Poll shows some fear loyalties of a Jewish leader

With that said, Lieberman managed to squeeze in a few statements about the need for peace, and Palestinian reforms, and a Palestinian crackdown on terrorism, and Palestinian willingness to negotiation and a new Palestinian leadership, etc. To be fair, Lieberman did briefly address the humanitarian needs of the Palestinians. But of course, it was not Israel who received the blame for the growing humanitarian catastrophe, but the “terrorists.”

But once again, the trip was a “complete success” if one considers official American policy in the Middle East; scolding and blaming the Palestinians, pretending that there is no such thing as a deadly Israeli occupation, illegal settlements or even occupied territories (For now, according to Donald Rumsfeld, they are known as “so-called occupied territories).

I followed the news of Lieberman’s visit to the Middle East, although I expected nothing out of the ordinary, no surprises, until he visited Saudi Arabia, another leg on his tour, one mainly aimed at building war alliances against Iraq.

In an interview with Saudi Arabia’s English daily, Arab News, on Dec 26, Lieberman mentioned something rather interesting. Despite my previous knowledge of the man’s undaunted commitment to Israel and to its interests, I couldn’t help but pause with surprise at a seemingly fleeting comment he made while comparing, or refusing to compare, Iraq to Israel. “But Israel is not a danger to its people and its neighbors in a way that Iraq under (Iraqi President) Saddam (Hussein) is. Obviously, from an American point of view, we feel over the years that the UN has been slanted against Israel and doesn’t give Israel a fair deal,” Lieberman told Arab News.

Considering the pro-Israeli rhetoric we often hear coming from US officials, especially those running for an office of some sort, I wondered to myself: what is so different about Lieberman’s statement from those uttered by other top US officials?

For one, Lieberman’s statement, although short, managed to squeeze in an unprecedented number of inaccuracies. The skill needed to pull off such a declaration is indeed impressive. But more, Lieberman’s statement appeared to subscribe more to the official Israeli viewpoint, and that of pro-Israeli lobby groups in the US, than that of the US administration itself.

Needless to say, Lieberman’s statement is false. Although, it is President George Bush who is often ridiculed by late night comedians in the US for not knowing a great deal about history or world politics, Lieberman’s statement, if genuine, suggests that the possible Presidential candidate is much less informed. For one, while Iraq did indeed invade Kuwait and fought a bitter war with its neighbor Iran, Israel has shown more hostilities to its neighbors than any other Middle Eastern country. Israel has attacked Egypt on several occasions, unleashed a deadly war on Lebanon, systemically attacked Palestinians, invaded parts of other Arab states, struck as far as Tunisia and Iraq, and is currently occupying the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, the Sheba farms, and the Golan Heights. Unlike Iraq’s invasions, Israel’s are long lived.

Following the Iraqi army invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the United Nations (thanks to the speedy efforts of the United States) passed a tough, straight-forward Security Council resolution demanding that Iraq pull out, or face war. Even before diplomacy received a fair chance, the US piled up untold armies and “bombed Iraq to the stone age.” Iraq is yet to escape the curse of that stone age, as promised by former President George Bush Senior, as the deadly sanctions not only crippled the country’s economy, but wasted an entire generation, who died as a result of food shortages, lack of medicine or were poisoned by depleted Uranium. Even more, the US has just managed to push through yet another tough UN resolution, threatening Iraq with “serious consequences” if it fails to comply with the weapon inspectors, no matter how humiliating their demands may be. Moreover, the US is already “screaming foul" before Iraq even got the chance to defy the inspectors.

But Lieberman, a man who will soon promote himself to the American public as a man of integrity and truth, is alleging that the UN is ‘being tough on Israel.’ If the honorable Senator is referring to the number of UN Security Council or General Assembly resolutions passed since the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948, either condemning an atrocity committed against Arabs and Palestinians, or demanding Israeli compliance with international law, I have to admit, the UN has spent a great deal of time and has wasted a lot of ink highlighting these matters.

I cannot help but wonder about the source of protest voiced by Lieberman, considering that Israel, who violated more UN resolutions than any other country in the world (68 unimplemented resolutions to be exact), is the country the least punished for failing to adhere to international law. While slapping strict sanctions on some countries, or waging wars on others, the United States, a country that vows to stand for freedom, justice and democracy, has soured its own ties in the Middle East and has severely harmed its own interests for the sake of Israel’s transgressions, defending its massacres, often blaming the victims and blocking the deployment of unarmed UN observers to provide the least protection possible for occupied Palestinians.

Was Senator Lieberman really honest when he made such claims? Is Sharon, the man who openly gloats over the deaths of Palestinians, and the Israeli government that is openly entertaining the expulsion of the Palestinian people no threat to its neighbors?

But again, why should I even raise such an issue as if I indeed held any expectations of the pro-Israeli Senator? On May 2, 2002, as the bodies of scores of Palestinians killed by the Israeli army in the West Bank were decomposing in the streets of Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah and elsewhere, Lieberman rushed to the Senate, co-authoring a resolution (S. Res. 247). The urgent resolution didn’t call on Israel to allow the Red Cross to collect the Palestinian corpses or to allow water supplies to reach Jenin or Nablus. Instead, it equated the US fight against terrorism with Israel’s ruthless attacks on heavily populated Palestinian centers. The resolution passed quickly, yet Lieberman’s fight for Israel is yet to fade. He continues to blame the victim, to fight for “security” for the occupier, he wants to attack Iraq and he blames the UN for being too harsh on Israel.

True, Lieberman’s actions are no surprise. They are very much in tune with his political philosophy. After all, it was no coincidence that he was the top recipient of pro-Israeli PAC contributions during the 2000 election cycle. I only wish, however, that Lieberman didn’t tell journalists in Israel that his visit was aimed at fostering peace and reviving the stalled peace process between Israel and the Palestinian leadership. Lieberman defended Israel, blamed Palestinians and called for war on Iraq. Such an agenda can hardly be argued to be that of a peacemaker, although one can hardly deny that according to today’s standards of American foreign policy, the Senator’s Middle East tour was a “great success.” Indeed.

Ramzy Baroud is the editor of PalestineChronicle.com and author of “Searching Jenin: Eyewitness Accounts of the Israeli Invasion 2002” (Cune Press)

Before it was cropped out of the picture, you could see Sharon and Lieberman jacking each other off.

Sen. Lieberman's Zionist Connections -
A Conflict Of Interest?

"No special foreign-based interest, like Zionism, should ever be placed above the interest of our Republic. Lieberman must be forced to come clean with the Senate about all his Zionist connections. Senate Rule 37 requires it and so does the future security of our nation."


On May 2, 2002, the Senate of the U.S. passed a notorious pro-Israel Resolution (S. Res. 247), with respect to the Mid-East controversy. Its co author was Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT). In pushing the measure, he barked, "You are either with us or the terrorists" (Washington Times, May 3, 2002). Who is this "us" he is talking about?

The measure falsely equated the U.S.'s post-9/11 fight against terrorism with Israel's brutal occupation of the Palestinian people in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. It also condoned Israel's vicious military attacks on Jenin, Ramallah and Bethlehem.

Black's Law Dictionary (5th Ed.) defines a conflict of interest as a "Term used in connection with public officials and their relationship to matters of private interest or gain to them."

The Senate Code of Official Conduct, "Conflict of Interest," Rule 37, Par. 2, states:

"No Member...shall engage in any outside business...which is inconsistent or in conflict with the conscientious performance of official duties."

The legislative history of this provision says, "It should be read to prohibit any outside activities which could represent a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest (See, Senate Ethics Manual, Select Committee on Ethics, United States Senate, p. 66).

The Congressional Directory, (107th Congress, 2001-2002), list the official biography for Lieberman. It is silent about his membership or association with any Zionist organizations or his adherence to a Zionist political ideology.

Lawmaking is built on trust. Lieberman has an obligation to his fellow senators to disclose fully his agenda to the members of the Senate. Almost all elected political entities abide by these ethical rules, which are centered on revealing any conflict of interest, appearance of a conflict of interest, prejudice, or bias.

Like all members of the Senate, Lieberman is required to file an annual "Financial Disclosure Statement" with the Secretary of the Senate. In his May 15, 2001 submittal, he again failed to mention any official membership in any Zionist organizations. Although, he does disclose his significant connection, as an advisory board member, to three Israeli-based non-profit organizations: "The Peres Center for Peace" at Tel Aviv; "Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies" at Bar-Ilan University, and the "Natural History Museum," located in Jerusalem.

Lieberman's membership in these Zionist affiliated groups does raise, on its face, an appearance of a conflict of interest on his part with respect to an issue, like S. Res. 247, since it advances the cause of Zionism and/or Zionist Israel. If he is in fact a Zionist, then the conflict between his public duties and his private interests becomes even more pronounced.

The Anti-Defamation League, a hot air organ for Israel, defines Zionism as, "The guiding nationalist movement of the majority of Jews around the world, who believe in, support and identify with the State of Israel." Does Lieberman subscribe, as a matter of personal political philosophy, to the ADL's definition of Zionism? If so, shouldn't he put that fact on the public record, whether he is a card carrying Zionist or not?

Actually, Zionism is an alien based political movement, global in scope, racially restrictive, with its spiritual headquarters in Tel Aviv, and not Washington, D.C. It aspires to a land grabbing "Greater Israel."

On another disturbing front, Israel Radio (Kol Yisrael), reported on Oct. 3, 2001, that Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, had boasted at a Cabinet meeting, "I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it."

In light of the above, I feel the Senate had a right to know any relevant information about Lieberman's Zionist political ideology, memberships, and associations in order to weigh the value of endorsing or opposing his pro Israel resolution. He should have, at a minimum, disclosed to the Senate any and all of his Zionist connections, and then, if appropriate, recused himself on the matter of S. Res. 247.

Our country is at high risk for terrorist attacks, partly, because of its flawed policy of giving unconditional support to a hawkish Israel, presently led by a man universally-loathed for his brutality. This policy, unfortunately, also includes unfairly demonizing and punishing Muslims and Arabs leaders in general; for example, the economic sanctions against Iraq, which have caused the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi children, fall into the latter category (CASI, 01/02).

During the 2000 election, Lieberman received $86,000 from Pro-Israel PAC contributors towards his Senate re-election campaign, (See, Janet McMahon, WRMEA, Oct/Nov. 2000 issue). What effect did that financial contribution, and others like it, have on his voting record and on his hidden political agenda?

Let me make this clear: Lieberman's religion is no one's business but his own. His politics, however, and any foreign links to it, are the public's business. I am pro-America. I am also an anti-Zionist and against Sharon's colonial policies.

S. Res. 247, which passed the Senate by a 94-2 vote, will only increase the hostility towards America in the Arab and Muslim world. It also, more importantly, will send a green light to the blood stained Sharonists to continue their killing spree against innocent Palestinians. Thankfully, Senators Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) and Ernest F. Hollings (D S.C.) had the courage to oppose the Resolution.

No special foreign-based interest, like Zionism, should ever be placed above the interest of our Republic. Lieberman must be forced to come clean with the Senate about all his Zionist connections. Senate Rule 37 requires it and so does the future security of our nation.

William Hughes is a Baltimore attorney and the author of "Andrew Jackson vs. New World Order" (Authors Choice Press), which is available online.

Knock Out Lieberman and
McCain To Save the Republic

by Jeffrey Steinberg

Faced with the specter of the worst financial and real-economic collapse in centuries, and the imminent danger of the outbreak of war on several Eurasian fronts, the very survival of the planet depends on effective policy leadership on the part of the President of the United States. Beyond the well-known weaknesses of President George W. Bush and his immediate circle of Presidential advisors, the greatest obstacle to that kind of effective leadership from the institution of the U.S. Presidency, is the vicious ongoing insurgency against the Bush Presidency, led by Senators Joseph Lieberman (D-Ct.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).

The McCain-Lieberman cabal must be crushed now, to liberate the Democratic Party from the grips of the so-called "New Democrats" insanity, and create the needed bipartisan climate to allow the Bush Presidency to make the Constitutionally-approved, but revolutionary policy changes, upon which the fate of humanity hangs. Leading circles in Europe, Asia, Ibero-America and other parts of the world can contribute to the needed policy shift, but no salvation is possible, unless the United States takes the proper leadership role among the community of sovereign nations.

Only the United States has the republican Constitutional system of government that permits the proper executive leadership during times of crisis. All other nations on the planet, to varying degrees, are still trapped in different forms of oligarchical rule—at best.

The treacherous McCain-Lieberman partnership has been a major fact of life in American politics since no later than the July 4th weekend of 2001, when the two men gathered at McCain's ranch in Arizona. They met to launch their "Bull Moose" campaign to blackmail the Bush Administration into fully adopting the Anglo-American agenda of "perpetual war," otherwise known as the Samuel P. Huntington, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Henry A. Kissinger dogma of the "Clash of Civilizations."

As reported in the Feb. 4, 2002 New Yorker magazine, McCain is demanding that President Bush invade Iraq, give Israeli butcher Ariel Sharon full backing to crush the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people, and carry out other "Clash of Civilizations" atrocities—or face certain re-election defeat in the 2004 Presidential election, through a McCain third-party "Bull Moose" candidacy.

In 1992, it was H. Ross Perot's third party campaign that helped defeat George Bush, Sr. in his re-election campaign. Both the 1992 Perot effort and the threatened 2004 McCain run are modeled on the 1912 Presidential election, when former President Theodore Roosevelt left the GOP to run as the British Fabian Society-sponsored "Bull Moose Party" candidate, throwing the election to the dyed-in-the-sheets Confederate, Democrat Woodrow Wilson. The result, back then, was two Anglo-American provoked world wars and a global depression. The results, this time, if the McCain-Lieberman insurrection is not crushed, will be worse.

Mobsters, Carlists and Jabotinskyites

That ongoing investigation has already turned up sufficient evidence to convince any honest Democrat that Joe Lieberman is the last man on Earth who should be allowed anywhere near the party leadership, not to mention nominated as its Presidential candidate.

The basic facts in the McCain-Lieberman file are these:

1. Since the day he entered public life, Joe Lieberman has been affiliated with, and sponsored by, some of the most notorious rightwing fascist circles on the planet.

Lieberman, himself, freely acknowledges that he owes his 1988 election to the U.S. Senate, to William F. Buckley, Jr., the avowed Carlist, apologist for Sen. Joe McCarthy, and publisher of the New Right National Review. On the surface, the Buckley-Lieberman 1988 "marriage of convenience" centered on Buckley's near-obsession with defeating then-incumbent Republican Senator Lowell Weicher, by throwing the election to Lieberman. But Buckley acknowledges his ties to Lieberman date back to the latter's tenure as editor of the Yale University Daily News, a post that Buckley had earlier held.

Buckley devoted the pages of National Review to a running attack on Weicher throughout the 1988 electoral season. Buckley launched a family political action committee, BuckPac, which was dedicated exclusively to pouring money into Lieberman's campaign coffers.

Sources familiar with the 1988 Senate campaign reported that, at a critical point, during the final months of the campaign, Lieberman was running out of money. Buckley again came to the rescue, by steering Lieberman to the Cuban exile community in Miami. Lieberman traveled to Miami to meet with Jorge Mas Canosa, the founder and head, at the time, of the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF), a collection of old Batista-era Cuban gangsters and politicos, who formed the core of the Brigade 2506 Bay of Pigs invasion force in 1961. Mas Canosa, who came to the U.S. in 1960, worked with the CIA on several assassination plots against Fidel Castro, after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. He was also closely affiliated with ex-CIA agent and Buckley intimate, E. Howard Hunt, who was later one of Nixon's Watergate burglars.

CANF was founded in the early days of the Reagan Administration, with the active involvement of Reagan's first National Security Advisor, Richard Allen. From the outset, CANF was an integral part of what came to be known as the "Iran-Contra secret-parallel-government," of Oliver North, Felix Rodriguez, et al.

Contra covert operator and former CIA officer Felix Rodriguez described Mas Canosa as "my longtime friend," in his autobiography, Shadow Warrior. The two men were in Brigade 2506 together—along with Luis Posada and Orlando Bosch, who were responsible for blowing up an Air Cubana passenger plane in 1976, killing all 73 people onboard. Posada went on, under Rodriguez's supervision, to head up the Nicaraguan Contra supply operations from Ilopango Air Base in El Salvador, a facility identified by the Drug Enforcement Agency as a major trans-shipment point for Colombian cocaine destined for the United States—cocaine which financed the Contras.

Bosch, for his part, was jailed in Venezuela for the Air Cubana bombing. Mas Canosa, until his death several years ago, staged an annual "Orlando Bosch Day" in Miami, and launched a campaign to have Bosch freed from jail in Venezuela, winning his release in 1988, the very year of the Mas Canosa-Lieberman liason.

From their first meeting, Lieberman became Mas Canosa's number one friend in the Democratic Party.

"We established a very close relationship with Sen. Lieberman, who understood the plight of the Cuban people," CANF spokesman Fernando Rojas told the Miami Herald, in a Feb. 1, 2000 interview. "Jorge Mas Canosa and he became very close friends over the years." The Free Cuba PAC, the election arm of the tax exempt CANF, has been giving money to Lieberman steadily since the crucial campaign financial bailout of 1988. Cuba PAC was launched by Mas Canosa, with the active assistance of Bernard Barnett, a bigshot in the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the official Israel lobby in America.

A Sept. 14, 2000 article in The New Republic, by Ryan Lizza, labeled Lieberman "Gore's Man in Little Havana," and updated the Lieberman love affair with the rightwing Cubans. "Once in the Senate," Lizza wrote, "Lieberman continued to work on behalf of the anti-Castro Cubans. He championed the 1992 Cuban Democracy Act, which tightened the U.S. embargo by barring foreign subsidiaries of American companies from trading with Cuba. In 1996 he supported the Helms-Burton Act, which penalizes foreign firms that do business with Cuba. He has publicly chastised Nelson Mandela for befriending Castro and Vaclav Havel for allowing the Czech Embassy to house Cuban diplomats in Washington, D.C.. He has consistently backed funding for Radio Marti and TV Marti, the much-criticized broadcasting operations run by Cuban exiles. He was even a member of Mas Canosa's 'Blue Ribbon Commission for the Economic Reconstruction of Cuba,' which hatched the dubious plan of sailing into Havana when Castro finally falls." That Blue Ribbon Commission is chaired by another rightwing free market Republican, Malcolm Forbes, Jr.

The Lansky Links
2. While John McCain's links to organized crime are notorious, his Connecticut partner in crime has also relied on the political and financial patronage of some of the leading associates of the late National Crime Syndicate boss-of-bosses, Meyer Lansky.

McCain literally married into the mob, when he dumped his first wife, shortly after returning home from years in a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp, and linked up with the 25-year old Cindy Hensley. McCain's new father-in-law, Jim Hensley, made his $200 million fortune as the principal beer distributor in Arizona for the Southwest's leading organized crime figure, Kemper Marley. Marley was given the Prohibition era bootlegging franchise by Sam Bronfman, the leading Canadian supplier to Lansky's National Crime Syndicate, and the father of Edgar Bronfman Sr., one of the founders of the Mega Group of Canadian and American Zionist billionaires, who are among both McCain and Lieberman's biggest boosters today.

The brothers Hensley, along with several scores of other Arizona gangsters—all part of the Kemper Marley apparatus—were convicted of tax evasion and other crimes in the immediate post-war period. Marley's Valley National Bank of Phoenix, was a major source of funding for the Lansky syndicate's move into Las Vegas. Later, real estate speculator Charles Keating, one of the notorious "Milken Monsters" who were bankrolled by Drexel Burnham's leading junk bond hoaxter Michael Milken, would provide a steady stream of "loans" to John McCain, earning him the distinct honor of being one of the "Keating Five," crooked Congressmen on Keating's dole.

The Bronfman gang, which launched the careers of Marley and Hensley, boasts a family motto: "From rags, to rackets, to riches, to respectability."

Lieberman Backer Michael Steinhardt
The same motto could apply, equally, to another of Joe Lieberman's leading mob-tainted patrons, Michael Steinhardt. Steinhardt ran one of the filthiest hedge funds on Wall Street during the 1980s and 1990s, Steinhardt Management. In conjunction with another large Wall Street hedge fund, Caxton Corp., Michael Steinhardt ran a thoroughly illegal conspiracy to corner the market on an April 1991 two-year U.S. Treasury bond issuance. Steinhardt and his chief partner-in-crime, Caxton founder Bruce Kovner, made an instant killing, netting between $200-600 million (by Steinhardt's own account in his recent autobiography, No Bull). But several years later, the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission landed on Steinhardt, Kovner and Salomon Brothers, which ran a parallel, and apparently coordinated cornering operation on a later Treasury auction.

On Dec. 16, 1994, the SEC and DOJ issued a joint press release, announcing that "Two of the country's leading investment fund managers, Steinhardt Management Company, Inc. and Caxton Corporation, have agreed to pay $76 million to settle antitrust and securities charges," which had been filed in Federal Court in the Southern District of New York.

The government complaint had noted that "The conspiracy had a dangerous probability of damaging the Treasury of the United States.... Above all, this represented an attempt to disrupt and render ineffective a part of the market of the sovereign debt of the United States."

Remarkably—or not so remarkably—Steinhardt avoided jail, and did not even face felony prosecution for the scam. Perhaps Steinhardt's intimate ties to both Lieberman and then-Vice President Al Gore had something to do with Steinhardt's good fortune. At the time of the Treasury market conspiracy, Steinhardt was the Chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council, the "Third Way" caucus in the Democratic Party that he had bankrolled from the mid-1980s, when it was launched out of Pamela Harriman's "Democrats for the 80s" group. When Steinhardt quit as DLC chairman in 1995, over his personal hatred for President Bill Clinton, the vacancy was filled by Steinhardt's favorit pol, Joe Lieberman.

In his autobiography, Steinhardt candidly admitted that he was a Barry Goldwater Republican, and a Buckleyite National Review booster. Steinhardt, Lieberman and Gore would go on to play a pivotal role in the attempted coup d'état of Sept. 1998, when they tried to convince President Clinton to resign over the Monica Lewinsky affair.

Steinhardt is now the chairman of Martin Peretz's The New Republic, and a director, along with the Hollinger Corporation's Conrad Black, Bruce Kovner, and Alliance Capital boss Roger Hertog, of the newly launched New York Sun. This is an unabashed Mega propaganda sheet, boosting the McCain-Lieberman assault on the Presidency.

I've never voted Republican in my life, but I would to keep Zionist Lieberman out of the office of the presidency! It's hard to believe that I actually did vote for him and Gore in the last election. It just goes to show there is a direct correlation between the Palestine-Israel conflict and "anti-semitism" (which in my case is really anti-racist Israel-ism)!

Vote Republican - we support Israel and oppose affrimative action.

Vote Republican - we support murdering adults (as long as they're Arab, and not American zygotes, ) and we support our white supremacist Trent Lott!

BTW, I saw a flier up at my school today, caught my attention because it had that republican elephant on it (which I recalled as being related to Saddam's Elite Republican Guard at the rally on Saturday) and the flier said "Am I the only Republican at this school??" It had tabs at the bottom with phone numbers but no one had taken any.

Sad.

Are you in high school or elementary school? That would explain a great deal.

Anti-semitism is on the rise due to the blatant racist ideology of Zionism and its Zionazi followers. Lieberman will NEVER win the presidency, no Zionist ever will! Americans are finally beginning to recognize Zionism for what it is: racism! Americans are finally understanding the fact that Israel has been conducting a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the indigenous Palestinian people, and funding their unjust war with our tax dollars. Sorry! The game is up!!

There will be one anti-Zionist candidate in the next election - David Duke. Hahahahahahahahahahahah!

Leiberman and Duke are just two peas in a pod! Both are racists, albeit with different motives.

Americans I expect better from you! This is really disappointing.

I expect more from America too! NO racists in the White House, not Leiberman, not Duke! Not Bush! Impeach Bush now!

You people disgust me, you are an embarrassment to your nation and everything it stands for!
I expect this sort of thing from Europe but America is a melting pot, racial harmony - you constantly criticise yourself for your racism (you don't see Europeans or Asians or Arabs doing that!) but you are the least racist country anywhere in the world. Don't backslide!! Don't copy the Europeans they are not so cultured! They stumbled across N and S America that's their only great acheivement. Come on America! You're better than this!

What words don't you understand? Zionism is blatant racism? Check out http://www.cactus48.com, http://www.divest-from-israel-campaign.org, http://www.jewsnotzionists.org, and http://www.boycottisraeligoods.org.

Do you understand that Americans don't want to fund a "racist, anti-democratic, apartheid regime", the words that an Israeli Refusenik soldier uses to describe Israel?????????

What part of APARTHEID don't you understand?

Better than rising antisemitism, which is what this article is about and the comments show.

Only a Zionist is that blind to his own prejudice, bigotry and racism against the Palestinian people!

Nothing to do with Zionism or Palestinians. "cactus48.com" eh? - I figured.

You are symptomise what I'm saying! To object to rising antisemitism makes me a zionist?? I thought zionist was a code word for 'Jew' now it's a codeword for anyone who makes a comment you don't like! Come on, you're an American!!

Get lost, Kiwi.

Zionist is NOT a codeword for Jew - except within the small and eugenically motivated minds of zionist cult members themselves.

Try doing a search for JEWS NOT ZIONISTS", then read the minutes of the Manchester Congress on Zionism to see how "real zionism" was redefined after the death of Hertzl to focus on stealing Palestine.

ZIONISM is a eugenically motivated political ideology.


Who is a Jew?

A person who adopts a political framework?

A matriachal descendant of those who speak Hebrew?

An adherent to Judaism?

A Peruvian convert to Judaism?