Tracking the AIPAC Vultures

JERUSALEM – Former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was indicted on corruption charges Sunday, becoming the first Israeli premier to go on trial and highlighting a series of cases that have shaken the public's faith in the political system.

The charges likely end the three-decade career of a man who just three years ago seemed poised to lead his nation to a bold withdrawal from the West Bank and an aggressive push for peace with the Palestinians.

Olmert, who was forced to step down because of the case, was accused of illegally accepting funds from an American backer, double-billing for official trips abroad and pocketing the difference, concealing funds from a government watchdog and cronyism. All of the alleged crimes took place before Olmert was elected prime minister in 2006.

Olmert, 63, issued a statement professing his innocence. "Olmert is convinced that in court he will be able to prove his innocence once and for all," said a spokesman, Amir Dan.

The formal charges in the indictment include fraud and breach of trust. The Justice Ministry did not say when the trial would begin or what penalties Olmert could face. But Moshe Negbi, a leading legal commentator, said the fraud charge alone could carry a prison term of up to five years....

Olmert, a lawyer by training, has repeatedly been linked to corruption scandals throughout a three-decade career that included a lengthy stint as Jerusalem mayor and a series of senior Cabinet posts. But until Sunday, he had never been charged. He is the first prime minister, sitting or retired, to be charged with a crime.

The indictment follows a string of high-profile trials that have soured an already cynical public toward the nation's leadership.

Olmert's former finance minister was sentenced to five years for embezzlement in June, and another member of his Cabinet was sentenced to four years for taking bribes. Israel's former ceremonial president, Moshe Katsav, is being tried on rape and sexual harassment charges, and a longtime Olmert aide has been charged with illegal wiretapping, fraud and breach of trust.

The most damaging allegations against Olmert accused him of accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars from an American businessman during trips abroad.

The businessman, Moshe Talansky, testified last year that he delivered the cash in envelopes and painted Olmert as a greedy politician who enjoyed first-class travel, fancy hotels and expensive cigars. The testimony helped turn public opinion against Olmert and played a large part in forcing him from office.

The indictment said Olmert used his connections to help Talansky's business, but did not charge Olmert with accepting bribes.

In another case, Olmert was charged with double-billing nonprofit organizations and the government for trips he took abroad and then using the extra money to pay for private trips for his family.

Olmert became prime minister in January 2006 after then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffered a debilitating stroke. He subsequently led their newly formed Kadima Party to victory in a parliamentary election....

Olmert's spokesman said his priority is to focus on his legal battle. "Once this is over and he has proved he is innocent, then he will consider what to do next. All options are open," he said.

The U.S. government is abandoning espionage-law charges against two former lobbyists for a pro-Israel advocacy group, federal officials announced this morning.

Prosecutors said they will ask a judge to dismiss the case against Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman because a series of court decisions had made it unlikely they would win convictions. The two are former lobbyists for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, an influential advocacy group.

Rosen and Weissman were charged in 2005 with conspiring to obtain classified information and pass it to journalists and the Israeli government. They were the first non-government civilians charged under the 1917 espionage statute with verbally receiving and transmitting national defense information. Some lawyers and First Amendment advocates have said the case would criminalize the type of information exchange that is common among journalists, lobbyists and think-tank analysts.

Dana J. Boente, the acting U.S. Attorney in Alexandria, said this morning that prosecutors were abandoning the case because of "the diminished likelihood the government will prevail at trial under the additional intent requirements imposed by the court and the inevitable disclosure of classified information that would occur at any trial.'' Prosecutors have filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, which must be approved by a federal judge.

Catbird Comment: In other words, it’s alright for espionage agents to pass along classified information relating to national security to foreign governments, journalists and lobbyists, but we just don’t want that classified information to fall into the hands of the general public?

Baruch Weiss, a lawyer for Weissman, said that the two former lobbyists "are innocent, and it's been clear to us from outset that we would ultimately prevail.'' He said defense lawyers "were able to put together an array of experts to demonstrate to the government that the information" the men were accused of passing along was "innocuous.''

The decision is a stunning vindication for the former lobbyists, who were accused of providing information about topics that included the activities of al-Qaeda and possible attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. Rosen, of Silver Spring, was AIPAC's director of foreign policy issues and was instrumental in making the committee a formidable political force. Weissman, of Bethesda, was a senior analyst. AIPAC fired them in 2005.

The trial had been set for June 2 in U.S. District Court in Alexandria. But recent pre-trial rulings had made the case difficult for the government. Those decisions included an appeals court ruling that allowed the defense to use classified information at trial. A lower-court judge also said prosecutors must show that the two men knew that the information they allegedly disclosed would harm the United States -- a high burden for prosecutors.

Chicken-hawk Comment: Why don’t we just put these two spies in a secret CIA prison camp and waterboard ‘em until they confess? No need for lawyers or judges! No need for a trial! No need to divulge secret classified information to U.S. citizens! No need to expose our duly-elected politicians, highly-paid lobbyists, corporate heads and attorneys to the possibility of being prosecuted and held accountable for corruption, espionage and terrorism! No need to hurt our national economy any worse than it is by hampering the lucrative selling of state secrets and military arms to foreign governments and terrorist organizations! No need to put the fear of prosecution or punishment into these political patrons, pompous judges and pseudo patriots! God forbid ... it’s the American Way!

Boente cited "the additional intent requirements imposed by the court" in his statement this morning. "When this indictment was brought," he said, "the government believed it could prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt based on the statute. However, as the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit noted, the District Court potentially imposed an additional burden on the prosecution not mandated by statute."

The AIPAC case has always been controversial, and it came to public attention again with the recent disclosure that a prominent House lawmaker, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif), had been recorded in 2006 on FBI wiretaps allegedly offering to use her influence on behalf of Rosen and Weissman.

Harman strongly denied the allegations and accused the government of an "abuse of power" in wiretapping her conversations. Law enforcement sources have said the review of the case was triggered by the recent court rulings and was unrelated to the revelations about Harman.

If the high-profile trial had gone forward, it was expected to feature testimony from a number of senior Bush administration officials, including former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, former national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, and former high-level Defense Department officials Paul D. Wolfowitz and Douglas J. Feith.

Despite strong evidence of the misuse of U.S. weapons against civilians in Gaza, Amnesty International recently revealed that the United States sent a massive new shipment of arms to Israel. The Wehr Elbe, a ship controlled by the U.S. Military Sealift Command, docked and unloaded several thousand tons of arms on March 22 at the Israeli port of Ashdod. Ask State Department officials why the United States would deliver these arms to Israel.

On March 2, former American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) foreign policy chief Steve Rosen filed a civil lawsuit in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Rosen accuses his former employer, directors, and outside public relations firm of libel and slander. Rosen seeks damages of $5 million from AIPAC and punitive damages of $500,000 each from former board members and the public relations firm Rational PR, L.C. An analysis of Rosen's civil complaint reveals how his "Samson's gambit" of threatening to pull down the walls of justice over the heads of the Israel lobby may prevail in getting criminal espionage charges dropped within the next two months.

In August 2005, Steve Rosen, fellow AIPAC employee Keith Weissman, and the Pentagon's Col. Lawrence Franklin were indicted under the Espionage Act for allegedly trafficking classified U.S. national defense information in the interest of provoking a stronger U.S. posture toward Israel's arch nemesis, Iran. Franklin has since pled guilty and received a prison sentence and fine. Franklin has not reported to prison, since he is cooperating with U.S. prosecutors and ready to testify when the criminal trial of Rosen and Weissman — repeatedly delayed by sophisticated defense team legal maneuvers — finally commences on May 27.

In his civil lawsuit against AIPAC Rosen maintains both his immunity from the Espionage Act and right to obtain tightly held government information for effective lobbying and public relations on behalf of Israel:

"To be effective, organizations engaged in advocacy in the field of foreign policy need to have earlier and more detailed information about policy developments inside the government and diplomatic issues with other countries than is normally available to or needed by the wider public. Agencies of the government sometimes choose to provide such additional information about policy and diplomatic issues to these outside interest groups in order to win support for what they are doing among important domestic constituencies and to send messages to select target audiences."

One surprising inside glimpse of AIPAC information flow in Rosen's complaint reveals how special relationships cultivated with U.S. government officials yielded periodic harvests of tightly held information. This bounty was then internally circulated and funneled to outside constituencies at the discretion of AIPAC's mirror bureaucracy of self-appointed declassification agents:

"To control the flow of such information, government agencies in the field of foreign policy have designated individuals with the authority to determine and differentiate which information disclosures would be harmful to the United States, and which disclosures would benefit the United States through the work of their agencies and would not be harmful to the United States. To maintain liaison with the authorized agency officials who at times are willing to provide such information, organizations like AIPAC have designated officials of their own who have the requisite expertise and relationships to deal with government foreign policy agencies. At AIPAC, Steve Rosen was one of the principal officials who, along with Executive Director Howard Kohr and a few other individuals, were expected to maintain relationships with such agencies, receive such information, and share it with AIPAC board of directors and its senior Staff for possible further distribution.

AIPAC, and those defendants who were AIPAC officials and/or members of its board of directors, knew that Mr. Rosen and others at AIPAC were receiving such information and expected that they would share it with them."

More damning to AIPAC, Rosen states unequivocally that other top AIPAC officials not only knew what he was doing, but also received classified information for which they both praised and financially rewarded Rosen and others handling and channeling classified information:

"Mr. Rosen was highly successful in his job, and was regularly praised and generously rewarded by AIPAC's executive director, its president, and its board of directors, including by those named as defendants herein who are and/or who were in those positions, for obtaining and sharing such information as described in paragraph no. 18 above. Indeed at the time it was shared with them, AIPAC's executive director, its president, and its board of directors including those named as defendants herein who are and/or were in those positions, were well aware of the nature of the information obtained by Mr. Rosen as described in paragraph no. 18 above.

Being so aware, they would often share that same information with others outside of AIPAC, particularly valuing Mr. Rosen for his ability to provide them with such information. In fact, AIPAC's executive director, its president, and its board of directors, including by those named as defendants herein who are and/or who were in those positions as well as others of AIPAC's staff, also obtained and shared with each other, and with others outside of AIPAC, such information as described in paragraph no. 18 above, and did so on a regular basis quite apart from the information obtained and shared with them by Mr. Rosen."

Curiously, Steve Rosen is not the only former AIPAC staffer suddenly surfacing to confront AIPAC. Another even intimates that AIPAC is a hotbed for activities of questionable legality. Former AIPAC chief lobbyist Douglas Bloomfield characterized AIPAC not as classified information bazaar, but rather as a covert foreign agent for Israeli governments bent on thwarting U.S. brokered peace deals. While simultaneously forecasting the imminent demise of the government's criminal prosecution against Weissman and Rosen, Bloomfield points to insider forces slowly arraying highly damaging information against AIPAC:

"In cutting loose the pair, AIPAC insisted it had no idea what they were doing. Not so, say insiders, former colleagues, sources close to the defense, and others familiar with the organization.

"One of the topics AIPAC won't want discussed, say these sources, is how closely it coordinated with Benjamin Netanyahu in the 1990s, when he led the Israeli Likud opposition and later when he was prime minister, to impede the Oslo peace process being pressed by President Bill Clinton and Israeli Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres.

"That could not only validate AIPAC's critics, who accuse it of being a branch of the Likud, but also lead to an investigation of violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

"What they don't want out is that even though they publicly sounded like they were supporting the Oslo process, they were working all the time to undermine it,' said a well-informed source."

Why the not-so-subtle public threats? Both Bloomfield and Rosen clearly feel that AIPAC violated the ethic of reciprocity when it cut loose Rosen and Weissman and halted funding for their legal defense. AIPAC fired the two to avoid indictment of the entire corporation in the aftermath of two harrowing FBI raids. Corporate criminal indictments probably would have led to AIPAC's immediate implosion.

The melodramatic sense of betrayal that permeates the defamation complaint hinges on the flawed deal lead prosecutor Paul McNulty offered to AIPAC: "We could make real progress and get AIPAC out from under all of us." AIPAC subsequently put Rosen and Weissman on leave and later fired them, after, in Rosen's view, "they had approved and rewarded the very behavior which they now condemned." AIPAC also began deploying its considerable influence in the news media to carefully place stories characterizing Rosen's work and comportment as unacceptable and uncharacteristic, seemingly oblivious to the idea that the same tactic could also be turned against it. These particular slights may be the straws that broke the camel's back.

Rosen's angst is palpable as he quotes AIPAC executive director Howard Kohr's harsh treatment:

"[M]r. Kohr subtly tried to make this case that Messrs. Rosen's [another AIPAC employee] behavior was out of the ordinary for employees of the organization that considers itself one of the most powerful in Washington. At the same time, Mr. Kohr said he has taken steps to ensure that no lines in the future will be crossed by his lobbyists and analysts. 'I will take steps necessary to ensure that every employee of AIPAC, now and in the future, conducts themselves in a manner of which you can be proud, using policies and procedures that provide transparency, accountability and maintain our effectiveness' he said."

Rosen cites a Jewish Telegraphic Agency report to make a surprisingly frank assertion that Kohr himself not only received classified information from Rosen, but also knew it was from U.S. intelligence sources:

"Further, on June 17, 2005, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported a different formulation to defame Steve Rosen: 'No current employee knew that classified information was obtained from Larry Franklin or was involved in dissemination of such information,' spokesperson Patrick Dorton said. In fact, Mr. Kohr had been told in writing that information obtained from Mr. Franklin originated from 'intelligence' sources, and Mr. Rosen knew no more about the sources or classification than Mr. Kohr."

The seemingly defeatist maneuvers of this circular firing squad partially mask Rosen's real strategy. Millions of dollars would do him little good behind bars or preserve AIPAC's reputation if he prevails. What Rosen needs most is for AIPAC to pull him 'out from under all this' as soon as possible. Otherwise AIPAC and the rest of the lobby will face the full wrath of Rosen's accumulated arsenal: access to damning AIPAC internal information and a multitude of allies who follow the credo that "divided we fall." Rosen, having recently proven his considerable powers even under indictment by derailing the nomination of Charles Freeman at the National Intelligence Council, now clearly expects AIPAC to muster the entirety of its own considerable resources to achieve concrete results before May 27.

For bystanders, the key remaining question is whether Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama have the mettle to withstand the most intense maneuvers from all directions urging them to fold the Espionage Act trial before it begins.

Not since former attorney general Robert F. Kennedy ordered AIPAC's parent organization to register as a foreign agent has the Israel lobby been as existentially threatened by rule of law in America. The elite mainstream press, from the Washington Post to the Wall Street Journal, has already pitched in to help by urging the DOJ to quickly march away from the prosecution. Pundits who before Barack Obama entered office saw the case as a threat to "freedom of the press" are now repositioning the trial as a vestigial legacy of the Bush administration's pervasive secrecy.

But the passage of time has not played in AIPAC's or the defendants' favor. In the economic aftermath of a disastrous war empowered by carefully channeled disinformation, many Americans are questioning how rule of law might temper selective leaks from lobbyists obliviously liquidating U.S. tax dollars and soldiers in foreign follies.

The Espionage Act should function like the financial industry's Fair Disclosure regulation, which protects small investors from being victimized by larger investors trading on material inside information. If AIPAC obtains closely held information, shouldn't all Americans instantly be privy?

Also, that AIPAC is a de facto foreign agent covertly injecting Israeli government mandates into Congress and the executive branch isn't quite the explosive secret AIPAC insiders presume it to be. In 2008, the DOJ grudgingly declassified all internal files detailing its earlier three-year fight to register AIPAC's parent organization as a foreign agent.

Any American who checks the Foreign Agents Registration Act against AIPAC's routine activities knows it is the agent of a foreign power. Middle East historians have no need of Douglas Bloomfield's verification that the Israel lobby thwarts presidential peace initiatives — the transcripts of Sen. J.W. Fulbright's investigation of the Israel lobby in 1963 reveal precisely how such concerted actions thwarted the Johnson plan for Middle East peace.

The issue is whether the Department of Justice will at long last stand up to AIPAC's obvious violations of important laws that protect the interests of average Americans. Both John F. and Robert F. Kennedy struggled mightily and failed. If Obama and Holder similarly fail, it is not for lack of evidence now being delivered on silver platters from AIPAC operatives.

For — ironically — everything Steven Rosen alleges in his lawsuit and Bloomfield in his bluff is verifiably true. As an individual actor, Rosen truly is innocent of AIPAC's protective ruse that he and Weissman alone were in any way unique at AIPAC. Yet another prior incident — also now public — substantiates this. AIPAC never adequately explained how its possession of a 300-page classified report in 1984 outlining the secret American negotiating position for the fatally flawed U.S.-Israel Free Trade Area could possibly be legal. The U.S. government, even in 2009, still won't declassify that report for an overdue public audit.

Steve Rosen's late legal gambit cannot obscure the obvious. The real issue isn't whether AIPAC failed its lobbyists by jettisoning them in a panic; it is whether the Department of Justice failed Americans when it didn't indict the entire American Israel Public Affairs Committee. If Obama and Holder resist urgent pressures from the Israel lobby, Steve Rosen's lawsuit may actually accomplish what prosecuting attorney McNulty could not — making all top AIPAC operatives finally stand trial together.

CHANGE HAS NOT COME TO AMERICA, NOT WITH YET ANOTHER JEW INFESTED PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION AT THE HELM OF THE USA.

It had to be pretty difficult to put together a more Judaized presidential administration than even Bill Clinton, but Obama has managed to do so. But then again, many of Obama’s Cabinet and personnel picks are little more than a repeat of the Clinton Administration. As most astute observers and researchers now well know, the two major political parties don’t matter much these days because the Jewish plutocrats, Jewish political machine, Jewish mass-media complex, and Jewish legal complex has both of them almost entirely locked down.

I estimate that at least 1/5-1/3 of Obama’s Cabinet plus important personnel posts are of ethnic Jewish ancestry, and that is probably a fairly low estimate. If one counts all of the aides, assistants, assistants of assistants, deputies, backups, right-hand (wo)men, lawyers, advisers, and other high to mid-level bureaucrats the number of ethnic Jews in the Obama Administration might actually be closer to 40-50% as in some recent administrations, as these aides and assistants are the individuals who often wield the real power because they do so much of the real work behind the scenes, far away from the glaring cameras of the (disproportionately Jewish) presscorp. Other ostensibly non-Jewish Cabinet and personnel members no doubt married a Jew (which is common amongst the American political class: Washington DC-Northern Virginia-Maryland is an extremely Jewish region) or have partial Jewish ancestry which no one is publicly aware of.

Keep in mind that Jews as an ethnic group in America are only about 2-3% of the overall population, yet still they are over-represented by a massively disproportionate margin in the Obama Administration, especially in the most important posts dealing with economic issues (which is noted). And as every U.S. citizen now realizes, economic issues are particularly critical at this juncture in American history – in short, the country is on the brink of insolvency. Knowing this, how good does it make you feel that the group in charge of America’s national finance, and thus the country’s overall economic destiny, are a group of people who are very well known to be (both historically and in modern times) completely and utterly manipulative, deceptive, and corrupt when dealing in financial matters?...

UNITED NATIONS – The United States late Saturday blocked approval of a U.N. Security Council statement calling for an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel and expressing concern at the escalation of violence between Israel and Hamas.

U.S. deputy ambassador Alejandro Wolff said the United States saw no prospect of Hamas abiding by last week's council call for an immediate end to the violence. Therefore, he said, a new statement at this time "would not be adhered to and would have no underpinning for success, would not do credit to the council."

France's U.N. Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert, the current council president, announced that there was no agreement among members on a statement. But he said there were "strong convergences" among the 15 members to express serious concern about the deteriorating situation in Gaza and the need for "an immediate, permanent and fully respected cease-fire."

Arab nations demanded that the council adopt a statement calling for an immediate cease-fire following Israel's launch of a ground offensive in Gaza earlier Saturday, a view echoed by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

Libya's U.N. Ambassador Giadalla Ettalhi, the only Arab member of the council, said the United States objected to "any outcome" during the closed council discussions on the proposed statement.

He said efforts were made to compromise and agree on a weaker press statement but there was no consensus.

As Israeli warplanes continue to bomb Gaza, attention is turning to the role of American-made weapons in the deadly attacks, which have now killed over 400 and wounded 2000, including many civilians.

CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr believes that Israel's use of American weapons against civilians "is becoming very problematic." She notes, for example, that the 2000 pound bomb which killed a Hamas leader and members of his family on Thursday "is part of the billions of dollars that Israel has spent buying weapons from the United States."

Israel's use of American-made weapons in attacking Gaza has been a matter of offical concern for years. In 2002, the State Department announced it was monitoring possible violations of the Arms Export Control Act after the Israeli military used an American-made jet to drop a laser-guided bomb that killed a Hamas leader and 14 civilians in a crowded Gaza City neighborhood.

Just last September, Congress approved a $77 million dollar deal to sell a thousand Boeing GBU-39 bunker-buster "smart bombs" to Israel. The Jerusalem Post reported on Monday that these small, GPS-guided missiles have now been used on underground tunnels and launchers in Gaza.

"Precision guided bombs are only precision in that they hit the target they are aimed at," Starr explained. "We're getting these civilian casualties. These weapons are supposed to be used for a country's self-defense. Israel, obviously, believes this is its self-defense against Hamas, but you see these civilian casualties. That's not why the US sells weapons abroad -- for the killing of innocent civilians."

"The world community only is going to stand for this for so long," continued Starr. "It's this reason that you're seeing people look for a political settlement." She added that Israel now intends to launch a ground campaign in Gaza to "get rid of Hamas once and for all," but -- as the US has learned in Iraq and Afghanistan -- it is impossible to wipe out an insurgency by military force along without first getting the civilian population on your side.

As part of its ongoing brutal military occupation and collective punishment of the Palestinian people, Israel invaded the al-Bureij refugee camp in the Gaza Strip in the early morning hours of Friday, Dec. 6. The avowed goal of the invasion, dubbed “Real Games,” was to arrest or kill Aiman Shasniyeh and destroy his family’s home—a brazen violation of international law and a callous act of inhumanity.

Shasniyeh was wanted by Israel for daring to fight for the right of his people to live in freedom. In March, he allegedly took part in an attack on an Israeli tank in which three soldiers were killed. Even if Shasniyeh was responsible for this act, however, it in no way justifies Israel’s disproportionate and indiscriminate response.

According to eyewitnesses, between 40 and 50 Israeli tanks, with aerial support from U.S.-provided AH-64 Apache helicopter gunships, entered the hapless refugee camp and surrounded the Shasniyeh home. There, an unexpectedly pitched battle ensued with local Hamas members who were armed with rifles, grenades and anti-tank shells. Israeli tanks and helicopters shelled and fired missiles on a densely populated area of the refugee camp, destroying the Shasniyeh home and others along with it.

Hassan Safi, who witnessed the attack, told the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot: “I ran, together with my son, to the destroyed house and extricated two people. The helicopters fired on us and it was almost impossible to evacuate the injured.”

Although many of the details of this lopsided battle remain murky, some facts are clear. When an army fires tank shells and missiles into an over-crowded refugee camp, it is likely to inflict a heavy toll on the people who reside there. Ten Palestinians died in this invasion, six of whom were apparently Hamas fighters, and four of whom were apparently civilians, including two U.N. employees. Twenty Palestinians were injured as well, including five from the Mansour family, whose home was struck directly by a tank shell.

What is also clear is that Israel again used U.S. weapons to injure and kill Palestinian civilians and destroy their homes. Unfortunately, many Americans are completely unaware that their tax dollars are being spent to fund these brutalities. If they were aware, perhaps Israel would not have the leeway it needs to commit these war crimes.

Many Americans also are unaware that the use of U.S. weapons in this manner violates a morally compelling law called the U.S. Arms Export Control Act. According to this act, countries can use U.S. weapons for the very limited purposes of “legitimate self-defense” or “internal security”—and certainly can never employ them against civilian populations. Only a sophist could argue that an Israeli offensive attack on Palestinian civilians in a refugee camp could constitute self-defense or fall under the rubric of internal security.

No country has carte blanche to violate the law, whether it is domestic or international. If Israel’s use of American weapons violates our laws, then it would logically follow that the U.S. should enforce the Arms Export Control Act and refuse to provide Israel with more weapons until it stops using them to attack civilians, thereby implicating Americans in the commission of war crimes. Instead of stanching the flow of death machines to the Israeli military, however, the Bush administration reportedly is favorably considering an Israeli request for an additional $4 billion of military assistance!

This ludicrous and tragic U.S. policy was highlighted by the State Department just hours after Israel’s murderous attack on al-Bureij. In his daily press briefing, a reporter asked spokesperson Richard Boucher if Israel would suffer any consequences for using U.S. weapons in this manner. Here is Boucher’s escape artist response, of which Harry Houdini would have been proud: “We have made our policy quite clear. We have made quite clear the violence has to stop. There’s no way to get to peace, there’s no way to get a Palestinian state, if the violence and terrorism continue. And we’ve repeatedly called on the Palestinians to do everything they can to stop the violence, and yet, despite this, we’ve seen bombings and terrorism continue.”

When the State Department has the audacity to blame the victim and calls on Palestinians to halt Israel’s violence, it is a sure-fire sign of a morally bankrupt policy. Just because the State Department cannot conceive of any consequences of Israel’s use of U.S. weapons against Palestinian refugees, however, does not mean they do not exist. How many more Twin Towers must fall before we realize that there are indeed consequences of the action (or inaction) that our democratically elected government takes in our name?

As Martin Luther King, Jr. once wrote: “We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.”

How much longer will it take for Americans of good conscience to hold our elected representatives accountable to our laws and ensure that Israel does not kill any more Palestinians in our name?

Josh Ruebner is co-founder of Jews for Peace in Palestine and Israel (JPPI) and a former analyst in Middle East Affairs at the Congressional Research Service (CRS).

J. Ezra Merkin has been ordered to not destroy any financial records related to the dealings of Bernard J. Madoff. Merkin is the chairman of GMAC who runs several hedge funds which invested with Madoff. The dealings came to light when one of Merkin’s clients, New York University, learned that Merkin had lost $24 million of their capital.

The suit claims that Merkin and his hedge fund, Ariel Fund Ltd. and its’ management group Gabriel Capital Corporation, failed on their responsibility of cash management by turning the money over to Madoff for investment. The Ariel Fund Ltd has already announced plans to liquidate their holdings in light of the recent scandal. The suit also mentions Fortis, who partnered with Merkin in the creation of Ariel Fund Ltd. All told, NYU had invested a staggering $94 million into the fund.

As the losses come in from the Madoff scam, the elite of New York City Jewish philanthropy are among the victims, as well as helping to perpetrate the fraud. Merkin is the grandson of Hermann Merkin who was known as a titan of Jewish philanthropy. He donated gave millions to help build Yeshiva University, and the Fifth Avenue Synagogue.

The human expense of the Madoff scheme is mounting. Charitable foundations and lives have been destroyed. Merkin clearly used his influential position and the capital of Yeshiva University to invest $1.8 billion into Bernard Madoff’s firm.

That was little consolation, however, to Yeshiva University, said to have lost $110 million of its endowment; or to Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun, the Ramaz School of Manhattan and SAR Academy in Riverdale, said to have lost substantial sums; or to several family foundations belonging to Merkin’s fellow trustees at Yeshiva University, including Robert M. Beren and Ludwig Bravmann.

Another Ascot casualty was a charitable trust founded by real-estate magnate Mortimer Zuckerman, the chairman of real-estate firm Boston Properties and owner of the New York Daily News and U.S. News & World Report. That lost $30 million.

“Without making disclosures in the quarterly reports to investors, and in the face of an extraordinary number of ‘red flags,’ Merkin, for years, simply turned over a substantial portion of Ariel’s funds to Madoff,” said NYU in their complaint.

“Mr. Merkin remains committed to obtaining for shareholders the best results possible in the wake of the terrible fraud committed by Bernard Madoff,” Andrew Levander, attorney for J. Ezra Merkin said.

It’s safe to say the the amount of damage to Jewish philanthropic organizations is significant....

NEW YORK – As Bernard Madoff returned home to his Manhattan apartment, it was impossible to overlook the disorder he has brought on with his alleged $50 billion investment fraud.

Cameras awaited him as he walked out of the courthouse toward his black SUV. Minutes later, a smirking Madoff was swarmed by more cameras as he entered his apartment building, with the scrum at one point turning into a shoving match between Madoff and a journalist.

He was then fitted with an electronic-monitoring bracelet and placed under house detention in his $7 million apartment.

Madoff's chaotic commute came on a day when the fallout over the scandal spread through the nation's capital, with the Securities and Exchange Commission taking more heat and Congress jumping into the fray.

The chairman of the House capital markets subcommittee, Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., announced an inquiry that will begin early next month into what may be the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time and how the government failed to detect it. The SEC is also looking into the relationship between Madoff's niece and a former SEC attorney who reviewed Madoff's business.

Madoff made his appearance in the courthouse to shore up conditions of his bail package. The judge had required him to find two additional co-signers to vouch for Madoff, but he was apparently unable to find anyone as the cloud of scandal swirls around him.

Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein responded by approving a modification to the bail package. As a result, Madoff had to show up to sign over his Upper East Side apartment and his homes in Palm Beach and the Hamptons.

Madoff, who has already surrendered his passport, now will be required to be at his apartment from 7 p.m to 9 a.m. His wife was required to surrender her passport as well. His lawyer, Ira Lee Sorkin, said the electronic monitoring was in place by Wednesday evening.

In Washington, SEC Chairman Christopher Cox again found himself on the defensive after days of withering criticism that his agency did not do enough to root out the fraud.

"We have thus far no evidence of any wrongdoing by any SEC personnel," Cox told reporters at SEC headquarters. "We need to go about this in a thorough, professional way."

SEC Inspector General David Kotz is looking into the agency's failure to uncover the alleged fraud in Madoff's operation. One area Kotz said he will examine is the relationship between a former SEC attorney, Eric Swanson, and Madoff's niece, Shana, who are now married.

As an SEC attorney, Swanson was part of a team that examined Madoff's securities brokerage operation in 1999 and 2004. Neither review resulted in any action against Madoff. In a statement about Swanson's role, the SEC compliance office cited its strict rules prohibiting employees from participating in cases involving firms where they have a personal interest.

A spokesman for Swanson said that he and Shana Madoff met at a breakfast in October 2003, started dating in April 2006 and married last year.

U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey recused himself from the Madoff probe because his son, Marc Mukasey, is representing Frank DiPascali, a top financial officer at Madoff's investment firm. The Justice Department refused to say when Mukasey became aware of the conflict but confirmed he was removing himself from all aspects of the case.

DiPascali was the Madoff employee who had the most day-to-day contact with the firm's investors. Several described him as the man they reached by phone when they had questions about the firm's investment strategy, or wanted to add or subtract money from their accounts.

The events unfolded the day after Cox delivered a stunning rebuke to his own career staff, blaming them for a decade-long failure to investigate Madoff.

Credible and specific allegations regarding Madoff's financial wrongdoing going back to at least 1999 were repeatedly brought to the attention of SEC staff, Cox said. He said he was gravely concerned by the apparent multiple failures over at least a decade to thoroughly investigate the allegations or at any point to seek formal authority from the politically appointed commission to pursue them.

Cox's critics said that targeting the staff was Cox's attempt to salvage his own reputation.

"He put in place the people he is now shifting the blame to," said Ross Albert, a former SEC senior special counsel and federal prosecutor and now a private attorney in Atlanta.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., suggested Cox bears some of the responsibility for what went wrong.

"I served in Congress with Christopher Cox, but I don't think he's going to make the All-Star team," said Reid.

Kotz said his office would move as quickly as possible to complete the inquiry into why regulators didn't pursue Madoff more aggressively.

Kanjorski, the lawmaker, said his subcommittee's inquiry will examine the alleged Madoff fraud and try to determine why the SEC and other regulators "failed to detect these substantial evasions."

WASHINGTON – The world opened its wallet for Bill Clinton. Governments, corporations and billionaires with their own interests in U.S. foreign policy gave the former president's charity millions of dollars, according to records he released Thursday to lay bare any financial entanglements that could affect his wife Hillary Rodham Clinton as the next secretary of state.

Saudi Arabia, Norway and other foreign governments gave at least $46 million, and donors with ties to India delivered millions more. Corporate donors included the Blackwater security firm, at risk of losing its lucrative government contract to protect U.S. diplomats in Iraq, and Web company Yahoo, involved in disputes over surrendering Internet information to Chinese authorities that led to the imprisonment of dissidents there.

Other high-profile Clinton donors don't suggest inevitable collisions between U.S. policies and their giving. Celebrities Barbra Streisand, Steven Spielberg, Paul Newman, Carly Simon and Chevy Chase all gave. Sports figures included New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner, Formula One driver Michael Schumacher and owners of the Indiana Pacers basketball team.

The records account for at least $492 million in contributions to the William J. Clinton Foundation, a nonprofit created by the former president to finance his library in Little Rock, Ark., and charitable efforts in dozens of countries to reduce poverty and treat AIDS.

President-elect Barack Obama made Hillary Clinton's nomination as secretary of state contingent on her husband revealing the foundation's contributors, to address questions about potential conflicts of interest.

The foundation disclosed the names of its 205,000 donors on its Web site Thursday, ending a decade of resistance to identifying them. It released only the names of donors and the range of their contributions. It did not identify each contributor's occupation, employer or nationality or provide any other details. The foundation said separately Thursday that fewer than 3,000 of its donors were foreigners but it did not identify which ones....

It was not immediately clear whether the disclosures will raise any serious challenge to Hillary Clinton's nomination to be secretary of state. The two senior lawmakers on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sens. John F. Kerry, D-Mass., and Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., wrote to colleagues on Thursday and said the list's disclosure "is designed to establish greater transparency and predictability with regard to the activities of the Clinton Foundation in the context of Sen. Clinton's service as secretary of state."

Shortly after the documents were released Thursday, Hillary Clinton made another appearance at the State Department for meetings with transition aides, officials said. The trip was the latest of several to the building for the former first lady since she was nominated by Obama. Her first visit was Dec. 8, after which she had dinner with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

After negotiations with Obama's transition team, Bill Clinton promised to reveal the contributors, submit future foundation activities and paid speeches to an ethics review, step away from the day-to-day operation of his annual charitable conference and inform the State Department about new sources of income and speeches.

According to Clinton's list, Saudi Arabia gave $10 million to $25 million to the foundation. Other government donors include Norway, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Oman, Italy, Jamaica and Tenerife in the Canary Islands. The Dutch national lottery gave $5 million to $10 million.

The Blackwater Training Center donated $10,001 to $25,000. The State Department will have to decide next year whether to renew Blackwater Worldwide's contract to protect U.S. diplomats in Iraq. A U.S. grand jury has indicted five Blackwater guards on manslaughter and weapons charges stemming from a September 2007 firefight in Baghdad's Nisoor Square in which 17 Iraqis died.

"Blackwater frequently supports charitable organizations and we were honored to make a donation to this one, long before Senator Clinton became the Secretary of State-designee," said Blackwater spokeswoman Anne E. Tyrrell.

Donors also include Yahoo; its co-founder Jerry Yang; Yahoo board member Frank J. Biondi and former Yahoo chief executive Terry Semel, who stepped down in June 2007. Another company where Yang serves on the board, Alibaba.com, does extensive business in China and contributed separately to the foundation.

Eager to tap into China's lucrative markets, Yahoo has fallen under bitter criticism — one congressman publicly called Yang a moral "pygmy" — after the company handed over e-mails that helped the Chinese government identify and ultimately imprison two Chinese journalists. Yang later expressed regret over the incident and urged Rice — who would become Hillary Clinton's predecessor — to negotiate for their freedom.

The foundation's list also underscores ties between the Clintons and India, which could complicate diplomatic perceptions of whether Hillary Clinton can be a neutral broker between India and neighboring Pakistan in a region where Obama will face an early test of his foreign policy leadership. Tensions between the two nuclear nations are high since last month's deadly terrorist attacks in Mumbai.

Amar Singh, a donor in the $1 million to $5 million category, is an Indian politician who played host to Bill Clinton on a visit to India in 2005 and met Hillary Clinton in New York in September to discuss an India-U.S. civil nuclear agreement.

Also in that category was Suzlon Energy Ltd. of Amsterdam, a leading supplier of wind turbines. Its chairman is Tulsi R. Tanti, one of India's wealthiest executives. Tanti announced plans at Clinton's Global Initiative meeting earlier this year for a $5 billion project to develop environmentally friendly power generation in India and China.

Two other Indian interests gave between $500,000 and $1 million each: the Confederation of Indian Industry, an industrial trade association; and Dave Katragadda, an Indian capital manager with holdings in media and entertainment, technology, health care and financial services. Ajit Gulabchand, chairman of the Hindustan Construction Co., gave $250,000 to $500,000.

AUSAID, the Australian government's overseas aid program, and COPRESIDA-Secretariado Tecnico, a Dominican Republic government agency formed to fight AIDS, each gave $10 million to $25 million. Norway gave $5 million to $10 million. Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei and Oman gave $1 million to $5 million each. The government of Jamaica and Italy's Ministry for Environment and Territory gave $50,000 to $100,000 each. The Tenerife Island government donated $25,000 to $50,000.

The biggest donations — more than $25 million each — came from two donors. They are the Children's Investment Fund Foundation, a London-based philanthropic organization founded by hedge fund manager Chris Hohn and his wife Jamie Cooper-Hohn and dedicated to helping children, primarily in Africa and India; and UNITAID, an international drug purchase organization formed by Brazil, France, Chile, Norway and Britain to help provide care for HIV-AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis patients in countries with high disease rates.

(Catbird Curiosity: Why do these foreign countries, government agencies, “philanthropists” and other entities need to give millions to The Clinton Foundation in order to fight poverty, disease and AIDS in Africa, India, and other foreign countries? Can’t they just give it directly to those countries in need???)

_Friends of Saudi Arabia and the Dubai Foundation each gave $1 million to $5 million, as did the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office.

_China Overseas Real Estate Development and the U.S. Islamic World Conference gave $250,000 to $500,000 apiece.

_The No. 4 person on the Forbes billionaire list, Lakshmi Mittal, the chief executive of international steel company ArcelorMittal, gave $1 million to $5 million. Mittal is a member of the Foreign Investment Council in Kazakhstan, Goldman Sachs' board of directors and the World Economic Forum's International Business Council, according to the biography on his corporate Web site.

_Simon Barcelo, chief executive of Barcelo Hotels & Resorts, gave $500,000 to $1 million. The company's holdings include hotels in Cuba, a communist country subject to U.S. trade sanctions.

_Victor P. Dahdaleh, who gave $1 million to $5 million, is a Canadian investor and philanthropist involved in aluminum production. His business ties have brought allegations of fraud and bribery in a lawsuit filed by a Bahrain aluminum company. The suit seeks more than $1 billion in damages for what it alleges is Dadaleh's involvement in questionable deals in the Middle East, and the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into the matter. Dahdaleh has vowed to vigorously contest the charges.

_Harold Snyder, director for Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, the largest drug company in Israel. His son, Jay T. Snyder, serves on the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, which oversees State Department activities, and served as a senior U.S. adviser to the United Nations, where he worked on international trade and poverty. Jay Snyder donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the foundation.

_No. 97 on the Forbes billionaire list, Ethiopian-Saudi business tycoon Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi.

_Mala Gaonkar Haarman, a partner and managing director at the private investment partnership Lone Pine Capital.

_Lukas Lundin, chairman of oil, gas and mining businesses including Tanganyika Oil Company Ltd., an international oil and gas exploration and production company with interests in Syria, and Vostok Nafta Investment Ltd., an investment company that focuses on Russia and other former Soviet republics.

_Victor Pinchuk, son-in-law of the former president of Ukraine. Clinton spoke in 2007 at an annual meeting of Yalta European Strategy, a group Pinchuk founded to promote Ukraine joining the European Union.

The top ranks of Clinton's donor list are heavy with longtime Democratic givers, some notable for their staunch support of Israel

_TV producer Haim Saban and his family foundation, who donated between $5 million and $10 million, splits his time between homes in Israel and California. "I'm a one-issue guy and my issue is Israel," he told The New York Times in 2004.

_Slim-Fast diet foods tycoon S. Daniel Abraham, a donor of between $1 million and $5 million, has been a board member of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which promotes Israel's interests before the U.S. government.

_The American Jewish Committee and the United Nations Foundation donated $100,000 to $250,000.

Clinton thanked his donors in a statement for being "steadfast partners in our work to impact the lives of so many around the world in measurable and meaningful ways."

The former president agreed to step away from direct involvement in the Clinton Global Initiative, an annual charitable conference where businesses and many foreign governments pledge donations to help ameliorate AIDS, poverty and other social ills. He will continue serving as CGI's founding chairman but will not solicit money or sponsorships. The CGI will cease accepting foreign contributions and will not host events outside the United States.

Clinton started raising money for his library before leaving the White House. Over the years, the Clintons repeatedly refused to identify all the foundation donors, and continued to do so during Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.

Names surfaced nonetheless. Several news organizations unearthed foreign-government donors, and in 2001, Bill Clinton turned over a list of 150 top foundation donors to a House committee investigating his pardon of fugitive businessman Marc Rich, whose ex-wife, Denise Rich, gave the library foundation at least $450,000.

Several years ago, I had dinner at Galileo, a Washington restaurant, with Steven Rosen, who was then the director of foreign-policy issues at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The group, which is better known by its acronym, AIPAC, lobbies for Israel’s financial and physical security.

Like many lobbyists, Rosen cultivated reporters, hoping to influence their writing while keeping his name out of print. He is a voluble man, and liked to demonstrate his erudition and dispense aphorisms. One that he often repeated could serve as the credo of K Street, the Rodeo Drive of Washington’s influence industry: “A lobby is like a night flower: it thrives in the dark and dies in the sun.”

Lobbyists tend to believe that legislators are susceptible to persuasion in ways that executive-branch bureaucrats are not, and before Rosen came to AIPAC, in 1982 (he had been at the RAND Corporation, the defense-oriented think tank), the group focussed mainly on Congress. But Rosen arrived brandishing a new idea: that the organization could influence the outcome of policy disputes within the executive branch—in particular, the Pentagon, the State Department, and the National Security Council.

Rosen began to court officials. He traded in gossip and speculation, and his reports to AIPAC’s leaders helped them track currents in Middle East policymaking before those currents coalesced into executive orders. Rosen also used his contacts to carry AIPAC’s agenda to the White House. An early success came in 1983, when he helped lobby for a strategic coöperation agreement between Israel and the United States, which was signed over the objections of Caspar Weinberger, the Secretary of Defense, and which led to a new level of intelligence sharing and military sales.

AIPAC is a leviathan among lobbies, as influential in its sphere as the National Rifle Association and the American Association of Retired Persons are in theirs, although it is, by comparison, much smaller. (AIPAC has about a hundred thousand members, the N.R.A. more than four million.)

President Bush, speaking at the annual AIPAC conference in May of 2004, said, “You’ve always understood and warned against the evil ambition of terrorism and their networks. In a dangerous new century, your work is more vital than ever.”

AIPAC is unique in the top tier of lobbies because its concerns are the economic health and security of a foreign nation, and because its members are drawn almost entirely from a single ethnic group.

AIPAC’s professional staff—it employs about a hundred people at its headquarters, two blocks from the Capitol—analyzes congressional voting records and shares the results with its members, who can then contribute money to candidates directly or to a network of proIsrael political-action committees. The Center for Responsive Politics, a public-policy group, estimates that between 1990 and 2004 these pacs gave candidates and parties more than twenty million dollars.

Robert H. Asher, a former AIPAC president, told me that the pacs are usually given euphemistic names. “I started a pac called Citizens Concerned for the National Interest,” he said. Asher, who is from Chicago, is a retired manufacturer of lamps and shades, and a member of the so-called Gang of Four—former presidents of AIPAC, who steered the group’s policies for more than two decades. (The three others are Larry Weinberg, a California real-estate developer and a former owner of the Portland Trail Blazers; Edward Levy, a construction-materials executive from Detroit; and Mayer “Bubba” Mitchell, a retired builder based in Mobile, Alabama.)

AIPAC, Asher explained, is loyal to its friends and merciless to its enemies. In 1982, Asher led a campaign to defeat Paul Findley, a Republican congressman from Springfield, Illinois, who once referred to himself as “Yasir Arafat’s best friend in Congress,” and who later compared Arafat to Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.

“There was a real desire to help Findley out of Congress,” Asher said. He identified an obscure Democratic lawyer in Springfield, Richard Durbin, as someone who could defeat Findley. “We met at my apartment in Chicago, and I recruited him to run for Congress,” he recalled. “I probed his views and I explained things that I had learned mostly from AIPAC. I wanted to make sure we were supporting someone who was not only against Paul Findley but also a friend of Israel.”

Asher went on, “He beat Findley with a lot of help from Jews, in-state and out-of-state. Now, how did the Jewish money find him? I travelled around the country talking about how we had the opportunity to defeat someone unfriendly to Israel. And the gates opened.” Durbin, who went on to win a Senate seat, is now the Democratic whip. He is a fierce critic of Bush’s Iraq policy but, like AIPAC, generally supports the Administration’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Durbin says that he considers Asher to be his “most loyal friend in the Jewish community.”

Mayer Mitchell led a similar campaign, three years ago, to defeat Earl Hilliard, an Alabama congressman who was a critic of Israel. Mitchell helped direct support to a young Harvard Law School graduate named Artur Davis, who challenged Hilliard in the Democratic primary, and he solicited donations from AIPAC supporters across America. Davis won the primary, and the seat. “I asked Bubba how he felt after Davis won,” Asher said, “and he said, ‘Just like you did when Durbin got elected.’ ” Mitchell declined to comment.

AIPAC’s leaders can be immoderately frank about the group’s influence. At dinner that night with Steven Rosen, I mentioned a controversy that had enveloped AIPAC in 1992. David Steiner, a New Jersey real-estate developer who was then serving as AIPAC’s president, was caught on tape boasting that he had “cut a deal” with the Administration of George H. W. Bush to provide more aid to Israel.

Steiner also said that he was “negotiating” with the incoming Clinton Administration over the appointment of a pro-Israel Secretary of State. “We have a dozen people in his”— Clinton’s —“headquarters . . . and they are all going to get big jobs,” Steiner said. Soon after the tape’s existence was disclosed, Steiner resigned his post.

I asked Rosen if AIPAC suffered a loss of influence after the Steiner affair. A half smile appeared on his face, and he pushed a napkin across the table. “You see this napkin?” he said. “In twenty-four hours, we could have the signatures of seventy senators on this napkin.”

It hasn't been a banner year for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. After coming out the loser in a public collision with President Bush over loan guarantees for Israel, being dressed down by Israeli Prime Minister Rabin, and facing revelations by a former employee first aired in the Washington Report that AIPAC runs a stealth operation to discredit American critics of the Jewish state, Israel's Washington, DC lobby ended the year with the resignation of its president, David Steiner, for, as his colleagues tell it, exaggerating AIPAC's influence both with Bill Clinton and with former Republican Secretary of State James Baker III.

The day after Clinton's election to the presidency should have been a joyous one for AIPAC. But instead, AIPAC's leaders awoke Nov. 4 to a page 3 story in the Washington Times announcing that Steiner, AIPAC's unpaid president, had resigned after being caught telling a prospective political donor on the telephone that the lobbying organization was "negotiating" with Clinton over whom the Democratic candidate would appoint as secretary of state and as his national security adviser should he win the election. When asked if AIPAC would participate in the selection of the new secretary of state, Steiner said, "We'll have access."

Steiner told this to Harry Katz of New York City on Oct. 22, not knowing that Katz was taping the conversation. He turned the tape over to the Washington Times. The tape's authenticity is not in dispute. (See the transcript of the phone conversation on page 13.)

"We have a dozen people in (the Clinton) headquarters. And they are all going to get big jobs," Steiner, a trustee of the Democratic National Committee, told Katz, who had said he wanted to donate $100,000 to AIPAC-supported candidates.

Katz told the Washington Times that he taped the conversation because "as someone Jewish, I am concerned when a small group has a disproportionate power. I think that hurts everyone, including Jews. If David Steiner wants to talk about the incredible, disproportionate clout AIPAC has, the public should know about it." Katz has a history of suing Jewish groups. He has been a low-level AIPAC donor.

AIPAC told the Times that Steiner's statements were untrue, that it had no role in any deal with Baker, and that it was not negotiating with Clinton about administration appointments. Steiner issued a brief statement when he resigned. "In an effort to encourage and impress what I thought was a potential political activist calling on the telephone," he said, "I made statements which went beyond over zealousness and exaggeration and were simply and totally untrue. I apologize to Governor Clinton, Chief of Staff Baker, and AIPAC for these actions."

The Jewish weekly Forward said in a page-one story that Steiner's resignation "means that backers of a strong relationship between America and Israel will have a harder time than ever helping shape decisions about key foreign policy posts in the incoming Clinton administration. . ."

Aside from the obvious embarrassment for AIPAC, the matter also touched the sensitive issue of whether the organization abides by the laws governing lobbying. AIPAC may neither raise money for federal candidates nor recommend candidates to potential contributors. The Federal Election Commission has investigated alleged wrongdoing by AIPAC, but has not found sufficient evidence of violations. Steiner told Katz that he was expressing only his personal choices in discussing races in several states and that AIPAC does not rate or endorse candidates.

Although AIPAC disavowed Steiner's statements, a source close to AIPAC told the Times that the lobbying group has promoted former Rep. Stephen Solarz as secretary of state but "they know they aren't going to get him." Solarz has been mentioned as a possible ambassador to the United Nations. Columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak reported that AIPAC official Steven Rosen tried to keep Warren Christopher, named by Clinton as director of the transition, from being appointed secretary of state. Christopher was deputy secretary of state under President Jimmy Carter, whose Middle East policy is regarded by pro-Israel activists as having been too sympathetic to the Arabs. The Los Angeles Times also reported that American Jewish leaders were trying stop a Christopher appointment. AIPAC denied the report, and other Democrats, including Solarz, defended Christopher.

In a related report, Forward said the Jewish Election Committee has urged Clinton not to appoint Christopher as secretary of state. Ruth King, spokeswoman for JEC, criticized Christopher for not wanting to confront Ayatollah Khomeini during the Iran hostage crisis. The JEC called on Clinton to give Vice President-elect Albert Gore, Jr. "the special responsibility for handling Middle East affairs."

The Washington Jewish Week reported that last month AIPAC made a major personnel shift by taking day-to-day responsibility away from Executive Director Thomas Dine and giving it to Deputy Director Howard Kohr. Dine will continue to be in charge of policy. Meanwhile, perhaps to indicate that the rift with Israel's prime minister is not permanent, AIPAC announced that Rabin would speak at its annual conference in March.

Morton Mandel, National Jewish Democratic chairman, credited the American Jewish community with sealing Clinton's victory, which he called a "tremendous achievement." American Jewish Congress President Robert Lifton and Executive Director Henry Siegman, in a congratulatory telegram to the president-elect, said they were pleased that Clinton and Gore were committed to the separation of church and state and to support for the Arab-Israeli peace talks.

Sheldon L. Richman is a Washington, DC-based regular contributor to the Washington Report.

Emanuel is an Israeli citizen and Israeli army veteran whose father, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, was a member of Menachem Begin's Irgun forces during the Nakba and named his son after "a Lehi combatant who was killed" - i.e., a member of Yitzhak Shamir's terrorist Stern Gang, responsible for, in addition to other atrocities against Palestinians, the more famous bombing of the King David Hotel and assassination of the UN peace envoy Count Folke Bernadotte.

In rapid response to this news, the editorial in the next day's Arab News (Jeddah) was entitled "Don't pin much hope on Obama - Emanuel is his chief of staff and that sends a message". This editorial referred to the Irgun as a "terror organization" and concluded: "Far from challenging Israel, the new team may turn out to be as pro-Israel as the one it is replacing."

That was always likely. Obama repeatedly pledged unconditional allegiance to Israel during his campaign, most memorably in an address to the AIPAC national convention which Israeli peace activist Uri Avnery characterized as "a speech that broke all records for obsequiousness and fawning", and America's electing a black president has always been more easily imagined than any American president's declaring his country's independence from Israeli domination.

Still, one of the greatest advantages for the United States in electing Barack Hussein Obama was the prospect that the world's billion-plus Muslims, who now view the United States with almost universal loathing and hatred, would be dazzled by the new president's eloquence, life story, skin color and middle name, would think again with open minds and would give America a chance to redeem itself in their eyes and hearts - not incidentally, drastically shortening the long lines of aspiring jihadis eager to sacrifice their lives while striking a blow against the evil empire.

The profound loathing and hatred of the Muslim world toward the United States, which has always had its roots for America's unconditional support for the injustices inflicted and still being inflicted on the Palestinians, can fairly be considered the core of the primary foreign policy and "national security" problems confronting the United States in recent years. Why would Obama, a man of unquested brilliance, have chosen to send such a contemptuous message to the Muslim world with his first major appointment? Why would he wish to disabuse the Muslim world of its hopes (however modest) and slap it across the face at the ealiest opportunity?

A further contemptuous message is widely rumored to be forthcoming -- the naming as "Special Envoy for Middle East Peace" of Dennis Ross, the notorious Israel-Firster who, throughout the 12 years of the Bush the First and Clinton administrations, ensured that American policy toward the Palestinians did not deviate one millimeter from Israeli policy and that no progress toward peace could be made and who has since headed the AIPAC spin-off "think tank", the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Neverthess, since it is almost always constructive to seek a silver lining in the darkest clouds, a silver lining can be found and cited. For decades, the Palestinian leadership has been "waiting for Godot" - waiting for the US Government to finally do the right thing (if only in its own obvious self-interest) and to force Israel to comply with international law and UN Resolutions and permit them to have a decent mini-state on a tiny portion of the land that once was theirs.

This was never a realistic hope. It has not happened, and it will never happen. So it may well be salutary not to waste eight more days (let alone eight more years) playing along and playing the fool while more Palestinian lands are confiscated and more Jewish colonies and Jews-only bypass roads are built on them, clinging to the delusion that the charming Mr. Obama, admirable though he may be in so many other respects, will eventually (if only in a second term, when he no longer has to worry about reelection) see the light and do the right thing. It is long overdue for the Palestinians themselves to seize the initiative, to reset the agenda and to declare a new "only game in town".

Furthermore, in February, Israel will elect a new Knesset. Bibi Netanyahu, who, most polls and coalition-building calculations suggest, is most likely to emerge as the next prime minister, has one (if only one) great virtue. He is absolutely honest in not professing any desire (however insincere) to see the creation of any Palestinian "state" (whether decent or less-than-a-Bantustan in nature) or to engage in any talks (even never-ending and fraudulent ones) ostensibly about that possibility. His return to power would definitively slam the door on the illusion of a "two-state solution" somewhere over an ever-receding horizon.

This would constitute a blessing and a liberation for Palestinian minds and Palestinian aspirations. Their leadership(s) could then return, after a long, costly and painful diversion, to fundamental principles, to pursuing the goal of a democratic, nonracist and nonsectarian state in all of Israel/Palestine with equal rights for all who live there.

This just goal could and should be pursued by strictly nonviolent means. If the goal is to convince a determined and powerful settler-colonial movement which wishes to seize your land, settle it and keep it (eventually cleansing it of you and your fellow natives) that it should cease, desist and leave, nonviolent forms of resistance are suicidal. If, however, the goal were to be to obtain the full rights of citizenship in a democratic, nonracist state (as was the case in the American civil rights movement and the South African anti-apartheid movement), then nonviolence would be the only viable approach. Violence would be totally inappropriate and counterproductive. The morally impeccable approach would also be the tactically effective approach. The high road would be the only road.

No American president - least of all Barack Obama - could easily support racism and apartheid and oppose democracy and equal rights, particularly if democracy and equal rights were being pursued by nonviolent means. No one anywhere could easily do so. The writing would be on the wall, and the clock would be running out on the tired game of using a perpetual "peace process" as an excuse to delay decisions (while building more "facts on the ground") forever.

Democracy and equal rights would not come quickly or easily. Forty years passed between when, on the night before his assassination, Dr. Martin Luther King cried out that he had been to the mountaintop and had seen the promised land and when Barack Obama was elected as president of the United States. (The Bible suggests a similar waiting period in the wilderness for Moses.) Forty-six years passed between the installation of a formal apartheid regime in South Africa and the election of Nelson Mandela as president of a fully democratic and nonracist "rainbow nation".

While it may be hoped that the transformation would be significantly quicker in Israel/Palestine, it is clear that many who already qualify as "senior citizens" will not live to see the promised land. However, if the promised land of a democratic state with equal rights for all is correctly and clearly perceived and persistently and peacefully pursued, there is ample reason for confidence that Israel/Palestine will one day experience the tearful exaltation of a "Mandela Moment" or an "Obama Moment", restoring hope in the moral potential both of a nation and of mankind, and that the Jews, Muslims and Christians who live there will finally reach their promised land.

John V. Whitbeck, an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team in negotiations with Israel, is author of "The World According to Whitbeck".

I wanted Obama to win. I really, really, really wanted Obama to win. McCain/Palin gave me nightmares. Just about the whole world held it’s collective breath willing Obama to win on Tuesday.

Obama’s election is powerful confirmation that America remains a land of opportunity, a democracy where power is allocated at the ballot box. It reassured the world that despite the lawlessness and arrogance of the past eight years, Americans are capable of enlightened, rational self-determination. It restores hope in much of the world that America can reorient itself toward tolerance and dialogue.

For all of that, I haven’t been happy since watching Obama’s acceptance speech live Wednesday morning on the BBC.

I have a bad feeling that America has just elected its Tony Blair. The package of Change the voters ordered isn’t what is being delivered to the White House.

The appointment of Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff didn’t ease my mind. Like Mr Blair’s close advisors Lord Goldsmith and Baron Levy, Mr Emanuel may inflame the suspicions in the Middle East that the agenda for the region under Obama will be no different than under Bush. The credibility of the United States as an honest broker and agent for peace will be further eroded if Obama’s gatekeeper is viewed as pre-disposed to more of the same policies which have fuelled hostilities. I hope it is not anti-Semitic to make the point that objectivity and fair dealing will be suspect with a chief of staff who is the son of an Irgun terrorist, who served as a civilian volunteer for the Israeli Army, and who has used his public positions in American politics – except for a brief stint at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein – to promote Israel’s interests.

Those who know Mr Emanuel suggest that because his devotion to Israel is unquestionable, he will be able to push Israelis toward moderation. But many in Israel, the Middle East and Washington will expect that future acts of aggression by Israel against Iran or other neighbours will be defended – if not promoted – by the man at Obama’s elbow.

The rumours that either Larry Summers or Tim Geithner will be made Treasury Secretary made me even queasier. The appointment of either of these architects of the current global financial disaster, these arch-deregulators and serial-forbearance artists, would be a great middle-finger to America’s foreign creditors and the global investors suffering asset deflation. Both men have been instrumental in, first, the Fed’s exported inflation via massive monetary bubble-blowing and, now, the Fed/FDIC/SIPC exported deflation through Chapter 11 and margin call orchestrations ensuring more pain abroad than at home.

Summers would be particularly egregious. Not only did Summers promote the Friedmanite export of toxic debt to the rest of the world at the Clinton Treasury, at the World Bank he promoted the export of toxic pollution to underdeveloped nations to add poison to poverty. To quote from his 1991 memo, "I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that."

The much bandied idea that Robert Gates, former deputy director of the CIA under President G.H.W. Bush, architect and financier of Saddam’s military machine and Bin Laden’s Al Qaida, might be kept as Secretary of Defense under Obama “for continuity’s sake” after six years of failed and callous military adventurism in Iraq and Afghanistan, with occasional illegal forays into Pakistan, Georgia, Syria and Iran, makes me frankly nauseous. If America is ever to restore its fiscal balance, cuts in the bloated military/security/ intelligence apparatus will have to be implemented. A career insider central to the creation and export of the bloat is the wrong man for the job.

Maybe the problem in America is not a struggle between rich and poor. Overtaxed and undertaxed. Empowered and disenfranchised. Educated and illiterate. Insured and uninsured. Law abiding and lawless. Godless and God-fearing. Republican and Democrat. Red and Blue.

Maybe the problem in America is there is no struggle about the fundamental mechanisms of American oppression and aggression: debt and threat.

American policies promote debt and force as the hammer and anvil for shaping the economy and the political dialogue. What cannot be financed into penury must be crushed into submission. The bulk of the economy is designed to prosper either the bankers or the police/ prison/military/intelligence industries at everyone else’s expense. Propped up on these twin pillars of debt and threat, America remains staunchly and irrevocably American whoever wins the elections.

The restoration of fiscal prudence has been swiftly repudiated post- election in favour of more debt-financed “stimulus” and “stabilisation”.

The restoration of the rule of law and holding those who committed crimes accountable – both within America and internationally – has received no post-election endorsement from Obama.

I asked the asylum Iraqis at the local kebab shop last night what they made of the American election. They follow the news, and I’ve always found them knowledgeable and articulate. The kebab chef (a former civil engineer from northern Iraq) looked glum. “It makes no difference. They are all the same.” I fear his well-informed cynicism is sound.

Our unglamorous and unelected British prime minister, Gordon Brown, called for more international cooperation “with American leadership central to its success” – as he toured the Arab Gulf with his begging bowl. He was physically following American “leadership” as he trailed Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmet’s pilgrimage to the Gulf last week. American leadership got us successfully into this debt crisis, and Brown appears determined to follow it even deeper.

The central banks in the UK, EU and Switzerland obliged yesterday by following the Fed toward negative real interest rates, discouraging savers and lenders alike by cutting 150bps, 50bps and 50bps respectively. Jean-Claude Trichet spoke of the cooperation of the central banks as a “brotherhood”. He made me think of the mafia or the Freemasons. Perhaps he meant to.

Obama demonstrated good judgement throughout the campaign, and good management of the people working for him. That in itself will bring major change to the White House.

Better managed American debt and threat policies under Obama will be an improvement over the horribly managed debt and threat policies under Bush. Some hope.

What a sycophantic Jewish circle-jerk love fest this is. It's like a Hollywood production. Our nation is owned - and not by those that care for our nation's best interests. We are no longer a democracy, we are a Jewish Oligarchy. How sad.

Exactly just look at who runs the Federal Reserve......i.e. the most powerful private banking cartel in the world.

The Federal Reserve System is divided into two parts: the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, located in Washington DC, and the Federal Reserve District Banks, located throughout the United States. Here is the official website of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors:

If you examine this page, you will see that there are five members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. You will also see that all five(5) of the board members are Jewish. This is a numerical representation of 100%. Why is this important? It’s important because Jews only constitute about 2% of the United States population*. So the odds that all five members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors would be Jewish are infinitesimally small. Here are the five members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors:

Benjamin S. Bernanke - Jewish
Donald L. Kohn - Jewish
Kevin M. Warsh - Jewish
Randall S. Kroszner - Jewish
Frederic S. Mishkin - Jewish

Now, if you examine the presidents of the twelve Federal Reserve District Banks, you will discover a similar pattern of Jewish over-representation. Here is the section of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors’ website that lists the twelve Federal Reserve District Banks and their respective presidents:

If you examine this section, you will see that there are twelve Federal Reserve Bank presidents. You will also see that nine(9) of the twelve presidents are Jewish. This is a numerical representation of 75%. Again, this is important because Jews only comprise about 2% of the United States population*, so the chances that nine of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank presidents would be Jewish are incredibly miniscule. Here are the twelve presidents of the Federal Reserve District Banks:

FRB of Boston: Eric S. Rosengren - Jewish
FRB of New York: Timothy F. Geithner - Jewish
FRB of Philadelphia: Charles I. Plosser - Jewish
FRB of Richmond: Jeffrey M. Lacker - Jewish
FRB of St. Louis: James B. Bullard - Jewish
FRB of Minneapolis: Gary H. Stern - Jewish
FRB of Kansas City: Thomas M. Hoenig - Jewish
FRB of Dallas: Richard W. Fisher - Jewish
FRB of San Francisco: Janet L. Yellen - Jewish
FRB of Cleveland: Sandra Pianalto - gentile
FRB of Atlanta: Dennis P. Lockhart - gentile
FRB of Chicago: Charles L. Evans - gentile

This extreme numerical over-representation of Jews among the members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Reserve District Bank presidents cannot be explained away as a coincidence or as the result of mere random chance.

You must ask yourself how such an incredibly small and extremely unrepresentative minority ethnic group that only represents about 2% of the American population could so completely dominate the highest levels of the United States Federal Reserve System.

Republican strategists who hope to cut into Democrats' usual advantage among Jewish voters have some cause for optimism this morning.

Speaking on Monday to the annual policy conference of the most powerful Jewish lobbying organization in Washington, DC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Sen. John McCain received his most enthusiastic standing ovation at the close of his most pointed attack on Sen. Barack Obama.

"We must apply the full force of law to prevent business dealings with Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps. I was pleased to join Senators Lieberman and Kyl in backing an amendment calling for the designation of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization responsible for killing American troops in Iraq. Over three quarters of the Senate supported this obvious step, but not Senator Obama. He opposed this resolution because its support for countering Iranian influence in Iraq was, he said, a 'wrong message not only to the world, but also to the region.' But here, too, he is mistaken. Holding Iran's influence in check, and holding a terrorist organization accountable, sends exactly the right message -- to Iran, to the region and to the world."

Many cheers and whistles accompanied that part of McCain's address, followed by a convention-wide standing ovation. Meanwhile, the Obama campaign fired off a response to McCain's speech before he was even finished delivering it, explaining that the Illinois Democrat's opposition to the resolution McCain cited was due to its inclusion of "aggressive passages" alongside what Obama felt was an accurate description of Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. Obama will have a chance to explain that vote to the conference on Wednesday.

The importance of the AIPAC's three-day event to both political parties was underscored by the range of participants in the panel discussion that directly followed McCain's speech. Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs committee Howard Berman, a California Democrat, shared the stage with Liz Cheney, Ambassador Dennis Ross and the Knesset's deputy defense minister. As Berman spoke, it was clear he was trying to gently contrast some of McCain's rhetoric, telling the crowd that despite bipartisan consensus that Iran's nuclear ambitions represent a danger, the current administration's policy toward Iran "is not working."

After noting the conference's non-partisan spirit, Liz Cheney went ahead and cast her response in partisan terms, telling the assembled group that the outcome of this fall's election -- and whether the next president will follow the Bush administration's example in fighting the war on terror -- will necessarily have a large impact on where Israel finds itself this time next year.

The New York Times today describes a June Israeli military exercise U.S. officials say "appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran's nuclear facilities." A "senior Pentagon official" said a goal of the exercise "was to send a clear message to the United States" and Europe that Israel was prepared to act militarily if U.S. pressure to stop Iran from enriching uranium continued to fail.

If so, retired Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner didn't get the message. "The signal I received is that Israel does NOT have the capability to effectively attack Iran's nuclear facilities," Col. Gardiner says.

Gardiner says a 2006 MIT paper by Whitney Raas and Austin Long, "Osirak Redux? Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities," is a good representation of how Israeli military planners think about targeting.

According to Raas and Long, in a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities Israel would be interested in three targets - the enrichment facility at Natanz, the conversion facility at Esfahan and the heavy water plant at Arak. They say Israel would want to attack these three facilities with a combined total of 36 aircraft....

"An Israeli strike would not be much of a strike," Gardiner says. Israel would hit approximately 100 aim points, single weapons on a single part of the target. "I would call the Israeli strike 'disruptive' rather than 'destructive,'" he says. It has taken three to five years to build the three facilities. "You would have to destroy most of the facilities to come close to setting back the program three to five years."

The US probably thinks in terms of about 10 times more aim points for a similar strike, Gardiner notes.

"President Bush likes beehive analogies," Gardiner points out. " An Israel-only strike would stir up the bees and leave the hives with only limited damage."

If Gardiner's analysis is correct, then Michael Gordon's New York Times article is deceptive, perhaps deliberately so. It's part of a campaign of pressure on Congress and European governments - likely orchestrated with the Cheney faction of the Bush Administration - to forego real negotiations with Iran, and to push towards U.S. military escalation. If we don't act, the Israelis will, the argument will be - neglecting the fact that no Israeli action is possible without a green light from Washington.

Next week, Congress may consider on its suspension calendar a resolution promoted by AIPAC that effectively endorses a naval blockade against Iran - an act of war. If you don't think such a resolution should be rushed through Congress, you can say so here.

... Every news story you are about to review in this comprehensive research paper is true and easily verifiable. This investigation represents 10 months of careful study, research, analysis, source verification and logical deduction. Every event and quote presented here is 100% accurate. There are over 190 detailed footnotes which I encourage, no, urge, readers to explore and verify for themselves....

Due to the fact that well organized efforts are under way to suppress these facts, some of these news links are mysteriously disappearing even as we speak. Fortunately, this information has all been transcribed by many web users and is has therefore been preserved from the censors....

This is no opinion piece. Rather it is a collection of buried, but undeniable facts, events, and quotes which, when assembled in one place, will state their own conclusions.

In putting together this research in a logical and sequential format, great care was taken to confirm and double confirm every piece of information. Any and all questionable data which could not be independently verified to this author’s satisfaction was discarded....

Like most Americans, I was gripped by senses of profound shock, horror, revulsion, sadness, and rage as I watched the horror of September 11, 2001 unfolding live on my television screen. Watching the mass murder of thousands of innocent people live on television was the most upsetting experience of my life. How could any person of sound moral character not be enraged at witnessing this horrific act of barbarism?...

But not all of the eye-witnesses to the 9-11 slaughter were so saddened. On September 11, five Israeli army veterans were arrested by the FBI after several witnesses saw them "dancing", "high-fiving", and "celebrating" as they took pictures of the World Trade Center disaster from across the river in New Jersey. Steven Gordon was the lawyer who volunteered to represent the five Israelis. He was asked by a Hebrew newspaper why the five men were being detained by the FBI. Here’s what Gordon told Yediot America:

"On the day of the disaster, three of the five boys went up on the roof of the building where the company office is located," said Gordon. "I'm not sure if they saw the twin towers collapse, but, in any event, they photographed the ruins right afterwards. One of the neighbors who saw them called the police and claimed they were posing, dancing and laughing, against the background of the burning towers….

"Anyhow, the three left the roof, took an Urban truck, and drove to a parking lot, located about a five-minute drive from the offices. They parked, stood on the roof of the truck to get a better view of the destroyed towers and took photographs. A woman who was in the building above the lot testified that she saw them smiling and exchanging high-fives. She and another neighbor called the police and reported on Middle-Eastern looking people dancing on the truck. They copied and reported the license plates.

When the photos were developed, they revealed that the dancing Israelis were smiling in the foreground of the New York massacre. According to ABC’s 20/20 attempted whitewash of the incident, in addition to their outrageous and highly suspicious behavior, the five also had in their possession the following items; box-cutters, European passports, and $4700 cash hidden in a sock. Why were these Israeli agents so happy about the horrible massacre that was unfolding right before their very eyes? What evil spirit could possess people who are supposed to be America's "allies", and who receive billions of dollars in financial and military aid from US taxpayers each year , to publicly rejoice as innocent people (including many American jews) were burning to death and jumping out of 110 story buildings? Could it be that these happy Israeli army veterans were in some way linked to this monstrous attack? That’s what officials close to the investigation initially told The Bergen Record newspaper of New Jersey.

As incredible, as ridiculous, and as "paranoid" as that belief may appear to you at this point, the fact is that certain elements within the Israeli government, and Zionist movement in general, have a long history of attacking the USA and framing Arabs in order to gain support from the US. Before we begin to piece together what really transpired on 9-11, it is absolutely critical that we first review some historical precedents regarding Israel's and International Zionism's treacherous history of manipulating America (and other nations) for their own selfish purposes. Without a basic understanding of this history, it would be impossible to understand the truth as it is today. So put aside your preconceived notions, your psychological defense mechanisms, and your prejudices, and step into my time machine for a journey down the memory hole....

Now that we have established the ruthless and criminal nature of radical Zionism, one more lesson needs to be understood before we return to the five dancing Israelis of 9-11 and other related stories. Even the Zionists themselves have never denied that they have long exerted great influence in America. But what we must understand is that the Zionists do not merely influence United States policy....they dominate it! It is this domination that enables them to pull off monstrous crimes and then conceal them from the general public.

The observation that Zionists dominate the American media, government, academia, and Hollywood has been made by many prominent Americans and is easily verifiable by public information.

"If after having elected their man or group, obedience is not rendered to the Jewish control, then you speedily hear of "scandals" and "investigations" and "impeachments" for the removal of the disobedient. Usually a man with a "past" proves the most obedient instrument, but even a good man can often be tangled up in campaign practices that compromise him. It has been commonly known that Jewish manipulation of American election campaigns have been so skillfully handled, that no matter which candidate was elected, there was ready made a sufficient amount of evidence to discredit him in case his Jewish masters needed to discredit him."

"Their greatest danger to this country lies in the Jewish ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government."

Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff under Ronald Reagan said this:

"I've never seen a President -- I don't care who he is -- stand up to them [the Israelis]. It just boggles the mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. If the American people understood what a grip those people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on."

While a guest on ABC's Face the Nation, William Fulbright - US Senator and Chairman of the US Foreign Relations committee - said this before a national television audience:

"Israel controls the United States Senate. We should be more concerned about the United States' interests."

Nationally syndicated columnist and former presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan said:

And US religious leader Billy Graham and President Richard Nixon once had the following exchange, which was caught on tape:

GRAHAM: "The Jewish stranglehold on the media has got to be broken or this country's going down the drain".

FACT: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, UPN, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Daily News, Time Magazine, Newsweek, People Magazine, US News and World Report and countless other media and Hollywood companies all have either a Zionist CEO, a Zionist News Chief, or are owned by a media conglomerate which has a Zionist CEO. Have you ever noticed how Hollywood movies always seem to portray Germans and Arabs as a bigoted fanatics or as terrorists? Now you know why!

FACT: AIPAC, the Israeli lobbying organization, is the most feared lobby in Washington DC. By their own admission, they are capable of unseating Congressmen and Senators that do not carry out their requests. The majority of Congressmen from both political parties receive large donations from AIPAC. Writing for the Nation Magazine, journalist Michael Massing explains:

"AIPAC is widely regarded as the most powerful foreign-policy lobby in Washington. Its 60,000 members shower millions of dollars on hundreds of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle." Newspapers like the New York Times fear the Jewish lobby organizations as well. "It's very intimidating," said a correspondent at another large daily. "The pressure from these groups is relentless." (emphasis added)

FACT: The Pentagon is under the control of a hard core Zionist named Richard Perle. The civilian Defense Policy Board actually wields more control over the military establishment than the Defense Secretary or the generals and admirals. There are a number of other Zionists who serve on the board (Kissinger, Cohen, Schlessinger) as well as non-jewish members who have always supported Israel and the expansion of the "War on Terror". The notoriously belligerent Perle, nicknamed the "The Prince of Darkness", is Chairman of the Board.

With Perle as Chairman of the Defense Policy Board, Zionist Paul Wolfowitz as Undersecretary of Defense, and Zionist award winner Douglass Feith as Undersecretary of Defense Policy, the Zionist Pentagon gang controls 3 of the top 4 civilian leadership positions of America’s armed forces. Careerist scoundrels like Condoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld are either under their influence or unwilling to oppose their drive for WW III. The Perle-Wolfowitz-Feith gang represent a fanatical and warmongering "government-within-a-government". In league with these Zionist Pentagon conspirators are jewish Zionist and potential 2004 Presidential candidate, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and his Gentile partner in crime Senator John McCain (R-AZ).

An Israeli journalist named Ari Shavit, lamenting the harsh treatments that his government dishes out to the Palestinians, made the following observation in Ha'aretz, a leading Israeli journal:

" We believe with absolute certitude that now, with the White House and Senate in our hands along with the Pentagon and the New York Times, the lives [of Arabs] do not count as much as our own. Their blood does not count as much as our blood. We believe with absolute certitude that now, when we have AIPAC [the Israel lobby] and [Edgar] Bronfman and the Anti-Defamation League, , we truly have the right to tell 400,000 people that in eight hours they must flee from their homes. And that we have the right to rain bombs on their villages and towns and populated areas. That we have the right to kill without any guilt." (emphasis added)

And this only scratches the surface of Zionist power! With such awesome power to control and cover up events, is it any wonder why so many of America's journalists and politicians are afraid to even talk about this issue? Is it any wonder why former President Bill Clinton would grovel before a jewish audience and say something as ridiculous as the following statement:

"The Israelis know that if the Iraqi or the Iranian army came across the Jordan River, I would personally grab a rifle, get in a ditch, and fight and die."

I could go on and on at much greater length about this subject, but I want to get back to the dancing Israelis. Have I made my point yet?...

Let us review what we have learned. We have clearly established that Zionists played a key role in steering the US into two World Wars. We have clearly established that Zionists do not care if Americans (or others) are killed to further their goals. We have clearly established that Zionists have a record of attacking Americans in order to frame Arabs. We have established that the Zionists are capable of acts of unspeakable brutality and genocide. We have established that US politicians fear the Zionist Mafia and defy them at their own peril. We have learned that warnings of a suicidal hijacking plot were issued to several people. And most importantly of all, we have clearly established that the Zionists have the capacity to make these amazing stories suddenly disappear from their controlled news media.

Having established these precedents, we can now easily deduce that the reason why those five dancing Israeli agents who celebrated the 9-11 attacks were so happy is because they knew that Americans would now become unconditional supporters of their "Israeli ally" and fanatical haters of Muslims and Arabs.

On the day of the attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attack would mean for US-Israeli relations. His quick reply was "It's very good…….Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)"

The five Israelis made such a spectacle that everyone who saw them felt compelled to call the police. According to ABC’s 20/20, when the van belonging to the cheering Israelis was stopped by the police, the first words out of the driver's (Sivan Kurzberg) lying mouth were: "We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem."

The police and FBI field agents became really suspicious when they found box cutters (the same items that the hijackers supposedly used), $4700 cash stuffed in a sock, and foreign passports. Police also told the Bergen Record that bomb sniffing dogs were brought to the van and that they reacted as if they had smelled explosives.

From there, the story gets becomes even more suspicious. The Israelis worked for a Weehawken moving company known as Urban Moving Systems. An American employee of Urban Moving Systems told the Bergen Record that a majority of his co-workers were Israelis and they were all joking about the attacks. The employee, who declined to give his name said: "I was in tears. These guys were joking and that bothered me."

A few days after the attacks, Urban Moving System's Israeli owner, Dominick Suter, dropped his business and fled the country. He was in such a hurry to flee America that some of Urban Moving System's customers were left with their furniture stuck in storage facilities. The five Israeli army veterans (Mossad) were held in custody for several months before being quietly released. Some of the movers had been kept in solitary confinement for 40 days.

Immediately following the attacks, the Zionist controlled media was filled with stories linking the attacks to Bin Laden. TV talking-heads and scribblers of every stripe spoon-fed a gullible American public a steady diet of the most outrageous propaganda imaginable. We were told that the reason Bin Laden attacked the USA was because he hates our "freedom" and "democracy". The Muslims were "medieval" and they wanted to destroy us because of our wealth.

But Bin Laden strongly denied any role in the attacks and suggested that Zionists orchestrated the 9-11 attacks:

"I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks....The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States." 63

To date, the only shred of "evidence" to be uncovered against Bin Laden was a highly suspicious, barely audible amateur video, that the Zionist dominated Pentagon just happened to find "lying around" in Afghanistan. Though there is no evidence, be it hard or circumstantial, to link the Al Qaeda "terrorist network" to these acts of terror; there is in fact a mountain of evidence, both hard and circumstantial, which suggests that the Zionist Mafia has been very busy framing Arabs for terror plots against America....

OBAMA WILL BE A GOOD FRIEND TO ISRAEL, HILLARY CLINTON TELLS AIPAC
- OBAMA IS MY FRIEND

US presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton delivered an address to AIPAC in Washington on Wednesday morning.

Less than 24 hours after the Associated Press reported that Senator Barack Obama had clinched a sufficient number of delegates to claim the Democratic nomination, Clinton announced that it had been “an honor” for her “to contest this race with [him]” and that it was also an honor to call Obama her friend.

Clinton then stated that she knew “Obama will be a good friend to Israel” and that the presumptive Democratic nominee “shares [her] views” that the US stands with Israel “now and forever.”

The US presidential candidate opened her speech by praising the pro-Israel lobby group for engaging in the constitutionally protected activity of “exercising the right to petition,” and expressed her “pleasure” in representing “one of the largest Jewish constituencies” in her role as a senator from New York State.

Speaking in commemoration of Israel’s 60th anniversary, the senator lauded Israel by stating that the Jewish state’s story “demonstrates [that] democracy can flourish in the most difficult of environments.”

“What a remarkable 60 years it has been,” the former first lady said, noting that after nearly continual “trials and tears” since Israel’s independence, “the desert is blooming again.”

Turning to current threats faced by Israel, Clinton declared that “our hearts go out to residents of cities like Sderot,” who exist under a nearly continuous barrage of Kassam rocket attacks.

In contrast to Obama, who expressed a deep commitment to Israel’s security, the New York senator also made mention of Israel’s security barrier. She recalled her visit to the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo, where she witnessed the barrier “protecting families.” She went on to say that she has “spoken up for the right of Israeli families to have that protective fence.”

At the close of her speech, Clinton outlined what she considered to be three important points of her Middle East and Israel foreign policy.

First, she stressed the importance of continued US support for Israel, including the 2 billion dollars of US military aid [a.k.a. US Taxpayers’ aid] given annually and cautioned against pressuring Israel to make unilateral concessions or implement “made in America” solutions to the conflict.

Secondly, she said that “no nuclear weapons for Iran” with its “president who denies the Holocaust” must be a central component of American policy in the region. Clinton reiterated her previous calls to have the US Congress define the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terror organization.

Lastly, Clinton stressed the importance of standing up against “hatred and anti-Semitism wherever they are found” and said that “every fair-thinking person must be concerned.”

Continuing to highlight the fight against anti-Semitism, she said that the “debacle at Durban” should never be repeated and even went as far to say that perhaps the “US should boycott” the so-called Durban II conference should it contain anti-Semitism rhetoric.

Despite her opponent Barack Obama having claimed victory on Tuesday evening, Senator Clinton made no mention of it, nor did she hint at conceding her campaign.

I was born in Illinois, the “Land of Lincoln,” and I’ve been studying our sixteenth president all my life. For me, he was the wisest and most spiritual of our presidents. He was also one of only a few who have been in office when acts of war brought death and destruction to American soil.

Carved in the marble walls of the Lincoln Memorial are these eloquent words from Abraham Lincoln’s second inaugural address:

With malice toward none; with charity for all; and with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan – to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.

Our family explored what it means to seek peace when we invited a young Muslim student to dinner in our home a few months after September 11, 2001. As the meal progressed, one of our sons asked our guest how she came to be in America.

“My father came here on a work visa,” she replied. “‘when the trouble came, he told us to pack to return home, because he was afraid of how Americans might treat us. Then, a few nights before we were to leave, he was watching the news on television. There was a group of people outside the White House, protesting American military action. A large, hostile crowd watched the protesters, and between the two groups were dozens and dozens of police. My father watched for a long time and then turned to the family and said, “Go unpack your bags. We are staying. Nowhere else in the world would the police protect the protesters. This is the freest land on earth, and we will make it our home.”

Lord, as I remember Abraham Lincoln, let me remember the blessings of freedom we share with all who come to our shores.

WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Robert Gates recommended Monday that Gen. Norton Schwartz, a 35-year veteran with a background in Air Force special operations, be the next Air Force chief.

In a sweeping shake up of the Air Force, Gates also formally sent former Air Force official Michael Donley's name to the White House to be the next secretary of the beleaguered service.

Gates announced last Thursday that he was removing Air Force Gen. Michael Moseley from the chief's job and Michael Wynne as its top civilian. Gates held them accountable for failing to fully correct an erosion of nuclear-related performance standards.

In an effort to get at least part of the new team in place right away, Gates also asked Bush to designate Donley as the acting secretary effective June 21 — a move that would allow him to begin work without waiting for Senate confirmation. Wynne's resignation is effective that day.

Schwartz had been thought to be in line for retirement, and his replacement as head of Transportation Command, Lt. Gen. William Fraser III, had been announced in April. But on Monday Gates recommended that Fraser be nominated as the next vice chief of the Air Force.

And he said that Gen. Duncan McNabb, the current vice chief, should move to the Transportation Command job.

Later Monday Gates is planning to visit Langley Air Force Base, Va., to address airmen and underscore the depth of his concern about weaknesses in service's leadership.

He is expected to stress the importance of leadership accountability and emphasize that despite his well-publicized tensions with the Air Force, he strongly supports the service and appreciates its many wartime contributions.

On Tuesday, Gates plans to make similar speeches at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo., home of Air Force Space Command, which has responsibility for the service's nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile force, and at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., home of Air Mobility Command, whose tanker refueling aircraft are part of the nuclear bomber mission.

When he announced last Thursday that he was firing Wynne and Moseley, Gates expressed disappointment that shortcomings in the Air Force's handling of its nuclear mission had been allowed to persist.

"I believed that we needed a change of leadership to bring a new perspective and to especially underscore the importance of accountability in dealing with these kinds of problems," Gates told reporters Thursday.

He said at the time that his decision was based mainly on the damning conclusions of an internal report on the mistaken shipment to Taiwan of four Air Force fusing devices for ballistic missile nuclear warheads. And he linked the underlying causes of that slip-up to another startling incident: the North Dakota-to-Louisiana flight last August of a B-52 bomber that was mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

The report asserted that slippage in the Air Force's nuclear standards was a "problem that has been identified but not effectively addressed for over a decade."

Gates said the Taiwan mistake did not compromise U.S. nuclear weapons technology and did not pose a physical danger, but it "raised questions in the minds of the public as well as internationally."

Tony McPeak, the retired general who was Air Force chief of staff during the first Gulf War in the early 1990s, said in a telephone interview Monday that he welcomed the selections of Schwartz and Donley.

"It's not a mainstream kind of thing" to choose an officer with Schwartz's extensive background in special operations, McPeak said. But Schwartz also has a variety of other experience, including holding senior positions on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "It's good to have that" broader perspective on the Air Force, said McPeak.

McPeak worked with Donley when Donley was the acting Air Force secretary in the early months of the first Clinton administration in 1993.

Donley served as acting secretary of the Air Force for seven months in 1993 and was the service's top financial officer from 1989 to 1993. He is currently the Pentagon's director of administration and management, and has held a variety of strategy and policy positions in government, including a stint on the National Security Council from 1984 to 1989.

Before that he was a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee staff. He served in the Army from 1972 to 1975. He earned bachelors and masters degrees from the University of Southern California.

Schwartz has held several high-level assignments on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and has been commander of the U.S. Transportation Command since September 2005.

Schwartz, a pilot with more than 4,200 flying hours, served as Commander of the Special Operations Command-Pacific, as well as Alaskan Command, Alaskan North American Aerospace Defense Command Region, and the 11th Air Force. Prior to assuming his current position, Schwartz was Director, the Joint Staff, Washington, D.C.

He attended the Air Force Academy and the National War College, and he participated as a crew member in the 1975 airlift evacuation of Saigon. In 1991, he served as chief of staff of the Joint Special Operations Task Force for Northern Iraq in operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.

Lt. General Schwartz, a 1973 graduate of the Air Force Academy, is Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Washington, D.C. In that role, he assists the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff by supervising, coordinating and providing support for and administering the work of the Joint Staff. He also functions as the Chairman’s point of contact for the National Defense University, and with the Secretary of Defence and other U.S. Government agencies.

General Schwartz is a command pilot with more than 4200 flying hours in a variety of aircraft. He participated as a crewmember in the 1975 airlift evacuation of Saigon and, in 1991, served as Chief of Staff of the Joint OPerations Task Force for Northern Iraq in operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. In 1997, he led the Joint Task Force that prepared for the noncombatant evacuation of U.S. citizens in Cambodia.

When the JCC (Jewish Community Centers) Armed Forces & Veterans Committe presented its Military Leadership Award to air force Lt. General Norton Schwartz in 2004, the general said he was “Proud to be identified as a Jewish as well as an American military leader.”

The Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal (also known as the AIPAC espionage scandal) refers to allegations that information regarding United States policy towards Iran was passed to Israel through Lawrence Franklin via staffers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC]. Franklin, a former Defense Department employee, has pleaded guilty to several espionage-related charges and was sentenced in January 2006 to nearly thirteen years of prison. Two former AIPAC employees have also been indicted.

The investigation and prosecutions, which began in 1999, have attracted attention because critics of U.S. Israeli policy have claimed AIPAC has served as a conduit for Israel’s spying efforts with near impunity due to its powerful connections in Washington. Franklin's indictment mentioned but did not name several foreign diplomats, widely believed to be Israeli, as being involved with his efforts.

On August 27, 2004, CBS News broke a story about an FBI investigation into a possible spy in the US Department of Defense working for Israel. The story reported that the FBI had uncovered a spy working as a policy analyst under Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. He was later identified as Lawrence Franklin, who had previously served as an attaché at the US embassy in Israel and was one of two mid-level Pentagon officials in the Office of the Secretary of Defense responsible for Iran policy in the office's Northern Gulf directorate. He has since been demoted within the Defense Department and no longer has his previous security privileges. Furthermore, he was sentenced on January 20, 2006 to 12 years and 7 months in prison sentence and a $10,000 fine for passing classified information to a pro-Israel lobby group and an Israeli diplomat Lawrence Franklin has pled guilty to passing on a classified Presidential Directive, and other sensitive documents pertaining to US deliberations on foreign policy regarding Iran, to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, who in turn provided the information to Israel. FBI sources have indicated that the year-long investigation was actively underway when the CBS News story broke.

According to FBI surveillance tapes, Franklin relayed top-secret information to Steve Rosen, AIPAC's then-policy director, and Keith Weissman, a senior Iran analyst with AIPAC, while at the Tivoli Restaurant in Arlington, Virginia. On 27 August, the FBI raided Rosen's office, copying his personal computer's hard drive.

According to the New York Times, Lawrence Franklin was one of two U.S. officials that held meetings with Iranian dissidents, including Paris-based arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar, a key figure in the Iran-Contra affair. These Pentagon-approved meetings were brokered by neoconservative Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, who had also played a part in Iran-Contra, and is said to have taken place in Paris in June of 2003. The Jerusalem Post reported that the purpose of the meetings was to "undermine a pending deal that the White House had been negotiating with the Iranian government", specifically, an exchange of high-ranking al-Qaeda members in Iranian custody in return for a stop to U.S. support of the anti-Iranian Mujahideen al-Khalq fighters in Iraq. The Post article dated the beginning of the FBI investigation to this secret meeting, which the public first learned about in August 2003.

Franklin had previously been assigned to a unit tasked with the Pentagon's Iraq policy, raising concern that he might have been used to influence the war on Iraq, although Pentagon officials have maintained that he was in no position to influence policy....

On August 30, 2004, Israeli officials admitted that Franklin had met repeatedly with Naor Gilon, head of the political department at the Israeli Embassy in Washington and a specialist on Iran's nuclear programs, but point out that this was completely appropriate activity for the two Iran specialists. A Newsweek report indicates that Gilon was under FBI surveillance and that Franklin only became a target after these meetings.

It has been suggested that Franklin's motivations may have been ideological or personal, rather than financial. An unnamed U.S. intelligence official told Newsweek: "for whatever reason, the guy hates Iran [the Iranian government] passionately."

Franklin's security clearance was revoked, although he was not fired, merely demoted. The FBI investigation continued until May 5 when he was arrested and charged with giving away top-secret information.

On May 3, 2005, the FBI filed criminal charges against Franklin. The complaint alleges that, at a June 26, 2003 lunch, Franklin disclosed classified national defense information related to potential attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq to two unnamed individuals. According to media reports, the two individuals are Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, who were employed by AIPAC at the time. The complaint also alleges that Franklin disclosed classified information to "a foreign official and members of the media", and that a search of Franklin's home found approximately 83 classified documents.

Franklin appeared in court on May 4. He was released on $100,000 bond. Franklin's lawyer said he will plead not guilty.

On August 4, a federal grand jury indicted Franklin on five charges of violating the Espionage Act of 1917.

One count of conspiracy to communicate national defense information to people not entitled to receive it. (18 USC 793 (d), (e) and (g))

Three counts of communicating national defense information to people not entitled to receive it. (18 USC 793)

One count of conspiring to communicate national defense information to an agent of a foreign government. (50 US 783, 18 USC 731)

Rosen was further charged with one count each of the first two, and Weissman with one count of the first charge.

The indictment revealed that the investigation had been going on since 1999, and suggested that other individuals at AIPAC, the Defense Department and the Israeli embassy had been involved as well. The indictment also alleged that Kenneth Pollack, a National Security Council staffer during the Clinton administration, provided information to Rosen and Weissman.

On September 30, the Washington Post reported that Franklin was negotiating an agreement with prosecutors and would plead guilty to at least the conspiracy charges at a court hearing the following week, after which he would continue his cooperation with prosecutors.

He did indeed plead guilty to the three conspiracy counts on October 5, explaining that he had shared his frustrations over U.S. Iran policy with the other two defendants regularly in 2002 and later passed documents he knew were classified to them in the hope they could get them to employees of the National Security Council who might be able to help force a harder line. He also asked Rosen for help getting him a job at the NSC; Rosen told him, "I'll see what I can do," claimed Franklin.

He also passed other classified information along to an Israeli official concerning weapons testing and military activities in Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries. In return, he said, the Israeli official told him far more. Franklin stated that he knew some of the documents he passed along could be used to the detriment of U.S. national security interests.

On January 20, 2006, Judge T.S. Ellis, III sentenced Franklin to 12 years and 7 months in prison sentence and a $10,000 fine for passing classified information to a pro-Israel lobby group and an Israeli diplomat.

In August, he denied Weissman and Rosen's motion to dismiss their indictment on the grounds that the government could still prosecute and punish those who retransmitted classified information regardless of whether they had a security clearance or not, an interpretation of the Espionage Act that could have wide-reaching implications if it were allowed to become legal precedent.

The spying charges have been denied by Israel as well as AIPAC. The Israeli Embassy in Washington called the charges "completely false and outrageous". AIPAC stated the allegations were "baseless and false".

On December 1, 2004 FBI agents raided the offices of AIPAC and seized computer equipment and files of Howard Kohr, the Executive Director, Richard Fishman, Managing Director, Renee Rothstein, Communication Director and Raphael Danziger. Research Director. According to an article published in the Washington Post eight days later, all were suspected of being cut-outs, agents who picked up information from Franklin and passed it on to Israel. The FBI did not bring charges against any of them.

There has been at least one other case of Israeli espionage in the United States before the AIPAC scandal. Jonathan Pollard, an Israeli spy who worked in the Naval Anti-Terrorist Alert Center, pleaded guilty to espionage and was sentenced to life in prison in 1987. The incident had a significantly detrimental impact on U.S.-Israeli relations. Israeli officials have stated that the Israeli government terminated all espionage activities in the United States after the Pollard affair.

Some believe that Israel's credibility with regards to Franklin is tainted by their insistence in the Pollard case that he likewise was not a spy, a position they maintained for 13 years before admitting, in 1998, that Pollard indeed had been a spy for Israel.... Others think the damage that Israel sustained over the Pollard affair makes it unlikely that the country would again jeopardize its relationship with the United States through espionage, and note that the U.S. government has neither registered a protest with the Israelis nor accused its officials of wrongdoing in the AIPAC affair...

According to a Pentagon statement, "the investigation involves a single individual at D.O.D. at the desk officer level, who was not in a position to have significant influence over U.S. policy." However, this characterization ignores evidence that while at the Office of Special Plans, Douglas Feith used Larry Franklin for sensitive projects involving foreign citizen contacts, overseas.

And according to the British Newspaper The Guardian, Feith's office had an unconventional relationship with Israel's intelligence services:

The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon's office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam's Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise.

"None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels," said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms.

The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel's Likud party.

Unauthorized information transmitted to foreign citizens was a reason for Larry Franklin's 12 year Federal Prison sentence.

However, it is said that the information would have allowed Israel to apply pressure on the US prior to a final Iran policy statement. An undisclosed CBS News source said Franklin would have been "inside the decision-making loop" on Iran policy. Tensions between Israel and Iran have recently increased in the wake of the regional power vacuum left by the collapse of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Israel is deeply distrustful of Iran's nuclear intentions and has warned it may carry out air strikes against Iranian nuclear reactors. Iran has indicated it may hit back in a similar fashion at Israel...

Journalist Jim Lobe suggests that the Franklin story is part of a larger investigation into transfer of sensitive military and dual-use technologies to Israel, including powerful case-management software. A concern is that Israeli companies have sold on sensitive U.S.-derived technology to potential U.S. strategic rivals such as Russia and China, and possibly on the black market where it can potentially be obtained by terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda.

FYI: Susan Oki, Echi Oki, Dan Mollway, Airline Industry, SEC, and the Broken Trust Asian Pacific Bamboo Legacy in collusion with AIPAC Political influence in the powerful influential Defense Appropriation Committee members {Ted Stevens and Duke Cunnigham} under Hawaii U.S. Senator Daniel Inouye's leadership...... and the stealth Political, Economic, and Socialized intents for the pending AKAKA BILL in Congress, documented, again, under "A Confederacy of Dunces" {Forbes}.

Hey CB....this one is the ultimate "insiders" in Hawaii regulatory Government for the Broken Trust cabals linked to the Hawaii Legislature members including their own Federal Reps in Washington protecting their Hawaiian Hui "inside" investors from Southeast Asia to Wall Street:

I talked with the State Ethic's Commissioner / Director, Dan Mollway....Ms. Susan Oki's husband... about the BIG conflicts of interests involving our case against the State DLNR, The Ombudsman Office Director, The DCCA Rico "Investigations" with huge Political cover-ups involving the ANZAI's and the Hawaii Judicial system protecting their own regulatory local hui investors linked to the Bishop Estate Trustees.

Dan Mollway was involved with the "separate" Investigations involving the DLNR Bureau of Conveyance Public land records being ILLEGALLY manipulated and tampered for "Controlled Business" practices by the private sector {Title Guarantee Company employees with Realtors linked to Hoiku Consultant private computers being placed strategically in Public Office Government Buildings linked to the Hawaii Legislature members and the KSBE investments under Headmaster Colbert Matsumoto}.

He claimed that the State Ethics Department was still in the process of their own "separate" investigations {with vague public follow-ups since last year} while the State of Hawaii Attorney General's office conducted their own internal "investigations" in conjunction with a Third Investigations by the Hawaii Legislature members with their Union supported employees!

This again, is the same as a California PYRO MANIAC investigating his own blazing Wild Fire, while creating numerous distracted small fires around the BIG MAIN BON-FIRE, to attention away from his malicious and well calculated deeds!

The gas can {State of Hawaii DLNR Public Forgery Document Executive Order 3117 with a false Public misleading Official GAO Survey Map} with the match {The original suppressed DLNR Legal Access documents} and the remaining evidence with charred ruins {The Hawaiian Airline Pilot's family Bankruptcy proceedings implicating the KSBE and U.S. Trustees mishandling and suppressing the FRAUD} is all their for the "Investigators" conducted by the same Hawaii Buzzards and Vultures linked to the BROKEN TRUST Hawaii Legislature members, again, conducting their own Public Relation separate "investigations" for their Union memberships obtaining bribery gifts and favors {Oriental customs?}; The Hawaii State Ethics Director, linked to the Bamboo network Hawaii Judiciary system Huis with their own separate Public Relation damage control "investigations" to nowhere under the Hawaii AG's Office....promoting a Sovereign Hawaiian Bill, based on Illegal Political Constructive Fraud in Washington {1993 Simple Federal Apology Resolution to Hawaii by Senators Daniel Inouye and Akaka} while ignoring blatant Public Fraud and Political Corruption with OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE with HUGE CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS for: "SOCIAL EQUALITY AND POLITICAL JUSTICE FOR ALL" in Washington......

DOESN'T GET MUCH BETTER THAN THIS while Congress protects their own vested interests under the Political Department of Injustice cabals while helping spread American Democracy and American Values in the controversial Middle East and around the World!

Some interesting bit of side notes involving Ms. Susan Oki and her father....a former member of the famed 442 U.S. Military Regiment: My father, a former World War 11 Combat photographer in the South Pacific theatre, was married to a local Japanese during the War. He was a distant Political acquaintance and supporter for Jack Burns in Kailua, Oahu. They both belonged to the Kailua Lions Club and were both members of the private Lanikai Mid-Pacific Country Club....mostly all haole members after the War years.

My father was involved in a very fraudulent Hawaii land purchase and sale during the 1950s involving a corrupt Hawaii land surveyor and a fellow Irishman linked to the Hawaii Judges family members. After he relocated to San Francisco in the early 1960s, he retained a Hawaii attorney whom I believe was none other than Echi Oki.....from Honolulu, linked to the famed 442 Hawaii Military Brigade members whom he always supported due to the persecution of the local Hawaii Japanese community after Pearl Harbor.

Echi Oki, again, had close political links vis-a-vis their Military Service to Dan Inouye and their tight knit Hawaii 442 hui cabals.....prior and after the 1954 Hawaii Legislature Revolution. My father lost the Court case, despite the SELLER testifying in favor of my fathers allegations...... with huge conflicts of interests since the Judge was related to the Hawaii Judge {Taveras}.

Another side Note with the Airline Industry: I was personally involved with the earlier Bankruptcy proceedings with Frontier Airlines in Denver {1986} which later involved Drexel Burnham Wall Street investors linked to Frank Lorenzo and Carl Ichan in New York. Like Mr. Rodney Stich, the FAA investigator making allegations against United Airlines in Denver, I was singled out with several others for exposing blatant FAA rules and blatant Public Safety violations involving massive fraud and corruption benefiting short-cutting - Airline cost saving procedures...comprising massive Public Safety cover-ups and FAA regulatory with damage control omitted issues involving the new non-unionized, young and ignorant work force.

This all began with the across the board firings for the FAA Air Traffic Controllers soon after the Reagan - Bush Sr Tenure came into Office in 1981. The massive Airline De-regulations in Washington vis-a-vis Wall Stree profiteers, {i.e. - Michael Milken, Marc Rich, Ivan Boesky} during the roaring unregulated 1980s which became famous with the Movies: WALL STREET {Michael Douglas} and "BARBARIANS AT THE GATE".

AIPAC'S Norman Brownstein, based in Downtown Denver, vis-a-vis my former Brownstein political mole "girlfriend" , New York attorney Lisa Holstein, was responsible for helping Lorenzo with the Texas Continental Airline gang members to get out of their Prime gate and exclusive lounge commitments, including a faulty Automated Baggage system, involving more massive fraud and cover-ups at the new Denver International Airport were allowed to quietly relocate back to their Houston based "Texas Air Corp" headquarters.

In 1993, Clinton denied Frank Lorenzo, with his New York Attorney wife with Chase Manhattan Bank, as well as their Texas Air Corps - Colorado Resort land investors in Aspen & Vail {Phillip Winn Group}, to continue manipulating the SEC within the confines of the "insiders" under the lucrative "De-Regulated Airline Industry" mergers using Union Pension plans for lucrative leveraged acquisitions....compromising Public Safety and FAA violations with massive cover-ups in Washington.

Again, like former FAA investigator, Rodney Stich, doing his job, I became another Politcial liability, which is the former "inside" Dept of Justice / CIA lawyer, Norman Phillip Brownstein's expertise specialized job as Mr. Fix It at DIA; Protecting SEC Billionaire Fugitive's such as Marc Rich and HUD Director Phil Winn, while sheltering Drug Traffic cabals with Florida's Jack Devoe...for helping AIPAC's Political "cause" in Washington DC into vested SECURITY interests in the secular Middle East.....of course....always using OPM: The defrauded & obliviouos American Public Tax Payers left holding the bag on Wall Street to Main Street.

Brownstein's young, former single AIPAC New York mole attorney, Ms. Lisa Holstein, like others linked to AIPAC and David Steiner, as well as former CIA - U.S. federal prosecutor - Hawaii Public Safety Director, John Peyton, are reported deceased in New York and remote Africa?

The Rocky Mountain High - SILVERADO DNC Political Convention in Denver, Colorado, moving the Public cost over-run to a larger media exposure event with INVESCO Stadium {Bronco Pro Football Stadium...who are clients of NORM BROWNSTEIN, JACK HYATT, AND STEVE FARBER, now joined by former GOP Denver University CABALS - former Colorado RNC Chairman, Commercial Real Estate Investor and Resigned Department of Veterans Affair Director - James "De Oppressor Libre" Nicholson, linked to former Colorado RNC Chair, for convicted Swiss Ambassador - HUD Director - Phil Winn {DU Professor} with former DU Secretary of Interior Gale {CREA} Norton, as well as the latest new GOP University of Colorado connections to former U.S. Senator / UC President Hank Brown....involved in the "E Pluribus Unum" Wall Street article related to: THE 1993 Simple FEDERAL APOLOGY RESOLUTION TO HAWAII under Clinton with Political Constructive FRAUD and Public cover-up intents for the future Public subsidized AKAKA BILL in Congress....pending in Washington since 2000, after the U.S. Supreme Court decision over ruling the Hawaii Political Judicial system hidden under the Political Ninth District Circuit Court of Appeals, involving 'RICE V. CAYETANO' {Office of Hawaiian Affairs}.

Subject: Check out The Raw Story | Official probing Rove now under investigation himself

To: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov, senator@akaka.senate.gov, ustrustee.program@usdoj.gov, admin@ehawaii.gov, jurisnot@yahoo.com, bobby_n_harmon@yahoo.com, hwburgess@hawaii.rr.com, Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com, rroth@hawaii.edu}

"While Rove Fiddled; The Bush was Burning"? or........White men who can't dance?

a} Congressional Defense Appropriation Committee members, previous Bureau of Indian Affair Chairman, Veterans Affair Committees, Intelligence Committees, Special Counsels {Iran - Contra / Central America International Committees} Bishop, Baldwin, REWALD, Dillingham & Wong, for Hawaii U.S. Senator - Daniel Inouye - Defense Chairman linked to: hidden Public Pork Barrel proceeds for the lavish Hokulia Canoe for Hawaiians only programs / Women Abuse Shelters for Two Political Hawaii Legislature members involved in 1992 U.S. Senate race allegations for Sexual Harassment allegations / Private Defense Contractor Brent Wilkes - Hawaii ADSC Company fronts - Lavish Hawaiian Private Vacations - Luxury Private Accommodations - Hawaiian "Entertainment" linked to Asian Pacific Advisory Council Politicians {Prince Hotels} - AIPAC Lobbyist for Akaka Bill; {Dismissed U.S. Attorney - Frederick Black, Political Appointee under former CIA Director / Vice-President / President George H. Bush linked to former U.S. Federal Prosecutors John Peyton - Kenneth Starr in collusion with former Hawaii District Judges {deceased}: Martin Pence, Harold Fong, & California District Judge: Brian Tamahana}.

b} Alaska U.S. Senator - Ted Stevens linked to hidden Public Pork Barrel projects {Bridge To Nowhere} with family member to self serving Alaska Contractors - Home remodeling projects as well as lobbying ANWAR Bill under the Department of Interior {CREA} with members with the Defense Appropriation Committee Political links to members of Congressional Committees {I.E. - Veterans Committee Chairman - Daniel Akaka, sponsor for the stealth Akaka Bill with no Public voice or vote in Hawaii, Obstruction of Justice in the South Pacific {Jack Abramoff - Tom Delay} and the Broken Trust legacy in Hawaii, in political exchanges for continued political support for a Case of War in Iraq and the ANWAR Bill.

c} California Congressman - Duke "Dukestar" Cunningham: Defense Appropriation Committee member - Veterans Affair Committees linked to lavish Political briberies with Private Defense Contractors and CIA agents linked to Iraq War Appropriations in Washington DC, Southern California, and Hawaii lavish vacations - "Entertainment" with obstruction of justice linked to political Dismissed U.S. Attorney Carole Lam, linked to Political dismissed U.S. Attorney Frederick Black in the South Pacific involving Jack Abramoff {AIPAC} linked to Grover Norquist and Tom Delay {CNP - PNAC}.

Outstanding representatives from the five branches of the U.S. military (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard) and the U.S. Special Operations Command were honored May 26, 2005 in Houston with JINSA’s (The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs) “Grateful Nation Award.” Lieutenant General Norton Schwartz, USAF, the Director of the Joint Staff, made the presentations to the Grateful Nation recipients on behalf of the Joint Chiefs and the Department of Defense.

The Grateful Nation Award was created two years ago to recognize those from the enlisted, noncommissioned officer and junior officer ranks who have distinguished themselves through superior conduct in the War on Terrorism since the September 11 attacks. The six Grateful Nation Award recipients, the third group to be so honored following presentations in 2003 and 2004, were each chosen by their respective services. JINSA organized travel for the recipients and their families to Houston. In addition, each honoree was presented with a monetary award....

"There has been since almost the earliest days of the Israeli state and the earliest days of the CIA a secret bond, basically by which Israeli intelligence did jobs for the CIA and for the rest of American intelligence. You can't understand what's been going on with American covert operations and the Israeli covert operations until you understand this secret arrangement."

Want to know a few of the results of the move towards the so-called "Global Economy" which has become the nirvana Corporate America seeks? Be very careful, you might not like what you find.

According to U.N. documents, 4 million women a year are sold into sexual slavery around the world. Understand, these documents aren't discussing some Mid- Eastern potentate's harem. What we're talking about is 500,000 women "imported" into Western Europe and 90,000 into Italy, alone. These women are kidnapped and sold into prostitution for the gratification of men like the late Larry Hilblom, the founder of DHL courier service. Hilblom, it should be added, also participated in the kidnapping and sales of many young women, as well.

The majority of these women, who are mostly just young girls, come from the countries once known as client states of the old Soviet Union, such as Albania and the Ukraine. In fact, the selling of girls for the sexual gratification of wealthy men has become a major export for many of the supposedly free nations from the former Soviet bloc.

Amazingly, many of these women are moved through our ally Israel. The reason Israel is a major center for these atrocities is that Israel has absolutely no laws against the sale or ownership of other humans. Now there is wonderful reason to continue our hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign aid to this moral back water of a country.

The main reason that these crimes can so easily occur is the demand by the world's corporations that there be few or no inspections at national borders and that, with corporations buying up governments just like ours at bargain prices, they own the decisions to investigate crimes and, of course, see no reason to investigate the very crimes they, themselves, are committing.

Now, of course, America is immune from these charges, aren't we. I mean, this is the country where politicians spend their entire careers shouting about their fairy tale world of "family values", right? Our government would immediately spring into action should even a hint of this crime appear within our borders, right?

Wrong, of course. Thai women were imported into the United States and forced into sexual slavery in New York, Houston and Toronto, according to stories in the LA Times, New York Times and Dallas Morning News.

How long will it take the corporate prostitutes in Washington, D.C., to even acknowledge these crimes? How many conservatives do you think are going to stand up in protest against these horrors against humanity? How many will demand hundreds of billions of dollars to fight these crimes against humanity? What is less than none?

Unless America wakes up to these violations against humanity and demands action from the blow hards in office, nothing, whatsoever, will ever happen. Why? Because the victims do not fall within the parameters these vile people respect. These are young girls from foreign countries that don't contribute to American political coffers, nor are they related to anyone who owns enough property to matter to American politicians. If they were all Republican, Christian, wealthy wives and daughters of campaign contributors then this would be a problem of cosmic proportion. They aren't, so the problem is ignored.

These crimes against women are only the most extreme examples of the damage that is being done to people all over the world in the name of corporate profits. Add in the disease ridden fruit coming into America from countries which have little in the way of health and safety laws and food covered with the pesticides that America banned so Corporate America sold its stock to the same Third World countries now supplying us with our daily fruits and vegetables and grains.

Consider the effects that corrupt rulers the world over have regarding the financial health of your retirement and investments and, if the idiots who hate government safety nets have their way, your Social Security. Consider the damage another episode like the Hunt brothers attempt to corner the silver market would have on America if it were done by a nation or groups of nations. Finally, consider the costs of a simple computer virus invading the systems which control what will be the world's financial institution.

You, as an individual, have absolutely nothing to gain in a global economy. In fact, you will be the loser if you continue to listen to the lies and do not begin fighting the mutation of your world into a world corporation where the wealthy would rule through unlimited economic power. As in all things, it is your choice but your inaction will affect billions of people for centuries to come.

The following is a partial listing of Defendant’s named prospective witnesses in CV05-00030 - David C. Farmer vs. Harmon, who have factual connections with this case. Each underlined name has been linked to a detailed description of that witness to enable the reader to more easily CONNECT THE DOTS TO...

WASHINGTON - The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday subpoenaed former White House top political adviser Karl Rove to testify about whether the White House improperly meddled with the Justice Department.

Accusations of politics influencing decisions at the department led to last year's resignation of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The subpoena issued Thursday orders Rove to testify before the House panel on July 10. He is expected to face questions about the White House's role in firing nine U.S. attorneys in 2006 and the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama, a Democrat.

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers had negotiated with Rove's attorneys for more than a year over whether the former top aide to President Bush would testify voluntarily.

"It is unfortunate that Mr. Rove has failed to cooperate with our requests," Conyers, D-Mich., said in a statement. "Although he does not seem the least bit hesitant to discuss these very issues weekly on cable television and in the print news media, Mr. Rove and his attorney have apparently concluded that a public hearing room would not be appropriate."

"Unfortunately, I have no choice today but to compel his testimony on these very important matters," Conyers said.

Neither Rove nor his attorney, Robert Luskin, could be immediately reached for comment.

While reportedly under investigation for her ties to an influential pro-Israel lobbying organization, California Rep. Jane Harman last month hosted a private dinner for the group that was attended by two top Bush administration officials—Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff.

The Sept. 13 dinner took place at the home of Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Select Committee on Intelligence, and was attended by over 120 top financial backers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The highlight of the evening was a panel discussion in which Harman played the host, questioning Negroponte and Chertoff about Mideast developments, international terrorism and homeland-security issues, according to an AIPAC official.

The dinner was hardly an unusual one for AIPAC. The group often arranges such elite pow-wows at the homes of senior members of Congress and government officials (one in the mid-1990s was hosted by then Vice President Al Gore) as a way for AIPAC to both demonstrate its political clout and to provide a perk for major donors.

But last month’s event raises new questions about recent reports that the FBI was investigating whether Harman, an outspoken supporter of Israel, last year may have agreed to improperly influence an ongoing Justice Department probe of AIPAC. The reports of the probe came just a few days after Harman released a politically sensitive House report that included important new details about the investigation surrounding the activities of disgraced former GOP Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham.

The low-level probe into Harman was launched last year after department officials received a tip that Harman was at the same time seeking the assistance of big AIPAC donors to lobby House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to stay on as the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee (and become the panel’s chairman if the Democrats retake control of the House in next month’s elections.)

Harman has dismissed the investigation, first reported last week by Time magazine’s Web site, as “laughable,” and no evidence has surfaced of any quid pro quo, or even any Harman effort to influence Justice. A Harman aide on Wednesday pointed to Negroponte and Chertoff’s presence at Harman’s home as further evidence that the inquiry couldn’t possibly have been a serious one. “It makes no sense,” said the aide, who asked not to be identified while talking about sensitive matters. “If there was a serious investigation going on, and there were concerns about Jane Harman’s reliability and intentions, why would the administration agree to send these two heavy hitters?”

One explanation could be that the reported Harman probe was on such a close hold that senior administration officials attending last month’s dinner never even knew about the inquiry. Chertoff, who was chief of the Justice Department’s criminal division between 2001 and 2003, “was not aware of an investigation at that time” and only learned about the “alleged investigation” when it became public a few days ago, a spokesman told NEWSWEEK on Wednesday.

A senior law-enforcement official said that Harman “has been looked at in a very preliminary level” because officials are obligated to pursue tips when they come into the Justice Department. But while describing the investigation as “not particularly well developed,” the official added that “it’s not closed.”

But another explanation, the one preferred by Harman’s allies, is that leaks about the probe were part of a political effort to discredit her and to divert attention from what they believe is the real issue: a web of influence peddling and corruption in national-security contracting that has tainted the House Intelligence Committee itself.

The key, they say, is timing. Harman, in recent weeks, has been engaged in an intense and increasingly bitter battle with Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Pete Hoekstra, a Republican from Michigan, over the release of an internal report on the activities of Duke Cunningham, the former California Republican congressman and member of the Intelligence Committee who resigned last year after pleading guilty to accepting at least $2.4 million in bribes. When Hoekstra refused to release a public executive summary of the report, Harman on her own two weeks ago released a copy and posted it on her Web site a move that infuriated Hoekstra and other GOP members of the committee.

The next day, Hoekstra unilaterally suspended Larry Hanauer , a Democratic staff member who reported to Harman, allegedly because of suspicions that Hanauer may have leaked a classified intelligence report on Iraq. (Hanauer has since denied in a sworn affidavit that he played any role in leaking the report, and Democrats have charged that the aide’s suspension was done as “retaliation” for Harman’s release of the Cunningham report.)

It was in the midst of this highly charged, and partisan, squabbling that the reports of the FBI investigation into Harman surfaced. They also came at a time that Pelosi, in line to be House Speaker if the Democrats win, was signaling she does not want Harman to be chairman of the intelligence panel; reports of a FBI probe into Harman would presumably give Pelosi cover to deny the chairmanship to Harman—a moderate Democrat whom Pelosi feels has not been aggressive enough in challenging the Bush administration.

Obscured amid the charges and countercharges is the important new information on the Cunningham investigation included in the Intelligence Committee report, prepared by a special counsel and released by Harman. One was the conclusion by the special counsel, Michael Stern, that the House Intelligence Committee staff had ignored numerous “red flags” that Cunningham was using his position on the panel to steer Pentagon intelligence contracts to one of the contractors, Mitch Wade, who was paying him bribes. (Wade has since pled guilty to bribing Cunningham. ) The red flags included “frequently expressed questions about the ethics and integrity of Wade” and “doubts about the value of the project” that Cunningham was directing to Wade’s company, according to the report.

The other new element was the special counsel’s call for further investigation into the award of large CIA contracts to yet another unidentified company. Federal sources and lawyers close to the case—who asked not to be identified talking about classified matters—tell NEWSWEEK that the unidentified company in the report is Global Transportation Systems (GTS), a Virginia-based shipping broker whose president, Richard Wenzel, has emerged as a potentially key witness in ongoing federal investigations into political influence peddling that have grown out of the Cunningham case, the sources said.

In January 2004, according to investigative blogger Laura Rozen , Wenzel and his company hired as Washington lobbyists a company affiliated with Brent Wilkes, a San Diego businessman who has been named as an unindicated co-conspirator in the Cunningham case. The committee report also describes a private dinner at a fancy Washington restaurant attended by Wenzel, Wilkes, former top CIA official Kyle (Dusty) Foggo and a House Intelligence Committee staffer apparently seeking a job from Wenzel. (Lawyers for Foggo and Wilkes have denied any wrongdoing by their clients. Wenzel could not be reached for comment.)

The clear suggestion in the committee counsel's report is that these alleged cozy relationships among congressional staffers and government officials may have distorted national-security contracting and cost the taxpayers millions of dollars — issues that are potentially more serious than the low-priority probe of Harman or her political feuds with her House colleagues.

Zionism: A Power Cult Of
Greed, Evil Take Back
America - Part 6
By Karl WB Schwarz

The only negative emails I have received regarding Part 1 through Part 5 are several known Zionists that bash anyone that dares to question the stupidity of policies that aid and abet Israel. It is way past time that the United States assume a position of protect Israel but not to the extent of infuriating the over 1 billion Islamic people on this planet. There has to be balance for there to ever be peace.

On the day that this was written, the Israelis had to call off an air strike in the Gaza when hundreds of women and children formed a human shield around a "Palestinian militant" the Israelis intended to kill. If the Israelis want fewer militants and peace, the Israelis need to change their policies. After this news was announced, the Israelis hit a Palestinian car with a missile. They will not stop until they are forced to stop and there are many ways to do that.

I cannot say for you but the dumbest thing I see in the history of this planet is war and killing over religion. The first casualty of war is the truth and that is when both sides have stepped off the ranch and God does not back liars or murderers.

This one particular basher raised a question about me asserting that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. It was indeed and arguing the semantics that many of the Founding Fathers were Deist misses one of the most important dynamics that led to the Revolutionary War. The right of religious freedom that they built into the Bill of Rights was due to what happened that led up to the Revolutionary War.

I enjoy watching the Zionists try to explain why there are so many movements in Judaism to rid their religion of Zionism. They go apoplectic trying to explain that away and out comes the name calling and threats rather than address the simple question.

Why is it that the True Torah Jews do not like you Zionists and want you out of Judaism?

The answer is quite simple. Zionism is not a religion; it is a power cult that represents the pure embodiment of greed and evil. It is an arrogance towards all others that are not part of their cult....

A religious Christian revival and the efforts by the King of England to suppress it led to the American Revolution. For those that study American history in intricate details, this movement and the reaction of the British crown to it are unmistakable as to the role it played in the forming of the United Sates of America.

It was certainly and absolutely not due to the Jewish or Zionists. It was not due to the Mormons who did not even exist at that time with the founding of that group in 1830. How our Bill of Rights came to embrace religious freedom for all came from a Christian movement that pushed Great Britain from our shores.

Thomas Jefferson was wise to see the bigger problem of how governments try to control the masses by micromanaging all things including religion. Freedom of speech was thwarted by King George so our Founding Fathers said enough is enough, never again.

Freedom of religion was what drove millions out of Europe and to the American Colonies so our Founding Fathers said enough is enough, never again.

Many Americans truly do not realize that the Bill of Rights is to bar government from what it cannot do, not what government has the right to do. The baseline for that premise in our Bill of Rights was due to King George. With those lessons fresh in their minds, the Founding Fathers set up a system to bar if from happening here.

It is happening here because our government is now just as despicable as King George and what we sent packing.

The reason that I provided the list in Part 5 is because there has been a similar recent uprising in America but it got off track and off target. They literally let "30 pieces of silver" from the government bribe them in supporting the wrong things. I believe the reason that the government under Bush supports Faith Based Initiatives is to create such a compromised backing over any compassionate conservative beliefs.

Even this recent disclosure that Karl Rove and the White House think the Ecumenical Christians are wackos supports that belief. Instead of being religious leaders they are now just paid PR people for the wrong message.

With 2 out of every 3 voters being conservative, it is really not that hard to craft a message that makes DNC look like a bunch of morons. Their message to America is about as out of touch with America as King George was in 1776 and George W. Bush is right now....

It started in large part due to the many valueless "ists" and "isms" created by the Far Left in the United States. Those same people that America just gave the reigns to in the House and Senate are directly responsible for the growth of the Evangelical movement in the United States. That is the rub between the 2 out of every 3 conservatives in the United States that reject, do not believe and will never believe what the DNC pushes as its mantra.

It does not matter how they slice it, dice it or package it, the true DNC values are not American and are not supported by two-thirds of the voters in the United States.

The Far Left wants a society where anything goes and no value judgments on personal conduct and the vast majority of Americans do not want that at all. Most Americans know that the DNC formula is one of anarchy and a society that will continue to decline. Most Americans are trying to figure out how to reverse the decline and head in the right direction.

The Evangelical movement in the United States made the mistake of engaging in politics which is a field they know nothing about. Evidently many of its leaders are either easily corrupted or lack discernment to detect the lies and see the evils in our government. We are seeing all too well that they cannot operate effectively with the likes of Ralph Reed, Ted Haggard, Falwell, Robertson, etc supporting the sleazy people they did while many of them did not have the character to be in positions of leadership....

Apathy is apparent with over 71 million registered voters not even involving themselves in the process. The Christians have made the mistake of going from abundance to complacency (and then asleep) and then into supporting the wrong things not realizing that bondage was the end result of what they have supported for the past 12 years.

The pendulum is too far left (no values) and too far right (misguided values that have nothing to do with good government or quality of life) and that is why America is casting about like a ship in rough seas and floundering ever nearer to the rocks.

They failed to pay attention to the many laws that were passed that had the intent of plundering America into dependence and bondage. I know many Christians that make the mistake of thinking that their decline in life over the past 12 years was the Will of God when it was the Will of the US government and those they serve.

This urgency of AIPAC and the Zionist to control all things, even speech and thought, is but a part of a larger agenda to push America into bondage, socialism and communism. There are many working against the ideals of freedom and liberty and their goal is subjugation of America.

I have sat in meetings back when the National Policy Forum was still in existence and heard them discuss what the fears are of the New World Order. The first is that they cannot indoctrinate into the US military that it is okay to shoot Americans if ordered to do so. For about 35 years they have tried to indoctrinate that into the soldiers and they have failed. They know that if push comes to shove, US soldiers would turn the guns at those that gave the orders.

That is one of the good things about the conscience that God gave to each of us. When at the edge of the abyss, most make the right decision.

Folks, we are at the edge of the abyss and it is time for Americans to start making the right decisions. Neither the RNC nor the DNC represent the true values of the American people. They have not for many years.

The other thing they are worried about is a Second Great Awakening and it being aimed right at the true heart of the problem. Due to the sheer size of the US economy and the wealth of our nation, a religious upheaval could topple the entire aims of the Zionists, the NWO globalists, and put this nation back on the right track.

A lot of what you are seeing right now is intentional abuse heaped on the Americans citizens to bludgeon us into bondage. They are trying to complete the cycle and push us all into slavery. When they force it to #8 on that list, we have two choices. Either surrender to slavery and bondage or go back to #1 and start over.

They are afraid of a Christian nation standing up and cleaning the house called America. It happened in 1776 and they are afraid it will happen again but in a different way.

We need no armed revolt. All we need is a nation standing up and cleaning house.

That is one of the reasons you see so many lies emanating from these people because they are truly walking on egg shells and thin ice. They know that one inadvertent slip up could spark a colossal uprising in America of Christians who have awakened to find that they are fed up and why they are fed up and do something about it.

What they rely on is intimidation and instilling fear into the masses. That is the only way for them to suppress such an uprising. I knew that in 1991.

This entire boogeyman of terrorism and global terrorism and global threat is but a means to try to keep Americans focused on things other than what is really going on. The bank robbery is in progress and they do not want you to figure that out until it is too late to stop it.

If you are interested, I want you to pay attention to an issue that is coming out of Germany that is what I think is one of those "best laid plans" that is going to backfire in the faces of many who want to push it as a reason for the recent surge in Hate Speech laws in Europe and other places. The Zionists are trying to push this as justification for their existence and conduct.

The Zionists have many in their ranks that are wanton thieves. They know I could prove that in a court of law and is one of the reasons they evade and do not fire back at me. People like Michael Milken, Gary Winnick, Bob Belfer, Andy Fastow, Maurice Greenberg, Sanford Weill and many others have plundered Americans in the capital markets and directed much of that ill-gotten gain to Israel and trying to build their own Zionist Empire in America.

Their religious doctrine in Zionism is that it is not a sin to tell a Gentile (Christian or otherwise) a lie or take what is theirs by any means legal and illegal. Some of them even revel and marvel at themselves in their smartness in doing it illegal time and time again and getting by with it. That is where this inherent arrogance and flaunting of laws comes from by the likes of Milken, Winnick and others. Some are taught, and believe, they are to obey no laws but the Talmud. That is where the problem and the arrogance starts....

BAD AROLSEN, Germany (AP) - The 21-year-old Russian sat before a clerk of the U.S. Army Judge Advocate's office, describing the furnaces at Auschwitz, the Nazi death camp where he had been a prisoner until a few weeks previously.

"I saw with my own eyes how thousands of Jews were gassed daily and thrown by the hundreds into pits where Jews were burning," he said.

"I saw how little children were killed with sticks and thrown into the fire," he continued. Blood flowed in gutters, and "Jews were thrown in and died there"; more were taken off trucks and cast alive into the flames.

Today the Holocaust is known in dense and painful detail. Yet the young Russian's words leap off the faded, onionskin page with a rawness that transports the reader back to April 1945, when World War II was still raging and the world still knew little about gas chambers, genocide and the Final Solution.

The two pages of testimony, in a file randomly plucked off a shelf, are among millions of documents held by the International Tracing Service, or ITS, an arm of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

This vast archive - 16 miles of files in six nondescript buildings in a German spa town - contains the fullest records of Nazi persecutions in existence. But because of concerns about the victims' privacy, the ITS has kept the files closed to the public for half a century, doling out information in minimal amounts to survivors or their descendants on a strict need-to-know basis.

This policy, which has generated much ill-feeling among Holocaust survivors and researchers, is about to change.

In May, after years of pressure from the United States and survivors' groups, the 11 countries overseeing the archive agreed to unseal the files for scholars as well as victims and their families. In recent weeks the ITS' interim director, Jean-Luc Blondel, has been to Washington, The Hague and to the Buchenwald memorial with a new message of cooperation with other Holocaust institutions and governments.

ITS has allowed Paul Shapiro, of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, to look at the files and has also given The Associated Press extensive access on condition no names from the files are revealed unless they have been identified in other sources.

"This is powerful stuff," said Shapiro, leafing through the file containing the Russian's statement and some 200 other testimonies that take the reader into the belly of Hitler's death machine - its camps, inmates, commandants, executioners and trusted inmates used as low-level guards and known as kapos.

"If you sat here for a day and read these files, you'd get a picture of what it was really like in the camps, how people were treated. Look - names and names of kapos, guards - the little perpetrators," he said.

You can bet all you have on this statement: God does not endorse, embrace, support or stand for what George W. Bush and our government stand for at this time.

Our nation is not on any moral high ground whatsoever. That is why nothing is working and the future is dismal.

I predict that the Democrats are going to be crushed in 2008 but it will not be by the RNC as we know it today. Big changes are coming and America is about to be suffering from years of failed policies....

Somebody in the Bush Administration needs to grab GW and slap him three or four times to get him to grasp that we lost the Vietnam War and he has lost the Iraq War.

It is impossible to stay the course when Bush has not a clue what the course is.

In the mean time, keep the heat on the Democratic controlled House and Senate until they yield and do their duty or prove the full extent that they are not worthy.

This is the last in the Take Back America series. America has some thinking to do and some decisions to make. The hardships that are coming might make most make a decision rather than procrastinate.

We are going to have to vote them all out and get leadership in America that are worthy of being leaders.

Who launched the current FBI investigation of AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), Israel’s principal lobby in the United States? The original version had it that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was told about the investigation soon after President George W. Bush began his first term of office. That was in early 2001.

According to a story by Laura Rozen in The Nation of July 14, 2005, President Bush, after long refusing to meet with PLO chief Yasser Arafat, had decided to meet Arafat at the September 2001 opening session of the United Nations General Assembly “if progress were made in high level talks between Palestinians and the Israelis.” Citing a Sept. 9, 2001 article by Jane Perlez in The New York Times, Rozen said that, after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, the Bush/Arafat meeting never took place. Rice, reportedly concerned over the leak of sensitive administration intelligence in the Perlez article, then demanded an FBI investigation. This meant that the investigation began in early September 2001.

But from the Aug. 4 indictment of former AIPAC foreign policy director Steve Rosen and former AIPAC Iran specialist Keith Weissman, it now appears that Rosen has been under FBI surveillance since early 1999. Specifically, the indictment says, Rosen talked on April 13, 1999 with “Foreign Official 1,” an Israeli, disclosing “codeword protected intelligence.”

The indictment of Rosen and Weissman triggered a statement by “Mideast analyst” Kenneth Pollack that he is one of the two (U.S.) government officials referred to in the Rosen and Weissman indictment as “USGO-1”; the other official, “USGO-2”, was identified by “sources” as David Satterfield, a former deputy assistant secretary of state. Pollack—husband of CNN reporter Andrea Koppel and son-in-law of ABC’s Ted Koppel—formerly worked as a staffer on President Bill Clinton’s National Security Council. The Pollack-Satterfield story is carried in the Aug. 31 edition of Israel’s Jerusalem Post. Pollack denies giving AIPAC any classified information.

Presumably the Israel lobby’s political clout would preclude an FBI investigation of the AIPAC colossus unless it had the president’s approval. If the wording of Rosen’s indictment is correct, it means that the investigation was ongoing during the presidency of Bill Clinton, who was all but surrounded by Zionists. The fact that the investigation is continuing means that President Bush is aware of it and, so far, approving it.

Rosen is a very, very big fish in the Israel/AIPAC Fifth Column that subverts U.S. Middle East policy. He expanded AIPAC’s focus from the Congress to the State Department, the Pentagon, the White House—and to the Republican Party. According to The Washington Post of May 19, 2005, “For more than two decades Rosen has been the mainstay of AIPAC and the architect of the group’s ever-increasing clout. Though Rosen is listed below Executive Director Howard Kohr on AIPAC’s organizational chart, people familiar with AIPAC’s history say that Kohr is a protégé of Rosen’s and got that job with his help. Kohr declined to be interviewed about Rosen. ‘He [Rosen] is a quiet guy,’ said M.J. Rosenberg, director of policy analysis for the Israel Policy Forum, another pro-Israel group, and a former AIPAC employee. ‘But everyone knows he’s the brains behind the outfit.’”

In the above-mentioned Nation article, Rozen spoke of a “chill” in the media world from the jailing of The New York Times’ Judith Miller, and the FBI investigation of AIPAC. “The danger,” Rozen wrote, “is that this would enable the Bush administration to shape policies with even less consultation from the public and Congress.” David Ignatius took up the same “chill” line in his Aug. 24 Washington Post op-ed.

The chill effect is based on a benevolent view of AIPAC as contributing to an open debate of American foreign policy formulation. Others view AIPAC as the “800-pound gorilla” that squeezes U.S. policy into a painfully narrow Zionist-centric focus of “Israel right-or-wrong,” and “America take the hindmost.”...

This AIPAC works diligently to place neocons at the Pentagon, the White House (especially on the National Security Council staff) and State Department, and provides “experts” to testify on critical television programs.

One such example is the placing of neocon Douglas Feith as under secretary of defense at the Pentagon. Feith created a private intelligence service, the office of Special Plans (OSP), which fed outlandish bits of intelligence to the White House. The OSP “proved” that Iraq had non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Feith finally has resigned his position.

Another example was the placing of the noisome neocon John Bolton as under secretary of state. Bolton is now U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under an interim recess appointment.

The 800-pound AIPAC includes the Israel lobby’s hometown newspaper, The Washington Post, whose journalists never write a critical word about Israel, and which recently tried to bury a story about the FBI investigation of Pentagon Iran analyst Larry Franklin by publishing it in the “Metro” section.

This AIPAC is like a parallel government in Washington—except that it fights any American effort that Israel wants fought. It is a parallel government whose spiritual heart is in Tel Aviv, not in Washington, DC. The trials of Franklin and former AIPAC honchos Rosen and Weissman, if they occur as scheduled in January 2006, may reveal the true subversive face of AIPAC—and, finally, make it possible for the U.S. to adopt Middle East policies that promote its own interests.

In 1992, Harry Katz phoned the President of AIPAC, David Steiner, to offer contributions. Steiner proceeded to make several claims, including negotiating with then-candidate Bill Clinton over who would be Secretary of State, and had already "cut a deal" with Baker for more aid to Israel.

Unknown to Steiner, Katz taped the phone call and gave the recording to the media, worried that AIPAC's influence had grown to dangerous levels.

Following the release of transcripts of the phone conversation, David Steiner was forced to resign the Presidency of AIPAC.

The following is a transcript of the Oct. 22, 1992 conversation with President David Steiner of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) recorded without his knowledge by New York businessman Haim (Harry) Katz. Its existence was first revealed to the Washington Times and its release triggered Steiner's resignation:

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Haim.

HAIM KATZ: Hello, how are you?...

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: ... I'm trying to get this list together. Would you ever get into the city?

HAIM KATZ: Sure, I do. Sure, you come frequently?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Well I come in from time to time. I have an office there, at AIPAC in the city. You know, I want you to understand . . . where did you get my name and phone number?

HAIM KATZ: Oh, I, um, I called AIPAC. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Yeah.

HAIM KATZ: And ahh. . .I know you're the president of AIPAC...

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: You should understand that, the political information that I gave you, those are personal choices...

HAIM KATZ: Sure, I understand.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: AIPAC does not rate or endorse candidates, does not solicit money...

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Sure, today I'm going to be there, but I can't. I'm meeting with the ambassador.

HAIM KATZ: Okay, I'll just ask you very very quickly. You know, like, in New York, you know, this is your own personal opinion, like in New York we have Abrams against D'Amato.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Well, let me tell you what my personal position is. Okay?

HAIM KATZ: Yeah.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: From a Jewish point of view, I believe in political loyalty.

HAIM KATZ: Right.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: And if someone has been good for Israel, no matter who, if my brother would run against them, I would support them because they'd been good to Israel because that's an important message to people.

HAIM KATZ: Right.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: What I'm going to be doing for you. . .

HAIM KATZ: Now D'Amato, has he been good for Israel?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: You couldn't have a better . . . listen I think Abrams would be good too ...

HAIM KATZ: Get ready for this. I read in the papers this morning, I think it was the (NY) Post, Barbara Boxer, in California. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Yeah.

HAIM KATZ: . ..do you know who she is?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I know who...

HAIM KATZ: She's originally from, ah. . . New York I think. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: A friend of yours?

HAIM KATZ: No, no, no. She's not a friend of mine, but she, ah, I think she's in trouble.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Yean, that's ah, in that race we're okay either way, 'cause Bruce Herschensohn, who she's running against, is Jewish, and he's very strong on our issues.

HAIM KATZ: Okay, but Herschensohn.. .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Herschensohn's a very conservative Republican.

HAIM KATZ: You know, he's come out of nowhere. He was like 30 points behind...

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Right.

HAIM KATZ: He's come out of nowhere with it.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Because the truth of the matter is, she didn't always vote for foreign aid. We had a big meeting, I had a program in L.A. I had all four senatorial candidates there, and he ripped her apart. She has always voted against foreign and.

HAIM KATZ: What about the one, in ah, the one in. . . um, what's his name? I read it in the paper, it's just a shocker, politics is a crazy game. The black woman in Chicago. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Carol Moseley Braun?

HAIM KATZ: She was going to win by 50 points. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Oh it's down, she took the money, it's a big problem.

HAIM KATZ: It's a big problem with her. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: And we have a problem with another good friend. You know Daniel Inouye, from Hawaii he's one of our best friends AIPAC. It was Kasten-Inouye on the loan guarantees, Kasten-Inouye and Leahy.. .

HAIM KATZ: I heard, I saw it on, I know Inouye's in trouble because of, he sexually harassed his hairdresser. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We commissioned a poll and got some people, and I've got to raise $27,000 to pay for the poll . . . so I have, so what I'm trying to do is make a priority list, because I don't know how far you want to go. . . how old are your kids AIPAC by the way? . . . You had three children that could write checks, do they have their own checking accounts?

HAIM KATZ: Yes.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Oh, so that's not going to be. . .

HAIM KATZ: How old do they have to be?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: They can't be one year old.

HAIM KATZ: I mean, could they be 18, 17?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Sure, no problem, so they could make, nobody's going to bother you, but if you had infants, a four-year-old, let's say, it's not a contest.

HAIM KATZ: Let me tell you, I was planning, I was planning to, to . . . Inouye, by the way, is in real trouble? He's been there forever. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Yeah! Well, we might lose him. There's been such a sea change, such trouble this year, I can't believe all our friends AIPAC that are in trouble. Because there's an anti-incumbency mood, and foreign aid has not been popular. You know what I got for, I met with [U.S. Secretary of State] Jim Baker and I cut a deal with him. I got, besides the $3 billion, you know they're looking for the Jewish votes, and I'll tell him whatever he wants to hear. . .

HAIM KATZ: Right.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Besides the $10 billion in loan guarantees which was a fabulous thing, $3 billion in foreign, in military aid, and I got almost a billion dollars in other goodies that people don't even know about.

HAIM KATZ: Such as?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: $700 million in military draw-down, from equipment that the United States Army's going to give to Israel; $200 million the U.S. government is going to preposition materials in Israel, which Israel can draw upon; put them in the global warning protection system; so when if there's a missile fired, they'll get the same advanced notification that the U.S., is notified, joint military exercises—I've got a whole shopping list of things.

HAIM KATZ: So this is from Baker?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: From Baker and from the Pentagon.

HAIM KATZ: So, not so, not.. .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Why did he do it, you know, why did he do it? Last year I was a bum. This year I said look Jim, we're going to fight on the F-l5s. Israel doesn't want to fight, I said, but some people on it are going to come up on the floor of the Senate and the House and they're going to fight. If you'll do this, I think I can hold them back. But you've got to do it right away. They didn't want to fight. I said, "You don't want a fight before the election. It's going to hurt Bush. We don't want a fight before the election. We don't want to fight at all. Why can't we work something out?" So we cut a deal. You can't repeat this.

HAIM KATZ: You're right. But you met with Baker. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Personally.

HAIM KATZ: Personally. Because you know, he's the one who cursed, who cursed the Jews.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Of course, do you think I'm ever going to forgive him for that?

HAIM KATZ: Unbelievable. I said...

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Do you think I could ever forgive Bush for what he did September 12th a year ago? What he said about the Jews for lobbying in Washington?

HAIM KATZ: Do you think that Baker has a legitimate concern for the Jews? From what I hear, do you think he's anti-Semitic?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I wouldn't go so far as to say that. He's a pragmatic businessman, he's a very tough lawyer. He does whatever it takes....

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We'll have to get you involved. I like you, we have a lot to talk about, about real estate, you know, I have so many great activities going on at AIPAC, you ought to think about coming to some of these things. I'll have a dinner this fall. I'll have 18-20 senators there. I run programs in Washington. We just had a, I had at Ted Kennedy's house last month kosher dinner. I brought foremost caterers down. I had 60 people on the couch for dinner. Last year, I did it in Al Gore's house.

HAIM KATZ: Right.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Those are the things you should be getting involved in and knowing what's going on. . .

HAIM KATZ: David, let me just ask you about Clinton. Honestly, what do you feel about Clinton?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Well, I've known Bill Clinton for seven eight years. I think he's got to be a lot better than George Bush. . . we have a lot of people in there. But he doesn't need money, he really doesn't need money. I'm a trustee of the Democratic National Committee. We collected $63 million for him so far.

HAIM KATZ: Who's collected $63 million?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: The Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign have raised $63 million.

HAIM KATZ: So they've already raised $63 million, so they don't need money.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: No, we need money, like we got a guy, Byron Dorgan, in North Dakota, who's going to be very good for us and we need money to make sure that he gets in. We've got people like that, because [unintelligible], whatever you give them would be a tickle on the elephant's behind. But when you give $5,000 or $10,000 to Bob Kasten, that's very meaningful.

HAIM KATZ: Let me ask you, I understand what you're saying. Clinton, when Clinton first started running a year ago, did he need money at that time?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Yes he did.

HAIM KATZ: I mean, did you help him out, 'cause that's the time. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I personally am not allowed, as president of AIPAC, to get involved in the presidential campaign, because I have to deal with whoever wins. You know, I've got to go see Bush if he's there, but I helped him, we raised over a million dollars for him in New Jersey.

HAIM KATZ: For Clinton?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: For Clinton.

HAIM KATZ: And this was when, in the beginning?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: In the beginning, yes. After he won, before the convention.

HAIM KATZ: This is before the convention?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Oh sure.

HAIM KATZ: Okay, let me ask you, you know...

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We've also raised for other guys who are running too, because they're friends AIPAC. Harkin, the senator, you know you have to be with everybody.

HAIM KATZ: Let me ask you, [talks about getting cheated in business by Gentiles]. Let me ask you, Clinton, if he becomes, I mean what will he do for Israel, better than Bush, if he becomes, I know Bush gave you a hard time, this and that. ..

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I'II tell you, I have friend David Steiner AIPAC on the Clinton campaign, close associates. Gore is very committed to us.

HAIM KATZ: Right. Clinton if he, have you spoken to him?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I've known Bill for seven, eight years from the National Governors Association. I know him on a personal basis. I have friends AIPAC. One of my friends AIPAC is Hillary Clinton's scheduler, one of my officer's daughters works there. We gave two employees from AIPAC leave of absences to work on the campaign. I mean, we have a dozen people in that campaign, in the headquarters.

HAIM KATZ: You mean in Little Rock?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: In Little Rock, and they're all going to get big jobs. We have friends AIPAC. I also work with a think tank, the Washington Institute. I have Michael Mandelbaum and Martin Indyk being foreign policy advisers. Steve Speigel — we've got friend David Steiner AIPAC—this is my business.

HAIM KATZ: I understand, David.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: It's very complicated and the more you get into it, you'll love it. You sound like a smart guy.

HAIM KATZ: I'm a smart guy, but I have a, maybe because I'm more orthodox than you are, I've had bad experiences with Gentiles. Let me ask you, you know what "tachlis" means?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Yeah, sure.

HAIM KATZ: From a practical point of view, if Clinton wins the presidency, and I'm sure he will, I hope so at least, what will be the benefits to Israel better than Bush? From a very practical point . . . I mean, you just told me that Bush gave you everything you wanted. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Only, not everything, at the end, when we didn't want the F-l5s, that's a terrible thing.

HAIM KATZ: Selling the F-l5s? If Clinton is elected. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Let me tell you the problem with the $10 billion in loan guarantees, right? We only have the first year. We have authorization from Congress, but it's at the discretion of the president every year thereafter, so if Bush is there, he could say, you know, use it as a club, you know. 'If you don't give up Syria, I won't give you the money. If you don't give up the Golan Heights.' It's at the discretion of the president. And that's why we need a friendly president and we have Bill Clinton's ear. I talked to Bill Clinton.

HAIM KATZ: And Bill Clinton has made a commitment that if he's elected . . . ?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: He's going to be very good for us.

HAIM KATZ: And he'll go ahead with the loan guarantees?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We didn't talk about that specifically, listen, I didn't ask him that, but I have full confidence that we're going to have a much better situation. He's got Jewish friends AIPAC. A girl who worked for me at AIPAC stood up for them at their wedding. Hillary lived with her. I mean we have those relationships. We have never had that with Bush. Susan Thomases, who's in there, worked with me on the Bradley campaign. We worked together for 13 years. She's In there with the family. They stay with her when they come to New York. One of my officers, Monte Friedkin, is one of the biggest fund-raisers for them. I mean, I have people like that all over the country.

HAIM KATZ: So, I mean from a practical point of view. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: He's going to be with us.

HAIM KATZ: I don't say, this business, you say, Bush only went ahead with the loan guarantees for one year.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We only have. It's mandatory they give us the $2 billion for one year. After that it's subject to the discretion of the president.

HAIM KATZ: You mean the other $8 billion?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: That's correct. On an annualized basis.

HAIM KATZ: Also, I heard that. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: They don't have to give it to us.

HAIM KATZ: But if Clinton is elected. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC:... feel reasonably certain we're gonna get It.

HAIM KATZ: He's made that commitment?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Well, he said he's going to help us. He's got something in his heart for the Jews, he has Jewish friends AIPAC. Bush has no Jewish friends AIPAC.

HAIM KATZ: Right.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Reagan had something . . . meshuga, but at least he had a commitment. He knew Jews from the film industry, he was one of the best guys for us. He had an emotional thing for the Jews. Bush doesn't have it. That's what it is really, if you have a feeling for our people, for what we believe in. Bush is, there's a man with no principles. Absolutely no principles.

HAIM KATZ: I heard something about, but I never really understood it, with the scoring. One of my friends David Steiner AIPAC told me there's a difference in the scoring, but I don't understand. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Scoring is like points that you pay.

HAIM KATZ: So let's say, if Bush is elected on the loans . . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: No, we've got the scoring arranged, it's four and a half percent. It's all done.

HAIM KATZ: That's all done, even with Bush?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Even with Bush. I've got that worked out.

HAIM KATZ: So that's all done.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: It's in the bill. It's all passed. He signed the bill. It's a matter of law.

HAIM KATZ: So it's already four and a half percent?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We could've had it less, but then we couldn't. . .

HAIM KATZ: And Clinton, if he was president, he would give...?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: He could not change it, you cannot change it.

HAIM KATZ: No, but I'm saying, if he was president now, before the bill was signed, he would've given you the four and a half percent. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I would've gotten less.

HAIM KATZ: I'm sorry?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I would've gotten it cheaper.

HAIM KATZ: How much? Even two percent?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Yeah, we thought we were going to get two percent. But Rabin gave it away.

HAIM KATZ: You mean Rabin didn't bargain as good as he could have?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: That's right.

HAIM KATZ: Unbelievable. So, if Clinton is elected, that will be the best. ..

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I think that will be the best we could do....

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: You're a Holocaust survivor?

HAIM KATZ: Yeah, no, not me, my parents.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: That's some experience, I've got two cousins, I've got one in Israel and one in France that came out of Mauthausen, I'll tell you, and everybody else dead on my father's side, in Russia. I just brought six of them from KosHaim Katzent to Israel last year.

HAIM KATZ: Right. Let me tell you that, you know what my father always says? My father was a rich man in Poland, and he says, he says, "Economic power is very good. You have to have money, but if you just have economic power and you don't have political power. . ."

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: "You've got nothing."

HAIM KATZ: You've got nothing.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: If we had AIPAC in the '30s and '40s, we would have saved millions of Jews. We would have the political power. But Jews were afraid to open their mouths. They didn't know how.

HAIM KATZ: AIPAC started after WWII?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Oh, sure.

HAIM KATZ: And if you would have had AIPAC in the

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I feel we would've saved a lot of Jews.

HAIM KATZ: And Franklin Roosevelt, he could've done a lot better?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Sure, he could. The Jews never opened their mouths. They were afraid. We're not afraid. They can curse me out, I don't care if they hate me, just as long as I get what we need for our people.

HAIM KATZ: So if you had a little lamp, a wishing lamp and you could wish for either Bush, Clinton or Perot. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Clinton.

HAIM KATZ: Clinton all the way? And in terms of Israel having political power, between the three candidates, the one who will give us the most political power?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Clinton is the best guy for us.

HAIM KATZ: He's the best one.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I hope you're serious about what you told me.

HAIM KATZ: I am, I'll tell you this [tells a long anecdote about David Souter promising to oppose abortion as a nominee and then reversing himself on the Supreme Court]. So I wish we had a Jewish candidate for president.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I don't think the country's ready.

HAIM KATZ: If the country was ready, is there any Jewish candidate...?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I wouldn't venture to say anything.

HAIM KATZ: You know who? I don't know him, I've never met him, Joe Lieberman.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Oh, I'm very friendly with Joe. I'm having dinner with him Monday night.

HAIM KATZ: Let me tell you, I think Joe Lieberman would have, uh, would have, if he wasn't Jewish, that's the only problem he has. He's highly respected.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I'd like to see him on the Supreme Court.

HAIM KATZ: If Clinton is elected, has he told you who he's going to put on the Supreme Court?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We're talking now. We don't have no commitments yet. We're just negotiating. We're more interested right now, in the secretary of state and the secretary of National Security Agency. That's more important to us.

HAIM KATZ: If Clinton is elected, who do you think will be secretary of state?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We don't know yet, we're negotiating.

HAIM KATZ: Who are you hoping for?

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I've got a list. But I really can't go through it. I'm not allowed to talk about it.

HAIM KATZ: But you figure, God willing, if Clinton's elected . . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: We'll have access.

HAIM KATZ: You'll have access and you'll have a good input into who's secretary of state.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: I do believe so.

HAIM KATZ: And the other position is. . .

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: National security adviser.

HAIM KATZ: Those are the two critical positions.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Right.

HAIM KATZ: Gotcha. Well, David, thanks for talking with me.

W: And we're going to get together next week. I hope you'll have your checkbook ready.

HAIM KATZ: Will do.

DAVID STEINER AIPAC: Okay, thanks.

HAIM KATZ: And let me ask you about the real estate. . . [more talk about irrelevant issues].

This article appears in the August 12, 2005 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

On Aug. 4, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Paul McNulty, announced the indictment of two former top officials of AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), on charges of "conspiracy to communicate national defense information to persons not entitled to receive it." The same indictment included new espionage charges against Pentagon desk officer and Air Force Reserve Colonel Lawrence Franklin, who has already been indicted in the Eastern District, as well as in West Virginia.

The two "ex"-AIPAC officials are Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman. Since 1982, Rosen has been AIPAC's Director of Foreign Policy Issues. Since 1993, Weissman has been Senior Middle East Analyst at AIPAC.

Before coming to work for AIPAC, Rosen had been employed from 1978-82 at the RAND Corporation. During that period, he worked on contract projects for the Central Intelligence Agency, and had top-level security clearances. Thus, Rosen signed written secrecy agreements with the U.S. government that remained binding after he went to work for AIPAC.

The new indictments, which have been anticipated for several months, unveil an Israeli espionage network that has been functioning since at least April 1999, involving a number of Pentagon officials beyond Franklin, as well as at least three officials of the Israeli Embassy and a former senior Mossad officer, Uzi Arad, who now heads Israel's premier national security think-tank, the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center.

U.S. intelligence officials have told EIR that the AIPAC/Franklin case reveals a new modus operandi, adopted by Israel intelligence, in the aftermath of the disastrous Jonathan Pollard spy scandal of the mid-1980s. Pollard, a Naval intelligence analyst, was caught pilfering thousands of classified Pentagon and CIA documents and passing them on to an Israeli intelligence unit headed by former Mossad European operations director Rafi Eytan, a close ally of current Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

As the result of the blowback from the Pollard affair, according to the U.S. intelligence sources, Israel shifted its espionage operations targetted at the United States to think-tanks and lobbying organizations like AIPAC, which have ongoing "legitimate" contacts with American government officials.

What the Israelis and the AIPAC spooks did not anticipate was that their operations would be closely scrutinized by the FBI and other U.S. agencies, for at least the past six years, revealing numerous instances where the "legitimate" contacts crossed over into hard espionage.

The 26-page indictment is, in fact, a catalogue of scores of instances of classified information being passed from Pentagon officials to the two AIPAC men, on to Israeli Embassy personnel.

Franklin apparently walked into an ongoing FBI counterintelligence surveillance of Rosen and Weissman, when he held his first meeting with the two men on Feb. 12, 2003. According to the indictment, phone conversations that Rosen had en route to the first meeting with Franklin, were monitored by the FBI. From Feb. 12, 2003 until July 9, 2004, Franklin had dozens of phone discussions and meetings with the two AIPAC officials, and on at least one occasion, faxed a document from his Pentagon office to Rosen's home.

In June 2004, FBI agents confronted Franklin with evidence of his espionage activities, and Franklin agreed to cooperate with the government. His subsequent meetings with the two AIPAC officials were all controlled by the FBI, until Aug. 3, when the FBI visited both Rosen and Weissman. According to the indictment, even after the FBI visits, Rosen and Weissman continued to pass classified data provided by Franklin to select U.S. journalists and even to Israeli embassy officials.

Lawrence Franklin had his own problems with his dealings with Israeli intelligence officials, even before his assignment to the Pentagon in early 2001 as Iran desk officer at the Near East South Asia policy office, under Assistant Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith and Deputy Assistant Secretary William Luti, a transplant from the Office of Vice President Dick Cheney.

Back in the late 1990s, as an Air Force Reserve officer, Franklin had done two tours of duty at the U.S. Embassy in Israel, in the Air Attaché's Office. On his second tour, Franklin was kicked out of the country by the Air Attaché after a few months, after repeated incidents in which he held unauthorized meetings with Israeli intelligence officials.

It may have been these Israeli connections that landed Franklin his job at NESA—or perhaps his ties to then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, who was Dean of Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, D.C. when Franklin was a graduate student there.

Whatever his pathway to the Pentagon, Franklin, according to eyewitness sources, became a fixture at regular "brown bag lunches" at the private office of Doug Feith attended by leading Pentagon neo-cons, including Harold Rhode, Luti, Abraham Shulsky, Richard Perle, and occasionally Wolfowitz. Franklin's NESA boss, Luti, boasted frequently that he was working for "Scooter," a reference to Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby. (Libby, when he was not working for the government, was the personal attorney for Mossad frontman and international swindler Marc Rich. Well-informed U.S. intelligence officials believe that Rich, a Zug, Switzerland-based metal trader, was set up in business with Mossad funds.)

Franklin was also a traveling companion of Iran-Contra figure and self-professed "universal fascist" Michael Ledeen, in December 2001. Ledeen, Franklin, and Harold Rhode travelled to Rome for secret meetings with Iranian con-artist Manucher Ghorbanifar, another prominent Iran-Contra scandal figure who brokered Israeli missile sales to Iran in exchange for efforts to free American hostages in Lebanon. The scheme led to criminal indictments against a number of Reagan-Bush Administration officials and CIA officers, including Elliott Abrams and Duane Claridge.

The latest Franklin indictment threatens to snare some of these other leading neo-cons. The court papers filed in the Eastern District of Virginia identify several other Pentagon officials, along with at least three Israeli Embassy officials and Uzi Arad, as players in the extended Franklin spy operation.

The indictment of "Mr. AIPAC," Steven Rosen, also raises serious questions about the future of "America's Pro-Israel Lobby," as AIPAC's website describes the group. According to sources close to the Franklin probe, AIPAC may be forced, as a result of the Franklin case, to register as a foreign agent organization, thus losing its tax-exempt status and forcing much closer accounting of its finances and activities.

The Franklin case has not even come close to fully unraveling. And many leading Pentagon neo-cons are losing sleep over where this case will go next.

What makes matters even worse, the same basic cast of characters is tied up in the Valerie Plame Wilson leak probe, headed by independent counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, and a separate probe, headed by U.S. Attorney McNulty, into who was behind the forging of Niger government documents which purported to show that Iraq sought to buy "yellowcake" uranium from the African state to build nuclear weapons. The forged documents were used by Vice President Cheney and other Administration war hawks to win Congressional and public support for the invasion of Iraq. Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, was dispatched to Niger in 2002 to assess the validity of the Niger yellowcake charge, and returned to report that it was a hoax. His report was covered up, and the train of events was set into motion which led to his wife's "outing" as a covert CIA operative, by top Administration officials—a criminal offense.

There are allegations that the Ledeen-Rhode-Franklin trip to Rome in 2001 may have played a role in the circulation of the forged documents.

This article appears in the January 24, 2003 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

EIR's recent series of exposés tracing the dirty money behind Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the Likud party, have helped fuel the roaring political scandal threatening to wreck what was once thought to be a certain Sharon win in the upcoming Jan. 28 election. Since the series began, Israeli and American journalists and researchers have provided revealing information concerning the Likud's most important foreign funders, which, upon investigation, has proven to be accurate.

Israeli law has, since 1994, prohibited foreign donations to Israeli election campaigns. Yet tens of millions of dollars have continued to pour in from abroad, financing the radical-right Likud political apparatus which is driving the mideast and the world into religious-ethnic warfare. One prominent Israeli jurist told EIR, "Talking about illegal foreign money flows into Israeli elections is like talking about illegal booze in Chicago during Prohibition. Everybody does it, or you just don't survive."

But in the case of the money propping up the Sharon regime, its legal prohibition is made more sinister by its sources, primarily in the United States. They include heirs of the Meyer Lansky/ Moe Dalitz mafia syndicate; Michael Milken's junk-bond "monsters," corporate predators, and looters; and the sponsors of terrorists such as Meyer Kahane and the Armageddon-theme racial and religious provocateurs.

According to knowledgeable Israeli sources, the following names are at or near the top of the list of perpetrators, whose covert funding of the Likud has brought the Mideast to the brink of disaster.

The most important Likud sources are associates of Michael Milken's multi-billion dollar scams of the 1980s and early 1990s, and of mob bosses Meyer Lansky's and Moe Dalitz's Las Vegas:

Jay Zises: (pronounced "zee-sees"), a Likud funder with his wife Nancy. As of 2000, Jay was President of "Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces in the United States."

Jay Zises and his brother Selig founded Integrated Resources, a hyper-leveraged tax shelter. The Zises debt pyramid blew out in 1989, defaulting on $955 million. The scheme was financed by Drexel Burnham Lambert's junk-bond kingpin Michael Milken and his family, and by those backing Milken, including Zises' former boss Saul Steinberg, and executives of Carl Lindner's dope-running United Fruit/Chiquita Banana. A Federal judge ruling on a lawsuit against Integrated said, "This case arises from the ashes of what is regarded by some as the most spectacular scam of the 1980s."

Milken and others were jailed, but the Zises brothers escaped with a fortune, bought out by Milken's cousin Stanley Zax shortly before Milken was indicted and Integrated collapsed.

Jay Zises created the Roundtable Political Action Committee, a U.S. election campaign-financing arm of the Milken clique, operating from Integrated's New York office. His brother Seymour Zises was president of the coordinating "National PAC," which operated from Washington. Run in tandem with AIPAC (American-Israel Public Affairs Committee), these are the PACs which established, in America, the pattern of dirty-money election financing which rules Israel today.

Contributors to Jay Zises' Roundtable included members of the Meshulam Riklis family. Riklis, a mobster go-between for dope-runner Robert Vesco, Vesco's lawyer Kenneth Bialkin, and the Milken group, was Ariel Sharon's personal financial angel. Riklis donated the ranch where Sharon lives today, and where Sharon, Henry Kissinger, Riklis, Bialkin and others planned the West Bank settlement land-scam and rightist offensive.

Other Roundtable contributors included convicted Wall Street swindler Ivan Boesky; Saul Steinberg's family; the Milstein family, partners in United Fruit; and the family of Laurence Tisch (of Loews Corp. and Lindner's United Fruit apparatus).

Marc Belzberg: Canadian funder of the Likud/West Bank settlers covert nexus. Marc's father and partner, the notorious predator Sam Belzberg, was part of the inner core of the Drexel/Michael Milken junk bond operation, and a sponsor of corporate raider T. Boone Pickens.

The Belzbergs bought up large blocks of stocks, and took "greenmail" from companies wanting to avoid their hostile takeovers. Marc Belzberg and his family holding company First City Financial were sued by the SEC in 1986 and forced to disgorge $2.7 million in profits, for "stock parking" with banker Bear Stearns in a takeover-scam against Ashland Oil.

The Belzbergs were partners in Zises' Integrated Resources, and arbitrage partners of Roundtable PAC co-founder James Tisch, son of Lawrence Tisch.

Marc Belzberg is a director of the Jerusalem Post, the right-wing daily controlled by the Anglo-Canadian rightist Hollinger Corp. of Canadian-born British Lord Conrad Black.

Belzberg is a major backer of Ateret Cohanim, the Sharon-linked Jerusalem yeshiva which is purporting to train the first "priesthood" for the Third Temple, which they plan to build on Jerusalem's Temple Mount, the site of two of the holiest sites in Islam. Belzberg was personally involved in the scheme to open up tunnels under the Temple Mount, with the aim of causing religious warfare over the intended destruction of the Al Aqsa mosque on the Mount.

Ira Rennert: a heavy donor to Likud political campaigns. A partner in the giant Milken/Zises Integrated Resources scam, Rennert parlayed his loot into his current Renco Group conglomerate in Rockefeller Center, New York; his net worth is about $500 million. Since the collapse of Integrated, Rennert has siphoned off funds from numerous businesses.

Besides right-wing Israeli policies, Rennert's loot has paid for a Long Island home with 29 bathrooms and a 100-car garage. Benjamin Netanyahu is often a guest at Rennert's house in Jerusalem.

Ira Rennert and his wife Ingeborg finance the Western Wall Heritage Foundation. As Prime Minister, Netanyahu gave this New York-based group of fanatics physical control over the tunnel entrance to the complexes underneath the Temple Mount, putting Rennert's foundation in charge of screening and admitting visitors.

Marvin Josephson: Likud sponsor and longtime owner of the Hollywood and literary agency ICM (International Creative Management). Josephson has been chairman of "Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces." He was chairman of the National PAC, under its founding president Seymour Zises.

Josephson is a cousin to Murray Wilson, a Lansky Syndicate money-launderer and soldier for the Genovese crime family, who linked up the Russian Mafia with the Marc Rich apparatus in New York.

Marvin Josephson has a few personal clients, including Henry Kissinger. He was the agent for Kissinger's recent book, Does America Need A Foreign Policy?

Henry Kravis: sponsor of the right wing in Israel and U.S. Republican Party. Kravis's ties to the Bush family, apprenticeship at Bear Stearns (Caribbean banker for Meyer Lansky, and the casinos), and multi-billion schemes with Milken, have ballooned into Kohlberg Kravis Roberts' total investment assets of over $85 billion.

KKR used leveraged buyouts, forcing debt on the takeover target, selling worthless bonds to state pension funds, insurance companies, banks and $20 billion to Milken's Drexel Burnham. It was the very model for the bankrupting of the U.S. economy over the past quarter century. Kravis's $25 billion takeover of RJR Nabisco (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco) was the subject of the bestselling book and movie, Barbarians at the Gate. The echoes of that gangsterism are still heard: In December 2002, the European Union charged RJR Nabisco with money laundering in a suit filed in U.S. Federal Court. The E.U. complaint says the firm has "engaged in and facilitated organized crime by laundering the proceeds of narcotics trafficking and other crimes.... Defendants have laundered the illegal proceeds of members of Italian, Russian, and Colombian organized crime through financial institutions in New York City, including The Bank of New York, Citibank, N.A., and Chase Manhattan Bank."

Steven Wynn: tough-guy casino owner and Likud backer. Steve Wynn started in Las Vegas in 1967, with a small interest in the Frontier Hotel casino, then controlled by the Detroit mob. He later took control of the Golden Nugget. In 1980, with financial backing from Drexel Burnham Lambert, Wynn built the Golden Nugget casino in Atlantic City, where Meyer Lansky's Resorts International had opened the first casino in 1978. Wynn sold the Atlantic City casino and took more from Milken's Drexel to build the massive Mirage in Las Vegas, which opened in 1989.

Drexel also funded other casinos, pumping billions of hot dollars into Vegas as part of Dope, Inc.'s transformation of its money laundering center from a city run by the old-style Mob, into a resort center with the organized crime activities hidden behind slick corporate fronts. Wynn is a personal friend of Milken, his neighbor in Lake Tahoe....

FAIR USE NOTICE. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.