ՀԵՌՈՒՍՏԱԾՐԱԳՐԵՐ - Հեղինակ՝ Admin. Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:52 - 2 քննարկում
“The General Assembly, [***] Determines that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.”
“The General Assembly, [***] Determines that
Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.”�
United Nations General Assembly Resolution Number 3379
revoked under Zionist pressure by Resolution Number 4686
NEW!
The complete 575 page book
The Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians
by
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
Enlarged Second Edition
Thursday, 1/28/2010
QUOTE OF THE DAY“The way I see it, the fact of the Jews’ racial peculiarity will necessarily influence their social relations with non-Jews. The conclusions which�in my opinion�the Jews should draw is to become more aware of their peculiarity in their social way of life and to recognize their own cultural contributions. First of all, they would have to show a certain noble reservedness and not be so eager to mix socially�of which others want little or nothing. On the other hand, anti-Semitism in Germany also has consequences that, from a Jewish point of view, should be welcomed. I believe German Jewry owes its continued existence to anti-Semitism.”�Albert Einstein, A. Engel translator, “How I became a Zionist”, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 7, Document 57, Princeton University Press, (2002), pp. 234-235, at 235.“Anti-Semitism will be a psychological phenomenon as long as Jews come in contact with non-Jews�what harm can there be in that? Perhaps it is due to anti-Semitism that we survive as a race: at least that is what I believe.”�Albert Einstein, English translation by A. Engel, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 7, Document 37, Princeton University Press, (2002), p. 159.
“What would you say, for example, if I did not deny there are good aspects of anti-Semitism? I say that anti-Semitism will educate the Jews. In fifty years, if we still have the same social order, it will have brought forth a fine and presentable generation of Jews, endowed with a delicate, extremely sensitive feeling for honor and the like.”�Theodor Herzl, as quoted by Amos Elon, Herzl, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, (1975), pp. 114-115.
“[T]here may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in the U. S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the big companies, and there is a force that we have to take into consideration.”�Richard Milhous Nixon, Thirty-Seventh President of the United States of America, as quoted by Leonard Dinnerstein, Antisemitism in America, Oxford University Press, New York, (1994), pp. 232-233. Dinnerstein cites: “Clipping of Fikri Abbaza, interview with Richard Nixon, Al-Mussawar, July 12, 1974, folder ‘Jewish Matters, 1969-1974,’ box 5, Leonard Garment mss., LC.”
“Yet despite the lack of Jewish worship and observance, and my family’s total assimilation into everything American and secular, we were thoroughly Jewish. Our perspective was Jewish, as was our very essence. The world was split into two distinct halves: Jews and gentiles. Jews were always sought in business or social dealings over gentiles. A common expression used by Jews to describe a slow, dense person was�and still is�’He’s got a goyisher kop,’ which literally means ‘He’s got a gentile head’ but figuratively means ‘slow-witted.’ First question when I came home and boasted of making a new friend always was ‘Is he Jewish?’ ‘God forbid!’ (my father’s expression) if I should ever go out with a gentile girl, and ‘Oy vey!’ (which literally means ‘Oh pain!’) if I ever got serious with her. All my parents’ friends were Jews. They all shared the same role models: Sandy Koufax, Bernard Baruch, Bess Meyerson, Sam Levinson, Hank Greenberg, Arthur Goldberg, Golda Meir, Albert Einstein�these were people to be admired. And that poet with the beard, Allen Ginsberg, so smart, but the faygeleh (homosexual) business, such a waste!”�S. G. Bloom, Postville: A Clash of Cultures in Heartland America, Harcourt, Inc., New York, (2000), pp. 63-64.
“Joseph’s appointment in Egypt was good for the Jews. The Jews of Persia were saved thanks to Esther’s influence with the king. When a very powerful emperor is elected by the majority of the people, we must cooperate with him[.]”�Vyacheslav Moshe Kantor, as quoted by Amiram Barkat, “Putin ally is frontrunner to head European Jewish Congress”, HAARETZ.com, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/873804.html, (21 June 2007).
“The [European Jewish Congress] has a very important role in the struggle against Iran. We are not Israel’s ambassadors, but we can pressure our governments and explain the danger[.]”�President of the Austrian Jewish Community Ariel Muzicant, as quoted by Amiram Barkat, “Putin ally is frontrunner to head European Jewish Congress”, HAARETZ.com, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/873804.html, (21 June 2007).
“Regarding a timeline … we decided that the end of 2007 will be the point of assessing the effectiveness of the sanctions and the amount of influence they are having on the Iranians. [***] I never said there is no military option, and the military option is included in all the options that are on the table, but at this time it’s right to use the path of sanctions, and to intensify them.”�Transportation Minister of Israel Shaul Mofaz as quoted by “News Agencies”, “Mofaz: All options, including military one, on the table regarding Iran”, HAARETZ.com, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/868786.html, (9 June 2007).
“I think we’ve got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq. And to me, that would include a strike into, over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers. [***] If they don’t play by the rules, we’ve got to use our force, and to me that would include taking military action to stop them from doing what they’re doing.”�United States Senator Joseph Lieberman, in an interview with Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation on 10 June 2007, “Lieberman: Bomb Iran If It Doesn’t Stop”, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/10/ftn/main2908476.shtml.
“It’s been conclusively proven Iran is not going to be talked out of its nuclear programme. So to stop them from doing it, we have to massively increase the pressure. If we can’t get enough other countries to come along with us to do that, then we’ve got to go with regime change by bolstering opposition groups and the like, because that’s the circumstance most likely for an Iranian government to decide that it’s safer not to pursue nuclear weapons than to continue to do so. And if all else fails, if the choice is between a nuclear-capable Iran and the use of force, then I think we need to look at the use of force. [***] If the choice is them continuing [towards a nuclear bomb] or the use of force, I think you’re at a Hitler marching into the Rhineland point. If you don’t stop it then, the future is in his hands, not in your hands, just as the future decisions on their nuclear programme would be in Iran’s hands, not ours.”�Former United States Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, as quoted by Toby Harnden, “We must attack Iran before it gets the bomb “, Telegraph.co.uk, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/16/wbolton16.xml, (17 May 2007).
“With two carrier strike groups in the Gulf, we’re sending clear messages to friends and adversaries alike. We’ll keep the sea lanes open. [. . .] We’ll stand with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating this region[.]”�United States Vice President Dick Cheney, as quoted by Graham Bowley, “On Carrier in Gulf, Cheney Issues Warning to Iran”, The New York Times www.nytimes.com, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/11/world/middleeast/11cnd-cheney.html?hp, (11 May 2007); and Tom Raum, “Cheney Warns Iran Sea Lanes Must Be Open”, The Associated Press, www.washingtonpost.com, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/11/AR2007051100572.html, (11 May 2007).
“The American president will not abandon the military option and I believe that we do not want him to do so[.]”�United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, as quoted by Reuters News Agency, “Bush won’t give up military option on Iran: Rice”, www.reuters.com, http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL086231320070508, (8 May 2007).
“Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. We all know that. Iran continues their efforts to build nuclear weapons. Iran is now exporting lethal IED’s and jihadists and suicide bombers into Iraq killing American soldiers. The Iranians encouraged Hezbullah to attack Israel from Lebanon recently. Iran poses one of the greatest threats to the world, to the security of the world, and in the Middle East. I believe the Iranians have got, we have got to bring greater pressures, diplomatic, economic, political, join with our European allies. We still fear greatly the effect of a cut off of oil on, from, into Europe. We have to work together. If the Russians and the Chinese are not helpful to us, then we had better figure out a way to put additional pressures encouraging democracy and freedom within Iraq, which is a very cultured socie. . . within Iran, which is a very cultured society. At the end of the day, we cannot allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. [. . .] My greatest fear is the Iranians acquire a nuclear weapon, and give it to a terrorist organization, and there is a real threat of them doing that. The trip wire [for a U. S. strike at Iran] is, that if they acquire these weapons, and their, our intelligence tells us, that this is a real threat to the state of Israel, to other states in the region. But I want to emphasize, Chris, there’s lots of additional efforts that can be made and must be made before we consider that option. There’s lots of things we can do. That is the ultimately final option and I don’t think we need to exercise it at this time.”�U. S. Senator and Presidential candidate John McCain, Republican Presidential Candidate Debates, http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=&p=hotvideo_m_debate_rep&t=c3684&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18296908/&fg=
“If there is a threat to the existence of Israel, which is by the way I think a potential threat to the existence of the United States, then you have to come to that, the aid of Israel.”�U. S. Congressman and Presidential candidate Tom Tancredo, Republican Presidential Candidate Debates, http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=&p=hotvideo_m_debate_rep&t=c3684&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18296908/&fg=
“It really depends on what our intelligence says. I mean the reality is the use of military force against Iran would be very dangerous. It would be very provocative. The only thing worse would be Iran being a nuclear power.”�U. S. Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, Republican Presidential Candidate Debates, http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=&p=hotvideo_m_debate_rep&t=c3684&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18296908/&fg=
“Right now Iran is moving equipment into Iraq that is being used to kill Americans. Iran has crossed the line. The United States has absolute license at this point to take whatever actions are necessary to stop those deadly instruments from being moved across the line being used in explosives, roadside bombs inside Iraq. And, lastly, you know we should not get to the edge of the cliff on this enrichment of uranium and plutonium to be used for a nuclear weapon in Iran. The United States needs to move very quickly.”�U. S. Congressman and Presidential candidate Duncan Hunter, Republican Presidential Candidate Debates, http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=&p=hotvideo_m_debate_rep&t=c3684&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18296908/&fg=
“If we do have to take offensive military action against Iran, it would be far better if the rest of the world saw it as a position of last resort, not first resort, because the effect and consequences will be global.”�United States Senator, and Presidential Candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, as quoted by Hilary Leila Krieger, “Clinton: US might have to confront Iran”, The Jerusalem Post, www.jpost.com, http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1177514487245&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (26 April 2007).
“If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this[.] The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going, and I think they should.”�Congressman Jim Moran, as quoted by Ted Barrett, “Lawmaker under fire for saying Jews support Iraq war: Moran apologizes; White House blasts comments”, www.CNN.com, http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/moran.jews/, (12 March 2003).
“Another diplomatic source said that the resolution was partly a result of Israel’s activity around the world.”�Ronny Sofer, “J’lem sources pleased with UN resolution increasing”, Ynetnews www.ynetnews.com, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3380541,00.html, (24 March 2007).
“‘I believe that ultimately the only real prospect of getting Iran to give up nuclear weapons is to change the regime,’ Bolton told reporters after an off-the-record speech to the Hudson Institute, a nonpartisan policy research organization. How should this be done? ‘By the force of the Iranian people themselves,’ Bolton replied. ‘But if the alternative is a nuclear Iran, as unpleasant as the use of military force would be, I think the prospect of a nuclear Iran is worse.'”�Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press Writer, quoting former US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, “Bolton: Iran Won’t Give Up Nuke Ambition”, Associated Press, Guardian Unlimited www.guardian.co.uk, http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6496892,00.html, (21 March 2007).
“Former ambassador to the UN John Bolton told the BBC that before any ceasefire Washington wanted Israel to eliminate Hezbollah’s military capability.”�“Bolton admits Lebanon truce block”, BBC NEWS, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6479377.stm, (22 March 2007).
“Chirac asked that Israel act to topple the Assad regime, and promised in return to block any moves against Israel within the United Nations or European Union.”�Ezra HaLevi, “France Urged Israel to Invade Syria During War”, Arutz Sheva www.IsraelNationalNews.com, http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/121878, (19 March 2007).
“I know this will annoy many of your readers. . . But the anger is over the fact that Israel did not fight against the Syrians. Instead of Israel fighting against Hizbullah, many parts of the American administration believe that Israel should have fought against the real enemy, which is Syria and not Hizbullah.”�Meyrav Wurmser, as quoted by Yitzhak Benhorin in, “Neocons: We expected Israel to attack Syria”, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3340750,00.html, (16 December 2006).
“Officials said Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other members of the leadership had decided to strip from a major military spending bill a requirement for Bush to gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran. Conservative Democrats as well as lawmakers concerned about the possible impact on Israel had argued for the change in strategy.”� David Espo and Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writers, “Dems abandon war authority provision”, Associated Press, YAHOO! NEWS http://news.yahoo.com, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070313/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq;_ylt=A0WTcUJqOfZFa8cAkxqs0NUE, (13 March 2007).
“Israeli Knesset member Effie Eitam has a reputation as a hawk, but on the question of Iran and its nuclear program, he believes he speaks for the country’s mainstream strategic thinkers. Diplomatic and political manoeuvres to rein in the Islamic state are feckless and doomed to fail, leaving Israel, with or without the co-operation of the United States, no alternative but to use military force to put an end to the nuclear threat, he says. ‘Israel is preparing and will definitely take action,’ Eitam predicted. [***] Eitam told The CJN that Israel may have to act alone against Iran within ‘a window’ to two to three years, but he suggested Israel would move before Bush leaves Office.”�Paul Lungen, “Israeli MK predicts attack on Iran”, The Canadian Jewish News www.cjnews.com, http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=11329, (8 March 2007).
“The Israeli Regime while remaining outside the relevant international instruments continues quantitative and qualitative development of its nuclear weapons, without any concern, international pressure or monitoring. Those who are pushing Security Council to take punitive measures against the peaceful nuclear program of the Islamic Republic of Iran, continue to hinder any action by the Security Council against Israeli regime to force it to abide by the NPT regime. Doing so, they have given wide latitude to this regime and even encourage it to develop freely the clandestine and prohibited possession of nuclear weapons. [***] While Iran has been providing the Agency with access to all its nuclear material and facilities pursuant to its NPT Safeguards Agreement and the Agency is able to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran (as reflected in paragraphs 26-27 of the report), few countries have been making daily threat of resort to attack Iranian fully safeguarded peaceful nuclear facilities uttered at their highest levels, in clear violation of Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter. The Islamic republic of Iran has already documented these unlawful and dangerous threats by sending official letters to the UN Secretary General and the Director General of the IAEA. And while overwhelming majority of the international community has been calling for a peaceful negotiated solution and Iran has announced its readiness for such a solution, the United States and Israel which both have a high record of vertical and horizontal proliferation activities are continuing to make threats against Iran’s full-scope safeguarded facilities.”�Ali Asqar Soltanieh, Permanent Representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors from Iran, in an address to the IAEA Board of Governors on 7 March 2007, “Full Text of Speech Delivered by Iran’s Envoy to IAEA”, Fars News Agency www.farsnews.com, http://www.farsnews.com/English/newstext.php?nn=8512160500, (7 March 2007).
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”�Charter of the United Nations, Chapter 1, Article 2, Paragraph 4.
“I believe that either regime change in Iran or, as a last resort, military action is the only thing that will stop the Iranians from getting nuclear weapons[.]”�John Bolton, Former American Envoy to the United Nations, as quoted by Janine Zacharia and Bill Varner, “Bolton Says U.S. Should Seek ‘Regime Change’ in Iran”, Bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.m.58sr9RqM&refer=home, (1 March 2007).
“Ahmadinejad is the pusher of all the Muslim world toward fanaticism and extremism. In his case, he should be made to disappear from the arena. He has said he wants to become a shahid, a martyr, so I think he should get his wish and be sent to heaven[.]”�Meir Amit, Former Director of Mossad, as quoted by Aaron Klein, “Former Mossad chief: Assassinate Ahmadinejad. Iranian president ‘says he wants to die a martyr so he should be sent to heaven'”, WorldNetDaily www.wnd.com, http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54244, (14 February 2007).
“It is time for Israel or the US to bomb Iran now. Not next week, next month, or next summer, but now. As quickly and as hard and as painfully as possible. [***] So like it or not, time is of the essence, and there is not a moment to lose. The US or Israel should bomb Iran now, before it proves too late.”�Michael Freund, “Right on!: Stop the atomic ayatollahs”, The Jerusalem Post www.jpost.com, http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359851111&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (13 February 2007).
“‘The only chance to convince Iran to dismantle without using brute force is if you choose a big enough stick and you wave it wildly enough,’ Steinitz told The Jerusalem Post. The Likud MK added that the goal was to ‘wave, in order to not to use it.’
‘At this moment, Iran thinks that Israel is weak politically, so it would be better if the United States were to issue the threats,’ said Steinitz. ‘There is one leader of the world and it is not miniscule Israel. Iran is a global threat they are developing a nuclear project to become not just a regional player but a global Player.'”�Sheera Claire Frenkel quoting Knesset Member Yuval Steinitz, “Steinitz: US must stop Iran from arming”, The Jerusalem Post www.jpost.com, http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359851884&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (14 February 2007).
“The global Holocaust denial led by Iran is a political move meant to de-legitimize Israel, and it is unacceptable that a country that denies the Holocaust is accepted by the world as part of the international community[.]”�Tzipi Livni, Foreign Affairs Minister and Vice Prime Minister of Israel, as quoted in Lilach Shoval, “Anti-Semitism very much alive, says Livni”, www.ynetnews.com, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3363734,00.html, (11 February 2007).
“ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.
Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear ‘bunker-busters’, according to several Israeli military sources.”�Uzi Mahnaimi and Sarah Baxter, “Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran”, The Sunday Times www.timesonline.co.uk, (7 January 2007).
“SPIEGEL: You said recently that Israel might have to stand alone and therefore must be ready to deal unilaterally with the Iran problem.
Lieberman: That is the worst-case scenario. The differences in opinion between Russia and Western Europe, between Europe and the U.S., between the U.S. and the United Nations have destabilized the global political system. We have to take into account that the international community may not do anything and that Israel may have to act alone.”�“SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH AVIGDOR LIEBERMAN” conducted by Christian Neef and Christoph Schult, quoting Avigdor Lieberman, Minister of Strategic Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister of Israel, Der Spiegel, SPIEGEL ONLINE, www.spiegel.de, http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,465769,00.html, (12 February 2007).
“We must turn to Hillary Clinton and other potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party so that they publicly support immediate action by Bush against Iran. We should also approach European countries so that they support American actions in Iran, so that Bush will not be isolated in the international arena again. We must clandestinely cooperate with Saudi Arabia so that it also persuades the US to strike Iran.”�Brigadier General (Res.) Oded Tira, Former IDF Chief Artillery Officer, “What to do with Iran?”, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3346275,00.html, (30 December 2006).
“‘Once you say that Iran is like Nazi Germany and that it is willing to use its nuclear weapons to destroy Israel regardless of the destruction it would bring to their own country, you are really arguing that there is no alternative but for Israel and the United States to attack first,’ said M.J. Rosenberg, director of policy analysis for the Israel Policy Forum.”�James D. Besser, “Leading Hawk Warns Of Hysteria Over Iran: Suggestion that war is only option misguided, JINSA official says”, The Jewish Week www.thejewishweek.com, http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13644, (9 February 2007).
“We must cry Gevalt before the entire world[. . . .] In 1938, Hitler didn’t say he wanted to destroy [the Jews]; Ahmadinejad is saying clearly that this is his intention, and we aren’t even shouting. At least call it a crime against humanity. We must make the world see that the issue here is a program for genocide.”� Likud chair MK Benjamin Netanyahu, Ninth Prime Minister of Israel, as quoted in Mazal Mualem, “Netanyahu wants Iran president tried for genocide”, www.haaretz.com, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/800838.html, (15 December 2006).
MISSION:
- *Expose the three deadly tenets of Judaism and Zionism*
- Critique Jewish Racism, Jewish Tribalism and Jewish Censorship
- Refute the claim that it is anti-Semitic to tell the truth
- Establish a political movement to defend us from Zionism and Jewish Racism
METHOD:
- Discuss the dangers that Jewish Racism and Zionism pose to Jews and non-Jews alike
- Publish scholarly and responsible articles and books
- Present lectures and documentaries informing the public of the facts
- Interview authorities on both sides of the issue
MEANS:
- Present the irrefutable evidence
- Network and communicate the facts
- Share information and other resources
Read Online
The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein
by Christopher Jon Bjerknes
2,825 page treatise on
Einstein’s plagiarism, Einstein’s Zionism,
History of Zionism, Racism, Judaism, and more.
QUOTES ARCHIVE
“The Jews of North African origin are strongly attached to Israel, don’t hide their ethnic affiliation and don’t fear a charge of ‘dual loyalty’ to both France and Israel. The young generation doesn’t bow to the old French Jewish model of being French first and Jewish later, and aren’t embarrassed about showing a ‘communitarian’ preference for a particular political candidate.”�JTA, “French Jews Favor Conservative”, The Jewish Week, www.thejewishweek.com, http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13926, (20 April 2007).
“Active Canadian Jews, I have observed, live with a completely different dynamic. They’re proud of their Canadian citizenship, but don’t have a deep sense of Canadian national identity. Their national identity is ebulliently Jewish, belonging to the Jewish nation.”�Gary Wexler, “US Jews can learn from the Canadian community”, The Jerusalem Post www.jpost.com, http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879238105&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (3 April 2007).
“SUBSIDIZING THE REFUGEE CAMPS
Senator GORE. Mr. Secretary, I realize that we do not have power, as Senator Symington has punctuated, to give instructions and directions there.
There is one problem, it seems to me, about which we can have a say, and that is continued subsidization of this refugee camp. I went there ten years ago and found it an impossible situation in which they have continued all the while to feed and clothe, support those people, and there are some 200,000 more than when they went into the camp. So surely we can have something to say about no longer continuing to subsidize this.
Secretary RUSK. Well, that constitutes some pressure on the Arabs. It does not constitute any pressure on Israel.
Senator GORE. Well, Israel has taken over some of them, in the Gaza Strip and also in Jordan. They are now claiming sovereignty. So it seems to me it might be a pressure on both.
Secretary RUSK. Well, I do think that the refugee matter should be raised and looked at wholly anew in connection with a settlement of this present situation.
Senator GORE. The point I am trying to make is this is one subject on which we can have a say, and that is how long we are going to continue to pay a very heavy cost of these refugees if they are not dispersed into the countryside.
Secretary RUSK. Well, I do not want to underestimate influence in this situation, but I just want to point out that it is not necessarily decisive when you are talking with countries about what they consider the life and death issues for them.
TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR DONATIONS TO ISRAEL
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Do we not give tax forgiveness for moneys contributed to Israel, which is rather unusual? We could stop that.
Secretary RUSK. I believe contributions to the UJA are tax exempt, yes.
The CHAIRMAN. That is right.
The only country. Do you think you have the votes in the Senate to revoke that?
Senator CASE. Are you in favor yourself?
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I think we ought to treat all nations alike.
Senator CASE. That is correct. But are you in favor of it?
Senator HICKENLOOPER. As long as we do not give it to other nations, I do not��
The CHAIRMAN. The trouble is they think they have control of the Senate and they can do as they please.
Senator SYMINGTON. What was that?
The CHAIRMAN. I said they know they have control of the Senate politically, and therefore whatever the Secretary tells them, they can laugh at him. They say, ‘Yes, but you don’t control the Senate.”
Senator SYMINGTON. They were very anxious to get every Senator they could to come out and say we ought to act unilaterally, and they got two, three.
The CHAIRMAN. They know when the chips are down you can no more reverse this tax exemption than you can fly. You could not pass a bill through the Senate.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I do not think you could.
The CHAIRMAN. Changing that tax exemption contribution to the UJA. I would bet you ten to one you could not begin to pass a bill You do not believe they could under any circumstances.
Senator SYMINGTON. A bill to do what?
The CHAIRMAN. To revoke the tax exemption of gifts to the UJA. That is one of their major sources of income. You yourself have pointed out the money they paid for the French arms they got from the U.S.
Senator SYMINGTON. Each year the money we give annually for this is less than 1 percent of the cost of Vietnam.
The CHAIRMAN. I agree with that.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. There you go.
U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS PAY THE ISRAELI ARMS
The CHAIRMAN. But you know very well, you said yourself, that the arms they buy from France are largely paid for by contributions that come from this country.
Senator SYMINGTON. Because we would not sell it to them, so instead of selling them the arms��
Senator GORE. Has the President recommended that this be repealed?
The CHAIRMAN. No, he has not. I do not wish to make the point except the Secretary is quite correct when he says his leverage on Israel is very limited because of the political situation.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I am sorry I brought it up.
Secretary RUSK. I did not say it.
The CHAIRMAN. If you did not say it, you do not disagree with it anyway.
Secretary RUSK. I think it should be pointed out though on this tax exempt matter that there are many other organizations, institutions, that would fall into the same principle, private foundations in their expenditures abroad, churches, the voluntary agencies; there are very large sums of money going to foreign countries that are tax exempt in this country as the origin.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I do not think it is analogous.
Senator GORE. It is tax deductible; you said tax exempt.
Secretary RUSK. Except the organizations are exempt. Contributions to them are tax deductible.
Senator COOPER. I suggest�it is possible after this that Israel may ask that this be removed as a sign of showing they are not absolutely dependent on the U.S.”�“BRIEFING ON THE MIDDLE EAST SITUATION, Friday, June 9, 1967, U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC.”, Executive Sessions of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Together with Joint Sessions with the Senate Armed Services Committee (Historical Series), Volume XIX, Ninetieth Congress, First Session, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., (1967/2006), pp. 705-728, at 710-712.
“History has shown that progress is possible only if the United States of America assumes its historic role as honest broker between Israel and Palestine[.] We cannot be peacemakers if American government leaders are seen as knee-jerk supporters of every action or policy of whatever Israeli government happens to be in power at the time.”�Jimmy Carter, Thirty-Ninth President of the United States of America, as quoted by Paul Kita, “Awards Ceremony Offers Carter Prize, Platform for His Opinions”, info Zine www.infozine.com, http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/22062/, (6 April 2007).
“The American friends of Israel who demand such subservience are in many cases sincere and well-intentioned people. I know them. But on this crucial issue, they are tragically mistaken. Their demands subvert America’s ability to bring to Israel what she most desperately needs and wants — peace and security within recognized borders.”�Jimmy Carter, Thirty-Ninth President of the United States of America, as quoted in, “US cannot be Mideast peacemaker as “knee-jerk” supporter of all Israeli”, Kuwait News Agency (KUNA) www.kuna.net.kw, http://www.kuna.net.kw/NewsAgenciesPublicSite/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=1721738&Language=en, (4 April 2007).
“It’s almost politically suicidal in the United States for a member of the Congress who wants to seek reelection to take any stand that might be interpreted as anti-policy of the conservative Israeli government, which is equated, as I’ve seen it myself, as anti-Semitism.”�Jimmy Carter, Thirty-Ninth President of the United States of America, in an interview on, “This week with George Stephanopoulos,” ABC, as quoted by Yitzhak Benhorin, “Balanced stand on ME is political suicide, says Carter”, www.ynetnews.com, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3369679,00.html, (26 February 2007).
“The Islamic Republic of Iran seeks good neighborly relations with all the surrounding states, and it desires establishment of sustainable peace, friendship and tranquility in the region, particularly in the Persian Gulf.”�Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar, as quoted in “Iran Seeks Peace, Stability in Persian Gulf”, Fars News Agency www.farsnews.ir, http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8511220267, (11 February 2007).
“That Iran is willing to threaten Israel is wrong[. . . .] We pose no threat and if we are conducting nuclear research and development we are no threat to Israel. We have no intention of aggression against any country. [. . .] Today we announce to you that the political will of Iran is aimed at the negotiated settlement of the case and we don’t want to aggravate the situation in our region[. . . .] We know that this issue can be settled in a constructive dialogue and we welcome that.”�Ali Larijani, Iranian Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council and Chief Iranian Nuclear Negotiator, as quoted in Associated Press, “Iran negotiator: Nuclear program ‘no threat to Israel'”, http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/11/iran.israel.ap/, (11 February 2007).
“Repeatedly and frankly we have announced that in Iran’s national security doctrine there is no room for atomic and chemical weapons as we consider them against Islamic laws. Iran’s Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei) in this connection had issued a decree that mass destruction weapons are prohibited by the Muslim religion. [. . .] Therefore we support the idea of a Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction[.]”�Ali Larijani, Iranian Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council and Chief Iranian Nuclear Negotiator, as quoted in “‘No room for WMDs in Iran’s national security doctrine,’ says Larijani”, Islamic Republic News Agency, http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-203/0702111128162815.htm, (11 February 2007).
“We are committed not to launch aggression on any country and defend ourselves in the face of any aggression.”�Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, as quoted in “IR calls for promotion of peace”, Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting www.iribnews.ir, http://www.iribnews.ir/Full_en.asp?news_id=231222&n=22, (11 February 2007).
“We are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations . . . the United States has overstepped its national borders in every way[. . . .] The legitimate use of force can only be done by the United Nations, which cannot be replaced by EU or NATO[. . . .] The unilateral illegal action has not resolved any problem. [. . .] [N]obody feels secure anymore[. . . .] We should not corner Iran into a hostile environment[.]”�Vladimir Putin, Second President of the Russian Federation, as quoted in Mu Xuequan, Editor, “Russia differences with West obvious at Munich conference”, China View www.chinaview.cn, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-02/10/content_5724866.htm, (10 February 2007).
“1 Why are the nations in an uproar? And why do the peoples mutter in vain? 2 The kings of the earth stand up, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against His anointed: 3 ‘Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.’ 4 He that sitteth in heaven laugheth, the Lord hath them in derision. 5 Then will He speak unto them in His wrath, and affright them in His sore displeasure: 6 ‘Truly it is I that have established My king upon Zion, My holy mountain.’ 7 I will tell of the decree: the LORD said unto me: ‘Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of Me, and I will give the nations for thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.’ 10 Now therefore, O ye kings, be wise; be admonished, ye judges of the earth. 11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12 Do homage in purity, lest He be angry, and ye perish in the way, when suddenly His wrath is kindled. Happy are all they that take refuge in Him.”�The Jewish book of Psalm 2 [version of the Jewish Publication Society]”
Chapter 1, Article 1, Paragraphs 1 & 2:
“1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;”
Chapter 1, Article 2, Paragraph 4:
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”
Chapter 6, Article 33, Paragraphs 1 & 2:
“1. The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
2. The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means.”
“The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”
Principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal, 1950
“Principle Vl
The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:
a. Crimes against peace:
i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
ii.Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (I).”
“To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”�Robert H. Jackson at the Nuremberg Tribunal, quoted in Curtis Doebbler, “A Farce of Law: The Trial of Saddam Hussein”, Jurist: Legal News & Research, http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/04/farce-of-law-trial-of-saddam-hussein.php, (24 April 2006).
“More than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today. [***] Hard-liners are alarmed that American intelligence underestimated the pace and scale of Iraq’s nuclear program before Baghdad’s defeat in the gulf war. Conscious of this lapse in the past, they argue that Washington dare not wait until analysts have found hard evidence that Mr. Hussein has acquired a nuclear weapon. The first sign of a ‘smoking gun,’ they argue, may be a mushroom Cloud.”�Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller, “Threats and Responses: The Iraqis; U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts”, The New York Times, (8 September 2002 / Late Edition � Final), p. 1.
“It is forbidden to be merciful to them. You must send missiles to them and annihilate them. They are evil and damnable[.] [***] The Lord shall return the Arabs’ deeds on their own heads, waste their seed and exterminate them, devastate them and vanish them from this world[.]”�Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, as quoted in BBC News, “Rabbi calls for annihilation of Arabs”, www.news.bbc.co.uk, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1270038.stm, (10 April 2001).
“And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:”�The Jewish book of Deuteronomy 7:2.
“‘U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons,’ the Democrat told a crowd of Israel supporters. ‘In dealing with this threat … no option can be taken off the table.’ Clinton spoke at a Manhattan dinner held by the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the U.S., the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.”�The Associated Press, quoting United States Senator Hillary Clinton, “Sen. Clinton: We must not permit Iran to acquire nuclear weapons”, www.haaretz.com,http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/821284.html, (2 February 2007).
“With American-Iranian tensions mounting, Democratic presidential contenders are facing a daunting political challenge: how to speak out against Tehran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons in a way that appeals to pro-Israel supporters without alienating the party’s overwhelmingly anti-war rank and file.”�Jennifer Siegel, “Crisis Over Iran Poses Political Headaches For Democratic Presidential Hopefuls”, The Jewish Daily Forward, http://www.forward.com/articles/crisis-over-iran-poses-political-headaches-for-dem/, (2 February 2007).
“While Jewish communal leaders focus most of their current lobbying efforts on pressing the United States to take a tough line against Iran and its nuclear program, some are privately voicing fears that they will be accused of driving America into a war with the regime in Tehran.”�Forward Staff, “Groups Fear Public Backlash Over Iran”, The Jewish Daily Forward, http://www.forward.com/articles/groups-fear-public-backlash-over-iran/, (2 February 2007).
“If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment of our troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond firmly. We � it makes common sense for the commander-in-chief to say to our troops and the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government that we will help you defend yourself from people that want to sow discord and harm. And so we will do what it takes to protect our troops.
One of the things that is very important in discussing Iran is not to mix issues. Our relationship with Iran is based upon a lot of different issues. One is what is happening in Iraq. Another is their ambitions to have a nuclear weapon. And we’re dealing with this issue diplomatically, and I think this can be solved diplomatically. And the message that we are working to send to the Iranian regime and the Iranian people is that you will become increasingly isolated if you continue to pursue a nuclear weapon.
The message to the Iranian people is that your government is going to cause you deprivation. In other words, you’ve got a chance to really flourish again as a great tradition. However, if your government continues to insist upon a nuclear weapon, there will be lost opportunity for the Iranian people. They won’t be able to realize their full potential.
The Iranian people have got to know that this government and the United States bears no hostility to them. We’re just deeply concerned about a government that is insisting upon having a nuclear weapon, and at the same time, rewriting history � the history of the past, and regards, for example, the Holocaust. It troubles a lot of people in this world, and I’ll continue to work with, you know, friends and allies to send a clear message.”�George W. Bush, Forty-Third President of the United State of America, “Full Transcript: NPR Interview with President Bush”, www.npr.org, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7065633, (29 January 2007).
“Twelve years ago, Saddam Hussein faced the prospect of being the last casualty in a war he had started and lost. To spare himself, he agreed to disarm of all weapons of mass destruction. For the next 12 years, he systematically violated that agreement. He pursued chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, even while inspectors were in his country. Nothing to date has restrained him from his pursuit of these weapons � not economic sanctions, not isolation from the civilized world, not even cruise missile strikes on his military facilities.
Almost three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam Hussein his final chance to disarm. He has shown instead utter contempt for the United Nations, and for the opinion of the world. The 108 U.N. inspectors were sent to conduct � were not sent to conduct a scavenger hunt for hidden materials across a country the size of California. The job of the inspectors is to verify that Iraq’s regime is disarming. It is up to Iraq to show exactly where it is hiding its banned weapons, lay those weapons out for the world to see, and destroy them as directed. Nothing like this has happened.
The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax � enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn’t accounted for that material. He’s given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin � enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hadn’t accounted for that material. He’s given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He’s not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.
U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them � despite Iraq’s recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He’s given no evidence that he has destroyed them.
From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He’s given no evidence that he has destroyed them.
The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.
The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary; he is deceiving. From intelligence sources we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors, sanitizing inspection sites and monitoring the inspectors themselves. Iraqi officials accompany the inspectors in order to intimidate witnesses.
Iraq is blocking U-2 surveillance flights requested by the United Nations. Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as the scientists inspectors are supposed to interview. Real scientists have been coached by Iraqi officials on what to say. Intelligence sources indicate that Saddam Hussein has ordered that scientists who cooperate with U.N. inspectors in disarming Iraq will be killed, along with their families.
Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks to build and keep weapons of mass destruction. But why? The only possible explanation, the only possible use he could have for those weapons, is to dominate, intimidate, or attack.
With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region. And this Congress and the America people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.
Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans � this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)
Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)
The dictator who is assembling the world’s most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages � leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained � by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)
And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country � your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)
The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council to convene on February the 5th to consider the facts of Iraq’s ongoing defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi’s legal � Iraq’s illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups.
We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. (Applause.)
Tonight I have a message for the men and women who will keep the peace, members of the American Armed Forces: Many of you are assembling in or near the Middle East, and some crucial hours may lay ahead. In those hours, the success of our cause will depend on you. Your training has prepared you. Your honor will guide you. You believe in America, and America believes in you. (Applause.)
Sending Americans into battle is the most profound decision a President can make. The technologies of war have changed; the risks and suffering of war have not. For the brave Americans who bear the risk, no victory is free from sorrow. This nation fights reluctantly, because we know the cost and we dread the days of mourning that always come.
We seek peace. We strive for peace. And sometimes peace must be defended. A future lived at the mercy of terrible threats is no peace at all. If war is forced upon us, we will fight in a just cause and by just means � sparing, in every way we can, the innocent. And if war is forced upon us, we will fight with the full force and might of the United States military � and we will prevail. (Applause.)
And as we and our coalition partners are doing in Afghanistan, we will bring to the Iraqi people food and medicines and supplies � and freedom. (Applause.)
Many challenges, abroad and at home, have arrived in a single season. In two years, America has gone from a sense of invulnerability to an awareness of peril; from bitter division in small matters to calm unity in great causes. And we go forward with confidence, because this call of history has come to the right country.
Americans are a resolute people who have risen to every test of our time. Adversity has revealed the character of our country, to the world and to ourselves. America is a strong nation, and honorable in the use of our strength. We exercise power without conquest, and we sacrifice for the liberty of strangers.
Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world, it is God’s gift to humanity. (Applause.)
We Americans have faith in ourselves, but not in ourselves alone. We do not know � we do not claim to know all the ways of Providence, yet we can trust in them, placing our confidence in the loving God behind all of life, and all of history.
May He guide us now. And may God continue to bless the United States of America. (Applause.)”�George W. Bush, Forty-Third President of the United State of America, “State of the Union Address”, (28 January 2003).
“‘The State of Israel will not allow the world to avoid a confrontation with a country calling for the destruction of Israel,’ Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Sunday during the weekly cabinet meeting. [***] ‘Anti-Semintism is the gentiles’ problem, not the Jews’, it is the gentiles’ disease, not ours. As long as there is anti-Semitism in the world, the world will be sick,’ Vice Premier Shimon Peres said.”�Ynetnews, www.ynetnews.com, “World can’t avoid confrontation with Iran, PM says”, http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/10486.htm, (28 January 2007).
“More important still, during all that period and to the present time, it was not possible freely to report or discuss a third vital matter: Zionist Nationalism. In this case the freedom of the press has become a fallacy during the past two decades. Newspaper-writers have become less and less free to express any criticism, or report any fact unfavourable to this new ambition of the Twentieth Century. When I eventually went to America I found that this ban, for such it is in practice, prevailed even more rigidly there than in my own country.
Today an awakening is supposed to have occurred in the matter of Communism. During the most fateful and decisive years of the Second War, when the things were being done which obviously set the stage for a third one, it was in fact almost impossible for any independent writer to publish any reasonable criticism, supported by no matter what evidence, about Soviet Communism and its intentions. Now, when the damage is done, Communism is much attacked, but even so the mass of Communist writers who were planted in the American and British press during those years has by no means been displaced; and the attentive newspaper-reader in either country may see for himself how the most specious Communist sophistries are daily injected into the editorial arguments and the news-columns of newspapers professing the most respectable principles.
In the matter of Zionist Nationalism, which I hold to be allied in its roots to Soviet Communism, the ban is much more severe. In my own adult lifetime as a journalist, now covering thirty years, I have seen this secret ban grow from nothing into something approaching a law of lese majeste at some absolute court of the dark past. In daily usage, no American or British newspaper, apparently, now dares to print a line of news or comment unfavourable to the Zionist ambition; and under this thrall matters are reported favourably or non-committally, if they are reported at all, which if they occurred elsewhere would be denounced with the most piteous cries of outraged morality. The inference to me is plain: the Zionist Nationalists are powerful enough to govern governments in the great countries of the remaining West!
I believe Zionist Nationalism to be a political movement organized in all countries, which aims to bring all Jews under its thrall just as Communism enslaved the Russians and National Socialism the Germans. I hold it to be as dangerous as both of those, and when I recall the results that came of the subtle suppression of information in the cases of Stalinism and Hitlerism, I judge that the consequences of this even more rigorous suppression will not be less grave.
I think it a cardinal error to identify ‘Jews’ with Zionist Nationalism, ‘Russians’ with Communism, or ‘Germans’ with National Socialism. I saw the enslavement of Germans and Russians and know different. I believe that the astonishingly powerful attempt to prevent any discussion of Zionist Nationalism by dismissing it as the expression of an aversion to Jews, as Jews, is merely meant to stop any public discussion of its objects, which seem to me to be as dangerous to Jew as to Gentile. Of the three groups which have appeared, like stormy petrels, to presage the tempests of our century, the Zionist Nationalists appear to me the most powerful. National Socialism, I think, was but a stooge or stalking horse for the pursuit of Communist aims. Communism is genuinely tigerish, and was strong enough to infest governments everywhere and distort the policies which were pursued behind the screen of military operations; but, if forced into a corner by the rising unease of their peoples, Western politicians are prepared in the last resort to turn against it.
But Zionist Nationalism! . . . That is a different matter. Today American Presidents and British Prime Ministers, and all their colleagues, watch it as anxiously as Muslim priests watch for the crescent moon on the eve of Ramadan, and bow to it as the faithful prostrating themselves in the mosque at Mecca. The thing was but a word unknown to the masses forty years ago; today Western politicians hardly dare take the seals of office without first, or immediately afterwards, making public obeisance towards this strange new ambition.”�Douglas Reed, Somewhere South of Suez, Devin-Adir, U. S. A., (1951), pp. 8-10.
“‘Death to Arabs’ was just one of the hateful messages left by Jewish settlers on Muslim graves after a destructive rampage on a cemetery and village near Nablus Tuesday.”�Ronny Shaked, “Settlers defile Palestinian graves under IDF watch: Jewish settlers desecrate graves, wreak havoc in Palestinian village”, www.ynetnews.com, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3356741,00.html, (25 January 2007).
VIDEO: Now Playing: Gov. Romney Concludes Remarks on Iran Threat
“Israeli billionaire and media mogul Haim Saban is at the top of the list of donors to political campaigns in the US.”�Itamar Eichner, “Israeli billionaire Saban biggest donor to US politicians”, www.ynetnews.com, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3355786,00.html, (23 January 2007).
“Republican US presidential aspirant Mitt Romney summed up the sentiment of four US presidential hopefuls who addressed the Seventh Annual Herzliya Conference over the last two days by saying, ‘Iran must be stopped, Iran can be stopped, and Iran will be Stopped.’ [***] Another Republican hopeful, Sen. John McCain, said the US should ‘intensify’ its military support for Israel to ensure that the country maintained it strategic edge over those who were bent on destroying it, such as Iran. [***] Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. John Edwards, meanwhile, said by video conference that stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons ‘is the greatest challenge of our generation.'”�Herb Keinon and Tovah Lazaroff, “US politicians rip Iran in Herzliya”, The Jerusalem Post, http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1167467797900&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (23 January 2007).
“New York’s junior senator, Hillary Rodham Clinton, is expected to snare the lion’s share of the Jewish community’s substantial political donations in the race for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.”�E. J. Kessler, “Hillary the Favorite in Race for Jewish Donations”, The Jewish Daily Forward, http://www.forward.com/articles/hillary-the-favorite-in-race-for-jewish-donations/, (23 January 2007).
“The Israeli people are facing the threat of a nuclear Holocaust, former US Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich warned the Herzliya Conference held by the Institute for Policy and Strategy at IDC Herzliya on Tuesday afternoon. Meanwhile, he said, the United States could lose a few million people or a number of cities to a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction.”�Yaakov Lappin, “Israel faces nuclear Holocaust warns Gingrich”, www.ynetnews.com, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3356103,00.html, (23 January 2007).
“Former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney laid out a five-point plan for preventing Iran from going nuclear at the Herzliya Conference in Israel today.”�Campaign Confidential, “Iran Hawk: Mitt Romney”, The Jewish Daily Forward, http://www.forward.com/blogs/campaign-confidential/iran-hawk-mitt-romney/, (23 January 2007).
“John Edwards[. . .] sounded Joe Lieberman-like on Iran[. . . .]”�Jennifer Siegel, “Iran Hawk: John Edwards”, The Jewish Daily Forward, http://www.forward.com/blogs/campaign-confidential/iran-hawk-john-edwards/, (23 January 2007).
“Extolling the ideals of socialist thinker Karl Marx, Chavez defended his government’s effort to establish a socialist model and rejected US concerns over a measure to grant him broad lawmaking powers, saying: ‘Go to hell, gringos! Go home!’ [***] The National Assembly, controlled by the president’s political allies, is expected to give final approval this week to what it calls the ‘enabling law,’ which would grant Chavez authority to pass a series of laws by decree during an 18-month period.”�Associated Press, “Chavez tells US to ‘go to hell’ in talk-show”, The Jerusalem Post, http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467784737&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (22 January 2007). See also: “Enabling Act” or Ermaechtigungsgesetz for a comparison to Adolf Hitler.
“[. . .]First of all, I would have no peace treaty with Syria. That’s number one. If Syria really wants peace, if they want peace, see number one, they have to give up land. They have to give up everything up to Damascus. I don’t want this Damascus, it’s a smelly, stinky place. That I don’t need. It’s one big toilet. But up to Damascus, I’ll take. And Syria has to behave itself, and has to kill out all the terrorists and Hezbullah. It’s never gonna happen, but in order for anyone to have peace with Israel they have to give up land. And if Syria will kill terrorists, and give up land, so then we’ll promise peace with Syria, and we won’t smash their heads in. How does that sound? We won’t smash the heads of the diaper heads, we won’t smash the pamper heads, we won’t smash the huggies heads. That’s what I say. . . That’s my peace. [. . .]”� Tovia Singer on Israel National Radio, http://www.israelnationalradio.com/Asx/tovias-tu-2.asx, http://www.israelnationalradio.com/#tovia, (16 January 2007 / Hour 2).
“The main umbrella group of American Jewish organizations is set to visit Dubai and Abu Dhabi next month in a sign of the growing concern among Sunni regimes over Iran’s nuclear and regional ambitions. The trip, by a delegation from the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations to the main power centers of the United Arab Emirates, is notable because the Sunni-majority UAE does not have formal diplomatic ties with Israel.”�Marc Perelman, “Groups Head to Emirates, as Worries Grow Over Iran”, The Jewish Daily Forward, http://www.forward.com/articles/groups-head-to-emirates-as-worries-grow-over-iran/, (19 January 2007).
“A group of rabbis have issued a halachic opinion implying that OC Central Command Maj.-Gen. Yair Naveh deserves to be killed. The rabbis, all connected with a movement to resurrect the Sanhedrin, the ancient Jewish governing body, said in their halachic ruling this week that Naveh was guilty of being a moser, a Hebrew word that can be roughly translated as an informant or traitor.”�Matthew Wagner, “Rabbis: Naveh deserves to be killed”, The Jerusalem Post, http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1167467765105&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (18 January 2007).
“Two additional halachic laws are of special importance both generally and specifically when related to the Rabin assassination. These two laws, employed since talmudic times to kill Jews, were invoked by the assassin, Yigal Amir, as his justification for killing Prime Minister Rabin and are still emphasized by Jews who approved or have barely condemned that assassination. These are the ‘law of the pursuer’ (din rodef) and the ‘law of the informer’ (din moser).[Notation: ‘Moser,’ the Hebrew word for informer, is a terrible insult for Jews, similar to the word ‘collaborator’ for Palestinians.] The first law commands every Jew to kill or to wound severely any Jew who is perceived as intending to kill another Jew. According to halachic commentaries, it is not necessary to see such a person pursuing a Jewish victim. It is enough if rabbinic authorities, or even competent scholars, announce that the law of the pursuer applies to such a person. The second law commands every Jew to kill or wound severely any Jew who, without a decision of a competent rabbinical authority, has informed non-Jews, especially non-Jewish authorities, about Jewish affairs or who has given them information about Jewish property or who has delivered Jewish persons or property to their rule or authority. Competent religious authorities are empowered to do, and at times have done, those things forbidden to other Jews in the second law. During the long period of incitement preceding the Rabin assassination, many Haredi and messianic writers applied these laws to Rabin and other Israeli leaders. The religious insiders based themselves on later developments in Halacha that came to include other categories of Jews who were defined as ‘those to whom the law of the pursuer’ applied. Every Jew had a religious duty to kill those Jews who were so included. Historically, Jews in the diaspora followed this law whenever possible, until at least the advent of the modern state. In the Tsarist Empire Jews followed this law until well into the nineteenth century.”�I. Shahak and N. Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London, (1999), pp. 137-138.
“Over the last couple of weeks, I have talked with people familiar with the meetings four U.S. senators recently had in the Middle East. One of them asked me a question: Can you guess which two meetings were the most similar? I tried and failed, so he gave me the answer: ‘The meeting with [King] Abdullah [of Saudi Arabia] was the Bedouin version of the meeting with [Israeli opposition leader] Benjamin Netanyahu.’ Netanyahu is the most vocal alarmist on Iran, and in the meetings he has with U.S. visitors, he tends to repeat the analogy he uses in public. It’s not about Vietnam, and it’s not about Cambodia. ‘This is 1938,’ he says. ‘Iran is Germany, and it is about to arm itself with nuclear weapons.’ The Saudi monarch, I wrote in Ha’aretz, ‘for whom the Nazi analogy is not his natural domain, expressed exactly the same fear, but in somewhat different words.'”�Shmuel Rosner, “Did We Just Declare War on Iran?”, www.slate.com, http://www.slate.com/id/2157489/, (12 January 2007).
“We must turn to Hillary Clinton and other potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party so that they publicly support immediate action by Bush against Iran. We should also approach European countries so that they support American actions in Iran, so that Bush will not be isolated in the international arena again. We must clandestinely cooperate with Saudi Arabia so that it also persuades the US to strike Iran.”�Brigadier General (Res.) Oded Tira, Former IDF Chief Artillery Officer, “What to do with Iran?”, (30 December 2006), http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3346275,00.html
“The many controversial issues concerning Palestine and the path to peace for Israel are intensely debated among Israelis and throughout other nations � but not in the United States. For the last 30 years, I have witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts. This reluctance to criticize any policies of the Israeli government is because of the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the American-Israel Political Action Committee and the absence of any significant contrary voices. It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine, to suggest that Israel comply with international law or to speak in defense of justice or human rights for Palestinians.”�Jimmy Carter, Thirty-Ninth President of the United States of America, “Speaking frankly about Israel and Palestine”, www.latimes.com, http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-oe-carter8dec08,0,1544474.story?coll=la-news-a_section, (8 December 2006).
“Israel Beiteinu is a racist party which is a danger to the state of Israel, Defense Minister Amir Peretz said during the Labor faction meeting on Monday. ‘The decision to appoint Ghaleb Majadle as minister is causing people to say things that are way out of proportion,’ Peretz said. ‘If there is a danger to the state of Israel, it is the danger [presented by] a racist party like Israel Beiteinu.'”�Gil Hoffman and JPOST Staff, “Amir Peretz calls Israel Beiteinu a ‘racist party'”, The Jerusalem Post , http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467737898&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull, (15 January 2007).
“A few hours after U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice came to Israel on another diplomatic mission, she hastened to meet with Strategic Threats Minister Avigdor Lieberman. Rice met Lieberman two days after the chairwoman of his Yisrael Beiteinu faction, MK Esterina Tartman, made crudely racist statements against the appointment (which has meanwhile been postponed) of MK Raleb Majadele as the first Arab minister in the country’s history. [***] Rice’s meeting with Lieberman was like giving a stamp of approval to the racist positions he and his party have adopted. It is not clear why the secretary of state saw a need to hold this meeting, which is not part of the standard protocol for her visits to Israel. Her meeting with Lieberman thus constituted a kind of American recognition of his status and his stances.”�Haaretz Editorial, “Down with racism”, www.haaretz.com, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/813380.html, (15 January 2007?).
“Israeli media reported that hardline deputy prime minister, Avigdor Lieberman, told Rice that the Israeli Army will have to re-enter the Gaza Strip at some point, and that 30,000 U.N. troops are needed to secure the chaotic Palestinian territory on Israel’s southern flank. Lieberman has in the past said Israel should assassinate Hamas’ leadership, ignore the moderate Palestinian president and walk away from international peace efforts. His ideas do not necessarily carry weight, but Rice defended the decision to meet with him.”�Anne Gearan, “Rice Says She Registers Mideast Demands”, The Associated Press/WashingtonPost.com, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/14/AR2007011400287.html, (14 January 2007).
“The most important thing, and especially if you’re a Gentile listening to my voice, if you’re not Jewish, the most important thing for the nations to do is to bless Israel. The most important thing is to bless Israel. That’s all a Gentile should be thinking about from the morning till night is, ‘How do I bless Israel? How do I stand by Zion?’ It’s the most important thing. And the most dangerous, the worst thing in the world, is to curse Israel�the worst thing. Every Gentile has to think every second of, ‘What can I do to strengthen Zion? What can I do to pray for Jerusalem? What can I do to stand by the nation of Israel?'”� Tovia Singer, “Can you Hear the Footsteps of the Messiah?”, Israel National Radio, http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=119335, (10 January 2007).
“I’m at the point of saying that Bush is going to do everything he can, essentially, to taunt Ahmadinejad into attacking us.”�Dr. Jerome Corsi, author of Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians, in an interview with Tovia Singer on Israel National Radio, http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=119335, (10 January 2007).
“Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my administration; it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress. We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century.”� George W. Bush, Forty-Third President of the United States of America, “Text of President Bush’s address on Wednesday, as prepared by the White House”, http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_4987452, (10 January 2007).
“No one denies that the Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives, in power from 1995 until 2006, was overwhelmingly pro-Israel. But with Democratic wins in both houses, the 110th Congress removes from power several maverick Republicans who wanted the United States to be more critical of Israel, and boosts to leadership lawmakers who are not just Israel-friendly but intimately acquainted with the U.S. Jewish community.”�Ron Kampeas, “Division of congressional posts seems to favor Jewish issues”, http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=17466&intcategoryid=3, (10 January 2007).
“The thing that makes us strong and secure� is that we here in Israel are only the spearhead of a great people spread all over the world, and one day they will come home where they really belong, to the State of Israel[.] [***] Birthright, if you want, is what Israel is all about. Israel is a Jewish state[.] [***] [Jews] have a birthright to come and live here. [***] [T]here is only one place in the world which is ours. [***] [W]e are one people, belong to each other, and that we love each other. [***] When it does happen, and you feel you are ready, we are waiting for you. And when you decide to come here, we will hug you, kiss you� we want nothing more than to have you, the future of the Jewish people, to come here, where they belong[.]”�Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, as quoted by Yaakov Lappin,”Olmert: Israel spearhead for all Jews”, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3349787,00.html, (8 January 2007).
“Most Americans would reject outright any effort by one of our allies to limit fair debate, discussion, and dialogue here in the United States about the nature of American relations with any given state. And yet America as a whole remains mute to the interference by the Israeli Lobby into any meaningful discussion of American�Israeli relations. The end result is that Israel and the Israeli Lobby are herding America down the path toward war with Iran, and most Americans remain ignorant and/or indifferent to this fact. The proof is in the pudding; even as the world debates and discusses the June 2006 incentives package offered to Iran, Israel has already proclaimed its opposition to any such negotiated settlement, and AIPAC has initiated a full-fledged lobbying campaign targeted at the U.S. Congress to keep America on track toward conflict with Iran. No one in the world wants such a confrontation, only Israel. Let there be no doubt: if there is an American war with Iran, it is a war that was made in Israel and nowhere else.”�Scott Ritter, Target Iran: The Truth About the White House’s Plans for Regime Change, Nation Books, New York, (2006), p. 211.
“It has been taught: R. Jose12 said: Three commandments were given to Israel when they entered the land; [i] to appoint a king; [ii] to cut off the seed of Amalek; [iii] and to build themselves the chosen house [i.e. the Temple] and I do not know which of them has priority. But, when it is said: The hand upon the throne of the Lord, the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation,13 we must infer that they had first to set up a king, for ‘throne’ implies a king, as it is written, Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king.14 Yet I still do not know which [of the other two] comes first, the building of the chosen Temple or the cutting off of the seed of Amalek. Hence, when it is written, And when He giveth you rest from all your enemies round about etc., and then [Scripture proceeds], Then it shall come to pass that the place which the Lord your God shall choose,15 it is to be inferred that the extermination of Amalek is first. And so it is written of David, And it came to pass when the king dwelt in his house, and the Lord had given him rest from his enemies round about, and the passage continues; that the king said unto Nathan the Prophet: See now, I dwell in a house of cedars etc.“�I. Epstein, Editor, “Sanhedrin 20b“, The Babylonian Talmud, Volume 27, The Soncino Press, London, (1935), pp. 107-111, at 109.
“So they went nearer and they heard him saying: ‘Crown, crown, two sons are kept outside, and there will be no peace or rest until the bird is thrown down in Caesarea.’ R. Jose wept and said: ‘Verily the Galuth is drawn out, and therefore the birds of heaven will not depart until the dominion of the idolatrous nations is removed from the earth, which will not be till the day when God will bring the world to judgement.'”�H. Sperling and M. Simon, Editors, The Zohar, Volume 2, The Soncino Press, New York, (1933), p. 311.
“We must turn to Hillary Clinton and other potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party so that they publicly support immediate action by Bush against Iran. We should also approach European countries so that they support American actions in Iran, so that Bush will not be isolated in the international arena again. We must clandestinely cooperate with Saudi Arabia so that it also persuades the US to strike Iran.”�Brigadier General (Res.) Oded Tira, Former IDF Chief Artillery Officer, “What to do with Iran?”, (30 December 2006), http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3346275,00.html
“* First, Israel should appoint a roving ambassador tasked with responsibility for maintaining relations with Christians in America. This should not be just an honorary title, nor should it go to one of the usual organizational fund-raisers or foreign service hacks. Instead, the government should appoint a person of faith, one who can communicate with evangelicals in terms they both understand and appreciate.
* Second, Israel should reach out to Christian leaders and their communities, and initiate the establishment of ‘prayer battalions’ in churches across the United States. Like rapid-deployment forces used by the military, these battalions could be mobilized at a moment’s notice to pray for specific issues, such as the return of Israel’s missing soldiers or the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions.”�Michael Freund, Served as Deputy Director of Communications in Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu, “Right On!: In praise of Christian Zionists”, (21 December 2006), http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1164881944891&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
“The conclusions from Dayan’s words are clear: This State has no international obligations, no economic problems, the question of peace is nonexistent. . . . It must calculate its steps narrow-mindedly and live on its sword. It must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no�it must�invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge. . . . And above all�let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space. (Such a slip of the tongue: Ben Gurion himself said that it would be worth while to pay an Arab a million pounds to start a war.) (26 May 1955, 1021)”�Excerpt from a 26 May 1955 entry in Moshe Sheratt’s personal diary as quoted in L. Rokach, Israel’s Sacred Terrorism, Third Edition, AAUG Press, Belmont Massachusetts, p. 41.
“In 1937, 5.7 percent of the Party were Jews yet they formed a majority in the government. Lenin himself (who was partly Jewish by ancestry) said that if the Commissar was Jewish, the deputy should be Russian: Stalin followed this rule. [***] Many Jewish Bolsheviks used Russian pseudonyms. As early as 1936, Stalin ordered Mekhlis at Pravda to use these pseudonyms: ‘No need to excite Hitler!'”� Simon Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Star, Vintage Books, New York, (2003), pp. 305-306.
“In the Great Jalkut Rubeni, in the Parasha Bereshith, [Footnote: Fol. 10. Col. 1.] we have the following Passage, ‘The Skin and the Flesh is the Coat of a Man. The Spirit within is the Man. But the Idolaters (meaning all the Nations but the Jewish) are not call’d Men, because their Souls have their Origin from the Unclean Spirit. But the Souls of the Israelites are derived from the Holy Spirit.’ And a little farther on in the same Treatise, it is said, [Footnote: Fol. 10. Col. 2.] ‘An Israelite is called a Man, because his Soul cometh from the Supreme Man. But an Idolater, whose Soul cometh from the Unclean Spirit, is call’d a Swine. If so, then is an Idolater the Body and Soul of a Swine.’ In another Part of the said Treatise, entitled Shaar olam hattobu [Footnote: Fol. 23. Col. 4.], there is a Passage running thus: ‘The Wicked are stiled the Dead in their Life-Time, because they have not a Holy Soul from the Foundation, which is called Him that liveth for ever. But they have the Soul from Kelifa (i. e. the Shell) by which is meant the Devil) who is call’d Death, and the Shadow of Death: And through the Sparklings of the same they live.'”�Johann Andreas Eisenmenger, The Traditions of the Jews, Contained in the Talmud and other Mystical Writings, Volume 1, J. Robinson, London, (1748), pp. 254-255.
“We Zionists wish to urge self-help on the people; thereby no exaggerated and unsound hopes will be awakened. On this ground, also, publicity in dealing with this point is of the highest value. [***] The confidence of the State, which is necessary for a settlement of large masses of Jews, can only be gained by publicity and by loyal action.”�Theodor Herzl, “The Zionist Congress: Full Report of the Proceedings”, The Jewish Chronicle, (3 September 1897), pp. 10-15, at 11.
“I hear, for ex., that your accomplishments are being used to make propaganda, with the ‘Jewish Newton, who is simultaneously an ardent Zionist’ (I personally haven’t read this yet, but only heard it mentioned). [***] But I cannot go along with the propagandistic fuss with its inevitable untruths, precisely because Judaism is at stake and because I feel myself so thoroughly a Jew.”�Letter from Paul Ehrenfest to Albert Einstein of 9 December 1919, English translation by A. Hentschel, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 9, Document 203, Princeton University Press, (2004), pp. 173-175, at 174.
“In 1983 AIPAC distributed to students and faculty around the country a ten-page questionnaire on political activism on their campuses. Its instructions include: ‘Please name any individual faculty who assist anti-Israel groups. How is this assistance offered? What are the propaganda themes . . . ?’ The survey results form the body of the AIPAC College Guide: Exposing the Anti-Israel Campaign on Campus, published in April 1984.
While AIPAC claims to respect the right of all to free speech, number eight on its list of 10 suggested ‘modes of response’ to pro-Palestinian events or speakers on campus reads: ‘Attempt to prevent.'”�Paul Findley, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, Lawrence Hill & Company, Westport, Connecticut, (1985), p. 181.
“I don’t understand your optimism,’ Ben Gurion declared. ‘Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it’s true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations’ time, but for the moment there is no chance. So it’s simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army. Our whole policy is there. Otherwise the Arabs will wipe us out.'”�David Ben-Gurion, as quoted in: N. Goldmann, The Jewish Paradox, Grosset & Dunlap, New York, (1978), p. 99.
“I know this will annoy many of your readers. . . But the anger is over the fact that Israel did not fight against the Syrians. Instead of Israel fighting against Hizbullah, many parts of the American administration believe that Israel should have fought against the real enemy, which is Syria and not Hizbullah.”Meyrav Wurmser, as quoted by Yitzhak Benhorin in, “Neocons: We expected Israel to attack Syria”, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3340750,00.html, (16 December 2006).
“21 And Isaac intreated the LORD for his wife, because she was barren: and the LORD was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived. 22 And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to inquire of the LORD. 23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger. 24 And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb. 25 And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau. 26 And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau’s heel; and his name was called Jacob: and Isaac was threescore years old when she bare them. 27 And the boys grew: and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a plain man, dwelling in tents. 28 And Isaac loved Esau, because he did eat of his venison: but Rebekah loved Jacob. 29 And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came from the field, and he was faint: 30 And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom. 31 And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright. 32 And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me? 33 And Jacob said, Swear to me this day; and he sware unto him: and he sold his birthright unto Jacob. 34 Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright.”�The Jewish book of Genesis 25:21-34.
“You and I both know the powerful influence of AIPAC, which is not designed to promote peace. I’m not criticizing them, they have a perfect right to lobby, but their purpose in life is to protect and defend the policies of the Israeli government and to make sure those policies are approved in the United States and in our Congress�and they’re very effective at it. I have known a large number of Jewish organizations in this country [that] have expressed their approval for the book and are trying to promote peace. But their voices are divided and they’re relatively reluctant to speak out publicly. And any member of Congress who’s looking to be re-elected couldn’t possibly say that they would take a balanced position between Israel and the Palestinians, or that they would insist on Israel withdrawing to international borders, or that they would dedicate themselves to protect human rights of Palestinians�it’s very likely that they would not be re-elected.”�Jimmy Carter, Thirty Ninth President of the United States of America, as quoted by Eleanor Clift, “Last Word: Jimmy Carter Revisiting ‘Apartheid'”, Newsweek International, (25 December 2006 � 1 January 2007).
“Thus what was on offer was no more and no less than the establishment of a fascist Jewish state in Palestine as an ally of German fascism!”�Klaus Polkehn, “The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazi Germany, 1933-1941”, Journal of Palestine Studies, Volume 5, Number 3/4, (Spring-Summer, 1976), pp. 54-82, at 79.
“The United States has made a massive commitment to the future of Iraq in both blood and treasure. As of December 2006, nearly 2,900 Americans have lost their lives serving in Iraq. Another 21,000 Americans have been wounded, many severely.
To date, the United States has spent roughly $400 billion on the Iraq War, and costs are running about $8 billion per month. In addition, the United States must expect significant “tail costs” to come. Caring for veterans and replacing lost equipment will run into the hundreds of billions of dollars. Estimates run as high as $2 trillion for the final cost of the U.S. involvement in Iraq.”�James A. Baker, et al.,The Iraq Study Group Report, Vintage Books, New York, (2006), p. 32.
“The conflict includes not only the Arabs in Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip, but Israeli Arabs also[.] [***] The linkage between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli Arab population � it will destroy us, it is impossible. What is the logic of creating one and a half country for one people and a half country for the Jewish people? [***] It’s not racism [***] The test is loyalty, not their religion.”�Avigdor Lieberman as quoted by Ira Stoll in “Israel’s Lieberman Calls for Tougher Stance on Israeli Arabs”, The New York Sun, (13 December 2006).
“Revolting as it is, it would be an interesting study in psychology to analyze the motives, other than fear and cowardice, that have prompted Jewish bankers to lend money to Germany as they are now doing. It is in part their money that is being used by the Hitler regime in its reckless, wicked campaign of propaganda to make the world anti-Semitic; with that money they have invaded Great Britain, the United States and other countries where they have established newspapers, subsidized agents and otherwise are spending untold millions in spreading their infamous creed. The suggestion that they use that money toward paying the honest debts they have repudiated is answered only by contemptuous sneers and silence. Meantime the infamous campaign goes on unabated with ever increasing intensity to the everlasting disgrace of the Jewish bankers who are helping to finance it and of the weaklings who are doing nothing effective to check it.”�Samuel Untermeyer, as quoted in: “Text of Untermyer’s Address”, The New York Times, (7 August 1933), p. 4.
“‘Hitler will be forgotten in a few years, but he will have a beautiful monument in Palestine. You know’, and here the biographer-historian seemed to assume the role of a patriarchal Jew�’the coming of the Nazis was rather a welcome thing. So many of our German Jews were hovering between two coasts; so many of them were riding the treacherous current between the Scylla of assimilation and the Charybdis of a nodding acquaintance with Jewish things. Thousands who seemed to be completely lost to Judaism were brought back to the fold by Hitler, and for that I am personally very grateful to him.'”�Meyer Steinglass quoting Emil Ludwig, “Emil Ludwig before the Judge”, American Jewish Times, (April, 1936), p. 35; as quoted in: L. Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, Lawrence Hill Books, Chicago, (1983), p. 59.
“19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: 19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.”�The Jewish book of Exodus 19:5-6.
“32:1 And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. 32:2 And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me. 32:3 And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron. 32:4 And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. 32:5 And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, To morrow is a feast to the LORD. 32:6 And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play. 32:7 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves: 32:8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. 32:9 And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: 32:10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. 32:11 And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? 32:12 Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. 32:13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever. 32:14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people. 32:15 And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tables of the Testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written. 32:16 And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables. 32:17 And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp. 32:18 And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the noise of them that sing do I hear. 32:19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. 32:20 And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it. 32:21 And Moses said unto Aaron, What did this people unto thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon them? 32:22 And Aaron said, Let not the anger of my lord wax hot: thou knowest the people, that they are set on mischief. 32:23 For they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us: for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. 32:24 And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off. So they gave it me: then I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf. 32:25 And when Moses saw that the people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies:) 32:26 Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD’s side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. 32:27 And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. 32:28 And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. 32:29 For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves to day to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day. 32:30 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin. 32:31 And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. 32:32 Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. 32:33 And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. 32:34 Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them. 32:35 And the LORD plagued the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.”�The Jewish book of Exodus 32.
“I see the entire leadership of Hamas and Jihad walking around freely, and it’s continuing to incite[. . . .] They … have to disappear, to go to paradise, all of them, and there can’t be any compromise.”�Avigdor Lieberman as quoted by KARIN LAUB Associated Press Writer, “Take Back Gaza, Israeli Official Says”, (18 November 2006), http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=979447
“The massacre of Armenian and Assyrian Christians in the Turkish Empire is a crime which in scale and horror has probably no parallel in the history of the world, and the sufferings baffle description which are now being endured by the rapidly dwindling number of hunted and persecuted survivors.”�Archbishop of Canterbury quoted in: “Armenians and Serbians”, The London Times, (15 December 1915), p. 7.
“8 Shall I not in that day, saith the LORD, even destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of the mount of Esau? 9 And thy mighty men, O Teman, shall be dismayed, to the end that every one of the mount of Esau may be cut off by slaughter. 10 For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever.”�The Jewish book of Obadiah.
“11 Observe thou that which I command thee this day: behold, I drive out before thee the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite. 12 Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee: 13 But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves: 14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: 15 Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods , and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; 16 And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods. 17 Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.”�The Jewish book of Exodus 34:11-17.
“Two other interrelated factors have contributed to the perpetuation of violence and regional upheaval: the condoning of illegal Israeli actions from a submissive White House and U.S. Congress during recent years, and the deference with which other international leaders permit this unofficial U.S. policy in the Middle East to prevail. There are constant and vehement political and media debates in Israel concerning its policies in the West Bank, but because of powerful political, economic, and religious forces in the United States, Israeli government decisions are rarely questioned or condemned, voices from Jerusalem dominate in our media, and most American citizens are unaware of circumstances in the occupied territories. At the same time, political leaders and news media in Europe are highly critical of Israeli policies, affecting public attitudes. Americans were surprised and angered by an opinion poll, published by the International Herald Tribune in October 2003, of 7,500 citizens in fifteen European nations, indicating that Israel was considered to be the top threat to world peace, ahead of North Korea, Iran, or Afghanistan.”�Jimmy Carter, Thirty-Ninth President of the United States of America, Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, Simon & Schuster, New York, (2006), p. 209.
“Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg had offered biblical justification for the view that the spilling of non-Jewish blood was a lesser offense than the spilling of Jewish blood. ‘Any trial based on the assumption that Jews and goyim are equal is a total travesty of justice,’ he said.”�”An Israeli Mayor Is Under Scrutiny”, The New York Times, (6 June 1989), p. 5.
“For Israel hath forgotten his Maker, and buildeth temples; and Judah hath multiplied fenced cities: but I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall devour the palaces thereof.”�The Jewish book of Hosea 8:14.
“We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the land of Palestine. In broad day-light, in front of cameras and before the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief.”�Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, “Open Letter to the American People”, (29 November 2006)
“Instead, the governments of Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert have built the fence and wall entirely within Palestinian territory, intruding deeply into the West Bank to encompass Israeli settlement blocs and large areas of other Palestinian land. It is projected to be at least three and a half times as long as Israel’s internationally recognized border and already cuts directly through Palestinian villages, divides families from their gardens and farmland, and includes 375,000 Palestinians on the ‘Israeli’ side of the wall, 175,000 of whom are outside Jerusalem. One example is that the wandering wall almost completely surrounds the Palestinian city of Qalqiliya with its 45,000 inhabitants, with most of the citizens’ land and about one-third of their water supply confiscated by the Israelis. Almost the same encirclement has occurred around 170,000 citizens of Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus.”�Jimmy Carter, Thirty-Ninth President of the United States of America, Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, Simon & Schuster, New York, (2006), pp. 190, 192.
“XXVIII. The next thing is that charge about the Jewish gold. And this, forsooth, is the reason why this cause is pleaded near the steps of Aurelius. It is on account of this charge, O Laelius, that this place and that mob has been selected by you. You know how numerous that crowd is, how great is its unanimity, and of what weight it is in the popular assemblies. I will speak in a low voice, just so as to let the judges hear me. For men are not wanting who would be glad to excite that people against me and against every eminent man; and I will not assist them and enable them to do so more easily. As gold, under pretence of being given to the Jews, was accustomed every year to be exported out of Italy and all the provinces to Jerusalem, Flaccus issued an edict establishing a law that it should not be lawful for gold to be exported out of Asia. And who is there, O judges, who cannot honestly praise this measure? The senate had often decided, and when I was consul it came to a most solemn resolution that gold ought not to be exported. But to resist this barbarous superstition were an act of dignity, to despise the multitude of Jews, which at times was most unruly in the assemblies in defence of the interests of the republic, was an act of the greatest wisdom. ‘But Cnaeus Pompeius, after he had taken Jerusalem, though he was a conqueror, touched nothing which was in that temple.’ In the first place, he acted wisely, as he did in many other instances, in leaving no room for his detractors to say anything against him, in a city so prone to suspicion and to evil speaking. For I do not suppose that the religion of the Jews, our enemies, was any obstacle to that most illustrious general, but that he was hindered by his own modesty. Where then is the guilt? Since you nowhere impute any theft to us, since you approve of the edict, and confess that it was passed in due form, and do not deny that the gold was openly sought for and produced, the facts of the case themselves show that the business was executed by the instrumentality of men of the highest character. There was a hundredweight of gold, more or less, openly seized at Apamea, and weighed out in the forum at the feet of the praetor, by Sextus Caesius, a Roman knight, a most excellent and upright man; twenty pounds weight or a little more were seized at Laodicea, by Lucius Peducaeus, who is here in court, one of our judges; some was seized also at Adramyttium, by Cnaeus Domitius, the lieutenant, and a small quantity at Pergamus. The amount of the gold is known; the gold is in the treasury; no theft is imputed to him; but it is attempted to render him unpopular. The speaker turns away from the judges, and addresses himself to the surrounding multitude. Each city, O Laelius, has its own peculiar religion; we have ours. While Jerusalem was flourishing, and while the Jews were in a peaceful state, still the religious ceremonies and observances of that people were very much at variance with the splendour of this empire, and the dignity of our name, and the institutions of our ancestors. And they are the more odious to us now, because that nation has shown by arms what were its feelings towards our supremacy. How dear it was to the immortal gods is proved by its having been defeated, by its revenues having been farmed out to our contractors, by its being reduced to a state of subjection.”�M. T. Cicero, Pro Flaccus, Chapter 28; translated by C. D. Yonge, The Orations of Marcus Tullius Cicero, Volume 2, George Bell & Sons, London, (1880), pp. 454-455.
“R. Joseph further had in mind to say, in regard to what has been taught that in the case of idolaters and shepherds of small cattle one is not obliged to bring them up [from a pit] though one must not cast them in it2 � that for payment one is obliged to bring them up on account of ill feeling. Abaye, however, said to him: He could offer such excuses as, ‘I have to run to my boy who is standing on the roof’, or, ‘I have to keep an appointment at the court.’
R. Abbahu recited to R. Johanan: ‘Idolaters and [Jewish] shepherds of small cattle need not be brought up though they must not be cast in, but minim,3 informers, and apostates may be cast in, and need not be brought up.’ Whereupon R. Johanan remarked: I have been learning that the words, And so shalt thou do with every lost thing of thy brother’s [thou mayest not hide thyself],4 are also applicable to an apostate, and you say he may be thrown down; leave out apostates! Could he not have answered that the one might apply to the kind of apostate who eats carrion meat to satisfy his appetite,5 and the other to an apostate who eats carrion meat to provoke? � In his opinion, an apostate eating carrion meat to provoke is the same as a min.6
It has been stated: [In regard to the term] apostate there is a divergence of opinion between R. Aha and Rabina; one says that [he who eats forbidden food] to satisfy his appetite, is an apostate, but [he who does it] to provoke is a ‘min’; while the other says that even [one who does it] to provoke is merely an apostate. � And who is a ‘min’? � One who actually worships idols.1
An objection was raised: If one eats a flea or a gnat he is an apostate. Now such a thing could only be done to provoke, and yet we are taught that he is merely an apostate! � Even in that case he may just be trying to see what a forbidden thing tastes like.
The Master said: ‘They may be cast in and need not be brought up’ � if they may be cast in need it be said that they need not be brought up? � Said R. Joseph b. Hama in the name of R. Shesheth: What is meant to convey is that if there was a step in the pit-wall, one may scrape it away, giving as a reason for doing so, the prevention of cattle being lured by the step to get unto the pit. Raba and R. Joseph both of them said: It means to convey that if there is a stone lying by the pit opening, one may cover the pit with it, saying that he does it for [the safety] of passing animals. Rabina said: It is meant to convey that if there is a ladder there, he may remove it, saying, I want it for getting my son down from a roof.”�I. Epstein, Editor, “Abodah Zarah 26a-26b“, The Babylonian Talmud, Volume 29, The Soncino Press, London, (1935), pp. 131-132.
“Let it, however, be kept in mind, that the restoration will be at first limited and partial; the government which they may form will be transitory and contingent; the great war prophesied in Ezekiel against Gog, prince of Rush, Meshech, and Tubal, the power which now controls Archenaz, Refath, and Togarmah of the Scriptures, that is to say, the Germans, Sclavonians, Sarmatians, and Turks of our day, is Russia; the descendants of the joint colony of Meshech and Tubal, and the little horn of Daniel. Russia, in its attempt to wrest India from England and Turkey from the Ottomites, will make the Holy Land the theatre of a terrible conflict. Tarshish, ‘with the young lions thereof’�evidently Great Britain, with her allies�will come to the rescue. Then will ensue the battle so sublimely described by the prophet: the fire and hailstones; the purification and victory; the advent of the Messiah, and the thousand years of happiness and peace which are to ensue.”�Mordecai Manuel Noah, Discourse on the Restoration of the Jews: Delivered at the Tabernacle, Oct. 28 and Dec. 2, 1844, Harper & Brothers, New-York, (1845), pp. 52-53.
“It was I. M. Wise, typically, who broke the silence of the established Jews as they saw what was happening to the good name of their faith. From the fresh air of Cincinnati, Wise observed the noisy, smelly scenes in the eastern seaports and was revolted. ‘It is next to an impossibility to associate or identify ourselves with that half-civilized orthodoxy which constitutes the bulk of the [Jewish] population in those cities,’ he stormed. ‘We are Americans and they are not. We are Israelites of the nineteenth century and a free country, and they gnaw the dead bones of past centuries.’ Wise was never a man to mince words. ‘The good reputation of Judaism must naturally suffer materially, which must without fail lower our social status.’ The prosperous ‘Uptown’ Jew of New York found identification with the unsavory ‘Downtown’ Jew dangerous in the extreme. It was in the Uptown salons of the German-Jewish aristocracy that the word ‘kike’ first appeared, to deride the uncultured and unclean immigrants. Yet the emotional dilemma was acute, for the Uptown Jew was not without a sense of obligation and guilt.”�Peter Grose, Israel in the Mind of America, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, (1983), pp. 31-32.
“The American Jewish community was divided into a three-stage action team. First were the individual sayanim (if the situation had been reversed and the United States had convinced Americans working in Israel to work secretly on behalf of the United States, they would be treated as spies by the Israeli government). Then there was the large pro-Israeli lobby. It would mobilize the Jewish community in a forceful effort in whatever direction the Mossad pointed them. And last was B’nai Brith. Members of that organization could be relied on to make friends among non-Jews and tarnish as anti-Semitic whomever they couldn’t sway to the Israeli cause. With that sort of one-two-three tactic, there was no way we could strike out.”� Victor Ostrovsky, The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad’s Secret Agenda, Harper Collins, New York, (1994), p. 32.
“Journalist Harold R. Piety observes that ‘the ugly cry of anti-Semitism is the bludgeon used by the Zionists to bully non-Jews into accepting the Zionist view of world events, or to keep silent.’ In late 1978 Piety, withholding his identity in order not to irritate his employer, wrote an article on ‘Zionism and the American Press’ for Middle East International in which he decried ‘the inaccuracies, distortions and� perhaps worst�inexcusable omission of significant news and background material by the American media in its treatment of the Arab-Israeli conflict.’
Piety traces the deficiency of U.S. media in reporting on the Middle East to largely successful efforts by the pro-Israel lobby to ‘overwhelm the American media with a highly professional public relations campaign, to intimidate the media through various means and, finally, to impose censorship when the media are compliant and craven.’ He lists threats to editors and advertising departments, orchestrated boycotts, slanders, campaigns of character assassination, and personal vendettas among the weapons employed against balanced journalism.”�Congressman Paul Findley, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, Lawrence Hill & Company, Westport, Connecticut, (1985), p. 296.
“7 Turn you, and take your journey, and go to the mount of the Amorites, and unto all the places nigh thereunto, in the plain, in the hills, and in the vale, and in the south, and by the sea side, to the land of the Canaanites, and unto Lebanon, unto the great river, the river Euphrates. 8 Behold, I have set the land before you: go in and possess the land which the LORD sware unto your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give unto them and to their seed after them.”�The Jewish book of Deuteronomy 1:7-8.
“42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. [***] 60:11 Therefore thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought. 60:12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted. [***] 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. 60:17 For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors righteousness. [***] 61:5 And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers. 6 But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.”�The Jewish book of Isaiah 42:1; 60:11-12, 16-17; 61:5-6.
“Sometime in the late 1950s, that world-class gossip and occasional historian, John F. Kennedy, told me how, in 1948, Harry S. Truman had been pretty much abandoned by everyone when he came to run for president. Then an American Zionist brought him two million dollars in cash, in a suitcase, aboard his whistle-stop campaign train. ‘That’s why our recognition of Israel was rushed through so fast.’ As neither Jack nor I was an antisemite (unlike his father and my grandfather) we took this to be just another funny story about Truman and the serene corruption of American politics.”�Gore Vidal in his Forward to Israel Shahak’s book Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, London, (2002), pp. vi-vii, at vi.
“THE LATEST PRODUCTION of Israel’s apologists is the ‘new anti-Semitism.’ [***] The main purpose behind these periodic, meticulously orchestrated media extravaganzas is not to fight anti-Semitism but rather to exploit the historical suffering of Jews in order to immunize Israel against criticism. [***] Finally, whereas in the original New Anti-Semitism marginal left-wing organizations like the Communist Party and the Socialist Workers Party were cast as the heart of the anti-Semitic darkness, in the current revival Israel’s apologists, having lurched to the right end of the political spectrum, cast mainstream organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch in this role. [***] WHAT’S CURRENTLY CALLED the new anti-Semitism actually incorporates three main components: (1) exaggeration and fabrication, (2) mislabeling legitimate criticism of Israeli policy, and (3) the unjustified yet predictable spillover from criticism of Israel to Jews generally. EXAGGERATION AND FABRICATION The evidence of a new anti-Semitism comes mostly from organizations directly or indirectly linked to Israel or having a material stake in inflating the findings of anti-Semitism.”�Norman G. Finkelstein, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History, University of California Press, Berkeley, (2005), pp. 21-22, 32, and 66. See also: N. G. Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, Second Edition, Verso, London, New York, (2003).
“The U.S. national interest should be the primary object of American foreign policy. For the past several decades, however, and especially since the Six Day War in 1967, the centerpiece of U.S. Middle East policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering U.S. support for Israel and the related effort to spread democracy throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security.
This situation has no equal in American political history. Why has the United States been willing to set aside its own security in order to advance the interests of another state? One might assume that the bond between the two countries is based on shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives. As we show below, however, neither of those explanations can account for the remarkable level of material and diplomatic support that the United States provides to Israel.
Instead, the overall thrust of U.S. policy in the region is due almost entirely to U.S. domestic politics, and especially to the activities of the ‘Israel Lobby.’ Other special interest groups have managed to skew U.S. foreign policy in directions they favored, but no lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical.1“�J. J. Mearsheimer and S. M. Walt, The Israel Lobby and U. S. Foreign Policy, Faculty Research Working Papers Series, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government, (March, 2006), p. 1.
“The Jewish Lobby, Not Big Oil
Contrary to the view of most American progressives that oil, and specifically the interests of Big Oil, is the primary mover, there is no evidence that the major US oil corporations pressured Congress or promoted the war in Iraq or the current confrontation with Iran. To the contrary: there is plenty of evidence that they are very uneasy about the losses that may result from an Israeli attack on Iran. Furthermore, it seems reasonable to suppose that Big Oil is far from happy about taking the rap for all that is happening in the Middle East, particularly when it combines with public anger at high gas prices, and leads to Senate inquiries.There is an abundance of evidence for the past 15 years that:
1. The oil companies did not promote a war policy.
2. The wars have prejudiced their interests, operations and agreements with prominent Arab and Islamic regimes in the region.
3. The interests of the oil companies have been sacrificed to the state interests of Israel.
4. The power of the pro-Israel lobbies exceeds that of the oil companies in shaping US Middle East policy.”�James Petras, The Power of Israel in the United States, Clarity Press Inc., Atlanta, (2006), pp. 21-22.
“24 Every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall be yours: from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river, the river Euphrates, even unto the uttermost sea shall your coast be. 25 There shall no man be able to stand before you: for the LORD your God shall lay the fear of you and the dread of you upon all the land that ye shall tread upon, as he hath said unto you. 26 Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; 27 A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: 28 And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known.”�The Jewish book of Deuteronomy 11:24-28.
“15:18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: [***] 17:8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.”�The Jewish book of Genesis 15:18; 17:8.
“A number of discrepant versions of Biblical borders of the Land of Israel, which rabbinical authorities interpret as ideally belonging to the Jewish state, are in circulation. The most far-reaching among them include the following areas within these borders: in the south, all of Sinai and a part of northern Egypt up to the environs of Cairo; in the east, all of Jordan and a large chunk of Saudi Arabia, all of Kuwait and a part of Iraq south of the Euphrates; in the north, all of Lebanon and all of Syria together with a huge part of Turkey (up to lake Van); and in the west, Cyprus.”�Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, London, (2002), p. 9.
“Much is heard of the [Balfour] Declaration as an instrument conferring upon the Jewish race unwarrantable privileges in a land from which that race had been effectively dispersed. There has been remarkably little said as to the reasons of high policy which impelled the Allies to adopt the purpose of the Declaration as one of their war aims.
To some extent altruistic motives influenced certain Gentile protagonists of the Zionism expressed in the Declaration. At a time when justice for oppressed races and small peoples had become an Allied slogan it was at least consistent to include the Jews among those whose wrongs might be righted as an outcome of the War. But we well may doubt how far such considerations, standing alone, would have carried the Allied Governments towards accepting the restoration of the Jewish people to Palestine as a war aim. The truth is, of course, that for Great Britain and her Allies the policy indicated in the Declaration was most definitely a war measure, well calculated to yield results of immense importance to the Allied cause. And, further, that for Great Britain special reasons existed why she should adopt and support the policy of the Declaration.
These may be found in the obvious advantages of covering the Suez Canal by an outpost territory, in which important elements of the population would not only be bound to her by every interest, but would command the support of world Jewry. That was the long view of British Imperial interests, taken in 1916 and 1917; it counted for much then, but for even more after the war.
But apart from exclusive British interests, the Declaration may be described as essentially a war measure adopted by the Powers of the Entente in the furtherance of their own vital interests. Defined in greater detail, it was a bold, imaginative, and statesmanlike effort to prevent the incalculable and universal influence of Jewry being exerted on the side of the Central Powers�as, indeed, it was, to a serious extent, then being exerted�and to transfer this highly important influence to the cause of the Entente. Nor was it a project of sudden origin, or hastily embraced. The advantages to be gained if the policy of the Declaration were adopted had long been urged; opposition to that policy had long been active. Before the British Government gave the Declaration to the world it had been closely examined in all its bearings and implications, weighed word by word, and subjected to repeated change and amendment. Unless full weight be given to these antecedent facts, no correct judgment upon the Declaration and its policy in operation can be formed.
2. The Zionists and the Declaration. Zionism had been a living and ambitious force in the Jewish world long before 1914. While awaiting its real opportunity it had, in 1905, rejected the tempting offer of territory for the creation of a Zionist State in Uganda, under the British flag. It had steadily looked to Palestine as the one land which could provide the historical connexion essential to Zionist aims. The entry of Turkey into the war brought the hitherto impracticable dreams of Zionism within the bounds of possible attainment. If the goodwill of the Allies, particularly of Great Britain, could be secured, and provided that ultimate success should attend the Allied arms, much might be done to realize the dearest ambitions of Zionism. It lay with Zionist leaders to bring their ideal before the British Government as a scheme likely to be of advantage to the Entente.
Suffice to say that at this crisis of its fortunes Zionism was fortunate, that in Dr. C. Weizmann and Mr. N. Sokolov it found two leaders equal to the great occasion, that British Statesmen, including Mr. (now Lord) Balfour, Lord Milner, Mr. Lloyd George, Lord Robert Cecil, immediately recognized the political importance and value of the Zionist suggestions, and that in the subsequent long negotiations and discussions by which the aims of Zionism were harmonized with the political realities of the situation, the British negotiators were Mr. Balfour and the late Sir Mark Sykes, both of them convinced and ardent supporters of Zionist aspirations. These British representatives and the Zionist leaders just named must be credited with the chief part in framing the policy of the Declaration.
Support of Zionist ambitions, indeed, promised much for the cause of the Entente. Quite naturally Jewish sympathies were to a great extent anti-Russian, and therefore in favour of the Central Powers. No ally of Russia, in fact, could escape sharing that immediate and inevitable penalty for long and savage Russian persecution of the Jewish race. But the German General Staff desired to attach Jewish support yet more closely to the German side. With their wide outlook on possibilities they seem to have urged, early in 1916, the advantages of promising Jewish restoration to Palestine under an arrangement to be made between Zionists and Turkey, backed by a German guarantee. The practical difficulties were considerable; the subject perhaps dangerous to German relations with Turkey; and the German Government acted cautiously. But the scheme was by no means rejected or even shelved, and at any moment the Allies might have been forestalled in offering this supreme bid. In fact in September 1917 the German Government were making the most serious efforts to capture the Zionist movement.
Another most cogent reason why the policy of the Declaration should be adopted by the Allies lay in the state of Russia herself. Russian Jews had been secretly active on behalf of the Central Powers from the first; they had become the chief agents of German pacifist propaganda; by 1917 they had done much in preparation for that general disintegration of Russian national life, later recognized as the revolution. It was believed that if Great Britain declared for the fulfilment of Zionist aspirations in Palestine under her own pledge, one effect would be to bring Russian Jewry to the cause of the Entente.
It was believed, also, that such a declaration would have a potent influence upon world Jewry in the same way, and secure for the Entente the aid of Jewish financial interests. It was believed, further, that it would greatly influence American opinion in favour of the Allies. Such were the chief considerations which, during the later part of 1916 and the next ten months of 1917, impelled the British Government towards making a contract with Jewry.
But when the matter came before the Cabinet for decision delays occurred. Amongst influential English Jews Zionism had few supporters, at all events for a Zion in Palestine. It had still fewer in France. Jewish influence both within and without the Cabinet is understood to have exerted itself strenuously and pertinaciously against the policy of the proposed Declaration.
Under the pressure of Allied needs the objections of the anti-Zionists were either over-ruled or the causes of objection removed, and the Balfour Declaration, as we have seen, was published to the world on 2nd November 1917. That it is in purpose a definite contract with Jewry is beyond question. Subsequently the Declaration was accepted and endorsed by the Governments of France, Italy, and Japan.
That it is in purpose a definite contract between the British Government and Jewry represented by the Zionists is beyond question. In spirit it is a pledge that in return for services to be rendered by Jewry the British Government would �use their best endeavours� to secure the execution of a certain definite policy in Palestine. No time limit is set for performance; completion alone appears to have been intended as the conclusion of the contract. It would thus seem to be an agreement incapable of being greatly varied except by consent.
How far the implied services of Jewry have been or may yet be rendered cannot be estimated, and must always remain a matter of opinion. The Declaration certainly rallied world Jewry, as a whole, to the side of the Entente. The war was won by the Entente; and to the Declaration as a measure to that end may be attributed a share in achieving the great result. And it is possible to understand from many sources that directly, and indirectly, the services expected of Jewry were not expected in vain, and were, from the point of view of British interests alone, well worth the price which had to be paid. Nor is it to be supposed that the services already rendered are the last�it well may be that in time to come Jewish support will much exceed in importance any thought possible in the past. That, however, is a possibility for Palestine of the future to demonstrate.”�W. J. M. Childs, in H. W. V. Temperley, Editor, A History of the Peace Conference of Paris, Volume 6, Published under the auspices of the British Institute of International Affairs, Henry Frowde and Hodder & Stoughton, London, (1924), pp. 171-174.
“‘Mr. Malcolm, President of the Armenian National Committee in London, advised Sir Mark Sykes to influence Wilson through Brandeis, and to guarantee Palestine forthwith to the Jews, in order to gain their support. After discussion with Lord Milner, Sykes begged Mr. Malcolm to put him into touch with the Zionist leaders, because Sir Edward Grey and Mr. Balfour were convinced of the justice of the Zionist demand for Palestine. Through Greenburg, Malcolm made contact with Weizmann.’ [***] [T]he Foreign Office had sent word to Brandeis and through him had worked on Wilson, in Washington.”�Malcolm Thomson’s English translation of Adolf Boehm, Die Zionistische Bewegung, Volume 1, Juedischer Verlag, Berlin, Hozaah Ivrith Co., Ltd., Tel Aviv, (1935), p. 656; and part of Thomson’s commentary in: “Origin of the Balfour Declaration”, The [London] Times Literary Supplement, (22 July 1949), p. 473.
“Mr. Malcolm, Praesident des Armenischen National-Komitees in London, riet Sir Mark Sykes, Wilson durch Brandeis zu beeinflussen und den Juden, um sie guenstig zu stimmen, gleichzeitig Palaestina zu sichern. Nach Ruecksprache mit Lord Milner bat Sykes Mr. Malcolm, ihn mit den zionistischen Fuehrern in Verbindung zu setzen, da Sir Edward Grey und Mr. Balfourvon der Gerechtigkeit der zionistischen Forderung auf Palaestina ueberzeugt seien. Durch Greenberg trat Malcolm auch mit Weizmann in Verbindung. [Footnote: Ueber die hier dargestellten Vorgaenge siehe den Bericht ueber die ,,Balfour-Declaration” von S. Landmann, der von 1917-1922 Sekretaer der zionistischen Exekutive war, in ,,World Jewry”, London, 1935, Nr. 42 und 43.]”� Adolf Boehm, Die Zionistische Bewegung, Volume 1, Juedischer Verlag, Berlin, Hozaah Ivrith Co., Ltd., Tel Aviv, (1935), p. 656.
“During the critical days of 1916 and of the impending defection of Russia, Jewry, as a whole, was against the Czarist regime and had hopes that Germany, if victorious, would in certain circumstances give them Palestine. Several attempts to bring America into the War on the side of the Allies by influencing influential Jewish opinion were made and had failed. Mr. James A. Malcolm, who was already aware of German pre-war efforts to secure a foothold in Palestine through the Zionist Jews and of the abortive Anglo-French demarches at Washington and New York; and knew that Mr. Woodrow Wilson, for good and sufficient reasons, always attached the greatest possible importance to the advice of a very prominent Zionist (Mr. Justice Brandeis, of the US Supreme Court); and was in close touch with Mr. Greenberg, Editor of the Jewish Chronicle (London); and knew that several important Zionist Jewish leaders had already gravitated to London from the Continent on the qui vive awaiting events; and appreciated and realised the depth and strength of Jewish national aspirations; spontaneously took the initiative, to convince first of all Sir Mark Sykes, Under-Secretary to the War Cabinet, and afterwards Monsieur Georges Picot, of the French Embassy in London, and Monsieur Gout of the Quai d’Orsay (Eastern Section), that the best and perhaps the only way (which proved so to be) to induce the American President to come into the War was to secure the co-operation of Zionist Jews by promising them Palestine, and thus enlist and mobilise the hitherto unsuspectedly powerful forces of Zionist Jews in America and elsewhere in favour of the Allies on a quid pro quo contract basis. Thus, as will be seen, the Zionists, having carried out their part, and greatly helped to bring America in, the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was but the public confirmation of the necessarily secret ‘gentleman’s’ agreement of 1916 made with the previous knowledge, acquiescence and/or approval of the Arabs and of the British, American, French and other Allied Governments, and not merely a voluntary altruistic and romantic gesture on the part of Great Britain as certain people either through pardonable ignorance assume or unpardonable ill-will would represent or misrepresent.
Sir Mark Sykes was Under-Secretary to the War Cabinet specially concerned with Near Eastern affairs, and, although at the time scarcely acquainted with the Zionist movement, and unaware of the existence of its leaders, he had the flair to respond to the arguments advanced by Mr. Malcolm as to the strength and importance of this movement in Jewry, in spite of the fact that many wealthy and prominent international or semi-assimilated Jews in Europe and America were openly or tacitly opposed to it (Zionist movement), or timidly indifferent. MM. Picot and Gout were likewise receptive.
An interesting account of the negotiations carried on in London and Paris, and subsequent developments, has already appeared in the Jewish press and need not be repeated here in detail, except to recall that immediately after the ‘gentleman’s’ agreement between Sir Mark Sykes, authorized by the War Cabinet, and the Zionist leaders, cable facilities through the War Office, the Foreign Office and British Embassies, Legations, etc., were given to the latter to communicate the glad tidings to their friends and organizations in America and elsewhere, and the change in official and public opinion as reflected in the American press in favour of joining the Allies in the War, was as gratifying as it was surprisingly rapid. [***] In Germany, the value of the bargain to the Allies, apparently, was duly and carefully noted. In his ‘Through Thirty Years’ Mr. Wickham Steed, in a chapter appreciative of the value of Zionist support in America and elsewhere to the Allied cause, says General Ludendorff is alleged to have said after the War, that: ‘The Balfour Declaration was the cleverest thing done by the Allies in the way of propaganda, and that he wished Germany had thought of it first.’ [Footnote: Volume 2, page 392.] As a matter of fact, this was said by Ludendorff to Sir Alfred Mond (afterwards Lord Melchett), soon after the War. The fact that it was Jewish help that brought U.S.A. into the War on the side of the Allies has rankled ever since in German�especially Nazi�minds, and has contributed in no small measure to the prominence which anti-Semitism occupies in the Nazi programme.”�Samuel Landman, Great Britain, the Jews and Palestine, New Zionist Press (New Zionist Publication Number 1), London, (1936), pp. 4-6.
“The obligations of the Mandate are specific and definite. They are to encourage the establishment of a national home for the Jews without detriment to any of the rights of the Arab population. I agree that it is a dual undertaking, and we must see that both parts of the Mandate are thoroughly enforced. But look at the conditions under which we entered into it. It was one of the darkest periods of the War when Mr. Balfour prepared his Declaration. Let me recall the circumstances to the House. At the time the French army had mutinied, the Italian army was on the eve of collapse and America had hardly started preparing in earnest. There was nothing left but Britain confronting the most powerful military combination the world has ever seen. It was important for us to seek every legitimate help we could get. We came to the conclusion, from information we received from every part of the world, that it was vital we should have the sympathies of the Jewish community. I can assure the Committee that we did not come to that conclusion from any predilections or prejudices, certainly we had no prejudices against the Arabs, because at that moment we had hundreds and thousands of troops fighting for Arab emancipation from the Turk.
In these circumstances and on the advice which we received we decided that it was desirable to secure the sympathy and co-operation of that most remarkable community, the Jews throughout the world. They were helpful in America and in Russia, which at that moment was just walking out and leaving us alone. In these conditions we proposed this to our Allies. France accepted it, Italy accepted it, and the United States accepted it, all the other Allies accepted it, and all the nations which constitute the League of Nations accepted it. And the Jews�I am here to bear testimony to the fact�with all the influence they possess responded nobly to the appeal which was made. I do not know whether the House realises how much we owe to Dr. Weizmann with his marvellous scientific brain. He absolutely saved the British army at a critical moment when a particular ingredient which was essential we should have for our great guns was completely exhausted. His great chemical genius enabled us to solve that problem. But he is only one out of many who rendered great services to the Allies. It is an obligation of honour which we undertook, to which the Jews responded. We cannot get out of it without dishonour.”�D. Lloyd George, The Parliamentary Debates. Official Report. House of Commons, Series 5, Volume 313, (19 June 1936), cols. 1339-1345, at 1341-1342.
“5 And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers. 6 But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.”�The Jewish book of Isaiah 61:5-6.
“All the treasures and natural resources of the world will eventually come in possession of the righteous. This would be in keeping with the prophecy of Isaiah: ‘And her gain and her hire shall be holiness to the Lord; it shall not be treasured nor laid up; for her gain shall be for them that dwell before the Lord, to eat their fill and for stately clothing.[Isaiah 23:18]’20 Similarly, the treasures of gold, silver, precious stones, pearls, and valuable vessels that have been lost in the seas and oceans in the course of centuries will be raised up and turned over to the righteous.21 Joseph hid three treasuries in Egypt: One was discovered by Korah, one by Antoninus, and one is reserved for the righteous in the ideal world.22 [***] Gold will be of secondary importance in the new social and economic order. Eventually, all the friction, jealousy, quarrels, and misunderstandings that exist under the present system, will not be known in the ideal Messianic era.319 The city of Jerusalem will possess most of the gold and precious stones of the world. That ideal city will be practically full of those metals and stones, so that the people of the world will realize the vanity and absurdity of wasting their lives in accumulating those imaginary valuables.320“�Michael Higger, The Jewish Utopia, Lord Baltimore Press, Baltimore, (1932), pp. 12-13, 57.
“10 And it shall be, when the LORD thy God shall have brought thee into the land which he sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give thee great and goodly cities, which thou buildedst not, 11 And houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantedst not; when thou shalt have eaten and be full; 12 Then beware lest thou forget the LORD, which brought thee forth out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 13 Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name. 14 Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you; 15 (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.”�The Jewish book of Deuteronomy 6:10-15.
“7 And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts. 8 The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the LORD of hosts.”�The Jewish book of Haggai 2:7-8.
“TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.Sir.�Your correspondent ‘Judaeus’ would seem to belong to the class of Jew satirized very recently by a Jewish writer as always anxious to cast overboard any fellow-Jews who are pointed to as inconvenient Jonahs. To-day he is bent upon dissociating himself as an English Jew from his Russian brethren because the latter are involved in Bolshevism. Yesterday he was anxious to dissociate himself from his German brethren because they were involved in Prussian militarism. He is desirous of disclaiming a Trotsky as a fellow-Jew, while doubtless willing to bask in the reflected glory of an Einstein.
But I am more concerned with his curious excursus into the ethnology of the Jew. He would have us believe that the Jew is contradistinguished from his fellow-beings only by religion, and that for the rest he is Russian in Russia, a German in Germany, and an Englishman in England�that race has no bearing upon the Jew as a product, and that we are wholly the result of the environment in which we may happen to be placed. It would be interesting, indeed, if ‘Judaeus’ would tell us how soon he thinks a Skye terrier domiciled in England would become a bulldog, or how long it would take for a race of bulldogs bred in the Celestial Empire to produce Pekinese pups.
Obediently yours,
AN ENGLISH-BORN JEW.”�”An English-Born Jew”, The London Times, (1 December 1919), p. 10.
“[. . .]The anti-Semitic press sneered disdainfully at ‘Sarah the Jewess,’ the Slavophiles made her name the pretext for fresh controversy with the Zapadniki�the ‘Occidentals’�as are termed those who are modest enough to admit that Russia has still a good deal to learn in the matter of civilization from Western Europe.
This polemic was at its height when she arrived at St. Petersburg; she was tired with her journey, out of spirits, suffering from a bad cold, and the reception at the depot was not calculated to bring up her morale, all of which suited the plans of her enemies, who prophesied a stupendous failure and an assault on the box-office by the public to get its money back before the end of the first act. The aristocracy took no part in this discussion, as the aristocracy affects supreme contempt for everything relating to the question of Jews versus Gentiles, simply ignoring the chosen people altogether, except when it wants its paper discounted. But, though caring naught for the stranger’s religious creed, it was, all the same, not benevolently inclined to her. These and all the other details indeed I got from another private letter written by one of the Bernhardt troupe, where all is not peace and good-will, although Marie Colombier is not of it. Sarah is accused of being too fond of M. Angelo, of snubbing certain great personages on account of that good-looking actor, and such derogations are not readily pardoned in Muscovy, as Mme. Patti learned to her cost. And so the fatidical moment came; the house was literally crammed; nowhere was even standing room obtainable; the fronts of every box resembled a horticultural exhibition; but the silence was glacial. The curtain rose, not a Russian hand was clapped in welcome, the Nationals in the pit smiled with ill-concealed satisfaction, not venturing on a hiss, but sternly shutting up the few French spectators who might have been disposed to manifest favorably. The first act passed, so did the second, and always with the same hostile reserve; Sarah was seriously disheartened; she said nothing and kept the door of her dressing-room closed and locked during the entr’actes, but rumor affirms that the grinding of teeth inside was distinctly audible from without, and that Mr. Jarrett grew pale as he thought of the scene which would follow that performance, and of the other scene which he might expect when summoned by the Director of Police to explain why there was no second performance, as the showman felt quite sure that she who had left the Francais because her interpretation of the ‘Aventuriere’ was pronounced to be defective would never risk a second affront from a Russian audience. However, Sarah is a brave woman; whatever she thought she kept severely to herself; never did she play better, and at last, suddenly, in the third act, in the pathetic scene between Marguerite and Armand Duval’s father, the ice melted as by enchantment; the artist had won her cause, and the whole audience broke into an enthusiastic tempest of applause, which was all the more passionate that it had been so long contained. No such triumph of talent over stupid prejudice is on record in the city of Peter; the stage became literally a parterre of flowers; even the Nationals cheered, and, forgetting their hatred of her origin, joined with the ‘Occidentals’ in sincere admiration of this ‘queen of dramatic art.’ Since then all has gone well with Mlle. Bernhardt, but it was so nearly not going well that she wants to come home, and, as I have already hinted as a strong probability, will not insist on M. Perrin’s making amende honorable in his shirt with a lighted taper in his hand and barefooted, which were, says Mrs. Grundy, the original conditions demanded by her as the sine qua non of her return, the derelict manager and the socictarians on the other hand, and as a quid pro quo for this gracious condescension, agreeing not to talk any more about those 100,000f. damages awarded by the court for breach of contract.
From a French actress on the Russian stage to a Russian play on the French stage, the transition is easy and natural, but before saying anything about ‘Serge Panine,’ I will just mention a few words concerning that tremendous anti-Semitic feeling which, first showing itself in semi-barbarous Southern Muscovy, has gradually spread westward, until not only Germany, but even skeptical, atheistical France begins to exhibit symptoms of the agitation. Far be it from me to justify or even palliate the atrocious acts of violence perpetrated at Odessa, at Kiev, at Elizabethgrad, and at a hundred other points upon the Israelites. Persecution is never justifiable, but truth and justice compel me to say that the Israelites have brought it upon themselves by over-zeal in acting up to the one command of the lawgiver which none of them have ever transgressed; they were bidden to spoil the Egyptians, and they have done so, confounding all who are not of their own communion in the same category as the original subjects of King Pharaoh, until the Gentiles have arisen in their wrath and smitten their oppressors. All through the East of Europe, except in Turkey, where, thanks to the superior cleverness of the Armenians, the Jews starve, these Pariahs prove that Shylock was not the mere creation of a poet’s fancy. A vast deal of maudlin sympathy was expressed about their sufferings in Roumania by their coreligionists in England, whose lying publications were circulated on all sides and awakened even an echo in America. I wish some of their sympathizers would go to Roumania, to Galicia, to Bessarabia, and judge from what they see how those Provinces have flourished since they were overrun by this scum of mankind, more destructive than the locusts and the grasshoppers of Egypt; the travelers might be sincere Philo-Semites when they started on their journey, but not one on his return, if he spoke the truth, would profess other than sentiments of ultra-anti-Semitism. The hatred of Poles for Russians is proverbial, and yet the late riots at Warsaw have proved that this animosity is about to be forgotten in their still stronger detestation of the Jews, whom the population accuses of its ruin by their shameless speculations on corn and breadstuffs, and their disgraceful manoeuvres on the Stock Exchanges of Frankfort, Berlin, and Vienna. I believe, and I think have already so stated, that Sarah Bernhardt is not a child of Israel, although she certainly is of that type, but the mere suspicion of her connection with ‘the foul accursed race who crucified our Lord’�I quote literally from a Russian author�is quite enough to create hosts of enemies; if she had tried it on about Easter, or rather about the time of the Passover, when the Slav peasant is convinced that the Jews steal and murder Christian babes ‘in their unholy rites,’ Sarah would have been pelted with something even more disagreeable than cucumbers, and about one-half of the nation would have thought, if it did not say so in so many words: ‘Served her right!’ [. . .]”�”Bernhardt in Russia”, The New York Times, (24 January 1882), p. 6. A Letter to the Editor by “Truth” in response to the above article appeared under the heading “Jews in Russia and the East” in The New York Times, (28 January 1882), p. 2.
“When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of the revolutionary party; when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse. [***] Again, people will say that I am furnishing the Anti-Semites with weapons. Why so? Because I admit the truth? Because I do not maintain that there are none but excellent men amongst us? Again, people will say that I am showing our enemies the way to injure us. This I absolutely dispute. My proposal could only be carried out with the free consent of a majority of Jews. Individuals or even powerful bodies of Jews might be attacked, but Governments will take no action against the collective nation. The equal rights of Jews before the law cannot be withdrawn where they have once been conceded; for the first attempt at withdrawal would immediately drive all Jews rich and poor alike, into the ranks of the revolutionary party. The first official violation of Jewish liberties invariably brings about economic crisis. Therefore no weapons can be effectually used against us, because these cut the hands that wield them.”�Theodor Herzl, A Jewish State: An Attempt at a Modern Solution of the Jewish Question, The Maccabaean Publishing Co., New York, (1904), pp. 23, 99.
“Resh Lakish said: He who is observant of fringes will be privileged to be served by two thousand eight hundred slaves, for it is said, Thus saith the Lord of hosts: In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you, etc.”� I. Epstein, Editor, Shabbath 32b, The Babylonian Talmud, Volume 7, The Soncino Press, London, (1938), p. 149.
“Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. 2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. 3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. 4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. 5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee. 6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark: 7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light. 8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be. 9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one. 10 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin’s gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king’s winepresses. 11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited. 12 ¶And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth. 13 And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great tumult from the LORD shall be among them; and they shall lay hold every one on the hand of his neighbour, and his hand shall rise up against the hand of his neighbour. 14 And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the heathen round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance. 15 And so shall be the plague of the horse, of the mule, of the camel, and of the ass, and of all the beasts that shall be in these tents, as this plague. 16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. 17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. 18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. 19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. 20 In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD’s house shall be like the bowl’s before the altar. 21 Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.”�The Jewish book of Zechariah Chapter 14
“Then shall Armillus with his whole army die, and the Atheistical Edomites (the Christians they mean) who laid waste the house of our God, and led us captive into a strange land, shall miserably perish; then shall the Jews be revenged upon them, as it is written, [Margin Note: Obad. 18] The house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau (that is, we Christians, as the Jews interpret, whom they Christen Edomites) shall be for stubble. This stubble the Jews shall set in fire, that nothing be left to us Edomites which shall not be burnt and turned into ashes.”�Johannes Buxtorf, quoting from Machir of Toledo’s Avkat Rokhel, Constantinople/Istanbul, (1516); Synagoga Judaica: Das ist Jueden Schul ; Darinnen der gantz Juedische Glaub und Glaubensubung. . . grundlich erklaeret, Basel, (1603); as translated in the 1657 English edition, The Jewish Synagogue: Or An Historical Narration of the State of the Jewes, At this Day Dispersed over the Face of the Whole Earth, Printed by T. Roycroft for H. R. and Thomas Young at the Three Pidgeons in Pauls Church-Yard, London, (1657), p. 323.
“It is a well-known fact that the Salonika Committee was formed under Masonic auspices with the help of the Jews and Donmehs, or crypto-Jews of Turkey, whose headquarters are at Salonika, and whose organization took, even under Abdul Hamid, a Masonic form. Jews like Emmanuel Carasso, Salem, Sassun, Fardji, Meslah, and Donmehs or crypto-Jews, like Djavid Bey and the Baldji family, took an influential part both in the organization of the Committee and in the deliberations of its central body at Salonika. These facts, which are known to every Government in Europe, are also known throughout Turkey and the Balkans, where an increasing tendency is noticeable to saddle the Jews and Donmehs with responsibility for the sanguinary blunders which the Committee has made.”�Vienna Correspondent for The Times of London, “Jews and the Situation in Albania”, The London Times, (11 July 1911), p. 5.
“And all people of the earth shall see that thou art called by the name of the LORD; and they shall be afraid of thee.”�Deuteronomy 28:10
“And that all the seed of his sons should be Gentiles; but from the sons of Isaac one should become a holy seed and should not be reckoned among the Gentiles. For he should become the portion of the Most High, and all his seed had fallen into possession of God, that it should be unto the Lord a people for His possession above all nations and that it should become a kingdom and priests and a holy nation.”�Book of Jubilees 16:38, as quoted in M. Higger, The Jewish Utopia, Lord Baltimore Press, Baltimore, (1932), p. 31. See also: Book of Jubilees 32:17-20.
“Yet the Jews of the Ottoman Empire, notwithstanding their degradation, exhibit a certain intellectual tendency. They live in an ideal world, frivolous and superstitious though it be. The Jew who fills the lowest offices, who deals out raki all day long to drunken Greeks, who trades in old nails, and to whose sordid soul the very piastres he bandies have imparted their copper haze, finds his chief delight in mental pursuits. Seated by a taper in his dingy cabin, he spends the long hours of the night in poring over the Zohar, the Chaldaic book of the magic Cabala, or, with enthusiastic delight, plunges into the mystical commentaries on the Talmud, seeking to unravel their quaint traditions and sophistries, and attempting, like the astrologers and alchymists, to divine the secrets and command the powers of Nature. ‘The humble dealer, who hawks some article of clothing or some old piece of furniture about the streets; the obsequious mass of animated filth and rags which approaches to obtrude offers of service on the passing traveller, is perhaps deeply versed in Talmudic lore, or aspiring, in nightly vigils, to read into futurity, to command the elements, and acquire invisibility.’ Thus wisdom is preferred to wealth, and a Rothschild would reject a family alliance with a Christian prince to form one with the humblest of his tribe who is learned in Hebrew lore.
The Jew of the old world, has his revenge:
‘The pound of flesh which I demand of him
Is dearly bought, is mine, and I will have it.’
Furnishing the hated Gentiles with the means of waging exterminating wars, he beholds, exultingly, in the fields of slaughtered victims a bloody satisfaction of his ‘lodged hate’ and ‘certain loathing,’ more gratifying even than the golden Four-per-cents on his princely loans. Of like significance is the fact that in many parts of the world the despised Jews claim as their own the possessions of the Gentiles, among whom they dwell. Thus the squalid Yeslir, living in the Jews’ quarter of Balata or Haskeni, and even more despised than the unbelieving dogs of Christians, traffics secretly in the estates, the palaces and the villages of the great Beys and Pachas, who would regard his touch as pollution. What, apparently, can be more absurd? Yet these assumed possessions, far more valuable, in fact, than the best ‘estates in Spain,’ are bought and sold for money, and inherited from generation to generation.”�”The Jews”, The Knickerbocker; or New York Monthly Magazine, Volume 53, Number 1, (January, 1859), pp. 41-51, at 44-45.
“You have doubtless heard that the Great Einstein is coming to America soon with Dr. Weizmann, our Zionist Chief. Palestine may need something more now than a new conception of the Universe or of several additional dimensions; but it is well to remind the Gentile world, when the wave of anti-Semitism is rising, that in the world of thought the conspicuous contributions are being made by Jews.”�United States Supreme Court Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis quoted in M. I. Urofsky and D. W. Levy, Editors, Letters of Louis D. Brandeis, Volume 4, State University of New York Press, Albany, New York, (1975), pp. 536-537.
“I don’t think that I approach cases in a particular way because I am Jewish any more than I do because I’m a woman. I have certain sensitivities for both. You know the old expression, ‘Is it good for the Jews?’ For example, a lot of people want to have crosses in front of their town hail or whatever. They say, ‘It doesn’t hurt anybody.’ We had one case where I was in dissent�it was about a cross in front of the Statehouse in Ohio. And to me, the photograph of that statehouse told the whole story of the case: Here is the Capitol in Columbus, and here is this giant cross. And what is the perception of a Jewish child who is passing by the Capitol? It’s certainly that this is a Christian country. A person’s reaction could be: ‘There’s something wrong with me.’ It’s not a symbol that includes you.”�United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as quoted in: A. Pogrebin, Stars of David: Prominent Jews Talk About Being Jewish, Broadway Books, New York, (2005), p. 24.
“‘You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits were Jews; that mysterious Russian Diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe is organized and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution which is at this moment preparing in Germany, and which will be, in fact, a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolize the professorial chairs of Germany. Neander the founder of Spiritual Christianity, and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, is a Jew. Benary, equally famous, and in the same University, is a Jew. Wehl, the Arabic Professor of Heidelberg, is a Jew. Years ago, when I was in Palestine, I met a German student who was accumulating materials for the History of Christianity, and studying the genius of the place; a modest and learned man. It was Wehl; then unknown, since become the first Arabic scholar of the day, and the author of the life of Mahomet. But for the German professors of this race, their name is Legion. I think there are more than ten at Berlin alone.[‘]”�Benjamin Disraeli, Coningsby; or, The New Generation, H. Colburn, London, (1844), here quoted from The Century Co. edition of 1904, New York, pp. 231-232.
“Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.”�Deuteronomy 23:20
“Mussolini demanded of Greece fifty million lire as compensation for a few murdered Italians. If we had the power to impose blood-money for our murdered, the financing of Palestine would become child’s play.”�Israel Zangwill, “Is Political Zionism Dead? Yes”, The Nation, Volume 118, Number 3062, (12 March 1924), pp. 276-278, at 276.
“While he lived in Germany, however, Einstein seems to have accepted the then-prevalent racist mode of thought, often invoking such concepts as ‘race’ and ‘instinct,’ and the idea that the Jews form a race.”�John Stachel, “Einstein’s Jewish Identity”, Einstein from ‘B’ to ‘Z’, Birkhaeuser, Boston, Basel, Berlin, (2002), pp. 57-83, at 68.
“TROTZKY LEADSRADICAL CREW
TO WORLD RULE
Bolshevism Only a Tool for His Scheme
BY JOHN CLAYTON.
(Chicago Tribune Foreign News Service.)
(By Special Cable.)
(Copyright: 1920: By the Tribune Company.)
PARIS, June 18.�For the last two years army intelligence officers, members of the various secret service organizations of the entente, have been bringing in reports of a world revolutionary movement other than Bolshevism. At first these reports confused the two, but latterly the lines they have taken have begun to be more and more clear.
Bolshevism aims for the overthrow of existing society and the establishment of an international brotherhood of men who work with their hands as rulers of the world. The second movement aims for the establishment of a new racial domination of the world. So far as the British, French and our own department’s inquiry have been able to trace, the moving spirits in the second scheme are Jewish radicals.
Use Local Hatreds.
Within the ranks of communism is a group of this party, but it does not stop there. To its leaders, communism is only an incident. They are ready to use the Islamic revolt, hatred by the central empires for England, Japan’s designs on India, and commercial rivalry between America and Japan.
As any movement of world revolution must be, this is primarily anti-Anglo-Saxon. It sees its greatest task in the destruction of the British empire and the growing commercial power of America. The brains of this organization are in Berlin.
Trotzky at Head.
The directing spirit which issues the orders to all minor chiefs and finds money for the work of preparing the revolt is in the German capital. Its executive head is none other than Trotzky, for it is on the far frontiers of India, Afghanistan, and Persia that the first test of strength will come. The organization expert of the present Russian state is recognized, even among the members of his own political party, as a man of boundless ambition, and his dream of an empire of the east is like that of Napoleon.
The organization of the world Jewish-radical movement has been perfected in almost every land. In the states of England, France, Germany, Poland, Russia, and the east it has its groups. It is behind the Islamic revolt with all the propaganda skill and financial aid at its command because it hopes to control the shaping of the new eastern empire to its own ends. Sympathy with the eastern nationals probably is one of the chief causes for the victory of the pro-nationals in the bolshevik party, which threw communism solidly behind the nationalist aspirations of England’s colonies.
Out to Grab Trade Routes.
The aims of the Jewish-radical party have nothing of altruism behind them beyond liberation of their own race. Except for this their aims are purely commercial. They want actual control of the rich trade routes and production centers of the east, those foundations of the British empire which always have been the cornerstone of its national supremacy.
They are striking for the same ends as Germany when she entered the war of 1914 to establish Mittel Europa and so give the Germans control of the Bagdad railway. They believe Europe is tired of conflict and that England is too weak to put down a concerted rebellion in part of her eastern possessions. Therein lies the hope of success. They are staking brains and money against an empire.
‘Westward the course of empire makes its way,’ but even it swings backward to the old battleground where for countless ages peoples have fought. Nations have risen and crumbled around control of eastern commerce.”�John Clayton, “Trotzky Leads Radical Crew to World Rule”, The Chicago Daily Tribune, (19 June 1920), p. 1.
“In European capitals there are Hebrew bankers who dictate certain international relations because they hold the purse-strings of governments; and every European country owes much to the men of great genius that the race has contributed to the arts and to statecraft.”�”The Jews in the United States”, The World’s Work, Volume 11, Number 3, (January, 1906), pp. 7030-7031.
“The way I see it, the fact of the Jews’ racial peculiarity will necessarily influence their social relations with non-Jews. The conclusions which�in my opinion�the Jews should draw is to become more aware of their peculiarity in their social way of life and to recognize their own cultural contributions. First of all, they would have to show a certain noble reservedness and not be so eager to mix socially�of which others want little or nothing. On the other hand, anti-Semitism in Germany also has consequences that, from a Jewish point of view, should be welcomed. I believe German Jewry owes its continued existence to anti-Semitism.”�Albert Einstein, “Wie ich Zionist wurde”, Juedische Rundshau, Volume 26, Number 49, (21 June 1921), pp. 351-352, at 351; English translation by A. Engel, “How I became a Zionist”, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 7, Document 57, Princeton University Press, (2002), pp. 234-235, at 235.
“We will also act to end the relationships between Arab men and Jewish women that is now growing and that so desecrates the Name of G-d.”�Rabbi Meir Kahane, On Jews and Judaism: Selected Articles 1961-1990, Volume 1, Institute for the Publication of the Writings of Rabbi Meir Kahane, Jerusalem, (1993), p. 81.
“Anti-Semitism will be a psychological phenomenon as long as Jews come in contact with non-Jews�what harm can there be in that? Perhaps it is due to anti-Semitism that we survive as a race: at least that is what I believe.”�Albert Einstein, “Ein Bekenntnisbrief Einsteins”, Israelitisches Wochenblatt fuer die Schweiz, (24 September 1920), p. 10; English translation by A. Engel, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 7, Document 37, Princeton University Press, (2002), p. 159.
“Jewish Messianism is in its origins and by its nature�this cannot be sufficiently emphasized�a theory of catastrophe. This theory stresses the revolutionary, cataclysmic element in the transition from every historical present to the Messianic future.”�Gershom Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism and Other Essays on Jewish Spirituality, Schoken Books, New York, (1971), p. 7.
“[Polish Jews] always resented�as they do to-day�the idea that they were Poles or a part of the Polish State; they insisted on being Jews and nothing else. Nor does it seem to be the case that the Jews in Poland were compelled to lead a distinct existence by the Government as a part of an anti-Jewish policy; the Ghetto was their own creation and their own choice; the fact that they were able to enjoy this privilege and many others, was what made their sojourn in Poland so agreeable and so free from the persecutions to which they were subject in other countries.”�Burton J. Hendrick, “Radicalism among the Polish Jews”, The World’s Work, Volume 44, Number 6, (April, 1923), pp. 591-601, at 593.
“[H]ad I been a Jew, I would have been a fanatical Zionist. I could not imagine being anything else. In fact, I would have been the most ardent Zionist imaginable.”�Adolf Eichmann, “Eichmann Tells His Own Damning Story”, Life Magazine, Volume 49, Number 22, (28 November 1960), pp. 19-25, 101-112; at 22.
“Never before had I been in such perfect tune with Nordau. [***] This has nothing to do with religion. He even said that there was no such thing as a Jewish dogma. But we are of one race. [***] ‘The Jews,’ he says, ‘will be compelled by anti-Semitism to destroy among all peoples the idea of a fatherland.’ Or, I secretly thought to myself, to create a fatherland of their own.”�Theodor Herzl, English translation by H. Zohn, R. Patai, Editor, The Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl, Volume 1, Herzl Press, New York, (1960), p. 196.
“In 1861 Salomon de Rothschild visited the Confederate States and wrote to his family, associated with the prominent Rothschild banking house in Paris: ‘What is astonishing here, or rather, what is not astonishing, is the high position occupied by our coreligionists, or rather by those who were born into the faith and who, having married Christian women, and without converting, have forgotten the practices of their fathers. Judah P. Benjamin, the Attorney General of the Confederate States, is perhaps the greatest mind on this continent. H. M. Hyams, the lieutenant governor of Louisiana, Moyse, the Secretary of the Interior, etc. And, what is odd, all these men have a Jewish heart and take an interest in me, because I represent the greatest Jewish house in the world.'”�Salomon de Rothschild, as quoted in R. A. Rosenberg, Everything You Need to Know About American Jews and Their History, Plume, New York, (1997), p. 53.
“Oppression and persecution cannot exterminate us. No nation on earth has survived such struggles and sufferings as we have gone through. Jew-baiting has merely stripped off our weaklings; the strong among us were invariably true to their race when persecution broke out against them. This attitude was most clearly apparent in the period immediately following the emancipation of the Jews. Later on, those who rose to a higher degree of intelligence and to a better worldly position lost their communal feeling to a very great extent. Wherever our political well-being has lasted for any length of time, we have assimilated with our surroundings. I think this is not discreditable. Hence, the statesman who would wish to see a Jewish strain in his nation would have to provide for the duration of our political well-being; and even Bismarck could not do that. [***] The Governments of all countries scourged by Anti-Semitism will serve their own interests in assisting us to obtain the sovereignty we want. [***] Great exertions will not be necessary to spur on the movement. Anti-Semites provide the requisite impetus. They need only do what they did before, and then they will create a love of emigration where it did not previously exist, and strengthen it where it existed before. [***] I imagine that Governments will, either voluntarily or under pressure from the Anti-Semites, pay certain attention to this scheme; and they may perhaps actually receive it here and there with a sympathy which they will also show to the Society of Jews.”�Theodor Herzl, A Jewish State: An Attempt at a Modern Solution of the Jewish Question, The Maccabaean Publishing Co., New York, (1904), pp. 5-6, 25, 68, 93.
“The most touching point about these Hebrew prayers is, that they are really an expression of the collective Jewish spirit; they do not plead for the individual, but for the entire Jewish race. The pious Jew is above all a Jewish patriot. The ‘new’ Jew, who denies the existence of the Jewish nationality, is not only a deserter in the religious sense, but is also a traitor to his people, his race and even to his family. If it were true that Jewish emancipation in exile is incompatible with Jewish nationality, then it were the duty of the Jews to sacrifice the former for the sake of the latter. This point, however, may need a more elaborate explanation, but that the Jew must be above all a Jewish patriot, needs no proof to those who have received a Jewish education. Jewish patriotism is not a cloudy Germanic abstraction, which dissolves itself in discussions about being and appearance, realism and idealism, but a true, natural feeling, the tangibility and simplicity of which require no demonstration, nor can it be disposed of by a demonstration to the contrary.”�Moses Hess, Rom und Jerusalem: die letzte Nationalitaetsfrage, Eduard Wengler, Leipzig, (1862); English translation, Rome and Jerusalem: A Study in Jewish Nationalism, Bloch, New York, (1918/1943), pp. 62-63.
“A final solution: Let Germany be policed forever by an international armed force? Even if such a huge undertaking were feasible life itself would not have it so. As war begets war, suppression begets rebellion. Undreamed horrors would unfold. Thus we find that there is no middle course; no act of mediation, no compromise to be compounded, no political or economic sharing to be considered. There is, in fine, no other solution except one: That Germany must perish forever from this earth!”�Theodor Newman Kaufman, Germany Must Perish!, Argyle Press, Newark, New Jersey, (1941), p. 88.
“[I applaud] the contribution of our enemies in the continuance of Jewry in eastern Europe. [***] We ought to be thankful to our oppressors that they closed the gates of assimilation to us and took care that our people were concentrated and not dispersed, segregatedly united and not diffusedly mixed [***] One ought to investigate in the West and note the great share which antisemitism had in the continuance of Jewry and in all the emotions and movements of our national rebirth . [***] Truly our enemies have done much for the strengthening of Judaism in the diaspora. [***] Experience teaches that the liberals have understood better than the antisemites how to destroy us as a nation. [***] We are, in a word, naturally foreigners; we are an alien nation in your midst and we want to remain one.”� Jakob Klatzkin, Krisis und Entscheidung im Judentum; der Probleme des modernen Judentums, Second Enlarged Edition, Juedischer Verlag, Berlin, (1921), pp. 61-63, 118; English translation by K. J. Herrmann, “Historical Perspectives on Political Zionism and Antisemitism”, Zionism & Racism: Proceedings of an International Symposium, International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Tripoli, (1977), pp. 197-210, at 204-205. A lengthy quotation from Klatzkin, in English translation, appears in: M. Menuhin, The Decadence of Judaism in Our Time, Exposition Press, New York, (1965), pp. 482-483.
“Man vergegenwaertige sich, wie gross der Anteil unserer Feinde am Fortbestand des Judentums im Osten ist. [. . .] Wir muessten beinahe unseren Bedraengern dankbar sein, wenn sie die Tore der Assimilation vor uns schlossen und dafuer Sorge trugen, dass unsere Volksmassen konzentriert und nicht zerstreut, abgesondert geeint und nicht zerklueftet vermischt werden[. . . .] Man untersuche es im Westen, welchen hohen Anteil der Antisemitismus am Fortbestand des Judentums und an all den Regungen und Bewegungen unserer nationalen Wiedergeburt hat. [. . .] Wahrlich, unsere Feinde haben viel zur Staerkung des Judentums in der Diaspora beigetragen. [. . .] Und die Erfahrung lehrt, dass die Liberalen es besser als die Antisemiten verstanden haben, uns als Volk zu vernichten. [. . .] Wir sind schlechthin Wesensfremde, sind � wir muessen es immer wiederholen � ein Fremdvolk in eurer Mitte und wollen es auch bleiben.”
“We continue to see anti-Semitism even where it has ceased to exist, or we exaggerate it where it continues to exist in marginalized form. Indeed, some Jewish newspapers refuse to print, and some Jewish organizations refuse to acknowledge, the good news, lest they risk alienating their readerships or losing their membership. For example, in November of 1996 I saw a fundraising letter from a Jewish organization which claimed that ‘anti-Semitism . . . appears to be growing more robust, more strident, more vicious � and more ‘respectable.” Well-intentioned as this organization is, it seeks support by exaggerating the threats we currently face and by comparing them to those we faced during the Holocaust.” � Alan M. Dershowitz, The Vanishing American Jew, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, (1997), pp. 12-13.
“We came across a horsehide-covered trunk which looked promising. Opening it, we found Father’s Confederate uniform. Digging deeper into the trunk, we pulled out a white hood and long robe with a crimson cross on its breast� the regalia of a Knight of the Ku Klux Klan. […] To my brother and me the thought that Father was a member of that band exalted him in our youthful eyes.”� Bernard M. Baruch, Baruch: My Own Story, Henry Holt and Company, New York, (1957), p. 32.
“They are, all of them, born with raging fanaticism in their hearts, just as the Bretons and the Germans are born with blond hair. I would not be in the least bit surprised if these people would not some day become deadly to the human race.”� Voltaire as quoted in A.Gould, What Did They Think of The Jews?, Jason Aronson Inc., New Jersey, (1991), p. 90. Gould cites: “Voltaire, Lettres de Memmius a Ciceron, 1771, in The French Enlightenment, p.300″
2 քննարկումներ
vardan manukyan