|
1. Israelis arrested on 9/11 sue U.S.
By Yuval Yoaz

Wed., September 15, 2004 Elul 29, 5764
Four Israelis arrested in New York on September 11, 2001, a short
while after the attacks on the World Trade Center, filed a
multi-million-dollar suit in the United States on Monday against the
American Department of Justice.
The four, Paul and Sylvian Kurcheil, Omer Marmari and Vyron Shmuel,
claim that their arrests were illegal, and that they were held for
months while they were interrogated and tortured.
In their suit, filed in New York District Court through their
attorneys, Nitzana Dershen-Leitner and Robert Tulchin, they claim that
"law officials, policemen and jailers arrested the four illegally, for
a long and protracted period, and violated their human rights while
they were detained at a holding center in 2001."
The four were employed by a New Jersey moving firm and the truck they
were riding in was stopped near the George Washington bridge between
New Jersey and New York when the Twin Towers were attacked.
The police officers arrested the four after they saw that they held
foreign (Israeli) driving licenses. They were arrested as suspects in
the terrorist attack and were transfered to the FBI for interrogation.
The four, who are now in Israel, claim that they were held in complete
isolation, without being allowed to meet with their attorneys or their
families, and were exposed to harsh interrogation methods, physical
abuse, sleep deprivation and racist insults

2. GI In Iraq - 'This Whole War Was
Based On Lies'
By Ann Scott Tyson
Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
9-22-4
- WASHINGTON -
Inside dusty, barricaded camps around Iraq, groups of American
troops in between missions are gathering around screens to
view an unlikely choice from the US box office: "Fahrenheit
9-11," Michael Moore's controversial documentary attacking the
commander-in-chief.
-
- "Everyone's watching it," says a Marine
corporal at an outpost in Ramadi that is mortared by
insurgents daily. "It's shaping a lot of people's image of
Bush."
-
- The film's prevalence is one sign of a
discernible countercurrent among US troops in Iraq - those who
blame President Bush for entangling them in what they see as a
misguided war. Conventional wisdom holds that the troops are
staunchly pro-Bush, and many are. But bitterness over long,
dangerous deployments is producing, at a minimum, pockets of
support for Democratic candidate Sen. John Kerry, in part
because he's seen as likely to withdraw American forces from
Iraq more quickly.
-
- "[For] 9 out of 10 of the people I talk
to, it wouldn't matter who ran against Bush - they'd vote for
them," said a US soldier in the southern city of Najaf,
seeking out a reporter to make his views known. "People are so
fed up with Iraq, and fed up with Bush."
-
- With only three weeks until an Oct. 11
deadline set for hundreds of thousands of US troops abroad to
mail in absentee ballots, this segment of the military vote is
important - symbolically, as a reflection on Bush as a wartime
commander, and politically, as absentee ballots could end up
tipping the balance in closely contested states.
-
- It is difficult to gauge the extent of
disaffection with Bush, which emerged in interviews in June
and July with ground forces in central, northern, and southern
Iraq. No scientific polls exist on the political leanings of
currently deployed troops, military experts and officials say.
-
- To be sure, broader surveys of US military
personnel and their spouses in recent years indicate they are
more likely to be conservative and Republican than the US
civilian population - but not overwhelmingly so.
-
- A Military Times survey last December of
933 subscribers, about 30 percent of whom had deployed for the
Iraq war, found that 56 percent considered themselves
Republican - about the same percentage who approved of Bush's
handling of Iraq. Half of those responding were officers, who
as a group tend to be more conservative than their enlisted
counterparts.
-
- Among officers, who represent roughly 15
percent of today's 1.4 million active duty military personnel,
there are about eight Republicans for every Democrat,
according to a 1999 survey by Duke University political
scientist Peter Feaver. Enlisted personnel, however - a
disproportionate number of whom are minorities, a population
that tends to lean Democratic - are more evenly split.
Professor Feaver estimates that about one third of enlisted
troops are Republicans, one third Democrats, and the rest
independents, with the latter group growing.
-
- Pockets of ambivalence
-
- "The military continues to be a Bush
stronghold, but it's not a stranglehold," Feaver says. Three
factors make the military vote more in play for Democrats this
year than in 2000, he says: the Iraq war, Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld's tense relationship with the Army, and Bush's
limited ability as an incumbent to make sweeping promises akin
to Senator Kerry's pledge to add 40,000 new troops and relieve
an overstretched force.
-
- "The military as a whole supports the Iraq
war," Mr. Feaver says, noting a historical tendency of troops
to back the commander in chief in wartime. "But you can go
across the military and find pockets where they are more
ambivalent," he says, especially among the National Guard and
Reserve. "The war has not gone as swimmingly as they thought,
and that has caused disaffection.
-
- Whether representing pockets of opposition
to Bush or something bigger, soldiers and marines on Iraq's
front lines can be impassioned in their criticism. One Marine
officer in Ramadi who had lost several men said he was
thinking about throwing his medals over the White House wall.
-
- "Nobody I know wants Bush," says an
enlisted soldier in Najaf, adding, "This whole war was based
on lies." Like several others interviewed, his animosity
centered on a belief that the war lacked a clear purpose even
as it took a tremendous toll on US troops, many of whom are in
Iraq involuntarily under "stop loss" orders that keep them in
the service for months beyond their scheduled exit in order to
keep units together during deployments.
-
- "There's no clear definition of why we
came here," says Army Spc. Nathan Swink, of Quincy, Ill.
"First they said they have WMD and nuclear weapons, then it
was to get Saddam Hussein out of office, and then to rebuild
Iraq. I want to fight for my nation and for my family, to
protect the United States against enemies foreign and
domestic, not to protect Iraqi civilians or deal with Sadr's
militia," he said.
-
- Specialist Swink, who comes from a family
of both Democrats and Republicans, plans to vote for Kerry.
"Kerry protested the war in Vietnam. He is the one to end this
stuff, to lead to our exit of Iraq," he said.
-
- 'We shouldn't be here'
-
- Other US troops expressed feelings of
guilt over killing Iraqis in a war they believe is unjust.
-
- "We shouldn't be here," said one Marine
infantryman bluntly. "There was no reason for invading this
country in the first place. We just came here and [angered
people] and killed a lot of innocent people," said the marine,
who has seen regular combat in Ramadi. "I don't enjoy killing
women and children, it's not my thing."
-
- As with his comrades, the marine accepted
some of the most controversial claims of "Fahrenheit 9/11,"
which critics have called biased. "Bush didn't want to attack
[Osama] Bin Laden because he was doing business with Bin
Laden's family," he said.
-
- Another marine, Sgt. Christopher Wallace
of Pataskala, Ohio, agreed that the film was making an
impression on troops. "Marines nowadays want to know stuff.
They want to be informed, because we'll be voting out here
soon," he said. " 'Fahrenheit 9/11' opened our eyes to things
we hadn't seen before." But, he added after a pause, "We still
have full faith and confidence in our commander-in-chief. And
if John Kerry is elected, he will be our commander in chief."
-
- Getting out the military vote
-
- No matter whom they choose for president,
US troops in even the most remote bases in Iraq, Afghanistan,
and elsewhere overseas are more likely than in 2000 to have an
opportunity to vote - and have their votes counted - thanks to
a major push by the Pentagon to speed and postmark their
ballots. The Pentagon is now expediting ballots for all 1.4
million active-duty military personnel and their 1.3 million
voting-age dependents, as well as 3.7 million US civilians
living abroad.
-
- "We wrote out a plan of attack on how we
are going to address these issues this election year," says
Maj. Lonnie Hammack, the lead postal officer for US Central
Command, an area covering the Middle East, Central Asia, and
North Africa, where more than 225,000 troops and Defense
Department personnel serve.
-
- The military has added manpower, flights,
and postmark-validating equipment, and given priority to
moving ballots - by Humvee or helicopter if necessary - even
to far-flung outposts such as those on the Syrian and
Pakistani border and Djibouti.
-
- Meanwhile, voting-assistance officers in
every military unit are remind- ing troops to vote, as are
posters, e-mails, and newspaper and television announcements.
Voting booths are also set up at deployment centers in the
United States.
-
- "We've had almost 100 percent contact,"
says Col. Darrell Jones, director of manpower and personnel
for Central Command, and 200,000 federal postcard ballot
applications have been shipped.
-
- "We encourage our people to vote, not for
a certain candidate, but to exercise that right," he said,
noting that was especially important as the US military is
"out there promoting fledgling democracy in these regions."
Many of the younger troops may be voting for the first time,
he added.
|

3. Did Rupert Murdoch Have Prior Knowledge of
9/11?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2004 10:48 AM
Subject: 9/11 News - Mike Ruppert's new book available for
advance orders!
Did Rupert Murdoch Have Prior Knowledge of
9/11?
Last updated 08/10/2003
Christopher Bollyn is an investigative journalist who has
written extensively on the events of September 11, 2001 in the
Washington-based American Free Press. He has researched different
aspects of the 9/11 attacks and uncovered facts and evidence that
challenge the official version of events.
Two organizations, both pro-Israel, the Anti Defamation League
(ADL) and the Fox News network, have desperately tried to smear
Bollyn as an “anti-Semite” in order to discredit him and diminish
the significance of his work. At the helm of both organizations,
the ADL and Fox News, is an Australian-born Zionist named Keith
Rupert Murdoch.
Murdoch and the ADL are clearly trying to marginalize Bollyn, and
other independent researchers like him, who use facts to challenge
the government’s flawed explanation of what occurred on 9/11.
Did Rupert Murdoch Have Prior Knowledge of 9/11?
Rupert Murdoch is said to be television’s “most
powerful man in the world with the capacity to reach more than 110
million viewers across four continents.” Murdoch sits at the helm
of News Corp., the parent company of Fox News network, and
controls a large part of the mass media in the United States,
including The New York Post and the Fox cinema and television
network.
Murdoch’s international media network owns more than 175
newspapers and magazines on three continents, publishes 40 million
papers a week and dominates the newspaper markets in Britain,
Australia and New Zealand.
A “close friend” of the accused Israeli war criminal and prime
minister Ariel Sharon, Murdoch and his media network are well
known for supporting Israel’s right-wing Likud Party and the
Anglo-American “war on terrorism.”
Less well known, however, is the fact that Murdoch produced a
television program in 2000, which predicted with uncanny accuracy
the attacks of 9/11.
Murdoch also has long-standing relationships with the key
individuals who gained possession of the World Trade Center
shortly before 9/11 – and who profited from its destruction.
In 2000, Murdoch produced a television program about a terror
attack on the World Trade Center, which predicted precisely the
kind of attack that occurred on 9/11. He is also closely connected
to the two individuals who leased, and then insured the WTC
property – and their future earnings – against precisely such an
attack.
These connections and circumstances suggest that Murdoch had a
considerable degree of prior knowledge of the attacks on the World
Trade Center.
Repeated calls to Murdoch’s office by American Free Press to
inquire about what he may have known or suspected about the
possibility of such an attack were not returned.
The Lone Gunmen
On March 4, 2001, Fox TV, a branch of Murdoch’s
media empire, broadcast the pilot episode of a “spin-off” series
based on characters from the popular Fox program “X-Files”. The
short-lived series was called “The Lone Gunman.”
A Murdoch-owned company called Canadian Millennium Productions,
Ltd. (News Corp. owns 83 percent), produced the pilot episode for
“The Lone Gunman” in Vancouver, Canada, and New York City from
March 20 to April 7, 2000.
The title “The Lone Gunman” refers to a Washington-based
government watchdog news weekly, not unlike the court-killed
SPOTLIGHT and the American Free Press. The show’s main characters
are the investigative reporters who produce the paper.
The pilot episode of “The Lone Gunman” depicted the hijacking of a
passenger aircraft by a hostile computer hacker who takes control
of the plane computer flight system and directs it to fly into one
of the towers of the World Trade Center.
The climactic sequence shows the plane heading straight for one of
the twin towers, but thanks to the efforts of the crew of “The
Lone Gunman” and the powerful “Octium” computer chip, the pilots
are able to regain control of the plane at the last second and
avoid the building by inches.
The pilots do not swerve away from the tower but pull the plane up
in a steep climb. In a memorable scene full of suspense the plane
narrowly missed the tower.
The background footage for the plane’s approach to the WTC was
actually filmed during the spring of 2000 by a special aerial crew
that used a helicopter flying low over Manhattan on a night flight
toward the twin towers.
Despite the uncanny similarities between the Murdoch-produced film
and the horrific reality of 9/11, rather than being discussed in
the media as a prescient warning of the possibility of such an
attack, the pilot episode of “The Lone Gunman” series seemed to
have been quietly forgotten.
While an estimated 13.2 million Fox TV viewers are reported to
have watched the pilot episode of “The Lone Gunman”, broadcast on
March 4, 2001, when life imitated art just six months later on
9/11, no one in the media seemed to recall the program.
No One Noticed
“I woke up on September 11 and saw it on TV and
the first thing I thought of was The Lone Gunmen,” Frank Spotnitz,
one of the program’s four executive producers said. “But then in
the weeks and months that followed, almost no one noticed the
connection.”
Frank Spotnitz, John Shiban, Vince Gilligan, and Chris Carter are
listed as executive producers of the program. Shiban is also
listed as a writer and creator of the pilot episode.
“What’s disturbing about it to me is, you think as a fiction
writer that if you can imagine this scenario, then the people in
power in the government who are there to imagine disaster
scenarios can imagine it, too,” Spotnitz said.
Robert McLachlan, director of photography, received an award from
the Canadian Society of Cinematographers on March 31, 2001 for his
camera work on the pilot episode.
“It was odd that nobody referenced it,” McLachlan told American
Free Press about the uncanny similarities between “The Lone
Gunman” pilot episode he filmed and the horrific reality of 9/11.
“You’re the first person who mentioned it,” he said. “In the
ensuing press nobody mentioned that [9/11] echoed something that
had been seen before.”
AFP asked McLachlan about who supervised the production of the
pilot program. “John Shiban was primarily the creator,” McLachlan
said, adding, “Chris Carter was not there.” Carter is well known
for his production of the “X-Files.”
“It’s their baby,” Carter said earlier about “The Lone Gunmen.”
Carter reportedly had “a minor part” in the production. Neither
Carter nor Shiban could be reached for comment.
Murdoch's Jewish Roots
Murdoch “became an American citizen for
business reasons,” according to Richard H. Curtiss, editor of the
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. Keith Rupert was born in
Melbourne, Australia, on March 11, 1931. “Rupert’s father, Sir
Keith Murdoch, was a newspaper publisher, and his mother an
Orthodox Jew,” Curtiss wrote, “although Murdoch never offers that
information in his biographies.”
Murdoch’s father married Elisabeth Joy Greene, daughter of Rupert
Greene in 1928. They had one son, Keith Rupert and three
daughters. Later in life, Keith Rupert chose to use Rupert, the
first name of his Jewish maternal grandfather.
The young Keith Rupert was educated at Australia’s fashionable
Geelong private school, and went on to the elitist and
aristocratic Oxford University in England, according to Candour
(UK) magazine.
“Rupert’s father Sir Keith Murdoch attained his prominent position
in Australian society through a fortuitous marriage to the
daughter of a wealthy Jewish family, née Elisabeth Joy Greene.
Through his wife’s connections, Keith Murdoch was subsequently
promoted from reporter to chairman of the British-owned newspaper
where he worked. There was enough money to buy himself a
knighthood of the British realm, two newspapers in Adelaide, South
Australia, and a radio station in a faraway mining town,” Candour
wrote in 1984. “For some reason, Murdoch has always tried to hide
the fact that his pious mother brought him up as a Jew.”
While Murdoch may have “tried to hide” his Jewish roots, he has
been quite forthright about his support for extreme right-wing
Zionists, such as Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon.
Netanyahu, who wrote a book entitled The War on Terror: How the
West Can Win in 1986, is a frequent commentator on Murdoch’s Fox
News.
Murdoch’s support for Zionism extremists is well known and a
matter of record. As New York Governor George Pataki said, “There
is no newspaper in the U.S. more supportive of Israel than the
[Murdoch’s] New York Post.”
It is through a network of Zionist organizations, in which Murdoch
plays a central role, that Murdoch is connected to the individuals
who arranged the privatization – and obtained control of the World
Trade Center – shortly before its destruction.
These key individuals are: Larry Silverstein and the former
Israeli commando Frank Lowy, the lease holders of dubious repute
who gained control of the WTC property six weeks before 9/11, and
Port Authority Chairman Lewis M. Eisenberg, who authorised the
transfer of the leases.
Murdoch belongs to, and has been honored by, a number of leading
Zionist organizations in which Silverstein, Lowy, and Eisenberg
all hold senior positions. These organizations include the
Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the United Jewish Appeal (UJA), and
the New York-based Museum of Jewish Heritage - A Living Memorial
to the Holocaust.
Fifty days before 9/11, Silverstein Properties and Lowy’s
Westfield America secured 99-year leases on the WTC. The Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey turned control of the World
Trade Center over to the private hands of Silverstein and Lowy on
July 24, 2001.
Silverstein and Lowy then took control of the 10.6
million-square-foot complex, which included the twin towers office
buildings and two nine-story office buildings. Silvestein and the
former Israeli commando Lowy then controlled all access to the
World Trade Center.
Lowy leased the shopping concourse called the Mall at the World
Trade Center, which comprised about 427,000 square feet of retail
space.
“Six weeks before the WTC towers were destroyed, the Port
Authority completed the process of leasing them for 99 years to
Larry Silverstein, the developer who had built 7 World Trade
Center [which mysteriously self-demolished at 5:25 p.m. on 9/11].
“Simultaneously, the retail space underneath the complex was
leased to Westfield America, the US division of an Australian
company that is one of the world’s largest operators of shopping
malls.” Paul Goldberger wrote in New Yorker, May 20, 2002.
“Silverstein and Westfield were given the right to rebuild the
structures if they were destroyed, and Westfield has the right to
expand the retail space by 30 percent,” Goldberger wrote.
Silverstein is suing for some $7.2 billion in insurance money for
the loss of the destroyed World Trade Center – and his expected
earnings – for property he had leased with a down payment of $100
million – of borrowed funds.
Murdoch the Zionist
“Murdoch is a close friend of Ariel Sharon,”
Sam Kiley, The Times (UK) veteran journalist on the Middle East
wrote about the man who took over the once famous British paper.
Kiley said Murdoch’s friendship with the Israeli prime minister
had caused senior staff at the paper to rewrite important copy.
“Murdoch’s executives were so afraid of irritating him that, when
I pulled off a little scoop of tracking down and photographing the
unit in the Israeli army which killed Mohammed al-Durrah, the
12-year-old boy whose death was captured on film and became the
iconic image of the conflict, I was asked to file the piece
‘without mentioning the dead kid.’” Kiley wrote. “After that
conversation, I was left wordless, so I quit.”
Sharon and Murdoch are old friends. On Oct. 15, 1982, a month
after the massacres of thousands of Palestinian refugees in the
Sabra and Shatila camps of Beirut, war crimes which occurred under
Sharon’s direct command, the Israeli defense minister held
meetings with Rupert Murdoch and others, reportedly in order to
advance his “West Bank real estate grab.”
The visit with Sharon included a trip for Murdoch and his editors
from New York and London that “took them on a bird’s-eye tour of
Israel aboard a helicopter gunship, flying over the Golan Heights,
West Bank and settlements.”
“I have always believed in the future of Israel and the goals of
the international Jewish community,” Murdoch said at a spring
fund-raiser for the Museum of Jewish Heritage - A Living Memorial
to the Holocaust on April 29, 2001.
From the beginning, News Corp., his global media company, “has
been supportive of the Jewish national cause,” Murdoch said.
Larry Silverstein, who had not yet acquired the lease on the World
Trade Center, attended the fund-raiser with Murdoch and reportedly
said about museum chairman Robert Morgenthau’s plans to expand the
museum: “I’ll support you…as long as you keep it under 110
stories.”
Murdoch and the ADL
“Henry Kissinger, Rupert Murdoch and Mortimer
Zuckerman are on the [ADL] dinner committee,” according to a
recent New York Times report on the ADL’s recent fund-raiser in
which the controversial Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi
received the ADL’s Distinguished Statesman Award.
Silverstein and Eisenberg have both held senior leadership
positions with the United Jewish Appeal (UJA), a billion dollar
Zionist “charity” organization, to which Murdoch and Lowy
generously contribute. In 1997, Henry Kissinger presented Murdoch
with the UJA’s award for “Humanitarian of the Year.”
Silverstein is a former chairman of UJA. This organization raises
hundreds of millions of dollars every year for a network of
Zionist agencies in the United States and Israel. Eisenberg, who
was instrumental in obtaining the lease for Silverstein, is on the
Planning Board of UJA.
Eisenberg in his role with the Port Authority was the key person
who negotiated the 99-year leases for Silverstein and Frank Lowy’s
Westfield America, who were in fact the low-bidders for the lease
on the 110-story towers and the retail mall.
Murdoch and the Czechoslovakian-born Israeli commando Frank Lowy,
a former fighter in Israel’s Golani Brigade, who emigrated to
Australia in the 1950s, have had a long friendship, which Murdoch
recounted during an American Australian Association fund-raising
dinner in honor of Frank’s son, Peter S. Lowy, in New York on
November 20, 2002. Larry Silverstein and his wife also attended
the American Australian event.
Some reporters refer to the American Australian Association, whose
membership includes James Wolfensohn, the president of the World
Bank, who raised cash for Rupert Murdoch when he first expanded
into the United States, as “the kangaroo mafia.”
“Frank was a brave and determined fighter,” Rafi Kocer, Lowy’s
former commander, said. Lowy has donated some $350,000 to build a
memorial museum in Israel for his former brigade.
Today, Lowy and his three sons control Westfield Corporation, one
of the largest operators of shopping centers in the United States
– and the world.
Insured Against Terrorist Attacks
On September 12, 2001, The Jerusalem Post
reported: “Frank Lowy, who emigrated to Australia from Israel in
1952, owns the 99-year lease for the 425,000 square foot retail
portion of the destroyed World Trade Center…Westfield said today
that it has insurance cover against terrorist attacks and its
earnings will not be materially affected.”
Lowy, is described by the Sydney Morning Herald as “a
self-made man with a strong interest in the Holocaust and Israeli
politics.”
Via Rumor Mill News
Murdoch’s “Lone-Gumen” TV Show-Psyop Transcript
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=37550

4. White
House said to have learned of Israel spy investigation in
2001
Pentagon analyst is focus of probe
By Curt Anderson, Associated Press |
September 4, 2004
WASHINGTON -- The FBI first briefed senior White House
officials early in the Bush administration about a broad
investigation into whether a major pro-Israel lobbying
organization was providing US intelligence information to
Israel, officials said yesterday.
President Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza
Rice, and her top deputy, Stephen Hadley, were informed of
the investigation on the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee not long after Bush took office in 2001,
according to two administration officials speaking on
condition of anonymity because of the matter's
sensitivity.
The exact date of the first briefing about the
long-running counterintelligence investigation was unclear
but was probably at least two years ago, the officials
said.
The timing suggests that investigators only recently
began to focus on Lawrence Franklin, a Pentagon analyst
specializing in Iran and Middle Eastern affairs in the
office of policy undersecretary Douglas Feith.
That part of the inquiry concerns whether Franklin
passed a classified, draft White House directive to two
AIPAC officials, who in turn allegedly provided it to the
Israeli government.
Disclosure of the broader investigation raises a series
of new questions about the case, including whether other
AIPAC or Pentagon officials are involved or whether it
reaches into the Israeli government. One senior official
at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, Naor Gilon, has
acknowledged meeting with Franklin but said he did nothing
illegal.
No one has been charged in the case, which is expected
to go before a federal grand jury as early as next week in
Alexandria, Va. Franklin has not responded to repeated
requests for comment but was said by officials to be
cooperating. Both AIPAC and Israel have denied any
wrongdoing.
Another part of the investigation concerns whether
Pentagon officials provided information to Ahmad Chalabi,
once a leading Iraqi politician and prewar Defense
Department favorite, The
Washington Post
reported in yesterday's editions. FBI and Justice
Department officials said they could not confirm the
account.
AIPAC and its allies have begun to mount a public
relations campaign to limit the political damage.
The committee, long considered one of the most
influential lobbying groups in Washington, said in a
statement issued Thursday that its members should contact
members of Congress ''to continue expressing your strong
support" for the group and for US-Israeli relations.
Larry Nussbaum, president of AIPAC's chapter in Kansas
City, Mo., said in a separate statement that the
investigation amounts to ''not only an attack on the
organization itself, but on the Jewish community. AIPAC
must prove that attacks such as this one will only make us
grow stronger." 
©
Copyright 2004 The New York
Times Company
|
|
|