TBR News April 11, 2017

The Voice of the White House

Washington, April 11, 2017: “With the increasing agitations with, and over, North Korean threats to the United States, I am excerpting portions of an interesting conversation I recently had in Washington with an old friend who is involved in anti-terrorist activities at a very high level.

Let us postulate the following scenario: A large cargo container ship is in the stream of such vessels destined for the California port of San Diego. This port is the largest one on the west coast of the United States. Every year is handles more that 6.8 million 20-foot container units.

This represents 82.3 million metric tons of cargo and this  cargo comes in the bottoms of 2,000 ships. In other words, San Diego is a busy port.

A report from DHS indicates that only 2% of the cargo is checked for illegal or explosive devices.

Given these figures, consider if you will, the probability, not possibility, of a hostile entity putting an atomic weapon into a cargo container and timing it to explode after a certain amount of time elapses.

If the container is not inspected, is off-loaded and put onto a truck for delivery, say, to Denver and without warning, the cargo explodes, say in Oklahoma City en route, there would be astronomical damage and many deaths.

Even the controlled media would not be able to ignore this and then the following disconnected and useless uproar would deafen the nation.

Russia, of course, would be blamed by the lunatic neo-cons, the President, whose actions caused it, would shout and point accusing fingers in circles, the media would accuse any country harboring a grudge against the United States (hundreds of countries would be possible perpetrators) and then some kind of attack would be launched, perhaps against whomever the President did not like.

And always look for the truth in the jest.”

Table of Contents

• North Korea state media warns of nuclear strike if provoked as U.S. warships approach
• US, North Korea, China – diplomacy and saber rattling
• Donald Trump actions risk ‘millions dying on Korean Peninsula’, congressman warns
• FAA bans drone flights over 133 US military bases, threatens criminal charges for violators
• Is Trump Enlisting in the War Party?
• It’s not just Syria. Trump is ratcheting up wars across the world
• Christian Fascism: The Seizure of Power in America
• Saudi Arabia Paid Conservative PR Firm $90,000 to Bring Vets to DC to Lobby Against JASTA
• The Vicious Inheritance: Stalin’s Jewish Executioners

North Korea state media warns of nuclear strike if provoked as U.S. warships approach

April 11, 2017

by Sue-Lin Wong

Reuters

PYONGYANG-North Korean state media on Tuesday warned of a nuclear attack on the United States at any sign of a U.S. pre-emptive strike as a U.S. Navy strike group led by a nuclear-powered aircraft steamed towards the western Pacific.

Tension has escalated sharply on the Korean peninsula with talk of military action by the United States gaining traction following its strikes last week against Syria and amid concerns the reclusive North may soon conduct a sixth nuclear test.

North Korea’s official Rodong Sinmun newspaper said the country was prepared to respond to any aggression by the United States.

“Our revolutionary strong army is keenly watching every move by enemy elements with our nuclear sight focused on the U.S. invasionary bases not only in South Korea and the Pacific operation theater but also in the U.S. mainland,” it said.

South Korean acting President Hwang Kyo-ahn warned of “greater provocations” by North Korea and ordered the military to intensify monitoring and to ensure close communication with the United States.

“It is possible the North may wage greater provocations such as a nuclear test timed with various anniversaries including the Supreme People’s Assembly,” said Hwang, acting leader since former president Park Geun-hye was removed amid a graft scandal.

The North convened a Supreme People’s Assembly session on Tuesday, one of its twice-yearly sessions in which major appointments are announced and national policy goals are formally approved. It did not immediately release details.

But South Korean officials took pains to quell talk in social media of an impending security crisis or outbreak of war.

“We’d like to ask precaution so as not to get blinded by exaggerated assessment about the security situation on the Korean peninsula,” Defense Ministry spokesman Moon Sang-kyun said.

Saturday is the 105th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il Sung, the country’s founding father and grandfather of current ruler, Kim Jong Un.

A military parade is expected in the North’s capital, Pyongyang, to mark the day. North Korea often also marks important anniversaries with tests of its nuclear or missile capabilities in breach of U.N. Security Council resolutions.

Groups of men and women in colorful outfits were singing and dancing on street corners in Pyongyang, which was illuminated by better lighting than in previous years, apparently practicing for the parade planned for later in the week.Syrian President Bashar al-Assad sent a message of congratulations to mark the event, lambasting “big powers” for their “expansionist” policy.

“The friendly two countries are celebrating this anniversary and, at the same time, conducting a war against big powers’ wild ambition to subject all countries to their expansionist and dominationist policy and deprive them of their rights to self-determination,” the North’s KCNA news agency quoted the message as saying.

“The two peoples of Syria and the DPRK are as ever struggling for their rights to self-determination and national sovereignty and the security and prosperity of their countries.”

DPRK stands for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the North’s official name.

The North’s foreign ministry, in a statement carried by KCNA, said the U.S. navy strike group’s approach showed America’s “reckless moves for invading had reached a serious phase”.

“We never beg for peace but we will take the toughest counteraction against the provocateurs in order to defend ourselves by powerful force of arms and keep to the road chosen by ourselves,” an unidentified ministry spokesman said.

North Korea and the rich, democratic South are technically still at war because their 1950-53 conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty. The North regularly threatens to destroy the South and its main ally, the United States.

SANCTIONS WARNING

North Korea is emerging as one of the most pressing foreign policy problems facing the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump. It has conducted five nuclear tests, two of them last year, and is working to develop nuclear-tipped missiles that can reach the United States.

The Trump administration is reviewing its policy towards North Korea and has said all options are on the table, including military strikes, but U.S. officials said non-military action appears to be at the top of the list.

Russia’s foreign ministry, in a statement ahead of a visit by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, said it was concerned about many aspects of U.S. foreign policy, and particularly concerned about North Korea.

“We are really worried about what Washington has in mind for North Korea after it hinted at the possibility of a unilateral military scenario,” a statement said.

“It’s important to understand how that would tally with collective obligations on de-nuclearising the Korean peninsula, something that is underpinned in U.N. Security Council resolutions.”

Russia slammed U.S. cruise missile strikes on a Syrian air base on Friday, calling them an illegal attack on a sovereign state.

The U.S. Navy strike group Carl Vinson was diverted from planned port calls to Australia and would move towards the western Pacific Ocean near the Korean peninsula as a show of force, a U.S. official told Reuters over the weekend.

U.S. officials said it would still take the strike group more than a week to arrive near the Korean peninsula.

Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, met in Florida last week and Trump pressed Xi to do more to curb North Korea’s nuclear program.

China and South Korea agreed on Monday to impose tougher sanctions on North Korea if it carried out nuclear or long-range missile tests, a senior official in Seoul said.

On Tuesday, a fleet of North Korean cargo ships was heading home, the majority of it fully laden, after China ordered its trading companies to return coal from the isolated state to curb coal traffic, sources with direct knowledge of the trade said.

The order was given on April 7, just as Trump and Xi were set for the summit where the two agreed the North Korean nuclear advances had reached a “very serious stage”, Tillerson said.

Following repeated missile tests that drew international criticism, China banned all imports of North Korean coal on Feb. 26, cutting off the country’s most important export product.

The North is seen ready to conduct its sixth nuclear test at any time, with movements detected by satellite at its Punggye-ri nuclear test site.

(Additional reporting by Ju-min Park in Seoul, Idrees Ali in Washington and Andrew Osborn in Moscow; Writing by Jack Kim; Editing by Robert Birsel and Nick Macfie)

 US, North Korea, China – diplomacy and saber rattling

A US aircraft carrier is headed for the Korean Peninsula. This may get things moving in the conflict over Pyongyang’s nuclear program, but it also makes the power games in East Asia riskier

April 10, 2017

by Matthias von Hein

DW

What is at least as dangerous as the Middle Eastern powder keg? That’s right – the Korean one! That’s what makes it worrying when US President Donald Trump, after firing 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian military air base, gives another show of military strength by sending the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier “Carl Vinson,” with its roughly 6,000 crewmembers and 85 warplanes, to patrol off the Korean coast.

It is worrying because, in the case of this supposed demonstration of determination, we do not know what purpose it is meant to serve. It is also unsettling that even the missile attack on Syria did not seem to form part of a larger strategy – and that it took place just as Trump was sitting together with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping enjoying steak and Californian wine. Xi has to have understood the strike as the exclamation mark on Trump’s remarks a few days before that the United States would possibly “solve North Korea” unilaterally.

Beijing’s dilemma

Xi and Trump sat together for some seven hours in Florida. North Korea is bound to have been near the top of the agenda. But Trump was not able to convince his guest from Beijing to undertake concrete steps against Pyongyang, even though Beijing is increasingly annoyed about Kim Jong Un’s wayward actions: North Korea carried out two atomic weapons tests last year alone. They were accompanied by dozens of missile tests, one of them even from a submarine.

This is not what Beijing considers to be a stable environment that is good for the economy, and still less the behavior of a good neighbor. Its repeated call for a Korean Peninsula that is free of nuclear weapons is believable. China backs the sanctions, tightened as recently as November, against the already isolated country. It has now again warned of fresh sanctions if Pyongyang carries out further nuclear and missile tests.

But importantly, more than anything else, Beijing fears the collapse of the regime in Pyongyang, millions of refugees and, ultimately, US troops possibly on its borders. North Korea, as the American foreign affairs expert Victor Cha already put it in 2010, is a “land of lousy options.”

End of ‘strategic patience’

Trump will also have to come to this conclusion. But the US – unlike in Syria – really does have serious national security interests at stake with regard to North Korea. Pyongyang’s missile tests often end in failure, it is true, but North Korean engineers can learn lessons too. The weapons are getting better. In a few years, they could reach the US, possibly with nuclear warheads on board.

However, whether the abandonment of the previous “strategic patience” as announced by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, coupled with threatening gestures, is the right way to counter this peril is another matter. The presence of American troops in South Korea is already a very visible build-up of military weight. Becoming involved in a game of poker with Pyongyang at an inopportune moment is dangerous. And you don’t put out a fire that is only smoldering with gasoline even if it seems to be the only liquid within reach.

Advantage Pyongyang

Like it or not: When it’s a matter of threats, the North Korean regime is at an advantage, because it can use its own population as hostages. And it can take its South Korean brothers and sisters hostage as well. Some 25 million people – almost half of all South Koreans – live in and around the capital, Seoul. And it is within the range of North Korean artillery.

And as if the South Koreans didn’t have enough to worry about, there is loud talk in US media, some of it stemming from hawkish ex-CIA chief James Woolsey, about “preventive nuclear strikes” on North Korea.

New security architecture in East Asia

This would certainly be the lousiest of the lousy options. What might be the best of them would be offering North Korea something – even if that might stick in one’s throat in view of the tyrannical regime in Pyongyang.

This idea has already occurred to Trump. During his election campaign, he boasted that he would eat hamburgers with Kim in the White House if it were necessary to solve the missile problem. A peace treaty could be a start. The Korean War has been over since 1953, but officially there is only a fragile cease-fire in place at the 38th parallel. The fact that North Korea is so highly armed is only partly the product of paranoia. And the atomic bomb is the guarantee of the regime’s survival. Kim Jong Un will work all the more obsessively on it, the more threatened he feels from outside.

If a new security architecture were also to take into account Beijing’s interests, it could bring China to put more pressure on Kim. But the North Koreans will have to get rid of their rogue regime themselves.

Donald Trump actions risk ‘millions dying on Korean Peninsula’, congressman warns

April 11, 2017

by Jon Sharman

The Independent/UK

Donald Trump is risking “millions” of lives by deploying an aircraft carrier strike group near the Korean peninsula, a congressman has warned.

Democrat Ted Lieu of California also claimed the “risk of harm to US troops” had “significantly increased” in the last two days, citing the naval deployment and missile strikes on Syria following the alleged chemical attack in Idlib province earlier this week.

The US Navy has sent the 100,000-ton USS Carl Vinson, along with its support ships, to the western Pacific as a show of force amid fears over North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile programmes.

This year North Korean officials, including dictator Kim Jong-un, have repeatedly indicated an intercontinental ballistic missile test or something similar could be imminent, possibly as soon as 15 April, the 105th birthday of North Korea’s founding president and celebrated annually as “the Day of the Sun”.

Since January the Carl Vinson, one of the US’ so-called “super-carriers”, has participated in numerous exercises with the Japan Maritime Self Defence Force and Republic of Korea Navy, various maritime security initiatives, and routine patrol operations in the South China Sea.

Mr Lieu, who is a colonel in the US Air Force reserves, said on Twitter: “Note to @POTUS: Unlike Syria, N. Korea has nukes & can rain down artillery on S. Korea. You mess up and millions can die on Korean Peninsula.

“In the last 48 hours, @realDonaldTrump significantly increased the risk of harm to US troops in Syria and South Korea.

“#TheScaryThingIs what happens if N. Korea does another missile test after this “show of force” by US? Does @realDonaldTrump strike N. Korea?”

In January Mr Lieu introduced a bill to the House that would prevent President Trump from making a “first-use” nuclear strike without congressional approval.

After the US bombed Syrian military targets earlier this week North Korea said the strike “proves our decision to strengthen our military power to stand against force with force was the right choice a million times over”.

Last month the repressive state declared it was ready for war with the US.

Its foreign ministry said: “The nuclear force of [North Korea] is the treasured sword of justice and the most reliable war deterrence to defend the socialist motherland and the life of its people. We have the will and capability to fully respond to any war which the US wants.

“If the businessmen-turned-US-officials thought that they would frighten us, they would soon recognise that their method would not work.”

In March, Rex Tillerson, US Secretary of State, said military action against North Korea was an “option on the table”.

Mr Trump’s highest-ranking foreign policy advisor said during a visit to South Korea he would bring an end to the policy of “strategic patience”. Instead, the US will explore a range of military options, alongside diplomatic, security and economic measures.

However, when President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping met in Florida this week, Mr Trump pressed his counterpart to do more to curb North Korea’s nuclear programme.

Increasing pressure on Beijing to rein in its reclusive neighbour forms the main thrust of a national security review completed by Mr Trump’s aides in relation to North Korea.

The US’ options include economic and military measures but lean more toward sanctions and urging China to do more. Although the option of pre-emptive military strikes on North Korea is not off the table, the review prioritises less-risky steps and de-emphasises direct military action.

Additional reporting by agencies

FAA bans drone flights over 133 US military bases, threatens criminal charges for violators

April 11, 2017

RT

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued an order making it illegal to fly drones over 133 US military facilities, threatening civil penalties and criminal charges to those who violate the airspace.

The order, announced by the FAA on Friday, restricts drone flights up to 400 feet within the lateral boundaries of the facilities. The agency has released a map of the restricted airspace, “to ensure the public is aware of these restricted locations.”

Those who are found to be in violation of the order “may be subject to enforcement action, including potential civil penalties and criminal charges,” the FAA wrote it its announcement.

The agency noted that there will be “only a few exceptions” to the restrictions, and that those must be coordinated with the individual military base and/or the FAA.

The order, which will go into effect on April 14, represents the first time the agency has issued airspace restrictions which specifically apply only to unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

The drone restrictions could be the first of many of the FAA, which says it is “considering additional requests from federal security and intelligence agencies.”

The order comes amid a surge in popularity for UAVs, with the FAA predicting last month that the number of so-called hobbyist drones will reach 3.6 million by 2021 – more than triple the 1.1 million estimated last year.

The agency also estimated that commercial drone fleet would grow from 42,000 at the end of 2016 to about 442,000 by 2021, with the possibility of it reaching 1.6 million by that time.

Drones are already banned within a 15-mile (24km) radius of Reagan National Airport in Washington DC, which includes the airspace over the Pentagon and other government facilities. UAVs are also banned at US sports stadiums while games are being played.

Is Trump Enlisting in the War Party?

April 11, 2017

by Patrick J. Buchanan

AntiWar

By firing off five dozen Tomahawk missiles at a military airfield, our “America First” president may have plunged us into another Middle East war that his countrymen do not want to fight.

Thus far Bashar Assad seems unintimidated. Brushing off the strikes, he has defiantly gone back to bombing the rebels from the same Shayrat air base that the U.S. missiles hit.

Trump “will not stop here,” warned U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley on Sunday. “If he needs to do more, he will.”

If Trump fails to back up Haley’s threat, the hawks now cheering him on will begin deriding him as “Donald Obama.”

But if he throbs to the war drums of John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio and orders Syria’s air force destroyed, we could be at war not only with ISIS and al-Qaida, but with Syria, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah.

A Syrian war would consume Trump’s presidency.

Are we ready for that? How would we win such a war without raising a large army and sending it back into the Middle East?

Another problem: Trump’s missile attack was unconstitutional. Assad had not attacked or threatened us, and Congress, which alone has the power to authorize war on Syria, has never done so.

Indeed, Congress denied President Obama that specific authority in 2013.

What was Trump thinking? Here was his strategic rational:

“When you kill innocent children, innocent babies – babies, little babies – with a chemical gas … that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line. … And I will tell you, that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me … my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.”

Two days later, Trump was still emoting: “Beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror.”

Now, that gas attack was an atrocity, a war crime, and pictures of its tiny victims are heart-rending. But 400,000 people have died in Syria’s civil war, among them thousands of children and infants.

Have they been killed by Assad’s forces? Surely, but also by U.S., Russian, Israeli and Turkish planes and drones – and by Kurds, Iranians, Hezbollah, al-Qaida, ISIS, U.S.-backed rebels and Shiite militia.

Assad is battling insurgents and jihadists who would slaughter his Alawite brethren and the Christians in Syria just as those Copts were massacred in Egypt on Palm Sunday. Why is Assad more responsible for all the deaths in Syria than those fighting to overthrow and kill him?

Are we certain Assad personally ordered a gas attack on civilians?

For it makes no sense. Why would Assad, who is winning the war and had been told America was no longer demanding his removal, order a nerve gas attack on children, certain to ignite America’s rage, for no military gain?

Like the gas attack in 2013, this has the marks of a false flag operation to stampede America into Syria’s civil war.

And as in most wars, the first shots fired receive the loudest cheers. But if the president has thrown in with the neocons and War Party, and we are plunging back into the Mideast maelstrom, Trump should know that many of those who helped to nominate and elect him – to keep us out of unnecessary wars – may not be standing by him.

We have no vital national interest in Syria’s civil war. It is those doing the fighting who have causes they deem worth dying for.

For ISIS, it is the dream of a caliphate. For al-Qaida, it is about driving the Crusaders out of the Dar al Islam. For the Turks, it is, as always, about the Kurds.

For Assad, this war is about his survival and that of his regime. For Putin, it is about Russia remaining a great power and not losing its last naval base in the Med. For Iran, this is about preserving a land bridge to its Shiite ally Hezbollah. For Hezbollah it is about not being cut off from the Shiite world and isolated in Lebanon.

Because all have vital interests in Syria, all have invested more blood in this conflict than have we. And they are not going to give up their gains or goals in Syria and yield to the Americans without a fight.

And if we go to war in Syria, what would we be fighting for?

A New World Order? Democracy? Separation of mosque and state? Diversity? Free speech for Muslim heretics? LGBT rights?

In 2013, a great national coalition came together to compel Congress to deny Barack Obama authority to take us to war in Syria.

We are back at that barricade. An after-Easter battle is shaping up in Congress on the same issue: Is the president authorized to take us into war against Assad and his allies inside Syria?

If, after Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Yemen, we do not want America in yet another Mideast war, the time to stop it is before the War Party has us already in it. That time is now.

It’s not just Syria. Trump is ratcheting up wars across the world

April 10, 2017

by Trevor Timm

The Guardian

Donald Trump’s missile strikes on Syria have attracted worldwide attention (and disgraceful plaudits) in recent days. But much less airtime is being given to his administration’s risky and increasingly barbaric military escalations on several other fronts across the world.

Let’s put aside, for the time being, that the Trump administration openly admits it has no clue what it is going to do in Syria next. Or that key members of Congress and in the administration are clearly eager for “regime change” in Syria with no plan for the aftermath. And the fact that hardly anyone seems to care that Russia’s former president Dmitry Medvedev said over the weekend that Syrian strikes put the US “on the verge of a military clash with Russia” – a nuclear power with thousands of warheads.

As troubling as these developments are, we should be just as concerned about the explosion of civilian deaths – more than 1,000 in March alone – that have come directly as the result of the Trump administration’s other reckless military campaigns across the Middle East over the past few weeks.

Recently, US airstrikes have claimed the lives of 200 civilians in Iraq, dozens were killed in separate strikes supposedly aimed at Islamic State in Syria and several more women and children died in a raid gone awry in Yemen. Those are just a few examples of the many attacks – launched under the pretext of defeating Isis – that wreaked havoc on civilian populations as the US military ramps up its bombing campaigns in multiple counties.

At the same time, the Trump administration has been expanding official US “war zones” in Somalia and Yemen, while working to “make it easier for the Pentagon to launch counterterrorism strikes anywhere in the world” and loosening restrictions on preventing civilian deaths that were put in place by the Obama administration, as the Washington Post reported a few weeks ago.

Drone strikes, already accelerated under the Obama administration, have increased even more under Trump. Micah Zenko, who tracks the numbers at the Council on Foreign Relations, noted in March that Trump was carrying out a drone strike every 1.8 days, compared to every 5.4 days under Obama.

On the other side of the world, the Trump administration is responding to North Korea’s nuclear program with even more saber rattling, sending in US ships over the weekend to the region as some vague “show of force”.

This comes just as NBC News reported, “the National Security Council has presented President Donald Trump with options to respond to North Korea’s nuclear program – including putting American nukes in South Korea or killing dictator Kim Jong-un”. Pressure is mounting from the outside too, as the Wall Street Journal’s right wing neocon-in-residence Brett Stephens loudly called for “regime change” in North Korea two weeks ago.

And then there’s Iran, which the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol is once again saying is the ultimate “prize” for regime change, now that Trump is directly bombing Assad’s forces.

Weeks ago, Trump’s defense secretary James Mattis was reportedly planning a brazen and incredibly dangerous operation to board Iranian ships in international waters. This would have effectively been an act of war. Apparently, the only reason the Trump administration didn’t carry it out was because the plan leaked and they were forced to scuttle it – at least temporarily. But that hasn’t stopped the ratcheting up of tensions towards Iran ever since he took office.

On top of all this madness, 16 years after America’s longest war in history started, a top general has already testified to Congress that the military wants more troops in Afghanistan to break the “stalemate” there. Well before the end of the Trump administration, there will be troops fighting and dying in Afghanistan who weren’t even born when the 9/11 attacks occurred.

To further shield the public from these decisions, the Trump administration indicated a couple weeks ago they have stopped disclosing even the amount of additional troops that they are sending overseas to fight. The numbers were already being downplayed by the Obama administration and received little attention as the numbers continually creeped up over the last two years. Now, the public will have virtually no insight into what its military is doing in those countries.

It should go without saying that Bashar al-Assad is a monster and a butcher and the people of Syria have suffered incredibly over the past five years. North Korea is potentially dangerous and unpredictable, and Iran is far from innocent on the world stage. But the idea that starting or expanding wars against these countries is going to solve anything belies the last 15 years of history, where the US has intervened and overthrown leaders in country after country, only to cause even more chaos and destruction, with trillions of dollars and millions of lives lost.

With several conflicts likely brewing with countries that have significant military power, the Trump administration is putting the US – and the world – on a potentially catastrophic collision course. And so far, pushback from politicians, the media and anyone else with influence in Washington has barely been seen.

Christian Fascism: The Seizure of Power in America

April 11, 2017

by Harry von Johnston PhD.

Rush Limbaugh: “Some people are self-starters, and some people are born lazy. Some people are born victims. Some people are just born to be slaves. Some people are born to put up with somebody else making every decision for them.”

Glenn Beck: Slavery wasn’t that bad until government fouled it up

American Family Association  AFA Action has compiled a Congressional Scorecard that covers 18 votes in the U.S. House and 25 in the U.S. Senate on vital pro-family issues in the 111th Congress. Pro-family issues in the Scorecard include:

• Taxpayer funding of abortion
• Protecting free exercise of religion at publicly supported colleges
• Passage of national health care reform (ObamaCare)
• Restricting free speech in elections
• Confirmation of two controversial Supreme Court justices

Today’s hard ‘Christian’ right seeks total social, economic and political dominion. It has been very busy, engaged in packing the courts with their supporters, flooding the Internet with their dogmas and infiltrating the American legislative system with their members and fellow travelers. In essence, the Christian right has virtually captured both the legislative and judicial branches of government and is now determined to capture the executive.  The target of the ‘Christian’ right is not the Democratic Party but democracy itself.

To expand its views and demands, the ‘Christian’ right has formed a political movement; the so-called ‘Tea Party’ movement with which they fully intend to complete their take-over plots.

As these people represent a serious internal danger to American democracy, they have been under strong surveillance for the past fifteen years and very little that they have planned, or executed or hope to execute is not known to the agencies tasked with domestic surveillance.

Firstly, let us consider the overall leadership and goals of the ‘Christian’ right.

The Dominonist Plot

‘Dominion Theology’ is a grouping of extreme theoretical  theological systems with the common belief that society should be governed exclusively by the law of God as codified in the Christian Bible, to the total exclusion of any and all secular law, and any other religion, regardless of its public acceptance or world-wide membership. The two main streams of Dominion Theology are Christian Reconstructionism and ‘Kingdom Now’ theology. Though these two differ greatly in their general theological orientation (the first is strongly Reformed and Neo-Calvinistic, the second is Charismatic), they share a postmillenial vision in which the kingdom of God must be established on Earth through political and even military means, implying force.

All strains of ‘Dominion Theology’ are small minorities, and are rejected by all mainstream Christians as quite radical. However, Dominion Theology is seen by some as a subset of Dominionism, a term used by some social scientists and journalists to describe a theological form of political ideology, which they claim has broadly influenced the Christian Right in the United States, Canada, and Europe, within Protestant Christian evangelicalism and fundamentalism.

The Basics of Dominionism and the Christian right

‘Dominionism’ is based eintirely on the Biblical  text in Genesis 1:26:

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” (King James Version).

“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'” (New International Version).

And God blessed [ Adam and Eve ] and God said unto them, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” —Genesis 1:28 (King James Version).

The ‘Dominionists’ firmly and even fanatically believe that God has appointed them, and only them,  stewards and caretakers of Earth. ;”that Christians alone are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns.” That belief is the basis of   “Dominionism.” ‘

The fanatical ‘Christian’ right has one firm goal that that is  to establish dominion, or absolute physical control over America society in the name of God. A high priest of the far-right religious militant movement, D. James Kennedy, formerly head of the Coral Ridge Ministries, demanded that his followers exercise “godly dominion … over every aspect … of human society,.”

And in February, 2005, Kennedy said:

“Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost. As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors — in short, over every aspect and institution of human society.”

In 1985, the ‘Dominionists’ took clear aim at the Republican Party as the means by which they could best achieve real power in the United States. They were aided by a small but powerful group of Republican leaders who, in turn, had targeted the far-right of the more extreme of the Christian branch cults, both fundamentalist, Pentecostal and charismatic.

They were completely successful in their effort to gain a firm political control over Congress and prior to the 2006 mid-term elections, the Christian right, led by the ‘Domionists’ had taken control of both houses of Congress, the White House (George W. Bush) and were only one seat away from control of the United States Supreme Court.

The American voters were not, and never were, any sort of adherents to the fanatic right-wing ‘Christian’ political movements and after January 1, 2007, they had effectively lost control of both houses of Congress and the White House.

Five of the Republican Senators who were unseated had earlier received top opinion scores of 100% from the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family voter scorecards.  Those Senators were: Conrad Burns (R-MT), George Allen (R-VA), Rick Santorum (R-PA), James Talent (R-MO), and Mike DeWine (R-OH). Rick Santorum was the number three ranking Republican in the party. Santorum and Allen both had Presidential ambitions. (FRC and FOF are the most politically influential of ‘Dominionist’ organizations

Christian Reconstructionism is a form of theocratic dominion theology. Its leaders challenged evangelicals across a wide swath of theological beliefs to engage in a more muscular and activist form of political participation. The core theme of dominion theology is that the Bible mandates Christians to take over and “occupy” secular institutions.

A number of Christian Right leaders read what the Christian Reconstructionists were writing, and they adopted the idea of taking dominion over the secular institutions of the United States as the “central unifying ideology” of their social movement. They decided to gain political power through the Republican Party.

This does not mean most Christian Right leaders became Christian Reconstructionists. It does mean they were influenced by dominion theology. But they were influenced in a number of different ways, and some promote the theocratic aspects more militantly than others.

It helps to see the terms dominionism, dominion theology, and Christian Reconstructionism as distinct and not interchangeable. While all Christian Reconstructionists are dominionists, not all dominionists are Christian Reconstructionists.

Dominionists were very close to controlling all three branches of the federal government from which they could impose their narrow interpretation of scripture on the rest of society. People so close to full political power are not going to go away. The American people need to maintain vigilance and understand the history of how dominionists came to political power. And we need to embrace democracy with a passion — for it was voter apathy that allowed leaders like Pat Robertson to get so many dominionists elected to Congress in the first place

Anthropocentrism

A longstanding usage of dominionism among social scientists and legal scholars describes a Biblical argument in favor of anthropocentrism, a favoring of the rights and interests of humans in relation to environmentalism and/or animal rights.

Dominion Theology

Dominion Theology is a grouping of theological systemswith the common belief that society should be governed exclusively by the law of God as codified in the Bible, to the exclusion of secular law, a view also known as theonomy. The most prominent modern formulation of Dominion Theology is Christian Reconstructionism, founded by R. J. Rushdoony in the 1970s. Reconstructionists themselves use the word dominionism to refer to their belief that civil government should be controlled by Christians alone and conducted according to Biblical law. Social scientists have used the word “dominionism” to refer to adherence to Dominion Theologyas well as to the influence in the broader Christian Right of ideas inspired by Dominion Theology. Although such influence (particularly of Reconstructionism) has been described by many authors, full adherents to Reconstructionism are few and marginalized among conservative Christians.

“that Christians alone are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns”.:

1. Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe that the United States once was, and should once again be, a Christian nation. In this way, they deny the Enlightenment roots of American democracy.
2. Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity.
3. Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, insofar as they believe that the Ten Commandments, or “biblical law,” should be the foundation of American law, and that the U.S. Constitution should be seen as a vehicle for implementing Biblical principle Since its inception in February 2009, the Tea Party movement—with the help of viral videos and social networking sites, such as Facebook and Twitter—almost instantly found a large and loyal following that has gained traction and supporters.

‘Putting hospital in hospitality’: United Airlines mercilessly trolled over video firestorm

April 11, 2017

RT

The PR firestorm which engulfed United Airlines since a passenger was dragged off one of its overbooked flights shows no sign of being extinguished. In fact, the incident has inspired Twitter users to invent company mottos for the company.

The incident that sparked the debacle took place on United Flight 3411 from Chicago O’Hare International Airport to Louisville, Kentucky, on Sunday. Videos filmed by other passengers showed a man screaming and resisting as airport police forcibly removed him from his seat.

People across the world reacted with shock and outrage when the footage emerged. Since then, United’s bungled attempts to address the incident have managed only to heighten public outcry.

The videos show the man being dragged down the aisle on his back with his stomach exposed. There’s a significant amount of blood around his mouth and his body is limp.

Twitter users have been inspired by the airline’s treatment of one of its passengers to invent new company slogans and have been sharing them with the hashtag #NewUnitedAirlinesMottos.

The video has also sparked outrage in China as the man was overheard saying he was being profiled for being Chinese. The video was the number one trending topic on Chinese social media site Weibo on Tuesday, attracting more than 130 million views. Many people alleged that United were guilty of anti-Chinese discrimination and called for a boycott of the airline.

In a letter reportedly circulated to employees United Chief Executive Officer Oscar Munoz did not apologize for the way the passenger was treated, writing that he had “defied” security officers, Reuters reported.

Munoz said that he “emphatically” stands behind his employees – though he did concede there are lessons the company can learn from this situation.

“We sought volunteers and then followed our involuntary denial of boarding process (including offering up to $1,000 in compensation),” Munoz wrote. “When we approached one of these passengers to explain apologetically that he was being denied boarding, he raised his voice and refused to comply with crew member instructions.”

Using the hashtag #DontFlyUnited, many expressed their disgust with the airline and say they would not be using the company again in the future.

The Chicago Department of Aviation said in a statement that one of the security officers involved in the incident did not follow protocol and has been placed on leave pending an investigation.

Passengers on the plane said the man told United staff that he was a doctor and had to return home to his patients.

The man subsequently ran back onto the plane and another video shows him in a very distressed state repeating: “Just kill me. Kill me,” and “I have to go home.”

Saudi Arabia Paid Conservative PR Firm $90,000 to Bring Vets to DC to Lobby Against JASTA

Firm owned by National Republican Trust PAC director Scott Wheeler months late in registering with the Department of Justice

April 10, 2017

by Brian P. McGlinchey

28pages

Saudi Arabia paid a conservative political consulting firm $90,000 to bring three groups of 25 to 35 military veterans to Washington to lobby for changes to the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), according to disclosure documents recently filed with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Enacted in September 2016, JASTA cleared the way for 9/11 families and survivors to sue Saudi Arabia for its alleged support of the attacks. Action in the lawsuit resumed last month.

The firm, Capitol Media Group, is owned by Scott Wheeler, executive director of the National Republican Trust Political Action Committee and an occasional commentator on Fox News, Newsmax and the Sean Hannity Show.

Wheeler’s relationship with the Saudi monarchy is apparently one of great mutual trust: According to a box checked on the filing, their arrangement “is the result of neither a formal written contract nor an exchange of correspondence between the parties,” implying his agreement to perform substantial work and take on financial responsibilities on behalf of the kingdom was purely oral.

Registration With DOJ Was Months Overdue

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) requires registration within 10 days of agreeing to become an agent of a foreign government and before commencing work for it.

Capitol Media Group’s March 31 registration, however, came months after its efforts for Saudi Arabia began last year, but just two days after a group of 9/11 families and survivors filed a complaint with the DOJ alleging broad misconduct by lobbyists for Saudi Arabia—including the failure of many of them to register.

Rather than being signed by Wheeler, the registration and supporting documents were signed by attorney James Kevin Wholey of Phillips Lytle LLP. Wholey was chief of staff to Senate Leader Bob Dole, served on transition teams for presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, and advises Republican senators and candidates.

Capitol Media Group’s disclosure forms indicate that Wheeler took his direction from “His Excellency Abdullah (bin) Faisal,” the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

One of Prince Abdullah’s predecessors in that role, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, figures heavily in 28 pages on Saudi government links to 9/11 that were partially declassified last summer.

The Capitol Media Group disclosure may represent a new dimension of the Saudi veterans lobbying scandal: Until now, only Qorvis MSLGROUP and associated individuals and firms were known to have helped the kingdom bring veterans to Washington to advance its interests.

It’s not known if Wheeler coordinated his efforts with Qorvis, or if Wheeler’s groups of veterans stayed at the Trump International DC, as did the veterans recruited by Qorvis. (If you have information, contact us: info@28pages.org.)

What Were Veterans Told?

Likewise, there’s no indication of how Wheeler went about recruiting veterans to the cause, or whether he engaged other individuals to help him—individuals who would also have a duty to register with the DOJ.

In describing Capitol Media Group’s arrangement with Saudi Arabia on the registration forms, Wholey indicated that the firm “agreed to contact U.S. service veterans interested in obtaining and providing information regarding the Justice Against Supporters (sic) of Terrorism Act.”

FARA requires the filing of informational materials used in a lobbying campaign on behalf of a foreign power. However, when asked on the DOJ registration form if Wheeler’s activities included “the preparation or dissemination of informational materials,” Wholey responded “no.”

According to The Lobbying Manual, the term “informational materials” under FARA includes not only tangible, printed material, but “any other form that is reasonably adapted to being…disseminated or circulated among two or more persons.”

Perhaps we are to conclude that, like Wheeler’s professed negotiation of his arrangement with Prince Abdullah bin Faisal, his recruitment of scores of veterans to travel to Washington to oppose JASTA was purely oral, too.

Whatever his means of communication, Wheeler likely told veterans that if other countries passed laws similar to JASTA, individual military service members would be sued in foreign courts—a false claim that has proven highly effective for Qorvis in luring veterans to the cause.

The most important question, though, is whether Wheeler informed veterans that he was acting on behalf of Saudi Arabia and that the kingdom was funding their travel. Seven veterans brought to Washington by Qorvis have come forward to say they weren’t told that Saudi Arabia was behind the campaign.

On its registration statement, Capitol Media Group offers to provide “individual names (of participating veterans) if requested.” 28Pages.org contacted the DOJ’s FARA unit and asked it to direct Wheeler to disclose the names. Seemingly, each of them should have registered as agents of Saudi Arabia, too.

Phone calls and emails from 28Pages.org to Wheeler and Wholey have not yet been acknowledged.

Second Wheeler Entity Also Worked Against JASTA

We’d like to ask Wheeler if he recruited veterans through another entity he controls: the National Republican Trust PAC, which does not appear to have registered with the DOJ as an agent of Saudi Arabia.

Wheeler is the executive director of the PAC, which has gained notoriety for attack ads, including a particularly shameful one that urged viewers to “kill” an Islamic community center and mosque proposed for lower Manhattan. The ad portrayed the center’s developers as jihadists who wanted to build a “monument to their victory” on 9/11 and “celebrate (the) murder of 3,000 Americans.”

A separate DOJ filing of informational materials used by Qorvis on behalf of Saudi Arabia includes an open letter to members of Congress on National Republican Trust PAC letterhead.

Purportedly from 140 veterans, the November 16 letter demanded JASTA’s outright repeal, in contrast to most Saudi-facilitated messaging, which calls for amendments to the law. In lieu of actual signatures, the letter listed the veterans’ names and branches of service.

28Pages.org reached one of the individuals listed on the letter: Daniel Bazikian, who served in the Army from 1968 to 1971. He says he has donated to National Republican Trust PAC on several occasions and, while he has no recollection of supporting the anti-JASTA effort several months ago, he notes that he receives many emails inviting him to sign petitions.

After contemplating information we shared about JASTA and news of Wheeler’s financial relationship with the kingdom, Bazikian responds by quoting a biblical proverb: “It is not good to be partial to the wicked or to deprive the righteous of justice.”

A high proportion of the money raised by Wheeler’s National Republican Trust PAC is paid out to Wheeler’s Capitol Media Group. In 2015 and 2016, his PAC took in $415,883 and paid his media firm $212,485 for a variety of services, including $154,634 for “PAC management consulting,” according to our analysis of reporting data posted by the Federal Election Commission.

Did Veterans Profit by Lobbying for Saudi Arabia?

The registration documents filed with the DOJ indicate that, on December 4, January 10 and February 4, Capitol Media Group dispersed $3,000 per participating individual to groups of 25 to 35 veterans to cover “travel and lodging expenses (expenses only–no renumeration).” The firm also declares in the filing that “individuals in the groups were not compensated beyond payment of expenses, within the agreed limits.”

Wheeler’s apparent use of a flat travel allowance, however, would seem to cloud the no-renumeration claim: To the extent participants were able to spend less than $3,000 on travel and lodging, it would appear the arrangement offered the opportunity to pocket the difference—in addition to receiving a free trip to Washington.

On the same dates that Capitol Media Group says it dispensed travel cash, the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia paid Capitol Media Group three $30,000 fees, plus $72,000, $101,000 and $102,000 in “expenses and reimbursements,” ostensibly covering those travel and lodging costs. The first and last amounts are equally divisible by $3,000, seeming to indicate those trips involved 24 and 34 travelers, respectively.

Wheeler Supported 9/11 Justice Until He Could Make $90,000 Opposing it

In a June 2009 column at Townhall titled “Obama Bows and Sells Out to Saudi Royals,” Wheeler slammed the Obama administration for arguing before the Supreme Court that, under sovereign immunity laws, 9/11 families should not be permitted to sue Saudi Arabia:

The “Flatow Amendment” to the Foreign Sovereign Immunity (sic) Act was intended to give the families of terrorism victims relief by legally pursuing state sponsors of terrorism. This is the very definition of what the Saudis have done by supporting al Qaeda. One might think that there must be some reasonable explanation for Obama taking this action. There is not. It was Obama’s preference for the Saudi princes over their American victims.

Eight years and $90,000 later, Wheeler’s own preference is now crystal clear.

If you have information about Scott Wheeler’s or anyone else’s recruitment of veterans to lobby against JASTA, please contact us: info@28pages.org.

The Vicious Inheritance: Stalin’s Jewish Executioners

by Dr. Phillip L. Kushner

We mustn’t forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish

Here’s a particularly forlorn historical date: Almost 90 years ago, between the 19th and 20th of December 1917, in the midst of the Bolshevik revolution and civil war, Lenin signed a decree calling for the establishment of The All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and Sabotage, also known as Cheka.

Within a short period of time, Cheka became the largest and cruelest state security organization. Its organizational structure was changed every few years, as were its names: From Cheka to GPU, later to NKVD, and later to KGB.

We cannot know with certainty the number of deaths Cheka was responsible for in its various manifestations, but the number is surely at least 20 million, including victims of the forced collectivization, the hunger, large purges, expulsions, banishments, executions, and mass death at Gulags.

Whole population strata were eliminated: Independent farmers, ethnic minorities, members of the bourgeoisie, senior officers, intellectuals, artists, labor movement activists, “opposition members” who were defined completely randomly, and countless members of the Communist party itself.

In his new, highly praised book “The War of the World,” historian Niall Ferguson writes that no revolution in the history of mankind devoured its children with the same unrestrained appetite as did the Soviet revolution. In his book on the Stalinist purges, Tel Aviv University ‘s Dr. Igal Halfin writes that Stalinist violence was unique in that it was directed internally.

Lenin, Stalin, and their successors could not have carried out their deeds without wide-scale cooperation of disciplined “terror officials,” cruel interrogators, snitches, executioners, guards, judges, perverts, and many bleeding hearts who were members of the progressive Western Left and were deceived by the Soviet regime of horror and even provided it with a kosher certificate.

All these things are well-known to some extent or another, even though the former Soviet Union ‘s archives have not yet been fully opened to the public. But who knows about this? Within Russia itself, very few people have been brought to justice for their crimes in the NKVD’s and KGB’s service. The Russian public discourse today completely ignores the question of “How could it have happened to us?” As opposed to Eastern European nations, the Russians did not settle the score with their Stalinist past.

And us, the Jews? An Israeli student finishes high school without ever hearing the name “Genrikh Yagoda,” the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU’s deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin’s collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system. After Stalin no longer viewed him favorably, Yagoda was demoted and executed, and was replaced as chief hangman in 1936 by Yezhov, the “bloodthirsty dwarf.”

Yezhov was not Jewish but was blessed with an active Jewish wife. In his book “Stalin: Court of the Red Star”, Jewish historian Sebag Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror, when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded by beautiful, young Jewish women.

Stalin’s close associates and loyalists included member of the Central Committee and Politburo Lazar Kaganovich. Montefiore characterizes him as the “first Stalinist” and adds that those starving to death in Ukraine , an unparalleled tragedy in the history of human kind aside from the Nazi horrors and Mao’s terror in China , did not move Kaganovich.

Many Jews sold their soul to the devil of the Communist revolution and have blood on their hands for eternity. We’ll mention just one more: Leonid Reichman, head of the NKVD’s special department and the organization’s chief interrogator, who was a particularly cruel sadist.

In 1934, according to published statistics, 38.5 percent of those holding the most senior posts in the Soviet security apparatuses were of Jewish origin. They too, of course, were gradually eliminated in the next purges. In a fascinating lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin described the waves of soviet terror as a “carnival of mass murder,” “fantasy of purges”, and “essianism of evil.” Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history.

The Jews active in official communist terror apparatuses (In the Soviet Union and abroad) and who at times led them, did not do this, obviously, as Jews, but rather, as Stalinists, communists, and “Soviet people.” Therefore, we find it easy to ignore their origin and “play dumb”: What do we have to do with them? But let’s not forget them. My own view is different. I find it unacceptable that a person will be considered a member of the Jewish people when he does great things, but not considered part of our people when he does amazingly despicable things.

Even if we deny it, we cannot escape the Jewishness of “our hangmen,” who served the Red Terror with loyalty and dedication from its establishment. After all, others will always remind us of their origin.

Today, there are several millions of Jews living in the United States. The bulk of us are Reformed Jews. Nearly all of us consider ourselves to be Americans. We and our children are proud to have served in the American military and even prouder to be citizens of the one nation that has welcomed refugee Jews, fleeing from European persecutions, and permitted them free access to American society.

A much smaller percentage of American Jews are Zionists. They view themselves as Jews first, Israeli’s second and, perhaps, Americans third. Their complete allegiance is to the state of Israel and not to America. They send money to Israel and, when they have access to it, military and commercial secrets. They are the Pollards of this country. They do not represent the rest of us at all.

The State of Israel has always been a Zionist state. It was born in violence and hatred. Jews, mostly from Poland, invaded the Palestine area, killing and maiming anyone who stood in their way: Arabs, British soldiers, civilians and even high UN officials. Bombings, bank robberies, arsons and mass murder attended the birth of this state. One man, Menachim Begin, blew up a hotel full of people and was later made Chief of State!

The Zionists have fastened themselves onto the instruments of power in the United States, feeling, rightly, that American soldiers, and most importantly, money, will nurture their state and protect it from their many enemies.

Instead of making efforts to co-exist with their neighbors, Israel has constantly attacked the impoverished Palestinian Arabs and killed as many of them as they could. The IDF has had no problem murdering Arab men, women and children. It has had no problem destroying the homes and businesses of the reviled Arabs and their sole, stated aim, is to drive the Arabs out of their homes so that Jews can take them over.

How redolent this is of the attacks by the Nazis, the Poles and the Russians in recent times past! It is true that the abused child becomes the abusing parent and Israel has in truth become the National Socialists of the Middle East.

The Zionists have infiltrated the American government to a remarkable degree. They have gained an astonishing hold in the American mass media. CNN, Time Warner, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Newsweek and Time magazines and a host of other media giants are either owned outright by Jews or are under the control of Jews.

These mighty organs daily pour out a great stream of pro-Israel commentary while Jewish organizations such as the ADL and various other pressure groups, make constant, threatening demands on a subservient American legislative entity.

The fact that there are many Jews in America that view such blatant and ruthless manipulation with horror is never reported in the media.

We are the silent Jews although we outnumber the loud ones twenty to one. Our views, those of tolerance and moderation, are never seen in the media but the frantic, fanatic views of the hysterical Zionists receive daily, slavish attention.

The American pubic is not stupid but it has no voice to express its concerns. Faked opinion polls, pious statements about Israel as “America’s best ally” can be seen daily in all the major branches of the media.

Believe me, Israel is not America’s best ally. Through the Israel lobby, American leaders and legislators do as they are told. The consequences of refusal or worse, opposition to Zionist demands is orchestrated oblivion. Furious because President Harry Truman blocked the sale of weapons of destruction to the rampaging Zionists in 1948, Jewish money backed Thomas Dewey. An assassination attempt was launched by the Stern Gang against Truman but failed.

The British, the United Nations and the United States eventually let the Zionists have their murderous way in Palestine because they grew tired of the constant acts of savage terrorism which seemed to inspire the terrorists to even greater infamies.

These miserable, vicious and ideological creatures have nothing to do with the great majority of American Jews. We deplore their savage, manipulative behavior because we know from bitter experience that eventually the American public will become aroused and infuriated. When that dismal day comes, and it will come, all the rest of us will be held to account for the savage brutes like Sharon and his butchers. We will become the eternal victims of a population enraged by the ruthless and self-serving manipulations of a small, detestable handful of chronic fanatics. We will, at last, lose the respect of our colleagues, our neighbors and our friends and again, the eternal wandering will begin.

The pro-Israel lobby is an enormous and very powerful force in American politics; the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, is the No. 1 foreign-policy lobby in Washington and the fourth most powerful lobby in Washington, according to Fortune Magazine. Other powerful and influential pro-Israel groups include the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA).

Is propaganda which involves exaggeration and distortion of facts, however worthy the cause for which it is used, ever justified? Is fiction, labeled with the brand of authenticity, ever impossible?