October 31, 2006

The usual outright, purposeful lies blaming Israel for whatever

By Joseph Farah

A tenured professor at the University of Chicago recently claimed Israel was to blame for the September 11 attacks and for the U.S. war in Iraq. The assertions by John Mearsheimer were met with an amen chorus from colleagues at New York University and Columbia. “The Israel lobby was one of the principal driving forces behind the Iraq war, and in its absence we probably would not have had a war,” he explained. Later, he said Al Qaeda ’s “animus to the United States stemmed from U.S. foreign policy toward Israel. ”Imagine what a peaceful world in which we would live if we could only rid ourselves of that annoying little Israel.

That is the essence of what we hear throughout much of academia. That is the essence of what we hear at the United Nations. That is the essence of what we hear from the so- called international community. That is the essence of what we hear from a vast segment of the world press. While it is an undeniable truth that Israel is on the front lines of the global Islamic Jihad, surrounded as it is by hostile neighbors and active terrorist organizations sworn to its destruction, I would love to hear one of these anti- Israel twits explain what the Jewish state has to do with the following conflicts:

Afghanistan —Far from Israel, the Taliban and Al Qaeda are battling U.S. coalition forces in an effort to re- establish their Islamic dream state —the one that actually gave us Sept.11.

•Algeria -Far from Israel, Islamic guerrillas continue to attack a government dominated by fellow Muslims.

•Bosnia —Far from Israel, it is now a home for Islamic terrorists thanks to the international community that handed it over to Muslim rule.

·Central Asia —Far from Israel, Islamic radicals are trying to spread Shariah law in states formerly part of the Soviet Union.

•Chad —Far from Israel, unrest is growing largely because of a refugee crisis started by the radical Islamic regime in neighboring Sudan.

•India —Far from Israel, Islamic radical groups regularly set off bombs, while India contests with neighboring Islamic Pakistan for control of Kashmir.

—Far from Israel, Islamic terrorists are a constant threat in the most heavily populous Muslim state in the world.

•Kosovo — Far from Israel, Islamic radicals burn down churches and persecute Christians. •Nigeria —Far from Israel, Muslims in the north fight for more control over the government and the nation ’s vast oil reserves. •Philippines —Far from Israel, Islamic guerrillas in the south are fighting for their own country and, of course, the forced expulsion of non-Muslims.

•Russia —Far from Israel, Islamic terrorists have attacked airliners, schools and other civilian targets in their fight for an independent, Islamic Chechnya.

•Somalia —Far from Israel. Tribal fighting continues in another former playground of Osama bin Laden. Islamic radicals fight for Shariah law to bring order.

•Sudan —Far from Israel, Muslims in the north slaughter Christians, animists and even other Muslims in a war that has already killed millions.

•Thailand —Far from Israel, a small population of Muslims in the south totals only about 3 percent, fight for a separate Islamic state. A recent military coup installed the country ’s first Muslim leader, who suspended the constitution.

•Uganda —Far from Israel, Muslim rebels in the north, aided by Sudan, have challenged the government.

Maybe political science professors can tie Islamic terrorist acts against Egypt ’s government and inside Lebanon and targeting the Saudi kingdom to Israel —because it ’s in the neighborhood. Maybe they can persuade some people that the U.S. invasion of Iraq had something to do with Israel, though Saddam Hussein posed little real threat to the Jewish state. But, how, I wonder, do these geniuses discount the raging Islamic Jihad on the march from the Eastern to the Western edge of the globe?

PS (One can’t help but wonder how much Saudi Arabia, Iran, et al are paying these “professors” for promoting this obvious destructive propaganda, attempting to effect are own will to continue the inevitable war against militant Islam) jsk

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of World Net Daily. His latest book is
“Taking America Back.”

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 05:42 AM | Comments (0)

October 29, 2006

Will the world listen to Pope Benedict XVI?

Redacted from an article by Emmanuel Winston
The Jewish Press, October 16, 2006

On September 12, 2006 in Germany, Pope Benedict XVI quoted verbatim from criticism of the Prophet Mohammed by the 14th-century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

The immediate result of this quote - churches were burned in Gaza, a Catholic nun was shot dead and the joy of bloodthirsty rage by Muslim mobs was let loose. It is difficult to dispute the facts that prompted Pope Benedict to utter a quote that Islam has always been evil and murderous. This is not merely chronicled history. Even now, thousands are being murdered in the most barbaric ways on the orders of extreme, fundamentalist leaders who interpret and teach Shariah laws, which they believe, were firmly established for Islam by Mohammed. These include the killing of ALL the “infidels ”(all non-Muslims, meaning Jews and Christians).

Pope Benedict displayed a truth, planned or otherwise. Keep in mind that before being elected pope, he was completely informed (as a high Church official) of Muslim plans and actions to drive Christians and Jews out of land claimed by radical Islamists. This is why cities like Bethlehem, Qalqilyah and Ramallah, all turned over by Israel in the disastrous Oslo “Peace ”Accords, are virtually now empty of Christian Arabs. Many have been forced to emigrate by hostile Muslim edicts and actions, and only the protection of the Jewish State has preserved Christianity in Israel, particularly in Jerusalem. Until the Jews returned to their ancestral homeland, Christians were not allowed to freely worship in their churches and shrines. Now Christians are free to go anywhere, except where Islam dominates. Pope Benedict also has watched Europe being overrun by Muslims. It will soon become “Eurabia,” so aptly coined by the now deceased Oriana Fallaci, o.b.m.

Surely the pope must know that Thomas Aquinas, the great Catholic theologian also made observations about Mohammed. In Summa Contra Gentiles, Aquinas describes Mohammed as follows:

“He (Mohammed) seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasures ...His teachings also contained precepts that were in conformity with such promises ...The truths that he taught were mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them fabrications of his own, as can be seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity.”

Perhaps Pope Benedict’s bold statement may have, to a degree, cleared the air for the West. Perhaps the hard cold facts of Christian persecution under the Palestinian Authority will finally be faced. The number of Christians in the Palestinian areas has dropped from 15% of the Arab population in 1950 to just 2% today. Conversely, according to Israel ’s Central Bureau of Statistics, Israel ’s Christian population is growing at the same rate as her Jewish population. In Bethlehem, the city ’s Christian population dwindled from 80% to 20% since the PA took control. Christians cannot sell their own real estate to non-Muslims under the threat of death.

In June 1948,when Israel was forced to hand over East Jerusalem and the adjacent valley which held the churches and shrines of Christendom, Pope Pius XII feared that the Muslims would clear out the Christians and convert the buildings into mosques. Muslim rulers have done all this before —to Christians, to Jews and to any other people whose religion got in the way of Islam ’s goal of world domination.

Uninformed and fearful apologists everywhere maintain that Pope Benedict was wrong for quoting the 14th century statement about Mohammed. But can telling the truth be honestly construed as an insult? If the accusation is accurate and those whose agenda is exposed wish to think of themselves both as untouchable and correct in what they will do to their intended victims, they most certainly regard it as an insult.

Does anyone in the world really think of Islam as a gentle, peaceful religion, which has no intention of harming followers of other religions? Meanwhile, as Western governments and journalists’ organizations continue to refer to Islam as a “religion of peace, ”we are well aware of the fact that virtually all terrorist acts worldwide have been committed by Muslims —against Jews, Christians, other non-Muslims and even against other types of Muslims. It appears that G-d may have had a message for all Christians and all peoples through the voice of Pope Benedict XVI. Indeed, the message has been heard and, not surprisingly, with rage by the Muslims of the world.

Even the Jews of Israel might hear and act accordingly, fully comprehending the Pope ’s message - but, unfortunately for them, not likely under their present leadership.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:34 PM | Comments (0)

October 27, 2006

Could you vomit?

U.S. State Department Honors Islam in month in which American soldiers stationed in Iraq suffered the most deaths!

By Bill Wilson, KIN Senior Analyst

WASH—Oct 24—KIN--While Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq are killing U.S. soldiers and Muslims in Israel are killing Israelis and Muslims in Europe are killing Europeans and Muslims in Iran are saying the United States and Israel must be destroyed, is it an ironic twist that in the ornate halls of the United States Department of State Muslims are being honored as a peaceful religion?

Featured last week on the front page of the State Department’s website were the remarks of Karen Hughes, Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, saying “Islam is a part of America and as a government official I am honored to represent it.”

Hughes, dressed in traditional Islamic garb, attended a ceremony marking the end of Ramadan. Muslims fast during Ramadan and break the fast with what they call Iftar dinners. Hughes continued, “Many of our government agencies have hosted Iftar dinners. The President celebrated an Iftar at the White House and I had the honor of meeting accomplished Muslim women and men from all over the world at our own Department of State Iftar. American Embassies throughout the world also opened their doors to welcome Muslims and to publicly celebrate the holy month of Ramadan together.”

President Bush issued a statement from the White House, marking the end of Ramadan. He said in part, “Islam is a great faith that has transcended racial and ethnic divisions and brought hope and comfort to many people.”

Neither the President nor the State Department mentioned that during Ramadan, more American soldiers were killed by the people of the great faith of Islam than at any previous time. The President did not bother to challenge these leaders of peace to stop the violence and terrorism. The very act of celebrating this death cult religion only rewards its violent leaders for the evil brought onto the world since Mohammed began killing Jews and Christians after his so-called “holy vision.”

The Koran says in 9:30, “The last hour will not come before the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, so that Jews will hide behind stones and trees and the Stone and the tree will say, O Muslim, O servant of God! There is a Jew behind me; come and kill him.” And the Koran says in 5:51, “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends.” Jesus Christ said in Matthew 5:44, “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.” And Jesus said in Matthew 24:4, “Take heed that no man deceive you.”

There is a fine line between loving, blessing and praying for your enemy, and approving of your enemy’s intent to destroy you.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 05:01 PM | Comments (0)

October 25, 2006

Recommended Vote for Michigan Senator

By Morrie Amitay, Former Executive Director AIPAC - (American Israel Public Affairs Committee)
Founder Washington Political Action Committee

DEBBIE STABENOW (D) Elected 2000
A fine record of support and assuming a leadership role.

Stabenow’s GOP opponent is tough-talking charismatic Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard. Bouchard, after initially dropping out of the race for medical reasons won an impressive victory in the August GOP primary. In post-primary match-ups with Stabenow, Bouchard was within single digits and with Michigan suffering high unemployment and job loss. Democrats such as Gov. Granholm and Stabenow were natural targets for voters. However, while Granholm is feeling the heat (and has a self-funding opponent) Stabenow is in better shape. Voters blame President Bush more than Stabenow for Michigan’s problems, and the Governor’s race is dominating the election. Stabenow wisely broke with Democrats on immigration legislation and she has stayed well ahead in fund raising. In two October polls, she led Bouchard 56% to 39% and 48% to 35% and the race is falling off the radar.

Vote for Stabenow, a proven, excellent friend of the State of Israel.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:34 PM | Comments (0)

October 23, 2006

A Beautiful Message to the Jews from PM Tony Blair

Jerusalem Post International October 5, 2006

As Jews around the world celebrate the New Year, and we in Britain continue to mark the 350th anniversary of the re-establishment of our Jewish community, I am struck by the courage and resolution of the Jewish people. To me, the Jewish community stands for what a community is all about. People respect each other as individuals, but they have a deep and profound sense of themselves as a community.

It is impossible to imagine modem Britain without its Jewish community. But for almost four centuries, Jews were forbidden to worship in Britain, even in private. All that changed with Cromwell’s decision in 1656. Since then, arts, sciences, commerce, politics, the world of learning and thought, have all been illuminated by the names of distinguished Jews who have made their mark, added to the store of knowledge and helped to make the United Kingdom a better place.

Earlier this month, 1 was presented with a report by the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism. The report states that Jews in Britain have become more anxious and vulnerable to abuse and attack than at any other time for a generation or longer. This is simply unacceptable. My government has a zero-tolerance policy towards anti-Semitism, and all manifestations of hatred and xenophobia. No community in Britain should feel that they are at risk. We shall study the report - and its recommendations — closely.

The report found that British Jews often bear the brunt of people’s anger over Israeli and American policies. There is of course a wider issue here, about how dissent should be handled in a democratic society - and we must continue to assert that the discussion should be carried out within the confines of peaceful, democratic debate. But it is natural that Jewish people everywhere have a particular place in their hearts for what happens in Israel, to which — for generations — they have prayed to return. And I believe that most people in Israel, and most Jewish people throughout the world, want to live side by side with the Palestinian people, in peace.

When I met Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas this month, I stressed that the only way to bring lasting peace to the Middle East is to have two states, both democratic, both viable and both recognizing the existence of the other. One point, which is striking about this long-standing conflict, is that there is a widespread consensus on what the shape of a solution has to look like. This is not an unattainable vision — it is a realistic goal towards which I am ever more determined to contribute. Such an outcome is the only long-term guarantee for Israel’s security in the region — something on which I do not expect Israel to compromise.

I am mindful, too, of the enormous importance of the effective implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701. (Security Council calls for end to hostilities between Hizbollah and Israel) This is one way in which working together - we can all demonstrate what can be achieved in the region, to bolster the men of peace and counter all those who have an agenda based on violence and the denial of others’ right to exist.

As the latest report on anti-Semitism illustrates, the Jewish people have too often in history been victims of hatred. But they have also rightly inspired respect and admiration. We must not forget that the Jewish community - the oldest minority faith community in Britain - serves as an example of how identity through faith can be combined with the deep loyalty to the British nation.

As one of the children from the Naima Primary School wrote in the booklet presented to me at the thanksgiving service at Bevis Marks Synagogue in June:

“Am I Jewish or English? This keeps me in confusion.
I’m both, you see, that’s my final conclusion.
Judaism is my religion: I make it so, clearly
I adore England, I love it so dearly.”

We shall continue to value our Jewish community and ensure that its members feel safe and security in Britain and know that they are an integral part of British society. We shall persist in the fight against anti-Semitism and racism, and our police will continue to work together with communities to ensure their safety and security.

The Jewish New Year is always an opportunity for renewal and new beginnings. My particular hope this year is that we can re-energize the peace process in the Middle East. But I would also like to say thank you to the Jewish community in Britain, which for the last three-and-a-half centuries has contributed enormously to Britain. I salute all they do for their community and country, their courage and endurance, their contribution and commitment to Britain, and Israel.

(PS - Of course, PM Blair does not really understand that the Arabs have only one goal for Israel and I am sure Ehud Olmert did nothing to enlighten him. But, that is not PM Blair’s fault and it is still a very beautiful, moving speech. Thank you very much - Jsk)

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 09:20 AM | Comments (0)

October 20, 2006

Sandra Day O’Connor and "Liberals" please take note

Also, those interested in their kids getting into first class colleges and in their obtaining quality employment opportunities

Study: Race still key at University of Michigan

By Mark Hicks
The Detroit News, October 17, 2006

Despite a mixed 2003 Supreme Court ruling on the use of racial preferences in University of Michigan admissions, race and ethnicity still factored heavily for students admitted to the school over four years, according to studies released today by a national research group.

The studies were compiled based on data on undergraduate, medical school and law school admissions that the university provided to the Center for Equal Opportunity, a Sterling, Virginia-based non-profit research and educational organization through freedom of information requests.

The data, which cover incoming freshmen in 1999, 2003, 2004 and 2006, reveals that last year, African-American and Hispanic applicants who scored 1240 on SAT and earned a 3.2 grade point average had a 9 out of 10 chance of being admitted to U-M. Whites and Asians with similar scores and grades had a l out of 10 chance!!

The studies suggest a “dramatic difference” in which students are admitted, said Roger Clegg, president of CEO. “‘The studies found race is not (a) small factor, but an overwhelming factor for who does or doesn’t get in,” he said.

But, U of M spokeswoman, Julie Peterson, said that while the university does consider racial makeup of its campus, the study does not take into account academic essays, teacher recommendations or extracurricular activities
“No top university admits students solely on the basis of grades and test scores,” Peterson said. “We consider many factors in order to admit a group of students who have diverse talents …“

Unfortunately, the Center for Equal Opportunity Research study quoted above proves Peterson’s statement an outright lie.

Vote "Yes" for Michigan Proposition 2 legislating genuine equal opportunity in college admissions and in all aspects of the work place.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 06:31 PM | Comments (0)

October 18, 2006

A Local/National Jewish Problem

Letter to:
Mr. Irwin Alterman, President
Jewish Community Center of Metropolitan Detroit
6600 West Maple Road
West Bloomfield, Michigan 48322

Dear Mr. Alterman,

I was dismayed to see in the October 5 Detroit Jewish News an advertisement for the satellite broadcast of Barbara Walter’s Interview of Frank Rich, a New York Times columnist and author of The Greatest Story Ever Sold: Bush’s America. The event is sponsored by Seminars for Adult Jewish Enrichment (SAJE), one of the subsidiary organizations of the Jewish Community Center of Metropolitan Detroit (JCC), and will be held at your West Bloomfield location.

In your advertisement the broadcast is promoted as follows: "Frank Rich examines what he says is the trail of fictions manufactured by the Bush Administration from 9/11 to Hurricane Katrina, exposing what he calls the most brilliant spin campaign ever waged."

While I realize that it is commonplace for local Jewish organizations to promote liberal politics and Democratic party candidates under the guise of, "To be a good Jew, you must vote Democratic," this time the Jewish organizational establishment in general and the JCC in particular have gone too far! And I resign from the Jewish Community Center.

I will leave aside the fact that it is not in the best interests of the State of Israel or American Jewry (or all non-Muslim Americans, for that matter) to turn over the Congress to the Democrats or to continue to torment President Bush while he fights terrorism, because I will not be able to convince you of such in one paragraph. Perhaps this article will help, for those who have the open-mindedness and the courage to invest 15 minutes in reading it: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5876&search=Ed

I say the JCC has gone too far because the event is clearly designed to sway Jews to vote for Democrats in the November election, and serves no other purpose: Were Frank Rich to actually appear in person at the JCC three weeks before the election, it might be of interest as the appearance of a legitimate celebrity and noted author (although I am fairly certain that SAJE would never invite Dennis Prager, David Horowitz, or Michael Medved to speak in person on why liberalism is bad for Jews). Were Mr. Rich to be speaking on the Arab-Israeli conflict, Jewish population issues, Jewish holidays or life-cycle events, even - and I am being generous here - church-state issues, the event could be seriously non-political and fall under the subject of "Jewish enrichment."

However, a satellite broadcast from New York of "what he [Frank Rich] says is the trail of fictions manufactured by the Bush Administration" cannot be construed as anything but an attempt to cram the Democratic party agenda down the throats of the Detroit Jewish community.

Further research made me realize that the satellite broadcast is part of a larger, nationwide series of lectures called Live from NY's 92nd Street Y. The schedule may be seen at:


Naturally, in keeping with the spirit of Jewish organizational brainwashing, there are lectures by noted liberals Joy Behar, Katie Couric, Erica Jong, and Abraham Foxman, while Jewish Republicans such as Dennis Prager, David Horowitz, Michael Medved, Elliott Abrams, Ken Mehlman, and Ari Fleischer are conspicuously absent.

It is truly unfortunate that Jewish organizations and Jewish newspapers have only presented one point of view. Despite this, many Jews are waking up. Please note that President Bush and other Republicans poll much better among Jews under age 50 than among those above age 50. This is a harbinger of the future.

Most important is the Jewish vote in the 2006 election. It is about far more than just tax cuts and environmental legislation! It very directly effects the very existence of the state of Israel and the Western world itself - making such issues as stem cell research, women’s rights, separation of church and state, which, by the way, are also supported by a huge number of Republicans, very secondary issues indeed. Hopefully, Jews will be voting accordingly.

Yours truly,

Benjamin M. Mayer
P.O. Box 721432
Berkley, MI 48072

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 03:18 PM | Comments (0)

October 16, 2006

Hollywood’s 84 Major Good Guys


The International Jerusalem Post, September 2006

Israel’s Los Angeles consulate has harnessed unprecedented public support from the film industry, with 84 major players signing last month’s petition backing the country’s fight against terrorism.

Any Hollywood producer would give his right arm to work with the stars listed in a full-page advertisement published last month in the Los Angeles Times, among them Nicole Kidman, Bruce Willis, Michael Douglas, Sharon Stone, Sylvester Stallone, Danny DeVito, William Hurt, James Woods, Gary Sinise and Millie Perkins. The list isn’t the cast of an upcoming blockbuster, but a plea by much of the Hollywood elite to back the fight against Hezbollah, Hamas and worldwide terrorism.

The ad, which has resonated across the global entertainment industry with additional placements in trade publications Variety and the Hollywood Reporter, describes its signatories as “pained and devastated by the civilian casualties in Israel and Lebanon caused by terrorist actions initiated by terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas. “If we do not succeed in stopping terrorism around the world,” the petition goes on, “chaos will rule and innocent people will continue to die. We need to support democratic societies and stop terrorism at all costs.”

The wording may not be forceful by the standards of the Anti-Defamation League and other Jewish organizations but for Hollywood, which has often remained silent in the face of anti-Semitic and anti- Israel attacks, the statement was a bit of a bombshell.

Signatory Lionel Chetwynd, a television writer and producer said, “I’ve been around here for a long time, and I can’t remember a time when so many people in the industry stood up for Israel. I tried something similar in 1982, when Israel was fighting in Lebanon, but I couldn’t get it off the ground.”

While the mix of Oscar winners and celebrity magazine fixtures on the petition has caught the attention of film fans around the world - Nicole Kidman’s signature in particular has been ballyhooed in the Australian media. Hollywood insiders have been most impressed by the inclusion among the 84 signatories of some of the men and women who wield the real power and influence in tinsel town. Mega media moguls Rupert Murdoch, Sumner Redstone and Haim Saban each signed on to the petition, as did studio heads Amy Pascal, Ron Meyer, Meyer Gottlieb and the newly retired Sherry Lansing. So did dozens of prominent producers1 directors and writers. In a professional class by herself, was tennis star Serena Williams.

The project was initiated by Ehud Danoch, Israel’s Consul General in Los Angeles, who made the entertainment industry a special concern after arriving in California for his first diplomatic assignment in October 2004. He first tapped the growing population of Israelis in Hollywood including Arnon Milchan, Danny Dimbort, Avi Lerner, Avi Arad, and David Matalon. The original task force also included veteran supporters of Israel like Bruce Ramer, Branko Ramer and Branko Lustig with the project snow-balling from there, thanks to Consul General Ehud Danoch’s fine effort. Thank you very much.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 11:43 PM | Comments (0)

October 14, 2006

Proposal 2 on ballot

I A Fight To Define Equality
By George F. Will

II And the Jews
By Jerome S. Kaufman

DETROIT -- A feisty 29-year-old white woman and a pugnacious 67-year-old black man are performing two services this autumn for Michigan and the nation. Their Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) is promoting colorblind government. And they are provoking remnants of the civil rights movement, which now is just a defender of a racial spoils system, to demonstrate its decadence, even thuggishness.

In November Michiganders will vote on this ballot initiative: “A proposal to amend the state constitution to ban affirmative action programs that give preferential treatment to groups or individuals based on their race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin for public employment, education or contracting purposes.” Almost identical measures were passed by referendums in California in 1996 and Washington State in 1998 in similar conditions to those here: They were opposed by both parties, all so-called civil rights organizations, most newspapers and many business leaders. What is different in Michigan is the involvement of a particularly nasty organization and an egregiously political judge.

At age 19, Jennifer Gratz, denied admission to the University of Michigan, fought the university all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. It endorsed her argument that it was an unconstitutional denial of equal protection of the law for the university to add 20 points to the scores of Black. Hispanic and Native American applicants. (The maximum score was 150: a perfect 1600 SAT earned just 12 points!)

Ward Connerly is a California businessman and former member of the University of California Board of Regents. He propelled to victory the measures mandating colorblind government in California and Washington State.

With Gratz is its executive director with Connerly lending hard-earned expertise. MCRI collected 508,000 signatures - more than ever have been gathered for a Michigan initiative. In response, some opponents of MCRI have adopted four tactics - none of which involves arguing the merits of racial preferences and all of which attempt-- in the name of “civil rights.” of course -- to prevent Michiganders from being allowed to vote on MCRI. The tactics have included:

Pressuring signers of MCRI petitions to say they did not understand what they were signing. Some talk radio stations have broadcast the names of signers and opponents of MCRI have gone to signers saving. ‘Did you know you signed a petition against equal opportunity?’ Two who recanted their signatures, saying they had signed without reading the measure are federal judges.

• Violently intimidating the state Board of Canvassers, which certifies that initiatives have qualified for the ballot. The Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action by Any Means Necessary (BAMN) disrupted the boards deliberations~, shouting and overturning a table!

·Asking a court to rule that MCRI committed “fraud’ because many who signed the petition supposedly were confused -- the signers were presumably not competent to read and understand the initiative, the full text of which was printed at the top of each petition. A federal judge - Arthur Tarnow, a Bill Clinton appointee -- sadly said he could not rule that way because, although he thinks MCRI is a fraud, whites as well as blacks were confused about it, and even if all signatures gathered in majority-black cities were invalidated, there still were enough signatures to qualify it for the ballot. So Tarnow contented himself with an extrajudicial smear of Gratz, charging that her “deception” had confused all Michigan voters, regardless of race.

Michigan ballots are printed by counties, so BAMN says it is asking local officials to assert an extralegal “moral authority” to leave MCRI off the ballot.

Because the plain language of MCRI is appealing, some opponents argue that MCRI would have terrible “unintended consequences.” It might, they say, eliminate single-sex public schools (Michigan has none while eight of 3,748 schools have a few voluntary single-sex classes) and breast-cancer screening or might stop a Department of Natural Resources program aimed at helping Michigan women become hunters! (The initiative concerns only hiring, contracting and public schools).

Given the caliber of opposition arguments. It is no wonder a Detroit News poll published Sept. 15 shows MCRI with an 11-point lead. Gratz says that if her group is outspent “only” five to one - Connerly was outspent that heavily while winning in Washington State - MCRI will become Michigan law.

Anti-MCRI demonstrators chant, “They say Jim Crow. We say hell, no.” So, the rancid residue of what once was the civil rights movement equates Jim Crow - the system of enforced legal inferiority for blacks -- with opposition to treating blacks as wards of government, in need of infantilizing preferences forever. To such Orwellian thinking, Gratz and Connerly and soon, perhaps, Michigan -- say: Hell, no.

George F. Will, September 24, 2006, The Washington Post Company

II And the Jews:

Most of their parents or grandparents came here at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century. From their time of arrival, the Jews have spent the next 60-70 years or more, and are still fighting, the discrimination against them that persists.

Jews now constitute approximately 2% of the American population but are lumped into the white majority. Therefore they are not included in the so-called minority population, which is over 10 times their number and is erroneously supposed to benefit from the misnomer “Affirmative action” - but what is, in fact, simply nothing more than reverse discrimination. It continues the destructive practices to which Jews have been subjugated since their arrival in this country! Jewish kids trying to get into quality colleges or obtain employment in industries under the intense scrutiny of racists like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et. al. are again being denied because somehow, they have been conveniently included with the so-called majority!

What position are most Jews taking on this issue in their usual sick attempt at currying favor? They are not, G-d forbid, sticking up for their own interests and, by the way, for the real interests of the minorities in question. Ask Bill Cosby or Thomas Sowell or Ward Connerly or any number of other intelligent, rational, independent Blacks. Most Jews and their deluded organizations are again recommending a vote against the above initiative described so eloquently by George F. Will!

George F Will is, of course, right - Vote “Yes” for Proposal 2 on the Michigan ballot and do yourself, the deliberately deluded so-called minorities and the whole country a huge favor.

Jerome S. Kaufman

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 10:13 PM | Comments (0)

October 11, 2006

Destructive self restraint in Israel's Public Relations attempts

Dr. Aaron Lerner
Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)

The absence of a clear and coherent interpretation of the current situation serves to seriously handicap the Government of Israel's PR efforts. And in many respects, this is self imposed.

What is Israel's take on Egypt's role in Israeli-Palestinian relations?
The photo-op answer is that we welcome the "positive contributions" of our Egyptian "partners in peace" with the spin that "Egypt's policy is driven by the concern it shares with Israel's over radical groups that threaten stability."

The truth is that we are concerned that Egypt's operative policy vis-a-vis the Palestinians is to facilitate an ongoing low grade Palestinian war of attrition against Israel. This is illustrated by Egypt's intensive efforts to preserve the various illegal radical armed Palestinian militias as it well as the massive flow of weapons from Egypt to the Gaza Strip.

What about Mahmoud Abbas?
The photo-op assessment is that he is a "moderate" and a "man of peace". Yet in truth, "moderation" is a tactical choice for Abbas rather than a commitment. Radical action is wrong only to the extent that it is ineffectual. "Moderate" Abbas embraced the "promising" and "moderate" Prisoners' Document that mandates the murder of Jews in Jerusalem ("resistance") and Abbas wants to put all armed terrorists on the PA payroll. Abbas has no qualms, noting that all bets are off if the Palestinians don't get every centimeter of land - and more - via negotiations.

And the dichotomy between "photo-op" and reality goes on and on.This isn't a matter of "constructive ambiguity" or diplomatic niceties or even a fervent hope that if the "photo-op" assessment is repeated enough times that maybe reality will somehow catch up with it.

Unfortunately, what really drives this phenomenon is the ruling Government's desire not to provide ammunition to the enemy.No. Not ammunition to the Arabs. The "enemy" are Israelis who could potentially use the statements of Israeli officials as ammunition against Government policy.

This is nothing new.
From the day Rabin embraced Oslo up through to the Olmert administration today, there has been a struggle in every administration between those who felt that the truth had to be told and the leadership who wanted to keep its
options open.

Sometimes it has reached the point of absurdity.
At a particularly severe low point in Israeli-Palestinian relations, the Barak Government's public affairs coordinator, Nachman Shai, released a "white book" on 20 November 2000 detailing Palestinian Oslo violations. While the publication was distributed by the Government of Israel at an official meeting with the press, there was no identifying marking on it indicating the source of the publication, the author, or that the Government of Israel was in any way associated with the publication. The publication was quickly pulled from distribution as Barak tried to make more "progress" with the Palestinians.

Does Israel need a bigger PR budget? Yes. But just as with an exorbitantly expensive sound system, it still very much matters what you play on it.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 03:05 AM | Comments (0)

October 08, 2006

Judiciary Reeks Anti-Semitism

Pentagon analyst gets light jail term

By Bill Gertz

THE WASHINGTON TIMES, September 9, 2006

A former Pentagon analyst who passed highly classified intelligence to two Chinese military officers was sentenced to three months in prison yesterday -- far shy of four to five years called for in sentencing guidelines. Federal Judge Gerald Bruce Lee said that despite the "very serious charge" against Ronald Montaperto, he was swayed to reduce the sentence based on letters of support from current and former intelligence and military officials.

Montaperto, 67, who pleaded guilty in June to unlawful retention of classified documents he obtained while working at the Defense Intelligence Agency, said he was trying to get intelligence for the United States from the Chinese officials. "I never meant to hurt my country in any way," Mr. Montaperto said during his hearing at U.S. District Court in Alexandria. He worked at the Pentagon from 1981 until his dismissal in 2003.

Neil Hammerstrom, the assistant U.S. attorney, told the court that Montaperto met 60 times with two Chinese military intelligence officers and provided both secret and top secret information during the meetings. Mr. Hammerstrom asked for at least a two-year sentence, arguing a tough prison term was needed because Montaperto "repeatedly placed in jeopardy sensitive sources and methods pertaining to our national security." Montaperto told investigators he could not remember the specifics of the classified information he passed to Chinese intelligence, lapses that prevented prosecutors from charging him with more serious spy charges. U.S. officials said a major U.S. electronic eavesdropping operation against China went silent around the time Montaperto admitted passing the highly classified data to the Chinese in 1988.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra, chairman of the House intelligence committee, said
he is concerned by the apparent support for Montaperto from the U.S.
intelligence community
and promised a committee probe. "You would think that the intel community would set the standard for holding people accountable for mishandling and passing of classified information to our enemies," Mr. Hoekstra said.

Among the officials who wrote letters of support were Lonnie Henley, currently the deputy national intelligence officer for East Asia in the office of Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte. Mr. Henley said he has been "close friends" with Montaperto since the 1980s. Another supporter was retired Rear Adm. Eric McVadon, who currently holds a security clearance as a consultant on China to the CIA and Pentagon. Adm. McVadon said he would not second guess the case against his friend but could only "recoil at characterizations of him in the press as a spy."

Judge Lee said he also considered Montaperto's "extraordinary" voluntary confessions in the light sentence, which includes three months of home detention and five years' probation! However, investigators said Montaperto did not reveal or admit the passing of secrets until fooled into making the admissions in a 2003 sting operation while he worked at the U.S. Pacific Command think tank in Hawaii.

U.S. intelligence officials have said Montaperto was first investigated in the late 1980s after a Chinese defector said Beijing considered him one of their "dear friends," or informal supporters of China.

The light sentence contrasts with the 12-year prison term given in January to another former Pentagon official, Larry Franklin, who was convicted of providing classified information to two officials of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Bill Gertz, Washington Times

The "light sentence" also contrasts starkly with the following case:

II Justice for Jonathan Pollard commentary:

In spite of his blatant espionage activities for 22 years on behalf of the Chinese, charges against Monteperto were downgraded to nothing more than "mishandling classified information." On these lesser charges, he was facing no more than a 4 year sentence. He got 3 months!

Compare with the case of Jonathan Pollard who did no damage to the US, worked for the government for only 6 years and was never indicted for intent to harm the U.S. Pollard got life for passing classified information to Israel, and is now completing his 21st year in an American prison!

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:21 PM | Comments (0)

October 06, 2006



By: Helen Freedman, October, 2006
30 W. 63rd St., New York, NY 10023; ghfree@aol.com; 917-886-0729

So you thought your money was going to the Jewish children and their parents who spent the past summer in bomb shelters. Or you believed that your donation was going to rebuild homes in the north of Israel that had been destroyed by Hezbollah rockets. Or perhaps you were thinking of the elderly, or school and camp programs. Whatever your thoughts might have been, did you think that a huge part of your donation would be given to the very Arabs who supported Hezbollah and danced on their rooftops in celebration whenever word came of Jewish soldiers or civilians killed? Probably not.

Therefore, the following information should be of interest to you:

I contacted United Jewish Communities through email and requested a breakdown of the millions of dollars raised in the Emergency Israel Relief Campaign. I received a copy, with three pages of detailed programs, activities, beneficiaries, allocations and monies paid so far. The very first item is: Activities for non-Jew sector in confrontation area. The organization designated for this concern is the Jewish Agency for Israel. The activity is designated: Support to non-Jewish children in community centers. The allocation is $3,300,000.

Community Center Emergency Outreach Programs is the next item:
The organization in charge is the Joint Distribution Committee/JDC. The money allocated is $3,000,000 and 25,299 Arab children are the beneficiaries.

The School Readiness Day Camp Program, solely for non-Jewish children, received $2,640,000 and the Summer camp for kids, including 10,000 non-Jews, received $17,300,000. The list goes on and on, but it is clear that Arabs are benefiting substantially from the generosity of Jews.

What is to be done about this? There are those who will take the high road, declaring that Israel is a democracy and must treat all its citizens the same; therefore funds for restoring the north should be handed out in democratic fashion. That is undoubtedly the argument you would get from the UJC. Indeed, on their website: www.ujc.org, they write the following:

“Is there a fundraising goal?
A half billion dollars or more may be required and we are currently assessing the needs.

Do donations go only to Jews?
No: we are helping all vulnerable populations, including Israeli Arabs, Druze and Jews.

So there you are folks. One question and a one-line answer, where Jews, Druze and Arabs are all in the same category of vulnerable populations!

When examining errors of commission, there are also errors of omission. NO WHERE, in the projected expenditures of the UJC is there any recognition of the 10,000 Jewish refugees from Gush Katif, the Jewish community in Gaza, who were forcibly expelled from their homes by the Israeli government in August, 2005.

More than one year later, NONE of them have received their full compensation for their destroyed homes and businesses, ALL of them are still in temporary homes, FEW of them have found employment, ALL of the youngsters have been shifted from one school to another, often expected to adjust to six or seven different schools in this one year period, ALL of them are desperately in need of money to try to do for themselves what the government has failed to do. If the United Jewish Communities does not respond from their projected half-billion dollar fund-raising campaign, who will?

AND as if to rub further salt into the wounds- a Y-net report tells us that the Israeli government is now promising a third of their aid to the north to the Arabs. The Y-Net report by Sharon Roffe-Ofir tells us that an additional $343.3 million will be added by donations raised by the JDC and the Jewish Agency. That’s your money, folks and please note that the government money takes no note of the needs of the Gush Katif refugees who desperately need their homes and businesses to be rebuilt. Their communities were totally destroyed and must be re-created, in new locations, from scratch. That includes schools, synagogues, shops, farms, hothouses, and homes.

How can the Israeli government, and the Joint, and the Jewish Agency, and the Federations that make up the United Jewish Communities turn their backs on needy Jews while they placate Arabs who are part of the plot to destroy Israel? It makes no sense. PLEASE make your voice heard in loud protest to such actions.

Write to Howard Rieger, President and Chief Executive Officer of UJC: info@ujc.org, or call him at: 212-284-6500. Insist that money donated by Jews to help the Jews of Israel be used for that purpose. At the very least, there must be full disclosure, up front, that donations to the Emergency Campaign go to Arabs and Druze as well as Jews.

At least then, Jews can determine whether to continue donating their money to UJC and their contributing Federations, or to give it more specifically to individual Jewish causes where the money goes directly to help Jewish needs. Information about direct giving to needy Jews can be secured by contacting Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, 212-828-2424; afsi@rcn.com; www.afsi.org.

HELEN FREEDMAN, 30 W. 63rd St., New York, NY 10023


By Rafi Israeli

The writing, to anyone with eyes that wished to see, has always been on the wall. Here is a redaction of an article written in 1989. It has proven to be a frighteningly accurate forecast and completely pertinent to the latest Federation Idiocy. It was found on the Internet - Jerusalem Letters of Lasting Interest VP: 82 24 Tevet 5749 / 1 January 1989. jsk

Most of the focus on Arab-Israeli relations over the last two decades (now make that four decades! - jsk) has centered on the situation of the Arabs in the administered territories, to the neglect of the Arabs in Israel. Yet the intifada has triggered scattered acts of violence by Israel's Arabs as well, mandating a new look at this community.

It would be wonderful to believe that the future of Arab-Jewish relations within Israel will follow the lead of the many Israeli-Arab friendship associations which have been at work for decades to foster greater understanding between the two peoples. Their work stems from a perspective that holds that basically people are good and therefore all we have to do is create an atmosphere of brotherhood in which we can embrace each other, talk to each other, understand each other, and then everything will fall into place. Unfortunately, I believe this is an exercise in futility and is not the way to approach the problem. The problem is soluble, but only via a political solution.

After forty years (60) of such attempts, relations between Arabs and Jews in Israel have not seriously improved. If anything, they have grown worse from the Israeli point of view. It can be plainly observed that the Arabs in Israel no longer talk about being merely a religious, cultural, ethnic or linguistic minority, as we used to hear. Today they speak about themselves as a national minority, with all that involves.

At the time of the establishment of the State of Israel, Israeli Arabs numbered about 110,000, living under the administration of a military government and numbering 11 percent of the total Israeli population. There were times when this percentage rose and fell, depending upon the rate of Jewish immigration to Israel. In the 1950s and 1960s when there was mass aliya to Israel, it dwindled to as low as 10 percent. There were times when it went up to 15 or 16 percent.

Now, partly because Israel annexed East Jerusalem and the Arabs of East Jerusalem are considered Israeli residents, the total number of Israeli Arabs is rapidly approaching 750,000, nearly 18 percent (now 20%) of the total Israeli population, and in about twenty years or less will reach one million, (now 1.4 million) a number which cannot be dismissed as insignificant.

There have been countless declarations about how the Arab citizens of Israel are equal members of Israeli society. It is undeniable that Israel has absorbed the Arabs into many facets of its society -- into a democratic political system with a plurality of political parties, which does not exist anywhere else in the Arab world. Israeli Arabs have a higher degree of education, a higher degree of medical care, and a higher standard of living than Arabs anywhere else. The life expectancy of the Arabs in Israel has grown over the past forty years from about 52 years to over 70 years and is just slightly below that of the Jewish population.

Yet they cannot be fully equal, not only because Israel is in a state of war with the Arab world but because they are, and increasingly so, identifying themselves as a national minority. For example, to the Arabs of Israel, the symbols of the state mean little or nothing. For example, on Independence Day, the most important date in the Israeli calendar, Jews dance in the streets of Jerusalem. For the Arabs it is a day of mourning. It is the date they call Naqba, meaning the holocaust or disaster.

That is the day they lost their land, from their point of view. At best they will sit in their villages and mourn their own fate. At worst they will burn the Israeli flag or other things of this sort. So the cleavage is there and it runs very deep. If Jews cannot even share their national holiday with their Arab fellow-citizens, then what do they have in common?

During the first twenty years, Israeli Arabs came to consider themselves increasingly as part of Israeli society, not because they liked it but because they were cut off from the rest of the Arab world and felt they had no option but to try to assimilate into the Israeli environment. During those years, in my opinion, successive Israeli governments committed the mistake of maintaining a cleavage between Arab society and Jewish society. For example, there was no integrated system of education. It is true that the Arabs wanted to have their own system of education in Arabic, to put an emphasis on Arab history, Arabic language and Islamic religion, all of which is understandable from their point of view. However, if they teach their own heritage, their own patrimony, their own culture as separate from the culture of the state in which they live, then they can be expected to acquire a separate identity which is not likely to tie them to the State of Israel as loyal citizens.

"Palestinian" Identity

The second circle of Arab identity is the Palestinian one. After 1967 when the so-called "green line" was erased, the Arabs in Israel discovered that they were part of a much larger and much more politically conscious Palestinian people. With the rise of the PLO in the late 1960s and 1970s, its recognition by the UN, the various acts of what we call terrorism and what they call heroic acts against Israel all contributed to an increase in Palestinian consciousness. Go to any village in the Galilee and ask the people who they are. In 60-70 percent of the cases they will tell you that first of all they are Palestinian.

This very real, genuine, authentic Palestinian identity has in some ways complicated the lives of the Arabs in Israel because on the one hand they clamor for Palestinian identity, but on the other they claim their Israeli rights. When they say "rights," it always means something they want to receive. You never see a group of Arabs demonstrating in Tel Aviv for the right to serve in the army or perform other national service. Clamoring for rights means demanding more money for Arab education, an education which is not only separate from our own but in many ways cultivates the anti-Israeli currents in their midst.

In the meantime they train themselves and cultivate their youth to meet that future challenge. The Arab history they learn in school can only strengthen their Arab identity, their feeling of being a part of the greater Arab world around them. They say that as long as the Arabs are in a state of war with Israel and there are no signs of peace between Israel and all the Arab countries, then it is natural that they should be on the Arab side in their hearts.

The fourth circle of identity is the Islamic one. The last twenty years have witnessed an Islamic revival all over the Moslem world from Morocco to Indonesia. (See Rafi Israeli, "The Impact of Islamic Fundamentalism on the Arab-Israeli Conflict," Survey of Arab Affairs, No. 13 [15 August 1988].) As can be seen throughout the Moslem world, in places where conflict is rife, there is always some element which will lean on Islam and use its symbols in order to bring forward its political message.

Now it has come to the fore with the Hamas movement, which is making its mark on the Palestinian struggle against Israel and not necessarily in collaboration or cooperation with the PLO. Not long ago I obtained the religious and political manifesto of the Hamas movement. It is a forty-page document and after reading it you have no doubt about what they want. It is not like the Algiers resolutions of the PLO, which are ambivalent and full of double-talk. It is unequivocal. They speak about an Islamic state in the entire territory of "Palestine."

To conclude, over the past two decades the "Israeli" component of Arab identity has been greatly reduced, while the Palestinian component has increased to the point where their surging new identity today is that of a national minority. The recognition of this fact and the formulation of a policy by the Israeli leadership to deal with it is long overdue. Such a policy must lump together Israeli Arabs, who are Palestinians for all intents and purposes, with the rest of the Palestinian people under Israeli rule.

Dr. Rafi Israeli is a senior lecturer in Islamic civilization and Chinese history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

The Jerusalem Letter and Jerusalem Letter/Viewpoints are published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 13 Tel-Hai St., Jerusalem, Israel

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 06:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 04, 2006

The Democratic Party and the Jews

A redaction from a much more detailed, explicit article

By Ed Lasky, News Editor of the American Thinker.

The Democratic Party has been a congenial political home for many American Jews since the era of FDR. The party welcomed them into its ranks and its programs comported well with many values Jews cherish. The Party was also seen as one that had offered help to the doomed Jews of Europe, opposed prejudice, and supported the fledgling state of Israel from enemies that boasted of its plans to destroy the state. Conversely, the Republican Party was perceived to be a WASP enclave, isolationist in its outlook, and weak on support for Israel (though George C. Marshall under the Truman Administration advocated abandoning Israel to the tender mercies of its Arab neighbors).

However, these views are now anachronistic and need to be revisited. Developments in the Democratic Party bode ill for the Jewish people and for the state of Israel – home of up to 40% of the world’s remaining Jewish population. The rank and file of the Party has become increasingly anti-Semitic and support for Israel has noticeably fallen. Democratic Congressmen have reflected this trend in very visible ways: their votes and actions in Congress reveal that support for Israel has eroded in alarming ways.
Furthermore, more than a few Democratic Congressman have openly made statements that are either clearly anti-Semitic or can be fairly construed to be at least, “anti-Semitic in effect, if not intent”.

The rise of the internet as a political force is a widely heralded phenomena. Political blogs have achieved a high level of influence in the Democratic Party-certainly more so than in the Republican Party. They also provide a very visible means to take the tone of the Democratic electorate and for Jews; this should strike a discordant tone. As several pundits have noted, the blogs have become a hot bed for anti-Semitic sentiments.In this Wall Street Journal op-ed, Bill Clinton’s former Special Counsel, Lanny Davis expressed his distress at the increasing tide of anti-Semitism and vitriol spewing forth from Democratic blogs. Examples he noted: “Ned Lamont and his supporters need to get real busy. Ned needs to beat Lieberman to a pulp in the debate and define what it means to be an American who is NOT beholden to the Israeli Lobby.”

Republicans and Democrats when it comes to support for Israel:

Among Republicans, an overwhelming 84% say they sympathize more with Israel than Arab states (which 1% of Republicans sympathize with) compared to just 43% of Democrats who do so (12% sympathize with Arab states).

Moreover, the increasing proliferation and importance of so-called 527 groups may play a roll in the increasing anti-Israel attitudes within the Democratic Party base. These are groups that can engage in partisan advocacy campaigns about the “issues”. While purportedly forbidden from targeting individual candidates, they have in fact been used in this manner. They are also a useful means to skirt federal laws limiting the amount individuals can give to federal campaigns. Arab oil billionaires have certainly found the means to influence public opinion by purchasing stakes in media properties and paying lavishly for news service feeds to their own networks and publications, endowing universities, and hiring former government officials with a view to influencing current policies.

Congressman Charles Rangel stated, “the Iraq war was the biggest fraud ever committed on the people of this country just as bad as six million Jews being killed” (Democratic Senator Durbin also made facile and insensitive comparisons of the torture and murder meted out by the Nazis to the actions of a few wayward guards at Abu Ghraib. Rangel has a history of tangling with the Anti-Defamation League but blames his problems with the ADL on their desire to create controversy to raise money.

Leading Democratic Congressman John Conyers is on the House Judiciary Committee and held a mock impeachment hearing to criticize President Bush. The hearing did much more than that, however. Conyers called “expert witnesses” who had histories of peddling anti-Semitic conspiracy theories regarding the “cabal that controls the White House.” 30 Democratic Congressmen attended the meeting. One of the witnesses, Ray McGovern, declared that the US went to war for “Oil, Israel, and military bases coveted by neocons so that the US and Israel could dominate that part of the world”.

The most senior Democrat from Michigan, John Dingell, declared himself ambivalent about which side he wanted to win in the war between Hezb’allah and Israel. Hezb’allah has in its charter that its goal is genocide against the Jews (not “just” the destruction of Israel. Hezb’allah is the number one terror group in the world. It has killed hundreds of innocent Jews in Argentina, hundreds of Americans sent to Lebanon as peacekeepers, and makes clear its desire to continue such “good works”.

Jim McDermott, the Democratic Congressman from Washington, enjoyed his moment in the sun by traveling to Iraq before the war started to support Saddam Hussein. This particular travel junket was paid for by an Arab-American “charity” group recently raided by the FBI and IRS. The federal government is investigating the group, which it suspects violated sanctions regarding doing business with Iraq.

The Democratic nominee for Congress in Minnesota’s Fifth District is a Black Muslim who has a long history of anti-Semitism that he has tried to obfuscate by a variety of means-including name changes and pseudonyms. He seems to be following the Cynthia McKinney playbook.

Neil Abercrombie is a Democratic Congressman from Hawaii who takes such pride in his anti-Israel stance that he was the sole “No” in a Resolution that stated that America should never give foreign aid to a Palestinian government if it is controlled by people calling for Israel’s destruction. He also was one of 8 members who voted “No” on House Resolution 921 that defended Israel’s right to defend itself against Hezbollah. See also “Neil Abercrombie, D-Hezbollah” on Front Page Magazine for a further analysis of his voting record.

Other prominent Democrats who may not currently serve but certainly have sway within the party include such anti-Israel and anti-Semitic luminaries as Jesse Jackson (who described New York City as “Hymietown” and said he “was sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust”) and the Reverend Al Sharpton who led an anti-Semitic pogrom in Harlem and rails against “diamond merchants” and “bloodsuckers” in black communities. Both of these figures flanked Ned Lamont during his speech when he declared victory against Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary in Connecticut.

Of course, Jimmy Carter is the elder statesman of the Democratic Party. He had pride of place at the Democratic National Convention. His anti-Israel stances are by now widely known through innumerable op-eds and speeches he has given (his new book will be titled “Palestine: Peace or Apartheid” that are basically screeds against Israel. Little appreciated is that he held these views, and others that can be construed as anti-Semitic, during his Presidency. According to Cyrus Vance, his Secretary of State, had Carter won a second term he “would have sold Israel down the river”

Recent voting patterns among Democrats regarding legislation impacting the US-Israel alliance are discouraging:The Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act was an attempt to funnel aid to the Palestinians in a way that did not empower terror groups and encouraged peaceful negotiations with Israel. While the House passed it in May of this year, 37 votes were cast against it (because they objected to the restrictions carefully designed to prevent the use of the aid to commit terror attacks). Thirty-one of them were from Democrats (the “Nos” included Abercrombie, Dingell, Moran, David Obey, Nick Rahall). Of the 9 Representatives who voted present (a weak “no”), all were Democrats.

The Iran Freedom Support Act was crafted as a way to support the Iranian people in efforts to reform a regime that has promised to “wipe Israel off the map” (and has an active nuclear program geared to do so). The Act passed the House but with 21 members voting against it, 15 of them were Democrats (including Obey, McKinney, Rahall, McDermott, Kucinich).

Most recently, on the other side of the Capitol, the Senate voted on a bill to place restrictions on the use of US-made cluster bombs. These were used by Israel in its efforts to defend itself against Hezb’allah. The measure was introduced by Senators Leahy (Democrat) and Feinstein (Democrat). Cluster bombs are in the arsenals of over 50 nations and are acceptable as a way to defend one’s people. Nevertheless, the Senate tried to crimp Israel’s ability to use the. Who voted to hurt Israel? Thirty Democrats and zero Republicans.

Senate Democrats have also led the campaign to prevent John Bolton from serving as America’s Ambassador to the United Nations (he currently serves by virtue of a recess appointment). Bolton has not only served America ably in representing our interests over the years, he has also been a friend to the Jewish people. He single-handedly took it upon himself to have the UN repeal the noxious “ Zionism is Racism” resolution by Herculean efforts. He also was instrumental in the creation of the Proliferation Security Initiative, a very effective measure in curbing the spread of the very type of weapons of mass destruction that are an existential threat to Israel (the program helped to uncover and stop Libya’s nuclear program). He has been a firm supporter of the American-Israel friendship.

The implications of a Democrat-majority House:

The majority party controls the naming of Chairmanships of the Committees in the House. These posts usually follow seniority. Several of the most senior Democrats hail from districts that are anti-Israel, particularly the Michigan Congressmen.

John Conyers will assume the Chairmanship of the House Judiciary Committee. He has made clear his intention to hold an impeachment proceeding against George Bush. Given that his previous “mock” hearing became a mini-orgy of anti-Semitism, can we look forward to a repeat performance?

John Dingell will assume the Chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Will he seek to prevent America from becoming more energy self-sufficient and thereby help empower Arab oil-exporting nations? Will he take actions that would upset the Arab-Americans in his community? He is a member of the Hall of Fame of anti-Israel Congressmen.

David Obey will become Chair of the Appropriations Committee. This is the committee responsible for drafting the legislation authorizing spending by the U.S. Government. He will very clearly cut the defense budget wherever possible and direct money to domestic programs. Military Aid is key to Israel’s ability to defend itself. Will Obey cut aid to Israel, as he has already voiced a desire to do (over the settlements issue)? Obey is a member of the Hall of Fame of anti-Israel Congressman.

Charles Rangel, who has publicly feuded with the Anti-Defamation League for years and compares the Iraq War to the Holocaust, would become Chair of the powerful Ways and Means Committee. This Committee has jurisdiction over all taxation, tariffs, and other revenue-raising measures. Anti-Israel Congressmen have periodically threatened the tax-deductibility of charity aid going to Israel. Rangel is a member of the Hall of Fame of anti-Israel Congressmen.

Neil Abercrombie will become Chairman of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee of Armed Services. A flourishing and synergistic trade in defense goods exists between Israel and American. Access to the high-tech weapons that America produces helps to offset the advantages Arab nations have in manpower and oil wealth. Yet, Abercrombie is on record as opposing the purchase of Israeli munitions, stating, “by no means, under any circumstances, should a round from Israel be utilized”

Nancy Pelosi, who will become Speaker of the House if the Democrats attain a majority there, has reportedly “cut a deal” with the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) involving the House Intelligence Committee. Should the Democrats attain a majority in the House, the Chairmanship would normally fall to Congresswoman Jane Harman of California, as the ranking Democrat. Instead, Pelosi hopes to curry favor with the CBC by skipping Harman and rewarding the chair to Congressman Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.). Hastings was formerly a federal judge, but was impeached and convicted 18 years ago on charges of extortion, perjury and falsifying documents. The intelligence services of America and Israel have close working relationships. Will Hastings try to disrupt these relationships? Recently, her record regarding Israel-American relations has weakened. Two months ago, she refused to support a Resolution expressing support for Israel because she wanted to attach language asking Israel to limit civilian casualties – a nod to extremist in her party who accuse Israel of wantonly killing civilians.

The loyalty American Jews have shown to the Democratic Party is increasingly not appreciated or reciprocated. As the Jewish population faces demographic decline, the Democratic Party is increasingly beholden to groups for which Israel is of no importance whatsoever (unions, for example). Several groups that form the core of the Democratic Party have anti-Semitism rates that are higher than the American population as a whole.

As the party skews to the left, it has increasingly adopted the anti-Israel philosophy and attitudes that animate so many on the left. Conversely, the Republican Party has never been more welcoming to Jews nor as supportive of Israel. The party has welcomed an increasing number of Jews to its ranks, and its candidates garner an increasing number of votes from Jewish voters. While Democrats demagogue the rise of evangelicals in America (and in the Republican Party) and demonize them as a threat to the Jews, such mythmaking does not reflect the fact that evangelicals cherish the Jewish people, for reasons having absolutely nothing to do with end-of-days scenarios.

Indeed, Jews have assumed leadership posts in the Republican Party. While Democratic National Committee head Howard Dean joyously dances with a keffiyah draped over his shoulders, Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman waxes nostalgically and publicly about his Bar Mitzvah.

Jews have faced many challenges throughout their history. Iran is one of the most dangerous enemies Israel has ever had: an oil-rich nation with an active nuclear program that has made clear its intention to wipe Israel off the map. A Democratic Party that is increasingly dominated by anti-Israel members, as shown by surveys and Congressional votes, will not be a dependable ally. In an era when over half the world’s Jews face the prospect of annihilation, it is time to reconsider old habits and political alignments.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:58 PM | Comments (0)

October 01, 2006

The Difference between Al Qaeda and the Jews?

Al Qaeda believes in G-d.

By Joseph Farah
The Jewish Press, September 15, 2006

Many have suggested Israel is the root cause of conflict in the Middle East. In the past I have defended the Jewish state, from this charge. I have made the case that, if anything, Israel has bent over backward to make peace. But in doing so, could Israel actually be making things worse? I believe so.
The truth is that Israel has compromised too much. It has not retaliated strongly enough. And its Arab population is the freest in the Arab world.
Ironically, I am not the only one who believes this. Israel’s most ardent adversaries — the very people who want to destroy the Jewish state at any cost — agree with me. And I can prove it to you.

Who would you say is Israel’s most implacable foe? Would you agree that it is Al Qaeda the terrorist group that attacked the U.S. Sept. 11, 2001, and is now openly organizing in Gaza? What would you say if I told you A1-Qaeda believes G-d gave the Jewish people an eternal covenant with the Promised Land? Would you say I was nuts?

How about if I told you Al Qaeda believes this contract between G-d and the Jewish people has been abrogated only because Israel has not been determined enough to defeat its enemies in obedience to G-d? Would it change your opinion of the Middle East dynamic if you learned that Israel’s compromises with and concessions to its enemies persuades Al Qaeda that it is unworthy of fulfilling G-d’s covenant with the Jews?

I’m not going to give you my opinion about this. I’m going to give you Al Qaeda’s verbatim analysis. But before I do, let me summarize it for you:
Israel’s “sin” is in not fearing G-d. Israel lacks the faith to fight for the land G-d bequeathed it. The Jews are willing to compromise with G-d’s promise by giving up the land of Israel piece by piece. That’s what Al Qaeda believes, according to a report it issued just over a year ago.

Here are translated excerpts from that Arabic language Al Qaeda report from July 2005 threatening eminent attacks on the Jewish state:

G-d decided to test the Jews when they were still an oppressed people while captive in Egypt. G-d seeks to lead them to the path of faith and victory and therefore urges them to conquer the Land of Israel. But the Jews are unwilling to make the necessary sacrifices to achieve the goal. To this day, the Jews have not learned that G-d grants victory only to those who struggle for victory.

Throughout the generations, Jews, unlike Muslims, showed that they do not fear G-d or recognize Him as the moving force in the universe. Instead, they are more concerned with what man thinks. For this reason, the Jews find it easier to break the covenant between G-d and Abraham, which awarded the land of Israel to the Jews forever. (Genesis 15:18).

In the Internet magazine Zerwat al Sanam, meaning “Tip of the Camels Hump,” the Al Qaeda author of this screed, Abu Zubeida al-Baghdadi, concludes that Israel’s willingness to compromise with its enemies gives the Arabs an opportunity to be G-d’s vehicle to destroy the Jews. The report goes on to suggest the best timing to launch attacks against Israel to fulfill G-d’s will. It also makes clear that the real enemy, beyond the Jews, is the West.

This analysis is wholly in line with the Koran, which states in the Table, Sura 5:20: “Bear in mind the words of Moses to his People. He said: ‘Remember, my People, and the favor which G-d has bestowed upon you. He has raised up prophets among you, made you kings, and has given you that which He has given to no other nation. Enter, my People, the holy land which G-d has assigned for you. Do not turn back, and thus lose all.”

The voices of international appeasement continue to advise Israel to accommodate the enemies who seek to destroy the Jews and Western civilization. It has not worked and it will not work. In fact, as Al Qaeda’s warped theologians illustrate, it will have just the opposite of the intended effect. Compromise will always convince Israel’s enemies that it is weak, disobedient to G-d, unworthy of His promises and ripe for destruction.

And that’s why I, too, believe Israel remains its own worst enemy. That is how Israel continues to worsen conflict in the Middle East, to make escalating violence inevitable, to engender more contempt and hate from its enemies. How? By not obeying G-d — by not believing in the Divine promises that made it a nation and by putting its faith in man rather than the Creator of the universe. If Israel truly wants to understand its enemies, if it truly wants their respect, it is pushing all the wrong buttons.

Joseph Faith is founder, editor and CEO of World Net Daily and a nationally syndicated columnist. His latest book is ‘ Taking America Back.”

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 03:59 PM | Comments (0)