| Author | Message | | Guest | | Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2002 9:14 am Post subject: how israel corrupts and controls the us congress and media |
| AIPAC (Jewish lobbying group composed of American Zionist Jews who for for pro-Israeli US policies) is the forth most influential lobby in the US, yet the ones above it are irrelevent as far as foreign policy goes:
http://www.fortune.com/lists/power25/index.html
Let us see AIPAC's work:
http://www.wrmea.com/html/aipac.htm
Let us look at the resultant support the US gives to Israel:
http://www.sustaincampaign.org/aidchart.html
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html
http://www.sustaincampaign.org/FASchart.html
http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm
http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/010201/0101015.html
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/israel050602.html
Of course this is the premise accepted by many Muslims and open-minded people:
http://www.ummah.com/waragainstislam/question.htm
So after all this, see the results in an article by Richard Curtiss as to the cost of Israel to the American people:
http://www.ummah.com/waragainstislam/cost.htm
The real fifth column who brought this mess upon the US are all the organisations under AIPAC and it's supporters who follow it's ideology, you should be blaming them, not Arabs/Muslims who acted as a natural conduit for the naturally expected retaliation which followed, i.e. 9-11 (if Muslims did it).
When you look at those pictures of the collapsing towers, and the people jumping out before they collapsed, think first about the US' biased support for this most unjust of states which was created violating the rights of the natives and which stole the people's lands. Then think about exactly who drives the US to gives it's support for this, as shown above. You shall see that they are amongst you, not the much demonised Arabs or Muslims but the Zionists who work against your national interests.
http://www.ummah.com/waragainstislam/reap.htm
Question: Before the US support of the Jewish state which started in 1947 when the US arm-twisted nations like Greece to support the creation of Israel, was the USA hated by Arabs and Muslims?
This is why the USA did what it did when it supported Israel in 1947 when it's President was Truman:
"I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.” - President Harry Truman, quoted in “Anti-Zionism”
Think about those Jewish-Zionist organisations all around the USA conspiring to help support and maintain US foreign policy which invites terrorism on the US civilians.
how israel corrupts and controls the us congress and media:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/06/01/how-israel-corrupts-and-controls-the-us-congress-and-media.php
WAKE UP AMERICA: YOUR GOVERNMENT IS HIJACKED BY ZIONISM
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/09/29/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism.php
Zionists Influencing USA (Britain) to Invade Iraq for Israel:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/12/30/zionists-influencing-usa-britain-to-invade-iraq-for-israel.php | |  | | Guest | | Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:45 am Post subject: Oil and Israel |
| Oil and Israel
Two unspoken reasons why Bush wants to wage war against Iraq
An Iraqi oil worker works at Al-Doura oil refinery Oct. 14 in Baghdad. What role does oil play in any campaign to topple Saddam Hussein?
By Michael Kinsley
SLATE.COM
Oct. 24 — So, why exactly is Iraq different from North Korea? Both are founding members of President Bush’s “axis of evil,” and both deserve that honor. North Korea has now admitted to a nuclear weapons development program on about the same timeline as what we only suspect about Iraq. So, why are we barely complaining in one case and off to war in the other?
• eDiets Diet Center
• Shop at B&N.com
• Auctions at uBid
• Yellow Pages
• lavalife.com Where singles click
• MSN Broadband
BUSH ADDRESSED this conundrum the other day. “Saddam Hussein is unique,” he explained. “He has thumbed his nose at the world for 11 years … and for 11 years he has said, ‘No, I refuse to disarm.’ ” The North Koreans, by contrast, said, “Yes, we will disarm” — they promised to stop building nukes in exchange for help in developing peaceful nuclear power — and then they didn’t do it. I guess that’s a difference, but it sounds as if we’re punishing Saddam for his honesty.
ULTERIOR MOTIVES
Bush’s public case for going to war against Iraq is full of logical inconsistencies, exaggerations, and outright lies. It reeks of ex-post-facto: First came the desire, and then came the reasons. But this raises a troubling question, especially for opponents of Bush’s policy: If his ostensible reasons are unpersuasive even to him, what are his real reasons? There must be some: Nobody starts a war as a lark. It would be easier to dismiss the whole exercise if there were an obvious ulterior motive. Without one, you are left wondering, “Am I missing something?”
Tariq Aziz has a theory. Saddam Hussein’s deputy told The New York Times this week, “The reason for this warmongering policy toward Iraq is oil and Israel.” Although no one wishes to agree with Tariq Aziz, he has put succinctly what many people in Washington apparently believe. They do not think the concern over potential use of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons is negligible or insincere, but they do think that “oil and Israel” is a pretty good summary of what, for President Bush, makes Iraq different from your run-of-the-mill evil dictatorship. Yet this presumption about Bush, and these issues themselves, barely appear in the flood of speculation and argument about Bush War II.
THE OIL FACTOR
“President Bush” is, of course, a metaphor. Much Washington political commentary and analysis is basically a discussion of what or whom the term “President Bush” is a metaphor for. Is it Karl Rove? Is it still Karen Hughes, although she has decamped? Even more than most presidents, Bush is regarded as the sum total of his advisers. Regarding Iraq, the advisers themselves are also used as metaphors, often in plural to signify a stereotype. “The Cheneys and the Rumsfelds” evokes a retro world of confident white CEOs in suits, oil barons, and the military industrial complex. “The Wolfowitzes and the Richard Perles” evokes — well, you know what it evokes.
MSNBC Weblogs
What are these people thinking about today?
• Eric Alterman: Altercation
• Alan Boyle: Cosmic Log
• Jan Herman: The Juice
• Chris Matthews: Hardball
• Michael Rogers: The Practical Futurist
• Robert Windrem: Spyscope
• Michael Moran: War of Words
• Weblog Central
The idea that oil is a factor in official thinking about Iraq shouldn’t even be controversial. Protecting oil supplies from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait was an explicit — though disingenuously underemphasized — reason for Bush War I. After all, we couldn’t claim to be fighting to restore democracy to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, let alone Iraq. This time around, the fact that Bush and Cheney are both oil men is suggestive, but the implication is not clear. A war to topple Saddam will raise oil prices in the short run but probably lower them in the longer run by stabilizing the supply. An oil man could have sincerely mixed feelings about these prospects. Surely, though, even a sensible opponent of the war ought to register a steady oil supply as one of the better reasons for it.
SUPPORTING ISRAEL
The lack of public discussion about the role of Israel in the thinking of “President Bush” is easier to understand, but weird nevertheless. It is the proverbial elephant in the room: Everybody sees it, no one mentions it. The reason is obvious and admirable: Neither supporters nor opponents of a war against Iraq wish to evoke the classic anti-Semitic image of the king’s Jewish advisers whispering poison into his ear and betraying the country to foreign interests. But the consequence of this massive “Shhhhhhhhh!” is to make a perfectly valid American concern for a democratic ally in a region of nutty theocracies, rotting monarchies, and worse seem furtive and suspicious.
• The obstacles to peace in the Middle East
Having brought this up, I hasten to add a few self-protective points. The president’s advisors, Jewish and non-Jewish, are patriotic Americans who sincerely believe that the interests of America and Israel coincide. What’s more, they are right about that, though they may be wrong about where that shared interest lies. Among Jewish Americans, including me, there are people who hold every conceivable opinion about war with Iraq with every variation of intensity, including passionate opposition and complete indifference. Jews are undoubtedly overrepresented in what little organized antiwar movement there may be (thus feeding another variant of the anti-Semitic stereotype).
Why and whether an American war against Iraq would be good for Israel is far from clear and is the subject of vigorous debate in Israel itself — but not in America.
A SILENT DEBATE
Advertisement
Theories range from the mundane to the exotic to the paranoid: Clearing out a neighborhood troublemaker before he gets the bomb is reason enough. Or, deposing Saddam will set off a complex regional chain reaction that will somehow turn the Arab nations into peaceful bourgeois societies. Or, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon actually wants a huge regional conflagration that he can use as an excuse and cover for expelling the Palestinians from the West Bank. In any event, the downside risk for Israel — of carnage, military and civilian — is like America’s, only far greater.
But we’d better not talk about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Kinsley is Slate’s founding editor.
Printable version
Point and click on a menu choice or a highlighted country.
Iraq
OPEC quota: Iraqi oil production is constrained by
the United Nations' limits on its exports. The U.S.
Energy Information Administration estimates
production at 2,560,00 barrels/day
United Arab Emirates
OPEC quota: 2,289,400 barrels/day
Old quota: 2,219,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 97.8 billion barrels
Minister: Obeid bin Saif Al-Nasiri
Qatar
OPEC quota: 678,800 barrels/day
Old quota: 658,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 3.7 billion barrels
Minister: Abdullah bin Hamad Al-Attiya
Kuwait
OPEC quota: 2,101,000 barrels/day
Old quota: 2,037,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 96.5 billion barrels
Minister: Sheikh Saud Naser Al-Sabah
Saudi Arabia
OPEC quota: 8,512,200 barrels/day
Old quota: 8,253,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 263.5 billion barrels
Minister: Ali bin Ibrahim al-Naimi
Iran
OPEC quota: 3,843,800 barrels/day
Old quota: 3,727,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 89.7 billion barrels
Minister: Bijan Namdar Zaganeh
Indonesia
OPEC quota: 1,358,600 barrels/day
Old quota: 1,317,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 5.0 billion barrels
Minister: Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
Nigeria
OPEC quota: 2,156,600 barrels/day
Old quota: 2,091,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 22.5 billion barrels
Minister: Rilwanu Lukman
Libya
OPEC quota: 1,404,200 barrels/day
Old quota: 1,361,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 29.5 billion barrels
Minister: Abdullah Salim al-Badri
Algeria
OPEC quota: 836,600 barrels/day
Old quota: 811,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 9.2 billion barrels
Minister: Chakib Khelil
Venezuela
OPEC quota: 3,018,800 barrels/day
Old quota: 2,926,000 barrels/day
Reserves: 72.6 billion barrels
Minister: Ali Rodriguez
Russia
1999 Average Production: 6,074,000 barrels/day
Norway
1999 Average Production: 3,018,000 barrels/day
United Kingdom
1999 Average Production: 2,691,000 barrels/day
China
1999 Average Production: 3,206,000 barrels/day
Oman
1999 Average Production: 900,000 barrels/day
Egypt
1999 Average Production: 852,000 barrels/day
Brazil
1999 Average Production: 1,094,000 barrels/day
Mexico
1999 Average Production: 2,906,000 barrels/day
United States
1999 Average Production: 5,938,000 barrels/day
(preliminary estimate)
Canada
1999 Average Production: 1,905,000 barrels/day
Printable version
SOURCE: U.S. Energy Information Administration | | | | *Mutt American | | Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2002 2:12 pm Post subject: |
| Good news for the people of Afghanistan! $300,000,000 for their economy plus 12,000 real jobs.
And it's still cheaper for the US to buy oil on the open market than it is to go to war over it. | | | | Guest | | Posted: Sat Jan 04, 2003 10:06 am Post subject: Return of Zionist Extremist Elliott Abrams |
| The Return Of Elliott Abrams
Israel's Likud Scores Big With White House Appointment
Jim Lobe writes for Inter Press Service, an international newswire, and for Foreign Policy in Focus, a joint project of the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies and the New Mexico-based Interhemispheric Resource Center.
Neo-conservative hawks in the administration of President George W. Bush have won a major battle against the State Department in the fight for control of United States Mideast policy with the surprise appointment of Iran-Contra figure Elliott Abrams to the region's top policy spot in the National Security Council (NSC).
The appointment, leaked to reporters by the White House, would for the first time place someone in a top Mideast policy spot who has publicly assailed the "land-for-peace" formula that has guided U.S. policy in the Arab-Israeli conflict since the 1967 war.
Abrams, who first came to national prominence as a controversial political appointee in the Reagan administration who later pleaded guilty to lying to Congress regarding the Iran-Contra scandal, has also opposed the Oslo peace process and called for Washington to "stand by Israel," rather than act as a neutral mediator between Israel and the Palestinians.
"Yet another American Likudnik is moving to a position where they control Washington's agenda in the Mideast," said Rashid Khalidi, a Mideast historian at the University of Chicago. "This is a tragedy for the Israeli and American people." Likud is the rightwing Israeli party headed by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
Currently the NSC staff chief for Democracy, Human Rights, and International Operations, Abrams will become Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the NSC for Southwest Asia, Near East and North African Affairs.
As such, he will be in charge of presenting policy papers and options for National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, whose own opinions have proven decisive in cases where the president receives conflicting views from hawks, represented by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney, and the more-dovish Secretary of State, Colin Powell, who is often backed by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the uniformed military. Rice, a Russia specialist, had no experience with Mideast issues until her current job. Abrams will replace Zalmay Khalilzad, a prominent foreign-policy strategist whose views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are considered much more neutral than Abrams'. Khalilzad succeeded Clinton holdover Bruce Reidel early last year but was quickly consumed with his native-borne Afghanistan after being named special envoy to the interim president, Hamid Karzai. Khalilzad will now become "ambassador-at-large for free Iraqis" and is expected to play a key role in sorting out internal conflicts among the Iraqi opposition.
Beloved by right-wingers who hail him as both a hero for his championship of the Nicaraguan contras during the 1980s, Abrams first gained prominence as a leading neo-conservative when he served as Reagan's Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights in the early 1980s and then as Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs.
In both positions, he clashed frequently and angrily with mainstream church groups and human rights organisations, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, who often accused him of covering up horrendous abuses committed by U.S.-backed governments, such as El Salvador and Guatemala, and rebel forces, such as the Contras and Angola's Unita, while, at the same time, exaggerating abuses by U.S. foes.
He was indicted by the Iran-Contra special prosecutor for giving false testimony about his role in illicitly raising money for the Contras but pleaded guilty to two lesser offenses of withholding information to Congress in order to avoid a trial and a possible jail term. He was pardoned by President George H.W. Bush along with a number of other Iran-Contra defendants in 1992.
His credibility for truth-telling was so low that at one point he was required to take an oath before testifying before Congressional committees. Most analysts here believe that he was given an NSC post by the new Bush administration because any other position would have required Senate confirmation.
After Reagan left office in 1989, Abrams, like a number of other prominent neo-conservatives, was not invited to serve in the Bush Sr. administration. Instead, he worked for a number of think tanks and eventually became head of the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) where he wrote widely on foreign-policy issues, including the Middle East, and the threats posed by U.S. secular society to Jewish identity. He also remained an integral part of the tight-knit neo-conservative foreign-policy community in Washington that revolved around one of his early mentors, Richard Perle and former UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).
Then-House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich furthered his public rehabilitation by appointing him to the new U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom in 1999 for which he also served as chairman in 2000-01. Muslim groups here have complained about his refusal to criticise Israeli practices in the occupied territories and Jerusalem, such as sealing off Muslim holy sites, as violations of religious freedom.
He is not known as an Arab-Israeli specialist but has long favoured Likud positions on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and even assailed former Likud Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for caving into U.S. pressure to respect the Oslo peace process. Shortly after the outbreak of the al-Aqsa intifida at the end of September 2000, he criticised mainstream Jewish groups for calling for a resumption of peace talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel, as well as a halt to the violence.
Like Perle, as well as Rumsfeld's civilian advisers like Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and Cheney's top deputy, I. Lewis Libby, he has favoured a Mideast strategy based on the overwhelming military power of both the United States and Israel and on a military alliance between Israel and Turkey against hostile Arab states, particularly Syria and Iraq, in order to create a "broader strategic context" that would ensure whatever state might emerge on Palestinian territory would be friendly to United States and Israeli interests and that could force Syria to withdraw from Lebanon. He has long favoured forceful action to oust Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
He has accused Palestinian Authority leader Yassir Arafat of being an untrustworthy partner under the Oslo process and is believed to have used his previous NSC Democracy position to push for his ouster from power as part of a thorough reform process. That view, which was strongly backed by Rumsfeld and Cheney's offices, was eventually accepted by Bush last June, over strenuous objections by the State Department and senior aides for Bush's father, notably his former national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft.
In his new position, according to John Prados, a historian who has written about the National Security Council, Abrams should be in an excellent position to influence U.S. policy on the Mideast, particularly in "delaying and/or halting policy on the 'roadmap'" that is being developed by the "Quartet" -- the United States, European Union, Russia, and the United Nations -- on resuming political negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Indeed, it already appears that British hopes for a major meeting of the Quartet on the roadmap before the end of the year are fading quickly.
Abrams is expected to support Israel's recent requests both to put off discussion of the 'roadmap' until after Israel's elections at the end of next month and for some 14 billion dollars in military aid and loan guarantees to help the country cope with economic hard times.
Abrams' influence on policy is already clear. For the first time ever the Bush administration voted against a U.N. General Assembly resolution last week that called on Israel to repeal the Jerusalem law that declares that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel."
In the past, Washington has abstained on the issue, insisting that the the status of Jerusalem must be determined by negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. Abrams has in the past assailed that vote, as well as Washington's refusal to recogize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, on the grounds that that such a position "tantalizes the Palestinians with the prospect of forcing the Jews to abandon Jerusalem."
As you might expect, Arab-Americans responded to the appointment with a mix of resignation and foreboding.
James Zogby, the director of the Arab-American Institute (AAI) here said Abrams' appointment sends "a very dangerous message to the Arab world" and adds to the "lock that the neo-con set now has on all the major instruments of decision-making except for the State Department."
Khalidi also pointed to Abrams' history as being less than forthcoming with information that may contradict his own views. "He will be yet another filter blocking reality from reaching the president," he said. | | | | Guest | | Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:11 am Post subject: 'DON'T DIE FOR ISRAEL' |
| > A Review by Dr. Susan Huck of "ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL," by Andrew
> Hurley
>
> Editor comments: Thank you Dr. Susan Huck.
>
> The following powerful one-page review of ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL by
> career journalist and book author Dr. Susan Huck is the most incisive
> review yet. It again reminds your Editor that this book was Andrew
> Hurley's life literary work, resulting from 20 years of careful data
> collection and writing.
>
> Hurley chose, because of the nature of his business relationships, to
> wait until his retirement to publish ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL. Each
> paragraph and every word was mulled over time and time again before
> it was finally printed. Only the clearest facts and conclusions
> survived. The result was this impeccable book.
>
> It was my honor to know Jim Hurley before his death last year, and to
> hear of the many antidotes he did not include, and some he could not
> include. Andrew J. Hurley (Jim) lived an abundant and adventurous
> life that would seem enviable to most of us. However It is my belief
> that he will someday be remembered, not for his business successes,
> but for this, his one and only book.
>
> ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL is the one book we know of that has yet to be
> seriously challenged on any material fact, and nary a detail has been
> upended since WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS published it as our first book.
> Hurley wrote ONUI believing that millions of live were at risk, and
> that he could make a difference.
>
> Thanks to Jim Hurley; we will do our best to help the world remember
> and honor him - Editor.
>
> DON'T DIE FOR ISRAEL
>
> A Review by Dr. Susan Huck of ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL, by Andrew
> Hurley
>
> The original title of this 1990 book, "Holocaust II? Saving
> Israel from Suicide", perhaps more accurately reflected the author's
> concern that aggressive Israeli policies might ultimately lead to
> disaster for Israel. However, the current title very accurately
> reflects the current American, as distinct from the Israeli problem.
> It details, as truthfully as any source I have seen, the manner in
> which Uncle Sam is converted into Uncle Schlemiel, Israel's 900-pound
> gorilla.
>
> The theme of suicidal Jewish zealotry is outlined in Hurley's
> first chapter, which draws upon A History of the Jews, by Dr. Abram
> Sachar, once president of Brandeis University. Far from the tale of
> continual undeserved victimhood constantly served to the public,
> Sachar demonstrates how, from a thousand years before the birth of
> Christ, Jewish tribes and states kept getting into needless
> difficulties with both friend and foe.
>
> Ah, but such a perspective does not serve current
> purposes. "We" non-Jews must be kept guilt-ridden and "obliged" to
> grovel, pay, and otherwise sacrifice ourselves for Jews. An Anti-
> Defamation League catalogue of "educational" material emphasizes the
> theme of victimhood and martyrdom at the hands of Christians, as in
> The Longest Hatred -- "from the Cross to the Swastika." The ADL's
> concept of a "good Christian" is one who sacrifices himself for the
> Jews. It is sad to see the American armed forces being set up to
> serve as "good Christians" for Israel.
>
> Hurley's book was originally published in 1990, before "Gulf
> War I," the Bush 41 war. The re-titled but not revised edition was
> published in 1999, apparently missing by just a few years "Gulf War
> II," or the Bush 43 war scheduled for 2003. Nothing, it seems, will
> deter President George Bush from initiating the all-out war on Iraq
> being pressed by a Jewish cabal within his administration. Jewish
> enthusiasts look forward to it as the beginning of "World War IV" to
> forcibly "re-educate" all Moslems everywhere, beginning with Israel's
> closest foes.
>
> As the preface to ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL explains, lawyer
> and historian Andrew Hurley does much more than examine Jewish
> history. He explains -- at length and with "documentation," the
> methods by which the Jewish lobby in the United States controls "our"
> federal government. The carrot is money, the stick is public
> smearing, followed if necessary by deprivation of livelihood.
>
> American and Israeli Jews collaborate seamlessly to bulldoze
> Congress and the entire executive branch into sending an
> uninterrupted stream of money, military hardware, and whatever else
> is wanted to Israel. Congressman Larry McDonald, who was on the
> research and development subcommittee of the House Armed Services
> Committee, once told me that "we wouldn't even have an R & D program
> if Israel didn't want us to," because the fruits of taxpayer-funded R
> & D, he knew, were funneled straight to Israel.
>
> The Israelis then feel free to market it, by the way. Hurley
> explains this in great detail. No cabinet member, not to mention mere
> bureaucrat, can stand in the way of this continual transfer of
> wealth, because the Jews can "go over the head" of anyone of any
> rank.
>
> Hurley, writing in 1990, could not have known that George
> Bush's father, Bush 41, would "learn" that he lost his 1992 re-
> election campaign because he merely delayed a "loan guarantee" to
> Israel. (That is, he delayed guaranteeing that if Israel
> defaulted, "our" government would pay. In any event, our annual multi-
> billion dollar gifts to Israel easily cover Israel's debts.) Young
> Bush 43 has been keenly monitored ever since he loomed on the horizon
> as a candidate. The ADL boasts of this.
>
> In short, Hurley's book is a manual of "how they do it,"
> filled with examples as of 1990. In 2003, "how they do it" has simply
> become more blatant, as Jewish "neocons" -- so-called neo-
> conservatives -- pack the administration with armchair warhawks and
> are apparently capable of employing the American armed forces as
> their own.
>
> By employing mere name-calling as a first-line weapon, the
> goyim are reduced to jellyfish. Why does anyone respond to
> accusations of "anti-Semitism" with other than a patient smile and
> the comment, "That won't work, either"?
>
> If the silly goyim ever wake up and do that, the United
> States might cease to be ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL. -end
>
> (Reviewer, Dr. Susan Huck's latest book "WHY DO WE AMERICAN SUBMIT TO
> THIS" By Newcomb Publisher's Inc., is now available from We Hold
> These Truths, $20.00)
>
> To Buy ONE NATION UNDER ISRAEL, 345 page soft cover, $17.50; 2 for
> $35.00; 10 for $128.00. (http://www.whtt.org/bookstor.htm)
>
> We Hold These Truths
> P.O. Box 14491
> Scottsdale, AZ 85254
> 480-947-3329
>
> To subscribe, type "Subscribe" in the SUBJECT LINE.
> To unsubscribe, type "Remove" in the SUBJECT LINE.
>
>
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
WORDS are Stronger than SWORDS! ~ Spread the words to the Wilderness!
++++++++++++++++++++++ eFreePalestine ++++++++++++++++++++++
eFreePalestine is America's Secular WILDERNESS VOICE for PALESTINE!*
www.FreePalestine.com No Peace Without Occupation Free PALESTINE!
++++++++++++++++++++++ eFreePalestine ++++++++++++++++++++++
Blessed are the Peacemakers NOT the Warmongers!
Chronic INJUSTICE is the ROOT of TERRORISM!
Fighting TERRORISM while AIDING OCCUPATION is Moronic!
END TERRORISM by ENDING Israeli OCCUPATION Stupid!
SHARON NOW = MILOSEVIC Then = HITLER IN 1942!
Peace Only in a Legislatively DEzIONIZED Secular State!
Aiding Israeli OCCUPATION = Aiding TERRORISM!
Where Does Our Simplistic Absolutist President Stand?!
++++++++++++++++++++++ eFreePalestine ++++++++++++++++++++++
www.Badil.org The RIGHT of RETURN!
www.IndictSharon.net Indict the BUTCHER!
www.PMWatch.org PALESTINE MEDIA WATCH!
www.PalestineRemembered.com PALESTINE for DUMMIES!
www.FreePalestineCampaign.org Be a Peacemaker in PALESTINE!
www.InternationalAnswer.org Act Now to STOP WAR and End RACISM
www.capwiz.com/ADC/home/ Tell Congress to Stop Aid to Israel!
www.Al-Awda.org/petition.htm END zIONIST Profit from OCCUPATION!
www.RamallahOnline.com Our Occupied Home in Ramallah PALESTINE!
www.groups.Yahoo.com/group/eFreePalestine/messages ARCHIVES!
www.PalestineChronicle.com News and Views from PALESTINE!
www.DocumentaryPhotographs.com Pictures from PALESTINE!
www.PalestineMonitor.org Monitor PALESTINE!
www.WRMEA.com zIONIST-Free MEDIA!
++++++++++++++++++++++ eFreePalestine ++++++++++++++++++++++
eFreePalestine-subscribe@YahooGroups.com SUBSCRIBE NOW
eFreePalestine-unsubscribe@YahooGroups.com Unsubscribe
eFreePalestine@YahooGroups.com Speak up on eFreePalestine!
eFreePalestine-owner@YahooGroups.com Questions/Comments!
Views expressed are the author's only*
++++++++++++++++++++++ eFreePalestine ++++++++++++++++++++++
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms | | | | Top | | Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 8:54 pm Post subject: |
| 
Houston, we gotta problem... | | | | Alpha | | | | Guest | | Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 2:33 pm Post subject: |
| Gaps in Iraq document, Blix expected to tell U.N.
Thursday, January 9, 2003 Posted: 5:33 AM EST (1033 GMT)
Blix will travel to Baghdad later this month.
UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix is expected to tell the Security Council on Thursday that his inspectors continue to find more information gaps as they comb the 12,000-page Iraqi weapons declaration.
Since the document was handed over on December 7, teams of analysts in New York have been scrutinizing the weapons declaration, comparing it to prior declarations and to a database of information kept by the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission.
Rather than resolving outstanding questions in the various weapons areas UNMOVIC is looking at -- chemical, biological and missile -- a U.N. official said, "We're finding more holes ... in all categories." The official would not specify particular gaps.
At the invitation of the Iraqi government, Blix is planning to travel January 19 to Baghdad, where he will raise the questions with the Iraqis. | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
