October 23, 2003
"It's not easy advocating Palestinian rights. Edward Said frequently commented upon the constant abuse he had received throughout his life. Upon his death, the Anti-Defamation Commission (ADC) in Australia (related to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in America) renounced Said as 'anti-American and anti-Semitic'. Supporting Palestinian self-determination, critiquing Israeli Government policy and questioning Zionist history was seemingly enough to incur the wrath of Jewish groups around the world. Hanan Ashrawi is currently finding herself in similar straits in Australia. The Sydney Peace Foundation, associated with the University of Sydney, recently decided to award Dr Ashrawi its annual peace prize. Previous winners have included the East Timorese leader Xanana Gusmao in 2000 and Archbishop Desmond Tutu in 1999. What originally appeared to be an uncontroversial choice has developed into a full-blown battle between the Peace Foundation, elements of the Jewish lobby, the New South Wales premier, Bob Carr and the Jewish press. The issue in my opinion, however, is not simply the prize, but a more fundamental debate around Palestinian identity in Australia. I believe it is nothing less than an attempt by the Jewish community to delegitimize the Palestinian cause. This kind of behaviour is becoming a regrettably common Zionist ploy in the Western world for increasingly transparent reasons. Since the announcement of the prize to Ashrawi, Jewish groups have begun a campaign to firstly discredit the high-profile winner, and then to convince Premier Carr that attending the ceremony on November 6 would be, in the words of Gerald Steinberg, an associate professor of political studies at Bar Ilan University, "honouring war, murder and hatred, while debasing the concept of peace and reconciliation". Incidentally, Professor Steinberg launched a petition to stop Ashrawi receiving the prestigious award and received nearly 4000 signatures. The Australian Jewish News (AJN), the sole Jewish community newspaper in Australia, wrote in its editorial on October 17, that "an Australian premier [Bob Carr] is about to present a peace prize to an apologist for terrorism…The problem is not that Premier Carr is meeting Dr Ashrawi; on the contrary, the more engagement there is, the greater the chance of achieving a solution. The problem is that by presenting her with the prize, he is endorsing her track record." Her track record, according to the AJN, is thwarting the Oslo peace deals in the 1990s, not condemning Hamas as a terrorist organization and suggesting Jews living in the West Bank are legitimate targets for Palestinian aggression. All these comments are a misappropriation of the truth. Dr Ashrawi was clearly aware of virulent anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab feeling in the Australian Jewish community, as her comments to the Sydney Morning Herald on October 23 suggested: "I knew there would be mobilised voices trying to malign Palestinians, particularly ones like me who have been outspoken for peace." So who are the groups so determined to smear Dr Ashrawi? The Australian Jewish News has been the conduit through which numerous Jewish groups and individuals have been able to libel her. The paper, not known for its coverage outside the official Israeli/Palestinian paradigm, has chosen to repeat the lies against Ashrawi and in doing so, has become even more of an impediment to dialogues of understanding between the two sides ... Indeed in August this year, after learning of [President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry Jeremy] Jones' complaints regarding the Peace Prize to Ashrawi, NSW Labor member Leo McLeay said the following in the New South Wales parliament: "Mr Jones's comments on this issue are in line with his regular attacks on members of Parliament and others who give any support for the people of Palestine…It amazes me how intolerant Mr Jones and the pro-Israeli lobby can be. If you are not an enthusiastic supporter of the Sharon version of the Berlin Wall [in the West Bank occupied territory] you are considered anti-Jewish. When will the Jeremy Joneses of this world understand that criticism of the Israeli Government and its actions is not anti-Semitism?" Other Jewish groups have also joined in placing pressure on Bob Carr to withdraw his support for Ashrawi ... The debate brings up a number of uncomfortable realities regarding the influence and mentality of the Jewish lobby in Australia, though their modus operandi is far from limited to this country. I would argue that the central, yet unspoken, complaint of the Jewish community is awarding a prize to a woman who so well articulates the Palestinian cause. In the current battle for international legitimacy, there is no question that Israel is losing friends at an ever-increasing rate. For this reason alone, the legitimacy given to Ashrawi lessen the arguments of Zionist and Israeli supporters. She is being given credence after a lifetime of speaking out against Israeli aggression" ... There is no reason to believe that the current battle over Dr Ashrawi is not yet another attempt at legitimising Jewish supremacy in the Israeli/Palestinian debate."

Bush won't tie KL aid to Jew remark White House says incoming Malaysian PM Abdullah deserves a clean start and should be judged on his own actions,
The Straits Times (Malaysia), October 31, 2003
"Saying that the incoming Malaysian Prime Minister deserved a chance to start with a clean slate, the Bush administration made clear yesterday that it opposed tying US$1.2 million (S$2 million) in military aid for Malaysia to religious freedom. Dr Mahathir and Mr Bush do not see eye to eye on the Malaysian leader's remark that Jews rule the world ... The Senate unanimously agreed on Monday to link US$1.2 million in military training aid to Malaysia to a determination by Secretary of State Colin Powell that the country supports and promotes religious freedom, including for Jews. The provision was added to a US$18 billion foreign aid spending Bill, which the Senate is expected to approve this week. The Senate vote was in response to Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's remarks to an Islamic summit earlier this month about Jews. He said: 'The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy.' The statements were condemned by Mr Bush and other Western leaders ... The whole Senate action was dismissed by Dr Mahathir who said his country was not at all bothered by it. The move, made purportedly on religious freedom, made no difference to the Malaysian government, he said. It was nothing new to the country. 'Before, they also cut US$1 million. It makes no difference to us. We don't really need that money. 'I think we can find US$1 million here,' he told reporters on Tuesday. His defiance continued yesterday when he said: 'Thank you very much, but we run this country in our own interests and in our own way.' Dr Mahathir also appeared to imply that the Senate vote was proof that his claim about Jews was correct. 'They are very annoyed about what I said about the Jews,' he told an impromptu news conference in Putrajaya. 'This is their reaction, so what I say is true.'"

Ledeen and other Zionist "neo-cons" want Iran taken out.
Reliable Source? The Ongoing Fight Over Ghorbanifar,
by Mark Hosenball, Yahoo!News, (from Newsweek), October 19, 12:17 pm ET NEW YORK, Oct. 19 "Terrorism expert Michael Ledeen has refueled the fight between neocons close to the Pentagon's civilian leadership and their foes at the CIA. Ledeen says that in early August, Manucher Ghorbanifar -- an Iranian businessman whose claims of contacts among Tehran moderates touched off the Iran-contra scandal -- put him in touch with an informant claiming to know where highly enriched uranium was hidden in postwar Iraq. Ledeen took this info to top Defense contacts, who passed it to the CIA (which in the 1980s ordered its operatives to shun Ghorbanifar) ... The CIA remains wary. One of Ghorbanifar's contacts recently asked U.S. officials for $250,000 to gather information in Tehran to foil a terror attack on the United States, scheduled for about Nov. 23 through Nov. 25 of this year, that would be "bigger" than 9/11. Ghorbanifar claims post-9/11 anthrax letters originated in Iran and that if the U.S. or Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities, the ayatollahs will attack Israel with chemical and biological weapons."

Cheney's new adviser has sights on Syria,
By Jim Lobe, Asia Times, October 22, 2003
"A neo-conservative strategist who has long called for the United States and Israel to work together to "roll back" the Ba'ath-led government in Syria, has been quietly appointed as a Middle East adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney. David Wurmser, who had been working for the undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, John Bolton, joined Cheney's staff under its powerful national security director, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in mid-September, according to Cheney's office. The move is significant, not only because Cheney is seen increasingly as the dominant foreign policy influence on President George W Bush, but also because it adds to the notion that neo-conservatives remain a formidable force under Bush, despite the sharp plunge in public confidence in Bush's handling of post-war Iraq resulting from the faulty assumptions propagated by the neo-cons before the war. Given the recent intensification of tensions between Washington and Damascus - touched off by this month's US veto of a United Nations Security Council resolution deploring an Israeli air attack on an alleged Palestinian camp outside Damascus - Wurmser's rise takes on added significance. The move also follows House of Representatives' approval of a bill that would impose new economic and diplomatic sanctions against Syria. Wurmser's status as a favored protege of arch-hawk and former Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) also speaks loudly to Middle East specialists, who note Perle's long-time close association with Cheney, Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld's chief deputy Paul Wolfowitz. Wolfowitz was the first senior administration official to suggest that Washington might take action against Syria amid reports in April that Damascus was sheltering senior Iraqi leaders and weapons of mass destruction in the wake of the US invasion. "There's got to be a change in Syria," Wolfowitz said, accusing the government of President Bashar Assad of "extreme ruthlessness". Rumsfeld subsequently accused Syria of permitting Islamic "jihadis" to infiltrate Iraq to fight US troops. Perle, who last week was in Israel to receive a special award from the Jerusalem Summit, an international group of right wing Jews and Christian Zionists who describe themselves as defenders of "civilization" against "Islamic fundamentalism", has made no secret of his own desire to confront Damascus. In a series of interviews, Perle applauded Israel's attack on Syrian territory - the first since 1967 - in alleged retaliation for a Palestinian suicide bombing in Israel. "I am happy to see the message was delivered to Syria by the Israeli Air Force, and I hope it is the first of many such messages," he said. Perle said he hoped the US would itself take action against Damascus, particularly if it turned out that Syria was acting as a financial or recruiting base for the insurgency in Iraq. "Syria is itself a terrorist organization," he asserted, insisting that Washington would not find it difficult to send troops to Damascus despite its commitment in Iraq. "Syria is militarily very weak," added Perle. Damascus has been in Wurmser's sights at least since he began working with Perle at the AEI in the mid-1990s. For the latter part of the decade, he wrote frequently to support a joint US-Israeli effort to undermine then president Hafez Assad, in hopes of destroying Ba'ath rule and hastening the creation of a new order in the Levant to be dominated by "tribal, familial and clan unions under limited governments" ... Wurmser, whose Israeli-born spouse Meyrav Wurmser heads Middle East studies at the neo-conservative Hudson Institute, was the main author of a 1996 report by a task force convened by the IASPS and headed by Perle, called the Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000. The paper, called "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm", was directed to incoming Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It featured a series of recommendations designed to end the process of Israel trading "land for peace" by transforming the "balance of power" in the Middle East in favor of an axis consisting of Israel, Turkey and Jordan. To do so, it called for ousting Saddam and installing a Hashemite leader in Baghdad. From that point, the strategy would be largely focused on Syria and, at the least, to reducing its influence in Lebanon. Among other steps, the report called for Israeli sponsorship of attacks on Syrian territory by "Israeli proxy forces" based in Lebanon and "striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper". "Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, even rolling back Syria," the report argued, to create a "natural axis" between Israel, Jordan, a Hashemite Iraq and Turkey that "would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula". "For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East, which could threaten Syria's territorial integrity," it suggested ... In the book's acknowledgments, Wurmser praised those who most influenced his work, a veritable "who's who" of those neo-cons most closely tied to Israel's far right, including Perle himself, another AEI scholar, Michael Ledeen and undersecretary of defense for policy and the man in charge of post-Iraq war planning, Douglas Feith ... Wurmser also gave thanks to Irving Moskowitz, a major casino operator and long-time funder of Israel's settlement movement, whom he described as a "gentle man whose generous support of AEI allows me to be here".

Malaysian PM: Jews are not 'Chosen People' ,
Interest! Alert (from UPI), October 30, 2003
"Retiring Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, on his last day in office, Thursday delivered more critical remarks about Jewish people. Mahathir, who received worldwide criticism for previous remarks alleging Jewish world dominance, compared Europe's past ill treatment of Jews to the way Israel treats Palestinians. The Jerusalem Post said Mahathir, who retires Friday after 22 years in power, used a visit to a mosque to stoke the controversy. Apparently referring to a U.S. Senate vote tying Malaysian military aid to a guarantee of religious freedom for Jews, he said: "Some people say we here have no freedom of religion. In reality, the people in (the United States) are the ones who were forced to embrace a religion." He said people "who abducted from Africa were brought to that country and made slaves, tortured, and forced to change their religion..." During a news conference, Mahathir was asked if he had a parting message for Jews. He replied: "They must never claim they are the chosen people. ... They have taken land belonging to the Muslims." The Post said Mahathir, 77, is credited with transforming Malaysia from a rubber- and tin-producing backwater to one of Southeast Asia's most prosperous and modern nations."

Throw Russia out of G8: US defence advisor,
" Senior Pentagon advisor Richard Perle said Russia "should be excluded" from the Group of Eight (G8) industrial nations for its arrest at gunpoint of its top oil baron, it was reported. "Not one of the G8 countries would allow itself to behave in such a way with one of its leading businessmen," the US Defence Department advisor said of the arrest last Saturday of the head of the Yukos oil giant Mikhail Khodorkovsky in an interview published Thursday in the business daily Kommersant, warning that Russia was "heading in the wrong direction." Khodorkovsky, whose oil group is the centre of a wide-ranging fraud investigation, was surrounded by armed security forces in a dawn raid at an airport in Siberia while he was on a business trip and flown back to Moscow. He was charged on seven counts of fraud, including one of embezzling the state of more than one billion dollars, and imprisoned. The arrest has been widely seen in Moscow as politically motivated, with Khodorkovsky having financed opposition parties ahead of December 7th parliamentary elections. As quoted by Kommersant, Perle said he hoped "the US administration will not allow Russian companies to return" to Iraq, noting that Washington had "liberated the Iraqis from the monstrous regime of Saddam Hussein with which Russian had fruitfully cooperated for a long time."

German MP sparks Jewish row. Hohmann compared the Russian atrocities to the Holocaust,
BBC News (UK), October 321, 2003
"A German MP has caused a storm of protest by linking Jews to execution squads in the Russian Revolution. Conservative Martin Hohmann said a large numbers of Jews were active in execution squads and could therefore be described as a nation of perpetrators. His speech triggered an angry response from the Jewish community and members of his CDU party, with some calling for him to stand down. The Christian Democrats have faced allegations in the past about members having links to the extreme right. Mr Hohmann's comments were made during a speech nearly a month ago, but have only surfaced now. 'Perpetrators' He compared the killings, which he said were orchestrated by Jews in Russia's violent 1917 revolution, with the murder of Europe's Jews during the Holocaust of the Second World War. According to a transcript of his speech shown on the website of his local CDU branch in Neuhof, Mr Hohmann said: "Jews were active in great numbers in the leadership as well as in the Cheka (Soviet secret police) firing squads. Thus one could describe Jews with some justification as a Taetervolk (a race of perpetrators). That may sound horrible. But it would follow the same logic with which one describes the Germans as a race of perpetrators." The speech has since been taken off the site. The BBC's Ray Furlong in Berlin says Mr Hohmann has now gone further in defending his remarks on national television. He said the MP demanded "justice" for Germans and that they should not define themselves as the nation who caused Auschwitz. The head of Germany's Jewish community, Paul Spiegel, called Mr Hohmann's speech "a reach into the lowest drawer of disgusting anti-Semitism". He said he had spoken to CDU leader Angela Merkel and assured reporters "she shared my views". Our correspondent says any criticism of Jewish people is still a taboo in Germany, which makes this extremely embarrassing for Mr Hohmann's party."

Poll controversy as Israel and US labelled biggest threats to World peace. Europeans believe the US contributes the most to world instability along with Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and North Korea,
by Andrew Beatty, EUOBSERVER; BRUSSELS, October 31, 2003
"Over half of Europeans think that Israel now presents the biggest threat to world peace according to a controversial poll requested by the European Commission. According to the same survey, Europeans believe the United States contributes the most to world instability along with Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and North Korea. The specially commissioned poll which asked citizens 15 questions on "the reconstruction of Iraq, the conflict in the Middle East and World peace", has caused controversy in Brussels. The European Commission is coming under fire for publishing the results of a number of questions - relating to Iraqi reconstruction - while failing to publish the results which revealed the extent of mistrust of Israel and the United States in Europe. A Commission spokesperson today (30 October) denied that the decision to withhold some of the results until next Monday was politically motivated, adding that some of the results not yet published are still "unstable". He did, however, add that a decision was made to publish a preview of the questions pertaining to the reconstruction of Iraq, to coincide with the Iraqi donors conference in Madrid, which took place at the end of last week. This admission has raised questions about whether the Commission sought to suppress the results which would have came at a particularly sensitive moment. One pollster involved in the survey told the EUobserver that some questions being raised about the poll were unfounded. "The questions were decided upon by both the polling organisations and the European Commission", the source said. Israeli officials dismissed the results of the poll as propaganda. According to El Pais, a massive 59 percent of Europeans said they believed that Israel is the biggest obstacle to world peace. The poll, conducted by Taylor Nelson Sofres/ EOS Gallup Europe, was conducted between 8 and 16 of October."

Throughout the world, the U.S. government creates hostility in its blind protection of Judeo Centrism. Khodorkovsky is Jewish.
Russia Angered by U.S. View of Yukos Case,
Earthlink, November 2, 2003
"Russia's foreign minister criticized the United States on Sunday for expressing concern about actions against the oil giant Yukos, but President Vladimir Putin's new chief of staff said he doubted the wisdom of freezing a large chunk of the company's shares. Last week, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the Bush administration regarded the arrest and jailing of Yukos head Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and the freezing of 44 percent of the company's shares, as raising "serious questions about the rule of law in Russia." Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, speaking on state television, reacted angrily. "The United States is trying to place the actions of the judicial organs of Russia in doubt. This is interference in the judicial affairs of another state that is not acceptable, and should not be, in the normal terms of democratic society," Ivanov said. He noted that several massive financial scandals have hit the United States and he accused Washington of employing a "double standard" because "the State Department did not express its anxiety about any of those noisy scandals, did not interfere in the judicial process." "To teach other people - that's the fashion in Washington," Ivanov said. The remark reflected the Kremlin's long-standing irritation with what it regards as official American arrogance, although it has largely held back on such criticism as Russian-U.S. relations have become closer since the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Russian officials have said the moves against Russia's biggest oil producer, which began in July when a top Yukos shareholder was arrested, are strictly a matter of investigating and prosecuting crimes. Khodorkovsky is charged with fraud, forgery and tax evasion."

As NATO meeing approaches, light shines on handling of Jewish issues,
By Adam B. Ellick, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Nov. 4, 2003
"Later this month, seven nations will clear a crucial hurdle toward full membership in NATO. But as they embrace a military alliance that seemed unimaginable during the Soviet era, these nations — Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia — will remain under close scrutiny to ensure they follow through on promises regarding “value issues,” including how they handle Jewish affairs. Jewish leaders are divided on how the nations will behave after they are formally invited to join the military alliance during the Prague Summit on Nov. 21. NATO demands that candidate countries establish high standards in treating their ethnic and religious minorities. NATO membership is not a foregone conclusion for the seven aspirant nations. Though invitations will be extended in Prague, nothing will be final for another 18 months. During that time, the legislatures of all 19 NATO members states — including the U.S. Senate — must approve the additions. During the past decade, Jewish leaders and the U.S. State Department have used NATO membership as leverage to encourage the aspirants to confront their Holocaust history. That includes politically sensitive issues like local collaboration with the Nazis, property restitution, Holocaust education and commemoration and the prosecution of war criminals. “There will be a greater effort to keep these countries” moving on such issues “than ever in the past,” said Bruce Jackson, executive director of the U.S. Committee on NATO, a nonprofit group that tracks value issues among aspirant nations. “The pressure to make good on reforms will be pronounced,” he said. “They’re young, fragile democracies, and there’s a feeling we have to encourage them to continue the reforms they have promised.” Jackson regards the handling of the 1999 NATO entrants — the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary — as a mistake. World leaders failed to anticipate a slowdown in reforms after the three joined NATO, he says. In Hungary in particular, he said, leaders were surprised when politicians there reverted to nationalist themes in elections and tolerated anti-Semitic remarks by far-right leaders ... Eastern European leaders acknowledge the importance of Jewish issues, but decisions are largely unpopular with local populations, most of whom — due to Soviet propaganda — were never educated about their nations’ Holocaust history."

Ashrawi lobbying damaged Jews: leader,
Nine MSN, November 3, 2003
"Overzealous efforts to stop NSW Premier Bob Carr giving the Sydney Peace Prize to Palestinian MP Hanan Ashrawi had probably damaged the Jewish community's standing, a senior Jewish leader said. Mr Carr will present the prize to Dr Ashrawi on Thursday in the face of opposition from Sydney's Jewish community, which regards her an inappropriate recipient for a peace prize. But NSW Jewish Board of Deputies president Stephen Rothman said Mr Carr's judgement should be respected and acknowledges some Jews had overstepped the mark in their lobbying. "There's been methods of approach by one or two people, who are not part of the leadership of the community that probably have not done the community much good," Mr Rothman told ABC radio. Efforts by some Jews to "heavy" members of the Sydney Peace Foundation and demand Mr Carr withdraw his offer to present the award were "unfortunate and probably inappropriate, but I don't criticise them for that", he said."

It is apparently a crime in Germany to question anything about Jewish history.
Jewish slur MP faces probe,
BBC (UK), November 3, 2003
"Christian Democrat Martin Hohmann compared the actions of Jews in the Russian revolution to those of the Nazis in the Holocaust. In a storm of angry reaction he was forced on Saturday to apologise for the remarks, made during a speech in October. But prosecutors on Monday announced their inquiry had been opened after a criminal complaint had been filed, alleging incitement, slander and disparaging the dead. Prosecutors in the central city of Fulda, near the town where the speech was delivered, said the identify of the person who filed the complaint was not being made public, although reports said it was an individual from Bonn. Jewish groups were furious at the Holocaust comparison. The Central Council of Jews had earlier said it was planning to lodge a complaint. The full text of Mr Hohmann's speech will now be examined by the prosecutors, before they decide whether to mount a full-scale inquiry, says prosecutors' spokesman Harry Wilke. Mr Hohmann's comments drew angry reaction from Jewish leaders and widespread criticism. 'Innocent lambs' He argued that while Germans still felt burdened by their Nazi past, others cast themselves as "innocent lambs" despite their own records - for example, the role of Jewish Bolsheviks in the 1917 Russian revolution. "With a certain justification, one could ask in view of the millions killed in the first phase of the revolution about the 'guilt' of the Jews," Mr Hohmann said. Blame should not be placed on the Germans for Nazi crimes or Jews for those of the Bolsheviks, but rather "the godless with their godless ideologies", he argued. On Sunday Mr Hohmann was thrown off a parliamentary commission looking at compensation for Nazi-era forced labourers. Christian Democrat leaders were due to discuss the case on Monday. Critics have called for him to be suspended from the parliamentary group. A German Government spokesman called the remarks "an unacceptable and intolerable gaffe". According to a transcript of his speech on the website of his local CDU branch in Neuhof, Mr Hohmann said: "Jews were active in great numbers in the leadership as well as in the Cheka [Soviet secret police] firing squads. "Thus one could describe Jews with some justification as a Taetervolk [a race of perpetrators]. "That may sound horrible. But it would follow the same logic with which one describes the Germans as a race of perpetrators." However, he went on to say: "Neither the Germans nor the Jews are a race of perpetrators." The speech has since been taken off the site."

EU Condemns Anti-Jewish Bias Amid Poll,
Earthlink (from Associated Pres), November 3, 2003 09:53 PM EST
"The European Union Monday condemned lingering anti-Jewish bias it said was reflected in a new survey, which found that many Europeans see Israel as a threat to world peace. Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi, whose country holds the EU presidency, called Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to express his "surprise and indignation" over the survey results, saying the question had been "misleading." The results "point to the continued existence of a bias that must be condemned out of hand," European Commission President Romano Prodi said in a statement. "To the extent that this may indicate a deeper, more general prejudice against the Jewish world, our repugnance is even more radical." The EU poll, released Monday after parts were leaked last week, found 59 percent of EU citizens said "yes" when asked if Israel posed "a threat to peace in the world." More than half - 53 percent - also said "yes" to Iran, North Korea and the United States. Eleven other countries followed ... Prodi, who is visiting New York, said the survey does not reflect the Commission's thinking and will not affect its Mideast policy. The telephone survey of 7,515 people was carried out Oct. 8-16 by 15 EOS Gallup Europe institutes. It has a margin of error of 4 percentage points."

German special forces chief sacked in anti-Semitism row,
Yahoo! News, November 4, 2003
"The head of the German military's special forces was sacked after backing a conservative politician under fire for comments widely criticized as anti-Semitic. Defence Minister Peter Struck, announcing the dismissal, described Reinhard Guenzel as a "lone, confused general" and said he was being dismissed from his post with immediate effect. At a hastily-arranged news conference, a clearly angry Struck said Guenzel had damaged the image of the army with his "abstruse and confused" views. "I don't think that you can call it an honorary dismissal when the minister throws him out," he said in reply to a question. Struck said he was convinced Guenzel was an isolated case. The row has again highlighted the acute sensitivity in Germany, because of its unique past, to anything which smacks of anti-Semitism or is seen to hark back to the Nazi era. Guenzel got into trouble for writing a letter to support to Martin Hohmann, a Christian Democratic Union (CDU) lawmaker, who said Jews could be seen as a "race of perpetrators" for alleged crimes against civilians during the Russian revolution of 1917. The CDU leadership has already formally admonished Hohmann and removed him from a key parliamentary committee. Guenzel, 59, a career soldier who rose through the ranks after joining as a paratrooper, has headed the elite KSK special forces for three years. It is not the first time he has been in trouble -- two years ago he warned of a potential "bloodbath" in the hunt for al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden and accused politicians of being willing to see anti-terror soldiers die to avoid the deaths of thousands of civilians. According to ZDF public television, Guenzel's letter lauded Hohmann for "an excellent speech ... of the kind only seldom read or heard in this nation" and showing a "courage for truth and clarity." He assured Hohmann that "with your words, you are speaking for the soul of the majority of our people." Hohmann's comments came in a speech to constituents early last month which only recently came to public attention. In it, the backbench Bundestag deputy likened what he claimed was bloodshed orchestrated by Jews during the Russian revolution to the Holocaust. He said Jews were active in the Bolshevik leadership and the Soviet secret police firing squads, according to a transcript that was later removed from a CDU website. "Thus one could describe Jews with some justification as a Taetervolk (race of perpetrators). "That may sound horrible," said Hohmann, 55. "But it would follow the same logic with which one describes the Germans as a race of perpetrators." He later said his words had been taken out of context and that he had not meant to deny the unique character of the Holocaust. Germany's Central Council of Jews said it planned to lodge a complaint with police and along with the Greens, junior partner in the ruling coalition, has demanded his expulsion from the CDU. The CDU leadership said Tuesday it saw no reason to take further action. Hohmann himself appeared to nuance his earlier apology, saying on ZDF that there were "dark areas" of Jewish history. "An apology would, I think, be a signal that the facts to which I referred are not correct. But the facts are correct." The KSK enjoy a reputation as Germany's toughest soldiers. Formed in 1996, the unit has some 450 troops, with plans to increase that to 1,000."

Understanding Jewish Influence II: Zionism and the Internal Dynamics of Judaism,
by Kevin MacDonald, Occidental Quarterly, Volume 3, Number 3
"The history of Zionism illustrates a dynamic within the Jewish community in which the most radical elements end up pulling the entire community in their direction. Zionism began among the most ethnocentric Eastern European Jews and had explicitly racialist and nationalist overtones. However, Zionism was viewed as dangerous among the wider Jewish community, especially the partially assimilated Jews in Western countries, because it opened Jews up to charges of disloyalty and because the Zionists’ open racialism and ethnocentric nationalism conflicted with the assimilationist strategy then dominant among Western Jews. Zionist activists eventually succeeded in making Zionism a mainstream Jewish movement, due in large part to the sheer force of numbers of the Eastern European vanguard. Over time, the more militant, expansionist Zionists (the Jabotinskyists, the Likud Party, fundamentalists, and West Bank settlers) have won the day and have continued to push for territorial expansion within Israel. This has led to conflicts with Palestinians and a widespread belief among Jews that Israel itself is threatened. The result has been a heightened group consciousness among Jews and ultimately support for Zionist extremism among the entire organized American Jewish community. In the first part of this series I discussed Jewish ethnocentrism as a central trait influencing the success of Jewish activism. In the contemporary world, the most important example of Jewish ethnocentrism and extremism is Zionism. In fact, Zionism is incredibly important. As of this writing, the United States has recently accomplished the destruction of the Iraqi regime, and it is common among influential Jews to advocate war between the United States and the entire Muslim world. In a recent issue of Commentary (an influential journal published by the American Jewish Committee), editor Norman Podhoretz states, “The regimes that richly deserve to be overthrown and replaced are not confined to the three singled-out members of the axis of evil [i.e., Iraq, Iran, and North Korea]. At a minimum, the axis should extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya, as well as ’friends’ of America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, along with the Palestinian Authority, whether headed by Arafat or one of his henchmen.” More than anything else, this is a list of countries that Israel doesn’t like, and, as I discuss in the third part of this series, intensely committed Zionists with close links to Israel occupy prominent positions in the Bush administration, especially in the Department of Defense and on the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney. The long-term consequence of Zionism is that the U.S. is on the verge of attempting to completely transform the Arab/Muslim world to produce governments that accept Israel and whatever fate it decides for the Palestinians, and, quite possibly, to set the stage for further Israeli expansionism."

Ashcroft: We'll Keep Fighting Anti-Semitism, Terrorism,
By DONNA DE LA CRUZ, Newsday, November 7, 2003
"Attorney General John Ashcroft vowed Friday that the Justice Department would continue its fight against anti-Semitism and terrorism. "This administration believes that acts of anti-Semitism must be confronted, condemned and denounced," Ashcroft said in a keynote address at the Anti-Defamation League's national meeting. "As history shows, verbal attacks on the Jewish people are portends of more savage criminality to come," he added. Ashcroft credited the ADL for standing up to hatred and bigotry and urged all Americans to do the same. "In this battle, every voice and every hand is needed to triumph over terrorism," he said. "It requires us to speak out in America for our highest values and to take our battle to the terrorists abroad" ... Ashcroft spoke on the second day of the three-day conference, celebrating the ADL's 90th anniversary"

Special treatment: Combined Jewish Appeal will play unprecedented role in recruiting Jewish immigrants to Québec. Although ineligible, the Combined Jewish Appeal also receives money from the United Way but is not eligible,
by Marc-A, Action Report (Focal Point Publications), November 2003
"THE French speaking Montréal-based paper Le Devoir [see article and link below] has once again demonstrated its ability to do good investigative work, and the courage to publish important and shocking stories which are ignored in the mainstream monopoly press. The first story is a mind-blower. It is entitled "Un partenariat douteux" (A dubious partnership) and was printed on October 30, 2003. In essence, Québec's provincial government is about to sign an obscure agreement with the Combined Jewish Appeal which would allow this organization to recruit immigrants from Latin America. Anyone who knows anything about Québec's immigration policies should immediately sense something is very wrong, because the Provincial Ministry Public Relations and Immigration has prided itself on not using religion as a criterion for choosing immigrants to Québec. BUT there is more: Bewildered authors are raising polite but awkward questions in Le Devoir. They not only ask why the government has rather rapidly and quietly decided to delegate this delicate task, but also argue that this organization, the Combined Jewish Appeal, has the means to pursue its own objectives without state-sponsored aid. It is reported that last year the CJA amassed $43 million (Canadian) for its activities from various donations and subsidies. In particular, they ask: Why should a private organization (which is not accountable to the public) have the right to recruit immigrants for the Québec government? Has this odd agreement come about due to political pressure or does this organization truly possess the expertise required to carry out such a task ... Indeed, it is odd for a government agency to give its power away to a private organization which will use religion as its main criterion for recruiting Latin Americans as immigrants to Québec. Although many things remain unclear because the ministry in question has not been forthcoming, the obvious and not so obvious ramifications of such an odd policy and partnership are many. In particular, the Combined Jewish Appeal's Web site states the following on its first page: FOR OURSELVES - FOR OUR CHILDREN - FOR ISRAEL FOREVER. It is further stated on this Web site that the Combined Jewish Appeal's goal is not only to increase the size of the local Jewish community but also to encourage and facilitate Aliyah to Israel as well as the absorption of thousands of new Olim(s) by the Jewish state. The authors ask how will this organization proceed to differentiate between the task it will be contracted to perform for the provincial government and its mission statement in re to Israel? Our initial reaction is: What the hell is going on? The questions which immediately came to mind are: Will my taxes be used to pay for this new "service"? Will my tax contributions somehow serve to finance the immigration of Latin American Jews to Israel? What criteria will be used to judge whether a person is eligible to be "recommended" for immigration to Canada by this organization? How do we, as citizens, exercise some form of control over immigration once public matters become privatized? Has the Combined Jewish Appeal found a clever way for the public to pay for its activities designed to facilitate immigration to Canada and will this augment its budget for activities related to immigration to Israel? Hence, could my tax dollar be indirectly financing the Likud or the IDF? THE other story is related and is very revealing with respect to how Joe Six-Pack unknowingly finances Zionist organizations while many Muslim organizations have been declared as illegal because they somehow "contribute to terrorism." Again, in an article in Le Devoir (November 2, 2003), Kathleen Levesque writes that the Combined Jewish Appeal is the second largest beneficiary of aid received from the charity Centraide (United Way of Canada) even though it does not meet the financing criteria which are applied to the 324 other groups who receive moneys from this charity. Since 1974, the Combined Jewish Appeal has apparently been receiving 3.4% of the Centraide's net charity revenues (over one million dollars in 2003). This percentage is said to reflect Jewish representation in Montréal. Despite the fact that this aid is given to the Combined Jewish Appeal on the condition that it is not to solicit aid from citizens outside the Jewish community, the Combined Jewish Appeal managed to amass 43 million dollars last year. The author says it is odd that a mainstream charity gives money to an organization which amasses more money each year than the charity itself and which sends a substantial part (36%) of its receipts to Israel. On the other hand, the other organizations which receive money from Centraide are not permitted to mount their own funding campaigns and to thus collect additional moneys independent of the United Way. Furthermore, seven of the 22 Jewish organizations which are part of the Combined Jewish Appeal group are subsidized by the government. When the United Way was asked to justify why the Combined Jewish Appeal is afforded this very special treatment, its Montréal director, Mrs. Thibodeau-Deguire, apparently blushed and could not provide a justification. All she said was although this is nonsensical and unjustifiable, it is traditional to look the other way when it comes to the Combined Jewish Appeal. The article finishes with the flimsy explanations and justifications provided by Jewish leaders asked to comment on the situation. One Goldbloom said that this situation was not a symbol of disloyalty toward society in general but was really based on biblical principles. What Bible, I wonder? Anyway, I find this special treatment outrageous although I suspect this is only the tip of the iceberg. In essence, people (including myself) have been unknowingly financing an organization which finances Israel and all this, while thinking we are giving money to the poor of Montréal. Furthermore, this same organization will be "recommending" people in Latin America for immigration to Québec by using religion as its primary criterion. Perhaps, they have been also recommending to the RCMP and CSIS who should be arrested under suspicion of terrorism and interrogated. Maybe, they will soon be running the province on similar "biblical" principles. As to Le Devoir, I would expect a charge of anti-Semitism to be soon leveled at its editor."

One of the French articles mentioned above:
Centraide verse un million à un organisme quarante fois millionnaire,
by Kathleen Lévesque, Le Devoir (Montreal), novembre 2, 2003
" Le deuxième organisme bénéficiaire en importance de Centraide, la Fédération CJA, une agence de collecte de fonds qui vient en aide à la communauté juive, échappe aux critères de financement appliqués aux 324 autres groupes soutenus par l'organisation caritative montréalaise, selon les vérifications faites par Le Devoir. Sylvain Abitbol, président de la Fédération CJA Jacques Nadeau Version pour imprimer Faire suivre ... Droit de reproduction En vertu d'une entente datant de septembre 1974 et renouvelée le 11 février 1999, la Fédération CJA (Combined Jewish Appeal, ou Appel juif unifié) reçoit chaque année 3,4 % du produit net de la campagne de financement de Centraide, soit le pourcentage que représente la population juive du territoire du Grand Montréal par rapport à la population totale. En 2003, la contribution de Centraide a ainsi totalisé, selon le rapport annuel de l'organisme, plus de un million de dollars. En contrepartie de l'aide accordée par Centraide, la Fédération CJA renonce à solliciter la population non juive lors de sa propre campagne de financement annuelle. Malgré cette obligation, la Fédération CJA a recueilli l'année dernière 43 millions destinés uniquement à la communauté juive. De cette somme, un million provient de Centraide qui, lors de sa collecte de fonds, a recueilli moins d'argent que la Fédération CJA, soit plus de 41 millions. La Fédération CJA, qui fait partie d'un regroupement de 156 fédérations et 400 communautés juives indépendantes à travers l'Amérique du Nord appelé United Jewish Appeal, a notamment pour mission de soutenir Israël."

U.S. House assails speech by Mahathir,
International Herald Tribune, October 31, 2003
"The U.S. House of Representatives has voted unanimously to condemn comments by Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad of Malaysia, who sparked controversy recently by asserting that Jews ruled the world. By a vote of 411 to 0, with one abstention, the lower chamber of Congress adopted on Thursday a resolution condemning Mathahir's remarks as "incendiary" and "despicable." . "Incendiary rhetoric of this nature can be neither excused nor rationalized," the resolution read, decrying "age-old stereotypes of Jewish global domination and grotesque anti-Semitism." . The resolution called upon other governments and international bodies, particularly the European Union, to condemn Mahathir's comments, which were made at the summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference held in Malaysia in mid-October. . At the meeting, Mahathir said that "the Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy."

U.S. officials receive homeland security tips from Israeli counterparts,
By Daniel Ben-Tal, Israel21c, June 23, 2003
"American leaders in the law enforcement, medical and legal fields are continuing to make working visits to Israel to learn about the latest Israeli developments regarding homeland security, anti-terror activities, and emergency medical procedures. This month, separate delegations of police officials, state attorney generals, and doctors all expressed admiration for Israeli expertise in these areas and confirmed they would be taking the lessons they learned home to their communities. The high-ranking U.S. delegation of police and municipal officials learned that Israeli neighborhood policing and anti-terror activity offers a valuable model for American law enforcement. The 11-strong delegation, headed by Patrick Cannon, deputy mayor of Charlotte, North Carolina and James Coates, Deputy Chief of the Sheriff's Office in Pinellas County, Florida, examined many aspects of their Israeli colleagues'work to keep the peace and prevent terrorist incursions ... The visit was organized through the Jewish Agency's 'Partnership 2000' program that creates partnerships between Israeli and Jewish Communities in the Diaspora, and facilitates professional exchanges. In a reciprocal study tour - an Israeli police delegation from the Hadera area paid a working visit to their colleagues in North Carolina last year - the visiting officers lodged with host families of Hadera Police officers."

Feith is the Answer Analysis,
By Jim Lobe, Inter Press Service News Agency, Nov 5, 2003
"The reference is to Douglas Feith, the administration's rather obscure but nonetheless strategically placed undersecretary of defence for policy, who reports directly to deputy secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld. If the administration is looking for a scapegoat for the situation it faces in Iraq, Feith is the most likely candidate both because of his relative obscurity compared to other administration hawks and the fact that, of virtually all of them, his ideas -- particularly on the Middle East -- might be the most radical. A protege of Richard Perle, the former chairman of Rumsfeld's Defence Policy Board (DPB) who stands at the centre of the neo-conservative foreign-policy network in Washington, Feith has long opposed territorial compromise by Israel. He was an outspoken foe of the Oslo process and even the Camp David peace agreement mediated by former President Jimmy Carter between Egypt and Israel. His former law partner, L. Marc Zell, is a spokesman for the Jewish settlers' movement on the occupied West Bank. But, more to the point, virtually everything that has gone wrong in Iraq -- especially those matters that Congress is either investigating or is poised to probe -- is linked directly to his office. ''All roads lead to Feith,'' noted one knowledgeable administration official this week. His now-defunct Office of Special Plans (OSP) is alleged to have collected -- often with the help of the neo-conservatives' favourite Iraqi exile, Ahmed Chalabi -- and ''cooked'' the most alarmist pre-war intelligence against Saddam Hussein and then ''stovepiped'' it to the White House via Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney, unvetted by the intelligence agencies. It was also his office that was in charge of post-war planning, and rejected the product of months of work by dozens of Iraqi exiles and Mideast experts in the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) who anticipated many of the problems that have wrong-footed the occupation. The OSP also excluded many top Mideast experts from the State Department from playing any role in the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Iraq. And it is Feith's office that, with the CPA, recommended companies for huge, and in some cases no-bid, contracts in Iraq that have amounted, in the eyes of some critical lawmakers, to flagrant profiteering. Among the firms that have profited most are those whose consultants or officers also serve on the Pentagon's DPB, members of which are chosen by Feith. In a particularly provocative move that raises a host of conflict-of-interest questions, Feith's former partner Zell has set up shop with Chalabi's nephew in Baghdad to help interested companies win contracts for reconstruction projects. ''Until they get rid of Feith, no one is going to believe that the administration is seriously reassessing its policies,'' one congressional aide whose boss has been a strong critic of Bush's policy in Iraq, told IPS ... Also like Perle, Feith has long taken a strong interest in Israel and its security. His father, Dalck Feith, a philanthropist and major Republican contributor from Philadelphia, was active in the militantly Zionist youth movement Betar, the predecessor of Israel's Likud Party, in Poland before World War II. Both father and son have been honoured by the Zionist Organisation of America (ZOA), which, unlike other mainstream Jewish groups in the United States, has consistently supported Likud positions and the settlement movement in the occupied territories and actively courted the Christian Right. Feith also served with Perle on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), a think tank that promotes military and strategic ties between the United States and Israel. Feith first entered government as a Middle East specialist on the National Security Council (NSC) under Ronald Reagan in 1981, but was abruptly fired after only one year. Perle, who was then serving in the Pentagon as assistant secretary of defence for international security, hired him as his deputy, a post he retained until leaving in 1986 to found Feith & Zell. Three years later, Feith was retained as a lobbyist by the Turkish government and, in that capacity, worked with Perle to build military ties between Turkey and Israel. In 1996, he participated in a study group chaired by Perle and sponsored by a right-wing Jerusalem-based think tank that produced a report calling for incoming Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to build a strategic alliance with Turkey, Jordan, and a new government in Iraq that would transform the balance of power in the Middle East in such a way that Israel could decisively resist pressure to trade ''land for peace'' with the Palestinians or Syria. In 1997, he published a lengthy article, 'A Strategy for Israel', published in 'Commentary' magazine, Feith argued that Israel should repudiate the Oslo accords and move to re-occupy those parts of the West Bank and Gaza that had been transferred to the Palestinian Authority."

National outcry over speech. Calls intensify for party ousting of allegedly anti-Semitic Christian Democrat,
By Heidi Sylvester, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Germany), November 7, 2003
"Calls for an exclusion of Martin Hohmann from his party's parliamentary faction grew louder this week, although the Christian Democrat by Monday had apologized for parts of his Oct. 3 speech in which he called the Jews “a race of perpetrators.“ Hohmann, an otherwise obscure member of parliament, had suggested that Jews had served in leadership positions and death squads during the Russian Revolution, making them culpable in the same way that Germans were held responsible for the Holocaust. An increasingly pressured Hohmann on Monday expressed regret for his remarks, stating in a press release: “It was not my intention to deny the uniqueness of the Holocaust“ nor “to describe the Jews as a race of perpetrators.“ Hohmann's remarks drew hefty criticism from politicians across the spectrum. CDU leader Angela Merkel on Monday described the statements as “completely unacceptable and intolerable.“ Nonetheless, the parliamentarian has only been reprimanded with the threat that he would face further consequences if such remarks were repeated. He will, however, have to switch from the CDU faction's interior committee to the environmental committee. While the circumstances make sacking the parliamentarian difficult, Paul Spiegel, the president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, criticized the CDU's weak response to the issue, saying that Hohmann's statement was the worst case of anti-Semitism he had come across in the past few decades. Spiegel's organization has also filed a complaint against Hohmann for violating Germany's law against inciting racial hatred. If found guilty, Hohmann, who has frequently been accused of holding extremist views, could face a fine or a jail sentence of up to five years. The Israeli ambassador to Germany, Shimon Stein, also demanded more wide-ranging consequences. Hohmann's remarks weren't “a slip of the tongue,“ but “old anti-Semitism,“ Stein said in an interview with a Berlin radio broadcaster. The scandal intensified on Tuesday after Defense Minister Peter Struck sacked Reinhard Günzel, a general commanding an elite army force, for backing Hohmann's statements. Günzel was dismissed after it was revealed that he had sent a letter to Hohmann backing his assertions and praising, among other things, Hohmann's “excellent speech.“ Struck said the affair had not only damaged the image of Germany but also the international reputation of the Bundeswehr armed forces, which some fear are a hotbed of anti-Semitic beliefs."

SHOCKING POLL: A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS CANNOT NAME A SINGLE DEPARTMENT IN THE PRESIDENT’S CABINET,
The Polling Company, November 4, 2003
"Most Americans are unable to identify even a single department in the United States Cabinet, according to a recent national poll of 800 adults. Specifically, the survey found that a majority (58%) could not provide any department names whatsoever; 41% could. Only 4% of those surveyed specified at least five of the 19 executive-level departments, a figure comparable to the poll’s overall margin of error (+/-3.5%). The same firm that last year revealed an eye-popping 64% of Americans could not name any of the Justices of the United States Supreme Court, has now uncovered a similar lack of knowledge with respect to the Executive Branch of federal government. “These poll numbers would make any high school civics teacher cringe,” says Kellyanne Conway, President and CEO of the polling company, inc., in Washington, DC, the firm that conducted the survey. “The differing levels of knowledge according to gender, race and age are astonishing,” she continued. “An incredible 70% of 18-34 year olds failed to specify a single agency or department, and while a majority of men (52%) could name at least one, less than one-third of women (32%) could do the same.” Total Men Women Dept of Defense 23% 29% 19% Dept of Treasury 14% 16% 12% Dept of State 13% 16% 10% Dept of Homeland Security 12% 15% 8% Dept of Interior 11% 15% 8% No respondent named all nineteen correctly and only 1% were able to name at least 11 departments within the President’s Cabinet. Hispanics (79%), African Americans (75%), 18-34 year olds (70%), women (68%), and Pacific coast residents are among the groups most likely to say “I don’t know” when asked to name at least one department within the current United States Cabinet."

Prepared Remarks of Attorney General Ashcroft New York, New York November 7, 2003 -- 11:00 am,
U. S. Government
"(Please Note: The Attorney General Often Deviates From Prepared Remarks) Thank you, Abe [Foxman]. It is a pleasure to be here for the 90th anniversary celebration of the founding of the Anti-Defamation League. I see U.S. Attorney Roslynn Mauskopf of New York's Eastern District and U.S. Attorney Jim Comey, the president's nominee for Deputy Attorney General. I also see Alex Acosta, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. Under Ralph Boyd and Alex Acosta, the Civil Rights Division over the past three years has set new records continually for prosecuting civil rights violations. Since I knew I was traveling to New York, I thought I would share with you a handwritten letter my legal counselor, Chuck Rosenberg, received from his seven-year-old nephew, Scott, a native New Yorker. Dear Chuck, To help find Osama Bin Laden you should use German Shepherds because they have great sense of smell. You will need about nine thousand of them. But to find him you should get some of his clothes and let all the dogs sniff it. Good luck. Love, Scott Weitzner This is a nation of problem solvers. We are a people who do not shirk from moral challenge. And besides, it really isn't a bad idea. Scott's letter is a testament to our national spirit and the creativity and ingenuity that flourish in freedom. It is a testament to just how much our terrorist enemies underestimated the resources and resolve of the American people. We are a mighty nation when we are stirred to defend justice and to defend freedom. We are a free people willing to be guided by our highest ideals and to reflect, repent, and act to better our world. Ninety years ago, the founders of the Anti-Defamation League dedicated themselves to the noblest ideals. They vowed to use their time, their energy, and their earnings to stand against intolerance and to stand for freedom. Our world has changed much over the past nine decades. And free nations and free peoples have learned many hard, bitter lessons about the cost of hate. Today, in the morning of a new millennium, we can look back on almost a century of unfathomable evil. Voices of hate rose to power in great nations and millions were murdered in the name of totalitarian creeds -- communism, fascism, National Socialism. We look back and grieve. And with the hindsight of history, we ask ourselves, "What if one more voice had spoken out against hate and taken a stand against evil? Could it have made the difference?" ... As the Anti-Defamation League understands all too well, we must secure our victories against terrorism in a way that is consistent with the ideals that impel us to action. In the days following September 11th, President Bush stood before the nation, not just to condemn the savagery of terrorism, but to speak out for tolerance, for freedom of religion, and for the dignity of every life. ... I believe we have fought this war successfully because President Bush is a leader of action guided by moral clarity. The Anti-Defamation League knows President Bush's record well. When Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad used the APEC forum to issue anti-Semitic lies, President Bush condemned him publicly. This administration believes that acts of anti-Semitism must be confronted, condemned, and denounced. After touring Auschwitz, President Bush stated unequivocally, quote: "When we find anti-Semitism, whether it be in Europe or anywhere else, mankind must come together to fight such dark impulses." As history shows, verbal attacks on the Jewish people are portends of more savage criminality to come ... The ADL has proven time and again its ability to warn of the dangers to the innocent when the good and truehearted do not band together to oppose hate. In this battle, every voice and every hand is needed to triumph over terrorism. It requires us to speak out in America for our highest values and to take our battle to the terrorists abroad."

Jewish neo-con David Frum wrote Bush's notorious"axis of evil" speech.
Egyptian paper: Israel, Jewish lobby behind Bush 'democracy' speech,
Jerusalem Post, November 8, 2003
"Israel and the Jewish lobby in Washington are behind US President George W Bush's speech calling for democracy in the Middle East, according to state-owned Egyptian newspaper 'Akhbar Elyom's' Saturday editorial. Last Thursday, Bush said the U.S. strategy of supporting non-democratic Arab leaders over the past 60 years had been a failure and challenged Syria, Iran, and Egypt to adopt democracy. "Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe, because in the long run stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty," Bush said in a speech to the National Endowment for Democracy. In response, the Egyptian paper's chief editor said in an opinion piece Saturday covering the entire front page that he did not rule out that Israel was behind Bush's speech, which has been greeted with scorn by many in the Arab world. "I don't rule out that the Israelis were the ones to have advised President Bush to announce this important discovery, that is democracy, and his invitation for implementing it in the Arab world and Iran as well as other countries hostile to both the United States and Israel," the chief editor wrote. "I also do not rule out that the US Jewish lobby stands behind this invitation that contains attacks against Arab governments with which Washington has old ties," in order to damage those relations, he said. The paper went on to say that Bush's speech was aimed at diverting the American public's attention from the problems the US is facing in Iraq."

Feinstein urges Bush to renegotiate U.S.-Mexican Extradition Treaty,
WTEV, News 47
"Calling Mexico a "safe haven for hard-core criminals," Senator Dianne Feinstein is urging President Bush to renegotiate the U-S-Mexican Extradition Treaty. The 1980 treaty contains a clause exempting capital punishment cases. The Mexican Supreme Court also has ruled that life in prison is cruel and unusual punishment. At least 350 people have fled to Mexico after allegedly committing murder and other serious crimes in California and have not been sent back to face prosecution. US law enforcement officials say the extradition issue has tied their hands. They cite the April 2002 murder of LA County sheriff's deputy David March. Although authorities say they know the whereabouts of the convicted methamphetamine dealer suspected in the crime, they are powerless to arrest him in Mexico."

Are The Israelis Willing To Start World War III?
Exclusive to American Free Press, By M. Raphael Johnson, rense.com, November 8, 2003
"The gloves are off, and with America and Israel still unable to steal any oil from Iraq because someone keeps blowing the pipelines, Russian and Chinese firepower buildup suddenly slammed the door firmly shut on Caspian oil reserves in the old Soviet republics. For more than a decade American oil multinationals have been conducting 'joint ventures' in the former Soviet republics bordering the Caspian Sea, with the stated intent of pumping stolen crude oil out through Turkey, then on to western markets. Now this route has been blocked permanently, and America is in no position to do anything about it, because a large part of the U.S. conventional army is currently bogged down in Iraq, being shot at and killed on a daily basis. For many who have been watching this region as a confrontation between the United States and Israel versus Russia largely over the control of the biggest gas and oil deposits in the world, a new front has been opened. As a response to this checkmate, Sharon recently visited Putin on Nov. 3 to meet with him concerning the nuclear issue in Iran. Quickly, Sharon permitted Palestinians to return to their jobs and eased their travel restrictions. Since the end of the Gorbachev era, the Russian oligarchs, nearly all Jewish by ethnicity (with the noticeable exception of Vladimir Potanin), have controlled nearly all key sectors of the Russian economy. This, of course, includes Russia's major ace-in-the-hole, oil and gas. The giant YUKOS conglomerate is presently one of the largest oil companies in the world, valued at about $40 billion. YUKOS is the result of a 'loans for shares' deal brokered through the semi-coherent Boris Yeltsin in 1995. Here, the liberal Russian government swapped loyalty from the oligarchs in exchange for privatization at prices far below that of the market. This $40 billion giant was bought for about $300 million, thus looting the entire Russian economy for the benefit of a handful of Israeli citizens living in Russia. When YUKOS' chair, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was arrested at the end of last month, the American capitalist establishment went orbital. Forgetting the 1999 New York Times's expose on massive money laundering and fraud from YUKOS, the conservative establishment began to lionize oligarchy and, specifically, Khodorkovsky. Recently, The Financial Times weighed in with a giggly piece from Chrystia Freeland, which referred to the oligarch as a 'democratic activist.' About a paragraph later, the writer said - without irony - that the oligarch's model for economics is the robber baron factories of the early American 20th century. Fox News, on Nov. 3, referred to YUKOS as the most progressive corporation in Russia. According to a Nov. 3 Agence France-Presse story, Khodorkovsky made a deal with Jacob Rothschild this year that control of the YUKOS giant would pass to Rothschild in the event of Khodorkovsky's arrest. However, the Russian government has frozen all YUKOS assets for the time being. It is significant that YUKOS's liberal pressure group, the Open Russia Foundation, is completely controlled by Rothschild now that its founder is in jail. As their official mission statement reads, "The motivation for the establishment of the Open Russia Foundation is the wish to foster enhanced openness, understanding and integration between the people of Russia and the rest of the world." Their board of trustees includes Rothschild and Henry Kissinger. The Washington, D.C. launch of the organization included Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Librarian of Congress James Billington, one of the leading voices against Russian traditionalism in the academic establishment. Significantly, the Open Russia Foundation recently provided Yale University with substantial grants to study the Russian economy as well as providing the Carnegie Foundation with 3 percent of its entire operating budget. It seems that the drive to control the globe's energy is progressing. The American empire's battles in Serbia, Central Asia, Iraq and Chechnya are one and the same war. Other than fighting Israel's enemies, these adventures are also wars to control Central Asian oil and natural gas (one of the main pipelines from the Caspian Sea went straight through Serbia). The control of this wealth by the United States and Israel necessitates bypassing Russian channels. This means that the Jewish oligarchy in Russia would become the central actor in world politics. The Israeli/CIA complex was using Khodorkovsky to sell off the assets of YUKOS to Exxon/Mobil (as well as a smaller piece to Texaco), hence bringing Russia's pipelines into the hands of the western powers. The Nov. 5 New York Times also indicated that the Bush family's Carlyle Group was involved. It was not long after Putin began threatening the YUKOS conglomerate that neo-conservative pundits such as William Kristol and Ariel Cohen began calling Putin a 'communist,' 'another Stalin' and 'tyrannical.' The basis of these wild accusations, of course, is the fact that Putin stands in the way of Zionist domination. From this, the roles of several other variables and players develop clearly. The State Department/Harvard University alliance was meant to 'deregulate,' or 'privatize' much of the Russian economy precisely to keep the Russian state out of the equation. Therefore, pro-Israel oligarchs (that is, Israeli citizens living in Russia) then benefited, placing most of the economy in their hands, and, by extension, Israel's. Russia's response has been to clamp down on further foreign penetration into defense and other sensitive industries, and specifically, to target those believed to be working for both the CIA and Mossad and attempting to control Central Asian oil. It needs to be reiterated that where the (CIA goes, Mossad goes as well. Israeli and American interests have come together in the dominance of the Central Asian region and therefore, so have liberal ideology, the Beltway set, neo-conservatism, Ivy League eggheads, Christian Zionism, the Rothschilds and the American media.) Afghanistan through the Caspian Sea through to Georgia, Azerbaijan and into the Balkans (not to mention pipelines leading to oil-hungry China), have become one single theater of war over trillions of dollars in oil and gas wealth, incorporating every single power center in global politics. The battle against the New World Order is being decided in Moscow. Therefore, all anti-Russian alliances in the region, from Islamic fundamentalism to Slavic separatism to the George Soros 'Open Society' Foundation, are in the interests of the CIA/Exxon/Ivy League/NWO complex ... Russia's response to Israel's terror threats against most of the Islamic world is fully understood as both a political and economic question. Further, increasing cooperation between Russia and India, as well as China, are clear markers that Putin, one of the few actually competent leaders in world politics, is building an anti-imperialist and anti-NATO alliance with the aim of countering American/Zionist moves for the world's oil and gas wealth. The interests, however, go even further than Zionist control over American foreign policy decision-making. Vialls writes on another topic: that the existence of the American/Zionist empire is based on the victory of American forces over the Russian and Islamic. Of course, both in Bosnia and Chechnya, the Mossad/CIA operatives have not hesitated to assist fundamentalists in fighting Slavic nationalism, largely because Slavicism is a greater threat with Putin firmly in the saddle. Islam, divided and leaderless, with a history of centuries of defeat and colonialism behind it, is only a potential force in world politics."

Jews rising everywhere to the reigns of power, usually hidden. This case in Great Britain is in the open.
Tories Rallying Around New Contender,
By JONATHAN FREEDLAND, FORWARD, November 7, 2003
"British politics just got a lot more interesting. After six years of uncanny good luck, facing only the most lackluster competition, Prime Minister Tony Blair suddenly has a serious opponent — and just at the moment when he has begun to feel vulnerable. Britain's Conservative Party, in the doldrums since 1997, has anointed a new leader. He is sharp, smart and said to strike fear in the prime minister. To cap it all, he is a Jew. The contender is Michael Howard. At 62 he is no rising star, but that rare creature on the Tory benches in the House of Commons today: a man of gravitas and experience ... He never courted popularity; on the contrary, he reveled in his tough-as-nails image. "I know what causes crime," he bellowed once, mocking the bleeding-heart liberals who look for the root causes of lawbreaking. "I'll tell you what causes crime: criminals!" A former barrister — one of the class of bewigged lawyers allowed to appear in court — Howard delighted in outraging liberal former colleagues in the legal profession. He wanted tougher sentencing, locking up ever greater numbers of felons under the slogan, "Prison works." And he restricted the right to silence of criminal suspects. Howard also courted controversy by moving to make Britain less open to refugees seeking asylum. Opponents charged hypocrisy, noting that Howard's own father, an Orthodox cantor then named Bernat Hecht, had fled to Britain following the Nazi invasion of his native Romania ... Meanwhile, British Jewry is watching events unfold with a wary pride. They're thrilled that one of their own has made it to the top in politics, the first Jewish leader of one of the two main parties (unless you count the 19th-century Tory premier Benjamin Disraeli, who was born a Jew but baptized into Christianity as a child). But they worry, as American Jews did at the thought of Vice President Lieberman in 2000, about attracting too much attention. Even before he emerged as the leader of the opposition, some Jews detected an undercurrent of antisemitism in invective directed at Howard by his foes. "There is something of the night about him," said Ann Widdecombe, a fellow Conservative who feuded with Howard when she served under him at the Home Office in the 1990s. That comment sank Howard's last attempt at the Tory leadership in 1997 and haunts him still. Jews sniffed an anti-Jewish undercurrent in Widdecombe's quip — as they do in the cartoonists' regular rendering of him as a Dracula-like vampire. The caricaturists say they are merely referring to Howard's roots in the Transylvanian region of Romania; Jews suspect otherwise."

Has American government BECOME Israel.
Maryland Governor Visits Israel for Homeland Security Tips,
By Dave Bender, Cybercast news Service, November 6, 2003
"As governor of a state bordering the nation's capital at a time when local political leaders must try to guard their citizens against international terrorist groups, Maryland Republican Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. is looking abroad for advice. Ehrlich is in Israel, along with a 30-member delegation of business and academic leaders from the state, to get a better idea of how the Israelis deal with security threats and the results of terror attacks ... He is Maryland's first Republican governor in 36 years and is also a former congressman, an ally of President George W. Bush and considered a strong supporter of Israel ... When asked about the status of personal security for his own state's Jewish residents, Ehrlich downplayed concerns, saying: "It is not the major issue of concern to the Jewish community. "I don't think in Maryland today, the issue of [an] anti-Semitism, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel sort of mindset is a dominant problem in the Jewish community," Ehrlich said. The Maryland delegation, including a number of leaders from the state's Jewish community, met with Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom at the ministry's Jerusalem center Wednesday. "The relationship between Israel and the state of Maryland has been extraordinarily strong for many decades, [and] it will continue to prosper under our administration. This is why I wanted to make a visit to Israel my first international trip as governor, as opposed to as a member of Congress," Ehrlich told reporters. The Ehrlich group hopes to cement a number of business deals and academic agreements during its stay."

Israel behind Bush's drive,
News 24, November 8, 3003
"A state-owned Egyptian newspaper on Saturday said US President George W Bush's drive for democracy in the Middle East was an Israeli-inspired idea aimed against countries hostile to Israel. Akhbar Elyom's chairperson and chief editor Ibrahim Saada, a man close to President Hosni Mubarak, said in an opinion piece covering the entire front page that Bush's message was also an attempt to divert Americans' attention from the Iraqi "swamp." "I don't rule out that the Israelis were the ones to have advised President Bush to announce this important discovery, that is democracy, and his invitation for implementing it in the Arab world and Iran as well as other countries hostile to both the United States and Israel," wrote Saada. "I also do not rule out that the US Jewish lobby stands behind this invitation that contains attacks against Arab governments with which it (Washington) has old ties," in order to damage those relations, he said. "I tend, indeed, to believe ... that the content of Bush's speech is an attempt to divert the attention of his people away from the tragedy of the attrition swamp in which the US soldiers have fallen in occupied Iraq. "But it will he a failed attempt. Nobody's attention will be diverted and it will only lead to more Arab hatred towards the United States and its government," he added. Bush, in a speech on Thursday, urged Middle East leaders to embrace democracy, and repudiated 60 years of US help for illiberal regimes that "did nothing to make us safe" from terrorism. Saada responded to this argument, writing: "We, in turn, say that our policy towards the United States over the past half a century was a failure because we, Arabs, have given our trust to somebody who does not deserve it ... somebody who covers all the wrongdoings of Israel, at the expenses of the rights and humanity of the Palestinian people."

No Tribal Solidarity, Jewish politicians are on their own,
by Jonathan Tobin, Jewish World Review, November 10, 2003
"During breakfast one day last week, I pointed out to my wife an article in The New York Times that piqued my interest being someone with a background in British history and politics. The piece concerned the likelihood that the next head of Britain's Conservative Party would be a Jew — one Michael Howard, M.P., the son of Romanian immigrants who grew up in Wales. I remarked on the fact that the account referred to Howard's chance to walk in the footsteps of 19th-century British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli, whom the newspaper wrongly referred to as Jewish (though he was proud of his heritage, he was baptized in the Anglican Church as a child). All of which provoked my wife to tersely ask, "What does any of this mean for us?" Awakened from my musing by her characteristic clarity of thought, I could only reply, "Well, actually, nothing." The point being that Michael Howard's ascent to the head of the Tories probably wouldn't help or hurt America's alliance with Britain; it wouldn't mark a turning point in the struggle against the rising tide of European anti-Semitism, and it certainly wouldn't help or hurt the State of Israel. It just meant that one highly ambitious Jewish Brit was climbing, as so many American Jews have done, to the top of the proverbial greasy pole of politics ... But while today, Jews can be candidates for literally any office in the land, there's still a difference between a Jewish candidate and being the Jewish candidate. Jewish issues, such as support for the State of Israel, social justice and education measures, are one thing. The religious identity of the candidate is quite another. With the 2004 presidential election now just one year away, it's worth pondering what obligations the presence of Jewish candidates places on Jewish voters. The answer is, of course, none. ... The obvious lesson here is that a Jewish presidential candidate who says he would be prepared to meet with Louis Farrakhan and would accept Hamas if the group suddenly gave up terrorism (and then would presumably pursue Israel's destruction by peaceful means) is a lot less useful than a non-Jewish candidate who would do neither of these things. So repeat after me: The personal interests of individual Jewish candidates have nothing to do with the interests of the Jewish community. Let those politicos who want tribal solidarity look to contributions from Native American casino owners. Jewish votes should be won on the issues." [Note: Who are so many of those "Native American casino owners? Jews. Howard and Sol Kerzner, Robert Berman, Lyle Berman, Jim Druck, casino lawyer Jack Abramoff, etc.]

The chosen person,
By Melanie Phillips, Jewish World Review, November 10, 2003
"The British Conservative party has elected Michael Howard as its first Jewish leader — and potential Prime Minister — since Benjamin Disraeli led the Tories in the 19th century. This has occurred when much of the Jewish community in Britain feels besieged by an upsurge of anti-Jewish hatred. So how can a country whose deep vein of prejudice is once again open and flowing be sanguine about the possibility of a Jewish Prime Minister? Some Jews see no problem in Britain — quite the reverse. Howard's rise demonstrates, they purr, that Britain has changed, that it has developed a new maturity, that British Jews have finally become truly accepted. From which Panglossian optimism, one can only marvel at the infinite human capacity for self-delusion. For Britain is where the veteran Labour MP Tam Dalyell claimed a 'cabal' of Jews was controlling Tony Blair and George Bush — and was then promptly excused as a lovable eccentric. Where the following day, the BBC TV current affairs show Newsnight concluded that Dalyell had a case, and a 'tightly-knit' group of Jews really did control US foreign policy. Where Israel is repeatedly dehumanized and delegitimized as an apartheid or Nazi state. Where almost two thirds of the public believe it is the biggest threat to world peace. Where attacks on Jews have increased. And where friendships between Jews and non-Jews founder over claims by the latter that the Jews are all-powerful, and that the establishment of Israel was a terrible mistake. In this hostile climate, however, Michael Howard has climbed to the top of the greasy Tory pole after the sacking of the previous party leader, Iain Duncan Smith. So how does one explain the apparent contradiction? The situation of diaspora Jews has always been characterized by many such ambiguities and nuances, by a profound ambivalence in the general population and a precarious balancing act over Anglo-Jewish identity. Howard's triumph is an astonishing turnaround. As Home Secretary in the last Conservative government in the 1990s, he became the most unpopular politician in Britain, as much because of his personality as his tough policies. He was widely viewed as sinister and menacing, leading his colleague Ann Widdecombe to make her infamous claim that he had 'something of the night' about him. So what was she getting at? Howard provoked a notable repugnance not associated with other, even harder men of the right. This was clearly because he was viewed as an unctuous, oily, slippery, devious, too-clever-by-half lawyer — all epithets associated in the public mind with Jews. True, under Margaret Thatcher's earlier regime there were no fewer than five Jews in the Cabinet. But this was an aberration, caused by Mrs. Thatcher's personal admiration for the Jews which was not shared by her colleagues, who objected that there were 'more Estonians than Etonians' in the government. Now, though, Howard is being hailed as the savior of his party which is falling over itself to describe him as charming, decent, honorable, upright, fair, fastidious and virtuous. So have the Tories suddenly learned to love the Jews? Not quite. The Conservatives are in the grip of a protracted nervous breakdown, because they've been out of power for six years and the country regards them as a hopeless joke. So lacking are they in talent, and so bad is their disarray, they would have elected a Martian if they thought he might win the general election ... Crucially, moreover, Howard's Jewish profile has always been low ... For Howard surely knew that for a Jew to complain about anti-Jewish prejudice in Britain is to provoke that very thing. That is the true measure of Anglo-Jewish status: you are accepted as long as you never come into conflict with the values of the surrounding community. Whatever they hit you with, you are supposed to take it in silence — the defining characteristic of the diaspora Jew. And this surely lies at the very heart of the terrible bitterness over British attitudes towards both Israel and the Jews. For the British think there's nothing wrong with the Jews as long as they agree with the generally accepted view that Israel is the cause of world terror because it is an apartheid or even a Nazi state. Those Jews who agree with this analysis, and also agree that claims of resurgent British anti-Semitism are a figleaf to conceal the crimes of Ariel Sharon, are the Good Jews ... Anti-Semitism is now the prejudice that dare not speak its name. Everyone knows that 'real' anti-Semitism was what caused Howard's father to flee Transylvania for Britain. Everyone also 'knows' that the victims of the Nazis have now turned into Nazis, that anti-Semitism is history, and that it exists today only as a shroud waved by whingeing Jews. In other words, the newly 'mature' British like Jews as long as they dump upon Israel, and deny the now rampant public prejudice against them. The British like Jews as long as they turn the other cheek when people commit mass murder against them. They are the good Jews: the Jews who die, just like Michael Howard's picturesque relatives. The bad Jews are the Jews who fight back. The British believe they are not anti-Jew but anti-Israel. (So do many British Jews on the left, who encourage them). But they are not merely against the government of Israel. The agenda now is that the creation of the Jewish state itself was the big mistake that has led to world terror, and that the very idea of a Jewish state is racist. People now say this to me all the time. So what would happen if Howard were to speak up loudly and firmly in support of Israel's measures for self-defense, and against the new anti-Semitism? He would be taking a big risk of being fingered for double loyalty."

Mossad and the JFK Assassination,
Michael Collins Piper, Feral News
"So while people have focused on how many assassins were involved, and how many shots they fired at JFK and where the shots came from and where the bullets hit, the real question of who was ultimately responsible for the assassination-not who fired the bullets, but who sponsored the assassins who fired those bullets-has been ignored. Thus, to find out who is responsible for JFK's murder, we have to find out WHY he was murdered-what motivated those who orchestrated his assassination. Consider the wide-ranging array of suspects that have been put forth: Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone; The Soviet KGB; Fidel Castro; Anti-Castro Cubans; The "Mafia"; Rogue CIA operatives and anti-Castro Cubans in collaboration with elements of "the Mafia"; J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI; Lyndon Baines Johnson; Former Nazi intelligence officers; The Texas Oil Barons; and The Military-Industrial Complex. Ten years ago, in 1992, a new suspect was added to the list. Former Rep. Paul Findley (R-Ill.) made the little-noticed but intriguing comment in the March 1992 issue of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs that "it is interesting but not surprising to note that in all the words written about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Israel's intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned, despite the obvious fact Mossad complicity is as plausible as any of the other theories." What Findley did not know was at that very time I was in the process of preparing a volume contending that the Mossad role alongside the CIA in the JFK assassination, was, in fact, the big secret-the "missing link"-that explained the entirety of the JFK conspiracy. The Mossad role is what I have also called "the secret picture on the other side of the jigsaw puzzle" of the JFK assassination conspiracy. My book summarizing this theory is entitled Final Judgment. What I find quite remarkable is that while many Israelis today believe that Israeli intelligence played a part in the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, many of Israel's friends in America have reacted quite hysterically to my contention that the Mossad played a role in the assassination of America's president. In addition, although there are many who believe that the CIA had a hand in the JFK assassination, quite a few of those same people are fearful of mentioning the likelihood of a Mossad role. Yet, as journalist Andrew Cockburn has pointed out: "There has been since almost the earliest days of the Israeli state and the earliest days of the CIA a secret bond, basically by which Israeli intelligence did jobs for the CIA and for the rest of American intelligence. You can't understand what's been going on with American covert operations and the Israeli covert operations until you understand this secret arrangement." Cockburn's words are a rough overview of the thesis that I have presented in Final Judgment. Although Final Judgment has never been in any major bookstore since it was first published nearly a decade ago, some 30,000 copies are in circulation-more copies than more widely-publicized books on the topic. It is truly an "underground best-seller." It is now in its 760-page fifth edition, documented with 1,114 footnotes. And on November 9, Dar El Ilm Lilmalayin, the oldest and largest privately-owned publishing house in the Middle East released the first-ever Arabic-language edition. In many respects, Final Judgment is more than a book about the JFK assassination. It also reveals the hidden global power politics of the last half of the 20th century. Final Judgment documents that in 1963 JFK was embroiled in a bitter secret conflict with Israeli leader David Ben-Gurion over Israel's drive to build the atomic bomb; that Ben-Gurion resigned in disgust, saying that because of JFK's policies, Israel's "existence [was] in danger." Then upon JFK's assassination, U.S. policy toward Israel began an immediate 180-degree turnaround. Israeli historian Avner Cohen's new book, Israel and the Bomb, confirms the conflict between JFK and Israel so powerfully that, Israel's Ha'aretz, declared Cohen's revelations would "necessitate the rewriting of Israel's entire history." In any case, Cohen pointed out, "the transition from Kennedy to [Lyndon] Johnson . . . benefited the Israeli nuclear program." Ethan Bronner, in the New York Times, called Israel's drive to build a nuclear bomb "a fiercely hidden subject." This explains why JFK researchers never considered an Israeli connection until Final Judgment supplied the missing pieces, assembling "the secret picture on the other side of the jigsaw puzzle." While all of this presents a strong motive for Israel to strike against JFK, Final Judgment also documents what Israeli journalist Barry Chamish says is "a pretty cogent case" for Mossad collaboration with the CIA in the assassination conspiracy. The fact is that when New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison prosecuted trade executive Clay Shaw with conspiracy in the assassination, Garrison had stumbled upon the Mossad link. Although (after his acquittal) Shaw was revealed to have been a CIA asset, in 1963 Shaw served on the board of a Rome-based company, Permindex, which was actually a front for a Mossad-sponsored arms procurement operation. A primary shareholder in Permindex, the Banque De Credit Internationale of Geneva, was not only the fiefdom of Tibor Rosenbaum, a high-level Mossad official, but also the chief money laundry for Meyer Lansky, "chairman" of the crime syndicate and long-time Israeli loyalist. Chief executive of Permindex was Louis Bloomfield of Montreal, a top figure in the Israeli lobby and an operative of the Bronfman family, intimate Lansky associates and leading patrons of Israel. Permindex was clearly the Israeli link to the JFK assassination, so much so that Jim Garrison himself later circulated the manuscript for a never-published novel in which he fingered the Mossad as prime mover behind the conspiracy although Garrison never otherwise mentioned a Mossad connection publicly. You may ask why Hollywood's so-called "radical film-maker" Oliver Stone, whose film JFK was a virtual tribute to Garrison never mentioned any of this. I would contend that Stone failed to mention these details in JFK because the film was financed by Arnon Milchan, an Israeli arms dealer linked to smuggling of materiel to Israel's nuclear program-the very point of contention between JFK and Israel. Milchan's role in the production of JFK is no secret, by the way. He is listed in the credits as "executive producer," which, in Hollywood parlance, means that he was the "money man," so to speak, behind the film."

Book Review,
by Richard M. Ebeling, The Future of Freedom Foundation, May 1996. The New Color Line: How Quotas and Privilege Destroy Democracy by Paul Craig Roberts & Lawrence M. Stratton (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 1995)
"The bottom line, in Professor Robert's and Mr. Stratton's view, is that the United States took a wrong turn when the Supreme Court and the Congress decided to forcefully impose integration on the country. This not only undermined the principles of democracy and the fundamental human right of freedom of association, it also poisoned race relations in the U.S. by introducing coercive social engineering into a delicate and troubled part of American society. They insist that they offer no apology for segregation. They even say that if the Brown v. Board of Education decision "had been only to end public segregation, it would have been a victory." But more than that happened. "Brown belittled democracy. The decision was based on the belief that democracy could not do the right thing and would not produce a moral outcome. The basis for the desegregation decision threw out the fundamental presumption of any democratic order — goodwill among citizens regardless of class, race, or gender. Without goodwill, there is no basis for uniting different people in democratic self-rule," the authors argue. The authors point out that in 1952 the issue of school desegregation had come before the Supreme Court and had been rejected. Not because the Court had endorsed or supported segregation, but because a majority of the Court at that time was reluctant to usurp what they ruled were matters of legislative power and democratic process. In other words, for the Court to impose a desegregation decision on the states would be to infringe on the principles of separation of powers and federalism. The Supreme Court member most frustrated with this decision was Justice Felix Frankfurter. Frankfurter was convinced by Myrdal's argument that unless the Court overturned segregation, the people would never demonstrate the democratic tolerance to do so through the ballot box and the legislative process. He set out to change the Court's decision. In 1953, Brown v. Board of Education was put back on the Court's schedule for reconsideration. In violation of judicial ethics, Frankfurter colluded with Philip Elman, who was responsible for civil rights cases in the solicitor general's office. Frankfurter and Elman informed each other about the attitudes of the members of the two branches of government and which arguments might be most effective for getting the members of the Court to give the case an affirmative decision. They had clandestine, late-night meetings and telephone calls to work out the strongest strategy. Frankfurter was assisted in this manipulation of the Court's decision-making process, the authors explain, by Earl Warren, President Eisenhower's recent appointment to the office of chief justice of the Supreme Court. This unethical conspiracy resulted in a unanimous affirmative Court decision on May 17, 1954. The decision, Roberts and Stratton argue, opened the door to an increasing judicial social engineering, in which the courts more and more began to dictate race relationships in society over the next several decades. This trend was reinforced by the civil rights acts of the 1960s, they also emphasize. At the foundation of (classical) liberal thought, the authors explain, is: "Freedom of conscience [which] lets individuals sort out their affairs on their own. It also recognizes that individuals have the right to be wrong. Instead of coercing people to change their minds, liberalism favors patience and persuasion. Ultimately, society is transformed as persuaded individuals vote their conscience." The tragedy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, they say, is that while it was proposed as an appeal to conscience — that men should not be judged and dealt with in terms of their race but as individuals — the act "ripped freedom of conscience from the body politic and replaced it with regulatory coercion." And in spite of what may have been the actual wording in the Civil Rights Act, once the government took on the coercive responsibility to assure that private individuals no longer discriminated in their relationships with others, the political authority responsible for the law's enforcement had to establish some benchmark to judge whether the law was being complied with. Hence, the system of racial quotas as practiced under affirmative action was practically inevitable. And, perversely, a law that it was claimed was meant to be an instrument to diminish racist behavior has ended up raising race consciousness as individuals have come increasingly to be classified and thought of in terms of whether the racial group to which they belong has received its "fair share" of jobs and places in institutions of higher learning. Indeed, the authors point out that affirmative action has become the most recent variation on the Marxian theory of class conflict."

[The political situation in Great Britain. JTR contributor's comment: "Lord Saatchi, an unelected Jew, has been given the position of Chairman, while 'Hampstead intellectual' Oliver Letwin is to be Shadow Chancellor. This means that the top three position in the Tory party are now held by Jews." Michael Howard was born Michael Hecht.]
Howard's shadow cabinet shake-up,
BBC (UK), November 10, 2003
"Howard's shadow cabinet is being announced on Monday. David Davis and Oliver Letwin are set to be big winners in Michael Howard's streamlined frontbench team. Mr Davis is expected to take over home affairs with Mr Letwin switching to become shadow chancellor. The shadow cabinet will be halved in size to 12, with some members shadowing two of Tony Blair's ministers. Ex-chairman Theresa May gets transport and the environment, Tim Yeo health and education while Liam Fox and Lord Saatchi share the job of chairman. David Curry MP is expected to be named as Tory local government spokesman working to Theresa May. And David Maclean - who stood down as chief whip after Iain Duncan Smith was ousted - has been reappointed. We are back in the big game of politics ... Advertising guru Lord Saatchi would deal with the internal issues affecting Conservative Central Office and "will seek to return the Conservative Party to its status as the country's premier political machine," Dr Fox said."

Howard Dean Campaign Organization,<