Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 17 (since 2009-11-15 20:28:52)

jdfsau

Showing comments 17 - 1
Page: 1

• What did the Sheldon and Miriam Adelson get for their money? (Not much)
  • jdfsau November 9, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    Don't kid yourselves. The Adelsons got plenty for their money. They forced Obama rightward and to pledge even more fealty to Israel in order to insure that all those retirees in Florida did not abandon him for Romney in the election.

    If anybody thinks that Obama is now going to do the right thing, they are absolutely naive. He is now even more beholden to the Israel Lobby (if that is possible.) He is not about be able to to jettison all those additional supporters of Israel who he was forced to take on in advisory roles in his campaign and will now form much of the core of his administration.

    The tip off about his true intentions will come when we see if Obama starts supporting the UK in its increasing belligerence towards Syria.

• Interfaith bullying, and a feckless letter from the Episcopal bishop
  • jdfsau October 19, 2012 at 12:33 pm with 3 replies

    The Episcopal Church lost all moral authority years ago. It has simply been bought and paid for.

    A few years ago the late Ed Miller MD, a strong supporter of Palestinian rights told me a curious story.

    Ed had managed to get Episcopal bishop Swing of California to sign a relatively mild petition supporting Palestinian rights. Then the bishop called Ed to tell him that he would have to withdraw his name from the petition. When Ed asked why he was told by Swing that "he (swing) wouldn't get the funds necessary to repair the roof on San Francisco's large and very impressive Grace Cathedral. Apparently these funds were coming from Jewish sources.

    There are Jewish philanthropies like the Koret Foundation that use their funding of Prtoestant and Catholic groups specifically to silence these groups as regard Israel. These christian groups to this day don't realize that there of specific strings attached to any funds they receive from these Jewish charities.

    Years ago, probably the biggest single benefactor of the University of San Francisco (USF) , a Jesuit school, was the very wealthy hotel owner Ben Swig, an ardent supporter of both Israel and the Anti-Defamation League. He eventually became head of the school's board of trustees. Professors were specifically told by school administrators told not to anger Swig by ever negatively mentioning Israel. By the time Swig died virtually all pro Palestinian voices at USF had been purged (if they didn't have tenure) or silenced.

    This sort of control didn't end with Swig's death. It continues through funding received from Jewish charities like the Koret Foundation and Bernard Osher Foundation that is given to church connected schools all over the USA.

    The only professor that seems to be allowed to voice criticism of Israel at USF is Stephen Zunes, who is Jewish and therefore apparently kosher.

• Neocons 'pushed' mindless Bush into 'idiotic war' -- Chris Matthews
  • jdfsau August 24, 2012 at 9:34 pm with 2 replies

    RE: "But you’re right that the stimulus got us out of the recession."

    The common refrain that invariably comes out of the left during economic downturns is that the unfeeling Republicans are against stimulus programs to revive the economy because they are cruel and unfeeling.

    Are you kidding! What do you think defense spending is? The defense budget is undoubtedly the biggest ongoing government stimulus program of all is is widely supported by virtually all the supposedly free market Republican politicians and many Democrats. Unlike many pure welfare programs, it continues in times of both prosperity and economic downturn. The Republicans support this funding because it directly benefits their own middle class constituents. Cut out this defense spending your will see places like Seattle, Houston, and Los Angeles, all of which all have sizable aerospace industries, going on like support. A place like Fort Hood, Texas will have its residents foraging for aluminum cans overnight if significant defense cuts are made.

    The cries for more taxes on the upper middle class and the rich are also problematical because these people are easily able to vote with their feet and move. I recently read that the high tax rate in California has resulted in the departure of one third (50 out of 150) of its highest tax payers. These people are moving to places like Texas and Florida that don't have state income taxes. They could just as easily move out of the US and renounce their citizenship if they felt that the government was unduly picking on them. This is apparently what a growing number are thinking of doing. These people aren't just socialite, coupon cutters living on inheritances. In many or most cases they are the entrepreneurs that set up companies that hired thousands of employees. When they leave, jobs leave also.

    Many on the left have a short memory of the effects of high taxation. The last time a country truly went after its highest income makers was in the UK starting post World War Two and ending in the 1970s. This was true income redistribution, not the fake sort like in the USA (or like that in the rest of Europe) where high marginal tax rates were mitigated by numerous deductions, tax shelters, or outright cheating which governments chose to overlook.

    The result of the high tax rates in the UK was the so called "brain drain" that occurred during this period. Huge numbers of technologically skilled high earners (medical doctors, engineers, etc) simply fled the country for places like Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, a loss that crippled the UK for decades to come. (It ended up with the UK government totally corrupting both its tax system and the accounting systems of its private corporations by allowing tax free "perks" to be used in lieu of regular income in order to stop its most talented workers from fleeing. It wasn't uncommon to see tuition at Eton College, gourmet lunches, free use of company owned villas in mainland Europe, or even prostitutes being doled out as tax free "perks" to favored employees.

    The ultra wealthiest UK citizens simply moved to places like Switzerland where the income they made outside the UK wasn't taxed. When these mega earners moved they often ended up bringing defacto their company headquarters along with them. (Google the current residences of the founders of mammoth, privately held companies like IKEA and ALDI (owners of, among other things, the Trader Joe's chain of stores). None live in their native countries because of high taxes. When they left jobs invariably followed them.)

    What people are seeing now is an economic debacle that resulted directly from an unfettered Federal Reserve Banking system that has promoted deficit spending for all sorts of government funding, both for defense and welfare, for decades. The Republicans always have made made great, faux, wailing sounds about this deficit spending but made no attempt to really control the (privately owned) Fed, its ultimate source, simply because they, like their Democratic brethren, are absolutely dependent on this unfunded spending for re-election. Ethanol anyone!

• Mearsheimer: 7 reasons Netanyahu & Barak might like war with Iran
  • jdfsau August 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm with 1 replies

    Israel has never been particularly eager to get in a war where there is even a remote chance of substantial Israeli causalities. It will however be more than happy to goad Obama into attacking Iran while at the same time promising their usual faux pledges of assistance right up to the day of the presidential election. After that day their leverage over Obama runs out.

    Someone has already mentioned the Kurds. What is happening in the Kurdish area of Iraq gives us a blueprint for what is meant to happen in Iran after it is defeated. The oil rich Kurdish area of Iraq is now fully independent and has an Israeli proxy government firmly in place. Scores of Israeli mercenaries or IDF members control the area's military and governmental affairs. (These mercenaries and IDF members often speak excellent American English and try to give the impression to visitors that that they are actually working work for the American government when they are not. Even the representatives of the US government there don't know which team they are actually on.)

    The Israelis will not be above using terror to frighten out the few remaining Americans who try to stay in the Kurdish area. The Israelis already know that the US like the UK before them, will quickly run away if exposed to the sort of false flag operations the Israelis are so proficient in committing. Then the Israelis will the Kurdish oil to themselves.

    The road to Iran runs through Syria. After looking at a map of Iran oil reserves I have come to the conclusion that Israel plans to split the oil rich areas there off from the rest of the country and control these regions using the same mix of IDF troops and Israeli paid mercenaries with air support. This can easily be done if Israel's new colony also controls part of the Iranian coast from which to ship the newly acquired petroleum and to which to receive essential supplies. Along with the sanctions against her, this denial of oil revenue will result in Iran becoming impoverished and no longer any sort of threat to Israel.

    The US has proved to be the loser in the Iraq war. It will also prove to be the patsy in any war with Iran. Israel fully intends to end up with all that oil.

• Shmully and guilt
  • jdfsau May 2, 2012 at 11:20 am with 1 replies

    I notice from his comments that the only one that tokyobk feels is unworthy of an invitation to one of his little love fests is Gilad Atzmon.

    Gilad Atzmon should feel complimented. Apparently tokyobk and his cohorts are at VERY aware of Atzmon's new book "The Wandering Who". The majority of them have probably been under orders not to read it but are VERY aware of its purported contents and consider it a truly existential threat of what appears to be almost Spinoza like proportions.

    I have heard Atzmon speak on two occasions. Both occasions were picketed by both Zionists and, interestingly enough, by supposed anti-Zionists.The first time he spoke the audience was full of people like tokyobk who attempted to take and embarrass Atzmon on and in the question section that followed his speech. Atzmon's replies to both their questions simply rendered them, for probably the first time in their lives, speechless. They ended up simply sitting there, mouths agape and fuming. Having their hypocrisy made so apparent, for probably the first time, by the absolutely fearless Atzmon was too much for them. I was struck by their sudden, strange, and very uncharacteristic silence.

    They were nowhere to be seen, except for picketing outside, during the second Atzmon speech I attended a year or so later. As usual they had tried to get his speech canceled but to no avail. Their lack of attendance at the speech itself showed that they weren't into being hardily spanked twice.

• Peres awaits, Shakira
  • jdfsau June 21, 2011 at 10:36 am with 3 replies

    It gets worse. Shakira is of Lebanese descent. I guess she wants to personally meet the people who bombed Beirut and her relatives to smithereens and congratulate them on their policy of "strategic remodeling."

• Bay Area billboards 'thank' the US for Israel's blank check
  • jdfsau July 29, 2010 at 3:41 pm

    Here is a rather revealing aside to the the issue of state employee retirement funds being pressured to buy Israeli bonds, which are, comparatively speaking, a terrible investment choice.

    Several years ago my friend Ed Miller, and only after much effort, finally got to speak before a committee of the California State Assemby about the California State Employees Retirement Fund (CALPERS,the biggest retirement fund in the US) and its long long time practice of purchasing, under obvious pressure, Israeli bonds despite the fact that they were markedly inferior in return and far less safe than other investment choices.

    He started speaking and to his amazement soon noticed that the previously attentive assemblymen and women had suddenly started reading newspapers and gossiping with their neighbors while he gave his presentation. They ignored him completely. It was as if he had suddenly become invisible.

    These Assembly people were so terrified of even giving the slightest appearance of lending serious consideration to the opinions of this obviously derrainged (to them) speaker that they pretended like he wasn't there. This was obviously done out of fear that their Zionist moneybags and media moguls might take offense if they were to fain even the slightest interest in what Ed had to say, let alone actually ask him questions about what the information he had presented to them.

    This happened several years ago. The Zionist influence over these retirement funds continues unabated today. These funds will not invest in any entity that doesn't have the seal of approval of the Israeli government.
    The country of Turkey will soon find this out.

• Cartoonists get the story, even if MSM is muzzled
  • jdfsau June 20, 2010 at 3:05 pm

    I just checked out the response from the editorial board. You get the impression it was dictated to it by AIPAC (which it probably was). This indicates the newspaper editors must have received some serious threats from the powers that be to have caved in like this.

    There is another interesting phenomenon that is starting to occur across the Internet that is reflected in the comments section following the editorial board response. All of the comments are following the board's article ( seven at the point I had finished the article early this morning) are pro Israel.

    This is happening more and more since the flotilla incident. The supporters of Israel appear to be given advance notice of the articles so that they can load up the comments sections when they first open. Then the comments sections are mysteriously cut off to other writers or simply vanish when the peasants get too uppity with their comments.

    This is why any impartial website with a comment section should publish the latest comments to articles first rather last to avoid this sort of problem.

    The Cleveland Plain Dealer was clearly threatened and it has good reason to pay heed to such threats. In the San Francisco Bay Area supporters of AIPAC and the ADL have shut down down two pro Palestinians newspapers, the monthly "The Coastal Post" and "The Berkeley Daily Planet" in the last six month to year period. This was accomplished this by threatening these newpapers' advertisers with boycotts, threatening the editorial staff, and stealing newspapers out of newspaper racks.

    These newspapers were then told that the boycotts and threats would only end if the newspapers promised to never cover the situation in the Mideast again.

    What was especially curious was the almost total lack of support these beleaguered newspapers received from the supposedly left wing community in the Bay Area. No big fund raising benefits. No anguished appeals from Radio station KPFA. No large scale picketing. Nothing. It was as if the two newspapers had been blacklisted by progressives. Apparently the two newspaper had veered too far away from "acceptable" opposition.

    The situation reminded me of something I had observed while attending a speech given by Gilad Atzmon a few months ago in Berkeley. Atzmon favors a one state solution. The audience was made up of a significant number of older left wing Zionists. They pleaded with Atzmon saying that he was being too tough on Israel and that Israel could somehow fix itself if given a chance. Atzmon would have none of their rationalizations. He said, echoing Israel Shahak, that Israel's original origins were based on racism and corruption and these two things made any redemption from within impossible. It had occurred tome at the time that the people criticizing Atzmon were exactly the same people who had so easily thrown "The Coastal Post" and "The Berkeley Daily Planet" to the wolves.

• My brother-in-law was going to pray when he was killed
  • jdfsau June 14, 2010 at 6:21 am with 2 replies

    If anyone thinks that the newly announced and supposedly "impartial" Israeli government investigation is going to be actually impartial, you should read this article written by David Trimble, one of those "outsiders" chosen by the Israeli government to participate. In the following article he writes very disparagingly about Hamas.

    He also seems to have connections to the UK group Conservative Friends of Israel before which he has spoken in the past.
    What a sham this is turning out to be!

    link to guardian.co.uk

• 'Huffpo' reflects staggering shift in liberal American discourse
  • jdfsau June 3, 2010 at 4:47 pm with 1 replies

    The only reason that Adrianna Huffington and Huffpo are being somewhat impartial is that she realizes her previous pro Israeli stance has suddenly become totally untenable.

    Ms. Huffington was once described by one of her friends as being "the most ambitious person he had ever met." She has has been a long acolyte and close friend of the reptilian Henry Kissinger so I believe that she probably contacted Henry beforehand to make sure that her new position wouldn't ruffle too many feathers. Apparently Henry must have told her that her new position could still be deemed as "kosher." It would have been absolutely inconceivable for her to have changed her position in such a way without first covering her bases. She is simply not the heroic type.

    Here is Adrianna Huffington is a nutshell. Around 1985 she announced to friends that she needed a husband ASAP. No one apparently knows the reason for this sudden urgency. She then went to her good friend Ann Getty, wife of oil billionaire Gordon Getty, and put in a request for a new hubby. (sorta like ordering a new TV). Ann Getty looked around and found wealthy Bush family crony Michael Huffington who had many things to recommend him ($$$$$) but also had one glaring deficiency: he was gay and potentially damaging whispers were starting to put his political career in jeopardy. Apparently Michael Huffington's sexual preferences were not a matter of concern in the least for Adrianna. She was not only was able to become a blushing bride, she was also able to talk the Getty's into paying for her elaborate wedding and reception, apparently by claiming poverty. What a saleswoman!

    After the two got hitched, her new hubby's career was instantly resuscitated. She remained his devoted but relatively absent wife until he was forced to come out of the closet a decade or so later. She then claimed that his lifestyle was a big surprise to her. (Apparently she wasn't put off by his ongoing lack of sexual ardor. After all, that was the reason he had made such an ideal husband.)

    Such a cynical move on Ms. Huffington's part shows that she is the ultimate opportunist. Don't think for a minute that her views on the Mideast have permanently changed. She is capable of doing a 180 degree about face yet again if such a move is required for self preservation. She is the ultimate survivor.

• House votes 410-4 to award another $205 million to--
  • jdfsau May 21, 2010 at 8:27 am

    This isn't aid, it is tribute, the same thing that a vassal give to his master or that the conquered gives to the conqueror. Its true purpose is to make the inferior acknowledge his inferiority. It can't be argued about in the context of normal foreign aid because it isn't in any sense normal. Israel demanded this "bonus" at this particular time to make it abundantly clear to its critics that the US's ongoing financial distress would simply not be a factor in determining its future funding for Israel.

• Why can't 'NYT' get on the horn to Finkelstein, Malsin, Falk & famous Spanish clown?
  • jdfsau May 17, 2010 at 2:28 pm with 3 replies

    What a hoot! I would have thought that Israel would have gone out of its way to welcome Chomksy's visit with open arms and a parade in his honor.

    Chomsky has become the prime water carrier for Israel on the left. He is the main left wing critic of Mearsheimer and Walt. He is probably the most influential critic of any sort of boycotts against Israel for its civil rights violations.

    Chomsky has always been Israel's controlled opposition. Nothing more.

    I cannot imagine Israel denying his entry for any reason other than to try to rebuild Chomsky's ever dwindling credibility among the left. What a blatant bit of disinformation this denial is.

• University of California execs say they'll only divest from occupation if US gov't finds genocide
  • jdfsau May 11, 2010 at 11:37 pm with 6 replies

    The campaign to recognize the Armenian genocide will go absolutely nowhere.
    Once it is found that arch Zionist Vladimir Jobotinsky was a major influence , as editor of the Young Turk Newspaper, on the new Young Turk movement people will suddenly get cold feet about pursuing the investigation any further.
    Their feet will get muchm much colder when the name of the Russian Jewish radical Alexander Parvus's name comes up. Parvus edited the other Young Turk newspaper, Turk Yurdu. He was also an integral part of the early history of the Jewish dominated Bolshevik movement in Europe. Jobotinksy and Parvus, by virtue of the important positions as editors granted them (despite being non Turks), show the odd intersecting of Jewish radicalism, Zionism, and the Young Turk interests.
    Parvus as well was intimately connected with the so called Three Pashas - Enver, Talat and Cemal - and Finance Minister Djavid Bey. The triumvirs of Three Pashas planned and executed Armenian Genocide in 1915.

    wiki for Parvus :link to en.wikipedia.org

    Curiously enough, this phase of Jobotinsky's life is missing from most internet biographies of him.

    wiki for Jabotinsky : http://en.wikipedia.org
    /wiki/Ze%27ev_Jabotinsky

• Report: Junior Israel lobbyist eavesdropped on Massad's class at Columbia
  • jdfsau April 30, 2010 at 9:52 pm with 3 replies

    Curious response from lareineblanche. I don't care what Zundel said, I believe that it is essential that we support the free speech of all or we support the free speech of none. Zundel suffered egregiously for his beliefs and his treatment has provided a glimpse to what the future might hold for all dissidents. Canada can now be officially designated as a police state.

    Somehow I get the impression that lareineblanche is especially upset that this article has been posted for all to see in its entirety. The reason she is asking for the link is so she can forward it to her friends at the ADL so the site can be shut down.

  • jdfsau April 30, 2010 at 8:08 pm

    Speaking of civil rights.
    Howdy:
    I came upon this quite by accident today. You might want to ask why progressives (or libertarians) chose to totally ignore this travesty when it was going on. My concern arises out of something my father once told me in the 1960's during the civil right demonstration. He said that "free speech will wither when left doesn't support the civil rights of those on the fringe." He also went on to say "It will never fully recover when when a travesty (like this one) is allowed to occur in silence.

    God, what an overpoweringly evil precedent this opens for the rest of us.

    Testing the Limits Of Freedom Of Speech -
    Ernst Zundel Speaks Out
    Foreign Policy Journal's Exclusive Interview With One
    Of The World's Best-Known Political Prisoners
    By Kourosh Ziabari
    4-30-10

    (Note - The first radio interview with Mr. Zundel will occur soon on the Jeff Rense Program. - ed)

    Ernst Zundel is a German author and historian who has spent seven years of his life behind bars as a result of expressing his controversial viewpoints and opinions. He is a revisionist who has denied the Holocaust as described by most historians. He has been one of the most prominent political prisoners in Europe and has been jailed in three countries on two continents.

    After his arrest in the U.S. in 2003, he was deported to Canada, where he was kept in prison as "a threat to the national security" for two years. After deportation to Germany in March 2005, he was convicted and sentenced in 2007 to five additional years of imprisonment on charges of holocaust denial. He was finally released on March 1, 2010.

    This is the first interview Ernst Zundel has given since his release, published in the Foreign Policy Journal.

    Firstly, I would like to extend my congratulations on your recent release. Were you ever mistreated or subject to any type of mental or physical punishment in breach of international conventions?

    My entire treatment these past seven years by those arresting me, trying and convicting me, and keeping me in prison has been in brutal breach of international conventions. I was arrested in broad daylight on American soil by officials of the U.S. government who acted as hit squads for a nefarious lobby. There was no arrest warrant. I was not read my rights. I was whisked away in handcuffs without being allowed to get my wallet, to call my attorney, to be allowed to make my case before an American Immigration Judge or even hug my wife goodbye.

    I was incarcerated in six different prisons on two continents in three countries-the USA, Canada, and Germany-without relief of any kind. In effect, I have had 10 percent of my life stolen from me ­ and for what "crime"? For having "overstayed my U.S. visa"?

    Throughout my imprisonment, basic human rights principles were trampled underfoot repeatedly and with impunity. The worst prisons were the Canadian detention centers at Thorold, Ontario and at Toronto West, where I was held for two long years in isolation cells, ice-cold in the winter, no shoes or socks allowed. The electric light in these cells, bright enough to be able to read, was kept on 24 hours a day. Through a glass slot in the door I was checked every 20 minutes, and my activities were meticulously noted by the guards: one sheet for every day. No dignity, no privacy. My toothbrush was kept in a plastic bin in a hall. I was not allowed to speak to other prisoners.

    Bed sheets were changed only after three months. No pillows. No chairs. When I wrote to my wife or to my attorneys, I had to sit on a makeshift pile of my court transcripts. No radio, no television, not even an electrical outlet to sharpen my pencils. No ball point pens, only pencil stubs, cut in half with a saw. No spoons, forks, or knives were permitted; only a white plastic spoon with a fork called a "spork" that had to be returned every time at the end of the meal. With very few exceptions when furtive guards showed me some kindness away from the surveillance cameras, I was treated as though I was the worst of criminals. That's Canada for you, where I have lived and worked without a criminal record for more than 40 years.

    It was somewhat better, but not much, in the United States. In Germany, it was quite a bit better in terms of the basic necessities, but personal mail was routinely withheld ­ 1,700 letters for up to five years ­ even after I forced a court to order that it be given to me. My so-called trial in Mannheim was a political show trial in the Stalinist mode in that my guilt was a foregone conclusion. I requested that exculpatory exhibits be allowed as validation for what I believed and had written and said. No meaningful defense was allowed. I could not put on record any forensic evidence, any historical documents, or even expert witnesses, That very request to be allowed to offer evidence was held to be a new offense of criminal behavior and could have resulted in new criminal charges ­ as were, in fact, lodged against my lawyers during that very trial who tried to overcome these restrictions.

    Along with the rest of EU members, Germany regularly criticizes other countries for violations of free speech and human rights. However, your case demonstrated the emptiness of such claims within Europe. What's your take on that? Is Europe really a utopia of liberty and freedom of speech?

    Most European countries have only selected free speech for officially approved and sanctioned views on history. Almost all EU countries have laws in place that restrict freedom of speech under the guise of one fig leaf or other, such as the prevention of racist or neo-Nazi activities. The state decides selectively who is and what is racist. These laws are hypocritical, in Germany's case superseding even their own Basic Law.

    Dissidents are allowed very little opportunity to be read or heard in the mainstream corporate media channels of the West. The control mechanisms of the press are many, often subtle but widely understood and obeyed ­ fear of loss of jobs, diminished circulation, the withholding of government advertisements etc. There is no longer unrestricted freedom in any Western country, not even in the U.S. with its wonderful Constitution and Amendments such as the Bill of Rights.

    Allow me here to point out to your readers the outline of a censorship practice known by its neutral term "rendition", but more honestly defined as political kidnappings to force the silencing of dissident speech or alternate thoughts. Renditions in the West are ever more frequently practiced not only against alleged "terrorist suspects" but against ordinary political activists and writers whose viewpoints are frowned upon by such outfits as AIPAC and similar Zionist lobby and interest groups, B'nai Brith, the Canadian Jewish Congress etc.

    In order to spell out what I can only describe to you in broad strokes, I'd like to briefly shed light on the period preceding my arrest in the U.S. and Canada, the conniving and the similarity in other cases like mine, where an innocuous or alleged infraction is used as a fig leaf to silence a political opponent.

    Viet Dinh, a Georgetown University law professor and director of their Asian Law and Policy Studies Program who helped craft the Patriot Act, put it succinctly, as reported in an American publication called Wired that deals with freedom of speech on the net. That interview reads:

    Wired News: An estimated 5,000 people have been subjected to detention since 9/11. Of those, only five - three noncitizens and two citizens - were charged with terrorism-related crimes and one was convicted. How do we justify such broad-sweeping legislation that has resulted in very few terrorist-related convictions?

    Dinh: I've heard the 5,000 number. The official numbers released from the Department of Justice indicate approximately 500 persons have been charged with immigration violations and have been deported who have been of interest to the 9/11 investigation.

    It may well be that a number of citizens were not charged with terrorism-related crimes, but they need not be. Where the department has suspected people of terrorism, it will prosecute those persons for other violations of law, rather than wait for a terrorist conspiracy to fully develop and risk the potential that that conspiracy will be missed and thereby sacrificing innocent American lives in the process.

    This is exactly what happened to me. The initial reason given was an alleged immigration infraction ­ namely a "visa overstay". I was no terrorist; I was a dissident writer. My political detractors knew perfectly well that I was in America legally, awaiting adjustment of status due to my marriage to an American citizen. I was in Immigration Adjustment of Status proceedings, meticulously following all the prerequisite steps. I was living openly in a rural area in Tennessee and was listed by address in the local telephone book. The U.S. government had given me a Social Security number, a work permit, a document that allowed me to leave the country and return unmolested. I had undergone and passed an FBI check and a health clearance. The only last step missing was a personal interview by an immigration official to ascertain a valid marriage to my American citizen wife.

    We had been notified in writing that this interview could take as long as three years, and that no status report would be given. We were patiently waiting for that last step, a routine interview with an immigration official. Our immigration attorney had requested such an interview in writing ­ twice! Under oath, he testified that he had written those letters. These letters have mysteriously disappeared from our immigration file. When I was arrested, it was claimed that I had negligently "missed a hearing" which gave them grounds for an arrest due to a visa overstay. In other words, a simple bureaucratic loophole was found or fabricated that has cost me seven years of my life.

    What happened to me in the context of a deliberate state policy of deception has also happened to others. Similar ruses via false accusations were used in cases like Germar Rudolf, likefwise married to an American citizen, El Masri of Germany, Maher Arar of Canada, Gerd Honsik of Spain, Siegfried Verbeke of Belgium, David Irving, and now Bishop Williamson of England, to name only a few individuals who were caught between the grind stones of a criminal policy possible only under the Patriot Act in the U.S. and similar legal instruments in other countries. Embedded in that background of a widespread covert policy and practice to force political conformity, my case makes eminent sense. We are no longer dealing with an aberration. These extrajudicial renditions give 9/11 and the Patriot Act a new light as a global policy instrument of brutal censorship of unpopular thinkers and writers.

    The thrust of a prestigious publication such as yours would normally deal with the policies of foreign governments, renditions, kidnappings, and incarcerations not only of foreign enemies but, as in the case of Vanunu, an Israeli-born- and-raised atomic scientist. He was no neo-Nazi, no racist, no Holocaust Denier, yet he was relentlessly pursued by the Mossad and ultimately kidnapped and jailed for 18 years.

    The patterns of the breaking of international law and conventions, the use of false identities, and the brazen practice of breaking and entering by spy and intelligence agencies, etc. ­ these criminal activities are daily in the news. This sets the stage and makes my case a logical progression of an old, established policy, with this one difference: we are no longer talking about hunting and kidnapping alleged "Nazi war criminals" like Eichmann or stone-throwing Palestinians or even "Arab terrorists", but instead the targeting of writers and other political dissidents in Western countries calling themselves "democracies".

    My story does not even end there. In my case, my "Holocaust Denier" profile was convenient, but passé. It was not even, as is so commonly and falsely claimed, "Denial of the Holocaust" or even more bizarre, my "visa overstay"! I was told what actually happened by a friend of ours with high-level UN connections. In his own words: "It was the Blue Booklet that did it! That's when it was decided at the very highest level to take you out for good!"

    Here is what happened, briefly: In the early months post-9/11 my wife, an avid Internetter, discovered a compelling research document entitled Stranger than Fiction: An Independent Investigation of 9/11 and the War on Terrorism by Anonymous, 11-11-2. She gave it to me over breakfast. I read it, found it interesting, and ran a few copies off on my printer for people on my mailing list. I did not write that lavishly footnoted paper. I did not research it. I merely copied it. Somebody must have concluded that I, with my background of thorough forensic investigations in other areas, showed more than ordinary interest in 9/11 as a potential political false flag common in intelligence agency operations!

    During my trial in Mannheim, ostensibly for "Holocaust Denial", portions of my monthly newsletter, where I mentioned this booklet and the 9/11 topic, were referenced by the prosecution as criminal offenses. Only after it became clear that I welcomed the opportunity to have my attorneys present forensic evidence of a potential 9/11 cover-up were those portions of the accusation against me hastily dropped, and my trial became a "Holocaust Denial" show trial in the traditional Stalinist mode, " accuse wildly but don't allow a defense!"

    As we later found out through various freedom of information requests in various countries, there was in place for years a deliberate, convoluted plan to arrest and detain me under false pretenses so as to take me out and put me behind bars.

    I mention this only as an overarching, logical example as to how diabolically clever my political opponents are in using the accusation of "Holocaust Denial" and persecution of Holocaust Revisionists as arrows in their arsenal of weaponry to shore up, consolidate, and protect their deceptively acquired power and influence.

    What's the reality behind Holocaust? Didn't it happen at all? What about people such as Elie Wiesel, Thomas Blatt, Wladyslaw Bartoszewski and Leopold Engleitner who are Holocaust survivors and describe their own accounts of those painful days, when they personally witnessed the heart-rending demise of their parents in concentration camps and bone-crushing machines. How should we resolve these contradictions?

    I will not answer this question. I would risk five more years in jail if I answered these questions honestly and truthfully. However, in the age of the Internet, others less known than I am find ways to simplify a painful, multifaceted problem, as the cartoon [Prevent Holocaust, Bomb Iran by Carlos Latuff] makes plain.

    Many people of other countries have come to the categorical conclusion that the Western world is a beacon of liberty and unrestricted freedom of speech. But it sometimes seems that the reality is something else, and that people can be easily prosecuted merely for publishing views that are disliked. The booklet you published, Did Six Million Really Die?, is an example. What do you think?

    Here is just one more example of what I already outlined above: We have faxes and other documents that prove on official embassy letterhead that the much vaunted and propagandized U.S. Judiciary has run interference for these kidnappers and renditioners via behind-the-scenes ex parte communication, thus engaging in a cover-up and whitewash worse than the ones practiced by those the U.S. government always blames for human rights violations in their hypocritical press campaigns, like against China in Tibet, Lukashenko in Belarus, Putin in Moscow and, of course, Iran during the recent so-called Green Revolution.

    Many Zionist websites have introduced you as a white supremacist. Is that a fair characterization?

    This claim is a convenient character assassination technique. I have never been a white supremacist and have stated so for decades, publicly, in countless interviews, newsletters, speeches, broadcasts, etc. It is my opponents' modus operandi to broad-brush complex issues by politically expedient demonization.

    You're opposed to the regime of Israel because of its discriminatory and atrocious approach against the nation of Palestine. You consider yourself a pacifist who advocates stability and peace; aren't these beliefs incompatible with your viewpoint regarding Hitler, who is internationally considered to be a notorious dictator and relentless killer? How can your peace-seeking stance come together with your approval of Hitler?

    I cannot answer this question due to legal restraints. An honest and complete answer would land me in jail as a re-offender very quickly. Implicit in your question is the toxic image of me that my detractors would like you to have. To be called a Nazi is worse than being called a leper. For decades I have been on the receiving end of just such a targeted character assassination campaign. I have been jailed many times not for advocating an ideology but for expressing a dissident, alternative viewpoint on many topics, including Adolf Hitler's role in history. Revisionism is not an ideology. It is merely a scientific method of re-examining historical events and of trying to understand the movers and shakers who made history a footnote to their personalities.

    Let me answer your question this way: I have always abhorred any kind of violence in the pursuit of political goals. By anyone! Politically, I was and am a pacifist, much in the Gandhi style. I advocate a sober, neutral look at history, including the period known as the Third Reich. The peoples of the world, regardless of what system of government they live under, owe it to themselves to emancipate themselves of the simplistic images of propaganda and deceit posing as history.

    On May 1995, your Toronto residence was the target of an arson attack which resulted in $400,000 worth of damage. A few days later, some of your extremist opponents were caught trying to break into your property. Again a few days later, you received a parcel bomb which the Toronto police detonated. Have you ever tried to lodge a complaint against them? Have they ever been lawfully sentenced?

    This is the flip side of some of the questions above. While I have never advocated or engaged in violence, egregious acts of violence have been repeatedly practiced on me, of which the political kidnapping in 2003 was merely the latest. As to the fire and the bomb, no, nothing was ever resolved. The police apprehended the bomb builders and senders, but the charges laid were stayed. There seems to have been no political will at the highest levels of the Canadian government. There was no political coin to be garnered by prosecuting Jewish arsonists, who even confessed to the deed.

    Do you differentiate between the Zionists and Jews as the followers of a divine, monotheistic religion?

    Yes, the two are totally different. Some Orthodox Jews who are united against Zionism, such as the Neturei Karta, believe that also. They know the godfathers of Communism and Zionism followed identical policies. The guiding spirit behind the two systems is the same. Neturei Karta rabbis attended the 2006 Teheran Conference sponsored by your President in an attempt to distance themselves from what they consider to be a dangerous atheist clique in the pursuit of illegal politics of conquest of which they want no part.

    The mainstream corporate media, while having already vilified you, remained silent about your release. What do you think about this? Are you going to continue your ideological path or would you prefer to keep a low profile and forget about the intellectual activities?

    Ironically, that was exactly what I intended to do when I moved to Tennessee and married Ingrid; keeping a low profile and turning to private endeavors such as my love for art and music. I felt that my revisionist outreach was finished, concluded to my inner satisfaction. Let others read both sides and then judge for themselves. All the arguments, all the information needed on the Holocaust is out there, on the Internet, in tens of thousands of websites, all for the taking. How often do you have to dig up an archeological site to find yet one more bone, yet one more implicating shard? My wife likes to say that you don't have to eat a camel to know what a cutlet tastes like. I was quite ready to retire and satisfy my creative needs and desires. I could leave the political mopping-up activities for others to complete. But could my political opponents bring themselves, as rational people might have, to likewise call it quits? No; that is simply not in their nature.

    As you point out so cogently, a powerful vilification campaign is still going full blast. It keeps my name in the media for people to decide for themselves who I am. Upon my release, my wife has collected thousands and thousands of letters from readers, only three of which were negative! Not a bad record, of the millions of dollars spent and millions of words dispersed in an attempt to paint me as as a devil with horns.

    Let me ask you ­ would your prestigious publication have cared to interview me if you thought that I deserved the label of 'Evil Incarnate'?

    (FPJ's editor note: The views and beliefs of Ernst Zundel are his own, and not those of Foreign Policy Journal. It is the policy of FPJ to uphold the principle of freedom of speech, which means freedom to say things that others may find despicable. It is otherwise a meaningless principle. It is also the position of FPJ that both sides to a story deserve to be heard. It's up to readers to draw their own conclusions and make their own judgments.)

• Not a good time to be Martin Kramer, or a good time to be Harvard's Weatherhead Center
  • jdfsau April 19, 2010 at 12:50 pm with 4 replies

    I am convinced that Richard Witty isn't really a person but a propaganda
    department of the Israeli government. Either that or he is Superman

    This guy is absolutely everywhere. He not only shows up at any and all Mideast related websites, he is probably one of the most prolific writers of letters to newspaper editors in the western hemisphere as well. He has even seen fit to offer his sage advice to our local, minuscule monthly newspaper "The Coastal Post" which is published in tiny Bolinas, California.

    The Coastal Post is now under attack by the minions of the ADL for its pro Palestinian positions. The Berkeley, California newspaper "The Daily Planet" is under similar, strong attack. Oddly enough, Mr. Witty has recently been struck uncharacteristically mute about the continuing attempts to put The Post out of business by threatening its advertisers and stealing its newspapers.

• Feeling the hate in Washington
  • jdfsau November 23, 2009 at 11:18 am

    When it comes to boycotts, no company deserves it more than chip maker Intel.
    I just read this weekend that Intel has 6500 employees in Israel. This is a curious bit of information because Israel is a comparatively high cost place to do business. It would have been much cheaper for Intel to do both its research and manufacturing in either China or India, where there is easily enough engineering talent and sheer brainpower to make the chips but at a far lower cost.

    Instead, Intel's decision to locate its factory in Israel must have been based almost entirely on non-economic concerns. This means of course that Intel is subsidizing its Israeli operations at the expense of both its American stockholders and potential American employees.

    Consider the fact that these 6500 employees are employed in a country with a population of just 7.3 million,which is less than three percent of the population of the USA, and you get an idea of just how big this subsidy is. (By comparison, Intel employs 48,000 people in the USA). Next time someone is driving around Silicon Valley and comes upon any of the many ex-Intel employees there who or either unemployed or underemployed making lattes at the local Starbucks, you might stop and tell them where a sizable number of their jobs seem to have disappeared to to. Not some third world country with very low wage rates, but to Israel, a country with one of the highest standards of living in the world. I think they will be standing there with their mouths' wide open when this bit of information finally sinks in.

    The fact that Israel is even more notorious than China for outright technology theft is another reason to question the "curious" rationale behind Intel's decision to locate their very expensive (multi billion dollar) chip foundries there.

Showing comments 17 - 1
Page: 1