Wednesday 31 October 2007

Religious comparison 2007.

This year Islam's and Judaism's holiest holidays overlapped for 10 days.
During that period, Muslims racked up 397 dead bodies in 94 terror attacks across 10 countries ... while Jews worked on their 159th Nobel Prize.

Monday 22 October 2007

Who needs Israel?

Who needs Israel anyway?

By Pat Boone

Many Western and European political leaders, having heard the deprecations and the determination to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, from the likes of Palestinian Yasser Arafat, Saudi Arabian Osama bin Laden, Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and so many other power brokers in the region have come dangerously close to deciding that little Israel is the "thorn in the side" of world order.

The next logical thought is: "Who needs Israel? Let her be erased, her people dispersed (or whatever), and the Middle East can settle comfortably into a harmonious Islamic community of states. Problem solved!"

What folly. What suicidal blindness. I just returned from a momentous event in our nation's capital. An organization called Christians United for Israel, or CUFI, convened 4,000 people from all 50 states in several days of briefings and strategy sessions, culminating in an exhilarating, rousing rally in the D.C. Convention Center featuring Jewish leaders and top Christian ministers celebrating the things we hold in common and the spiritual bonds that unite us. The next day, several thousand of the participants fanned out over Washington and Capitol Hill, lobbying virtually every representative and senator on behalf of Israel and its sovereignty.

Why? Couldn't we all see this is an exercise in futility - an unnecessary bother that we'd all be better off if Israel didn't exist? No, we all see clearly that the world needs Israel - The whole world. What do I mean? Consider:
Israel, the 100th smallest country, with less than 1/1000th of the world's population, can make claim to an astounding number of society's advances in almost every direction!
· Intel's new multi-core processor was completely developed at facilities in Israel.
· In addition, our ubiquitous cell phone was developed in Israel by Motorola, which has its largest development center in the little land.

· Voice over Internet Protocol (V0IP) technology was pioneered in Israel.
· AirTrain JFK the 8.1-mile light rail labyrinth that connects JFK Airport to NYC's mass transit is protected by the Israeli-developed Nextiva surveillance system.
· Bill Gates calls Israel, "a major player in the high-tech world."
· Most of Windows NT operating system was developed by Microsoft-Israel;
· The Pentium MMX Chip technology was designed in Israel at Intel;
· Both Microsoft and Cisco built their only R&D facilities outside the U.S. in Israel;
· In addition, with more than 3,000 high-tech companies and start-ups, Israel has the highest concentration of high-tech companies in the world apart from the Silicon Valley.

Get this: Israel leads the world in the number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, with 145 per 10,000, as opposed to 85 in the U.S., over 70 in Japan, and less than 60 in Germany. With over 25 percent of its workforce employed in technical professions, Israel places first in this category as well! It goes on and on.
The Weidman Institute of Science has been voted "the best university in the world for life scientists to conduct research." Israeli researchers have:
· Discovered the molecular trigger that causes psoriasis.
· Developed the Ex-Press shunt to provide relief for glaucoma sufferers.
· Unveiled a blood test that diagnoses heart attacks ... by telephone!
· Found a combination of electrical stimulation and chemotherapy that makes cancerous metastases disappear and developed the first fully computerized, no-radiation, diagnostic instrumentation for breast cancer!

· Designed the first flight system to protect passenger and freighter aircraft against missile attack.
· Developed the first ingestible video camera so small it fits inside a pill used to view the small intestine from the inside, enabling doctors to diagnose cancer and digestive disorders!
· Perfected a new device that directly helps the heart pump blood, an innovation with the potential to save lives among those with congestive heart failure, synchronizing the heart's mechanical operations through a sophisticated system of sensors.
These are only a few of Israel's recent contributions to the welfare of the world. There are just too many to list here. Water shortage, global warming, space travel, anti-virus, anti-smallpox, blood pressure, solar power, paralysis, diabetes, data storage these and hundreds more are being addressed by Israel's scientists. They're pioneering in DNA research, using tiny strands to create human transistors that can literally build themselves and playing an important role in identifying a defective gene that causes a rare and usually fatal disease in Arab infants!


· Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin;
· It has the largest number of startup companies globally, second only to the U.S.;
· It is No. 2 in the world for venture capital funds, financing all these advances;
· Its $100 billion economy is larger than all of its immediate neighbors combined;
· Moreover, Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East.
· In addition, while it maintains, by far, the highest average living standards and per-capita income, exceeding even those of the UK, Israel is the largest immigrant-absorbing nation on earth, relative to its population. It is truly an unparalleled marvel of our time.

So, what's the point of all this?

Simply that the very idea of eradicating or even displacing Israel from its historic home is suicidal to the rest of the world, not just her Arabic neighbors. Though there are ominous biblical consequences pronounced on those who "curse Israel," there are also wonderful blessings promised those who "bless" her and we're seeing those real, practical, humanitarian blessings proliferate around the world, blessing all humanity.

Stop just for a second and imagine a world today that never knew Israel. And then go further: Given their living standards, ideologies and attitudes toward all who dare to disagree with them, imagine what our world would be like if Israel's enemies held sway. Would you rather live in an Iran, Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan? Or an Israel?

Who needs Israel? Let's be honest. We all do.

Sunday 21 October 2007

...And we will be asked to put our security in the hands of Abbas..

News has just broken that Israel's Shin Bet uncovered a plot to assassinate Ehud Olmert during an August visit to Jerico to meet Palestinian President Abbas.
Israel's elite intelligence and security unit, Shin Bet, obtained information of a planned attempt on the life of Prime Minister Olmert set for 6th August. Two of the plotters were apprehended by Shin Bet field officers.
Israel then transfered the intelligence to the Palestinian Authority whose forces promptly arrested the three remaining members.
All five confessed to their involvement in the attempted terror attack against Israel's leader.
What was surprising was that they were all members of the Palestinian Authority security forces selected to guard the Israeli Prime Ministers motorcade in Jerico.

However, the most startling news was that Israeli border police apprehended two of the potential assassins, two months later, at a checkpoint near Jerico.
When Israel complained to top Palestinian negotiator, Ahmed Qurei (also known as Abu Ala), he assured Israel that all the suspects were still in custody.
However, on Friday October 19th, it became clear that they had, indeed, been released by lower ranked Palestinian officials.

It is clear, heading to Anapolis, that Mahmoud Abbas cannot control the Hamas element of Palestinian society. It is now obvious, as we approach this vital upcoming meeting, that he does know and cannot control what is going on inside his own security force.

...And Israelis are being asked to put our destiny, and our fate, in his hands ??

Sunday 7 October 2007

Is a Palestinian state the burning issue in the Middle East.

So they are trying to convince you that a Palestinian state is THE burning issue in the Middle East.

Certainly it takes up more time in the United Nations than any other world crisis.
More resolutions have been passed condemning Israel and supporting the Palestinians than, say, Ruanda, Darfur, Burma, and all the other trouble spots that are REALLY in crisis.

More committees have been set up, more personnel employed, more money spent, by the United Nations on the Palestinians than any other cause worldwide.
The Europeans have been pumping money, diplomats, media attention, at the Palestinians than anyone else.

Christian NGOs have been putting much of their resources into the Palestinian territories. This despite the fact that Palestinians have been persecuting and murdering their fellow Christians. (More of this in a future article).

All of this without any noticeable progress. Where has all the money gone?

And is the Palestinian problem really the focus of attention in the Middle East?
Is the creation of a Palestinian state the main issue for all their so-called supporters in the surrounding countries.
Is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict the one matter that is causing anguish in the local Arab world?

Let's look around the region and examine what is going on...

Lebanon has a major internal conflict between the secular and Christians who are a withering population valiantly trying to hold out against Islamic Hizbollah, and the murderous Syrians who seem determined to execute any politician who speaks up against them.

Iraqis have to get their act together. Everyone knows that they will continue to kill each other when the Coalition forces pull out.

Who would wish to be the leader of Egypt with their population explosion, their abject poverty, the internal threat of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Quaida sneaking into the Sinai region. They can't even maintain a stable four mile border with the Gaza Strip due to the corruption of their border guards. Their internal political and economical problems are a double headache that is not going away any time soon.

Like Egypt, Jordan has a peace agreement with Israel. They would love to develop strong economic ties with Israel but with a security eye on their internal Palestinian and Muslim population they are hindered from acting too boldly. Al Quaida has made the occasional forays into the Hashemite Kingdom and Abdullah sits on a shaky throne.

Syria tries to shows its muscle by causing grief in Iraq and in Lebanon. It is acting in an ambivalent manner with Israel. Its close links with Iran, Hamas, Hizbollah, and other insurgents and nuisance makers, makes it a doubtful partner for peace talks.

The Saudis are playing a dangerous game of stoking up the Wahhabi brand of Islam that creates radical terror while sucking up to the American administration.
The bloated royal family look anxiously at its population who, one day, could rise up and, in a fit of home grown radical Islam, remove the fat cats.
And what do you think will happen once these troublesome dudes, who hate the West, get their hands on the oil tap?

Iran, despite the recent "Let's make love" pronouncements of the little Tehran tyrant
is a danger not only to the region but to the whole world.
Yes, he protests too much that Palestinian is his reason for being, but this is a pretext for putting his proxies in place throughout the region. He is playing a much wider chess game, with Israel as his first pawn to take off the board.

Oil, a growing water shortage, over population, poverty, increasingly fractious populations, external pressures and threats, all occupy the mind of local leaders far more critically than the Palestinians.

If diplomats would tell you the truth they would tell you that regional leaders really can't stand the Palestinians.
They have used them as a third party to have a go at Israel. But, increasingly, they have become despairing of the Palestinian leadership, both past and present, who have proven themselves corrupt, weak, ineffective, to make use or value of the huge help and support they have been given.
They have despaired at the missed opportunities they have been offered.
They are frustrated now that the Palestinians have become fractious with a sizable section not willing to find a solution save for the elimination of Israel.

Despite what you've heard, most neighbouring countries can't stand the Palestinians.
Just look at recent history. Jordan, when on that Black September, King Hussein had enough of Arafat's meddling and threw them out. Or Kuwait, who expelled their Palestinian workers after they sided with Saadam Hussein in his invasion of their country. Or in Lebanon, with its recently terminated blood bath, when Lebanese forces cleared out a Palestinian terror group who had challenged the local militia. And surely Egypt must look at Hamas activities over its' border with Gaza with some trepidation.

Now come the latest revelations that the Palestinians actually decided to reject statehood over objections from within their organisations and submitting to external Arab pressure.
Certainly Arafat turned down a generous offer of nationhood with massive concessions given to him by Ehud Barak at Camp David and backed by President Clinton.
Clearly, even the Palestinians are not in a hurry for a state of their own - unless it replaces Israel, of course.

So, is the Palestinian issue the main event in this region?

With the exception of Iran, absolutely not!

Friday 5 October 2007

The poignant and perfect answer to the lies of Ahmadinajad... SHIRI NEGARI.

I am sure that future articles will return to the petty Iranian tyrant who returned home to Tehran fresh from his successful tour of New York and South America.

For now, I wish to close my current concentration on his lies and deceit on a sad and poignant note.

I came across the picture in this article. It made me pause. I looked at the lovely face of SHIRI NEGARI and shed a tear of sadness and frustration.

SHIRI was killed on 18th June, 2002. She, along with another eighteen people, were blown up by a Hamas terrorist (funded by Iran) on a Jerusalem bus.
She was aged 21.

I am sad and frustrated.
Sad at the hateful policies of Ahmadinajad and his Islamic fanatics that killed this delightful girl through their Hamas proxy.
Sad in the knowledge that they see no crime in seeking her out for death. On the contrary, it was a holy and glorious mission.
Sad that nothing Ahmadinajad said at Columbia University, or in the United Nations, pointed to a desire to reach a peaceful solution to the Middle East crisis, save that Israel must cease to exist.
On the contrary, all his comments expressed a desire to terminate the Jewish state of Israel and to kill other innocent Shiris, if that is what it takes.

Ahmadinajad would have you believe that he is a friend of the Jewish people but an enemy of Zionism. That enmity killed SHIRI.
What Ahmadinajad is saying is that many more Shiris will been blown up, and massacred, in the name of this mans' Jihad, if Israel does not voluntarily liquidate itself.

I weep for Shiri. I am sad for her family. I am also frustrated.
Frustrated against an impotent world that refuses to face up to his threats. Frustrated at a cynical world that submits to this evil mans' will. Frustrated at a university that allows him a stage to espouse his views. Frustrated at an international community that pays lip service at imposing sanctions, yet does nothing. Frustrated at an appeasing world that refuses to bring this man, and his evil regime, to justice.

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Sadly, at Columbia University, good men did something. They gave this killer a platform.

I am frustrated that Columbia University gave its stage to Ahmadinajad in the name of free speech, but will not give those who represent his victims the same stage.

As the message says under SHIRI's photograph, SHIRI would like to speak at Columbia University, but Ahmadinajad made sure that SHIRI would never speak again...

Thursday 4 October 2007

The Israel lobby? What about the Arab lobby?

With the publication of the book 'The Israel Lobby' by renowned academics Professors Mearsheimer and Walt the notion is out there that Israeli pressure groups have had a major effect in coloring American foreign policy to the detriment of the US.
The learned couple would have you believe that Israeli and Jewish lobbyists are the most powerful influence on the US Administration.

My friend, Maurice Ostroff, has partially answered the claims made by these supposed researchers in a rebuttal entitled 'Academic Freedom and Sloppy Research'.

Mearsheimer and Walts findings fail on two counts. One of incorrect assertions. The other is the failure of what the did not include in their book. This, perhaps deliberate, omission is the most dangerous of their faults. It leaves the reader with the impression that Israeli and Jewish leaders have an unrivalled access to policy makers in Congress and in the State Department.
This is wrong. The biggest investment in lobbying power has, for a long time, been invested in the rich hands of the Arabs, led by the Saudis, and the other oil interests.
Against this powerful force Israel can never successfully compete.
However, the small voice of reason and democracy is trying to make itself heard.

by Maurice Ostroff

The much discussed articles and latest book by Professors Mearsheimer and Walt, attacking the Israel Lobby, are glaring examples of misleading by omission of vital relevant data.

Of course there is no objection to academics expressing unpopular opinions, but it’s scary to realize that some university students are being taught by mentors who, in their public pronouncements and publications, exhibit shockingly low standards of scholarship and even ignorance. Even when they don’t write in the names of their universities, serious readers are entitled to expect a minimum standard of objectivity and intellectual honesty from tenured professors.

The website of Students for Academic Freedom pinpoints one of the most egregious sins of a growing number of academics in its slogan: "You can’t get a good education if they’re telling you only half the story".

Too many opinion-makers mislead by telling half the story; deliberately omitting all relevant information that may contradict their preconceived opinions. The much discussed articles and latest book by Professors Mearsheimer and Walt, attacking the Israel Lobby, are glaring examples of misleading by omission of vital relevant data.

In response to a letter I sent criticizing their articles published last year, I received an 81-page paper from Professor Mearsheimer, titled "Setting the record straight: a response to critics of The Israel Lobby” (which I will refer to in this article as their response paper). In it, the authors admit that being fallible human beings, their work contained a few minor errors. Let’s take the example of one of their central claims – that pressure from Israel was critical in the US decision to attack Iraq in March 2003 ­ and let the reader judge whether this is merely a minor error.

If they had done a modest amount of research they would have learned and disclosed that contrary to their allegation, Israeli officials had warned the Bush administration against destabilizing the region by invading Iraq.

This information was available to the professors. In an interview with the Mother Jones blog, Professor Walt emphasized that he and Mearsheimer relied heavily on both Israeli sources and Jewish newspapers like the Forward. And in the Forward of January 12, 2007, Yossi Alpher, an adviser to former PM Ehud Barak, confirmed that prior to March 2003, Israel PM Sharon advised Bush not to occupy Iraq and that AIPAC officials in Washington told visiting Arab intellectuals they would rather the United States deal militarily with Iran than with Iraq.

This refutation of the professors’ allegation has since been confirmed by Lawrence Wilkerson, a former member of the State Department's Policy Planning Staff as reported by ISP.

Was this a minor error?

In the interview with Mother Jones, Professor Walt explained that as he and Mearsheimer aren't investigative reporters and have a day job, they weren't in a position to spend a lot of time interviewing people in Washington. This statement possibly encapsulates the underlying weakness of their publications. Far from being in-depth products of original research by academics from prestigious institutions, they are a rehash of carefully selected extracts from the writings of others, mainly new historians like Noam Chomsky and Benny Morris, whose methodologies have been severely criticized by authoritative historians.

It is almost amusing to note how in their response paper, the authors praise Benny Morris as a respected historian when he expresses views they accept, and then reject his views when they don’t serve their purpose. Having served in the Israel army during the 1948 war, I have challenged from personal knowledge some of the conclusions Morris derived from his interpretation of archived documents, and I absolutely challenge M & W’s third and possibly fourth-hand views on this subject.

In their March 2006 article, the professors wrote: "Contrary to popular belief, the Zionists had larger, better-equipped and better-led forces during the 1947-49 War of Independence." It is difficult to understand the reason for inserting this bit of totally irrelevant disinformation into a paper about the Israel Lobby.

Those of us who were there in 1948 know that Israel was invaded by five armies in a Holy War to drive us into the sea. The Arab armies included the British-trained Jordanian Legion, the well-equipped Egyptian army, navy and air force and the armies of Lebanon, Iraq and Syria. And we know how desperate and badly equipped we were. We remember how rickety old trucks were converted to homemade armored vehicles nicknamed sandwiches, because the armor comprised timber between two steel plates. (See photo.)

We know that our total population of only 600,000 included women, children and the elderly and that, tragically, 6,000 were killed in the War, not to mention the seriously wounded. We know that many of our troops were untrained newcomers, who had survived the death camps, only to be thrown directly into battle.

In their response paper, the professors go to great lengths elaborating on remarks by Ben Gurion and others indicating that they had hoped for a greater area than allocated under the 1947 partition plan. But they ignore the fact that Israel nevertheless reluctantly, but unconditionally, accepted the partition resolution while all Arab states rejected it outright. There would be no Palestinian refugees today if they had accepted instead of immediately declaring Holy War, with the publicly proclaimed intention of driving the Jews into the sea.

Arab League Secretary, General Azzam Pasha declared, "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades," and the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al Husseini echoed, "I declare a holy war, my Moslem brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!"

The professors ignore how Israel reacted to Arabs who stayed neutral in 1948 – such as the village of Abu Ghosh. In an article in the Jerusalem Post in 1997, Sam Orbaum quoted Mohammed Abu Ghosh as saying, "What we did, we did for Abu Ghosh, for nobody else. Others who lost their land, hated us then, but now all over the Arab world, many people see we were right. If everyone did what we did, there'd be no refugee problem . . . And if we were traitors? Look where we are, look where they are."

Incredibly, their strong prejudices prevent the professors from acknowledging not only Israel’s attempts to negotiate peace, but also the infamous three no's response of Arab leaders in Khartoum in August 1967: "no peace, no recognition of Israel and no negotiation.”

The professors’ claim that US policy towards Israel is a main contributor to America's terrorist problem deserves critical examination. In November 2002, Alex Alexiev, in an article published by the United States Committee for a Free Lebanon (USCFL), pointed out that Riyadh, flush with oil money, became the paymaster of most of the militant Islamic movements, which advocated terror. In its aggressive support for radical Islam, even the most violent of Islamic groups, like Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, receives Saudi largesse. He claims that official Saudi sources indicate that between 1975 and 1987, Riyadh's "overseas development aid" averaged $4 billion per year, of which at least $50 billion over two-and-a-half decades financed Islamic activities exclusively. The SAAR Foundation alone, which has been closed down since 9/11, received $1.7 billion in donations in 1998.

Compared to these numbers, the miniscule Israeli PR budget is laughable.

It is incredible that academics discussing external influences on USA policy ignore the dramatic stranglehold of OPEC, the blatantly monopolistic cartel which threatens not only the US, but the world economy. This stranglehold began with the Arab decision to use oil as a political weapon in 1973 when the price was $2.60 per barrel. After October 1973, when the Arab members of OPEC imposed their oil embargo against the West, the price quadrupled to about $12 by January 1974 and is now soaring to $80. All this, while, believe it or not, production costs average about $6 per barrel for non-OPEC producers and $1.50 per barrel for OPEC producers (Bulletin of Atomic Scientists May/June 2005).

By focusing on one lobby only without placing it in the context of the prevailing phenomenon of the numerous lobbies that are an essential part of the Washington scene, this work cannot be regarded as a scholarly study, but rather as a subjective, no-holds-barred political attack.

Dozens of interest groups spend billions to convince politicians to pass or oppose particular laws. Any study of the Jewish Lobby cannot avoid comparison with Arab influence on Washington, which is indeed harmful to American interests.

But the professors claim: “There is no well organized and politically potent Arab Lobby and little evidence that US politicians ever feel much pressure from pro-Arab groups.” This categorical statement in their response paper is mind-boggling. It indicates either inexcusable ignorance or deliberate suppression of information about the many Arab lobbyists who have had, and continue to have, intimate access to US presidents.

In an article in Harpers magazine of April 17, 2007, John R. MacArthur wrote about Saudi ambassador to Washington, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan:

When he wasn't entertaining congressmen and spreading good cheer through his highly paid lobbyist, Fred Dutton, Bandar was busy making friends with, at first vice president, and then president, George H.W. Bush, and by extension with Bush's son, the future president. This personal relationship with the Bush family has served Bandar and his family very well, as documented in Craig Unger's book, House of Bush, House of Saud.

Before he died in the World Trade Center on 9/11, the former FBI counterterrorism chief John O'Neill complained to French investigator Jean-Charles Brisard that Saudi pressure on the State Department had prevented him from fully investigating possible al-Qaida involvement in the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 U.S. servicemen, and of the destroyer Cole in 2000.

Now, according to Seymour Hersh, Bandar has virtually joined the Bush administration as a shadow cabinet member. In a March 5, 2007 New Yorker article, “The Redirection,” Hersh writes that Bandar, the Saudi national-security adviser, served as Ambassador to the United States for twenty-two years, until 2005, and has maintained a friendship with President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. In his new post, he continues to meet privately with them.

The organization Axis Information and Analysis (AIA), which specializes in information about Asia and Eastern Europe, has rated Prince Bandar as the most influential foreigner in the USA. As head of the Saudi embassy in Washington in 1983, he was an important participant in backstage intrigues, clandestine negotiations, and billion-dollar deals relating to US interests in the Middle East, with broad links among high-ranking officials in the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA. Bandar's father, Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz al Saud, was a leading figure in the ruling dynasty, which decides the extent of military cooperation with the United States. AIA has publicly stated that it was Bandar Bin Sultan who initiated the first Gulf War in 1990-91, by pushing President Bush the elder to start the military campaign against Iraq.

In an obituary to Clark Clifford (October 11, 1998), the New York Times spoke of him not only as a key adviser to four presidents, but also as a powerful lobbyist for Arab sources. In his memoir, Counsel to the President, Clifford wrote that he advised clients:

What we can offer you is an extensive knowledge of how to deal with the government on your problems. We will be able to give you advice on how best to present your position to the appropriate departments and agencies of the government.

Clifford, a paid lobbyist, made about $6 million in profits from bank stock that he bought with an unsecured loan from the failed Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI).

In an interview on Democracy Now, Craig Unger, author of House of Bush, House of Saud, spoke of Bandar’s influence. Referring to the fact that the 9/11 Commission said it knew of six chartered flights with 142 people aboard, mostly Saudis, that left the United States between Sept. 14 and 24, 2001, Unger said that if you look at Prince Bandar’s body language in photos of him and President Bush, this is not a guy standing in awe of the President of the United States. This is a guy who is visiting his friend's son, and he’s sort of lounging on the arm of a big armchair by 9/13, two days after 9-11. And suddenly, flights began going out.

Unger tells of Saudis investing as much as $800 billion into American Equities, not only in massive blue chip companies but also into companies that weren't doing so well, but were linked to powerful politicians.

He also speaks of at least $1 million donated to each presidential library, emphasizing that the Saudis give to Democrats and Republicans alike:

Prince Bandar has been quite frank. If we give to our friends after they get out of office, the people in office will get the message.

The Saudis are fabulous at public relations. If you look at their whole campaign over the last 30 years, they spent $70 billion on propaganda. It's the biggest propaganda campaign in the history of the world, more than Soviet communism at the height of the Cold war. Immediately after 9-11, Bandar hired Burson Marsteller, the huge American public relations firm.

In the knowledge that the above information is readily available, would a first-year student, let alone a tenured professor, earn a passing mark for submitting a paper claiming that there is no well-organized and politically potent Arab Lobby and little evidence that US politicians ever feel much pressure from pro-Arab groups?

The Lies of Ahmadinajad (Part 3)

YouTube - Ahmadinejad's lies - Part 1

"We Love all Nations! We are friends with the Jewish People!"

Yet another lie straight from the mouth of the man from Tehran..

(courtesy of MidEast Truth).

The Lies of Ahmadinajad (Part 4)

Ahmadinajad loves the Jews. It's only Israel he hates.

This is the impression that the Iranian leader wished to make in his Columbia University address.
As with his other remarks it is a blatant lie.

The Iranian litany of anti-Semitism is long and well recorded. It has been activated by threats, terrorism, and death.

Ahmadinajad's perverted world view is deeply based on anti-Semitism. It is his reason for being. It is what colours his past, his character, his beliefs, and his future actions.

One only needs to go back to his impressionable years when his political and theological views were founded in the passionate Iranian Revolution of his spiritual and political leader, Ayatollah Knomeini who said on 13th April, 1963, "I know that you do not want Iran to live under the boot of the Jews!" Later that year, Khomeini called the Shah of Iran "a Jew in disguise."

Ahmadinajad was a young activist for Khomeini as the Islamic revolution sought to take over Iran.
Khomeini's biographer, Amir Taheri, wrote that the Ayatollah was convinced there was a Jewish conspiracy to "control everything" and to "emasculate Islam".
He channeled his anger towards the Jewish state of Israel. Among his theological students was a young Ahmadinajad who looked up to the Ayatollah as a hero.
Khomeini's inflammatory statements included "Israel does not want the Koran to survive in Iran." "It is destroying us." "It is destroying you and the nation." "It wants to demolish our trade and agriculture." "It wants to grab the wealth of the country."

Ahmnadinajad was imbued with the accusatory link between Jews and Israel.

After the Six Day War in 1967, Khomeini, who was not yet in power, wrote that "The Jews wish to establish Jewish domination throughout the world."
In 1977 he wrote, "The Jews have grasped the world with both hands and are devouring it with an insatiable appetite."
Two years later Ayatollah Khomeini was the unchallenged leader of the Iranian Revolution.

Mohammed Hassan Rahimian, a representative of the Iranian Supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who stands even higher in the Iranian hierarchy than Ahmadinajad, said on 16th November 2006, "The Jew is the most obstinate enemy of the devout. The main war will determine the destiny of mankind. The reappearance of the Twefth Imam will ead to a war between Israel and the Shia!"

Again one can see the twisted link between hatred of the Jew and of Israel. They are intertwined to create a political and theological hatred that is nothing less than potent anti-Semitism with Israel as the first victim.

Ahmadinajad devoutly believes that an Armagedon must occur to herald the arrival of his Messiah, the Twelfth Imam.
It would be the fulfilment of his religious obligation to assist in bringing about this glorious day. And what better place to create the mushroom cloud than over the Jewish state which, in his eyes, is an abomination and an insult to Islam.

However, this lethal anti-Semitic rage of the Iranian Republic of Iran lashed out in a rather strange direction in 1994.

The Argentine government recently released details of its investigation into the bombing of the Jewish Community Centre in Buenos Aires in Argentina on March 17, 1992, in which 85 people were killed and more than 200 were wounded. That bombing was conducted by Iranian intelligence services, with Hezbollah playing a key role in its execution.

The decision in principle to strike at the Jewish community center was made in August 1993 at a meeting chaired by Iranian spiritual leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Other participants included President Rafsanjani, Intelligence Minister Ali Fallahian, Khamenei's intelligence and security adviser, Muhamed Hijazi, and the country's foreign minister at the time, Velayati.

The meeting was convened because it was to be the second major explosion in the Argentine capital after the Israeli embassy bombing 18 months earlier. Israeli intelligence believes the reason Buenos Aires was chosen a second time was because of a deterioration in relations between the two countries at the time.

Intelligence Minister Fallahian was given responsibility for the job. To back up the mission, Khamenei issued a fatwa instructing him to undertake the mission. Fallahian ordered the mission be given to the Overseas Operations Unit of the Hezbollah, headed by Amad Amiad Maghnieh, with Iranian intelligence providing full aid and cooperation. That Hezbollah unit was also responsible for the embassy bombing. Hezbollah found the suicide bomber, Baro, a Hezbollah man, who arrived a few days before the bombing. A few hours before the bombing, Baro called his family in Lebanon, telling them he was going to be unified with his brother, who was killed in a car bombing attack on Israeli soldiers in Lebanon in 1989.

The Iranian foreign service provided much of the diplomatic cover for the operation. There was an unusual number of Iranian couriers coming in and out of the country before the bombing, with some staying longer than usual in Argentina, and there was a dramatic increase in telephone traffic between various Iranian elements in Argentina and Iran in the days leading up to the bombing.

Arrest warrants have been issued by the Argentine authorities against Rafsanjani and others to stand trial for this crime against a Jewish target.

Ahamadinajad tries to be more sophisticated than his now dead spiritual leader. He does not say that 'Jews' are conspiring to rule the world. That would expose him as a blatant anti-Semite.
Instead, he tries to be clever and say that 'Zionists' have for sixty years blackmailed Western Governments, and that 'Zionists' control the banking, financial, cultural, and media sectors of the world.

Ahmadinajad uses the word 'Zionist' with exactly the same meaning and intensity as Hitler poured into the 'Jew' as the incarnation of all the world's evil.

As with Hitler, Ahamadinajad is driven by an raging anti-Semitism of genocidal proportions.