|     America is more than just the world’s most powerful military. It     spends more on its armed forces than the rest of the world put     together. For instance, "The 281 ships and half-a-million members of     the US navy, larger than those of the next 17 naval nations     combined, guarantee the security of the country's oil supply." (Will Hutton ‘A battle for oil could set the world aflame’ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1764542,00.html April 30, 2006). It is a hyper-power. Under these circumstances, it might be expected that all americans, whether politicians, business people, religious leaders, or consumers, would fully support their country’s military might being used to protect and enhance america’s political, and economic, interests around the world. It would hardly be surprising if they were prone to extreme displays of patriotism. What could be more natural than outbursts of american jingoism from those benefiting from american imperialism around the world? And yet the most prevalent phenomenon in america at present is the exact opposite of such expectations - americans grovelling at the feet of their jewish masters. This is certainly one of the most surprising, and shocking, political phenomenon of the 21st century. America might be a hyper-power, but americans are in the process of selling their country, their national interests, their constitution, and their souls, to the jews-only state in palestine, (jos). They are traitors not merely to their own country, their constitution, their own interests, their own beliefs, but to themselves. This phenomenon affects virtually all americans  few seem immune to this parasitic zionist infestation. This article explores the phenomena of americans sacrificing their country, their political system, their economic interests, their way of life, and even their own identities, for the sake of the jos.     1: Jewish Americans or Jews in America? 
     What’s the Difference? 
     Just as brazilians live in brazil so jews are people who live in,     and are citizens of, the jos. Those who have a jewish genetic     heritage but are citizens of other countries, are not jews. For     example, in america they should be regarded as american jews (or     jewish americans) i.e. people who define themselves as americans.     Despite their jewish genetic heritage they put america’s national     and global interests first - like any other american citizen. The only people who refer to jews globally i.e. as people with a common genetic heritage who are dispersed around the world, are anti-semites, jewish racists and, of course, the jos. When anti-semitic racists, jewish racists, and the jos, use the word ‘jew’ they use it racially (the former derogatorily, the latter in what they believe is a positive way) to describe all those around the world with a jewish genetic heritage. Both believe this genetic racial heritage is more important than a person’s own definition of themselves as the citizen of another country e.g. an american jew or a brazilian jew, etc. Anti-semites are racist because they want harm done to all those with a jewish racial genetic heritage even if they have no allegiance to their own race or to the jos. Conversely, jewish racists are racists because they want to persuade all those with a jewish racial genetic heritage that their racial identity is more important than their self-chosen political identity i.e. their citizenship of another country, and that they should be with their own race in the jos. Thus the anti-semitic racist and the jewish racist are just opposite sides of the same coin. As a consequence, the identity of american jews (or british jews etc) becomes a battlefield where their desire to be loyal to america, and to put america’s interests first, are being undermined by jewish/anti-semitic racists.     Let’s say that as a result of this battle over their identity, an     american jew decides s/he wants to renounce her/his loyalty to     america and give it to the jos. This person then becomes what could     be called a jew living in america. The difference between a jewish     american and a jew in america is that the former puts the interests     of the united states first no matter how much nostalgia or     attachment they feel for the jos, whilst the latter puts the     interests of the jos before those of america. In general, once those     with a jewish genetic heritage living outside of the jos see     themselves as totally jewish they become a jewish racist.     The jos is a racist state. It gives all people around the world with     a jewish genetic heritage the right to become a citizen of the jos.     Thus, virtually all jewish americans have the legal right to become     citizens of the jos. Out of the jewish american population of 3     million about 500,000 have already taken advantage of this legal     right. Once jewish americans decide to take up dual citizenship they     take a large stride towards becoming jews in america  although they     do not necessarily cross this line. "And it could be argued that     numerous US government officials in the highest and most powerful     positions in the land including -but not limited to - Michael     Chertoff (Homeland Security chief), Paul Wolfowitz (former Deputy     Defense Secretary), Richard Perle (former head of the Defense Policy     Board), Douglas Feith (former Undersecretary for Defense) and Dov     Zakheim (former Comptroller for Defense), (reportedly) hold both US     and Israeli citizenship....... and what's wrong with that? Some of     the dual citizens have even worked in both the Israeli and US     government. In fact, in both US and Israeli defense." (Lila Rajiva     Double Standards on Foreign Owners’ http://www.counterpunch.org/rajiva02272006.html     February 27, 2006). American jews cross the line when they put the     interests of the jos before those of america. They then become jews     in america and thus traitors to america.     The most clear cut means for distinguishing between a jewish     american and a jew in america is their attitude to jonathon pollard.     Pollard is currently in prison for selling american secrets to the     jos. Jewish americans would obviously condemn pollard for his     treasonous activities towards america. However, those who seek to     diminish pollard’s crime by arguing that he was not guilty or that     what he did was not serious enough to involve incarceration, or that     he didn’t warrant such a severe prison sentence, are clearly jews     living in america.      It should be pointed out that pollard is worshipped almost as a     saint by many jews in america even whilst they adamantly argue they     are loyal to america, "In his New York Times column Safire damned     Inman for having "contributed to the excessive sentencing of     Jonathan Pollard," Israel's spy in the naval intelligence service     (whom some Jewish-Americans treat as a martyred saint)." (Michael     Lind ‘The Israel Lobby’ Prospect April 1, 2002).     In america, the jewish lobby, the jewish dominated media, jewish     think tanks, jewish academics, are currently trying to defend two     people accused of giving american secrets to the jos. "The recent     arrest of two AIPAC officials for handing confidential government     documents over to Israeli embassy officials has led the pro-Israel     lobby to mobilize a massive media campaign in their defense,     converting an act of espionage against the US into an ‘exercise of     free speech’. Editorials and op-ed articles in favor of dismissal of     the charges have appeared in most of the leading newspapers in what     must be the most unprecedented campaign in favor of agents of a     foreign government in US history. The power of the propaganda reach     of the Lobby far exceeds any countervailing power, even though the     case against the AIPAC officials is very strong, including the     testimony of the key Pentagon official convicted of handing them the     documents." (James Petras ‘Noam Chomsky and the Pro-Israel Lobby:     Fourteen Erroneous Theses’ March 2006). Just how similar the case of     the two aipac officials is to that of pollard has yet to be     determined but should it be shown to be identical and their     supporters continue to support them then a considerable party of     america’s jewish elite will expose themselves as traitors to america.     Jews in america do not go around stating they are totally loyal to     the jos because if they did they would face suspicion and hostility     from ordinary americans They thus try to cover up their primary     allegiance to the jos by pretending they are just american jews.     American jews can support jewish racism and the racist jos without     becoming jews in america but once they begin to advocate that     america should pursue foreign policies that are in the interests of     the jos but not in america’s interests then they cross the line and     become traitors to america. To clarify: just as white americans have     the constitutional right to advocate white racism so american jews     the same right to advocate jewish racism without being condemned as     jews in america.      To repeat: in this work the term ‘jew’ refers to citizens of the jos.     There is a case for arguing that jews are racists because they live     in a racist state, but this is not relevant here. Those with a     jewish genetic heritage who live outside the jos who give their     loyalty to the country in which they live and in which they have     citizenship are better described as, for example, american jews. It     is only when such people give their loyalty to the jos, not the     country in which they live and are a citizen, that they become, for     example, jews in america.     They’re supposed to be Jewish Americans but really they’re Jews in     America: Jews-only Summer Schools.     In the following quote there is a rather convenient conflation     between jews who give "primary loyalty" to the jos and those who     have "dual loyalty". Surely these are two entirely different     political phenomena? The former being traitorous to america whilst     the latter is not. "Ethnocentric political Zionism as the basis of     Jewish identity is more appealing to many former leftist and liberal     Jews in the US than the adoption of a stringent Orthodox Jewish     lifestyle. But making political Zionism the basis of Jewishness imposes a stark dual loyalty, as Stephen Steinlight argues in the essay I have quoted. "I'll confess it, at least: like thousands of other typical Jewish kids of my generation, I was reared as a Jewish nationalist, even a quasi-separatist. Every summer for two months, for ten formative years during my childhood and adolescence, I attended Jewish summer camp. There, each morning, I saluted a foreign flag, dressed in a uniform reflecting its colours, sang a foreign national anthem, learned a foreign language, learned foreign folk songs and dances, and was taught that Israel was the true homeland. Emigration to Israel was considered the highest virtue... Of course we also saluted the American and Canadian flags and sang those anthems, usually with real feeling, but it was clear where our primary loyalty was meant to reside... That America has tolerated this dual loyalty - we get a free pass, I suspect, largely over Christian guilt about the Holocaust-makes it no less a reality."" (Michael Lind ‘The Israel Lobby’ April 1, 2002).     They’re supposed to be Jewish Americans but really they’re Jews in     America: Members of Congress.     "The authors cite Morris Amitay, a former head of AIPAC, as saying:     "There are a lot of guys at the working level up here [on Capitol     Hill] … who happen to be Jewish, who are willing … to look at     certain issues in terms of their Jewishness. … These are all guys     who are in a position to make the decision in these areas for those     senators. … You can get an awful lot done just at the staff level.""     (Justin Raimondo ‘The Lobby’ http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8730     March 20, 2006).     John Wexler.     "An orthodox Jew, Wexler has always been a Zionist hard-liner and     has received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions     from pro-Israel interests during the past six years. And he's picked     up a big stick for the fight against Iraq. A member of the House     committee on international relations, lately he's been spending an     inordinate amount of time traveling around the country and the world     promoting Israel and the war on Hussein. So last week, I asked     Wexler the obvious question: Who, as you prepare to send U.S.     soldiers to war, are you really representing: South Florida or     Israel? "Let's get this straight," he answered. "I'm American. I'm     100 percent American. I bleed American. Am I proud of my heritage?     Yes. I support the state of Israel and wholeheartedly support an     unbreakable bond between the U.S. and Israel... but there is nothing     about my policy that is anything other than American. It is not     driven by Israel. At this point, it is supportive of President     Bush." (bob.norman@newtimesbpb.com New Times Broward-Palm Beach     http://www.newtimesbpb.com/issues/2002-09-26/news/norman.html     September 26th 2002).     Peter Deutsch.     "Deutsch is strongly aligned with AIPAC and, according to the Center     for Responsive Politics, has received roughly $100,000 in campaign     contributions from pro-Israeli political interests during his past     decade in office - including $40,000 since 2000. In May, he traveled     to Israel, where he pledged allegiance to the Jewish state and     hand-delivered to Sharon a House resolution pledging unequivocal     support from the United States. During the trip, Deutsch announced,     "We are totally committed to the war against terrorism... and there     should not be a Yasser Arafat exception," according to the Jerusalem     Post. "He is a terrorist." It's one of the Broward-based     congressman's favorite phrases, "Arafat exception," and it implies,     though Deutsch doesn't say it, that the United States should     forcibly remove Arafat from power." (Bob Norman ‘Hawking for Israel’     http://www.newtimesbpb.com/issues/2002-09-26/news/norman.html     September 26th 2002).     Rahm Emmanuel.     "The Israelization of America: The latest chapter. Only missing from     this important article is the fact that Rep. Rahm Emmanuel, a second     term Democratic congressman from Illinois, while he was working as a     staff director for Pres. Clinton, took time off to serve as a     volunteer in the Israeli army during the first intifada. And why     shouldn't he, his parents are Israeli which makes him.... His other     job? He's the one the Democratic Party leaders have chosen to make     the decision who should run for Demo House seats in the upcoming     election and, as I understand it, who should get the money. Now tell     me again, which country is the strategic asset of the other?" (Jeff     Blankfort ‘Israelization of America. Double Standards on Foreign     Owners/Amdocs vs. DP World’ jblankfort@earthlink.net Feb 28 2006).     2: Jewish Ownership of American Politicians.     A Quick History of the Rise of Jewish Power after the Second World     War.     In america, during the 1930s and 1940s, wealthy jewish individuals,     a smattering of american/globaljewish lobbying organizations, and     politically active jewish communities, tried to influence american     administrations to support the formation of the jos. Although they     had no way of controlling day to day political decisions they were     able to exert an influence at critical moments in america’s     political decision making processes. Perhaps their most crucial     intervention came in 1948 when they persuaded harry truman to     support the establishment of the jos. His support for the jos became     critical when he was elected president of the united states.     The structural dilemma facing american politicians at that time is     exactly the same as it is now: should they support a country with no     resources or a region with vast amounts of resources? The choice     made in 1948 has had a critical influence on the shape of global     politics ever since. Indeed, its ramifications have unravelled     dramatically over the last six decades. One small, critical,     decision has turned into world defining moment. The critical factor     in determining the choice that was eventually made was not an     objective analysis of america’s global interests but domestic party     political considerations in the run up to a presidential election,     "The decision of Harry Truman to vote in favor of the partition of     Palestine was not easily reached. The State Department and several cabinet members disagreed. They deemed it more rational to stick with the wealthy Arabs who possessed the Middle Eastern oil than to side with the Jews. FDR, Truman's predecessor, had promised King Ibn Saud, a major tap to that oil, that the U.S. would not change its policy towards Palestine without prior consultation with Arabs and Jews. Alternate proposals were considered. A plan to permit immigration of 100,000 Jews and the creation of a federal state in Palestine, which Truman thought reasonable, was rejected by the Zionists. An informal lobby of Jews flooded the White House with demands for partition and was instrumental in Truman's ultimate decision. Harry, the underdog in the 1948 election, realized that to win reelection he would have to please that lobby!" (Philip Greenspan ‘Is The Israel Lobby Effective?’ http://www.swans.com/library/art12/pgreen87.html April 24, 2006). If all the presidential candidates in the election agreed to pursue america’s global interests they would have ignored such jewish pressure but in the competition between the candidates the ultimate winner would be the one who courted this segment of the american electorate. "The late Steve Smith, brother-in-law of Teddy Kennedy, and a powerful figure in the Democratic Party for several decades, liked to tell the story of how a group of four Jewish businessmen got together $2 million in cash and gave it to Harry Truman when he was in desperate need of money during his presidential campaign in 1948. Truman went on to become president and to express his gratitude to his Zionist backers." (Alexander Cockburn ‘The uproar over the Isreal lobby’ http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/2/2006/1368 May 5, 2006).     The zionists in america’s jewish community were also able to use     their power to manipulate american jews who were dubious about the     zionists’ terrorist methods to create the jos. "Many years ago, in     1946, when the New York Times still provided reliable news coverage,     the paper of record disliked and opposed the coercive tactics of the     Zionists. This most powerful news source was hit, even before the     existence of AIPAC, with an advertiser boycott that swung the paper     from an anti-Zionist to a pro-Zionist position." (Philip Greenspan     ‘Is The Israel Lobby Effective?’ http://www.swans.com/library/art12/pgreen87.html     April 24, 2006).     The weakness of the jewish lobby in america could be seen in 1956     when america ordered britain, france, and the jos, to end their     joint invasion of egypt during the suez crisis.     By the early 1960s, american jews had considerable influence over     america’s policies towards the jos - but not much influence over     america’s wider foreign policies towards the middle east, let alone     the rest of the world. "Today's mess started a half-century ago on     Capitol Hill when the lobby for Israel first promoted a heavy bias     in U.S. policy in the Middle East. By the time I became a Member of     Congress in 1961, the lobby's activities had already thoroughly     intimidated our political institutions. During my 22-year career on     Capitol Hill, and since, I have watched intimidation grow deeper and     more pervasive. Former Ambassador George W. Ball said Congress     behaves like trained poodles, jumping through hoops held by     lobbyists for Israel. The lobby marshals great resources to defeat     its critics and reward supporters." (Paul Findley ‘United States     Must Address Control of its Middle East Policies by Israeli Lobby’     http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0326-22.htm March 26, 2006).     The jewish lobby in america and the jos had a decisive impact on     america’s foreign policies towards the jos and the middle east     during the october 1973 war. It had a similar impact over nixon’s     policy of detente with russia. However, in the 1980s, despite the     presence of jewish neocons in the reagan administrations, they could     do little to prevent america supporting saddam hussein during the     iran-iraq war. In the late 1980s, the collapse of the soviet empire     opened the floodgates to american, and thus jewish, power in the     middle east and central asia. The continuing rise of the jewish     neocons enabled american jews to exert an influence over america’s     policies beyond the jos to cover much of the middle east. The power     of the jewish dominated media, the jewish lobby, the jewish neocons,     jewish academia/think tanks, and the jos, resulted in america’s     first proxy zionist war, the first gulf war. The power of american     jews was consolidated during the 1990s because clinton’s cabinets     and administrations contained a significant proportion of jewish     neoliberals.      After the pentagon and new york bombings, the bush administration     allowed the jos to implement whatever policies it wanted towards the     palestinians. "With hardly a murmur of protest, Congress recently     approved resolutions saluting the prime minister of Israel for     building high walls and fences that keep Palestinians penned up on     their own land like cattle." (Paul Findley ‘United States Must     Address Control of its Middle East Policies by Israeli Lobby’     http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0326-22.htm March 26, 2006).     They were also able to exert considerable influence over america’s     policies in the middle east and beyond including the west asian     continent.     The Jewish Lobby, the Jol.     The jewish lobby currently consists of a large number of jewish     organizations some of which are indigenous to america, but others     merely branches in america of global jewish organizations. One of     the biggest, and most well known, organizations in the jewish lobby     is the american israel public affairs committee (aipac). "Founded in     1959, with each passing year, the organization gets bigger and     stronger. With a base in Washington, offices across the country,     85,000 energized members, a staff of 165, and a $33.4 million annual     budget, AIPAC is at the pinnacle of a massive complex of Jewish     organizations and Political Action Committees (PACS) across the     country, from the national to the local, that are devoted to     maintaining Israel’s privileged status in the nation’s capitol."     (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the     Israel-Palestine Conflict  April 2005). But it is only one of many,     "Many of these politically-oriented organizations, including the     American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC), are part of the     Council of Presidents of Major Jewish American Organizations, which     regroups 52 national Jewish organizations." (Rodrigue Tremblay ‘The     Israel Lobby and Democratic Public Discourse’ http://www.thenewamericanempire.com/tremblay=1015     April 2, 2006).     Each of the organizations in the jewish lobby specializes in     lobbying a specific part of american politics and society. Aipac     lobbies members of congress. Jinsa lobbies retired generals. "The     American Jewish Committee is the foreign policy arm of the Jewish     pro-Israel lobby in the US with offices in Brussels and Geneva,     official representation at the UN, and has become very busy and     successful lobbying European states in Israel's behalf." (Jeff     Blankfort ‘AJ Committee Briefing on Israeli and Middle Eastern     Affairs’ jblankfort@earthlink.net Feb 27th 2006). In america it also     lobbies other ethnic lobby groups to win their support for the jol     in america and the jos. B'nai B'rith/ADL works to broaden the     definition of anti-semitism, popularize this broad definition, and     then punish those deemed to have transgressed this definition. ..     "the Anti-Defamation League, the thought-police of the Jewish     establishment." (Uri Avnery ‘Who's the dog? Who's the tail?’ http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/29562     April 22 2006). Various jewish organizations focus on financing     jewish educational institutions whilst others organize jewish     students in american universities, etc, etc. The jewish lobby is so     comprehensive it is able to lobby every single sector of american     society.      The core of the lobby, those employed by jewish lobbying     organizations to implement their policies, is almost exclusively     jewish, "The core of the Lobby is comprised of American Jews who     make a significant effort in their daily lives to bend U.S. foreign     policy so that it advances Israel’s interests." (John J. Mearsheimer     and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’     rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.12). What could be called the     periphery of the lobby consists of both jews and non-jews. "The     Lobby also includes prominent Christian evangelicals like Gary     Bauer, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, and Pat Robertson, as well as Dick     Armey and Tom DeLay, former majority leaders in the House of     Representatives. They believe Israel’s rebirth is part of Biblical     prophecy, support its expansionist agenda, and think pressuring     Israel is contrary to God’s will. In addition, the Lobby’s     membership includes neoconservative gentiles such as John Bolton,     the late Wall Street Journal editor Robert Bartley, former Secretary     of Education William Bennett, former U.N. Ambassador Jeanne     Kirkpatrick, and columnist George Will." (John J. Mearsheimer and     Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’     rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.15). Hereinafter the jewish lobby     will be referred to as the jews-only lobby (jol).     American Politicians bought by the Jol.     Virtually all american politicians are funded to one extent or     another by america’s fabulously wealthy jol. Aipac’s role is to     advise jewish political action committees about campaign donations     to american politicians based on their services not to america but     to the jos. Presumably the greater the dedication to jos, the     greater the donations. "With some 200 employees and 100,000 wealthy     benefactors .." (Arnaud De Borchgrave ‘Touching the third rail’     http://news.monstersandcritics.com/northamerica/article _1157963.php/Touching_the_third_rail Apr 24, 2006).     The jol bribes american politicians to vote in favour of policies     that are in the interests of the jos  even if those policies are     contrary to america’s interests. "The reason that the pro-Israel     lobby has to give so much more money to the politicians than the     other lobbies such as arms manufacturers, oil, etc., is that     supporting Israel is arguably not in the US interest from any     perspective and the contributions are necessary to buy the     politicians' cooperation." (Jeffrey Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell     Plitnick’s ‘Myth and Reality: Jewish Influence on US Middle East     Policy’ May 24th 2005); "Indeed, the mere existence of the Lobby     suggests that unconditional support for Israel is not in the     American national interest. If it was, one would not need an     organized special interest group to bring it about. But because     Israel is a strategic and moral liability, it takes relentless     political pressure to keep U.S. support intact." (John J.     Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign     Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 Note 1 p.43).     The scale of the money that the jol has directed towards american     politicians is considerable, "Why would the intelligent and shrewd     pro-Israel lobbyists contribute almost forty million bucks,     $39,865,672 to be exact, between 1978 and 2004, to politicians for     their campaigns, if they were not expecting something special in     return? It is no secret that lobbyists invariably get many quids for     every quo they contribute, and Israeli lobbyists ain't no Santa     Claus. The business of lobbying is a perpetual bull market for all     involved - the givers and the takers. Hounding the politicians and     inundating them with campaign contributions results in a fabulous     dividend return. Opponents who cannot be bought - are there still     any? - can expect retaliation in the next election, which invariably     results in a loss for the incumbent." (Philip Greenspan ‘Is The     Israel Lobby Effective?’ http://www.swans.com/library/art12/pgreen87.html     April 24, 2006).     The extreme zionist jack abramoff apparently had in the region of 60     members of congress on his payroll. "The snakepit of corruption that     is Washington, D.C., is writhing and roiling these days with the     news that super-lobbyist and Republican fundraiser Jack Abramoff has     pleaded guilty to bribery, fraud, and other charges that could     embroil Capitol Hill in the biggest corruption scandal in recent     memory. As many as 60 members of Congress may be implicated in the     massive network of payoffs, phony nonprofit foundations, and other     criminal activities up to and including murder." (Justin Raimondo     ‘Abramoff and the Israeli Connection’ http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8372     January 11, 2006). "A number of prominent Republicans involved in     the Abramoff bribe scandal remain under investigation. Robert Ney     (R-Ohio), head of the House Administration Committee that oversees     federal campaign finance laws, accepted a golfing trip to Scotland,     a gambling junket to London, campaign contributions and free meals     from Abramoff, who persuaded Ney to benefit his lobbying clients. In     September, a Texas grand jury indicted House Majority Leader Tom     DeLay (R-Tex.) for funneling illegal corporate contributions to     Texas state elections. The indictment followed three rebukes from the House ethics committee for unethical conduct. Delay is being investigated for accepting payoffs from Abramoff, including skyboxes at sporting events, flying his staff to the Super Bowl and the U.S. Open, lavish trips to Saipan, Russia, Korea and London, Broadway shows and expensive meals. Abramoff, who raised over $100,000 for Bush, implicated other powerful Republican leaders in Congress, including: John Doolittle (R-Calif.), who took illegal campaign funds from Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff; Senator Conrad Burns (R-Mon.), who received $150,000 in contributions from Abramoff; and 17 current and former congressional aides, half of whom were hired by Abramoff. David Safavian, the White House chief procurement officer, who once worked as a lobbyist for Abramoff, was indicted in October for making false statements involving Abramoff to investigators." (Don Monkerud ‘Corruption Reform?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/monkerud04292006.html April 29 / 30, 2006). The scale of the corruption being financed by the jol suggests that it might be more accurately described as a jewish mafia - like the one that ruled russia during the 1990s.     Lobbying Members of Congress costs $13 Billion.     There are those who might be tempted to say that a few jollies     aren’t going to cause too much corruption. What possible difference     could a golfing trip to scotland, a gambling junket to london, free     meals, skyboxes at sporting events, flying staff to the super bowl     and the u.s. open, lavish trips to saipan, russia, korea and london,     broadway shows, expensive meals. But according to one     non-governmental organization the costs are a little higher and much     less politically resistable, "Since 1998, the Center for Public     Integrity found that lobbyists spent twice as much-$13     billion-influencing legislation and government regulations as they     did on campaign finance. These funds buy influence in Washington,     obscured by a federal disclosure system in disarray. Many firms     never file required documentation of their influence peddling, over     14,000 documents are "missing," 300 lobbyists lobbied without     filing, and thousands of forms were never filed. While the right to     petition government is upheld in the U.S. Constitution, the sad     truth is Congress promotes a system of legalized corruption." (Don     Monkerud ‘Corruption Reform?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/monkerud04292006.html     April 29 / 30, 2006).     The Jol Opposes Lobbying Reforms.     Although the abramoff bribery scandal led to demands for reforms,     congress eventually succeeded in shrugging off the idea of new laws.     This issue had a particular impact on the jol since it regularly     funds members of congress to go on all epxenses paid trips to the     jos. "After the Abramoff scandal, Washington is back to business as     usual. In March, The Senate passed (90 to 8) weak legislation     requiring lobbyists to file more reports, and Congressmen to receive     advance approval for lobbyist-paid trips and abstain from lobbying     Congress for two years after leaving office. The weak bill would not     ban lobbyist-sponsored private travel or do away with earmarks,     which dole out favors to lobbyists. The Senate rejected (30 to 67)     an independent ethics office to investigate illegal lobbying and     bribery, and will do nothing to regulate lobbyist money-raising     activities for Congressmen who rely on them for most fund-raising     activities. In February, House Republicans challenged nearly every     reform proposal and rejected bans on lobbyists-funded travel and     limits on gifts. Banning rides on lobbyist's corporate jets was     called "childish," and the restrictions on lobbyists using the gym     "would stifle social calls." The Washington Post reports that     lobbyists foresee "business as usual," with new rules only "a     nuisance," and "any limits will barely put a dent in the billions of     dollars spent to influence legislation."" (Don Monkerud ‘Corruption     Reform?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/monkerud04292006.html April 29     / 30, 2006).     The Jol also buys American Political Parties.     The jol not only buys individual politicians, it also buys political     parties. Blankfort points out that, "Jewish donors not only dominate     the lists of major donors to both parties, the sums they give are     equal or almost equal to those donated by non-Jews. In 2002, an     Israeli-American, Haim Saban, donated $12.3 million to the     Democratic Party. All of the arms industry PACs together gave $14     million to both political parties the same year. It was headlines     when Enron was reported to have given the Republican Party $6     million over 10 years, but the item on Saban’s donation - twice as     much in only one year - rated only a few paragraphs in the NY Times.     Moreover, Mother Jones 400 list of the leading individual donors for     the 2000 election showed that 8 of the top 10 were Jews, and 13 of     the top 20, and at least 125 of the top 250 were Jewish. At that     point I stopped counting. While these donors obviously had other     interests besides Israel, "There’s only one thing members [of     Congress] think is important to American Jews -Israel, Sen. Bernard     Metzenbaum, told the 500 delegates to the National Jewish Community     Relations Advisory Council in 1991 (Forward, 2/22/91)." (Jeffrey     Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell Plitnick’s ‘Myth and Reality:     Jewish Influence on US Middle East Policy’ May 24th 2005).     Some of the American Politicians Defeated by the Jol.     If american politicians do not fully and explicitly support the jos,     the jol funds the electoral campaigns of their political opponents.     "In 1982, when the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC),     the main center of Israeli lobbying in Washington, claimed credit     for keeping me from election to a 12th term in the House of     Representatives, I became the lobby’s prize trophy. Two years later,     Sen. Charles Percy, who was also guilty of failing to toe AIPAC     line, joined me on the trophy shelf. Our fate has, no doubt,     discouraged others from speaking out about Israel’s misbehavior."     (Paul Findley ‘Study shows undue Israeli influence on U.S. policy’     http://www.sj-r.com/sections/opinion/stories/83937.asp April 19,     2006); "There is no doubt about the potency of these tactics. To     take but one example, in 1984 AIPAC helped defeat Senator Charles     Percy from Illinois, who, according to one prominent Lobby figure,     had "displayed insensitivity and even hostility to our concerns."     Thomas Dine, the head of AIPAC at the time, explained what happened:    "All the Jews in America, from coast to coast, gathered to oust Percy. And the American politicians - those who hold public positions now, and those who aspire - got the message." AIPAC prizes its reputation as a formidable adversary, of course, because it discourages anyone from questioning its agenda." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.18); "The lobby marshals great resources to defeat its critics and reward supporters. Senators Charles Percy and Adlai Stevenson and Representatives Paul "Pete" McCloskey, Cynthia McKinney, Earl Hilliard and I are among those defeated at the polls by candidates heavily financed by pro-Israel forces." (Paul Findley ‘United States Must Address Control of its Middle East Policies by Israeli Lobby’ http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0326-22.htm March 26, 2006); "The Democrat Party leadership was overjoyed when McKinney was defeated for re-election in 2002. After she had served five terms, AIPAC decided to make an example of her for having criticized Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. That led to a stream of money flowing to her opponent, Denise Majette, from wealthy out of town Jewish donors. That, a steady drumbeat of attacks by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, plus an estimated 40,000 votes from Republicans who crossed over to vote in the Democratic primary were enough to turn the tide against her. The Democrats were, in turn, mortified two years later when, without their help, the plucky McKinney ran and was re-elected to her seat." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘A tale of two Congress members and the Capitol Police’ http://www.sfbayview.com/041206/atale041206.shtml April 15th 2006); "Among the political or governmental figures whose careers were destroyed because they violated the powerful taboo have been US Senators William Fulbright, Adlai Stevenson III, and Charles Percy, Congressmen Paul McCloskey and Paul Findley, and Deputy Secretary of State George Ball." (Abdullah Mohammad Sindi ‘How the Jewish-Zionist Grip on American Film and Television Promotes Bias Against Arabs and Muslims’ Institute for Historical Review http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n5p-2_Sindi.html c1999).     American Politicians prefer to fund the Jos rather than America.     It is often mentioned that america provides a huge annual subsidy to     the jos. Over the decades this has amounted to something in the     region of $150 billion. "Since the October War in 1973, Washington     has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to     any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct     economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest     recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over     $140 billion (in 2004 dollars)." (John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt     ‘The Israel Lobby’ http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/print/mear01_.html     March 23rd 2006). But these are not subsidies. They are tribute     payments that the vanquished pay to their conquerors i.e. that     americans pay to their jewish masters.     American politicians prefer to fund the jos rather than improve     conditions for their own people, "Over the years Congress has been     at the ready to give Israel additional funding, even when money has     been unavailable for essential domestic programs, as happened in     2002 when the Senate, after defeating a bill that would have     provided $150 million for inner-city schools that had been impacted     by 9-11, turned around and tucked an additional $200 million for     Israel into the Homeland Security Bill as if Israel had been     targeted that day and not New York and Washington." (Jeffrey     Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine     Conflict  April 2005).     Kurt nimmo points out the obvious social and economic consequences     of the jewish dominated american media, the jewish dominated     congress, and the jol, pressurizing american administrations into     launching a succession of proxy zionist wars in the middle east. "In     other words, billions will be squandered on "security" to protect     Israel from its enemies before a dime is spent here in America on     education, nutrition programs, repairing our crumbling     infrastructure, and other things insignificant to Republicans and     their multinational corporate masters. Crushing debt and the rapid     devaluation of the dollar in the coming year will result in more     pink slips, more Americans relegated to the ranks of the ignored     poor, more compounded and intensified misery under the leadership of     Republicans, who will maintain a stranglehold on Congress no matter     who is selected CEO of America. For the Israel First clan commanding     the highest reaches of our government, unemployment and tumbling     standards of living are far less of a concern than the "threat"     posed to the sacrosanct state of Israel by Iran, Syria, and Saudi     Arabia." (Kurt Nimmo ‘Neocon pink slips and the fall of America’     http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/100204Nimmo/ 100204nimmo.html October 2, 2004).     The Jol writes American Legislation for the Jos and the Middle East.     Since the first gulf war, america’s first proxy zionist war, aipac     has become increasingly involved in writing legislation which is     debated in congress. The days when the jol simply tried to amend     american legislation to benefit the jos or tried to block parts of     it not in the interests of the jos, have long since gone. Now jews     write, lobby for, and sponsor, their own legislation. "Long before     the Christian Zionists emerged as a political force, the lobby,     directed by AIPAC, was already dictating policy to Congress and     staffers from the AIPAC office were writing the critical legislation     that would set US Middle East policy. The Lebanese Sovereignty     Restoration and Syrian Accountability Act was one of its more recent     accomplishments." (Jeffrey Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell     Plitnick’s ‘Myth and Reality: Jewish Influence on US Middle East     Policy’ May 24th 2005); "And they also write the legislation that     Congress passes regarding the Middle East. For example, the recent     Syrian Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act,     which was passed a couple of years ago and which lead to what we see     in Lebanon and Syria today was written by AIPAC which later bragged     about it. It is not a secret. The only people that pretend they     don't know it is the Left. It's on AIPAC's website, it is in their     publications." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in Réseau Voltaire ‘The     Chomsky/Blankfort Polemic’     http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials/signs_TheChomskyBlankfortPolemic.php     February 20, 2006).      B'nai b'rith/anti discrimination league (adl), another part of the     jol in america, was responsible for another major piece of     legislation. "On October 16, 2004 President Bush signed into law the     Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. It establishes a special department     within the U.S. State Department to monitor global anti-Semitism,     reporting annually to Congress. This is more "Hate Crimes"     legislation, orchestrated by the international Jewish religious,     educational, and fraternal organization, B'nai B'rith, and its     Anti-Defamation League. The new "Department of Global Anti-Semitism"     is designed to make critics of Israel not only into "anti-Semites"     but ultimately into "domestic terrorists." The Report on Global     Anti-Semitism repeatedly calls for passage, both nationally and     internationally, of "hate crime" legislation. These laws, the     brainchild of B'nai B'rith/ADL, also have as their ultimate goal     making it a "hate crime" to criticize Jews, matters Jewish, or the     state of Israel. The Report on Global Anti-Semitism reeks with B'nai     B'rith/ADL logic, phraseology, and evidence of their incredible     worldwide organizational and statistic-gathering capacities. It     contains thirty-three pages of minute documentation of "anti-Semitic     incidents" in fifty-eight countries of the world, documentation     which only B'nai B'rith/ADL, with its offices in more than fifty     countries, could compile or even be that vitally interested in.     Without a doubt, as with hate laws, this Global Anti-Semitism Review     Act is their creation." (Rev. Ted ‘The Real Motive Behind 'Dept Of     Global Anti-Semitism' http://www.rense.com/general67/globa.htm     August 25th 2005).     The jol writes/lobbies/sponsors a huge chunk of american     legislation. "University of Michigan Professor Juan Cole sounded the     alarm on AIPAC with equal vigor, noting a CNN report that AIPAC,     "holds 2000 meetings a year with US Senators and Congressmen,     leading to the passage of an average of 100 pro-Israel pieces of     legislation every year!"" (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam     Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict  April 2005).     Aipac is even allowed to sit in on congressional meetings to ensure     their jewish-owned congressional puppets vote in the right way, "In     every hearing in the Congress that involves Middle East issues, you     have staff members of AIPAC sitting in these committee hearings. No     other lobbies, foreign lobbies, have this privilege." (Jeffrey     Blankfort quoted in Réseau Voltaire ‘The Chomsky/Blankfort Polemic’     http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials/signs_TheChomskyBlankfortPolemic.php     February 20, 2006). "It is a matter of record that every bill deals     with US Middle East policy originates in Congress and it is no     secret that any piece of legislation that will affect Israel is     either written by an AIPAC staffer or vetted by one before it even     "goes to committee" at which an AIPAC representative will invariably     be present." (Jeffrey Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell Plitnick’s     ‘Myth and Reality: Jewish Influence on US Middle East Policy’ May     24th 2005).      At its annual conference this year aipac boasted that over the     previous year it had managed to persuade the congress into passing a     hundred pieces of legislation for the jos. "AIPAC helps pass more     than 100 pro-Israel legislative initiatives a year through more than     2,000 meetings with members of the U.S. Congress, according to AIPAC     statistics." (Denyse Tannenbaum ‘"European media is questioning     Israel’s right to exist"’ www.ejpress.org/article/6686 March 10th     2006).     The jol wrote, lobbied, and sponsored, legislation concerning     america’s foreign policies towards the palestinians. "At the moment,     most major Jewish organizations endorse an Aipac-backed bill now     making its way through the House of Representatives to outlaw     American contacts with the P.A. once Hamas takes power, and to deny     financial aid to such an entity." (Ori Nir ‘Clash Seen Over Hard     Line on Islamists’ http://www.forward.com/articles/7427 March 3,     2006).     Even more recently the jol has written, lobbied, and sponsored,     legislation concerning america’s foreign policies towards iran. The     ‘iran freedom act’ has successfully passed through the house of     representatives. "The bill was opposed by the Bush administration,     which officially holds that diplomacy is the way to go on the     Iranian nukes issue. Thus it was supported by many Democrats,     including the voluble Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), a co-author of the bill     along with Florida Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Passage is a     major goal of AIPAC, Israel's premier lobbying organization in the     U.S., which for the past two years has featured the alleged Iranian     threat to America as its convention theme: this year's conclave     featured a multimedia exhibit supposedly dramatizing how Iran is     "pursuing nuclear weapons and how it can be stopped." As Middle East     expert Trita Parsi, of the John Hopkins School for Advanced     International Studies, put it: "I don't see any other major groups     behind this legislation that have had any impact on it."" (Justin     Raimondo ‘Steppingstone to War’ http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8914     April 28, 2006); "The measure also states that the names of     individuals, governments and companies that have invested at least     $20 million in Iran's energy sector be published in the Federal     Register. It denies U.S. aid to countries that are invested in     Iran's energy sector, but gives the president the authority to waive     such a ban on national security grounds." (Jim Abrams ‘House Backs     Tighter Iran Sanctions’ http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060426/ap_on_go_co/congress_iran     April 26th 2006).     The Jewish Power of Convocation: Americans paying Tribute to their     Jewish Masters.     It is easy to assess the power of the jol in comparison to other     ethnic lobby groups in america. The jewish lobby’s power of     convocation is unrivalled amongst lobbying organizations. This year,     despite the fact that two former aipac employees were about to go on     trial for receiving american secrets, america’s politicians turned     out in force to pay homage to their aipac paymasters. "AIPAC’s     influence was underscored by the seeming multitude of government     leaders in attendance at the conference, the biggest in its 52-year     history. This year, half the Senate, a quarter of the House and many     White House administration officials, including vice president Dick     Cheney, participated." (Denyse Tannenbaum ‘"European media is     questioning Israel’s right to exist"’ www.ejpress.org/article/6686     March 10th 2006). "Chomsky ignores the unmatchable power of elite     convocation which the Lobby has. The AIPAC annual meeting draws all     the major leaders in Congress, key members of the Cabinet, over half     of all members of Congress who pledge unconditional support for     Israel and even identify Israel’s interests as US interests. No     other lobby can secure this degree of attendance of the political     elite, this degree of abject servility, for so many years, among     both major parties. None of the major lobbies like the NRA, AARP,     the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Chamber of     Commerce can convoke such a vast array of political leaders, let     alone secure their unconditional support for favorable pro-Israel     legislation and Executive orders." (James Petras ‘Noam Chomsky and     the Pro-Israel Lobby: Fourteen Erroneous Theses’ March 2006).      The american jewish committee, however, refuses to be politically     upstaged by aipac’s display of political power. "AJC’s Centennial     Meeting is now officially at capacity, with 1,500 participants     already registered. Watch AJC’s Web site as we will update daily     from Washington with printed materials, photos and video. President     George W. Bush, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, German Chancellor     Angela Merkel and Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres will     address in person the gala dinner on May 4 celebrating our 100th     anniversary."     The Power of the Jol is not merely Economic but     Social/Political/Cultural.     The jol does not get its way in congress merely by sponsoring     candidates for congress in american elections and then bribing them     in congress to support pro-jos legislation. The jol, in conjunction     with the jewish owned media, and the jews in american politics, uses     it social/political/cultural power to hype up the horrors of     anti-semitism until it is now deemed to be the single worst     social/political transgression. The jol is then able to use the     accusation of anti-semitism as a weapon to intimidate its opponents     whether they might be members of congress or the american people.     "Words spoken years ago by George W. Ball, a distinguished diplomat,     author and champion of human rights, have vivid, new currency: "When Israel’s interests are being considered, members of Congress act like trained poodles. They jump dutifully through hoops held by Israel’s lobby." In the same interview, Ball said, "The lobby’s most powerful instrument of intimidation is the reckless charge of anti-Semitism." Sadly, his words ring true today, verified by my own experiences and those of many of my colleagues in the U.S. legislature. Fear of the anti-Semitism stain is intensified these days, because the lobby has succeeded in redefining anti-Semitism to include any criticism of Israeli behavior, an inferred threat that prompts all major media to ignore or sanitize reports of Israeli violations." (Paul Findley ‘Study shows undue Israeli influence on U.S. policy’ http://www.sj-r.com/sections/opinion/stories/83937.asp April 19, 2006); "Israel’s U.S. lobby is peerless among the hundreds of lobbies in our nation’s capital for one main reason: It alone is armed with the ultimate persuader, an ample supply of indictments for anti-Semitism. The supply promotes automatic cooperation when legislation on behalf of Israel moves forward. It is the modern-day Sword of Damocles, a fearsome instrument that hangs over almost every head in our government. Until recently, it seemed to cow all of the nation’s prestigious scholars, except for a few hardy ones like professor Noam Chomsky of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Juan Cole of the University of Michigan." (Paul Findley ‘Study shows undue Israeli influence on U.S. policy’ http://www.sj-r.com/sections/opinion/stories/83937.asp April 19, 2006).     AIPAC is an Agent for a Foreign Government.     Successive american administrations pretend that aipac is just a     lobbying organization. In reality, however, it is an agent for a     foreign government representing the jos in congress, "The bottom     line is that AIPAC, which is a de facto agent for a foreign     government, has a stranglehold on the U.S. Congress." (John J.     Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign     Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.18). As raimondo has     argued, "If AIPAC isn't an agent of Israel, then the Communist Party     was never an agent of the Soviet Union and the German-American Bund     was never an agent of Nazi Germany." (Justin Raimondo ‘Smear and     Fear’ http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8832 April 10, 2006).     Aipac claims it cannot be an agent of a foreign government because     it has no foreign funding and yet it is being funded by many jews     with dual citizenship, "With some 200 employees and 100,000 wealthy     benefactors, AIPAC claims it doesn`t have to register as a foreign     agent because all its funding comes from U.S. sources. There are     also over 500,000 Israelis with dual citizenship, a number of them     AIPAC contributors." (Arnaud De Borchgrave ‘Touching the third rail’     http://news.monstersandcritics.com/northamerica/article _1157963.php/Touching_the_third_rail Apr 24, 2006).     Jewish Legislation Undermines American Interests.     The jol has frequently written legislation which is passed by     jewish-owned members of congress to boost the political or military     interests of the jos even though it undermines america’s economic     interests. "as a result of pressure that pro-Israeli groups were     able to exert on Congress, a set of antiboycott laws was passed that     severely limit [US] business in the Arab world. As a result,     American companies and the United States economy suffer an estimated     $1 billion loss per year." (Professor Cheryl Rubenberg quoted in     Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the     Israel-Palestine Conflict  April 2005).      In 1995, under pressure from the jewish owned media, jewish academia     and think tanks, and the jol, president clinton banned american     energy companies from investing in iran to exploit the country’s     vast fossil fuel reserves thereby sacrificing the interests of     america’s gigantic multinational oil corporations to the interests     of the jos. This self sacrifice has recently been reinforced by the     ‘iran freedom support act’. "The Congress declares that it is the     policy of the United States to deny Iran the ability to support acts     of international terrorism and to fund the development and     acquisition of weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver     them by limiting the development of Iran's ability to explore for,     extract, refine, or transport by pipeline petroleum resources of     Iran."" (Gordon Prather ‘Mad Cow’     http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=8917 April 29, 2006).     It’s just the Jewish Plutocrats who are a Problem.     According to one blogger the jewish usurpation of the american     political system is caused solely by jewish plutocrats. "The     problem, and it is an immense one, isn’t with American Jews, whose     sole problem is that they remain quiet while others purport to speak     for them (with some praise-worthy exceptions), but with a tiny group     of American Jewish plutocrats. And I mean tiny. We’re talking less     than a hundred big political donors, probably less than twenty-five.     They have large amounts of money to give, mostly come from the     American media and entertainment industries (and thus control their     own spin), and most importantly, donate their money based on only     one issue, requiring the recipients of their donations to take a     pure Likudnik approach on the Middle East." (xymphora ‘Proof of a     conspiracy’ http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_xymphora_archive.html     March 27, 2006). Politically, it would be a lot easier to challenge     jewish power if this was the case. Unfortunately, it is not.      Firstly, the jol in america has a pronounced hierarchical structure.     National jewish organizations have roots in every jewish community     and branches in most regions/states. This enables national jewish     leaders to mobilize jews at the grassroots/regional/state/national     levels whenever necessary. "Many Jewish critics of Israeli policy     frequently say and write that the organized Jewish establishment,     represented by the major Jewish organizations and the hundreds of     community relations councils and federations across the country,     does not speak for them and it is always important to distinguish     between what is Jewish and what is Zionist. They would have a     stronger argument if there was actually a movement among Jews that     was not just critical of Israeli policies, but one that would     publicly take on and expose the activities of the leading Jewish     organizations rather than attempting to dismiss their power as, with     few exceptions, is presently the case. Two examples of the latter     are the rapidly growing and well-funded Jewish Voice for Peace and     Rabbi Michael Lerner's Tikkun community." (Jeff Blankfort ‘US Jewish     organizations unite against Hamas’ jblankfort@earthlink.net March     4th 2006).      What this means is that, to one degree or another, huge numbers of     american jews are involved in the jol whether this might be in     letter writing/email campaigns, fundraising, election campaigning,     attending demonstrations, or bloc-voting in elections according to     directions given by the jol. For example, one of many, "10 May 1976     was a memorable day for me. I gave a talk at Harvard University's     Science Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Due to massive threats,     the event and I were under police protection. The disruptions,     shouts, and boos were immense. The rowdies, Jewish-Zionist students,     yelled, "She won't speak here!" (Felicia Langer Preface to the     German edition of Beyond Chutzpah’ March 27 2006). Blankfort     provides evidence of the proportion of american jews participating     in the jol. "There is a coalition of the 12 leading Jewish women's     organizations, representing a million Jewish women, calling itself     "One Voice for Israel," that formed in 2002 in response to the bad     publicity Israel received over the destruction of Jenin. Each year,     in what it calls "Take-5," it gets it members to call the White     House at the same time and then on another day, to do the same to     Congress. Each time they have done it, they have tied up the Capitol     switchboard. It is one of the ways in which they show their power.    This coming February 22nd, they will be phoning President Bush to express their opinion on what he should do about Iran, and its development of nuclear energy or weapons. This a kind of operation that goes on all the time, but it is not even an issue or even known about by the anti-war movement, or by the left, and Professor Chomsky has written to me and others that he is not interested in the issue." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in Réseau Voltaire ‘The Chomsky/Blankfort Polemic’ http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/editorials /signs_TheChomskyBlankfortPolemic.php February 20, 2006). Such facts are avoided by the jewish dominated left, the neolefties.     Secondly, america’s jewish leaders go out of their way to monitor     the attitudes of american jews and then design policies to boost     their racial affinity for jews in the jos and the jos itself i.e. to     transform them into jews in america. "This week, the American Jewish     Committee (AJC) celebrates its centennial. Ahead of the event, it     published a study it commissioned on the subject of American Jews     between the ages of 18 to 39, who constitute almost one-third of the     Jewish population of the U.S. One finding: The Holocaust is a very     important part of the identity of young Jews; Israel far less so.     This is an important finding, but not a surprising one, having been     observed in many similar studies. Here is some of what can be gleaned about the fifth Jew: This individual is to be found in almost every sample. In a previous AJC survey, 18 percent of respondents said that they felt "somewhat distant" emotionally from Israel. Another five percent said that they felt "very distant." To the statement that concern for Israel was a major part of their Judaism, 19 percent said that they did not agree. Out of the 60 percent of respondents who had never visited Israel, one-fifth gave reasons that are disturbing: Eighteen percent simply had no interest, and two percent said that they felt "hostile" toward Israel. (The rest did not visit for more technical reasons, like cost, personal safety, etc). The fifth Jew is revealed in many ways. For example, when American Jews are asked whether the goal of the Arabs is "the destruction of Israel," 78 percent say yes, and 18 percent say no, while five percent are unsure. Luntz proposed a solution based on education from a young age. He noted that if a child leaves high school without a clear sense of a relationship to Israel, this is very hard to correct. A few months ago, Haaretz asked David Singer, who was in charge of the AJC study, to go over the tables and try to locate the fifth Jew. Singer believes that identification with Israel is, all in all, "very impressive," but he rose to the challenge. Here are some findings: The fifth Jew is almost always Reform or unaffiliated with any movement. Only two percent of Orthodox respondents do not feel a deep connection with Israel, and only 12 percent of Conservative Jews do not. On the other hand, 31 percent of Reform respondents and 35 percent of the unaffiliated did not feel a deep connection to Israel. (Israeli alienation to Reform Judaism, incidentally, certainly does not contribute to strengthening ties with this movement)." (Shmuel Rosner ‘The mystery of the fifth Jew’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/711308.html May 1 2006). As michael neumann has concluded, "Israel has committed war crimes. It has implicated Jews generally in these crimes, and Jews generally have hastened to implicate themselves." (Michael Neumann ‘What is Antisemitism?’ http://www.ukar.org/neuman/neuman01.html June 4, 2002).     Thirdly, is it really feasible to believe that american jews who     usually have relatives, friends, colleagues, living in the jos, do     not develop a considerable loyalty to the jos arising out of these     personal connections? "Far more revealing and just as damning would     be the story of how ordinary Jews either applaud the worst Israeli     crimes, or deplore them and support Israel anyway, or denounce them     with rhetoric that somehow never gets around to advocating anything     that would stop them. It is a story that just lies there, ready and     waiting to be told." (Michael Neumann ‘Blame Yourself: American     Power and Jewish Power’ http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann01072003.html     January 7, 2003). What is worse is that given american jews’ close     affinity for, and identification with, jews in palestine it is more     than likely that the racist views of the latter are rubbing off on     the former. "Sixty-eight percent of Israeli Jews would refuse to     live in the same apartment building as an Israeli Arab, according to     the results of an annual poll released Wednesday by the Center for     the Struggle Against Racism. The poll further revealed that 63 percent of Jewish Israelis agree with the statement, "Arabs are a security and demographic threat to the state." Thirty-one percent of Jews did not agree. Agreement with the statement was strongest among Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox Jews and low-income earners. Forty percent of Jews believe "the state needs to support the emigration of Arab citizens" and just 52 percent don't agree with the statement. Thirty-four percent also agreed with the statement that "Arab culture is inferior to Israeli culture." Fifty-seven percent did not agree with the statement." (Eli Ashkenazi and Jack Khoury ‘Zionism as racism: 68% of Israeli Jews would refuse to live in same building as an Arab’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticle En.jhtml?itemNo=697458 March 22, 2006). Most american jews have become as arabophobic as their jewish counterparts in the jos.     Fourthly, another argument put forward to suggest american jews do     not support the jol is that they vote overwhelmingly for the     democratic party rather than the republicans. The implication of     this proposition is that, on the whole, they are more humane,     liberal, and supportive of civil/human rights than ordinary     americans who tend to be more conservative. But this implication is     misleading. American jews might be more concerned about civil/human     rights in america than ordinary americans but this does not mean     they are concerned about civil/human rights in palestine. For many     decades, the democratic party has been a much greater supporter of     the racist hate state in palestine than the republican party. The     fact that american jews vote for democrats rather than republicans     does not indicate they are concerned about civil/human rights in the     jos but that they racist for voting for a pro-jos party. Of course     american jews are going to vote for the democratic party when its     vice presidential candidate in america’s 2000 election was the     fanatical zionist extremist joe libermann.     Fifthly, it is also argued that whilst the jewish-owned media,     jewish academics/think tanks, the jol, and the jews in the bush     administration might have been at the forefront of the campaign to     launch a proxy zionist invasion of iraq, american jews opposed the     war. "Approximately 70 percent of Jews in the United States oppose     the war in Iraq, compared to 28 percent who support the war"     (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/660353.html). Alan dershowitz     used this argument to attack a view expressed by norman finkelstein.     "Finkelstein's claim that "there is credible evidence that the Iraq     war was a Jewish war" is easily falsifiable. As even Walt and     Mearsheimer acknowledge in their paper, Jews were "less supportive     of the Iraq war than the population at large." How could this be a     "Jewish war" if so many Jews were opposed to it? Moreover, many of     those opposed to the war in Iraq - like me - are supporters of     Israel and, according to Mearsheimer and Walt, members of "the     Lobby."" (Alan Dershowitz ‘The Lobby, Jews, and Anti-Semites’     http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20060412/cm_huffpost /018998;_ylt=A86.I1cO1j1E014Ajhb9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBj MHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA-- April 12th 2006). And yet, in the 2004 presidential elections american jews had the chance to vote for an anti-war presidential candidate. They voted overwhelmingly for pro-war candidates such as kerry and bush.     According to current opinion polls a majority of americans are     opposed to america’s continued occupation of iraq. This seems to     imply they are sick of the war, the loss of american lives, and the     squandering of american resources  especially when american rule in     iraq is far more barbaric than that of saddam hussein. And yet,     according to other opinion polls, a majority of americans are also     in favour of an even bigger, more expensive, and more dangerous war     against iran! Indeed, as if to confirm the misleading nature of     opinion polls, the democratic party leadership is more fervently in     favour of a war against iran than the bush administration. The     democrats wouldn’t position themselves to be more pro-war than     george bush if they didn’t believe this is where the popular vote,     including the jewish american vote, is to be found. The democrats’     willingness to be more militaristic than bush allows american jews     to remain faithful to their traditional political party of choice.     There is another argument which helps to explain american jews’     attitude towards the proxy zionist invasion of iraq. It is certainly     true that the most prominent supporters of the invasion were members     of america’s jewish elite. "Within the United States, the main     driving force behind the Iraq war was a small band of     neoconservatives, many with close ties to Israel’s Likud Party."     (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S.     Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.31). The jol was     worried this perception might become commonplace and stir up     animosities towards american jews. It feared that if the proxy     zionist invasion went wrong then american jews would be blamed for     the deaths and injuries of tens of thousands of american soldiers     and the vast squandering of america’s resources. "The Jewish Weekly     of New York reports that Abraham Foxman, national director of the     Anti-Defamation League, is concerned that the report will promote     the claim that "Jewish and pro-Israel groups played a major role in     pressing for the Iraq war in 2003." "We have always been concerned     that those opposed to the war have tried to portray it as a Jewish     war, an Israeli war," Foxman said. "Our concern has been that if the     war went badly, and there was more public disillusionment, these     kinds of conspiracy theories could resurface and grow." That, he     said, is "exactly what’s happening now" as the Harvard report races     around the world on antiwar and anti-Israel Web sites." (Tom Regan     ‘Israeli media condemn, discuss report on US-Israel ties’ http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0324/dailyUpdate.html     March 24, 2006).      As a consequence, prior to the invasion of iraq, the jol sent a     message to the jos to dampen public displays of support for the     invasion. "As journalist Gideon Levy observed at the time, "Israel     is the only country in the West whose leaders support the war     unreservedly and where no alternative opinion is voiced." In fact,     Israelis were so gung-ho for war that their allies in America told     them to damp down their hawkish rhetoric, lest it look like the war     was for Israel." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The     Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006     p.31). "In the debate over the Iraq war  such as it was, prior to     the first shots being fired  the Lobby kept its head down, and the     Israeli government was careful not to make too many public     pronouncements, although naturally everyone knew they wanted the     invasion to be launched with dispatch." (Justin Raimondo ‘War With     Iran? It would mean the end of our Republic’     http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8936 May 3, 2006). It is     more than likely that the jol also put out the word to jews in     america to avoid the same liability which may be why opinion polls     concluded that a majority of jews in america were opposed to the     invasion of iraq.     As the jewish-owned media, jewish academics/think tanks, the jewish     owned congress, the jewish owned political parties, the jol, the     jewish neocons in the bush administration, and the jos, exert     increasing pressure on the bush administration to launch an illegal     and pre-emptive war against iran, some members of the jol are once     again starting to emphasize the need for the jol to cover its     tracks. "President Bush’s repeated focus on Israel as a reason to     confront Iran could spark public fury against the Jewish state and     Jews if U.S. military action is accompanied by skyrocketing gas     prices or terrorism at home, some say. President Bush is risking a     backlash that could injure the Jewish community - and his own cause     - by repeatedly citing Israel as his top rationale for possible U.S.     military conflict with Iran, Jewish leaders and Middle East analysts     warned this week. Bush’s repeated, sometimes exclusive, focus on     Israel could spark public fury against the Jewish state and Jews if     U.S. military action is accompanied by skyrocketing gas prices,     terrorism at home or fallen GI’s who might be seen as dying for     Israel, some said. Others feared it could fracture the shaky     international coalition Bush is striving to assemble to oppose     Iran’s nuclear program by framing the threat as primarily to Israel     rather than international stability. Ambassador Edward Walker, a     former U.S. envoy to Israel who now heads the Middle East Institute     in Washington, termed Bush’s Israel focus "a terrible idea." Malcolm     Hoenlein, executive vice president of the Conference of Presidents     of Major American Jewish Organizations, said "The linkage to Israel     is not a good idea, because then the Iranians say, you see, it’s the     Zionists driving this." (James D. Besser And Larry Cohler-Esses     ‘Iran-Israel Linkage By Bush Seen As Threat’ http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3? artid=12350 April 21st 2006); "Jewish community leaders have urged the White House to refrain from publicly pledging to defend Israel against possible Iranian hostilities, senior Jewish activists told the Forward. Messages were passed to the White House through several channels, Jewish activists said. And it seems to have worked: Speaking before the annual conference of the American Jewish Committee in Washington last week - his most recent address before a Jewish audience - President Bush talked about America's commitment to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and about his administration's commitment to Israeli security, but he did not link the two, as he has several times in recent months. "We are basically telling the president: We appreciate it, we welcome it. But, hey, because there is this debate on Iraq, where people are trying to put the blame on us, maybe you shouldn't say it that often or that loud," said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. "Within the Jewish community there is a real sense of 'thank you but no thank you.'" Communal leaders say that although they deeply appreciate the president's repeated promises to come to Israel's defense, public declarations to that effect do more harm than good. Such statements, they say, create an impression that the United States is considering a military option against Iran for the sake of Israel - and could lead to American Jews being blamed for any negative consequences of an American strike against Iran." (Ori Nir ‘Groups to Bush: Drop Iran-Israel Linkage’ http://www.forward.com/articles/7764 May 12, 2006).     The jol’s tactic of provoking america into wars for the benefit of     the jos, but camouflaging its role to prevent any adverse reaction     from the american public, goes back to america’s first proxy zionist     war. "Chomsky’s comment, notwithstanding, AIPAC, "was widely     credited with having played a key role" in rounding up the necessary     votes in the Senate to give Pres. Bush his majority. "[B]ecause of     the extreme sensitivity to the issue, AIPAC was anxious to     camouflage its role to avoid providing evidence for the     accusation... that the Persian Gulf War was fought at the behest of     the Jews to protect Israel." To disguise their role, the Washington     Jewish Week’s Larry Cohler reported that AIPAC had prominent Jewish     senators vote against the war while lobbying non-Jewish senators in     states with small Jewish populations to support it. That Saddam     Hussein was not removed at the time brought strong criticism from     the primarily Jewish neocons and on a lower register from AIPAC.     During the Clinton presidency they would press their demand for     regime change in Iraq and under Bush Jr., they made sure that task     would be carried out." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam     Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict  April 2005).     Sixthly, as will be explored later, the right wing of american     politics is dominated by jewish neoconservatives. But this     phenomenon is replicated across the political spectrum. There are     jewish neoliberals, jewish neolefties, jewish neogreenies, and even     jewish neopeaceniks. Support for the jos runs across america’s     political spectrum which suggests it is also endemic amongst     america’s jewish population. As will be argued later, there is a     strong reason for believing that jewish neo-lefties, people who     should be opposed to the racist nature of the jos, hold views that     are virtually identical to neoconservatives and thus ought to be     regarded as being part of the jewish establishment ruling america.     Seventhly, huge numbers of american jews are employed in jewish     owned/managed industries. Even if they deplore jewish racism or the     racism of the jos they realize their livelihood depends on jewish     bosses who are more than likely to be zionist. They are thus lured     into public displays of support the jos whether they like it or not.     The overwhelming majority of the jewish americans who work for     jewish americans will tend to support the jos and jewish racism.     There is one final piece of evidence of popular support for the jol/jos     amongst american jews. The jol spends millions of dollars every year     sending tens of thousands of high flying american jews to the jos to     awaken their identification with, and loyalty to, the jos. Such     trips are also intended to encourage them to see the jos as a     western, liberal, multi-cultural, secular democracy just like     america rather than the terroristic, racist apartheid state it is.     It provides scholarships for students at american universities. It     organizes students at american universities to defend the jos.         Jewish society in america is hierarchical. At the very top are     jewish billionaires, the jewish plutocrats. Below them are the     jewish upper-middle class which consists of jewish academics/policy     makers, media owners, the jol, and american jews in congress,     american political parties, and in the bush administration.     America’s ruling jewish elite consists of both groups. Below them     are the ordinary members of america’s jewish community.     The jews in america who were primarily responsible for manipulating     america into the invasion of iraq, the same ones who are currently     manipulating america into a war against iran, are undoubtedly     members of america’s ruling jewish elite. However, most jews in     america accept the policies of their jewish leaders and a     significant proportion even participate in campaigns organized by     the jol to promote such policies. There was no civil war within the     jewish community in america over support for america’s proxy zionist     invasion of iraq. The same is also true as regards the pending proxy     zionist war against iran.     There are many commentators who go out of their way to try and avoid     being charged with anti-semitism, which might well bring about the     end of their careers, by arguing it is necessary to make a     distinction between jews and zionists. Zionists often insist upon     this distinction because it offers them the chance to denounce those     who use the word ‘jew’ as racists and thus dismiss their criticisms     of jewish racism. The real distinction as far as america is     concerned is between jewish americans who, although they have a     jewish genetic/cultural heritage, believe they are first and     foremost american citizens and, on the other hand, jews who live in     america who are loyal primarily to the jos. (A similar distinction     also applies in other countries). In terms of this distinction there     are very few jewish americans. Most are jews living in america. To     be politically effective in america they try to present themselves     as jewish americans but in terms of the priority they give to the     jos they are jews in america. One major piece of evidence that     points in this direction without being conclusive is that, "There     are also over 500,000 Israelis with dual citizenship, a number of     them AIPAC contributors." (Arnaud De Borchgrave ‘Touching the third     rail’ http://news.monstersandcritics.com/northamerica/article _1157963.php/Touching_the_third_rail Apr 24, 2006). In other words, one-sixth of american jews are dual citizens. How easy it must be for them to believe they can give wholhearted support for the jol and the jos without infringing upon their loyalty to america. In one way or another, the jol has connections with the majority of jews in america who are encouraged to support the jos and its racist policies. carbonomics 
 | 
Thursday, 7 February 2008
Americans groveling at the feet of their Jewish Masters.
Posted @
17:21
 
 
Post Title: Americans groveling at the feet of their Jewish Masters.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
![[9_10_s22.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTXnQay9wzz0E6nVHrVhaHKoq_zYXDqZjijHlNDQzj90MZzInrCuVX4ciFYCiBfZ7lhlgr2bBhhnl7ddWbhdih5JbXjQYbA605TNyiq046bQqjG2A4S-nHTmh1VBTQSG6tmc23wq47QQ/s1600/9_10_s22.jpg)





1 comment:
You do understand that there is more to this story, don't you? Where does the Vatican fit into your "theories?"
Patience and humility...
Remember, scoffing in the face of profundity causes blindness !!
The combination of the Center for Public Integrity's "Iraq: The War Card" research, George Tenet's book, At the Center of the Storm, Eisner & Royce's The Italian Letter, and the books and research of many others in recent years now provide enough of a foundation for everyone to finally discern that 9:11 was a "false flag" operation against both the American public and the Muslim world. Notice how the Bush/Cheney crew and cohorts ruthlessly profited from these events and the resulting wars and how they were ready and prepared to do so, even before 9:11?
Read More
Here is Wisdom !!
Peace...
Post a Comment