Monday, May 15, 2006

Americans Vanquished: Jewish Ownership of American Politicians.

A Quick History of the Rise of Jewish Power after the Second World War.
In america, during the 1930s and 1940s, wealthy jewish individuals, a smattering of american/globaljewish lobbying organizations, and politically active jewish communities, tried to influence american administrations to support the formation of the jos. Although they had no way of controlling day to day political decisions they were able to exert an influence at critical moments in america’s political decision making processes. Perhaps their most crucial intervention came in 1948 when they persuaded harry truman to support the establishment of the jos. His support for the jos became critical when he was elected president of the united states.

The structural dilemma facing american politicians at that time is exactly the same as it is now: should they support a country with no resources or a region with vast amounts of resources? The choice made in 1948 has had a critical influence on the shape of global politics ever since. Indeed, its ramifications have unravelled dramatically over the last six decades. One small, critical, decision has turned into world defining moment. The critical factor in determining the choice that was eventually made was not an objective analysis of america’s global interests but domestic party political considerations in the run up to a presidential election, "The decision of Harry Truman to vote in favor of the partition of Palestine was not easily reached. The State Department and several cabinet members disagreed. They deemed it more rational to stick with the wealthy Arabs who possessed the Middle Eastern oil than to side with the Jews. FDR, Truman's predecessor, had promised King Ibn Saud, a major tap to that oil, that the U.S. would not change its policy towards Palestine without prior consultation with Arabs and Jews. Alternate proposals were considered. A plan to permit immigration of 100,000 Jews and the creation of a federal state in Palestine, which Truman thought reasonable, was rejected by the Zionists. An informal lobby of Jews flooded the White House with demands for partition and was instrumental in Truman's ultimate decision. Harry, the underdog in the 1948 election, realized that to win reelection he would have to please that lobby!" (Philip Greenspan ‘Is The Israel Lobby Effective?’ April 24, 2006). If all the presidential candidates in the election agreed to pursue america’s global interests they would have ignored such jewish pressure but in the competition between the candidates the ultimate winner would be the one who courted this segment of the american electorate. "The late Steve Smith, brother-in-law of Teddy Kennedy, and a powerful figure in the Democratic Party for several decades, liked to tell the story of how a group of four Jewish businessmen got together $2 million in cash and gave it to Harry Truman when he was in desperate need of money during his presidential campaign in 1948. Truman went on to become president and to express his gratitude to his Zionist backers." (Alexander Cockburn ‘The uproar over the Isreal lobby’ May 5, 2006).

The zionists in america’s jewish community were also able to use their power to manipulate american jews who were dubious about the zionists’ terrorist methods to create the jos. "Many years ago, in 1946, when the New York Times still provided reliable news coverage, the paper of record disliked and opposed the coercive tactics of the Zionists. This most powerful news source was hit, even before the existence of AIPAC, with an advertiser boycott that swung the paper from an anti-Zionist to a pro-Zionist position." (Philip Greenspan ‘Is The Israel Lobby Effective?’ April 24, 2006).

The weakness of the jewish lobby in america could be seen in 1956 when america ordered britain, france, and the jos, to end their joint invasion of egypt during the suez crisis.

By the early 1960s, american jews had considerable influence over america’s policies towards the jos - but not much influence over america’s wider foreign policies towards the middle east, let alone the rest of the world. "Today's mess started a half-century ago on Capitol Hill when the lobby for Israel first promoted a heavy bias in U.S. policy in the Middle East. By the time I became a Member of Congress in 1961, the lobby's activities had already thoroughly intimidated our political institutions. During my 22-year career on Capitol Hill, and since, I have watched intimidation grow deeper and more pervasive. Former Ambassador George W. Ball said Congress behaves like trained poodles, jumping through hoops held by lobbyists for Israel. The lobby marshals great resources to defeat its critics and reward supporters." (Paul Findley ‘United States Must Address Control of its Middle East Policies by Israeli Lobby’ March 26, 2006).

The jewish lobby in america and the jos had a decisive impact on america’s foreign policies towards the jos and the middle east during the october 1973 war. It had a similar impact over nixon’s policy of detente with russia. However, in the 1980s, despite the presence of jewish neocons in the reagan administrations, they could do little to prevent america supporting saddam hussein during the iran-iraq war. In the late 1980s, the collapse of the soviet empire opened the floodgates to american, and thus jewish, power in the middle east and central asia. The continuing rise of the jewish neocons enabled american jews to exert an influence over america’s policies beyond the jos to cover much of the middle east. The power of the jewish dominated media, the jewish lobby, the jewish neocons, jewish academia/think tanks, and the jos, resulted in america’s first proxy zionist war, the first gulf war. The power of american jews was consolidated during the 1990s because clinton’s cabinets and administrations contained a significant proportion of jewish neoliberals.

After the pentagon and new york bombings, the bush administration allowed the jos to implement whatever policies it wanted towards the palestinians. "With hardly a murmur of protest, Congress recently approved resolutions saluting the prime minister of Israel for building high walls and fences that keep Palestinians penned up on their own land like cattle." (Paul Findley ‘United States Must Address Control of its Middle East Policies by Israeli Lobby’ March 26, 2006). They were also able to exert considerable influence over america’s policies in the middle east and beyond including the west asian continent.

The Jewish Lobby, the Jol.
The jewish lobby currently consists of a large number of jewish organizations some of which are indigenous to america, but others merely branches in america of global jewish organizations. One of the biggest, and most well known, organizations in the jewish lobby is the american israel public affairs committee (aipac). "Founded in 1959, with each passing year, the organization gets bigger and stronger. With a base in Washington, offices across the country, 85,000 energized members, a staff of 165, and a $33.4 million annual budget, AIPAC is at the pinnacle of a massive complex of Jewish organizations and Political Action Committees (PACS) across the country, from the national to the local, that are devoted to maintaining Israel’s privileged status in the nation’s capitol." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict – April 2005). But it is only one of many, "Many of these politically-oriented organizations, including the American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC), are part of the Council of Presidents of Major Jewish American Organizations, which regroups 52 national Jewish organizations." (Rodrigue Tremblay ‘The Israel Lobby and Democratic Public Discourse’ April 2, 2006).

Each of the organizations in the jewish lobby specializes in lobbying a specific part of american politics and society. Aipac lobbies members of congress. Jinsa lobbies retired generals. "The American Jewish Committee is the foreign policy arm of the Jewish pro-Israel lobby in the US with offices in Brussels and Geneva, official representation at the UN, and has become very busy and successful lobbying European states in Israel's behalf." (Jeff Blankfort ‘AJ Committee Briefing on Israeli and Middle Eastern Affairs’ Feb 27th 2006). In america it also lobbies other ethnic lobby groups to win their support for the jol in america and the jos. B'nai B'rith/ADL works to broaden the definition of anti-semitism, popularize this broad definition, and then punish those deemed to have transgressed this definition. .. "the Anti-Defamation League, the thought-police of the Jewish establishment." (Uri Avnery ‘Who's the dog? Who's the tail?’ April 22 2006). Various jewish organizations focus on financing jewish educational institutions whilst others organize jewish students in american universities, etc, etc. The jewish lobby is so comprehensive it is able to lobby every single sector of american society.

The core of the lobby, those employed by jewish lobbying organizations to implement their policies, is almost exclusively jewish, "The core of the Lobby is comprised of American Jews who make a significant effort in their daily lives to bend U.S. foreign policy so that it advances Israel’s interests." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.12). What could be called the periphery of the lobby consists of both jews and non-jews. "The Lobby also includes prominent Christian evangelicals like Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, and Pat Robertson, as well as Dick Armey and Tom DeLay, former majority leaders in the House of Representatives. They believe Israel’s rebirth is part of Biblical prophecy, support its expansionist agenda, and think pressuring Israel is contrary to God’s will. In addition, the Lobby’s membership includes neoconservative gentiles such as John Bolton, the late Wall Street Journal editor Robert Bartley, former Secretary of Education William Bennett, former U.N. Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick, and columnist George Will." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.15). Hereinafter the jewish lobby will be referred to as the jews-only lobby (jol).

American Politicians bought by the Jol.
Virtually all american politicians are funded to one extent or another by america’s fabulously wealthy jol. Aipac’s role is to advise jewish political action committees about campaign donations to american politicians based on their services not to america but to the jos. Presumably the greater the dedication to jos, the greater the donations. "With some 200 employees and 100,000 wealthy benefactors .." (Arnaud De Borchgrave ‘Touching the third rail’
_1157963.php/Touching_the_third_rail Apr 24, 2006).

The jol bribes american politicians to vote in favour of policies that are in the interests of the jos – even if those policies are contrary to america’s interests. "The reason that the pro-Israel lobby has to give so much more money to the politicians than the other lobbies such as arms manufacturers, oil, etc., is that supporting Israel is arguably not in the US interest from any perspective and the contributions are necessary to buy the politicians' cooperation." (Jeffrey Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell Plitnick’s ‘Myth and Reality: Jewish Influence on US Middle East Policy’ May 24th 2005); "Indeed, the mere existence of the Lobby suggests that unconditional support for Israel is not in the American national interest. If it was, one would not need an organized special interest group to bring it about. But because Israel is a strategic and moral liability, it takes relentless political pressure to keep U.S. support intact." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 Note 1 p.43).

The scale of the money that the jol has directed towards american politicians is considerable, "Why would the intelligent and shrewd pro-Israel lobbyists contribute almost forty million bucks, $39,865,672 to be exact, between 1978 and 2004, to politicians for their campaigns, if they were not expecting something special in return? It is no secret that lobbyists invariably get many quids for every quo they contribute, and Israeli lobbyists ain't no Santa Claus. The business of lobbying is a perpetual bull market for all involved - the givers and the takers. Hounding the politicians and inundating them with campaign contributions results in a fabulous dividend return. Opponents who cannot be bought - are there still any? - can expect retaliation in the next election, which invariably results in a loss for the incumbent." (Philip Greenspan ‘Is The Israel Lobby Effective?’ April 24, 2006).

The extreme zionist jack abramoff apparently had in the region of 60 members of congress on his payroll. "The snakepit of corruption that is Washington, D.C., is writhing and roiling these days with the news that super-lobbyist and Republican fundraiser Jack Abramoff has pleaded guilty to bribery, fraud, and other charges that could embroil Capitol Hill in the biggest corruption scandal in recent memory. As many as 60 members of Congress may be implicated in the massive network of payoffs, phony nonprofit foundations, and other criminal activities up to and including murder." (Justin Raimondo ‘Abramoff and the Israeli Connection’ January 11, 2006). "A number of prominent Republicans involved in the Abramoff bribe scandal remain under investigation. Robert Ney (R-Ohio), head of the House Administration Committee that oversees federal campaign finance laws, accepted a golfing trip to Scotland, a gambling junket to London, campaign contributions and free meals from Abramoff, who persuaded Ney to benefit his lobbying clients. In September, a Texas grand jury indicted House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) for funneling illegal corporate contributions to Texas state elections. The indictment followed three rebukes from the House ethics committee for unethical conduct. Delay is being investigated for accepting payoffs from Abramoff, including skyboxes at sporting events, flying his staff to the Super Bowl and the U.S. Open, lavish trips to Saipan, Russia, Korea and London, Broadway shows and expensive meals. Abramoff, who raised over $100,000 for Bush, implicated other powerful Republican leaders in Congress, including: John Doolittle (R-Calif.), who took illegal campaign funds from Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff; Senator Conrad Burns (R-Mon.), who received $150,000 in contributions from Abramoff; and 17 current and former congressional aides, half of whom were hired by Abramoff. David Safavian, the White House chief procurement officer, who once worked as a lobbyist for Abramoff, was indicted in October for making false statements involving Abramoff to investigators." (Don Monkerud ‘Corruption Reform?’ April 29 / 30, 2006). The scale of the corruption being financed by the jol suggests that it might be more accurately described as a jewish mafia - like the one that ruled russia during the 1990s.

Lobbying Members of Congress costs $13 Billion.
There are those who might be tempted to say that a few jollies aren’t going to cause too much corruption. What possible difference could a golfing trip to scotland, a gambling junket to london, free meals, skyboxes at sporting events, flying staff to the super bowl and the u.s. open, lavish trips to saipan, russia, korea and london, broadway shows, expensive meals. But according to one non-governmental organization the costs are a little higher and much less politically resistable, "Since 1998, the Center for Public Integrity found that lobbyists spent twice as much-$13 billion-influencing legislation and government regulations as they did on campaign finance. These funds buy influence in Washington, obscured by a federal disclosure system in disarray. Many firms never file required documentation of their influence peddling, over 14,000 documents are "missing," 300 lobbyists lobbied without filing, and thousands of forms were never filed. While the right to petition government is upheld in the U.S. Constitution, the sad truth is Congress promotes a system of legalized corruption." (Don Monkerud ‘Corruption Reform?’ April 29 / 30, 2006).

The Jol Opposes Lobbying Reforms.
Although the abramoff bribery scandal led to demands for reforms, congress eventually succeeded in shrugging off the idea of new laws. This issue had a particular impact on the jol since it regularly funds members of congress to go on all epxenses paid trips to the jos. "After the Abramoff scandal, Washington is back to business as usual. In March, The Senate passed (90 to 8) weak legislation requiring lobbyists to file more reports, and Congressmen to receive advance approval for lobbyist-paid trips and abstain from lobbying Congress for two years after leaving office. The weak bill would not ban lobbyist-sponsored private travel or do away with earmarks, which dole out favors to lobbyists. The Senate rejected (30 to 67) an independent ethics office to investigate illegal lobbying and bribery, and will do nothing to regulate lobbyist money-raising activities for Congressmen who rely on them for most fund-raising activities. In February, House Republicans challenged nearly every reform proposal and rejected bans on lobbyists-funded travel and limits on gifts. Banning rides on lobbyist's corporate jets was called "childish," and the restrictions on lobbyists using the gym "would stifle social calls." The Washington Post reports that lobbyists foresee "business as usual," with new rules only "a nuisance," and "any limits will barely put a dent in the billions of dollars spent to influence legislation."" (Don Monkerud ‘Corruption Reform?’ April 29 / 30, 2006).

The Jol also buys American Political Parties.
The jol not only buys individual politicians, it also buys political parties. Blankfort points out that, "Jewish donors not only dominate the lists of major donors to both parties, the sums they give are equal or almost equal to those donated by non-Jews. In 2002, an Israeli-American, Haim Saban, donated $12.3 million to the Democratic Party. All of the arms industry PACs together gave $14 million to both political parties the same year. It was headlines when Enron was reported to have given the Republican Party $6 million over 10 years, but the item on Saban’s donation - twice as much in only one year - rated only a few paragraphs in the NY Times. Moreover, Mother Jones 400 list of the leading individual donors for the 2000 election showed that 8 of the top 10 were Jews, and 13 of the top 20, and at least 125 of the top 250 were Jewish. At that point I stopped counting. While these donors obviously had other interests besides Israel, "There’s only one thing members [of Congress] think is important to American Jews -Israel, Sen. Bernard Metzenbaum, told the 500 delegates to the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council in 1991 (Forward, 2/22/91)." (Jeffrey Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell Plitnick’s ‘Myth and Reality: Jewish Influence on US Middle East Policy’ May 24th 2005).

Some of the American Politicians Defeated by the Jol.
If american politicians do not fully and explicitly support the jos, the jol funds the electoral campaigns of their political opponents. "In 1982, when the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the main center of Israeli lobbying in Washington, claimed credit for keeping me from election to a 12th term in the House of Representatives, I became the lobby’s prize trophy. Two years later, Sen. Charles Percy, who was also guilty of failing to toe AIPAC line, joined me on the trophy shelf. Our fate has, no doubt, discouraged others from speaking out about Israel’s misbehavior." (Paul Findley ‘Study shows undue Israeli influence on U.S. policy’ April 19, 2006); "There is no doubt about the potency of these tactics. To take but one example, in 1984 AIPAC helped defeat Senator Charles Percy from Illinois, who, according to one prominent Lobby figure, had "displayed insensitivity and even hostility to our concerns." Thomas Dine, the head of AIPAC at the time, explained what happened: "All the Jews in America, from coast to coast, gathered to oust Percy. And the American politicians - those who hold public positions now, and those who aspire - got the message." AIPAC prizes its reputation as a formidable adversary, of course, because it discourages anyone from questioning its agenda." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.18); "The lobby marshals great resources to defeat its critics and reward supporters. Senators Charles Percy and Adlai Stevenson and Representatives Paul "Pete" McCloskey, Cynthia McKinney, Earl Hilliard and I are among those defeated at the polls by candidates heavily financed by pro-Israel forces." (Paul Findley ‘United States Must Address Control of its Middle East Policies by Israeli Lobby’ March 26, 2006); "The Democrat Party leadership was overjoyed when McKinney was defeated for re-election in 2002. After she had served five terms, AIPAC decided to make an example of her for having criticized Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. That led to a stream of money flowing to her opponent, Denise Majette, from wealthy out of town Jewish donors. That, a steady drumbeat of attacks by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, plus an estimated 40,000 votes from Republicans who crossed over to vote in the Democratic primary were enough to turn the tide against her. The Democrats were, in turn, mortified two years later when, without their help, the plucky McKinney ran and was re-elected to her seat." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘A tale of two Congress members and the Capitol Police’ April 15th 2006); "Among the political or governmental figures whose careers were destroyed because they violated the powerful taboo have been US Senators William Fulbright, Adlai Stevenson III, and Charles Percy, Congressmen Paul McCloskey and Paul Findley, and Deputy Secretary of State George Ball." (Abdullah Mohammad Sindi ‘How the Jewish-Zionist Grip on American Film and Television Promotes Bias Against Arabs and Muslims’ Institute for Historical Review c1999).

American Politicians prefer to fund the Jos rather than America.
It is often mentioned that america provides a huge annual subsidy to the jos. Over the decades this has amounted to something in the region of $150 billion. "Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars)." (John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt ‘The Israel Lobby’ March 23rd 2006). But these are not subsidies. They are tribute payments that the vanquished pay to their conquerors i.e. that americans pay to their jewish masters.

American politicians prefer to fund the jos rather than improve conditions for their own people, "Over the years Congress has been at the ready to give Israel additional funding, even when money has been unavailable for essential domestic programs, as happened in 2002 when the Senate, after defeating a bill that would have provided $150 million for inner-city schools that had been impacted by 9-11, turned around and tucked an additional $200 million for Israel into the Homeland Security Bill as if Israel had been targeted that day and not New York and Washington." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict – April 2005).

Kurt nimmo points out the obvious social and economic consequences of the jewish dominated american media, the jewish dominated congress, and the jol, pressurizing american administrations into launching a succession of proxy zionist wars in the middle east. "In other words, billions will be squandered on "security" to protect Israel from its enemies before a dime is spent here in America on education, nutrition programs, repairing our crumbling infrastructure, and other things insignificant to Republicans and their multinational corporate masters. Crushing debt and the rapid devaluation of the dollar in the coming year will result in more pink slips, more Americans relegated to the ranks of the ignored poor, more compounded and intensified misery under the leadership of Republicans, who will maintain a stranglehold on Congress no matter who is selected CEO of America. For the Israel First clan commanding the highest reaches of our government, unemployment and tumbling standards of living are far less of a concern than the "threat" posed to the sacrosanct state of Israel by Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia." (Kurt Nimmo ‘Neocon pink slips and the fall of America’
100204nimmo.html October 2, 2004).

The Jol writes American Legislation for the Jos and the Middle East.
Since the first gulf war, america’s first proxy zionist war, aipac has become increasingly involved in writing legislation which is debated in congress. The days when the jol simply tried to amend american legislation to benefit the jos or tried to block parts of it not in the interests of the jos, have long since gone. Now jews write, lobby for, and sponsor, their own legislation. "Long before the Christian Zionists emerged as a political force, the lobby, directed by AIPAC, was already dictating policy to Congress and staffers from the AIPAC office were writing the critical legislation that would set US Middle East policy. The Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration and Syrian Accountability Act was one of its more recent accomplishments." (Jeffrey Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell Plitnick’s ‘Myth and Reality: Jewish Influence on US Middle East Policy’ May 24th 2005); "And they also write the legislation that Congress passes regarding the Middle East. For example, the recent Syrian Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, which was passed a couple of years ago and which lead to what we see in Lebanon and Syria today was written by AIPAC which later bragged about it. It is not a secret. The only people that pretend they don't know it is the Left. It's on AIPAC's website, it is in their publications." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in Réseau Voltaire ‘The Chomsky/Blankfort Polemic’ February 20, 2006).

B'nai b'rith/anti discrimination league (adl), another part of the jol in america, was responsible for another major piece of legislation. "On October 16, 2004 President Bush signed into law the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. It establishes a special department within the U.S. State Department to monitor global anti-Semitism, reporting annually to Congress. This is more "Hate Crimes" legislation, orchestrated by the international Jewish religious, educational, and fraternal organization, B'nai B'rith, and its Anti-Defamation League. The new "Department of Global Anti-Semitism" is designed to make critics of Israel not only into "anti-Semites" but ultimately into "domestic terrorists." The Report on Global Anti-Semitism repeatedly calls for passage, both nationally and internationally, of "hate crime" legislation. These laws, the brainchild of B'nai B'rith/ADL, also have as their ultimate goal making it a "hate crime" to criticize Jews, matters Jewish, or the state of Israel. The Report on Global Anti-Semitism reeks with B'nai B'rith/ADL logic, phraseology, and evidence of their incredible worldwide organizational and statistic-gathering capacities. It contains thirty-three pages of minute documentation of "anti-Semitic incidents" in fifty-eight countries of the world, documentation which only B'nai B'rith/ADL, with its offices in more than fifty countries, could compile or even be that vitally interested in. Without a doubt, as with hate laws, this Global Anti-Semitism Review Act is their creation." (Rev. Ted ‘The Real Motive Behind 'Dept Of Global Anti-Semitism' August 25th 2005).

The jol writes/lobbies/sponsors a huge chunk of american legislation. "University of Michigan Professor Juan Cole sounded the alarm on AIPAC with equal vigor, noting a CNN report that AIPAC, "holds 2000 meetings a year with US Senators and Congressmen, leading to the passage of an average of 100 pro-Israel pieces of legislation every year!"" (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict – April 2005).

Aipac is even allowed to sit in on congressional meetings to ensure their jewish-owned congressional puppets vote in the right way, "In every hearing in the Congress that involves Middle East issues, you have staff members of AIPAC sitting in these committee hearings. No other lobbies, foreign lobbies, have this privilege." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in Réseau Voltaire ‘The Chomsky/Blankfort Polemic’ February 20, 2006). "It is a matter of record that every bill deals with US Middle East policy originates in Congress and it is no secret that any piece of legislation that will affect Israel is either written by an AIPAC staffer or vetted by one before it even "goes to committee" at which an AIPAC representative will invariably be present." (Jeffrey Blankfort’s comments on Mitchell Plitnick’s ‘Myth and Reality: Jewish Influence on US Middle East Policy’ May 24th 2005).

At its annual conference this year aipac boasted that over the previous year it had managed to persuade the congress into passing a hundred pieces of legislation for the jos. "AIPAC helps pass more than 100 pro-Israel legislative initiatives a year through more than 2,000 meetings with members of the U.S. Congress, according to AIPAC statistics." (Denyse Tannenbaum ‘"European media is questioning Israel’s right to exist"’ March 10th 2006).

The jol wrote, lobbied, and sponsored, legislation concerning america’s foreign policies towards the palestinians. "At the moment, most major Jewish organizations endorse an Aipac-backed bill now making its way through the House of Representatives to outlaw American contacts with the P.A. once Hamas takes power, and to deny financial aid to such an entity." (Ori Nir ‘Clash Seen Over Hard Line on Islamists’ March 3, 2006).

Even more recently the jol has written, lobbied, and sponsored, legislation concerning america’s foreign policies towards iran. The ‘iran freedom act’ has successfully passed through the house of representatives. "The bill was opposed by the Bush administration, which officially holds that diplomacy is the way to go on the Iranian nukes issue. Thus it was supported by many Democrats, including the voluble Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), a co-author of the bill along with Florida Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Passage is a major goal of AIPAC, Israel's premier lobbying organization in the U.S., which for the past two years has featured the alleged Iranian threat to America as its convention theme: this year's conclave featured a multimedia exhibit supposedly dramatizing how Iran is "pursuing nuclear weapons and how it can be stopped." As Middle East expert Trita Parsi, of the John Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies, put it: "I don't see any other major groups behind this legislation that have had any impact on it."" (Justin Raimondo ‘Steppingstone to War’ April 28, 2006); "The measure also states that the names of individuals, governments and companies that have invested at least $20 million in Iran's energy sector be published in the Federal Register. It denies U.S. aid to countries that are invested in Iran's energy sector, but gives the president the authority to waive such a ban on national security grounds." (Jim Abrams ‘House Backs Tighter Iran Sanctions’ April 26th 2006).

The Jewish Power of Convocation: Americans paying Tribute to their Jewish Masters.
It is easy to assess the power of the jol in comparison to other ethnic lobby groups in america. The jewish lobby’s power of convocation is unrivalled amongst lobbying organizations. This year, despite the fact that two former aipac employees were about to go on trial for receiving american secrets, america’s politicians turned out in force to pay homage to their aipac paymasters. "AIPAC’s influence was underscored by the seeming multitude of government leaders in attendance at the conference, the biggest in its 52-year history. This year, half the Senate, a quarter of the House and many White House administration officials, including vice president Dick Cheney, participated." (Denyse Tannenbaum ‘"European media is questioning Israel’s right to exist"’ March 10th 2006). "Chomsky ignores the unmatchable power of elite convocation which the Lobby has. The AIPAC annual meeting draws all the major leaders in Congress, key members of the Cabinet, over half of all members of Congress who pledge unconditional support for Israel and even identify Israel’s interests as US interests. No other lobby can secure this degree of attendance of the political elite, this degree of abject servility, for so many years, among both major parties. None of the major lobbies like the NRA, AARP, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Chamber of Commerce can convoke such a vast array of political leaders, let alone secure their unconditional support for favorable pro-Israel legislation and Executive orders." (James Petras ‘Noam Chomsky and the Pro-Israel Lobby: Fourteen Erroneous Theses’ March 2006).

The american jewish committee, however, refuses to be politically upstaged by aipac’s display of political power. "AJC’s Centennial Meeting is now officially at capacity, with 1,500 participants already registered. Watch AJC’s Web site as we will update daily from Washington with printed materials, photos and video. President George W. Bush, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres will address in person the gala dinner on May 4 celebrating our 100th anniversary."

The Power of the Jol is not merely Economic but Social/Political/Cultural.
The jol does not get its way in congress merely by sponsoring candidates for congress in american elections and then bribing them in congress to support pro-jos legislation. The jol, in conjunction with the jewish owned media, and the jews in american politics, uses it social/political/cultural power to hype up the horrors of anti-semitism until it is now deemed to be the single worst social/political transgression. The jol is then able to use the accusation of anti-semitism as a weapon to intimidate its opponents whether they might be members of congress or the american people. "Words spoken years ago by George W. Ball, a distinguished diplomat, author and champion of human rights, have vivid, new currency: "When Israel’s interests are being considered, members of Congress act like trained poodles. They jump dutifully through hoops held by Israel’s lobby." In the same interview, Ball said, "The lobby’s most powerful instrument of intimidation is the reckless charge of anti-Semitism." Sadly, his words ring true today, verified by my own experiences and those of many of my colleagues in the U.S. legislature. Fear of the anti-Semitism stain is intensified these days, because the lobby has succeeded in redefining anti-Semitism to include any criticism of Israeli behavior, an inferred threat that prompts all major media to ignore or sanitize reports of Israeli violations." (Paul Findley ‘Study shows undue Israeli influence on U.S. policy’ April 19, 2006); "Israel’s U.S. lobby is peerless among the hundreds of lobbies in our nation’s capital for one main reason: It alone is armed with the ultimate persuader, an ample supply of indictments for anti-Semitism. The supply promotes automatic cooperation when legislation on behalf of Israel moves forward. It is the modern-day Sword of Damocles, a fearsome instrument that hangs over almost every head in our government. Until recently, it seemed to cow all of the nation’s prestigious scholars, except for a few hardy ones like professor Noam Chomsky of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Juan Cole of the University of Michigan." (Paul Findley ‘Study shows undue Israeli influence on U.S. policy’ April 19, 2006).

AIPAC is an Agent for a Foreign Government.
Successive american administrations pretend that aipac is just a lobbying organization. In reality, however, it is an agent for a foreign government representing the jos in congress, "The bottom line is that AIPAC, which is a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on the U.S. Congress." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.18). As raimondo has argued, "If AIPAC isn't an agent of Israel, then the Communist Party was never an agent of the Soviet Union and the German-American Bund was never an agent of Nazi Germany." (Justin Raimondo ‘Smear and Fear’ April 10, 2006).

Aipac claims it cannot be an agent of a foreign government because it has no foreign funding and yet it is being funded by many jews with dual citizenship, "With some 200 employees and 100,000 wealthy benefactors, AIPAC claims it doesn`t have to register as a foreign agent because all its funding comes from U.S. sources. There are also over 500,000 Israelis with dual citizenship, a number of them AIPAC contributors." (Arnaud De Borchgrave ‘Touching the third rail’
_1157963.php/Touching_the_third_rail Apr 24, 2006).

Jewish Legislation Undermines American Interests.
The jol has frequently written legislation which is passed by jewish-owned members of congress to boost the political or military interests of the jos even though it undermines america’s economic interests. "as a result of pressure that pro-Israeli groups were able to exert on Congress, a set of antiboycott laws was passed that severely limit [US] business in the Arab world. As a result, American companies and the United States economy suffer an estimated $1 billion loss per year." (Professor Cheryl Rubenberg quoted in Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict – April 2005).

In 1995, under pressure from the jewish owned media, jewish academia and think tanks, and the jol, president clinton banned american energy companies from investing in iran to exploit the country’s vast fossil fuel reserves thereby sacrificing the interests of america’s gigantic multinational oil corporations to the interests of the jos. This self sacrifice has recently been reinforced by the ‘iran freedom support act’. "The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States to deny Iran the ability to support acts of international terrorism and to fund the development and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them by limiting the development of Iran's ability to explore for, extract, refine, or transport by pipeline petroleum resources of Iran."" (Gordon Prather ‘Mad Cow’ April 29, 2006).

It’s just the Jewish Plutocrats who are a Problem.
According to one blogger the jewish usurpation of the american political system is caused solely by jewish plutocrats. "The problem, and it is an immense one, isn’t with American Jews, whose sole problem is that they remain quiet while others purport to speak for them (with some praise-worthy exceptions), but with a tiny group of American Jewish plutocrats. And I mean tiny. We’re talking less than a hundred big political donors, probably less than twenty-five. They have large amounts of money to give, mostly come from the American media and entertainment industries (and thus control their own spin), and most importantly, donate their money based on only one issue, requiring the recipients of their donations to take a pure Likudnik approach on the Middle East." (xymphora ‘Proof of a conspiracy’ March 27, 2006). Politically, it would be a lot easier to challenge jewish power if this was the case. Unfortunately, it is not.

Firstly, the jol in america has a pronounced hierarchical structure. National jewish organizations have roots in every jewish community and branches in most regions/states. This enables national jewish leaders to mobilize jews at the grassroots/regional/state/national levels whenever necessary. "Many Jewish critics of Israeli policy frequently say and write that the organized Jewish establishment, represented by the major Jewish organizations and the hundreds of community relations councils and federations across the country, does not speak for them and it is always important to distinguish between what is Jewish and what is Zionist. They would have a stronger argument if there was actually a movement among Jews that was not just critical of Israeli policies, but one that would publicly take on and expose the activities of the leading Jewish organizations rather than attempting to dismiss their power as, with few exceptions, is presently the case. Two examples of the latter are the rapidly growing and well-funded Jewish Voice for Peace and Rabbi Michael Lerner's Tikkun community." (Jeff Blankfort ‘US Jewish organizations unite against Hamas’ March 4th 2006).

What this means is that, to one degree or another, huge numbers of american jews are involved in the jol whether this might be in letter writing/email campaigns, fundraising, election campaigning, attending demonstrations, or bloc-voting in elections according to directions given by the jol. For example, one of many, "10 May 1976 was a memorable day for me. I gave a talk at Harvard University's Science Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Due to massive threats, the event and I were under police protection. The disruptions, shouts, and boos were immense. The rowdies, Jewish-Zionist students, yelled, "She won't speak here!" (Felicia Langer Preface to the German edition of Beyond Chutzpah’ March 27 2006). Blankfort provides evidence of the proportion of american jews participating in the jol. "There is a coalition of the 12 leading Jewish women's organizations, representing a million Jewish women, calling itself "One Voice for Israel," that formed in 2002 in response to the bad publicity Israel received over the destruction of Jenin. Each year, in what it calls "Take-5," it gets it members to call the White House at the same time and then on another day, to do the same to Congress. Each time they have done it, they have tied up the Capitol switchboard. It is one of the ways in which they show their power. This coming February 22nd, they will be phoning President Bush to express their opinion on what he should do about Iran, and its development of nuclear energy or weapons. This a kind of operation that goes on all the time, but it is not even an issue or even known about by the anti-war movement, or by the left, and Professor Chomsky has written to me and others that he is not interested in the issue." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in Réseau Voltaire ‘The Chomsky/Blankfort Polemic’
/signs_TheChomskyBlankfortPolemic.php February 20, 2006). Such facts are avoided by the jewish dominated left, the neolefties.

Secondly, america’s jewish leaders go out of their way to monitor the attitudes of american jews and then design policies to boost their racial affinity for jews in the jos and the jos itself i.e. to transform them into jews in america. "This week, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) celebrates its centennial. Ahead of the event, it published a study it commissioned on the subject of American Jews between the ages of 18 to 39, who constitute almost one-third of the Jewish population of the U.S. One finding: The Holocaust is a very important part of the identity of young Jews; Israel far less so. This is an important finding, but not a surprising one, having been observed in many similar studies. Here is some of what can be gleaned about the fifth Jew: This individual is to be found in almost every sample. In a previous AJC survey, 18 percent of respondents said that they felt "somewhat distant" emotionally from Israel. Another five percent said that they felt "very distant." To the statement that concern for Israel was a major part of their Judaism, 19 percent said that they did not agree. Out of the 60 percent of respondents who had never visited Israel, one-fifth gave reasons that are disturbing: Eighteen percent simply had no interest, and two percent said that they felt "hostile" toward Israel. (The rest did not visit for more technical reasons, like cost, personal safety, etc). The fifth Jew is revealed in many ways. For example, when American Jews are asked whether the goal of the Arabs is "the destruction of Israel," 78 percent say yes, and 18 percent say no, while five percent are unsure. Luntz proposed a solution based on education from a young age. He noted that if a child leaves high school without a clear sense of a relationship to Israel, this is very hard to correct. A few months ago, Haaretz asked David Singer, who was in charge of the AJC study, to go over the tables and try to locate the fifth Jew. Singer believes that identification with Israel is, all in all, "very impressive," but he rose to the challenge. Here are some findings: The fifth Jew is almost always Reform or unaffiliated with any movement. Only two percent of Orthodox respondents do not feel a deep connection with Israel, and only 12 percent of Conservative Jews do not. On the other hand, 31 percent of Reform respondents and 35 percent of the unaffiliated did not feel a deep connection to Israel. (Israeli alienation to Reform Judaism, incidentally, certainly does not contribute to strengthening ties with this movement)." (Shmuel Rosner ‘The mystery of the fifth Jew’ May 1 2006). As michael neumann has concluded, "Israel has committed war crimes. It has implicated Jews generally in these crimes, and Jews generally have hastened to implicate themselves." (Michael Neumann ‘What is Antisemitism?’ June 4, 2002).

Thirdly, is it really feasible to believe that american jews who usually have relatives, friends, colleagues, living in the jos, do not develop a considerable loyalty to the jos arising out of these personal connections? "Far more revealing and just as damning would be the story of how ordinary Jews either applaud the worst Israeli crimes, or deplore them and support Israel anyway, or denounce them with rhetoric that somehow never gets around to advocating anything that would stop them. It is a story that just lies there, ready and waiting to be told." (Michael Neumann ‘Blame Yourself: American Power and Jewish Power’ January 7, 2003). What is worse is that given american jews’ close affinity for, and identification with, jews in palestine it is more than likely that the racist views of the latter are rubbing off on the former. "Sixty-eight percent of Israeli Jews would refuse to live in the same apartment building as an Israeli Arab, according to the results of an annual poll released Wednesday by the Center for the Struggle Against Racism. The poll further revealed that 63 percent of Jewish Israelis agree with the statement, "Arabs are a security and demographic threat to the state." Thirty-one percent of Jews did not agree. Agreement with the statement was strongest among Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox Jews and low-income earners. Forty percent of Jews believe "the state needs to support the emigration of Arab citizens" and just 52 percent don't agree with the statement. Thirty-four percent also agreed with the statement that "Arab culture is inferior to Israeli culture." Fifty-seven percent did not agree with the statement." (Eli Ashkenazi and Jack Khoury ‘Zionism as racism: 68% of Israeli Jews would refuse to live in same building as an Arab’
En.jhtml?itemNo=697458 March 22, 2006). Most american jews have become as arabophobic as their jewish counterparts in the jos.

Fourthly, another argument put forward to suggest american jews do not support the jol is that they vote overwhelmingly for the democratic party rather than the republicans. The implication of this proposition is that, on the whole, they are more humane, liberal, and supportive of civil/human rights than ordinary americans who tend to be more conservative. But this implication is misleading. American jews might be more concerned about civil/human rights in america than ordinary americans but this does not mean they are concerned about civil/human rights in palestine. For many decades, the democratic party has been a much greater supporter of the racist hate state in palestine than the republican party. The fact that american jews vote for democrats rather than republicans does not indicate they are concerned about civil/human rights in the jos but that they racist for voting for a pro-jos party. Of course american jews are going to vote for the democratic party when its vice presidential candidate in america’s 2000 election was the fanatical zionist extremist joe libermann.

Fifthly, it is also argued that whilst the jewish-owned media, jewish academics/think tanks, the jol, and the jews in the bush administration might have been at the forefront of the campaign to launch a proxy zionist invasion of iraq, american jews opposed the war. "Approximately 70 percent of Jews in the United States oppose the war in Iraq, compared to 28 percent who support the war" ( Alan dershowitz used this argument to attack a view expressed by norman finkelstein. "Finkelstein's claim that "there is credible evidence that the Iraq war was a Jewish war" is easily falsifiable. As even Walt and Mearsheimer acknowledge in their paper, Jews were "less supportive of the Iraq war than the population at large." How could this be a "Jewish war" if so many Jews were opposed to it? Moreover, many of those opposed to the war in Iraq - like me - are supporters of Israel and, according to Mearsheimer and Walt, members of "the Lobby."" (Alan Dershowitz ‘The Lobby, Jews, and Anti-Semites’
MHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA-- April 12th 2006). And yet, in the 2004 presidential elections american jews had the chance to vote for an anti-war presidential candidate. They voted overwhelmingly for pro-war candidates such as kerry and bush.

According to current opinion polls a majority of americans are opposed to america’s continued occupation of iraq. This seems to imply they are sick of the war, the loss of american lives, and the squandering of american resources – especially when american rule in iraq is far more barbaric than that of saddam hussein. And yet, according to other opinion polls, a majority of americans are also in favour of an even bigger, more expensive, and more dangerous war against iran! Indeed, as if to confirm the misleading nature of opinion polls, the democratic party leadership is more fervently in favour of a war against iran than the bush administration. The democrats wouldn’t position themselves to be more pro-war than george bush if they didn’t believe this is where the popular vote, including the jewish american vote, is to be found. The democrats’ willingness to be more militaristic than bush allows american jews to remain faithful to their traditional political party of choice.

There is another argument which helps to explain american jews’ attitude towards the proxy zionist invasion of iraq. It is certainly true that the most prominent supporters of the invasion were members of america’s jewish elite. "Within the United States, the main driving force behind the Iraq war was a small band of neoconservatives, many with close ties to Israel’s Likud Party." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.31). The jol was worried this perception might become commonplace and stir up animosities towards american jews. It feared that if the proxy zionist invasion went wrong then american jews would be blamed for the deaths and injuries of tens of thousands of american soldiers and the vast squandering of america’s resources. "The Jewish Weekly of New York reports that Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, is concerned that the report will promote the claim that "Jewish and pro-Israel groups played a major role in pressing for the Iraq war in 2003." "We have always been concerned that those opposed to the war have tried to portray it as a Jewish war, an Israeli war," Foxman said. "Our concern has been that if the war went badly, and there was more public disillusionment, these kinds of conspiracy theories could resurface and grow." That, he said, is "exactly what’s happening now" as the Harvard report races around the world on antiwar and anti-Israel Web sites." (Tom Regan ‘Israeli media condemn, discuss report on US-Israel ties’ March 24, 2006).

As a consequence, prior to the invasion of iraq, the jol sent a message to the jos to dampen public displays of support for the invasion. "As journalist Gideon Levy observed at the time, "Israel is the only country in the West whose leaders support the war unreservedly and where no alternative opinion is voiced." In fact, Israelis were so gung-ho for war that their allies in America told them to damp down their hawkish rhetoric, lest it look like the war was for Israel." (John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’ rwp_06_011_walt.pdf March 2006 p.31). "In the debate over the Iraq war – such as it was, prior to the first shots being fired – the Lobby kept its head down, and the Israeli government was careful not to make too many public pronouncements, although naturally everyone knew they wanted the invasion to be launched with dispatch." (Justin Raimondo ‘War With Iran? It would mean the end of our Republic’ May 3, 2006). It is more than likely that the jol also put out the word to jews in america to avoid the same liability which may be why opinion polls concluded that a majority of jews in america were opposed to the invasion of iraq.

As the jewish-owned media, jewish academics/think tanks, the jewish owned congress, the jewish owned political parties, the jol, the jewish neocons in the bush administration, and the jos, exert increasing pressure on the bush administration to launch an illegal and pre-emptive war against iran, some members of the jol are once again starting to emphasize the need for the jol to cover its tracks. "President Bush’s repeated focus on Israel as a reason to confront Iran could spark public fury against the Jewish state and Jews if U.S. military action is accompanied by skyrocketing gas prices or terrorism at home, some say. President Bush is risking a backlash that could injure the Jewish community - and his own cause - by repeatedly citing Israel as his top rationale for possible U.S. military conflict with Iran, Jewish leaders and Middle East analysts warned this week. Bush’s repeated, sometimes exclusive, focus on Israel could spark public fury against the Jewish state and Jews if U.S. military action is accompanied by skyrocketing gas prices, terrorism at home or fallen GI’s who might be seen as dying for Israel, some said. Others feared it could fracture the shaky international coalition Bush is striving to assemble to oppose Iran’s nuclear program by framing the threat as primarily to Israel rather than international stability. Ambassador Edward Walker, a former U.S. envoy to Israel who now heads the Middle East Institute in Washington, termed Bush’s Israel focus "a terrible idea." Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice president of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said "The linkage to Israel is not a good idea, because then the Iranians say, you see, it’s the Zionists driving this." (James D. Besser And Larry Cohler-Esses ‘Iran-Israel Linkage By Bush Seen As Threat’
artid=12350 April 21st 2006); "Jewish community leaders have urged the White House to refrain from publicly pledging to defend Israel against possible Iranian hostilities, senior Jewish activists told the Forward. Messages were passed to the White House through several channels, Jewish activists said. And it seems to have worked: Speaking before the annual conference of the American Jewish Committee in Washington last week - his most recent address before a Jewish audience - President Bush talked about America's commitment to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and about his administration's commitment to Israeli security, but he did not link the two, as he has several times in recent months. "We are basically telling the president: We appreciate it, we welcome it. But, hey, because there is this debate on Iraq, where people are trying to put the blame on us, maybe you shouldn't say it that often or that loud," said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. "Within the Jewish community there is a real sense of 'thank you but no thank you.'" Communal leaders say that although they deeply appreciate the president's repeated promises to come to Israel's defense, public declarations to that effect do more harm than good. Such statements, they say, create an impression that the United States is considering a military option against Iran for the sake of Israel - and could lead to American Jews being blamed for any negative consequences of an American strike against Iran." (Ori Nir ‘Groups to Bush: Drop Iran-Israel Linkage’ May 12, 2006).

The jol’s tactic of provoking america into wars for the benefit of the jos, but camouflaging its role to prevent any adverse reaction from the american public, goes back to america’s first proxy zionist war. "Chomsky’s comment, notwithstanding, AIPAC, "was widely credited with having played a key role" in rounding up the necessary votes in the Senate to give Pres. Bush his majority. "[B]ecause of the extreme sensitivity to the issue, AIPAC was anxious to camouflage its role to avoid providing evidence for the accusation... that the Persian Gulf War was fought at the behest of the Jews to protect Israel." To disguise their role, the Washington Jewish Week’s Larry Cohler reported that AIPAC had prominent Jewish senators vote against the war while lobbying non-Jewish senators in states with small Jewish populations to support it. That Saddam Hussein was not removed at the time brought strong criticism from the primarily Jewish neocons and on a lower register from AIPAC. During the Clinton presidency they would press their demand for regime change in Iraq and under Bush Jr., they made sure that task would be carried out." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict – April 2005).

Sixthly, as will be explored later, the right wing of american politics is dominated by jewish neoconservatives. But this phenomenon is replicated across the political spectrum. There are jewish neoliberals, jewish neolefties, jewish neogreenies, and even jewish neopeaceniks. Support for the jos runs across america’s political spectrum which suggests it is also endemic amongst america’s jewish population. As will be argued later, there is a strong reason for believing that jewish neo-lefties, people who should be opposed to the racist nature of the jos, hold views that are virtually identical to neoconservatives and thus ought to be regarded as being part of the jewish establishment ruling america.

Seventhly, huge numbers of american jews are employed in jewish owned/managed industries. Even if they deplore jewish racism or the racism of the jos they realize their livelihood depends on jewish bosses who are more than likely to be zionist. They are thus lured into public displays of support the jos whether they like it or not. The overwhelming majority of the jewish americans who work for jewish americans will tend to support the jos and jewish racism.

There is one final piece of evidence of popular support for the jol/jos amongst american jews. The jol spends millions of dollars every year sending tens of thousands of high flying american jews to the jos to awaken their identification with, and loyalty to, the jos. Such trips are also intended to encourage them to see the jos as a western, liberal, multi-cultural, secular democracy just like america rather than the terroristic, racist apartheid state it is. It provides scholarships for students at american universities. It organizes students at american universities to defend the jos.

Jewish society in america is hierarchical. At the very top are jewish billionaires, the jewish plutocrats. Below them are the jewish upper-middle class which consists of jewish academics/policy makers, media owners, the jol, and american jews in congress, american political parties, and in the bush administration. America’s ruling jewish elite consists of both groups. Below them are the ordinary members of america’s jewish community.

The jews in america who were primarily responsible for manipulating america into the invasion of iraq, the same ones who are currently manipulating america into a war against iran, are undoubtedly members of america’s ruling jewish elite. However, most jews in america accept the policies of their jewish leaders and a significant proportion even participate in campaigns organized by the jol to promote such policies. There was no civil war within the jewish community in america over support for america’s proxy zionist invasion of iraq. The same is also true as regards the pending proxy zionist war against iran.

There are many commentators who go out of their way to try and avoid being charged with anti-semitism, which might well bring about the end of their careers, by arguing it is necessary to make a distinction between jews and zionists. Zionists often insist upon this distinction because it offers them the chance to denounce those who use the word ‘jew’ as racists and thus dismiss their criticisms of jewish racism. The real distinction as far as america is concerned is between jewish americans who, although they have a jewish genetic/cultural heritage, believe they are first and foremost american citizens and, on the other hand, jews who live in america who are loyal primarily to the jos. (A similar distinction also applies in other countries). In terms of this distinction there are very few jewish americans. Most are jews living in america. To be politically effective in america they try to present themselves as jewish americans but in terms of the priority they give to the jos they are jews in america. One major piece of evidence that points in this direction without being conclusive is that, "There are also over 500,000 Israelis with dual citizenship, a number of them AIPAC contributors." (Arnaud De Borchgrave ‘Touching the third rail’
_1157963.php/Touching_the_third_rail Apr 24, 2006). In other words, one-sixth of american jews are dual citizens. How easy it must be for them to believe they can give wholhearted support for the jol and the jos without infringing upon their loyalty to america. In one way or another, the jol has connections with the majority of jews in america who are encouraged to support the jos and its racist policies.


Post a Comment

<< Home