THE ONGOING DREYFUS AFFAIR (The United States Conspiracy Against Israel)

26 June 2007
Note: The article below was originally published in 1999. The information below is so accurate and timely that B'nai Elim is publishing it again on this forum so that Johnathan Pollard will not be forgotten, an furthermore, we are requesting that you call the White House to leave messages for President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney,urging President Bush to pardon and release Pollard immediately (See contact information below). Blogmaster

Phone Numbers
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461

E-Mail

Please send your comments to comments@whitehouse.gov. Due to the large volume of e-mail received, the White House cannot respond to every message. For further up-to-date information on Presidential initiatives, current events, and topics of interest to you, please continue to use the White House website.

Vice President Richard Cheney: vice_president@whitehouse.gov

_______________________________________________________________________________

Conspiracy Against Pollard and Israel

WINSTON MID EAST ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY
January 12, 1999

Freeman Center For Stategic Studies
Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East analyst & commentator

Never in our recorded history have so many Intelligence Agencies, the Military and the Politicians conspired to keep one man in jail. Their zeal verges on mass hysteria which is so blatant it makes one wonder if they are anxious to protect the United States - or themselves.

Jonathan Pollard betrayed a trust - or did he? He gave Israel information about Soviet supplied weapons to Iraq, Syria, Libya and other Arab countries, including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) materials and missile technology to deliver it. According to several prior MOUs (Memorandums of Understanding) including 1983 by a long line of American Presidents and Congress, this vital information was to be shared with Israel as part of American policy to insure Israel's defensive viability against a host of surrounding hostile Arab countries.

And yet powerful men like Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, Deputy CIA Director embargoed this life and death information from Israel. Inman was enraged by Israel's bombing of the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1991 and from that point on, deliberately withheld this information from Israel. Weinberger tried to insure a "Level Playing Field" for the combined Arab confrontation States arrayed against Israel. (What exactly was the Weinberger - Inman relationship with Saddam which enraged them.)

Caspar Weinberger revealed his knowledge of Saddam Hussein's intentions to use gas capability against Israel during a radio interview which we heard during the first SCUD attack on Israel, January 18,1991. Weinberger said: "It's a shame that Saddam is using poison gas against Israel." In 1983 when Pollard protested the embargo of this information from Israel, he was told by his superiors: "Don't tell the Jews. They're too sensitive about gas." Weinberger's secret memorandum to Judge Aubrey Robinson before his sentencing of Pollard to "Life with No Parole" has never been shown to any of Pollard's lawyers, violating American justice of the defendant's rights to confront his accusers. We know from Justice Arthur Goldberg's admission that Weinberger falsely accused Pollard of spying for South Africa to enrage Judge Robinson (who is black).

After the US government abrogated its plea agreement with Pollard, they locked him down in solitary first in a prison for criminally insane and then at Marion Illinois' maximum security prison for over 7 years. He is now in his 14th year of prison (Now 21 Years) - 4 times what others who spied for allies received. Clearly, the conditions of lock-down were more than to keep him isolated and more like an effort to break him, possibly ending in a staged suicide.

Whenever the American and Israeli people, the Congress and the Knesset have moved in unity to urge commutation of Pollard's sentence to time served or for any kind of leniency against his sentence of "Life with No Parole", the Intelligence community has arisen in a vast coordinated movement to stop it. By now the punishment has gone beyond any imprisonment of any spy, particularly one who warned an ally that Saddam Hussein was building up his NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) arsenals - with Israel as his first target. Several spies for enemies like the Soviet Union have been released after 4, 6, 9 and 19 years (of a 40 year sentence) respectively. The maximum sentence for spying for an ally is 10 years, the median sentence is 2-4 years or nothing.

Was the release of Jonathan Pollard after 14 years a risk to the nation years after the secrets were stale? Or were these same Intelligence Agencies, Presidents, Vice Presidents, Defense Secretaries acting so maliciously because of their own risk of exposure as co-conspirators in a nefarious plan to eliminate an ally, Israel, whose presence disturbed their Arab oil market clients? Angelo Codevilla, professor of International Studies at Boston University and former Naval Intelligence officer served on the staff of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence during the Pollard arrest and conviction. He has written that: "Some US intelligence experts say the Intelligence community in Washington no longer opposes Pollard's release. The group that wants to keep Pollard in jail consists mostly of those who dealt with the case in the mid 1980s: Weinberger, Bobby Ray Inman and the US prosecutors [possibly one desperate former President]. It is a straightforward political matter.

"In briefings to the Senate Committee, US officials never claimed that Pollard gave intelligence methods and sources to Israel. Instead, he relayed data, analysis and photographs - the sort of material that Israel had received from the US. Pollard angered US government leaders by his effort to undermine what he regarded as a pro-Iraqi policy by Washington. The US policy of aiding Iraq was a disastrous policy which led to the Gulf War. The authors of that policy were Shultz, Weinberger and Inman." "Inman said they [the Israelis] had used US satellite pictures to plan the bombing [of Osirak]..and had harmed sophisticated US efforts to build an important relationship with Saddam. Therefore, he [Inman] personally cut Israel off from satellite information about Iraq and later began to send satellite pictures to Saddam." (1)

George Bush, then VP (former Director of the CIA) and Jim Baker (Reagan's Treasury Secretary) were deeply involved in manipulating the Reagan administration's buildup of Iraq, a policy they continued as President and Secretary of State until the day Saddam invaded Kuwait. And, since Bush ended his Desert Storm after only 4 days on the ground, allowing Saddam and his top Revolutionary Army to survive, facilitating his transfer of 100 jets to Iran (later shipped to Syria), one wonders about their complicity in building Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction and responsibility for its eventual victims. This includes victims of the Gulf War - as well as those casualties of Saddam's poison gas attacks against Iran and his own Kurdish citizens.

Another question begging for an answer: Was Saddam given President Bush and Sec. of State Baker's approval to invade Kuwait, to take its $80 billion in assets so Saddam could continue his massive purchases of weapons and continue fulfilling our aberrant foreign policy? According to reports, US Amb. April Glaspie under orders from Baker, told Saddam "the US wasn't interested in his border disputes." This was the "green light" for Saddam to invade Kuwait.

Saddam still claims Kuwait Iraq's sovereign territory. So it's not over yet. Thanks to Bush/Baker's premature halt to the first Gulf War and to Clinton's wimpy occasional bombing, Saddam is still the power and threat to the Middle East. Denials notwithstanding, Col. Scott Ritter disclosed that Secretary of State Albright had interfered with UNSCOM's surprise inspections to avoid a political confrontation with Saddam in order to continue our foreign policy to protect him. (2) Is it OK for the CIA to spy in Iraq today in order to expose Saddam's NBC arsenal, but in 1984 it wasn't OK for Pollard to blow the whistle on Saddam's intention to eliminate Israel? Saddam declared that he would "burn half of Israel" - and he had the weapons from the West to do it.

For years Pollard's accusers hinted mysteriously that he had done terrible things such as betraying the intelligence methods and identities of American spies in the Soviet Union. But, lo and behold, the spy who did this turned out to be a deep and powerful CIA mole who himself created the disinformation against Pollard because he was in charge of that brief. Aldridge (Rick) Ames, chief of the CIA's Soviet/Eastern Europe counterintelligence, was convicted of the very crimes for which he accused Pollard and which precipitated the deaths by execution of at least 34 of these American and allied agents in the Soviet Union. Ames identified 55 clandestine US and allied operations in the Soviet Union, thus causing the deaths of many others.

However, even after Ames was revealed as the spy and mole who caused these deaths by his leaks to the USSR, Pollard was then and is still being falsely accused by the Intelligence Agencies of Ames' crimes. Pollard has been wrongfully blamed for the deeds of a CIA Director (Ames) who had for years transferred every secret he could lay his hands on. One can understand why the present CIA Director, George Tenet tasked to improve the image of the CIA, would threaten to resign if Pollard were released. The coverup of the CIA failure was to be erased from the American mind by keeping Pollard as their permanently jailed scapegoat.

According to former Justice Department attorney John Loftus, "In order to hide his own espionage for the Russians, Rick Ames successfully point the finger of suspicion at Pollard for the spate of serious leaks that crippled US networks inside the Soviet Union." How does Loftus know? He cites: "recent disclosures in the ‘intelligence community'. Several investigations from the CIA and NIS (Naval Investigative Service) have made sheepish admission that Pollard was the victim of hysterical over-reaction." The first key to this turnaround, says Loftus, is "the recent confession of CIA agent Ames that he (not Pollard) was responsible for leaking top level secrets to the Kremlin." Loftus quotes Naval Intelligence sources as admitting that "90 percent of the things we accused [Pollard] of stealing, he didn't even have access to." (3)

John Loftus wrote in "Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People 1920-92" that "Pollard had little access either to communications intercepts or satellite data , let alone secret NSA codes. His primary access US Navy data banks on ocean shipping. His private focus was on arms shipments to terrorists." Which, according to Loftus, "is where the ugly truth lies. Pollard noticed a pattern of vessels back and forth from Greece to Yemen, where the PLO had a major base. Summer of 1984 the Israelis tipped off the Greek authorities to seize an entire shipload of arms destined for the PLO. Neither Pollard nor Israel was aware that they had smashed George Bush's first shipment of arms to Iran. The British Secret Service had arranged the Greek shipment to ransom American hostages held in Lebanon. Pollard never realized that he had busted the most secret White House operation of modern times. The summer 1984 Greek shipment was a dagger over George Bush's head. The Greek shipment in 1984 exposes the entire White House coverup." (4)

Jerry Agee, Pollard's superior in Naval Intelligence told Wolf Blitzer, he and another colleague were suspicious of the number of classified documents Pollard was taking home with him. They concluded that the information was almost certainly going to Israel. As the materials dealt with Soviet weapons systems and Arab military capabilities, it was not something the Soviets would be interested in. As Agee said to Blitzer: "It didn't take a fool to find out that the Soviets were not buying back all their own information." (5)

Now, with President Clinton about to commute Pollard's sentence, the Intelligence, Military and Justice Department communities have become frantic. As a desperate measure they released, through a journalist who was fed the "correct" information, the great secrets that Pollard was to have transferred.

On January 11, the deadline day of Clinton's promised clemency decision, an article was printed in the NEW YORKER by Seymour Hersh. Of course, the article was cooked and planted by the same Intelligence Agencies, and "leaked" it to a journalist known for his susceptibility for sensational stories. Of course, Seymour Hersh is known for gullibly accepting the disinformation, including rumors, he propagates in the Pollard chapter of his book "The Samson Option." Hersh gains much profit by the credibility the NEW YORKER article lends to his reputation and his book. But, Hersh is thought to be an ‘empty vessel' into which the disinformation entities pour their vitriol.

What is so outrageous about the NEW YORKER article is that Hersh drowns his listener in what even he calls "Tom Clancy" stuff - details and extrapolations of technical espionage that the US carries on against friends and allies alike. He fails to footnote, uses numerous "unnamed" sources: and quotes all the defamatory false accusations we've seen piled up against Pollard since 1985. One man he does quote by name is a former convict, now journalist. However, in alia, Hersh reveals that the US does indeed spy on its friends and allies, including especially Israel. Nothing is mentioned regarding US transfer of this information to such nations as Saudi Arabia, Syria or Iraq - consistent with an aberrant foreign policy pushed by special oil interests.

And, of course, in this day of the Internet and instant communications, it simultaneously appears in the NEW YORK TIMES: "US Now Tells of Must Deeper Damage by Pollard Than Thought" by Tim Weiner and repeated in the JERUSALEM POST: "Pollard Stole 10-volume Intelligence ‘Bible'", etc. They threw in every false accusation printed before and made up now for "effect" - to scare off those members of Congress, Knesset,

American and Israeli publics who smell a collective rat. Most have appeared before and been refuted:

Volume of material: an absurdity. He would have needed a moving van on several occasions. Inveterate liar: (9 months of polygraphs proved Pollard told the truth.) Cocaine abuser: Accuser a convicted felon. Disproved along with spurious and salacious charges of alcoholism and homosexuality. A test for drug use by a private physician was negative. Strangely, that medical file disappeared.

These now-to-be released "secrets" of what Pollard was to have stolen include a "10 Volume Directory of electronic frequencies and signals intercepted by the NSA (National Security Agency - the US primary electronic eavesdropping service and its biggest espionage entity) which listens to every nation in the world. Hersh admits there is no documented proof for the accusations leaked to him.

But, if this was that important, why hadn't the Soviets tasked Aldridge Ames to secure these volumes. Clearly, Ames had the highest level of security rating and access to this information years earlier. It would seem that our Intelligence Agencies, in an effort to keep hidden some of their ugly work against Israel, huddled and thought up a number of chilling scenarios which they could feed to the President (distracted by his own personal trials) and the American citizens via the media to justify their unjust continued imprisonment of Pollard. But, mostly they acted to assure their own personal safety and continued employment.

Have our President, Military Intelligence, CIA, NIA, NSA or politicians every lied to us? You bet. Do Politicians lie? Examine the Iran/Contra and Iraq-gate lies. Yes, indeed, these people are following the psychology explained by Carl Jung, wherein you blame your victim for what you are about to do to him.

"They" are telling us Pollard committed "Treason" (which he was never accused of nor indicted for). But, it was "They" who aided Saddam to build up his NBC arsenal, that, according to VP Al Gore, could kill off all the people on Earth. The "They" who should be questioned includes, among others: George Bush, Caspar Weinberger, Bobby Ray Inman, prosecutor Joseph Di Genova, George Shultz, James Baker, Brent Scowcroft, and various heads of the Intelligence Agencies and Justice Departments during the 1980s and 1990s. They have been aided and abetted by willing journalists, always eager for the scoop and sensation that gets them and their papers or TV/radio stations profits and good ratings.

The great American nation and its wonderful people have been an example to the world in its humanity for others. True, we have our crooks, our dirty politicians, our murderers and rapists - like all other nations. The problem is that as a super-power, we attract the power brokers who believe they know best. We find them often at the highest levels of government and in our Intelligence Agencies. They all believe they are doing right for the country and themselves by using any means - illegal or unethical - to a achieve their goals. They know the American people would not approve of their methods and so they go underground.

"They" tell us Pollard is guilty of crimes not originally spoken about during his "in camera" hearing. Pollard never had a trial. He gave up his right to a trial because they promised his ill wife Anne better treatment with no prison term and a light sentence for Pollard. The government broke its plea agreement and Pollard received a life sentence. Let us then have an open, fair trial where his accusers can openly charge Pollard and then have their accusations tested by lawyers who know to dig out the facts from this reluctant cabal bent on keeping themselves out of the docket and possibly jail. Let the liars lie under oath and we'll see where it leads.

Some may recall the hearing at an Appeals Court where three judges heard some of the evidence. Two concluded on a technicality that it was too late for such a trial. One was Ruth Bader Ginsberg who shortly thereafter was appointed to the Supreme Court. But the third Judge Stephen Williams said that "This was a gross miscarriage of justice." No, he did not receive an appointment to higher position.

So, we have an amoral President, a twisty State Department, Intelligence Agencies who will do anything to achieve their goals and cover their backsides, certain industrialists connected to Arab oil and their markets - all seemingly coalesced to assure that this one man stays in prison til he dies. You have to wonder why.

The true story of the Wye fiasco was exposed by Kenneth Timmerman. "Apparently, at 4 am on Friday at the Wye Plantation President Clinton agreed to a request - not from Mr. Netanyahu but from PLO Chairman Yassir Arafat - to release Pollard as part of a prisoner exchange to get Israel to drop its demand that Israel extradite the 36 Palestinians wanted on terrorism charges. The key terrorist of the 36 was the commander of the Palestinian Police, Ghazi Jabali. Arafat wanted to exchange Pollard for Jabali. President Clinton agreed. Several hours later, after the CIA jawboned him, he back out. And when Mr. Netanyahu balked at Clinton's reversal, Clinton threatened the US would recognize a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood in May - the equivalent of dropping a nuclear weapon on Netanyahu and his supporters." (6) Of course, the head of the CIA, George Tenet had to threaten to resign to achieve this full score effect.

This sounds like the Dreyfus Affair, except that Pollard readily admits his guilt for transferring vital intelligence to Israel and has often expressed deep remorse. However, his accusers seem to have adopted a plan to elevate Arab military power to a level that could wipe out Israel.

Pollard was not charged with nor convicted for treason but it is highly probable that his accusers may have committed treason and are now desperately trying to cover up their black deeds.

Footnotes

1. "Israel's Spy Was Right About Saddam" by Prof. Angelo M. Codevilla WALL STREET JOURNAL August 6, 1998
2. "Richard Perle Suggest Albright May Need to Resign Over Iraq: "Day-Long AEI (American Enterprise Institute) Symposium (Oct. 14, 1998) Demonstrates Flaws of Clinton ME Policy as Wye Summit Threaten to Compound Them" by Frank Gaffney Center for Security Policy #98-D 174
3. "Whose Crimes? Pollards or Ames's?" by Hershel Shanks, Editor MOMENT MAGAZINE 12/95
4. "Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People 1920-1992" by John Loftus & Mark Aarons, St. Martin's Press 1994 p. 402
5. "CIA Aims at Pollard for Scapegoating" by Arnold Forster & David Kirschenbaum HERITAGE SOUTHWEST 11/25/94
6. "Peace Process or Spin Politics?" by Kenneth Timmerman WASHINGTON TIMES 10/27/98

---

See Also: The Admiral Bobby Ray Inman Page

Return to home page -Justice for Jonathan Pollard

Israel offers the Golan Heights to Syria

Has Olmert gone round the bend? Is he mad?... a lunatic?... totally inept on the world stage?... a traitor in collusion with our enemies?... or is he simply stupid? Just what does Olmert think the Syrians will do with the Golan...sooner, or later. We know what they will do, they will do exactly as they did before. Syria will use the Golan to murder the Israelis below. Olmert blundered in Lebanon, causing the deaths and wounding of many of our soldiers to what end... for what purpose? Now he wants to hand the Golan over to the Syrians on a silver platter??? Who in the Government is minding the store? Can it be that the Knesset will allow the Prime Minister of Israel to further weaken Israel and our ability to defend ourselves? There must be NO MORE JEWISH LAND GIVEN AWAY TO OUR ENEMIES...NOT ONE CENTIMETER...NOT ONE INCH...NYET, NADA, LO! If Syria takes possession of the Golan Heights, it is the beginning of end. Do not allow this "trade of land for peace". Olmert is behaving like Herod - a puppet king subservient to those who seek Israel's destruction. Perhaps he is the new "tetrarch of Galilee" ! To merely consider the surrender of Jewish land is inherently evil and any such plan must be stopped by the people without delay. The destiny of Israel cannot be left in the hands of Olmert, or any of his ilk. The time for Olmert's resignation is long overdue! Israel offers the Golan Heights to Syria By Charles Levinson in Katzrin, Israel Last Updated: 2:16am BST 09/06/2007 The Israeli prime minister has offered to return the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for peace, the nation's press reported yesterday. Israelis tour a military bunker in the Golan Heights. The strategic highlands could be returned to Syria in exchange for peace. In a secret communique, Ehud Olmert demanded that in exchange for the return of the strategic highlands, Syria dissolve its alliances with Iran, Hezbollah and Palestinian militant factions who maintain headquarters in Damascus. Syria, under the regime of Bashar al Assad, is a key supporter of the Lebanese Shia Hizbollah militia, who battled Israel to a standstill last summer. Many of the anti-tank rockets that wreaked havoc on Israeli ground forces originated in Syria, a crucial conduit for the Iranian Katyushas and other rockets that rained down on Israeli cities throughout the 34-day war. Were Syria to abandon its Shia allies in Lebanon and Iran in exchange for peace with the Jewish state, it would seriously weaken Israel's most potent foes. "I am your partner for making peace between our countries," Mr Olmert told Damascus through German and Turkish mediators, Israel's Yediot Ahranot newspaper reported. "I know that a peace agreement with Syria requires me to return the Golan Heights to Syrian sovereignty. I am willing to fulfil my part in this deal." Mr Olmert reached out to Syria only after America's president George W Bush gave the green light in an hour-long phone conversation last month. The prime minister's office would neither confirm nor deny the reports. Israel and Syria participated in arduous peace talks throughout much of the 1990s. But those efforts collapsed in 2000 amid disagreement over sovereignty of a narrow strip of land near the eastern shore of Lake Kinneret.

L.A. TIMES = THE WORST JOURNALISM

Open Letter to the L.A.Times..

By Arlene Peck

For years, I've been a working member of the press. There was a time when I looked with pride at my life's accomplishments. Of course, those were the days when such men as Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Morrow were the role models. In recent years, I've become increasingly alarmed with the trend that I've seen among those who consider themselves 'reporters' as well as those talking heads on the television's nightly news programs We listen to dumbed-down, usually attractive post-puberty 'experts' who can only speak in sound bites before they're interrupted by their co-anchor in the box. They talk about the Middle-East, but I'll bet if you put a map in front of them and asked them where that is, they wouldn't have a clue.

The CEOs of these companies wonder why their newspapers are going out of business. It's simple: it's the same as with the airlines. Lack of service.
When the newspapers began to invent the news instead of reporting the news, the public had nowhere to go but to the call in to talk stations where there was at least a chance of hearing the truth.

The worst so-called" journalism" I believe, is practiced by the LA Times. For years, I've held on to my subscription if only because I am a columnist and felt that reading the morning paper was the only way to keep up with what was happening in the world so I might give my opinion on it; which is what a columnist does.

A recent edition of the Los Angeles Times was the last straw! That Sunday's front page was covered with a picture of Jerusalem entitled, "The Struggle For Jerusalem."
I'm surprised that they didn't use their resident anti -Semite to write the biased column against the Jewish state, but nevertheless it was pretty awful.

I'm not surprised when I see that the sympathetic slant of their series is for "the plight of the poor Palestinians." After all, that's what they do best. Everything, in my opinion, that they write has always been against Israel. For example when they write that Arab families are being "cut off for good from the city of birth" because of the "Israel barrier" which Israel "insists" is aimed at keeping out suicide bombers from entering. The concept that suicide bombers are homicidal mass murderers is foreign to the Times.

Their dumbing-down the issue is working. Israel was forced to build a fence to keep out the murderers that constantly came into Israeli cities to bomb their schools, pizza restaurants, buses and neighborhood markets at will.

Prior to the barricade, we were reading in that same biased paper about how many Jews were being killed on an almost daily basis. Of course, why should I be surprised?: This is the same paper that instead of writing about how the open borders from Mexico have turned California into Mexifornia and our cities into places resembling third world countries. This same paper was also writing multi-page series about how the poor illegal immigrant families are being separated and forced to live in poverty. I wish our government had had the foresight that Israel is now showing before our country got so out of hand.

Meanwhile the L.A.Times reporter sat in their safe comfortable office, sipped lattes, and wrote about Jews and Arabs living bitterly apart. They wrote about how "Their schism is one of the key obstacles to peace"
and how the Palestinians have been "hemmed in by Israeli rule over their East Jerusalem neighborhoods."

Well gol-ly, this pampered bunch of so-called journalists write that "the status of Jerusalem remains one of the biggest obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement" and the issue was a major stumbling block at the Camp David talks of 2,000." I wonder how they might feel if any of the wonderful illegal aliens who have come across our border from Mexico were to build an un-permitted shack without permits next door to their Starbucks. Would they write a column about how unfairly Gonzalez and his eight children were being treated when forced to tear it down? Actually, with the leftist, anti-Semitic and anti-Israel attitude that I've learned to expect from this bunch, they would probably write the same treasonous trash.

In addition to relating to poor Kamil Saou, and his five children, they elaborated how "scores of Israeli police officers converged on a bluff in East Jerusalem, surrounded his modest home and escorted a bulldozer to the door." They went on to lament that since Kamil had neglected to get a permit, "That gave the government the legal right to demolish the home." As well it should! Try that in Beverly Hills and see how fast the bull dozers come!

I wonder while the Los Angeles Times is publishing these four day, three page spreads that they noticed that virtually every other page in their paper was filled with the violence and terror caused by Islamic terrorists elsewhere? Or, is it just the "question" of Jerusalem that is causing the problems from Iraq to Dakar? This is a culture that doesn't give a damn about living in peace, side-by-side as the non-informed columnists write. I wonder if in the effort to be fair and balanced these reporters have spoken to non-Muslims from areas now controlled by the same Islamic fundamentalists who want to control Jerusalem.

I'm sure that they don't remember, but I'd like to remind them that the town of Bethlehem was once about 86% Christian. That was until pressure from front page stories and an incompetent State Department caused that holy city to be turned over to Arab control. Since then, the city has become a wasteland of roaming terrorists who have brutalized, murdered and mutilated the Christians who had been living there for generations. They've done such a good job that Bethlehem's Christian population is now less than 5%. Maybe they might want to pay more attention to the promise that once the Muslims are finished with the Saturday people, they will implement their plans for the Sunday people.

Call me silly. Call me a tad old-fashioned, but, I take offense that this beacon of understanding writes to the masses of how, "In the absence of peace, Israel and the Palestinians jostle for advantage, reshaping the holy city and further diminishing changes for an agreement." I do want to tell them though, that the Jews maintaining control of the Jewish State, for which the deed was given to them 3,500 years ago is not the reason for discord.
It's because we are dealing with a barbaric mind-set intent on killing all who are not them! The Times doesn't get it. None of the liberal press seems to get it. But, giving these savages a hug or more land isn't going to bring peace. They understand death and destruction, and want a martyr's death. I'm all for giving it to them!

GAZA, THE WEST BANK, PALESTINIAN TERRORISM

We just don't get it!

WHEN IS ENOUGH, REALLY ENOUGH?

by Bill Maniaci, B'nai Elim Intel Director

How much does it take before we "Get It"? Israel can never guarantee the safety of its citizens as long as there are terrorists on our borders bent upon nothing less than our annihilation and the destruction of Israel. When does "Enough" become "Enough"? We have bent over backwards in the name of peace, offering appeasement after appeasement. Never before in history has there been a country that has been more concessive than Israel and to what end? The loss of Jewish land, continued and open acts of war, the destruction of homes and businesses, and the death of our citizens who live in constant fear. I realize that talk of the "relocation" of the so-called "Palestinians" into neighboring Arab countries is not politically correct but it may be the only solution. What is really more important... for us to be "politically correct" and agonize over world opinion, or take permanent and decisive measures to insure the safety and integrity of Israel and our citizens!