May 5, 2008
May 12, 2008
May 19, 2008
May 26, 2008
Who profits from the Iraq war? More than a quarter of senators and congressmen have invested at least $196 million of their own money in companies doing business with the Department of Defense (DoD) that profit from the death and destruction in Iraq.
According to the latest reports, 151 members of Congress invested close to a quarter-billion in companies that received defense contracts of at least $5 million in 2006. These companies got more than $275.6 billion from the government in 2006, or $755 million per day, according to FedSpending.org, a website of the watchdog group OMBWatch.
Congressmen gave themselves a loophole so they only have to report their assets in broad ranges. Thus, they can be off as much as 160 percent. (Try giving the IRS an estimate like that.) In 2004, the first full year after the present Iraq war began, Republican and Democratic lawmakers—both hawks and doves—invested between $74.9 million and $161.3 million in companies under contract with the DoD. In 2006 Democrats had at least $3.7 million invested in the defense sector alone, compared to the Republicans' "only" $577,500. As the war raged on, so did the billions of profits—and personal investments by Congress members in war contractors, which increased 5 percent from 2004 to 2006.
Investments in these contractors yielded Congress members between $15.8 million and $62 million in personal income from 2004 through 2006, through dividends, capital gains, royalties and interest. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), who are two of Congress's wealthiest members, were among the lawmakers who garnered the most income from war contractors between 2004 and 2006: Sensenbrenner got at least $3.2 million and Kerry reaped at least $2.6 million.
Members of the Senate Foreign Relations and Armed Services committees which oversee the Iraq war had between $32 million and $44 million invested in companies with DoD contracts.
War hawk Sen. Joe Lieberman (IConn.), chairman of the defense-related
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, had
at least $51,000 invested in these companies in 2006.
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), who voted for Bush's war, had stock in defense companies, such as Honeywell, Boeing and Raytheon, but sold the stock in May 2007.
Of the 151 members whose investments are tied to the "defense"
(war)
industry, as far as we know, not one of them offered to donate
their bloodstained profits to the national treasury to offset
the terrible debt they have imposed. Has one of them even offered
to donate one cent of their war profits to lessen the debt that
increases more than $1 million a minute?
When our boys and girls are wounded the government bills them to return their reenlistment bonus. They have to return any pay they received while they were hospitalized. They have to pay for their helmets and uniforms that are destroyed in the hell of war. But they keep on fighting for these politicians' right to keep their war profits.
• Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) $3,001,006 to $5,015,001
• Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) $250,001 to $500,000
• Rep. Kenny Ewell Marchant (R-Tex.) $162,074 to $162,074
• Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) $115,002 to $300,000
• Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) $115,002 to $300,000
• Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) $100,870 to $100,870
• Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) $65,646 to $65,646
• Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) $50,008 to $227,000
• Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.) $50,001 to $100,000
• Rep. Stephen Ira Cohen (D-Tenn.) $45,003 to $150,000
Contact freelance writer Ralph Forbes at justrite@ipa.net.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Both the electronic and print media made certain that the world knew that Sens. Hillary Clinton and John McCain had questioned Gen. David Petraeus before the Armed Services Committee but totally ignored the blistering by Rep. Ron Paul before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
"Reviewing the presentations by our panel, I have noted with some concern that they seem more focused on justifying a future attack on Iran than reporting on progress in Iraq," Paul said.
Paul expressed concern about claims that "new enemies" were emerging in Iraq with ties to Iran: "First we were told that the enemy was Saddam Hussein and his Baathist Party. Then we were told the enemy was the ‘bitter-enders' from Saddam's former government. Then the prime enemy became al Qaeda in Iraq, a prime focus of the presentation by Amb. Crocker and Gen. Petraeus last September.
Now the two were saying that the new enemies are mysterious ‘Special Groups' that are said to have spun off from Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.
"If this phenomenon of constantly emerging enemies bent on destabilizing Iraq is accurate and our presence in Iraq keeps generating new enemies," he said, "perhaps the problem is the occupation itself. If this is the case, doesn't it make sense that our departure from Iraq may actually have a stabilizing effect?"
Paul said he suspects that these Iranian-supported "Special Groups" are not the prime enemy. He suggested they are being used to provide an excuse for a U.S. attack on Iran or are meant as justification for a permanent U.S. military presence in Iraq.
"It makes little sense to assert that Iran is funding militias to undermine the Iraqi government.
"The leading political parties of Iraq, the Islamic Dawa Party and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, have close ties to Iran. Leaders of these parties were in exile in Iran until the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Iranian President [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is warmly welcomed in Baghdad by Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki. Why would Iran set up militias in the south to destabilize a government with such strong Iranian ties? I find the allegation that Iran just cannot tolerate an elected government next door to be unsatisfying."
Paul then challenged them to produce "any hard proof " that the Iranian government is arming groups in Iraq.
Paul: "Why should the American people continue to support a war that was justified by false information, since Saddam Hussein never aggressed against the United States, Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, and Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction?
"It is said that we must continue the war because we have already sacrificed so much. But what is moral about demanding even more needless sacrifice of human lives merely to save face for the mistakes of invading and occupying Iraq? Doesn't it seem awfully strange that the Iraqi government we support is an ally of the Iranians who are our declared enemies? Are we not now supporting the Iranians by propping up their allies in Iraq? If (Iraqi Prime Minister) Maliki is our ally and he has ‘diplomatic relations' with (Iranian President) Ahmadinejad, why can't we? Why must we continue to provoke Iran, just looking for an excuse to bomb that country? Does our policy in Iraq not guarantee chaos for years to come?
"It is estimated that up to 2,000 Iraqi soldiers refused to fight against al-Sadr's militia. Why should we not expect many of the 80,000 Sunnis we have recently armed to someday turn their weapons against us, since they as well as the Mahdi Army detest any and all foreign occupation?
"Is it not true that with the recent surge in violence in March, attacks are now back at the same levels as they were in 2005? Does Iran not have a greater justification to be involved in neighboring Iraq than we do, since it is 6,000 miles from our shores? If China and Russia were occupying Mexico, how would we react? Since no one can define ‘winning the war,' just who do we expect to surrender? Does this not mean that this war will be endless since the political leaders will not end it—until we go broke?"
Paul said, "I do have one question that there is enough time to answer: In your estimation, does the administration have the authority to bomb Iran without further congressional approval?"
Petraeus: "Uh, congressman, I, uh, I'm the commander for Iraq, and I do not know the answer to that question, and it's not within my purview."
Crocker: Er, uhh, congressman, nor is it in mine, er, ahh, uh, I, uhh you know, my job is Iraq, and I'm just not competent to pronounce on, uh, an issue like that."
Paul: (who must have been wondering if either had ever read the Constitution) "It disturbs me to no end that we cannot get a flat-out "no" on this question."
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
CONGRESS CAN END ONE FIT OF IDIOCY promptly by making English the official language. The English Language Unity Act (HR997), sponsored by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) and 145 co-sponsors, is pending and the House could act at any moment. It should act at this moment. Two Senate bills (SB 1335 and SB 2715 are also English-only measures.
Unless these measures are passed this year, the next president could act as silly as Bill Clinton. Clinton, you recall, ordered federal applications for welfare, medical care and other tax-payer-funded benefits to be printed, at great expense, in various languages.
Mostly it involved Spanish, but if the Census Bureau found a certain percentage of Vietnamese, for example, lived in an area, the applications had to be printed in Vietnamese.
This would be an expensive operation. About 400 languages are spoken in the United States. If we accept English and a "second language," where does it end?
Unless English is made the official language, and government business conducted in no other, the United States will become Balkanized. The great waves of immigrants who came to America in the second half of the 19th century and early waves of the 20th century were looking for "a hand up, not a handout," as President Ronald Reagan said.
The reverse is true today, of the immigrants who started arriving in the 1970s, after Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) got legislation passed making it difficult for Europeans to come here but easy for South Americans.
Nevertheless, many South Americans arrived illegally. And they were looking for handouts.
They would come and give birth, becoming parents of "American citizens." (Some scholars say no constitutional amendment is necessary to change the doctrine that those born on U.S. soil are citizens; but Congress can pass legislation declaring that the Constitution's intent was that only those born of legal citizens are citizens.)
Illegal immigrants would come, feed at the welfare trough, and bring in relatives to join the gravy train.
The average family of illegal immigrants has cost taxpayers thousands of dollars annually. A giant step toward ending this costly nonsense would be to enact English-only legislation. Today, an estimated 24 million newcomers cannot speak English, and many refuse to learn the language.
Unlike the earlier European immigrants, they do not want to
assimilate into
American society. All they want is American handouts and American
jobs.
There is also a security factor, which has yet to enter the national debate, on having a "multi-lingual" society. Defeat in battle could result from the inability of military personnel to communicate in a common language.
Prussian Field Marshal Gebhard von Blucher could not effectively command his disparate elements of German, Swedish, Polish, Russian and other troops, and thus lost to Napoleon in several battles. American commanders must be able to communicate directly and immediately with their units.
Thirty states have passed constitutional amendments or laws making English official, including California, Texas, Florida, Colorado, North Carolina and New York, all with substantial majority votes. Recently, Idaho and Kansas adopted English-only. Alaska has successfully defended its English-only law. It's past time for Congress to join this patriotic parade.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
As part of their continuing campaign to keep John Sununu out of the U.S. Senate—an effort which failed in 2002, when then-Rep. Sununu (R-N.H.) was first elected to "the world's greatest deliberative body"—pro-Israel PACs bestowed a whopping $44,000 on would-be Democratic opponent Katrina Swett in 2007.
In case that name doesn't ring a bell, Swett is the daughter of the late Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), who was one of Israel's most ardent champions in the House. Her husband is former Rep. Dick Swett (D-N.H.), who, after two terms in the House and an unsuccessful Senate bid, managed to amass a respectable $95,500 in pro-Israel PAC contributions.
Will Sununu's Democratic opponent, former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, who received $72,022 in pro-Israel PAC contributions to oppose Sununu in 2002, find it in herself to rise above the crowd?
Janet McMahon is managing editor of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. This astounding compilation of research was provided to AFP by that fine publication. For more information on The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, please write the publisher at P.O. Box 53062, Washington, D.C. 20009. Call them at 800-368-5788 or see their website at www.wrma.com
Top 2008 & Career Recipients of Pro-Israel PAC Funds
Compiled by Hugh Galford
HOUSE: 2008 CYCLE $
Berkley, Shelley (D-NV) 34,700
Hoyer, Steny (D-MD) 32,500
Pence, Mike (R-IN) 30,000
Kirk, Mark (R-IL) 27,000
Boehner, John (R-OH) 27,000
Cantor, Eric (R-VA) 25,500
Klein, Ron (D-FL) 16,150
Crowley, Joseph (D-NY) 15,745
Johnson, Tim (R-IL) 13,000
Bachmann, Michele (R-MN) 13,000
House: Career $
Berkley, Shelley (D-NV) 283,405
Engel, Eliot (D-NY) 193,418
Hoyer, Steny (D-MD) 171,775
Obey, David (D-WI) 156,100
Kirk, Mark (R-IL) 156,882
Cantor, Eric (R-VA) 156,730
Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana (R-FL) 133,490
Lowey, Nita (D-NY) 130,738
Levin, Sander (D-MI) 124,221
Lantos, Tom (D-CA) 123,250
SENATE: 2008 CYCLE $
Levin, Carl (D-MI) 61,850
Swett, Katrina (D-NH) 44,000
Lautenberg, Frank (D-NJ) 39,000
Pryor, Mark (D-AK) 37,500
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) 35,500
Collins, Susan (R-ME) 33,500
Coleman, Norm (R-MN) 31,000
Durbin, Richard (D-IL) 29,000
Reed, Jack (D-RI) 27,500
Landrieu, Mary (D-LA) 24,790
Senate: Career $
*Levin, Carl (D-MI) 720,737
*Harkin, Tom (D-IA) 526,950
Specter, Arlen (R-PA) 492,973
*Lautenberg, Frank (D-NJ) 473,078
*McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) 412,685
Lieberman, Joseph (D-CT) 373,851
*Durbin, Richard (D-IL) 359,421
*Baucus, Max (D-MT) 342,648
Reid, Harry (D-NV) 320,301
Wyden, Ronald (D-OR) 277,562
*UP FOR RE-ELECTION
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
It is treason for any American, including the president, to surrender national sovereignty. Yet, the mainstream media dares not include the word treason in detailed stories about the NAFTA celebration by President Bush, Mexican President Felipe Calderon and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper in New Orleans.
Yes, their stories were "balanced" otherwise, readers and viewers - with CNN's Lou Dobbs being the notable exception - would think this a mere dispute over tradde and not national survival. Hidden was the fact that this treasonous trio plans to merge their three nations into one, eliminating all borders.
The three heads of state had agreed to a "Security and Prosperity Partnership," or SPP, behind closed doors, This would merge the three nations into one "North American Union." National sovereignty would be surrendered to the "Union." by any definition the SSP is a treaty requiring Senate confirmation. Other parts would require House approval, as well.
Yet, Congress has been left out of the entire process - no hearings, no debates, no votes.
The so-called "NAFTA Superhighway" is being built and concrete poured even as Washington bureaucrats deny the obvious. This will run from Mexico through the United states and nto Canada - another ribbon linking the nations into aa single political entity. AFP has had many stories about this.
But the treachery does not end with the North American Union. It has been a goal, for more than a decade, of the Trilateral Commission and secret Bilderberg group to expand NAFTA throughout the western Hemisphere and for it to evolve into an "American Union" similar to the European Union. Even at this moment, the Trilateralists are sitting behind locked and guarded doors at the Ritz Carlton in Washington pressing luminaries from Japan and other Asian countries to establish a parallel "Asian-Pacific Union."
The ultimate goal is to divide the world into three great regions
for the administrative convenience of the Rothschilds, while their
UN evolves into a world government. National currency, a symbol
of xovereignty, is to disappear. Europe will have its euro, the
American Union will have the "amero, and the Asian-Pacific
Union will have its own currency. All this was admitted to The
Spotlight years ago, in an eyeball-to-eye-ball confrontation
with Kenneth Clark a member of the British Parliament and long-time
bilderberg luminary.
Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) raised one of the few voices protesting SSP in an interview on the Lou Dobbs program April 21. "There have been no hearings on the SSP negotiations and transactions," she said. "In fact, I sighed a letter with parliamentarians from Canada, Mexico and the United States, asking that these discussions not proceed forward until the legislative bodies of all three countries are informed as to what's going on."
"Critics say all this secrecy amounts to what they call a full assault on the sovereignty of the United States," said fellow TV talkie Tucker Carlson. "As well as the sovereignty of Canada and Mexico," Dobbs added. "True," Carlson agreed.
But most Americans remain ignorant of the fact that, thanks
to bush the nation has suffered a diplomatic Pearl Harbor.
|Top|
How high must the price of fuel - and thus, food and everything else - before simpering tree-huggers in Congress allow drilling for oil on an ice cap in Alaska? The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR, covers just 2,000 acres, a raindrop in Alaska's 365-million0-acre territory. ANWR's estimated 10.4 billion barrels could match or replace for 19 years the 1.5 million of Saudi oil America imports daily.
New technology permits horizontal drilling. You drill one hole straight down and then drill sideways. It is proposed that drilling be limited to winter months, when huge rigs wold do no damage to the ice.
Yet, with all these gestures and reassurances, kids like sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) act as if the drilling in this remote wilderness would spoil picnic grounds for the multitudes. Lieberman once said wind power should be used instead of ANWR oil. He became silent when informed that it would require enough windmills to cover and darken his state of Connecticut.
Tree-huggers are worried about harm to the caribou, but the herd has increased from 6,000 in 1978 to 32,000 today. Half a century ago, when the Alaskan pipeline project was debated, tree-huggers in Congress predicted that the moose herd would be destroyed. Instead, the herd multiplied because the moose would stand underneath the elevated pipeline to enjoy the warmth it provided.
Grow up, kids: permit drilling on that icecap. You can also
permit drilling in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, where operations
would be out of sight to people on the beaches.
|Top|
Luminaries at the Trilateral Commission meeting in Washington expressed confidence that they own all three major presidential candidates, who, despite political posturing, will support sovereignty-surrendering measures such as NAFTA and the "North American Union."
"John has always supported free trade, even while campaigning before union leaders," said one. "Hillary and Barack are pretending to be unhappy about some things, but that's merely political posturing. They're solidly in support."
He was referring to Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
Mrs. Clinton, they noted, held strategy sessions as first lady on how to get Congress to approve NAFTA "without changes." As president, they agreed, she would do no more than "dot an i or cross a t."
Candidate Obama has not denied news reports in Canada that his top economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, assured Canadian diplomats that the senator would keep NAFTA intact and his anti-trade talk is just "campaign rhetoric."
PETRIFIED ABOUT PAUL
While they are confident they can deal with any "potential president," the Trilateralists paid huge tribute to Ron Paul in an equally large twist of irony, by expressing alarm that he is causing "significant future damage."
They expressed concern that Paul's rallies have attracted multitudes of young people who are getting "their political education." They want Republicans to pressure Paul to drop out now and stop his education rallies. This assignment was given to Thomas Foley, former U.S. House speaker.
The reasons Paul's "education campaign" strikes fear into Trilateral hearts are obvious. Paul would refuse to surrender an ounce of U.S. sovereignty to an international organization and TC wants world government.
Paul would immediately bring U.S. troops home from Iraq, Afghanistan and from 130 UN "peacekeeping" missions around the globe. TC wants to enjoy war profiteering and global power. Paul would abolish the federal income tax while the TC wants to pile on a global tax payable to the UN.
The formal agenda was loaded with everything Paul and American patriots detest: higher taxes, more foreign giveaways, more immigration, both legal and illegal, into the United States and "engaging Iran," among others.
AMERICA NEEDS TO PAY HER FAIR SHARE?
The Trilaterals got down to real work on Saturday, April 26, with a high-powered panel called "U.S. Foreign and Domestic Policy: Broad Outlines for a New Administration."
It was presided over by journalistic pimp David Gergen, who will write nothing about TC in his magazine, U.S News and World Report. Also participating were Kenneth Duberstein, former White House chief of staff for President Ronald Reagan; Strobe Talbot, president of the Brookings Institution and former deputy secretary of state; and Joseph Nye, former assistant secretary of defense. Henry Kissinger, former secretary of state and long-time Bilderberg leader, was present and listed as a participant. But a TC staff member crossed his name out. Some speculated he had throat problems.
This panel had these orders for the next president: increase foreign aid across the board because "America does not pay its fair share," pay up the arrears in UN dues, allow as many immigrants into the United States as want to come and provide "amnesty" for illegal aliens already here.
Little, if anything, was said about the fact that American taxpayers pay one-fourth of the UN's operating costs and one-third of the cost of 130 "peacekeeping missions" or the fact that immigrants from South America depress wages here and the average immigrant family costs the government thousands of dollars a year in welfare, health and other "benefits."
Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank and another long-time Bilderberg boy, largely echoed these views in a sweetheart "interview" by another journalistic strumpet, Lionel Barber, editor of The Financial Times, who will obediently report nothing.
FIGHT WARMING; ALLOW IMMIGRANTS
There were "subgroup" meetings on "climate change," "water and sanitation" and "migration and development." Every nation, especially the U.S., should spend big bucks to fight "global warming," they agreed. The United States should spend more "because Americans cause the most pollution," one argued. Americans should send more money to Africa so natives can drink clean water and scrub themselves, they said.
Antonio Garrigues Walker, chairman of Garrigues Abogadas y Asesores Tributarios, joined Peter Sutherland, the UN secretary-general's "special representative on migration and development," to call on the United States to not only allow unlimited immigration, but to throw more money at Mexico and other impoverished Latin countries. It was, somehow, their "right" to have more U.S. dollars. Sutherland is chairman of British Petroleum and Goldman Sachs International. He is also a long-time Bilderberg leader.
MEDIA BLACKOUT
Bill Emmott, another kept journalist, spoke on "the rise of Asia" at a reception-dinner held at the Smithsonian American Art Museum. Emmott, former editor of The Economist, will report nothing.
Sunday morning, Robert Blackwill, former U.S. deputy national security adviser for Iraq, led a panel discussion on "engaging Iran and building peace in the Persian Gulf Region." For the first time, there was dissent. Blackwill tried to rationalize the invasion of Iraq. Others doubted that Saddam Hussein was connected to the 9-11 terrorist attacks or was a nuclear threat. Blackwill said the military option remains but he hopes diplomatic efforts succeed.
Other participants were Ray Takeyh of the Council on Foreign Relations, which functions as the propaganda ministry for TC and Bilderberg; Volker Perthes, head of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs and Hitoshi Tanaka, former Japanese deputy minister of Foreign Affairs.
MORE, MORE, MORE MONEY
More foreigners demanded more U.S. money at a lunch panel called "European and Asian views on U.S. Foreign and Security Policy." Participants were Elisabeth Guigou, a member of the French National Assembly and former minister for European affairs and Han Sung-joo, former minister of foreign affairs for South Korea.
An afternoon session addressed "global health" with more calls for American tax dollars. A major voice in this cause came from Sylvia Mathews Burwell, president of Global Development Programs, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill Gates has attended at least one Bilderberg meeting.
EXCUSES FOR IRAQ; PLANS FOR IRAN
John Negroponte, U.S. deputy secretary of state, addressed the evening dinner on "U.S. foreign policy perspectives." Again, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were rationalized and an invasion of Iran held out as a possibility.
The Monday morning finale addressed the Global Financial Crisis involving these luminaries: Robert Kimmitt, U.S. deputy secretary of the treasury; Martin Feldstein, former chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers; David Rubenstein, managing director of The Carlyle Group; Naoki Tanaka, president of the Center for International Public Policy Studies and Sir Andrew Crockett, president of JP Morgan Chase International.
Among them, there was much talk of the U.S. government's "duty" to "intervene" on behalf of "financial institutions under stress." Little or nothing was said of the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are losing their homes because financial institutions lured them into buying houses they could not afford.
Throughout the weekend, no American voices were heard objecting to the demands on their country. Instead, there were smiles, nods and applause.
AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the "elite" media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker's Bilderberg Diary. Loaded with photos—many never published before—the book recounts Tucker's experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
TRILATERAL COMMISSION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Thomas S. Foley North American Chairman
Peter Sutherland European Chairman
Yotaro Kobayashi Pacific Asia Chairman
Allan E. Gotlieb North American Deputy Chairman
Herve De Carmoy European Deputy Chairman
Han Sung-Joo Pacific Asia Deputy Chairman
Lorenzo H. Zamibrano North American Deputy Chairman
Ainijrzej Olechowski European Deputy Chairman
Shijuro Ogata Pacific Asia Deputy Chairman
David Rockefeller Founder And Honorary Chairman
Paul A. Volcker North American Honorary Chairman
Georges Berthoin Chairman European Honorary
Otto Graf Lambsdorf European Honorary Chairman
Michael J. O'Neil North American Director
Paul Revay European Director
Tadashi Yamamoto Pacific Asia Director
NORTH AMERICAN GROUP
Madeleine K Albright The Albright Group LLC Washington, D.C.
Graham Allison Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Cambridge,
Mass.
Richard L. Armitage Armitage International Washington, D.C.
James L. Balsillie Co-Chief Exec. Officer, Research in Motion
Waterloo, Ontario
Charlene Barshefsky Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering Washington,
D.C.
Alan R. Batkin Eton Park Capital Management New York, N.Y.
Lael Brainard The Brookings Institution Washington, D.C.
Doug Bereuter The Asia Foundation San Francisco.
C. Fred Bergsten Peterson Institute for Int'l Economics Washington,
D.C.
Catherine Bertini Syracuse University Syracuse, N.Y.
Robert D. Blackwill Former Deputy Asst, to the President Washington
D.C.
Dennis Blair, USN (Ret.) Institute for Defense Analyses Alexandria,
Va.
H. Blanco Mendoza Private Office of Herminio Blanco Mexico City
Stephen W. Bosworth Dean, Tufts University Medford, Mass.
David G. Bradley Atlantic Media Company Washington, D.C.
Harold Brown Center for Strategic and Int'l Studies Washington,
D.C.
Zbigniew Brzezinski Center for Strategic and Int'l Studies Washington,
D.C.
Sylvia Mathews Burwell President Global Development Program Hinton,
WV
Louis C. Camilleri Altria Group, Inc New York, N.Y.
Kurt Campbell CEO Center New American Security Washington, D.C.
Raymond Chrétien Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP Montreal,
Quebec
William T. Coleman III Cassatt Corporation San Jose, Calif.
Timothy C. Collins Ripplewood Holdings New York, N.Y.
Richard N. Cooper Harvard University Cambridge, Mass.
F. Gerald Corrigan Goldman, Sachs & Co. New York, N.Y.
Michael J. Critelli Pitney Bowes Inc. Stamford, Conn.
Lee Cullum "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer," Dallas, Texas
H. Lawrence Culp, Jr CEO of Danaher Washington, D.C.
Gerald L. Curtis Columbia University New York, N.Y.
Douglas Daft The Coca Cola Company Atlanta, Ga.
Lynn Davis The RAND Corporation Arlington, Va.
Arthur A. DeFehr Palliser Furniture Winnipeg
André Desmarais Power Corporation of Canada Montréal,
Quebec
John M. Deutch Mass. Institute of Technology Cambridge, Mass.
Jamie Dimon JP Morgan Chase & Co. New York, N.Y.
Peter C. Dobell Parliamentary Centre Ottawa, Ontario
Wendy K Dobson University of Toronto Toronto
Kenneth M. Duberstein The Duberstein Group Washington, D.C.
Robert Eckert Mattel, Inc. El Segundo, Calif.
Jessica P. Einhorn The Johns Hopkins University Washington, D.C.
Jeffrey Epstein J. Epstein & Company, Inc. New York, N.Y.
Dianne Feinstein U.S. Senate (D-Calif.) Washington, D.C.
Martin S. Feldstein Harvard University Cambridge, Mass.
Roger W. Ferguson, Jr. Swiss Re America Holding Corp. Washington,
D.C.
Stanley Fischer Bank of Israel; frmr president, Citigroup New
York, N.Y.
Richard W. Fisher Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Dallas, Texas
Thomas S. Foley Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld Washington,
D.C.
Kristin J. Forbes Associate Prof. of Int'l Management Cambridge
Mass.
Michael B.G. Froman Citigroup Inc. New York, N.Y.
Francis Fukuyama The Johns Hopkins University Washington, D.C.
Dionisio Garza Medina ALFA Mexico
Richard A. Gephardt Former member House of Reps. (D-Mo.) Washington,
D.C.
David Gergen Harvard; Editor, USN&WR Cambridge, Mass.
Peter C. Godsoe Scotiabank (ret.) Toronto, Ontario
Allan E. Gotlieb Bennett Jones LLP Toronto, Ontario
Bill Graham Canadian House of Commons Ottawa, Ontario
Donald E. Graham CEO of The Washington Post Company Washington,
D.C.
Jeffrey W. Greenberg Aquiline Capital Partners, LLC New York,
N.Y.
Richard N. Haass President, Council on Foreign Relations New York,
N.Y.
James T. Hackett Anadarko Petroleum Corp. Texas
John J. Hamre Center for Strategic and Int'l Studies Washington,
D.C.
William A. Haseltine Haseltine Global Health, LLC Washington,
D.C.
Richard F. Haskayne University of Calgary Alberta
Charles B. Heck Senior Adviser, Trilateral Commission Washington,
D.C.
Carlos Heredia International Affairs Mexico
Carla A. Hills Hills & Company, Int'l Consultants Washington,
D.C.
Richard Holbrooke Perseus LLC New York, N.Y.
Karen Elliott House Dow Jones & Co. & Wall Street Journal
Princeton, N.J.
Alej. Junco de la Vega Grupo Reforma Monterrey, Mexico
Robert Kagan Carnegie Endowment for Int'l Peace Washington, D.C.
Arnold Kanter The Scowcroft Group Washington, D.C.
Charles R. Kaye Warburg Pincus LLC New York, N.Y.
James Kimsey Founding CEO of AOL Washington, D.C.
Michael Klein Citigroup Inc. New York, N.Y.
Steven E. Koonin British Petroleum London
Enrique Krauze Editorial Clio Libros y Videos, S.A. de C.V. Mexico
City
Robert Lane Deere & Company Moline, Ill.
Fred Langhammer The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. New York, N.Y.
Jim Leach Former U.S. Representative (R-IA) Washington, D.C.
Gerald M. Levin AOL Time Warner, Inc. New York, N.Y.
Winston Lord International Rescue Committee New York, N.Y.
E. Peter Lougheed Bennett Jones, Banisters & Solicitors Calgary,
Alberta
Roy MacLaren Former High Commissioner to the UK Toronto, Ontario
John A. MacNaughton Frmr CEO Canada Pension Plan Invest. Brd Toronto,
Ontario
Antonio Madero San Luis Corporacion, S.A. de C.V. Mexico
John Manley McCarthy Tétrault LLP Ottawa, Ontario
Sir Deryck C. Maughan KKR Asia, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts &
Co. New York, N.Y.
Jay Mazur Union of Needletrades, Textile Employees New York, N.Y.
James Moore Canadian Parliament Ottawa, Ontario
Marc H. Morial National Urban League New York, N.Y.
Heather Munroe-Blum McGill University Montreal, Quebec
Brian Mulroney Ogilvy Renault Montréal, Quebec
Indra K. Nooyi PepsiCo, Inc. Purchase, N.Y.
Joseph S. Nye, Jr. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Cambridge,
Mass.
David J. O'Reilly Chevron Corporation San Ramon, Calif.
Meghan O'Sullivan Former Deputy National Security Adviser Washington,
D.C.
Richard N. Perle American Enterprise Institute Washington, D.C.
Thomas R. Pickering Consultant, The Boeing Company Arlington,
Va.
Martha C. Piper The University of British Columbia Vancouver,
B.C.
Richard Plepler Executive Vice President, HBO New York, N.Y.
Joe Ralston, USAF (Ret) The Cohen Group Washington, D.C.
Charles B. Rangel U.S. House of Representatives (D-N.Y.) Washington,
D.C.
Susan Rice Brookings Institution Washington, D.C.
Hartley Richardson James Richardson & Sons, Ltd. Winnipeg,
Manitoba
Joseph E. Robert, Jr. J.E. Robert Companies McLean, Va.
John D. Rockefeller IV U.S. Senate (D-W.V.) Washington, D.C.
Kenneth Rogoff Center for Int'l Development, Harvard Cambridge,
Mass.
Charles Rose The Charlie Rose Show, PBS New York, N.Y.
Irene B. Rosenfeld CEO Kraft Foods Northfield, Ill
Dennis Ross Ambassador Counselor and Ziegler Washington, D.C.
David M. Rubenstein The Carlyle Group Washington, D.C.
Luis Rubio Center of Research for Development Mexico City, Mexico
Arthur F. Ryan Prudential Financial, Inc. Newark, N.J.
Jaime Serra SAI Consulting Mexico City, Mexico
Dinakar Singh TPG-Axon Capital New York, N.Y.
Anne-Marie Slaughter Princeton University Princeton, N.J.
Gordon Smith Centre for Global Studies, U. of Victoria Victoria,
B.C.
Donald R. Sobey Empire Company Ltd. Halifax, Nova Scotia
Ronald D. Southern ATCO Group Calgary, Alberta
James B. Steinberg LBJ School of Public Affairs, U. of Texas Austin,
Texas
Jessica Stern Program on Terrorism & the Law, Harvard Cambridge,
Mass.
Barbara Stymiest RBC Financial Group Toronto, Ontario
Lawrence H. Summers Harvard University Cambridge, Mass.
John J. Sweeney AFL-CIO Washington, D.C.
Strobe Talbott The Brookings Institution Washington, D.C.
George J. Tenet Georgetown Univ., former CIA Director Washington,
D.C.
John Thain New York Stock Exchange, Inc. New York, N.Y.
G. Richard Thoman Columbia University New York, N.Y.
Paul A. Volcker Wolfensohn & Co., Inc., frmr Fed. Res. Chair.New
York, N.Y.
William H. Webster Former CIA Director Washington, D.C.
Fareed Zakaria Newsweek International New York, N.Y.
Lorenzo H. Zambrano CEMEX Monterey, Mexico
Ernesto Zedillo Former president of Mexico; Yale Univ. New Haven,
Conn.
Mortimer B. Zuckerman Chairman, U.S. News & World Report New
York, N.Y.
William T. Coleman, Jr. Lifetime Trustee, Trilateral Commission
Washington, D.C.
Henry A. Kissinger Lifetime Trustee, Trilateral Commission Washington,
D.C.
Robert S. McNamara Lifetime Trustee, Trilateral Commission,
frmr pres., World Bank; frmr sec.of Defense; frmr pres., Ford
Motor. Washington, D.C.
David Rockefeller Founder, Lifetime Trustee, Trilateral Comm.
New York, N.Y.
NEW TRILATERAL MEMBERS ATTENDING FROM EUROPE
Patricia Barbizet CEO Artemis Group, France
Dermot Gleeson Chairman, AIB Group, Ireland
Elisabeth Guigou French National Assembly, France
Nigel Higgins Senior Partner N M Rohschild & Sons, UK
Jerzy Kozminski President & CEO Polish-American Freedom, Poland
Thomas Leysen CEO Umicore, Belgium
Manfred Bischoff Chairman, SNCF, France
Arpad Kovacs Pres. State Audit Office Hungary, Budapest
Friedrich Merz Member of the German Bundestag, Germany
Pietro Modiano Mng. Director CEO Intesa Sanpaolo, Italy
Hans Reisenhuber (returning) Member of the German Bundestag, Germany
Jeroen van der Veer Chief Executive, Royal Dutch Shell, The Netherlands
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
The arrest of a New Jersey engineer on charges of conspiracy to pass U.S. military secrets to Israel shows a consistent, continued pattern of spying on its major benefactor, the United States, according to espionage experts.
"The Israelis have always been active intelligence collectors in the U.S. It's just a matter of time in terms of when we have sufficient evidence to bring one of the cases," said John Martin, retired senior U.S. Department of Justice executive who oversaw the investigation and prosecution of espionage cases in the U.S. for more than 30 years, including that of convicted spy Jonathan Pollard. Pollard is currently serving his 23rd year of a life sentence in federal prison in North Carolina for passing highly classified information to Israel.
"The Israelis got caught again, and they'll get caught again after this," said Martin, referring to the recent indictment by the U.S. government of Ben-Ami Kadish, a former U.S. military engineer who allegedly helped give restricted nuclear weapons data, classified jet fighter weapons system data and key information on the Patriot missile system to Israel between 1979 and 1985.
Martin said Pollard and Kadish likely did not know each other. "As a matter of trade-craft, the Israeli intelligence service would not want one operative to know the other unless it was absolutely necessary, and it does not appear to have been necessary.
Pollard was in the Navy stealing highly classified communication information while Kadish was getting information on the latest developments in aircraft technology," said Martin.
Pollard's wife Esther, who married Pollard after he was sent to prison, told ABC News that her husband was in no way connected to Kadish. "Any attempt to connect these allegations to my husband adds insult to injury. He has served more than five times the usual time for espionage," she said. Pollard's first wife, Anne, served three and a half years of a five-year sentence on a charge related to Pollard's.
Kadish was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act, which is a capital offense. The U.S. does not usually seek the death penalty for such a charge, according to Martin. Kadish's lawyer, Bruce Goldstein, said Kadish has entered a plea of not guilty. He would not comment further.
Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman, Arye Mekel, said he knew nothing about the case against Kadish. "We heard about it from the media," he said, but would not comment further.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY, N.H. Courageous 9-11 widow Ellen Mariani has often lamented that she has "no body to bury," since her deceased husband Louis Neil Mariani's body was never recovered when he died during the 9-11-01 attacks. According to the government's disputed account, Neil Mariani, at age 59, died aboard United Airlines Flight 175 when it hit the south tower of the World Trade Center on 9-11-01.
Still saddened by the loss of a spouse she loved so much, Mariani tells friends she needs closure. But she also wants justice. Money alone won't do. Justice sometimes comes in increments. Consider the New Hampshire Probate Court's hearing on April 28, held to determine whether to revoke the admission of California attorney Bruce Leichty in the settlement of the estate of Neil Mariani, who was from Derry, N.H.
Since Leichty's admission was not revoked, he can continue
to be Mariani's counsel. This ruling represents perhaps her first-ever
victory in any court case since she became the first widow to
refuse the federal payout in 2001. Some say she gave up a $2 million
federal bribe to pursue
the truth about the murder of her husband.
Friends of Mrs. Mariani, saying she had an especially tough time finding competent, honest legal representation, say she considers Leichty a straight shooting attorney who will not just help her pursue a fair settlement from her deceased husband's estate, but also help her stand tall in her quest to find out what really happened to her husband on 9-11.
The estate's beneficiaries are supposed to be Ellen and her stepdaughter Lauren Peters. While Leichty's motion to dismiss the attempted revocation of his legal services for the estate was approved by Judge Peter Hurd, the judge did stipulate that neither Mrs. Mariani nor Leichty, as of the conclusion of the April 28 hearing, can talk to the news media about any issues surrounding the estate settlement or about 9-11 in general. That gag order, as clarified during the hearing, first took hold as of Feb. 8 of 2008, when Leichty was first granted pro hac vice ("for this occasion") admission in the estate case. Anything said to the media prior to that date was deemed to be of no consequence.
The gag order apparently gives no time line as to when it might be lifted. Local attorney Patrick Fleming, accompanying Leichty at the hearing, pointed out to Judge Hurd that nothing in the order's language prevents attorneys from talking to the media. But Hurd, while he did not quote the order out loud, did not see it that way.
According to Lauren Peters' legal counsel, Janine Gawryl of Nashua, N.H., Peters sees Mrs. Mariani's nationally known 9-11 activism as interference in the estate settlement. And when Leichty's repeated objections, regarding Gawryl's statements to Judge Hurd, slowly deflated the case Gawryl was trying to make, she took the unusual approach of getting Hurd to allow her to take the stand. Another attorney in the room, the estate administrator, then questioned her. This enabled Gawryl to generally discuss what became "Exhibit 1," a stack of 159 pages of Internet news articles that were cited as "evidence," of sorts, to "prove" that Leichty and Mrs. Mariani broke a gag order that at first was dated back to September and December of 2004. But that time frame was voided during the hearing.
Leichty "silenced me on evidentiary rules," Gawryl stated in court as the hearing sunsetted. She also said that Mariani "wants to use this court as a political forum" and that she has been speaking to the media espousing "conspiracy theories" that might block Peters from getting her settlement and "could cause the federal litigation to come apart."
Meanwhile, observers allege that Peters borrowed an undisclosed amount of money against what she expects to be a favorable probate settlement in which she receives a sizable portion of the money from her late father's estate. Peters and Mariani seem to be very much at odds over this whole issue. Peters is said to be highly critical of her stepmother's 9-11 truth movement activism and wants to settle the estate as quickly as possible in order to pay back the loan she is said to have received against the settlement.
Peters attended the April 28 hearing but evidently cannot talk to the media either. Mariani was among survivors of the 9-11 victims who did not take the federal Victim Compensation Fund payout not long after the "attacks." This "hush fund," which paid out millions of dollars, carried the requirement that recipients must not sue the aviation companies, nor any other entity, apparently.
Mariani, as a plaintiff, has two claims in the ongoing litigation: For wrongful death, and loss of spousal consortium. She has spent a lot of her time in federal district court in the Southern District of Manhattan before Judge Alvin Hellerstein, where certain establishment law firms have consolidated the process by pushing various other 9-11 cases into settlements.
Indeed, not a single federal case against the airlines or security companies has gone to trial in New York, as far as can be determined.
Mariani's claim in federal court has been kicked around for
years. And amid claims made by the federal court in 2007 that
a federal settlement for
Mariani had been reached—contrary to a tentative AFP report
to that effect last September—such a settlement actually
was never secured.
Mariani, after a long delay that forced the early afternoon hearing on April 28 to start about 53 minutes late, made a conference call to the courtroom so she could listen to the proceedings. An attempt by Peters' attorney to put Mariani "on the stand," even though the widow called in from Colorado and could not physically do so, was rebuffed by Judge Hurd, who said he cannot allow the questioning of witnesses who are not there in person.
Mark Anderson is the author of The Ron Paul Revolution, AFP's special report we are encouraging everyone to distribute. For more on how you can help Ron Paul make a stand, click here. Mark can be reached at truthhound2@yahoo.com
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
As soaring petroleum prices bring recession home to U.S. consumers, the fact that much of our oil comes from unstable parts of the globe means things can only get worse in the months and years ahead.
A stark example of how conflict impacts the oil market and
the U.S. economy was the decline on Wall Street when oil recently
jumped to $120 a barrel following an attack by rebels on two Shell
pipelines in the Niger Delta. Exports from Nigeria dropped by
162,000 barrels a day
of light crude, the type most favored by U.S. refineries.
Nigeria is the fourth largest exporter of light crude and petroleum to the U.S., and each time rebels attack oil platforms, seize foreign workers or blow up pipelines, the international markets panic and prices increase. Conflict zones like Nigeria are now having a bigger impact on increasing oil prices because overall global demand has increased and the dollar is at an all-time low. Therefore, when oil output from Iraq, Nigeria or Sudan is shut off or reduced by terrorism or internal civil strife the price of oil soars.
When supplies from troubled countries like Nigeria, Iraq, Angola, Algeria or Colombia are interrupted, the U.S. is forced to seek other suppliers and inevitably pays higher prices that are passed on to the consumer.
National Geographic painted one of the starkest portraits of Nigeria in a commentary by Tom O'Neill:
Oil fouls everything in southern Nigeria. It spills from the pipelines, poisoning soil and water. It stains the hands of politicians and generals, who siphon off its profits. It taints the ambitions of the young, who will try anything to scoop up a share of the liquid riches—fire a gun, sabotage a pipeline, kidnap a foreigner. . . . Dense, garbage-heaped slums stretch for miles. Choking black smoke from an open-air slaughterhouse rolls over housetops. Streets are cratered with potholes and ruts. Vicious gangs roam school grounds. Peddlers and beggars rush up to vehicles stalled in gas lines. This is Port Harcourt, Nigeria's oil hub, capital of Rivers state, smack-dab in the middle of oil reserves bigger than the United States' and Mexico's combined.
That description of Nigeria sitting atop massive reserves of oil and gas reserves and as a human garbage heap points to a volatile future in which heavily armed gangs like MEND— Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta—continue to attack oil facilities in the delta in order to force out foreign companies. When the West looks at countries like Nigeria, there must be military planners envisaging a scenario when it may be necessary for the U.S. and its allies to send in troops to protect the oil supply as oil becomes more scarce.
It took the Bush administration a long time to recognize the growing role of China in Africa where some of the world's largest gas and oil reserves are still waiting to be tapped. Beijing has demonstrated in its dealing with the Sudanese regime, which has overseen the genocide in Darfur, that it cares little about the nature of the regimes it does business with as long as they cater to China's insatiable appetite for energy, wood and minerals.
On the world stage, the major oil suppliers are not necessarily countries the U.S. can rely on in the longer term, and some are hostile toward America. According to BP Global, the top ten oil reserves are in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Russia, Kazakhstan, Libya and Nigeria.
If Iraq, as now seems likely, becomes dominated by Shiites, who feel closer to their co-religionists in Iran than their American liberators, the Bush administration will effectively have created a major oil bloc that could in the future shut off supplies to the United States. Russia has begun to use its massive energy supplies in tandem with its foreign policy, a factor that could someday bring it into conflict with the United States.
Richard Walker is the nom de plume of a former mainstream news producer who now writes for AFP.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Phone or email your Senators and Congressmen - there is insufficient time for snail mail. Sen Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, plans to inhibit First amendment rights with another "hate crimes" provision in the fiscal 2009 defense authorization bill.
Fortunately, President Bush says he will veto the bill if it reaches his desk with such an amendment. It is doubtful Democrats could raise the votes necessary to evade a filibuster or override a veto. Still, it is better to err on the side of caution and contact your legislators. Also, this is a "momentum" game - keep the issue alive and hope for a more left-wing Congress after the November election.
Levin siad he plans to attach hate crimes language to the defense bull either during the committee's closed-door markup or as an amendment during floor debate. Whether it comes as a floor amendment or out of markup, even legislators opposed to hate crimes legislation must be alerted because votes on the final, foot-high bill may come so fast they are unable to read through it to discover the mischief.
Hae crimes language is a "very appropriate" amendment to the annual defense bill, Levin said, because it represents "one of the values of this country" that the military fights to protect. He failed to mention that the armed forces also fight to protect the First Amendment right to free speech.
The Supreme Court ruled years ago that the First Amendment allows "robust" speech and has upheld the Anglo-Saxon common law of eight centuries that "the court has no remedy for hurt feelings." this means someone can say the most horrible, untrue things about you in a letter or eyeball-to-eyeball if there is no third party present. Thus, it is not "published" and you have no cause of action for liable or slander if you "publish" by telling a third party.
Hate crimes legislation would turn the First Amendment upside down and uproot centuries of common law, which lawyers often refer to as "case law." Did the hoodlum mug the victim because he wanted his or her money, or did he say something suggesting he also "hated" him because of his race, gender or "sexual orientation: (meaning lesbians, homosexuals and transsexuals)?
Public ignorance on this "feel good" legislation is appalling. President Bush was pilloried, as governor of Texas, for refusing to turn over the case of four young white boys who killed an aged Negro to the federal government for prosecution under federal "hate crimes" laws. Three of the "hands on" killers are on death row and the fourth is behind bars for life. They are afraid to die and would have preferred a federal trial because there is no death penalty under federal law.
Finally, there is the issue of the 10th Amendment and states'
rights. All states punish violent crime more harshly than the
federal government. And the federal government has no constitutional
right to intrude into every locality turning local street crimes
into federal crimes.
|Top|
Has another name been added to the long list of government-sponsored murders, with possible chief suspects belonging to the Bush-Clinton crime cabal? And, although police Captain Jeffrey P. Young revealed that at least two apparent suicide notes were discovered, suspicions are running high that foul play was involved in Palfrey's hanging.
For starters, less than 10 percent of all female suicides are by hanging. According to journalist Mick Gregory, "of all female suicides, very few are by hanging. It's been out of fashion for 100 years."
What propelled this story into the national headlines was a client list of 10,000 to 15,000 names that included Washington's political and business elite, including officials from the IMF and World Bank, corporate CEOs, White House and Pentagon employees and lobbyists.
Palfrey's "little black book" of telephone numbers weighed 46 pounds and had already caused the resignation of Randall L. Tobias, deputy secretary of state to Condoleezza Rice. Others named in these phone logs were Bill Clinton's former advisor Dick Morris, along with Harlan K. Ullman, the man who came up with "shock and awe."
What most worried Washington's political elite was Ms. Palfrey's defiant attitude. As reported by Paul Duggan in The Washington Post, on April 16 "Palfrey announced that she would make public some of her records, exposing ex-clients from the more refined walks of life in the nation's capital."
In another interview, she threatened, "I can state with unequivocal certainty this situation will be a very long and unpleasant one. I'm sure as heck not going to federal prison because I'm shy about bringing in the deputy secretary of whatever."
Palfrey also let it be known that she would be willing to sell her little black book, and it was rumored that a book deal was about to be signed.
The stakes got even higher when Palfrey's attorney, Montgomery Blair Sibley, said in 2007 that even though a firm price had not yet been established for this book, "If Bill Clinton's on the list, that's a different matter. . . ."
Was Sibly simply dropping names, or did he know something more? Some researchers have linked Clinton's name to a September 1994 batch of phone records originating from Washington's Park Hyatt Hotel, yet corroborating evidence is not strong enough at this time to prove these assertions to be factual. Still, when we consider information presented in my trilogy on the Clintons, we learn that Bill's consigliere, Bruce Lindsey, used to scurry Clinton to the Marriott Hotel in downtown D.C. for extramarital affairs—a distance of little more than one mile from the Park Hyatt. In light of the former president's sexual proclivities, it's not hard to imagine that he used multiple locales for his trysts.
Another figure that repeatedly keeps surfacing in the D.C. Madam case is Dick Cheney, whose phone number while CEO of Halliburton appeared on numerous escort service lists. Friends close to Ms. Palfrey have told authorities that she was about to reveal more client names, and that this information was her ace-in-the-hole. In fact, Palfrey recently admitted, "Dick Cheney might be a client, but I can't tell you right now."
Only days before her death, Palfrey complained to close associates that she was being followed, and that a contract had been placed on her head.
However, Palfrey assured numerous radio interviewers that she was not suicidal, and if she met a sudden demise, it would be murder.
A final twist to this story involves a former employee of Ms. Palfrey named Brandi Britton who, only three months earlier, also met an untimely death that was ruled a suicide—by hanging. With her trial set to start the following week, Britton threatened to blow the whistle and name names during her hearing. Palfrey had also warned that she planned on exposing the government and all those involved.
If this data is correct and either Bill Clinton or Dick Cheney's names was contained in Palfrey's records, the implications would be enormous. Hillary Clinton's presidential ambitions would be immediately sunk, while Cheney's inclusion on this list would be another black eye to an already disastrous Bush presidency. The Justice Department has recently sealed the names of every client on this list.
Victor Thorn is the author of Hillary (And Bill): The Clinton Trilogy.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
BROOKLINE, N.H.—Betty Hall, 87, a New Hampshire state representative, shows an unwavering "can-do" attitude toward her House Resolution 24, which is intended to prod the U.S. Congress into investigating (and implementing the impeachment of) President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Backers charge that the Bush-Cheney regime dragged the nation into an undeclared, preemptive, never-ending war under false pretenses. Rep. Hall said that some backers have as their "tipping point" a strong concern about the Bush administration doing away with prohibitions against torture.
"What is Congress's tipping point?" she asks. AFP has reported on the administration's wartime eagerness to snoop on the public and its use of "signing statements" and executive orders to bypass proper legislative input and, in effect, legislate for itself.
Although some fellow state legislators say the timing is wrong, Rep. Hall is not worried about how close the next election is, as she believes the moral imperative of impeachment is too great to ignore. With the blood of America's youth staining the sands of distant lands, underwritten by obscene public expenditures that fatten privileged contractors and drain the national treasury to the breaking point, Rep. Hall wants the 400-member New Hampshire House—said to be the world's third most populous English-speaking legislative body behind the Congress itself and the British House of Commons—to pass HR 24 and tell Congress that, for God's sake, it's time to consider some actual checks and balances and get on with impeachment. It boils down to this: An imperial presidency has no place in a free nation.
A visit to New England shows that the spirit of the American revolution does not easily die. The famed Old North Bridge at Concord, Mass., for example, where the colonists won a decisive fire fight and sent a contingent of Redcoats fleeing back to Boston, features Ralph Waldo Emerson's stirring words on "the shot heard round the world" that heralded the War of Independence.
Well, HR 24 backers want the legislative action on this issue to be "the vote heard round the world" to drive back tyranny from within our shores, just as the historic battle drove back tyranny that came from afar.
"It actually did go to the floor for a vote on the 16th of April," Rep. Hall said during an interview with AFP. She explained HR 24 in the wake of a local April 14 impeachment rally that featured, among others, former Pentagon official-turned-whistle blower Daniel Ellsberg; and retired Air Force pilot Dr. Robert Bowman, a Vietnam veteran who is known as an eloquent speaker on the fallacies of the government's 9-11 story and the distant conflicts which this story "justified."
HR 24, which resembles an earlier joint resolution in Vermont that only passed the state Senate and stopped there, was introduced in early 2007 but was not approved that year, after considerable debate. Drafted again in January 2008, it differs from the Vermont measure in that it is not a joint document, so only the New Hampshire House needs to deal with it; the state Senate need not be involved, which simplifies the process. This year, HR 24 has endured a series of standard public hearings and committee actions.
The April 16 floor vote failed to pass, 95-227, with around 75 not showing up to vote (most were unexcused absences; only five called in as "excused"). But in New Hampshire, such a vote does not kill the resolution; it merely tables it. It was last declared "inexpedient to legislate," but a simple majority vote would get it off the table so it could be voted on again to remove the "inexpedient" tag and proceed from there.
The N.H. legislative session ends in early June and resumes in January. There are various committee meetings in the interim.
Rep. Hall also planned to take HR 24 to the Democratic State Convention in New Hampshire on May 17, where well-known party figure Howard Dean is expected to expose the "Bush/McCain agenda," according to a promotional flyer. At the 2006 state Democratic convention, Rep. Hall said a measure similar to HR 24 was unanimously approved by the state party leadership.
"On May 17, I will try again without hesitation," she said. She also noted that N.H. independent voters are banding together to support impeachment. Many Republicans, however, see HR 24 as revenge for the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton. Several are hostile toward it.
"Some of them walked out of the chambers on April 16," Hall said, noting that of the 95 who voted for it, only four were Republicans in a House that is about two-thirds Democratic and one- third Republican. Until fairly recently, it was the other way around.
On the national level, she said that the task is far from easy. A Michigan congressman, John Conyers (D), once favored impeachment.
"Rep. Conyers is on the hot seat, and he's wavering," Rep. Hall said, referring to his chairmanship on the House Judiciary Committee—the panel that would start the impeachment process. To impeach only means to indict; removal from office would only come after trial and conviction by the Senate). Conyers, said Rep. Hall, "was in favor of impeachment when he was a ranking member on the committee. He even wrote a book about it."
However, Republicans are not the only barrier. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and other Democratic leaders are pressuring Conyers to stay away from the impeachment issue, she said..
But Rep. Hall will have none of the jibber-jabber about impeachment being misguided, too late or whatever.
"It's not just about Bush and Cheney, it's about our Constitution," she said. "It's about finding the truth, justice, and restoration of the rule of law. You can't have a state legislature without a relationship with the federal government."
She said that even starting the impeachment "late" is beneficial because the impeachment process itself would send a strong signal about the need for accountability. And, as she sees it, the process and the required fact-finding about the current administration's misdeeds also would have a beneficial chilling effect on whoever sits in the Oval Office after Bush.
"Setting precedents is important," she said, especially considering that Sen. John McCain has talked about continuing the Bush policies in Iraq and Afghanistan if he is elected president. Having served 28 years in the New Hampshire Legislature, first as a Republican and then as a Democrat, Rep. Hall knows the procedures well. So if anybody can make this happen, she can. Earning just $100 a year to serve, she is no careerist like those overpaid "servants" found in legislatures in Michigan, California, New York and elsewhere.
What is known as a "vote of no confidence" in foreign governments to recall defective leaders assumed the more stable form of impeachment in America. Rep. Hall said this action must be taken because, as she put it, "Our checks and balances are out of whack."
NOTE: Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont and Washington are among the other states taking similar actions to pass resolutions calling on the U.S. Congress to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney. There also are websites put together by other people and coalitions, such as that of the Northeast Impeachment Coalition (neimpeach.org) as well as impeachthem.com. Rep. Hall's website is Hall4impeachment.com, or write her at: P.O. Box 309, Brookline, N.H. 03033. Or call 603-672-8712.
Mark Anderson is the author of The Ron Paul Revolution, AFP's special report we are encouraging everyone to distribute. For more on how you can help Ron Paul, click here.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
The State Department "Office of Global Anti-Semitism" says the New Testament claim that the Jews had Christ crucified is "classical anti-Semitism"—a historic form of hate. It included as an "anti-Semitic incident" the case of a Polish priest who said Jews killed Christ.
Are you one of tens of millions of Christians who agree with Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ that Jewish leaders incited a Jewish mob and persuaded Pilate to have Christ crucified? The government now considers you "anti-Semitic." You are part of a worldwide scourge the U.S., Canada, Australia, and 55 European nations are uniting to suppress.
In the many countries now ruled by hate laws, it is already a federal offense to repeat the claim of New Testament "hate literature" that the Jews had Christ crucified. The State Department's equation of biblical Christianity with "hate" is an ominous indication. The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith—architect of hate laws worldwide (and primary ideological and statistics-gathering force behind the Office of Global Anti-Semitism)—is moving rapidly to create bias against Christians as haters, particularly of Jews and homosexuals.
Despite passionate support of Israel by evangelicals, the ADL claims Christianity is inherently anti-Semitic. The ADL says the New Testament is the seedbed of suspicion and blame against Jews leading to the Holocaust of World War II. Televangelist John Hagee, recipient of numerous Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith awards, upholds ADL propaganda.
He preaches that Jews did not reject or kill Christ, do not have to accept Him, and that New Testament Christianity is a primary source of anti-Semitism throughout the ages.
As Jewish-dominated media increasingly persuades the public and government to agree with this stereotype, it will become easier to pass Christian-restricting hate crime laws. All who adhere to the Bible on homosexuality or Jewish complicity in Christ's death could be subject to state-sponsored prosecution.
Bible believers aren't the only ones at risk. The State Department report also says it is anti-Semitic to: Allege "intentionally or unintentionally" that the state of Israel persecutes Palestinians; criticize "intentionally or unintentionally" Zionism or Israel if such criticism leads to lowering of public opinion of Jews or the government, military, or people of Israel; publish cartoons depicting the Israeli government and military as similar to Nazis; diminish the 6 million figure of Holocaust dead in any amount; allege that Jews exert undue influence in Congress, the White House and the media; and/or allege that American Jews are equally loyal to Israel.
Congress unanimously created this office of thought crimes disinformation in 2004. Cast your vote to end its influence: call your senators and representative toll-free at 1-877-851-6437. Tell them: "Please revoke funding for the State Department's Office of Global Anti-Semitism. It does not represent scholarly research but the anti-Christian biases of the Anti-Defamation League."
The Rev. Ted Pike is director of the National Prayer Network, a Christian/conservative watchdog organization.. He can be reached at 503-631-3808, emailed at www.truthtellers.org, or contacted by mail at National Prayer Network, P.O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
THE BEST AND STRONGEST border-protection bill is pending before eight (count 'em) House committees and, while there is virtually no chance of final action this year, it is important to push hard now for "momentum" in the new Congress to be seated in January.
Some Democrats got elected to the House in 2006 by acting like Republicans, opposing gun laws and supporting immigration reform without amnesty for illegal aliens already here. Among these are Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), author of the present bill. It will be tough.
The new Congress may have more of a leftward tilt and the current Congress has accomplished nothing. But immigration reform is urgent, and action is critical to the future of the United States. According to new Census Bureau estimates, Latinos are taking over the country, not only by entering illegally, but by having children in numbers above the present reproduction rate of white Americans. Taxpayers provide free medical care for pregnant illegals.
Hispanics are the largest-growing minority group, and account for one in five children younger than 5. "Hispanics have both a larger proportion of people in their child-bearing years and tend to have slightly more children," said Jeffrey Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center and co-author of a study predicting that the Hispanic population will double from 15 percent today to 30 percent by 2050.
"So this means that in five years, a quarter of the 5- to 9-year-olds will be Hispanic, and in 10 years a quarter of the 10- to 14-year-olds will be Hispanic," he said. "It's just going to move up through the age distribution with each successive cohort being slightly more Hispanic." (This presumes no more Hispanics cross the border illegally, which is obviously not going to happen.)
Researchers warn that the high poverty rate of U.S.-born Latino students and the fact that many are reared by immigrant parents poses challenges to their education and integration into U.S. society.
"Based on what we know, many in this population may not be growing up speaking English in their homes," said Margie McHugh of the Migration Policy Institute in Washington. In a recent study, she found that 75 percent of students in Los Angeles with limited English proficiency were born in this country.
At this rate, your children will not recognize the country in which you were born. Whites will soon become the minority. Hispanics, blacks and Asians will make up the majority. Since much higher percentages of Latinos and blacks are uneducated, poor and more likely to engage in criminal activities, government expenses will skyrocket.
Hearings are now under way on the Shuler bill, and Republicans have filed a discharge petition to force a House vote. While the bill is bipartisan, more Republicans than Democrats are backing it, notable among them Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Col.). Tancredo, the son of legal immigrants, is the most vocal lawmaker calling for strong border protection.
To force a floor vote, 218 House members must sign the discharge petition. Thirty-two more signatures are needed—grab your phone.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
At every stop, Ron Paul supporters are treated like the illegitimate child at a family reunion. In Missouri, The St. Louis Dispatch reported that district GOP leaders disqualified almost half of the convention delegates or alternates - most of them suspected supporters of the Texas congressman.
"It was a ramrod job!" shouted Don Griffin, a GOP activist and Paul supporter, as he confronted convention chairman Rich Magee after the session adjourned. "You should be ashamed of yourself.
Magee, mayor of Glendale, said the delegate purge complied with last-minute changes in convention rules approved by the state party, which placed credentials committee business atop the agenda. That was necessary, Magee added, to protec the results of the state's Feb. 5 presidential primary, won by John McCain. As a result, McCain in now guaranteed all 58 of Missouri's delegates. Debbie Hopper, national field director for U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, said she's concerned that the state Republican Party is out to disenfranchise the Paul delegates selected at those previous caucuses.
The Washington Post, among other dailies, purposefully misconstrued a Web video by Paul in March and reported that he was no longer in the race. But Paul never stopped running for president and never intended to.
"He put out a video in which he said victory in the convention sense was not available to us, but there was still much that the campaign could try to accomplish," Ron Paul 2008 spokesman Jesse Benton said yesterday. "People in the press reported that as him dropping out."
He is still racking up votes, for one thing, having garnered 16 percent of the vote in Pennsylvania's republican primary on April 22. And his supporters circuit is sure to stoke sales. The book debuted at No. 1 on Amazon's"Hot New releases in Books."
It seems that the power elite are doing their best to marginalize Ron Paul and disenfranchise his supporters, but his strong finish in Pennsylvania showed he was very much still alive. The Hawaii GOP has removed Ron Paul from its website, listing McCain as the nominee already, even though they haven't yet chosen their nominee and won't until the caucus on May 16. The delegates to the caucus are chosen locally to be sent to the Hawaii State Republican Convention. They are independent and free to vote for whomever they choose in the National Convention, as long as that person is in the race. The rules sy that except by their own commitments, national delegates and alternates shall not be required to support any particular candidate for the Republican nomination for president.
In the most egregious example of all regarding the party's bias, the Republican Bosses shut down the Nevada convention on April 26 before it could elect any national delegates when it looked like Paul would win a majority.
This emergence of the large numbers of Paul supporters frightening the party bosses is also reflecting the massive election fraud that went on all over the nation during the primaries.
Pat Shannan is AFP's assistant editor. See more at www.patshannan.com.
|Top|
What is really disturbing the average American (yes, that's you) today? You can sense and even see the anger the minute you leave the security of your home and venture out into the public streets and highways.
A look at the polls, if you want to believe them, tells you that the No. 1 issue that has alarmed the public is the war in Iraq. The public is tired, very tired of this no-win, unconstitutional war. Reports that come out of the Pentagon and the white House are most assuring that the is doing well, a stable native government is gradually taking control over that historic land, and peace will soon prevail.
Of course no such peace is happening and certainly won't as ong as the neo-conservative policy gurus and their allies in our government keep pressing for an American attack on Iran, which will likely turn the Middle East into a nuclear conflagration.
American Free Press readers know well what happened t Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, they-head of the U.S. Central Command, which had charge of military operations in the Middle East, East Africa and Central Asia, who had the courage and patriotism to challenge the policy of the White House for a greater Israel. He was forced to resign.
Where were the members of Congress who should have come to his defense? The overwhelming majority of them are supporters of Israel who tremble to even think of defying the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). This is an organization that has members in every congressional district in the country who when called upon can force a congressman to turn somersaults on demand.
Errant congressmen and senators simply won't know what hit them, so to speak. They will be bombarded by phone calls, emails and personal visits from some of their staunchest supporters. And if they refuse to Kow-tow to them they will face a powerful and fully funded opponent in the next election.
Still, the responsibility for our being in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere lies with Congress. The key word here is responsibility. They are the "fall guys" for those with the real power who control them.
There is one member of Congress who consistently rises above the crowd of is complacent and internationalist colleagues and puts America and the Constitution first in all his deliberations and decisions that he makes as a true representative of the people.
That man is Ron Paul of Texas, an unabashed nationalist in a time when internationalism and imperialism have all but taken over the free government that our Founding fathers established.
As AFP reported in our May 5 issue, Paul took no political gobbledygook from Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker when they appeared before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
At the end of his questions Paul asked the general and ambassador: "In your estimation, does the administration have the authority to bomb Iran without further congressional approval?"
Petraeus: "Uh, congressman, I, uh, I"m the commander for Iraq, and I do not know the answer to that question, and it's not within my purview."
Crocker: "Er, uhh, congressman, nor is it in mine, er, ahh, uh, I uhh you know, my job is Iraq, and I{m just not competent to pronounce on, uh, an issue like that.
Paul: [who must have been wondering if either had ever read the Constitution]. "It disturbs me to no end that we cannot get a flat-out ‘no' on this question."
In his farewell George Washington warned about the danger facing the United States were it to make permanent alliances with other countries. His sage counsel falls in deaf ears, and what we have is a United States governed by executive decree. Congress, the voice of the people, has turned into a rubber stamp for powerful lobbyists.
The congressional leaders of the two so-called major parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, like to make speeches about "lawmaking," but their purpose seems to be looking ahead to winning the next election or retiring on a nice pension to spend more time with their family," a euphemism for joing the growing band of lobbyists who are the real power behind Congress
Readers of AFP, just as the readers of the court-killed Spotlight, are fed up with the unpatriotic activities in which Congress and the White House participate.
Despite the rhetoric by certain members of the House calling for impeachment, nothing has materialized. Nothing will happen during the few remaining months of the current administration.
LOOK AT CONGRESS
Here is a closer look at Congress: one internationalist measure after another sails through the legislative process - foreign aid to trouble making countries like Israel that has received $10 billion annually or $1 trillion since the U.S. recognized that rogue state in 1948; unconstitutional free trade agreements that cause America to lose its sovereignty and lower our standard of living; undeclared foreign wars; and legislation supporting the fortifying and unconstitutional banking system.
AFP continues to espouse the populist philosophy longtime readers have come to recognize as truly American: against foreign aid, for sound money and against the private bankers' money monopoly, for withdrawal from the UN, against world government, for Congress to issue currency, for strict neutrality in the Middle East, for abolishing the privately owned Federal Reserve.
Don't give up on Ron Paul. Support him in the remaining primary
elections. He will be at the Republican convention in St. Paul,
Minn. September 1-4.
|Top|
Six years after AFP first warned of the dangers of depleted uranium (DU), the administration persists in claiming there is no conclusive evidence that it is a silent weapon of mass destruction that may harm U.S. troops and the alleged enemy.
However, the British government has long since attributed birth defect claims from a 1991 combat veteran to DU poisoning, and studies using cultured cells and laboratory rodents continue to confirm the likelihood of leukemia resulting from chronic exposure as well as the possibility of genetic, reproductive and neurological effects.
Vietnam veterans of a generation ago remember the similar symptoms that affected so many of them from their contact with Agent Orange. Some of their offspring carry daily reminders of what their future fathers inadvertently brought home with them and the eventual birth defects that were passed on.
A study by the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at Long Island University in New York found that uranium dust may do permanent damage to the lungs, resulting in chronic respiratory problems, and that uranium exposure also affects neurological function. Rats exposed to uranium had impaired nerve cell function, and 1991 Gulf War I veterans who were excreting high levels of uranium in their urine showed impairment in cognitive function.
More minor health effects from lesser exposure may also include skin rashes, headaches, blurred vision, sensitivity to light and sound, localized numbness and urinary symptoms, such as kidney stones, increased urine volume and blood in the urine.
Nothing has changed, and until such issues are resolved with further research, the controversial use of DU by the military will continue. Citing the effectiveness of DU in penetrating enemy armor and protecting U.S. forces, the military has rejected calls to ban its use. In fact, some critics have even accused the Pentagon of working to limit the scope of testing for exposure to DU.
In 2004, AFP reported, "The U.S. government has knowingly violated conventions on war by subjecting our own troops and foreign civilians and soldiers to this weapon of mass destruction. The U.S. military should immediately stop using shells and armor made with DU, and a thorough and independent probe of DU's environmental impact should be set up. Moreover, a comprehensive study should be funded to test civilians in Iraq."
It was at that time that AFP reported that Doug Rokke, a retired Army officer and Ph.D. dedicated to exposing this coverup, demanded "the end to the use of DU munitions."
Rokke again publicly deplored the government's inaction more than a year ago and pointed out that the DU situation had worsened and demanded that President Bush do something, but to no avail.
In early 2007, Rokke said, "The use of uranium weapons is absolutely unacceptable and a crime against humanity. Consequently the citizens of the world and all governments must force cessation of uranium weapons use. I must demand that Israel now provide medical care to all DU casualties in Lebanon and clean up all DU contamination. U.S. and British officials have arrogantly refused to comply with their own regulations, orders and directives that require U.S. Department of Defense officials to provide prompt and effective medical care to all exposed individuals. Israel must do so now."
Dr. Rokke was quoted earlier as saying, "while U.S. and British military personnel continue using DU munitions, the ‘dirty bombs' in the coalition arsenal, officials from the Army, Department of Energy and Department of Defense are using agents and hired guns to attack patriotic critics of DU weapons."
Rokke claimed then, and has seen no change, that his detractors continue to attempt to disrupt his efforts to ensure compliance with mandated medical care and environmental remediation requirements, because the Pentagon wants to be able to use the deadly DU munitions.
His complaints continue to fall on deaf ears—mainly because the corporate-controlled media continues to ignore the illegal use of DU and its long-lasting effects on the health of veterans and the public.
According to humanitarian law, the illegality of DU weapons is based on four criteria:
• The "territorial" test. Weapons of war may only be used in the legal field of battle. Weapons may not have an adverse effect off the legal field of battle.
• The "temporal" test, meaning that weapons may only be used for the duration of an armed conflict. A weapon that continues to act after the war violates this criterion. The territorial and temporal criteria are meant to prevent weapons from being "indiscriminate" in their effect.
• A weapon cannot be unduly inhumane. The Hague Convention of 1907 prohibits "poison or poisoned weapons." Because DU weapons are radioactive and chemically toxic, as the military knows, they fit the definition of poisonous weapons banned under the Hague Convention.
• The "environmental" test says that weapons cannot have an unduly negative effect on the natural environment. Depleted uranium does not meet the requirements of any of the four.
This outrageous treatment of humanity by an elite few war profiteers has not changed. The extent of adverse health and environmental effects of uranium weapons contamination is not limited to combat zones, but includes domestic facilities and sites where uranium weapons have been manufactured or tested including: the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico; Colonie, N.Y.; and the Jefferson Proving Grounds, Ind.
Medical care must be provided by the Department of Defense for all individuals affected by the manufacturing, testing or use of uranium munitions. Thorough environmental remediation should be completed without further delay.
Pat Shannan is the assistant editor of American Free Press. He is also the author of several videos and books.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
More than 360 workers who dealt with the aftermath of the World Trade Center disaster are known to have died, New York health officials said in May. Of the more than 600 diagnosed with cancer (other than blood cancer), 80 are included in the death count. Other deaths were traced to blood cancers and heart and circulatory diseases. Five ex-workers committed suicide, said Kitty Gelberg, who is tracking the deaths for the state's World Trade Center Responder Fatality Investigation Program.
Officials have determined the cause of death of 154 of the responders and volunteers who toiled at Ground Zero, the blocks nearby and at the Fresh Kills landfill, where debris from the site was taken. "It's the tip of the iceberg," said David Worby, who is representing 10,000 workers who say they got sick after working on rescue and recovery efforts.
"These statistics bear out how toxic that site was, Worby said. Most of the deadly tumors were in the lungs and digestive system, according to the tally from the state's program. Ms. Gelberg said she had not yet determined whether the number of cancer deaths was more or less than those typically occurring in men in their 20s to 50s who work as cops, firefighters or laborers—the majority of 9-11 workers.
"We are not saying all of these deaths are World Trade Center-related," she said, not yet ready to make that determination without the statistics.
She added that relatives of people who died of cancer may be likely to link their loved one's death to their 9-11 work and add them to the database, despite other possible factors. Ms. Gelberg said she is compiling the deaths from public sources, individuals and agencies and believes there is an overall undercount of workers who have died. The statistics cover Sept. 12, 2001, through May 1, 2008.
The city Health Department said it was actively examining whether deaths have been elevated as a result of 9-11. Last year, the head of Mount Sinai Medical Center's monitoring and treatment program, Dr. Robin Herbert, predicted a "third wave" of 9-11-related deaths from cancer.
"We know people were exposed to carcinogens. There was benzene, dioxin, asbestos," said her colleague Dr. Philip Landrigan. "There's reason to be concerned, so we're engaged in watchful waiting. So far, there's no excess."
Cathy Murray, whose husband, Fire Lt. John Murray, died of colon cancer April 30, "absolutely" connects his disease to his work at Ground Zero. He was diagnosed in June and was 52 when he died, she said. An FDNY spokesman couldn't immediately say where or when Murray performed 9-11-related duty, but a department letter confirms that he spent at least 40 hours at World Trade Center-designated work sites.
"He was perfectly healthy," said Cathy Murray, 53, of Staten Island. "He never smoked a day in his life, and neither did I. It happened so quick and [was] so aggressive. He was responding [to therapy] at first, but then he wasn't," she added. "And now he's gone."
Celia Correa, 58, has lung disease and a host of other medical problems that she believes are connected to her exposure to the World Trade Center dust after 9-11. She and other activists recently held a forum about 9-11 health on a Sunday afternoon. Residents, workers and students spoke about their continuing health problems following 9-11. Doctors talked about the 9-11-related illnesses they have seen and told people where they can go for treatment.
"More and more of us are developing more and more illnesses and conditions, but they're not being linked to 9-11," Ms. Correa said.
"These medical problems take a toll on your body slowly, and finally it erupts." One goal of the event was to spread the word about the WTC Environmental Health Center, which offers free treatment to anyone with 9-11-related health problems. Staff from the center registered attendees for intake exams at Bellevue Hospital, Gouverneur Healthcare Services on the Lower East Side and Elmhurst Hospital in Queens.
Laine Romero-Alston, director of research and policy for the Urban Justice Center, one of the organizers, saw the event as an opportunity to spread the word about the free healthcare to those in the city and elsewhere who are unaware of the program
"There's a serious health crisis related to 9-11," Ms. Romero-Alston said. "Doctors don't know what's going on. What was initially all respiratory, is not all respiratory now."
She said doctors are now seeing increasing numbers of cancer cases and blood diseases in those exposed to 9-11 contaminants, along with more complaints about skin, digestive and gynecological problems.
Ms. Correa said she has experienced a progression of symptoms. She worked as an administrative assistant in the WTC ruins area from October 2001 until July 2004. She helped clean an office and worked at a desk directly beneath an air vent. The dust from 9-11 was literally part of the air she breathed, she said. She developed lung disease, chronic asthma and bronchitis, respiratory problems that some doctors have linked to 9-11. But she also noticed a number of other health problems, which she didn't initially connect to her exposure. She developed acid reflux, vertigo, muscle aches, hemorrhaging and a rash that doctors couldn't diagnose.
No longer able to work, Ms. Correa was left without health insurance and had to declare bankruptcy. The activists also called on the federal government to provide funding for 9-11-related healthcare and research.
"They're not doing anything about it," Ms. Correa said. "We don't understand why the government doesn't want to acknowledge us."
She wants a guarantee of lifelong workers compensation and subsidized healthcare. "We don't know, ultimately, what the full health fallout is, or what it will be in five, 10 years," Ms. Romero-Alston added. "There needs to be long-term federal response for all those affected."
Pat Shannan is the assistant editor of American Free Press. He is also the author of several videos and books including One in a Million: An IRS Travesty. See more from Pat at patshannan.com.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
In a follow-up story to one that ran in AFP's May 12, 2008 edition, the New Democratic Party of Canada (NDP) is actively opposing the Security and Prosperity Partnership, which its members see as a prelude to the construction of the North American Union on the ruins of once-independent nations.
According to Steve Fought, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), at least three national legislators from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico have a formal plan to call more attention to the proposed integration of the three nations.
NDP international trade critic Peter Julian announced that he had "successful discussions" with partners in the U.S. Congress and the Mexican congress.
"These elected representatives have agreed to file motions to stop further implementation of the so-called Security and Prosperity Partnership process imposed undemocratically on our three nations, and to open up the process that has taken place behind closed doors, to instead have a transparent review and scrutiny within their respective legislatures," Julian said in a NDP news release.
Rep. Kaptur and Yeidckol Polevnsky Gurwitz (senator for Mexico State and vice president of the Mexican Senate) are the legislators diligently working with Julian on this project.
"This is an important step forward for the middle class in North America," Julian said. "The NDP has been campaigning across Canada to expose and to stop the SPP. We've held over 20 public forums in more than 20 cities and a dozen more are being planned for the spring of 2008."
The NDP also reports: "The legislators from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico also agreed to launch a task force to push for renegotiating NAFTA with support from their respective political parties. Members of the task force promote the renegotiation of NAFTA within their respective legislatures."
Fought said the North American Summit in New Orleans looked like a transparent attempt to praise NAFTA and promise more of the same—undermining the U.S. economy and national sovereignty. He called the summit "completely one-sided in favor of the corporations while putting the public interest in the streets."
As for NAFTA, Fought said that his state of Ohio, and Michigan, are "ground zero" for witnessing NAFTA's destruction of the manufacturing sector. He said he recently saw parts of Detroit that reminded him of distant Third World zones stricken by poverty. "The idea of defending and extending NAFTA is untenable," he said.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
The Federal Reserve crossed a Rubicon of sorts, lending tens of billions of dollars, not to a commercial bank, as has been its historical practice, but for the first time to an investment bank.
Commercial banks pay the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) for deposit insurance, whereas investment banks do not, and yet the Fed suddenly made liquidity available to the latter. Commercial banks are legally allowed to use leverage to a maximum ratio of $13 of debt to every dollar of equity, whereas investment banks—ironically subject to less regulatory oversight than commercial banks—can leverage their equity by a factor of 34.
Invoking an obscure, never-before-used legislative provision, the Fed made billions of dollars available to JPMorgan Chase to acquire another investment bank, the essentially insolvent Bear Stearns.
The Fed-engineered JPMorgan takeover of Bear raises startling questions: What is the degree of cooperation between the Fed and JPMorgan? Was this an impromptu alliance, or had it been plotted in advance? Was JPMorgan drafted against its will to absorb Bear Stearns, or did the central bank give JPMorgan a plum that it already coveted? More importantly for the country, what will be the relationship of JPMorgan and the Fed going forward?
Clearly, if Bear was "too big to fail," then undoubtedly the much larger JPMorgan is too big to fail. JPMorgan was already a key dealer of U.S. government debt before absorbing Bear, and now it has Bear's erstwhile share of that operation, too. Of even greater significance, even before the takeover, JPMorgan already had multiples of the kind of illiquid financial derivatives that did in Bear Stearns—in fact, more derivatives than any other company in the world—and now it owns Bear's junk, too. This implies that the Fed will have to make good on those derivatives—even if it eventually means giving JPMorgan real money for worthless "assets"—if that's what it takes to keep JPMorgan alive.
Apparently, investors quickly grasped that implication. The
perception that
JPMorgan has a new partner—the ultimate sugar daddy, the
Fed—helped JPM's stock to soar 30 percent in the week after
the Bear takeover was announced.
The Fed and JPMorgan partnership will remain implicit. There will be no official merger or formal union of the two; on the other hand, it may be no exaggeration to say that the Federal Reserve has effected a partial de facto nationalization of JPMorgan. It will be interesting to see what degree of autonomy JPMorgan will retain. There is an old saying that if someone owes the bank a million dollars, the bank owns him, but if someone owes the bank a billion dollars, then he owns the bank.
In the present case, JPMorgan appears to be under the Fed's thumb. However, because the Fed now requires JPMorgan's survival, it will do whatever it needs to do to accomplish that. The potential moral hazard created by this dynamic is enormous.
JPMorgan may have the Fed over a barrel, too. Treasury Secretary Paulson has proposed sweeping regulatory reforms that would extend the kind of control that the Fed now has over JPMorgan to all investment banks. Theoretically, such power is necessary to prevent investment banks from ever putting this country into such a precarious situation again. In practice, though, this would be a huge step toward a national banking monopoly.
Considering the various boom-bust cycles caused by the Fed, not to mention the loss of 98 percent of the dollar's purchasing power under the Fed's watch, do we really want to place our faith in a bulked-up, super-powered, but clearly fallible Fed?
For the present, Paulson and Bernanke have postponed the financial apocalypse. Gold and commodities prices are tumbling. Real estate markets are making necessary adjustments. It would be premature, though, to declare the financial crisis over. As long as trillions of dollars of derivatives—ticking financial time bombs—continue to lurk on the balance sheets of our major financial institutions, we are not out of danger.
Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson is a faculty member, economist, and contributing scholar with the Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College in Grove City, Pa.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to Americcan Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
With the election of beorge Bush in 2000 the world was given Afghanistan and Iraq, but with the election of Sen. John McCain it will be Iran, Syria, and Russia.
McCain made it clear - both by his actions as a senator and on the campaign trail - that he will do whatever is required to get elected. He said America may be in Iraq for 100 years, just as Americans have been deployed in South Korea since the 1953 cease-fire. He said there could be "more wars" under his watch. When asked about Iran, he mimicked the old Beach Boys' song with his own version of "Bom, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran. He is cozy with Pastor Rod Parsley, whom he calls his "spiritual guide" and a "moral compass" for America. Parsley had the following to say concerning the clash of civilizations between the Christian and Muslim worlds:
Islam is an anti-Christ religion.... America was founded in part with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed... America has historically understood herself to be a bastion against Islam in the world.... I do not believe our nation can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam ... we were built for the battle. We were created for the conflict. We get off on warfare.
Parsley interprets the Book of revelation and the Apocalypse therein to mean that America's reason for existence is fighting Israel's never-ending wars against the world's 1.5 billion Muslims scattered throughout dozens of countries.
McCain sees potential conflict with a nuclear armed, nationalist-minded and increasingly assertive Russia.
McCain said Russia should be excluded from the G-8, and that Vladimir Putin is nothing more than a KGB thug, among other taunts. His campaign staff is full of warmongerers. Max Boot, who lauds Mccain as the candidate who would scare the snot out of our enemies"and whose "bellicose aura" would result in other countries being "more afraid to mess with him than with other occupants of the Oval Office" including George Bush. Robert Kagan, of the Project for the New American Century (basic blueprint for worldwide American warmongering) has made pushing for confrontation with Russia his favorite calling card.
James Woolsey, former CIA director (who also sits on the same Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs investigated several times by the FBI for Israeli espionage and who has called for the release of Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard from prison) has never met a war he did not like, including any future conflict with Russia.
They have all publicly supported Bush's move to station U.S.
missiles in countries bordering Russia, a move viewed so threatening
that Putin himself warned of targeting these nations with nuclear
weapons should they allow themselves to be used as American proxies.
|Top|
To understand Barack Obama on the Second Amendment, you have to know about the clash of character between the then-Chicago state senator and an ordinary citizen who exercised his right to armed self-defense, in violation of a local gun ban.
That citizen was a 52-year-old resident of Wilmette, Ill, who, on Dec. 28, 2003 woke to find that during the night his home had been invaded by a career criminal; a thief who stole household items, keys and the home owner's car.
The victim, Hale DeMar, described his fear in a letter to the Chicago Sun Times: "For me, the seconds until I found my children still safely tucked in their beds were horrifying... The police were called, and in routine fashion they came, took the report and with little concern left, promising to increase surveillance. Little comfort, since the invader now had keys to our home and our automobiles. The police informed me that his was not an uncommon event in east Wilmette and offered their condolences...."
Not 24 hours after the first burglary, the thief returned. Using DeMar's house keys, the man entered the home, this time setting off the alarm system, automatically notifying the security company. Given the previous night's lackluster response by police, DeMar was prepared, armed with a handgun - legally purchased years before and kept in a safe. But under Wilmette's gun ban, that firearm in the home was illegal.
DeMar confronted the criminal, and believing his children were in danger, shot the burglar, who then fled the home. Said DeMar:
"Until you are shocked by a piercing alarm in the middle of the night and met in your kitchen by a masked invader as your children shudder in their beds, until you confront that very real nightmare, please don't suggest that some village trustee knows better.
"If my actions have spared only one family from the distress and trauma that this habitual criminal has caused hundreds of others, then I have served my civic duty and taken one evil creature off of our streets, something that our impotent criminal justice system had failed to do, despite some 30-odd arrests, plea bargains and suspended snetences."
The burglar, who was arrested after driving DeMar's stolen SUV to a hospital, had an extensive criminal record.
Cook County prosecutors ultimately declared DeMar's use of a firearm to be justified. But Wilmette village officials pressed nonetheless to prosecute him for illegal possession of his handgun - a charge punishable by a huge fine and jaail time. A town official was quoted in Reason magazine saying, "We need to set the example that we're trying to protect our citizens." And he said, DeMar - by possessing a legally purchased handgun - "is endangering innocent civilians.&"
Obama's alleged support of the Second Amendment is utterly cynical and false.
The outcry of the Illinois public was heard all the way to the state capitol. As a result, the Illinois House and Senate passed legislation in May 2004 to protect citizens who use handguns in self-defense in their homes or businesses despite local handgun bans. The House accepted the DeMar self-defense bill by a vote of 86-25 and the Senate moved the legislation on a 38-20 vote.
When Obama turned thumbs down on the bill, he voted against the most basic element of the Second amendment - the right of defense of self and family - the reason that millions of Americans own firearms.
When the governor vetoed the bill, Obama again voted against a citizen's right to self-defense. But the veto override passed the Senate and the House by overwhelming majorities.
Now, fast forward to today's slippery oratory of U.S. Sen. Barack Obama just three years from being an unknown state senator - now morphed by the media into a spellbindding senator seeking to be president.
Using words like "protecting sportsmen," Obama is now saying that he believes in the second Amendment ... but with almost universal exceptions, all of which he lists under the heading of"common sense gun safety laws."
"Commonsense gun safety" and the Second Amendment? Like endorsing the D.C. gun ban, which outlaws armed self-defense in the home - now being challenged before the Supreme Court. Obama, who as president would be in the position to nominate justices to that high court, has declared that the D.C. ban doesn't violate the Second Amendment.
"Commonsense gun safety?" In 1998 he pledged to support a "Ban on the sale or transfer of all forms of semiautomatic weapons" - meaning most handguns and many rifles and shotguns that you and I might own.
"Commonsense gun safety?" Like demanding that the federal government preempt the 40 hard-won state laws creating ritht-to-carry. The Chicago Tribune reported: "Obama said he opposed allowing ordinary citizens to carry concealed weapons and that a federal law banning concealed carried weapons except for law enforcement is needed."
"Commonsense gun safety?" Like the draconian proposals funded to the tune of $18 million by the rabdly anti-gun Joyce Foundation while Obama was a activist member of its board of directors.
Obama's alleged support of the Second Amendment is utterly cynical and false.
Barack Obama is not for the right to keep and bear arms; he's
out to destroy it.
|Top|
Over a month after my talks at the Greenwich (Conn.) Library, I find that Israel loyalists are still publishing astonishingly inaccurate tirades about me in local news papers. While the name-calling is unfortunate, it is excellent that discussion of the profoundly important topic of Israel-Palestine is continuing.
Given that American taxpayers, even during recessions in which thousands of Americans are thrown out of work, have long given Israel far more of our tax money than to any other nation on earth - currently about $7 million per day - it iis highly appropriate that we examine the target of our truly inordinate generosity.
In his recent column about me, Rabbi Mitchell Hurvitz strays into three unusual areas of terrain. While, I was extremely surprised to see him venture there, I will be happy to follow him.
First, he starts out by quoting the First amendment of the Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...."
It is strange that an Israel advocate should draw attention to this bedrock principle of democracy, since Israel violates it so systematically. Israel is a self-defined "Jewish state" in which non-Jews (i.e., the Christians and Muslims who made up a majority of the population in this land until recently, and still make up almost 20 percent of the population) are second-class citizens, at best.
While U.S. media almost never report this, the fact is that [the Christian and Muslim religions[ are routinely disparaged, their economic situation is far inferior, their children are taught in school that Jewish culture is superior to all others, and periodically there are outright attacks on their institutions and texts. In 1980 hundreds of copies of the New Testament were publicly and ceremonially burnt in Jerusalem under the auspices of a Jewish organization subsidized by the Israeli Ministry of Religions. Today, thousands of Muslims and Christians under Israeli occupation are prevented from worshiping in their holiest churches and mosques.
I am continually astounded at the stance of people such as rabbi Hurvitz, who support Israeli discriminatory practices. It seems to me that either one is against discrimination based on race, religion, and ethnicity, or one is not.
It seems that when Rabbi Hurvitz is a member of a minority (Jewish Americans constitute approximately two percent of the American population) he applauds a secular state in which the majority religion relinquishes its traditional symbols and culture in the name of freedom of religion. When he is a member of the majority, on the other hand, he advocates a state where a religious symbol is on the very flag itself, and where individuals must carry ID cards denoting their religious background.
Second, it is odd that Rabbi Hurvitz brings up the Constitution, given that Israel itself has deliberately chosen not to adopt one - a far cry from the U.S. system, in which fundamental principles and rights were codified at the very beginning of our national existence and can only be modified through a long and tedious process of public involvement.
Third, Rabbi Hurvitz provides a mini-sermon drawn from halakhah (Jewish law) and the Talmud. Again, this is a bit odd. Truthfully, the Talmud and Jewish law are such mixed bags that I'm surprised he handed them to us to peer into.
While I rarely speak or write on this subject matter, there is no doubt that it is significant and should be explored. There are two extremely valuable books on the topic by authors less timid than I, both Jewish, one Israeli: Jewish History, Jewish Religion* by Dr. Israel Shahak, a Holocaust survivor and, until his death in 2001, a highly regarded Israeli professor of chemistry; and Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, co-authored by Dr. Shahak and Dr. Norton Mezvinsky, a professor of history who in 2002 was named by the Connecticut State University Board of Trustees an official "Connecticut State University professor ... a signal honor, reserved for faculty members who fulfill the highest ideals of outstanding teaching, scholarly achievement and public service," in the words of Peter Kildoff of Central Connecticut State University.
In his first book, Shahak explains that he took on this topic when he realized that "neither Zionism, including its seemingly secular part, mor Israeli politics ... nor particularly the policies of the Jewish supporters of Israel in the diaspora, could be understood unless the deeper influence of Talmudic laws, and the world view which they both create and express is taken into account ... without a discussion of the prevalent Jewish attitudes to non-Jews." Shahak emphasizes, "even the concept of Israel as ‘a Jewish state,' as Israel formally defines itself, cannot be understood."
Shahak and Mezvinsky provide a number of translations from the Talmud and other writings that they note are omitted from books on Judaism published in English; for example, from a fundamental book of Hasidism: "All non-Jews are totally satanic creatures ‘in whom there is absolutely nothing good.' Even a non-Jewish embryo is qualitatively different from a Jewish one. The very existence of a non-Jew is ‘non-essential,' whereas all creation was created solely for the sake of the Jews." There are many such passages.
What makes such texts particularly significant, Shahak explains, is that"in Israel these ideas are widely disseminated among the public at large, in the schools and in the army." In a booklet published by the Israeli army for its soldiers, Shahak reports, the chief chaplain wrote:
"When our forces come across civilians during a war or in hot pursuit or in a raid, sol long as there is no certainty that those civilians are incapable of harming our forces, then according to the halakhah they may and even should be killed.... In war, when our forces storm the enemy, they are allowed and even enjoined by the halakhah to kill even good civilians, that is, civilians who are ostensibly good."
One can only imagine what this kind of teaching means for Palestinians in Israel itself, and, still worse, for those in the West Bank who live next to settlements populated by heavily armed adherents of such a ruthless and supremacist faith - and who regularly attack them with impunity, periodically beating, torturing and killing them. A sentence several years ago, on the rare occasion when a perpetrator was even charged with a crime, was six months community service.
While the above citations do not in any way represent the whole of Judaism, the reality is that certain religious text taught in Israel contain a distressing number of profoundly offensive teachings. I have no doubt that the vast majority of Jewish Americans have long since repudiated these, including Rabbi Hurvitz. Still, just as Christian and Muslim leaders have publicly condemned and disowned spurious dogmas and practices, I suspect it would be valuable for Rabbi Hurvitz and other Jewish leaders to do the same. Such shared honesty and humility by all our religious leaders, I believe, helps us move forward as a stronger, more moral and more unified society.
Most importantly, while most Israelis also do not hold the beliefs touched upon above, many do - and this group holds disproportionate power in the Israeli regime. If Americans are going to continue showering Israel with millions of dollars per day, I think we are obligated to investigate to what degree our money is being used to further the kind of supremacist, racist violence the most of us oppose.
A first step is to read what Shahak and Mezvinsky have to tell us. The next step, I suspect, is to turn of the tap.
*Jewish History, Jewish Religion (softcover, 120pages,#246,
$20 minus 10% for subscribers to TBR magazine) by Israel Shahak
is available from TBR, P.O. Box 15877, Washington, D.C. 20003.
Call The Barnes Review toll free at 1-877-773-9077 to charge to
Visa or MasterCard.
|Top|