Wednesday, December 31, 2003

Martin Kramer: Said's Splash

As opposed to Said's dishonesty vis-a-vis the stories
about himself and about 'Palestine', this long article
by Martin Kramer discusses his scholarship.

On the right bar, near the bottom are links to other articles
by Kramer on Said.

See the article at

Edward Said--False Prohet of Palestine

Justus Weiner

The article covers the following:

o A Mythical Childhood in Jerusalem
o Unraveling the Mystery
o An Avatar of Palestinian Suffering
o Evicting Martin Buber
o Said's Network of Friends
o The Response of Independent Journalists
o Generating a Smokescreen
o Should Intellectuals Lie?

See the complete article at

Some History on Palestinian Violence Against Americans

The following is an excerpt from Daniel Pipes' weblog. At the end of the
article in information on getting on his list.


Don't Rely on the Media: Palestinian Authority violence against Americans.

Is there any subject that the mainstream media treats worse than the
Palestinian Authority (PA)? Case in point: placing the Oct. 15 murder of
three American security personnel in Gaza. Here is USA Today's comment
( , representative
of media assessments of the topic: "the killings reflected a potentially
dangerous new escalation in a conflict that for the past half-century has
largely treated U.S. officials as bystanders. Terrorist Palestinian groups
have generally avoided attacks on U.S. officials."

To find out the real situation, one has to go to such sources at the
Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA),
Palestinian Media Watch, and The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

CAMERA's Eric Rozenman points to a long history of the PLO targeting
American officials (Ambassador to Sudan Cleo A. Noel Jr. and his colleague
George C. Moore in March 1973; U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Frances E. Meloy
and his colleague Robert O. Waring in January 1977). It notes that
approximately 103 American citizens have been killed by Palestinian
terrorists in Israel and the disputed territories since 1968; and at least
39 Americans have been murdered in the past three years. CAMERA concludes
that "reports stating that the three security guards murdered on October 15
are the first Americans killed by Palestinian terrorists, either following
September 29, 2000, or before, are simply wrong."

Palestinian Media Watch's Itamar Marcus argues
( that "In its
English statements, the PA presents itself as an American ally, while its
Arabic messages incite its people to hate and kill Americans," then
documents this statement with a list of hair-raising quotes, calling on
Saddam Hussein to kill American soldiers, threats against Americans, and
promises that the United States will be destroyed. PMW concludes that the
American security personnel were murdered "by Palestinians fulfilling their
role in their war against Americans, as they have been taught by their
leaders, through years of hate-mongering and calls for violence against

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy's Matthew Levitt provides
extensive background in his "Terrorist Attacks against Western Officials in
Gaza, The West Bank, and Israel." He quotes Palestinian threats (an al-Aqsa
Brigades leader: "Now, American targets are the same as Israeli targets"),
points to U.S. government expectations of such attacks (George Tenet in
February 2002: if Palestinian groups "feel that U.S. actions are threatening
their existence, they may begin targeting Americans directly"), and recalls
Palestinian attacks on other Western personnel (Canadian and Danish, in
particular). He concludes that the Oct. 15 incident was "neither
unprecedented nor unexpected."

Unfortunately, this means that if you read just the newspaper – never mind
only watching television – you basically don't know the score on an issue as
complex and historical fraught as Palestinian violence against Americans. To
be well informed requires reading the work of think tanks and advocacy
organizations. (October 18, 2003) Permalink

To see the Daniel Pipes archive, go to

To subscribe to or unsubscribe from this list, go to
(Daniel Pipes sends out a mailing of his writings 2-3 times a week.)

Sign up for related (but non-duplicating) e-mail services:
Middle East Forum (media alerts, event reports, MEQ articles):
Middle East Intelligence Bulletin (monthly publication):

You may freely forward this information, but on condition that you send
the text as an integral whole along with complete information about its
author, date, and source.

A Brief History of Palestinian Attacks on Americans

The following information is presented as a public
service. It may be reprinted without charge -- with
attribution. If you would like to be added or removed from
this mailing list, you may send an email to this address.
We have recently updated our list, so if you hav
inadvertently been placed on it when you have asked to be
removed in the past, we apologize and will make any
requested changes.

MYTH #117

"Palestinian terrorists only attack Israelis; they never
assault Americans."


The PLO has a long history of brutal violence against
innocent civilians of many nations, including the United
States. Palestinian Muslim terrorist groups are a more
recent phenomenon, but they have not spared Americans
either. Here are a few examples of Palestinian terrorist
incidents involving American citizens:

*More than three dozen Americans were among the
passengers who were held hostage when the Popular Front
for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked four jets
in September 1970.

*In 1972, the PLO attempted to mail letter bombs to
President Nixon, former Secretary of State William Rogers
and Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird.

*On March 2, 1973, members of the PLO murdered U.S.
Ambassador to the Sudan Cleo Noel and chargé d'affaires
George Moore. The killers were captured by Sudan and
admitted they had gotten orders directly from the PLO.
U.S. intelligence officials were believed to also have
evidence directly tying Yasser Arafat to the killings, but
for unknown reasons suppressed. All the terrorists were
released (Neil Livingstone and David Halevy. Inside the
PLO, Readers Digest Press, 1990, pp. 276-288).

*On March 11, 1978, PLO terrorists landed on
Israel's coast and murdered an American photographer
walking along the beach. The terrorists then commandeered
a bus along the coastal road, shooting and lobbing
grenades from the bus window at passersby. When Israeli
troops stopped their deadly ride, 34 civilians were dead
and another 82 wounded.

*In October 1985, a PLF terror squad commanded by
Abul Abbas hijacked the ocean liner Achille Lauro. Leon
Klinghoffer, a wheelchair-bound American passenger was

* On April 9, 1995, a Hamas suicide bomber blew up an
Israeli bus killing eight people, including 20-year-old
Brandeis University student Alisa Flatow.

*August 9, 2001, Shoshana Yehudit Greenbaum, 31, was
among 15 people killed in a suicide bombing at the Sbarro
pizzeria in downtown Jerusalem. Hamas and the Islamic
Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

*July 31, 2002, a bomb exploded at the Hebrew
University cafeteria killing seven and wounding 80. Five
Americans were among the dead.

*June 11, 2003, a bus bombing in Jerusalem killed
one American and inured the daughter of New Jersey State
Senator Robert Singer.

*June 20, 2003, a shooting attack on a car driving
through the West Bank killed Tzvi Goldstein, 47 and
injured his father, mother, and wife.

*August 19, 2003, suicide bombing on a bus in
Jerusalem killed five Americans, including children aged
9, 3, and 3 months, an 11-year-old American was injured.

*October 15, 2003, Palestinian terrorists ambushed
an American convoy in the Gaza Strip killing three U.S.
citizens on contract to the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv.

Source: Myths & Facts Online -- A Guide to the
Arab-Israeli Conflict by Mitchell G. Bard, To order a copy of
the paperback edition of Myths and Facts, click HERE.

Dr. Bard is available for speaking engagements and
interviews on this and other topics.

You can help AICE continue this work by becoming a sponsor
of the Jewish Virtual Library. Click here for more

Diplomatic and Legal Aspects of the Settlement Issue

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
Institute for Contemporary Affairs

JERUSALEM ISSUE BRIEF Vol. 2, No. 16 19 January 2003

Diplomatic and Legal Aspects of the Settlement Issue
Jeffrey Helmreich

One may legitimately support or challenge Israeli settlements in the disputed territories, but they are not illegal, and they have neither the size, the population, nor the placement to seriously impact upon the future status of the disputed territories and their Palestinian population centers. The outbreak of the Al Aqsa Intifada in the fall of 2000 began to erode the orthodoxy that settlements were driving Palestinian anger and blocking peace. New York Times foreign affairs analyst Thomas L. Friedman wrote in October 2000: "This war is sick but it has exposed some basic truths." In particular, Friedman wrote, "To think that the Palestinians are only enraged about settlements is also fatuous nonsense. Talk to the 15-year-olds. Their grievance is not just with Israeli settlements, but with Israel. Most Palestinians simply do not accept that the Jews have any authentic right to be here. For this reason, any Palestinian state that comes into being should never be permitted to have any heavy weapons, because if the Palestinian had them today, their extremists would be using them on Tel Aviv."

In recent months, however, the settlements have re-emerged as an explanation for the failure of nearly every ceasefire and diplomatic effort to quell the conflict. The Mitchell Report in 2001 and recent remarks by visiting U.S.senators have raised the question of settlements (though not directly blaming them for the conflict), and the UN General Assembly concluded its 2002 session with over 15 agenda items condemning "illegal" Israeli settlements. Settlements have also become a focal point in the Quartet'sDecember 2002 "road map."

In fact, since their establishment nearly three decades ago, settlements have been the cause celebre of critics seeking to attribute the persistenceof the conflict to Israeli policy. The criticism falls into two categories: moral/political arguments that settlements are "obstacles to peace," and legal claims that settlements are illegitimate or a violation of international norms. The pervasiveness of these claims masks the fact that, upon closer scrutiny, they are false, and they hide the true source of grievances and ideological fervor that fuel this conflict.

Read the entire article at

U.S. charges Israel 7% on loan guarantees

For those that argue that Israel gets a free ride.

U.S. charges Israel 7% on loan guarantees
By Yoram Gavison for Ha'Aretz

The U.S. is charging Israel a fee of 7 percent on its bonds issued under the loan guarantee program. The charges were discovered in a Bank of Israel report on macroeconomic and political developments released last week.

According to the report, 7 percent of the receipts from the Israeli government's bond issues is to be transferred to U.S. treasury in order to compensate it for the risk of the issue (known as scoring). This is considered to be are latively high rate for bond issues.

The value of the total bond issue is $3 billion or NIS 13.575 billion, which brings the fees to some NIS 1 billion, representing an additional 0.3 percent in annual interest costs for Israel.

The treasury publicized the results of its bond issue in the middle of September, and stated that it was pleased that the interest rate for the 30 year issue was 5.58 percent, only 38 basis points (0.38 percent) over the interest on U.S. government bonds. The 20 year bonds, which raised most of the funds - $1.15 billion out of a total of $1.6 billion raised on the issue to date - were sold at an interest rate of 5.53 percent, representing a premium of only 33 basis points over U.S. government rates for similar notes. However, the effective interest rate premium for the bonds including the fees paid to the U.S. treasury comes to 70 basis points.

The report also reveals how these fees were accounted for in the budget.

(the entire article can be read at

All of the Middle East Peace Plans and Initiatives

A practical guide to Middle East peace plans and grassroots initiatives
By Ellis Shuman
November 28, 2003PM

Ariel Sharon's son MK Omri Sharon traveled to London this week for talks with Palestinian officials aimed at advancing the "road map" peace initiative. Sharon hinted he would take "unilateral steps" if no agreement with the Palestinians was reached. Next week the unofficial "Geneva Accord" will be signed in a star-studded ceremony. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell angered Israel by announcing his willingness to meet with the"architects" of the Geneva Accord, and possibly with the initiators of the Peoples' Voice as well.

A plethora of peace plans and grassroots initiatives makes it hard tounderstand the Middle East peace process. Here's a guide.

Read outlines of all of the plans at

Online Version of the Suppressed EU Anti-Semitism Report

There is a version of the report online at Internet Haganah that is divided up and interlinked to make it easier to read:

It is broken down into the following sections:

[One country not mentioned is Australia; however there have been recent attackson Jews there too. See]

Executive Summary
Country Reports
The Netherlands
United Kingdom

The Legal Obstacles to Uprooting Settlements

The Legal Obstacles to Uprooting Settlements
Legal Commentator: Heavy Legal Obstacles On The Road ToUprooting Communities
17:08 Dec 23, '03 / 28 Kislev 5764

"It's not impossible, but it requires special legislation- a very long legal process." So says left-wing Israel Broadcasting Authority legal commentator Moshe Negbi regarding the possibility of expelling Jewish residents from their homes in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. All in all, Negbi was not very "optimistic" about the chances for doing so. Excerpts from his interview on Israel Radio this past Thursday:

"It's important to emphasize, if we're talking about relocating communities, it must be remembered that this has a legal aspect that is bound, of course, with the residents' rights. Relocating towns is not an impossible mission - we remember that it happened before in Sinai following the peace agreement with Egypt - but it is avery hard mission [in that it] requires legislation -possibly even legislation that requires a special majorityof 61 MKs. This is a very very long legal process. Let's remember that the evacuation of the towns in Sinai took five years, more or less. And this time it's more complex."

Read the entire article at

Holocaust Denial: A Global Survey - 2003

by Alex Grobman & Rafael Medoff

The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies
On the campus of Gratz College
7605 Old York RoadMelrose Park, PA 19027
tel (215) 635-5622 / fax (215) 635-5644

Table of Contents

North America
Middle East
New Zealand

Executive Summary: Holocaust Denial - A Global Survey:2003

Holocaust denial activity decreased in the United States during 2003, but continued full force in government-sponsored media in Arab countries and the Palestinian Authority.

The decrease in the United States was due to the ongoing legal conflicts between the two major U.S. promoters of Holocaust denial, the Institute for Historical Review and Liberty Lobby founder Willis Carto. At the same time, British Holocaust-denier David Irving maintained an active presence on the U.S. lecture circuit throughout the year, speaking in at least twenty-five cities.

Other notable developments in 2003:

* For the first time ever, a Holocaust denier was invited to the White House. Palestinian Authority prime minister Mahmoud Abbas, author of a book denying the Holocaust, visited the White House in July 2003.

* A prominent former United States Senator, Mike Gravel (D-Alaska), appeared as a speaker at the June 2003 conference of a Holocaust-deniers' publication, The Barnes Review.

* The leader of a major Muslim country, Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohammed, publicly affirmed that the Holocaust occurred. However, he did so in a speech alleging Jewish control of the world, and it was that theme, not his acknowledgment of the Holocaust, which attracted attention.

About the Authors

Alex Grobman, Ph.D., president of the Institute for Contemporary Jewish Life and the Brenn Institute, is co-author (with Michael Sherman) of Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It? and author of Rekindling the Flame: Jewish Chaplains in the U.S. Army and the Survivors of the Holocaust. He was the founding director of the St. Louis Holocaust Museum and Learning Center , and served as director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles where he was the founding editor-in chief of the Simon Wiesenthal Annual. He edited Genocide: Critical Issues of the Holocaust; Anne Frank in Historical Perspective; and Those Who Dared: Rescuers and Rescued.

Rafael Medoff, Ph.D., is director of The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies. He is associate editor of the scholarly journal American Jewish History and Visiting Scholar at Purchase College - The State University of New York. He is the author of seven books on the Holocaust, Zionism, and the history of American Jewry, the most recent of which (co-authored with David S. Wyman) is A Race Against Death: Peter Bergson, America, and the Holocaust. His essays have appeared in numerous scholarly journals, encyclopedias, and other reference volumes, including Holocaust & Genocide Studies, the Journal of Genocide Research, and Holocaust Studies Annual.

The entire survey can be viewed at

Official Web Site for the Security Fence

The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs now has a site dedicated to the Security Fence at

The site describes itself as follows:

This website covers the various aspects of the security fence project. Hereyou will find comprehensive information on the Israeli point of view, answers to Palestinian claims, background material and analyses which will help you get to the root of this complex issue and to understand the true nature of this fence: a temporary and reversible line of defense - not a"Berlin wall"; a necessary life-saving fence that takes into account humanitarian considerations - not an "apartheid wall".
In addition to the following web pages, we invite you to watch a Power-Point presentation on the security fence issue.

The Mass Psychology of Judeophobia

From The American Thinker (

The outdated and inaccurate euphemism “anti-Semitism” is on its way out, to be replaced by much preferable neologism “Judeophobia,” a phenomenon mostly identified with the left. Contemporary hatred of Jews in the West is primarily found among so-called progressives. An important discourse on Euro-Judeophobia is newly available in English, courtesy of Frontpage Magazine. Pilar Rahola, a Catalan from Barcelona, is a noted figure on the Spanish left who has opened her eyes, and speaks honestly about reality as she sees it. A feminist, Rahola has something of the tone of a Camille Paglia about her: someone who doesn’t mind probing deeply into the modern mentality, regardless of where it takes her.

Her analysis of why the European left is so taken with the Palestinian cause, and so eager to overlook its sins, while engaging in hypercritical examination of Israel, is telling. Here are just a few of the gems she scatters before us.

You can read the entire interview at

U.S. Attempts to Prevent Terror Victims from Suing Terrorist Regimes


December 29, 2003
Contact: (212) 481-1500 Attn: NEWS EDITOR
Terror Victims' Rights at Risk in U.S. Courts

NEW YORK The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) and Stephen Flatow, father of terror victim Alisa Flatow, are deeply concerned about theBush administration's new attempt to prevent victims of terrorism from suinggovernments that sponsor terrorism.

Officials of the State Department and Justice Department presentedarguments to this effect before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Districtof Columbia on December 15 that would prevent victims of terror from suinggovernments that sponsor terror.

Read the whole article at

Monday, November 17, 2003

The Inextricable Link Between Anti-Semitism and Anti-Americanism

On Hating the Jews
The inextricable link between anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism.
Monday, November 17, 2003 12:01 a.m. EST

No hatred has as rich and as lethal a history as anti-Semitism--"the longest hatred," as the historian Robert Wistrich has dubbed it. Over the millennia, anti-Semitism has infected a multitude of peoples, religions and civilizations, in the process inflicting a host of terrors on its Jewish victims. But while there is no disputing the impressive reach of the phenomenon, there is surprisingly little agreement about its cause or causes.

Indeed, finding a single cause would seem too daunting a task--the incidence of anti-Semitism is too frequent, the time span too broad, the locales too numerous, the circumstances too varied. No doubt that is why some scholars have come to regard every outbreak as essentially unique, denying that a straight line can be drawn from the anti-Semitism of the ancient world to that of today. Whether it is the attack on the Jews of Alexandria in the year 38 or the ones that took place 200 years earlier in ancient Jerusalem, whether it is the Dreyfus affair in 1890s France or Kristallnacht in late-1930s Germany--each incident is seen as the outcome of a distinctive mix of political, social, economic, cultural and religious forces that preclude the possibility of a deeper or recurring cause.

A less extreme version of this same approach identifies certain patterns of anti-Semitism, but only within individual and discrete "eras." In particular, a distinction is drawn between the religiously based hatred of the Middle Ages and the racially based hatred of the modern era. Responsibility for the anti-Semitic waves that engulfed Europe from the age of Constantine to the dawn of the Enlightenment is laid largely at the foot of the church and its offshoots, while the convulsions that erupted over the course of the next three centuries are viewed as the byproduct of the rise of virulent nationalism.

Obviously, separating out incidents or eras has its advantages, enabling researchers to focus more intensively on specific circumstances and to examine individual outbreaks from start to finish. But what such analyses may gain in local explanatory power they sacrifice in comprehensiveness. Besides, if every incident or era of anti-Semitism is largely distinct from every other, how to explain the cumulative ferocity of the phenomenon?

Read the rest of the article at:

Sunday, November 16, 2003

Secret Government Memo On Cooperation Between Hussein and bin Laden.

Case Closed
From the November 24, 2003 issue: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

by Stephen F. Hayes
11/24/2003, Volume 009, Issue 11

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.

According to the memo--which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points--Iraq-al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which insome cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis.

Read the rest of the article

Friday, November 14, 2003

The Difference Between Their Hasbara and Ours

Besides the fact the Pro-Palestinian supporters have come out stronger, I wonder if there is an intrinsic difference between how they are able to present their views and how we do it.

What they want to present can be boiled down to a picture, such a crying mother whose house has been destroyed by the IDF (no need to mention in a caption that their were suicide bomb belts hidden under the bed). It appeals to emotion and seems real. And they have great bumper stickers ("Save Palestine").

What do we offer? Articles and long-winded editorials (an exageration, but not far off the mark, I think); expositions of the history of Israel, discussions of why settlements are legal and why the occupied territory is at best merely disputed according to international law--instead of stories about real people...boring. People cannot make their way through it and tend not to trust it.

Now we are getting showing how Israel reacted to 9/11 contrasting with Palestinians celebrating. No wonder Pro-Palestinians are crying (whining?) foul. Is the next step a bumper sticker ("Stop the Palestinian Murder of Americans!")

But the problem is, if their pictures ring true and our pictures ring true, if we both have clever bumper stickers--won't that merely give the edge to the "let's be even-handed; its a cycle-of-violence" crowd?

Thursday, November 13, 2003

Dowd Flip-Flop

Everyone is entitled to change their opinion. But it is still worth noting...

From Andrew Sullivan's Blog:

...So it's helpful to remember Dowd's response to the threat of WMDs from Saddam when Clinton was in power. Here's a column written six years ago this month. Guess what her concern was? That the Clinton administration was too weak to deal with a strongman like Saddam! A trip down memory lane:

Suddenly there are fears about Iraqi crop dusters spraying death on the Mall, about the nation's capital being another Nagasaki... Having covered President Bush's efforts to demonize the Iraqis, I understood the motive behind Secretary Cohen's alarmist performance art. We are talking about a world-class monster who strangles people with his bare hands, gasses entire villages, assassinates members of his family and uses babies as shields. Wondering if the Clinton crowd has the spine for its first big crisis is giving me a bad case of the jits. The suspicion lingers about these alumni of make-love-not-war that they are not entirely comfortable with things military ... Even with George Bush's sometimes scattered style and Colin Powell's inhibition about the use of force, the Bush-Baker-Cheney-Powell-Schwarzkopf team still gave the impression of command ... I want Madeleine Albright, the most virile of the lot, to stop wearing picture hats around the Mideast. Saddam Hussein is not threatening Ascot. I fret that toothy Tony Blair is no Iron Lady.

And on and on. All this reveals is that it's a little futile attempting to criticize Maureen Dowd. She'll write anything that comes into her head at the moment. There's no argument, no thread of consistency that I can glean from one moment to the next. If the Clintonites are in power, they're wimps in the face of Saddam's threat; if the Bushies are in power, they're testosterone-crazed imperialists, hyping Saddam's threat. We should confront/appease Saddam right now/never, because the threat is real/bogus, imminent/non-existent and we have to do something/hang loose before all hell lets loose/or I get off deadline. But my favorite part of the column is the opener:

I was peaceably eating my penne at lunch the other day when my friend, another reporter, told me he thought Washington was in imminent danger of being gassed, germed, VX'ed or anthraxed.
Yes, imminent! Bush may never have said it. Rummy may never have believed it. But Ms Dowd wrote it six years ago - and now blames the Bushies for allegedly agreeing with her.

NYT Flip-Flop

From Today's Best of the Web

Breaking News From Nine Months Ago

"President Bush sketched an expansive vision last night of what he expects to accomplish by a war in Iraq. Instead of focusing on eliminating weapons of mass destruction, or reducing the threat of terror to the United States, Mr. Bush talked about establishing a 'free and peaceful Iraq' that would serve as a 'dramatic and inspiring example' to the entire Arab and Muslim world, provide a stabilizing influence in the Middle East and even help end the Arab-Israeli conflict."--editorial, New York Times, Feb. 27

"The White House recently began shifting its case for the Iraq war from the embarrassing unconventional weapons issue to the lofty vision of creating an exemplary democracy in Iraq."--editorial, New York Times, Nov. 13

Have You Noticed That...

1. The media is liberal and presents news in a way that is slanted against the leader of the country and it's policies.

2. Citizens visit and show sympathy with foreign countries against whom we intended and carried out military action.

3. There is increased yelling and screaming by members of opposing parties.

4. Congress shows increasing partisan in-fighting and undermine political opponents.

5. Peace movements organize large protests against the government.

6. The country is viewed by other countries as a danger to world peace.

7. The country is threatened and attacked by terrorists.

8. Intellectuals and experts in history and political science stress the need to understand and sympathize with the roots of these militants.

9. The US military is now threatening to destroy the homes of Iraqi terrorists

Gee, the US is looking more and more like Israel each day...