| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:01 pm Post subject: AIPAC (Israel Lobby) Statement on 2004 'Election' of Bush |
| AIPAC (Israel Lobby) Statement on 2004 'Election' of Bush
http://www.whtt.org/whtt.shtml?rpr/AipacEl.htm
How the State of Israel’s lobby in Washington works to control the American Congress. In its own words, AIPAC celebrates the election
of “Jewish members of Congress.” Read Andrew Hurley’s superb One Nation Under Israel-Ed
AIPAC Statement on 2004 Election Results
Arutz Sheva, Israel National News Agency
Nov 04, '04 / 20 Cheshvan 5765
(IsraelNN.com) Following is the media statement released tonight by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) officials.
Washington, D.C., AIPAC congratulates President Bush on his reelection victory. We look forward to continuing to work with the President and his administration on issues vital to the U.S.-Israel relationship. President Bush has demonstrated his commitment to the special relationship between United States and Israel, and has many friends in the pro-Israel community across the country.
We also look forward to working with the members of the 109th Congress. Many of Israel's strongest friends and supporters were re-elected Tuesday to the House and Senate. The 109th Congress will be the most pro-Israel ever.
We look forward to continuing to work with the leadership of both parties in both houses of Congress, and congratulate House Speaker Dennis Hastert, Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Majority Whip Roy Blunt, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer on their victories.
There were nine new members of the U.S. Senate and about 40 new members of the House of Representatives elected Tuesday. AIPAC has met with every one of the successful candidates, and we look forward to working with them on the issues affecting the U.S.-Israel relationship.
AIPAC extends its best wishes to Jewish members of Congress Martin Frost and Peter Deutsch, both of whom served with great distinction during their careers in the House and have been true champions of the relationship between the United States and Israel.
We also welcome the election of two new Jewish members of Congress, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL 20) and Allyson Schwartz (D-PA 13), whose election keeps at 26 the number of Jewish members of the House. -End
ED- Buy Andrew Hurley’s - One Nation Under Israel, two for $20.00, (click here)

Copyright (c) 2004, Strait Gate Ministries, All Rights Reserved
May be reproduced only in full.
[ Home ]
Please send questions and comments to info@whtt.org | |  | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:36 pm Post subject: Jewish Dominance Of America - Facts Are Facts |
| http://www.rense.com/general59/sdom.htm
Jewish Dominance Of America - Facts Are Facts
By Jonathan Silverman
11-21-4
(Parts of this article are excerpted from one written by Eric Hume and first posted in 1999 before the Christian/Jewish Zionist Neocons took control of the base direction/decisions of the US government fronted by George W. Bush)
The USA in 1999 is under that same degree of Jewish domination that Weimar Germany was under in 1929.
Sir Arthur Bryant, a respected historian of the 1920s, wrote that although Jews comprised only 1% of the German population, in 1924 in the Reichstag they constituted a 25% of the Social Democrats.
Jews controlled 57% of the metal trade, 22% of grain, and 39% of textiles. More than 50% of the Berlin Chamber of Commerce were Jewish, as were a spectacular 1,200 of the 1,474 members of the German Stock Exchange.
Of the 29 legitimate theaters in Berlin, 23 had Jewish directors. Authorship was almost a Jewish monopoly. In 1931, of 144 film scripts worked, 119 were written by Jews and 77 produced by them.
Look at Hollywood in 1999. Jews totally dominate the film industry. Although most of the films are vulgar, violent trash, the industry falls all over itself giving each other awards for producing such. Propaganda and 'message' films flow out of Hollywood and across TV screens. (Read 'How The Jews Invented Hollywood' by Neal Gabler)
The news and communications industry is a Jewish kingdom. How many Jewish bylines do you come across? From the NY Times to your local paper, from NPR to radio talk show hosts, you are being 'informed' by a specific group of people American society.
The American financial industry is essentially a Jewish franchise. From the Federal Reserve to banks and mortgage and other financing industries, the ownership is most often Jewish.
And the professions are so dominated by Jews, it is shocking. Open the phone book Yellow Pages and read through the Physicians and Attorneys sections...and prepare to be stunned.
Did you know an Israeli company does the entire billing for most of America's cell and regular phone systems? The company has total knowledge of who you talk to and for how long - at least.
Did you know an Israeli company created and installed and maintains the absolutely HIGHEST level of secure communications in the Pentagon and White House? Do you think someone might have built in a monitoring system?
Also, do a Google search and try to find and read the Fox News 3-part series by Carl Cameron on Israeli spying in America.
Look around. The USA of today very closely mirrors the Germany of 1929.
Is there anything 'wrong' with this? Not in principle, no. All people are deserving of the rewards of the energy they invest in achievement. The problem is one of monopoly and the exclusion of non-Jews via the self-promotion which predominates in most of today's Jewish-controlled America. If a Jew is up for a job against a non-Jew, and the one doing the hiring is Jewish, gets who gets the job.
Since Jews stick together as a group, they pull and shove each other up the ranks of corporations and pull strings ensuring members of their race are given first shot at student openings in the major universities and top jobs throughout the areas of their dominance in every type of business imaginable.
Bryant also wrote that in 1929 Germany, in law and medicine, Jews were vastly over represented. In Berlin in 1931, 42% of the city's doctors and 48% of its lawyers were Jews.
The Jews in Weimar Germany used their propaganda levers to ridicule German ideals and culture. They even slandered the memory of the fallen German soldiers of that terrible war, World War One.
During the horror days of the great inflation, Jews by and large remained wealthy people and prospered at the losses of the masses. They took expensive vacations while ordinary Germans starved.
Today, Jews control 70% of the wealth in America.
Today, in 1999, the U.S.A. is totally dominated by Jews. Virtually every newspaper or magazine is owned by Jews. Their self-serving propaganda constantly fills the TV screen. The Federal government is totally under Jewish control. US military forces are the pawn of Israel. The banks, the markets are theirs. They systematically denigrate our Founding Fathers and our heritage and our Constitution.
Certainly, many non-Zionist Jews of America are waking up to the political and other manipulations they and most Jews are being controlled and influenced by. There are many, many wonderful Jews in American society but the facts are the facts...and monopolies of any sort aren't healthy in any society. Such monopolies led to the terrible years just before and during during WWII. Let's pray that never, ever happens again. Let's also pray that non-Jews learn from their fellow citizens about how to achieve and to prosper in our waning American culture. Alas, most gentiles are content with their lower rungs on the ladder and that 'content' will forever doom them to second class status in today's Jewish America. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:27 am Post subject: WRMEA: Poor AIPAC—what’s a foreign lobby to do? |
| WRMEA: Poor AIPAC—what’s a foreign lobby to do?
If You’ve Got It, Flaunt It (or Maybe Not): An AIPAC Primer
Washington Report, November 2004, pages 24-25
http://www.wrmea.com/archives/November_2004/0411024.html
Lobby Watch
If You’ve Got It, Flaunt It (or Maybe Not): An AIPAC Primer
By Janet McMahon
To download Pro-Israel PACs Contributing to Federal Candidates 2004 Election Cycle, click here. http://www.wrmea.com/pdf/pac_24.pdf
“One of the capital’s toughest and most effective behind-the-scenes lobbies.”
—The Washington Post, Sept. 5, 2004
“A political juggernaut and one of the most effective and controversial lobbying groups in the U.S. [with] close ties to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his Likud Party.”
—Sunday Herald (UK), Sept. 5, 2004
Israel’s “client,” one of the most “consistently potent and reliable…weapons in Israel’s policy arsenel.”
—Haaretz, Sept. 7, 2004
There seems to be little disagreement on the power and influence of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Contrary to popular perception, however, the Israel lobby’s big daddy does not make campaign contributions to elected officials. That task is carried out by its numerous innocuously named progeny (see chart at right).
Instead AIPAC treats congressmen to junkets to Israel, writes legislation such as the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, and keeps very close tabs indeed on who does and does not toe the Israel line. The results of its scorekeeping are evident in the reports filed to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) by the baby PACs which dole out the money: after reading the reports of one or two, one can predict with near complete accuracy the recipients of all the others.
This does not mean, however, that AIPAC’s 50 board members—who, according to the Sept. 5 Washington Post, represent “a cross section of influential figures in Republican and Democratic politics and in civic affairs across the country”—are twiddling their thumbs. “Since 2000,” the Post reported, “the board members have contributed an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political committees. One in every five…is a top fund-raiser for Kerry or Bush.”
Indeed, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry recently appointed former AIPAC board member and California congressman Mel Levine as his top adviser on the Middle East. Not to be outdone, at an AIPAC co-hosted fund-raiser in New York prior to the Republican Convention—and two days after reports of possible AIPAC involvement in Israeli spying on the U.S. first appeared—Bush campaign chair Ken Mehlman was introduced with the words, “We are honored that President Bush’s campaign is being managed by one of us.”
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington, DC-based watchdog organization, “Since the 1989-90 election cycle, pro-Israel interests have contributed $41.3 million in individual, PAC, and soft money contributions to federal candidates and party committees. More than two-thirds of that total, or $28.6 million, has gone to Democrats.”
AIPAC reported spending $1.28 million on lobbying in 2003. Given its total annual budget of $33.4 million, one wonders what it does with the leftover $30-plus million. Surely that’s more than enough to pay for its staff of 165 and offices in Washington, DC, 10 states and Israel. With a membership of 85,000, the pro-Israel behemoth boasts that it holds more than 2,000 meetings with members of Congress and “helps” pass more than 100 pro-Israel legislative initiatives yearly, according to The Washington Post.
Clearly, however, AIPAC—and Israel—are uneasy when the lobby’s fame spreads too far beyond Capitol Hill—at least when the reason is possible espionage (see article p. 26). In his article in the Sept. 9 edition of the Israeli daily Haaretz, “10 Ways the Pentagon Spy Case May Damage Israel,” Bradley Burston lists as number three “Undermining AIPAC.” “It has been suggested that a key source of AIPAC’s strength is its widespread image of unparalleled clout in affecting foreign policy regarding Israel,” he explained, “an image that the affair could sap.
“In fact,” Burston noted, “AIPAC’s very success in lobbying for Israel’s interests has also rendered the group…vulnerable to charges of undue influence in Washington decision making.”
Poor AIPAC—what’s a foreign lobby to do?
Janet McMahon is managing editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
SIDEBAR
What Is a PAC?
Political Action Committee (PAC)—A popular term for a political committee organized for the purpose of raising and spending money to elect and defeat candidates. Most PACs represent business, labor or ideological interests. PACs can give $5,000 to a candidate committee per election (primary, general or special). They can also give up to $15,000 annually to any national party committee, and $5,000 annually to any other PAC. PACs may receive up to $5,000 from any one individual, PAC or party committee per calendar year. A PAC must register with the FEC within 10 days of its formation, providing name and address for the PAC, its treasurer and any connected organizations. Affiliated PACs are treated as one donor for the purpose of contribution limits.
Many politicians also form Leadership PACs, which are not technically affiliated with the candidate, as a way of raising money to help fund other candidates’ campaigns. Leadership PACs are often indicative of a politician’s aspirations for leadership positions in Congress or for higher office. (A breakdown of spending by Leadership PACs is available at <www.opensecrets.org>.) Further background on Leadership PACs is online in the Center for Responsive Politic’s 1996 publication, A Bag of Tricks.
For more information on PACs, check out the FEC’s Campaign Guide for Corporations and Labor Organizations and the Campaign Guide for Nonconnected Committees (both available in PDF format). For an alphabetical list of PAC acronyms, abbreviations, initials, and common names, see the FEC’s list of PACRONYMS. A chart showing the rise and fall in the number of PACs over the years is also available on the FEC’s Web site, <www.fec.gov>.
—Center for Responsive Politics, <www.opensecrets.org>
http://www.wrmea.com/archives/November_2004/0411024.html | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 11:10 am Post subject: Not What You Think |
| Not What You Think
(from Information Clearing House)
by Charley Reese
11/20/04 -- With all of the political hoopla and heifer dust that is spread about the Middle East, you might think we are totally dependent on Middle Eastern oil. Actually, we are not.
The United States imports about 62 percent of its oil and other petroleum products. Only about 11 percent of domestic usage comes from the Persian Gulf countries. Saudi Arabia, for example, supplies about 7.2 percent of domestic usage.
Our main imports by far come from Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, and Nigeria. From January to July 2004, Saudi Arabia was fourth, just ahead of Nigeria and behind Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. Iraq was sixth. These figures [.pdf] are from the American Petroleum Institute.
We are bogged down in the Middle East because of Israel, not oil. Iraq was perceived as a threat to Israel, not to Saudi Arabia and certainly not to us. A man who at one time prepared the president's daily intelligence briefing told me years ago that there was never any indication whatsoever that Iraq was going to invade Saudi Arabia. We just used that as an excuse for the first Gulf War.
The majority of American diplomatic efforts in the Middle East are directed at trying to persuade Arab countries to accept Israel. Their relationship to Israel is really none of our business.
I realize that members of a Christian cult that originated in the 19th century believe they have a biblical obligation to love Israel. Well, people are entitled to their religious beliefs, but none of them has any business being used as a basis for American foreign policy. We have one, and only one, interest in the Middle East. That is access, at a fair market price, to oil. Whether the countries from which we buy oil like or don't like Israel, are democracies or monarchies or dictatorships, is immaterial and irrelevant.
I harbor no ill feelings toward Israel. In many ways, it is an admirable country, but it is a foreign country, and the United States should treat Israel the same as it treats every other foreign nation. We should make it clear, for example, that Israel's enemies are not our enemies. If the Israelis and the Syrians don't get along, that's their business. Our relations with Syria should be based strictly on how Syria treats Americans and America's interests.
Unfortunately, Israel has a very powerful lobby in the United States. Even though our intelligence people said Syria was cooperating with the United States in the war on terrorism, we nevertheless applied sanctions, not because of anything Syria said about us or did, but because Syria allows some Palestinian organizations opposed to Israeli occupation to operate inside Syria.
When Jimmy Carter was president, we ended up in effect paying bribes both to Israel and to Egypt so they would sign a peace treaty. That was a dumb thing to do. It was in their interest, not ours, to sign a peace treaty. Why should the American taxpayers be dunned to pay for it?
The whole underlying basis of the neoconservative cockamamie idea of democratizing the Middle East at the point of a gun is the theory that if the Arab countries are democracies, they will accept and get along with Israel. I seriously doubt that, as their dispute with Israel is not over forms of government but over Arab land Israel has seized and refuses to relinquish.
George Washington advised us to harbor neither habitual enmity nor habitual friendship for any foreign country. He also advised us to beware of foreign influence in our domestic affairs. Both pieces of good advice, and both ignored because too many politicians in Washington are wet-pants scared of the Israeli lobby.
We should not be involved in the Middle East at all except as purchasers of oil, but we will go on spending treasure and blood in that area until the American people elect some politicians brave enough to face down the Israeli lobby.
Establishing a modern state of Israel in the middle of the Arab world was a British colonial idea. Americans should not pay with their lives and tax dollars for a British blunder.
© 2004 by King Features Syndicate, Inc.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
