The American Kafir


Leiter: “Terrorist Attacks Surpassed the Number and Pace of Attacks Since 9/11”

Source: Weekly Standard

Here’s the transcript:

Chairman Lieberman, Senator Collins as you have already noted, the past year has noted the most significant developments in terrorism since 9/11. The three attempted homeland attacks during the past year from overseas based groups, and the two lone-wolf attacks here in the United States, Carlos Bledsoe in Arkansas and Nidal Hassan have surpassed the number and pace of attacks during any year since 9/11.

The range of al Qaeda core, affiliated and allies plotting against the homeland during the past year suggest the threat has in fact grown far more complex and underscores the challenges of identifying and countering a more diverse array of threats to the homeland.

Al Qaeda’s affiliates and allies increasing ability to provide training, guidance, and support for attacks against the U.S. makes it very difficult to anticipate the precise nature of the next attack and from where it might come. The regional affiliates that have grown and allies have been able to compensate to some extent for the decreased willingness of al Qaeda in Pakistan to accept and train new recruits and additional attempts by al Qaeda affiliates and allies to attack the U.S., particularly attempts in the homeland, could attract the attention of even more western recruits, thereby increasing those groups’ threat to the homeland.

And even failed attacks such as AQAP’s and TTP’s attempts this past year due to some extent further al Qaeda’s goal of fomenting terrorist attacks against the West and demonstrate that some affiliates and allies and homegrown terrorists are embracing their vision. Today, al Qaeda in Pakistan is at one of its weakest points organizationally, but I would stress a significant ‘however,’ that the group has time and time again proven its resilience and remains a very capable and determined enemy. The threat as you have noted is compounded significantly by operationally distinct plotting against the U.S. by its allies, affiliates and sympathizers.


Shariah the Threat to America Team B Report-PDF Copy

View this document on Scribd


The 9/11 Anniversary and What Didn’t Happen

By Scott Stewart

Sept. 11, 2010, the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, was a day of solemn ceremony, remembrance and reflection. It was also a time to consider the U.S. reaction to the attack nine years ago, including the national effort to destroy al Qaeda and other terrorist groups in order to prevent a repeat of the 9/11 attacks. Of course, part of the U.S. reaction to 9/11 was the decision to invade Afghanistan, and the 9/11 anniversary also provided a time to consider how the United States is now trying to end its Afghanistan campaign so that it can concentrate on more pressing matters elsewhere.

The run-up to the anniversary also saw what could have been an attempted terrorist attack in another Western country. On Sept. 10 in Denmark, a potential bombing was averted by the apparent accidental detonation of an improvised explosive device in a bathroom at a Copenhagen hotel. The Danish authorities have not released many details of the incident, but it appears that the suspect may have been intending to target the Danish Jyllands-Posten newspaper, which has been targeted in the past because it published cartoons featuring the Prophet Mohammed in 2005. Groups such as al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) have tried hard to ensure that the anger over the cartoon issue does not die down, and it apparently has not. It is important to note that even if the perpetrator had not botched it, the plot — at least as we understand it so far — appears to have involved a simple attack plan and would not have resulted in a spectacular act of terrorism.

Yet in spite of the failed attack in Denmark and all the 9/11 retrospection, perhaps the most interesting thing about the 9/11 anniversary in 2010, at least from an analytical perspective, was what did not happen. For the first time, the al Qaeda core leadership did not issue a flurry of slick, media-savvy statements to mark the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. And the single statement they did release was not nearly as polished or pointed as past anniversary messages. This has caused us to pause, reflect and wonder if the al Qaeda leadership is losing its place at the ideological forefront of the jihadist cause.

The 9/11 Anniversary and What Didn't Happen
-/AFP/Getty Images
Al Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri in a video marking the 5th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks

A History of Anniversary Messages

When it comes to anniversaries, al Qaeda has not always seized upon them as opportunities for attacks, but it has long seen them as tempting propaganda opportunities. This first began in September 2002, when the group released numerous messages in a multitude of forms to coincide with the first anniversary of 9/11. These included a one-hour video titled “The Nineteen Martyrs,” referring to the 9/11 attackers; a book released by al-Ansar media telling the story of the 9/11 attacks; an audio tape from al Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri; a statement from al Qaeda’s “Political Bureau”; and a statement from al Qaeda spokesman Sulaiman Abu Ghaith. Then, on Oct. 7, 2002, Al Qaeda released a message from Osama bin Laden to the American people to commemorate the first anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.

Since 2002, other 9/11-anniversary messages from al Qaeda have included:

  • A September 2003 video of bin Laden and al-Zawahiri walking in the mountains and praising the 9/11 attackers, released via the Qatar-based Al Jazeera television network. As-Sahab, al Qaeda’s media wing, also released a video that contained Saeed al-Ghamdi’s martyrdom tape.
  • A September 2004 audio message from al-Zawahiri released on the same day as a bombing attack against the Australian Embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia.
  • A September 2005 video message in which Adam Gadahn, the American-born al Qaeda spokesman, came to the world’s attention threatening attacks against Los Angeles and Melbourne. Al-Zawahiri had released a video message on Sept. 1 that contained the martyrdom video of July 7 London bomb-plot leader Mohammad Sidique Khan.
  • A September 2006 video message in which Gadahn reappeared to commemorate the fifth anniversary of 9/11, this time in tandem with al-Zawahiri. As-Sahab then issued, on Sept. 7, a video message titled “Knowledge is for Acting Upon: The Manhattan Raid,” and on Sept. 11 an interview and question-and-answer session with al-Zawahiri. As-Sahab also released some undated and previously unreleased video footage of bin Laden and other high-ranking al Qaeda members planning the 9/11 attacks.
  • A September 2007 video, released by As-Sahab, showing bin Laden speaking and titled “The Solution.” This was followed by a video released on Sept. 11 that contained an audio statement by bin Laden and the martyrdom message of Abu Musab Waleed al-Shehri, one of the 9/11 operatives.
  • A September 2008 video, released by As-Sahab, showing al-Zawahiri criticizing Iran for helping the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq. On Sept. 17, As-Sahab released a video titled “Results of 7 Years of the Crusades” and, on Sept. 19, it released another message from al-Zawahiri.
  • A September 2009 video, released by As-Sahab, that contained an audio recording and still photo of bin Laden intended to address the American people on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. As-Sahab also released a video by al-Zawahiri on Aug. 29 entitled “The Path of Doom.”
  • A September 2010 video, released by As-Sahab, that contained an audio recording and still photo of al-Zawahiri and was titled “A Victorious Ummah, a Broken Crusade: Nine Years after the Start of the Crusader Campaign.”

This history shows a steady decline in al Qaeda’s anniversary messaging in terms of quantity and production quality (clearly seen in comparing the al-Zawahiri audio message of 2010 with the al-Zawahiri video message of 2006). Another consideration is topical relevance. Al-Zawahiri’s 2010 message was actually rather bland, uninspiring and little more than a rehash of several points the group has made in the past. There were no stirring and inspirational calls to action, no new threats to the West, and no real meaningful discussion of the 9/11 anniversary beyond the message title.

While the recent 9/11 anniversary highlighted a declining trend in al Qaeda’s messaging, it has actually been going on since long before Sept. 11, 2010. It has been more than a year since a video appeared featuring a key al Qaeda leader (the last one, of al-Zawahiri, was released in August 2009).

Explaining the Lapse

Currently, there are very few people, all in the al Qaeda core leadership and their As-Sahab media wing, who know the true reason why the group has suffered such a decline in its propaganda efforts. There could be a number of possible explanations for the lapse. The first could be that the group is observing a period of radio silence in expectation of a large attack. This is certainly possible, and something we have heard analysts propose during al Qaeda quiet times. However, an examination of past patterns of al Qaeda communiques and attacks since 9/11 has not shown any type of correlation between times of silence and attacks. This is to be expected when most of the actors conducting attacks are either affiliated with the regional franchise groups or are grassroots operatives with no link to the al Qaeda core leadership. In fact, we have seen media releases by As-Sahab shortly before past attacks such as the March 2004 Madrid bombings and the July 2005 London attacks. As-Sahab was in the midst of a media blitz in the months leading up to the thwarted August 2006 Heathrow liquid-bomb plot, and it also released several statements in the weeks prior to the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.

In the past, hackers have used the occasion of the 9/11 anniversary to disrupt jihadist websites in an attempt to cripple al Qaeda’s ability to distribute its 9/11 anniversary statements. We saw this particularly in September 2008, in a hacking that resulted in some of the messages being delayed until Sept. 17 and Sept. 19. This year, however, there is no sign of that type of broad-based hacking campaign, and while some jihadist websites are down for a variety of reasons, many other jihadist websites continue to operate unabated, offering recent Ramadan and Eid ul-Fitr sermons and salutations.

It is also possible that the floods that have ravaged Pakistan this summer could have displaced the al Qaeda leadership or the As-Sahab crew. However, the floods began with the heavy monsoon rains in late July and the dearth of messages from the al Qaeda core leadership reaches back much further, with 2010 being an unusually quiet time for the group. Past anniversary messages have been produced weeks, and even months, before their release dates, so the As-Sahab multimedia crew should have had time to adjust to the flood conditions if that was truly the cause.

The best explanation for the decline in As-Sahab’s propaganda efforts may be the increase in the number of strikes by U.S. unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) inside Pakistan in areas along the Afghan border since August 2008. More than 1,000 people have been killed in such strikes, including a number senior al Qaeda members. A confluence of factors could be responsible for the decline, with floods and hackers posing additional problems for an organization on the run from U.S. airstrikes and trying to maintain a low profile. Even if the core al Qaeda leadership is living deeper in Pakistan and away from the threat of U.S. airstrikes, many lower-level al Qaeda members are operating in the border area and have certainly been impacted by the strikes.

An Eclipse?

It is important to view the decline in As-Sahab propaganda efforts in the larger context, specifically statements involving the core al Qaeda leadership, and then compare those statements to the messages released by the franchise groups, such as AQAP.

Over the past few years, STRATFOR has often discussed how the war against the jihadists is occurring on two planes, the physical battlefield and the ideological battlefield. We have also discussed how we believe that the al Qaeda core leadership has lost its place in recent years at the forefront of the physical battlefield and has instead focused its efforts largely on the ideological battlefield, where its role is to promote jihadism and inspire jihadist groups and individuals to conduct attacks.

This belief that the franchise groups are assuming leadership on the physical battlefield was supported by attacks in 2009 and early 2010 that were linked to groups such as AQAP and allied organizations like the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan. Even the suspect in the June 2009 shootings in Little Rock, Ark., claimed to be part of “Abu Basir’s Army” and not bin Laden’s. (Abu Basir is the honorific name, or kunya, for Nasir al-Wahayshi, the current leader of AQAP.)

And it appears that the leadership provided by the franchise groups may not be confined to just the physical battlefield. As the core al Qaeda leadership continues to maintain a low profile, the leaders of groups like AQAP and figures such as Anwar al-Awlaki and Nasir al-Wahayshi have dramatically increased their profile and significance on the ideological battlefield. They have been the individuals leading the way in calling for grassroots jihadists to conduct simple attacks and in fanning the flames over issues such as the Mohammed cartoons. Even the al Qaeda core tried to jump on the AQAP bandwagon when spokesman Adam Gadahn echoed al-Wahayshi’s call for simple grassroots attacks and praised AQAP-inspired Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan as an example for all Muslims to follow. Indeed, it was interesting to watch the core al Qaeda group following the lead of a regional franchise rather than paving the way themselves.

Now, perhaps in a few days or a few weeks, As-Sahab will return to releasing a flurry of slick, high-quality messages as it has done in years past. Maybe fresh videos of bin Laden and al-Zawahiri will appear that will present new ideas, vault them back into prominence in jihadist discourse and motivate their intended audience to action. But we may be witnessing, instead, the eclipse of the al Qaeda core leadership on the ideological battlefield.

The 9/11 Anniversary and What Didn’t Happen is republished with permission of STRATFOR.


Botched Abortion Nightmare: ‘I wish I never heard of them’

I have a very strong belief that a baby is born at conception and is not a blob as so many pro abortionist claim. Watch the video of actual child growth inside the mothers womb, then read how old the child was inside the womb of the mother by these butchers from hell. It makes me sick to think that we could be murdering the next great sports hero, musician, artist, president,  someone who could do good for mankind, but will never be given that chance because of the murder called abortion being performed. Walt

Details emerge of a secret criminal plot to commit illegal late-term abortions in New Jersey and Maryland

By Cheryl Sullenger

She is only eighteen, but she is lucky to be alive. The ordeal that nearly cost her life began in early August. D.B., as records identify her, was on a popular brand of birth control pills that limited the number of periods, so she was unaware that the pills had failed until her pregnancy was advanced. On August 9, 2010, D.B. went to American Women’s Center in Voorhees, New Jersey, and discovered she was 21.5 weeks pregnant.

What happened next led to a dramatic abortion clinic raid, the suspension of the medical licenses of three abortionists, and launched investigations that span four states. News of the discovery of a multi-state illegal late-term abortion scheme has shaken the abortion industry to its crumbling foundations.

Authorities believe that if D.B. had not suffered her terribly botched abortion, the dangerous late-term abortion ring would still be one of the abortion cartel’s dirtiest of secrets.

Documents paint a shocking picture

Operation Rescue received 302 pages of documents from the State of New Jersey on September 9, 2010, through an open records request. The documents tell a shocking story of a well-planned conspiracy to circumvent abortion laws, evade discovery of the unlicensed practice of medicine, and deceive women and authorities who have long suspected illegal activity at the chain of clinics operated by troubled abortionist Stephen Chase Brigham.

The documents were related to a New Jersey complaint against Brigham filed on September 8, 2010, that demanded the suspension of his medical license after D.B.’s serious late-term abortion injuries caught the attention of the police as well as physicians at Johns Hopkins Medical center where D.B. was eventually treated. Brigham has since agreed to a suspension effective September 15, to give him more time to present his case to the New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners, (NJBME), at its scheduled meeting on October 13, 2010.

Brigham’s need to evade the law

The time-line of events actually began in January, 2010, when Brigham, who is not licensed to practice in Maryland, opened a secret office in a rented medical space in Elkton, Maryland. This clinic was not advertised under Brigham’s American Women’s Services, his four-state empire of 15 known abortion mills. Documents show that the Elkton facility’s paperwork often bore the name Grace Medical Services, but the people that worked there simply referred to it as Elkton. (See D.B. AWS Record, p. 30) The purpose of this under-the-radar office was to complete second and third trimester abortions that were illegally initiated at Brigham’s Voorhees, New Jersey, headquarters.

New Jersey law states that abortions can only be done up to 14 weeks at clinics not licensed as ambulatory surgical centers or hospitals. (N.J.A.C. § 13:35-4.2) The upper limit for any abortion in New Jersey is 18 weeks gestation. Brigham’s clinics are not licensed as ambulatory surgical centers, but that did not stop him from beginning abortion procedures there on women as late in their pregnancies as 36 weeks, according to his own records. (See Elkton Patient Logs)

According to interviews conducted by the Maryland Board of Physicians, (MDBP), with those involved in D.B.’s abortion, Brigham would, in spite of the law, see women who were beyond 14 weeks at his Voorhees, NJ clinic, where he would inject digoxin into the baby’s heart in order to initiate fetal demise, (in other words, kill the baby), then insert laminaria, thin sticks of seaweed that slowly expand to begin the cervical dilation process. He would also prescribe medications there. The women would be told to report to the Voorhees clinic the following morning where they would be taken to another undisclosed location for the completion of their abortions.

In June, 2010, suspecting illegal late abortions were being done by Brigham in Voorhees, the New Jersey Deputy Attorney General sent Brigham a list of questions that were was supposed to be answered in writing under oath. Brigham sent back a letter dated June 30, 2010, asking for additional time, but also addressing the question of late abortions. He wrote:

I looked briefly at the Demand and it appears that you may have the false impression that late-term abortions are being done by us in an office setting in New Jersey. This portion of your Demand I can directly answer now in this letter. We are not performing any abortions beyond 14 weeks in an office setting in New Jersey.

However, the documents supplied to patients and signed by them clearly show that abortions as late as 36 weeks are being started by Brigham in New Jersey.

Post-Laminaria Insertion Instructions given to patient D.B. in New Jersey clearly state, “You have just completed the first step of your abortion procedure…Remember that your abortion really begins when the laminaria is inserted into your cervix.” (D.B. AWS Record, pg. 21)

Brigham is charged with lying to the New Jersey Attorney General’s office about his late-term abortion activity in New Jersey. (See Pleadings, Count IV, p. 14)

We’re not in New Jersey anymore

Once the late-term women gathered at the Voorhees on the second day of their abortion procedure, they are assigned places in a caravan by Brigham, then led in their private vehicles to the Elkton facility where they are locked down for the remainder of their abortion.

Such was the case on August 13, the day of D.B.’s abortion. D.B., who was accompanied by her mother and boyfriend, was under the impression she was going to a clinic in Baltimore and was surprised to find herself in Elkton. In the caravan were some of Brigham’s New Jersey clinic workers, which were transported to Elkton to assist with the abortions. Other clinic workers from his Pennsylvania operations also met them in Elkton. It appears that there were no Maryland residents working at the Elkton clinic.

When they arrived at Elkton, the patients along with their accompanying family members were separated and placed into cubicles, or “booths” where they waited for the conclusion of the abortions. One of the other girls seemed to be in more pain than D.B. and the third abortion patient, so they took her first. Records show that this woman aborted twins that were 25 weeks gestation.

Nicola Riley

At about 11:00 a.m., D.B. was called back to the procedure room for her abortion. There, Brigham introduced her to Nicola Irene Riley, an African-American abortionist from Salt Lake City, Utah, that had recently been hired by Brigham. Riley’s first day on the job had been July 30, 2010, when she received training in third-trimester abortions on a woman who records show was 33 weeks pregnant. Riley reluctantly described that abortion as a “partial delivery.” The day of D.B.’s abortion was only Riley’s second day of work at Elkton. (MDBP Interview with Riley, p. 7)

Riley had been doing abortions for five years at another low-key abortion clinic in Salt Lake City known as SMP Family Medicine and Homecare, P.A., having been trained to do abortions through 20 weeks by experienced abortionists Colorado and Salt Lake City. She had agreed to work for Brigham every other weekend. She would spend Fridays in Elkton and Saturdays at the Baltimore and Frederick locations. Riley was trying to establish herself in Virginia, where she has family, in advance of a permanent move to the East Coast for the purpose of attempting to regain custody of her children.

In fact, it was D.B.’s impression that Brigham was training Riley on the day of her abortion. In her interview with the MDBP there was the following exchange:

Q. …Now when you walked into the exam room, Dr. Brigham was in there?
A. Mm-hmm
Q. Okay, did he say anything to you?
A. He introduced me to Dr. Reilly [sic]
Q. Okay. So, he just said this is Dr. Reilly?
A. Mm-hmm
Q. Did he say what Dr. Reilly was going to be doing?
A. No.
Q. Okay.
A. But it seemed like he was training her.
Q. Okay. Why did it seem like that to you?
A. Because she went to put in my anesthesia and he just like was telling her what to do.
Q . Okay.
A. And I was like nervous. I did not go to sleep right away.

While Brigham stroked D.B.’s shoulders in an attempt to calm her, Riley injected her with additional medication then proceeded with the D&E dismemberment abortion on her 22 week old baby.

But the patient’s mother, identified in documents only as C.B., began to think something was wrong. She estimates that D.B. had been in the procedure room about 2 hours. C.B. was disturbed by her daughter’s screams of pain. She told the MDBP, “Well, I kept hearing her [D.B.] screaming and hollering. And then – I mean, it did take long. It took like two hours, I think…But all I kept hearing was her screaming and hollering. And I told the lady that worked there, I can’t stand this. I got to leave out. So I kept going out to the hall, you know, to the other part of the building, you know, in front… Because, you know, I didn’t want to hear her [screaming] – and why is she screaming now because they put her to sleep.” (See MDBP Interview-CB)

Meanwhile, in the procedure room, Riley had begun the abortion procedure. She admits she remembers removing an arm, a leg, and some soft tissue. As she was going in to search for the cranium, Riley discovered what appeared to be a bowel in D.B.’s birth canal. Brigham confirmed that the tissue was likely a bowel. The abortionist had perforated D.B.’s uterus, shoved the remains of baby into her abdominal cavity, and pulled out part of her bowel through her vagina.

Time line problems and other discrepancies

There is a discrepancy in the time line and in accounts of the events that happened next.

C.B. claims that D.B. began her procedure at about 11:00 a.m. and that it lasted for about two hours. At that point, Riley came out and told C.B. that her daughter had complications and needed to be taken to the nearby hospital. Riley had placed D.B. into a wheelchair with her legs up and had intended to push her the two blocks to the emergency room. C.B. said that she insisted that an ambulance be called, but Riley refused, and after some discussion, D.B. was loaded into Brigham’s rental vehicle and transported to Union hospital where records* show that they arrived at 1:39 p.m.

Riley first told the MDBP that she began the abortion around 11:00 a.m. but changed her story to 12:00 p.m. after the interviewer confronted her with the time of arrival recorded by Union Hospital. Riley recorded in D.B.’s medical record at the clinic, that she started the abortion at 1:00 pm. She told the MDBP that she was only 10-15 minutes into the abortion when she discovered the apparent complication, stopped immediately, and got her patient to the hospital within 10 minutes. (See MDBP Interview-Riley)

It is impossible that Riley’s confused account of the time line and C.B.’s account could both be true. Riley’s account changes three times, while C.B. and D.B. both have similar stories, making their version the most credible.

Records show that Riley ordered one of the aids to start an I.V. on D.B. before she was transported to the hospital, (see DB AWS Record, p. 31) however, Riley told the MDBP that she started the I.V. herself which “blew out” after a few minutes. (See MDBP Interview-Riley, p. 24) Riley says she monitored D.B.’s vital signs during the drive to the hospital and that her patient remained stable. Union Hospital records indicated that D.B. arrived unmonitored and without I.V. support. Their records also indicate that an IV was established in D.B. at the hospital with no problems.

I work “at the secret clinic that performs second trimester abortions in town.”

Once at the hospital, Riley and Brigham were said to have behaved strangely. Riley identified herself as a physician “that works at secret clinic that performs second trimester abortions in town.” (See Union Hosp Records*) Brigham did not identify himself and hung back from the conversations. Riley insisted that an E.R. doctor come outside and speak with her, which delayed D.B.’s care. Riley informed the E.R staff of the complication and of the medications the patient had been given, but was evasive about the time and dosage of those medications. After ten minutes at the hospital, Riley and Brigham returned to the “secret clinic” in Elkton and completed another abortion.

Meanwhile, the staff members at Union Hospital were shocked. Records indicate that the physicians were not aware of any abortion clinic operating legally in Elkton.

Union Hospital examined and evaluated D.B. and determined that the injuries she suffered were so severe that the decision was made to transport her via helicopter to Johns Hopkins Medical Center in Baltimore where she was rushed into surgery immediately upon her arrival. There, doctors removed the remains of her partially aborted baby from her abdominal cavity, removed and repaired part of her small intestine, and repaired a tear at the back of her uterus. (See Johns Hopkins Records*)

Elkton Police Arrive, Brigham Flees

Someone tipped off the Elkton police, because while Riley was finishing up her last abortion of the day, an officer arrived at the clinic and asked to speak with her. After the abortion was done, Riley spoke with the police. She presented her Utah drivers license and her Maryland physician’s license card.

Police asked if any other doctors were present. When she indicated that Brigham was there as well, police asked her to go get him so they could speak with him. To her surprise, when she went to notify Brigham that police officers wanted to see him, he had already fled the building, leaving Riley to deal with the increasingly tense situation with the police.

Riley resisted showing the officers around the clinic, citing “patient privacy” concerns. Finally she consented to walk the police through the building. Of that encounter Riley told the MDBP, “It was very kind of heated, I can actually say. And I said – I told them, you have to respect the patients’ privacy.”

She gave the police the website for Brigham’s American Women’s Services and his clinic license number and told them if they wanted more information, they would have to talk to the Voorhees office.

Police Raid Elkton

Riley’s next shift at Elkton was scheduled for August 20, 2010. Riley told the MDBP that she suspected that, based on the way she was “treated” in their previous encounter, the police may attempt to “impede procedures” on August 20. She arrived for her duty shift two hours early and remained in her car reading and drinking coffee.

Riley was approached by a plain-clothes detective who asked for her identification. Before she knew it, six squad cars had blocked both entrances to the clinic, including her vehicle. Even the Elkton Chief of Police was there.

The questioned Riley about “Maryland law and illegal criminal activity” and informed her that there was an open criminal investigation. Riley indicated that she either had to have an attorney present or they needed to let her go if she was not being arrested or subpoenaed. After about ten minutes, police allowed Riley to leave the scene.

She confided with the MNBP that she was anxious to get away from the police because she knew that Brigham was already in route from Voorhees, New Jersey, to Elkton, Maryland, with a caravan that included four women who were “active” and would need to have their abortions completed. Once free from the police, Riley says she called Brigham and told him that the police were at Elkton and that the women should be diverted to Baltimore. Riley rushed to Baltimore and readied the clinic for the late-term abortions. The caravan arrived about an hour after she did, and the four late-term abortions were done.

Riley admitted she arrived at Elkton early because anticipated the equivalent of a “picket line” of police and wanted to warn Brigham if that was so.

Open murder investigation

It was not until August 24, that Riley became aware that Brigham had been served with a search warrant for the Elkton clinic when he “casually” brought it up in conversation. Riley was stunned that the basis of that warrant was a open murder investigation. Riley was upset at Brigham for ducking out during the first police encounter, then for failing to notify her of the search warrant. She considered his conduct “unprofessional.”

In Maryland, there is no legal limit on when abortions can be done. However, if a pre-born baby is past viability and his or her life is taken in an illegal act, murder charges can be brought. (Md. Criminal Law Code Ann. § 2-103) Viability, as mention previously, is generally considered to be 24 weeks gestation.

Abortion logs recovered from the Elkton clinic show that Riley was involved in an abortion on twins at 25 weeks on the day of D.B.’s abortion, and on a 33 week baby on July 30. The gestational ages of the babies aborted in Baltimore on August 20 after the police raided the Elkton clinic are unknown.

Those same logs show that between June 23 and August 13, 2010, 51 abortions were started in Voorhees, New Jersey, after the 14-week legal limit there and completed in Elkton, Maryland. Of those abortions, 15 were done on viable babies either by Brigham or at his direction.

Riley’s “Physician Independent Contractor Agreement” dated July 30, 2010, provides a pay scale for Riley’s abortion services up to 37 weeks gestation.

Based on these records, felony charges in New Jersey of illegal late-term abortions and murder charges in Maryland would be very appropriate.

Read it all


As Rosh Hashanah 2010 approaches—A look back at Obama’s last 19 months

I was doing a search for Obama having anything to state to the Jewish American’s about Rosh Hashanah, and also trying to find where the supposed President of the entire United States of America has even had any respect for Christian Holidays like he seems to have many for the Muslim Americans. I came across this excellent article below.

As I expected very few if even any speeches to the Judea-Christian population, which the last I checked, is the majority in the United States. And Obama has the audacity to state he cannot go around with his Birth Certificate plastered on his forehead because about 1/4 of the United States citizens thinks he is Muslim. Hmmm maybe Barack Hussein Obama it is because we judge you by your actions and not your usual rhetoric. Walt

As Rosh Hashanah 2010 approaches—A look back at Obama’s last 19 months

Source: Canada Free Press
By Christopher Massie  Monday, September 6, 2010

In 1952, the National Day of Prayer formally became law. Prior to that, this day had been recognized by the United States Congress as an official day of religious observance, based on previous calls for a day of prayer by the American government since as early as 1775. No president, regardless of insidious court challenges, has ever bypassed this sacred day of America’s right to closeness with God, so even the great divider Obama could not devise a secular-socialist plot to undermine such a profound day of historical implication.

But oh my, how he would try. According to the National Day of Prayer Task Force “Every President since 1952 has signed a National Day of Prayer proclamation”; ‘the audacity of non-authorship’ would surely have resulted in impeachment for number 44.

No, it would not be through the avoidance of penning the Proclamation that Obama would inflict a permanent black eye on the National Day of Prayer of 2010. His would be more subtle; a southpaw undercut you’d have to see coming to fully contemplate. First, there would be the words—few, well placed, and so subtle that even this author skimmed right past them at first reading. With emphasis added, here is that Proclamation:

“NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America do hereby proclaim May 6, 2010, as a National Day of Prayer. I call upon the citizens of our Nation to pray, or otherwise give thanks, in accordance with their own faiths and consciences, for our many freedoms and blessings, and I invite all people of faith to join me in asking for God’s continued guidance, grace, and protection as we meet the challenges before us.”

It would require comparing the entire article as located on the White House web-site, and as signed by Obama, to that written and signed by George W Bush, and others, before the above became crystal clear. Through the ever so subtle tweaking of the Proclamation to include “or otherwise give thanks”, Obama acknowledged—for the first time in history—an alternative to prayer within the nation’s call to prayer! Furthermore, by adding that one seemingly innocuous word “consciences” to the Proclamation, he incorporated into a document requiring a belief in faith the inclusion of secularists, atheists, antitheists, God-less elitists and more. In short, with 5 well placed words, our once God-fearing Proclamation was rendered the secular-socialists pledge of allegiance.

Additionally, with respects to prayer, no matter the creator one is speaking to, God is a prominent theme; when we pray, we pray to God. As an author of a document calling for a nation of 307 million to pray, it would be logical, even reasonable then, for a majority of the recipients of said letter to witness the occasional reference to Him. Barack Hussein Obama’s Proclamation of prayer, quite to the contrary includes one mention of God; compare that to Bush’s 15 allusions to the Almighty and that’s one “blame Bush” we could do with more of.

Secularization of the Proclamation

If that secularization of the Proclamation had been the sole transgression on Obama’s part, perhaps the issue could have been back page news. Not THIS Liberal; his agenda far outstrips the comparatively mild Clinton improprieties of what seem like centuries past. No, Obama had a message for Christians and Jews, and this day was just the day Barack Hussein Obama II had been awaiting.

Enter William Franklin Graham III (Evangelist Franklin Graham). Reverend Graham was originally scheduled to be the honorary chairman and main speaker at the 2010 annual Day of Prayer event that was held this year at the Pentagon. Obama’s administration, after receiving faxes and letters from the “Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF)”—the group representing Muslim communities in America—decided it would disinvite Mr. Graham. Well, ain’t that swell. Obama, under pressure from the Muslim community, fires one of the most prominent religious figures in the free world.

A lot of folks in the Muslim community point to Franklin Graham’s attitude towards radical Islam as their justification for crucifying the Reverend. The pressure on Obama, precipitated by the MRFF, stemmed from the piecing together of assorted talking points spliced into one overtly biased opinion of Graham by various sources, all dating back to the horrific days of 9/11. Rather than interview Graham himself, Obama allowed out-of-context statements to be used towards the end goal of the complete removal of religion from the Day of Prayer.

As we say, however, the truth will set one free. Here is an actual interview with Graham that Obama COULD have been a part of—if truth had EVER been a part of Obama’s agenda:

Male reporter: “Strong language from Mikey Weinstein. What’s your response to his group’s angry reaction to your invitation to the Pentagon?”

Graham: “Well, first of all, the United States, about 89% of the American people would profess to have some Christian background, connection or faith.Right now the US military is engaged in a war…in two wars…and I believe that ourNation and the men in the military need our prayer. Of course by coming to the Pentagon we’re not talking about Islam or Hindus or Buddhists. We’re just talking about men and women to pray for our Nation during this time of war. I have a son who is in Afghanistan‚Äìthis is his fourth tour. He’s a graduate of West Point. I know many people in the military and we certainly want to support them with our prayers. The majority of the United States are Christians, they are not Muslims. We’re Christians and we don’t want to attack the Muslims. We don’t want to say anything bad about them. We love them and we want them to know that Jesus Christ died for their sins and rose from the grave and, if they are willing to repent of their sins and receive Christby faith, that God will hear from heaven and heal their hearts. I want them to know the truth: that Jesus Christ is the son of the living God…”

Female reporter: “Let me interrupt you for just a moment. Mikey Weinstein’s claim is not whether or not there is a majority Christian population in this country. It’s that the US Military represents people of all faiths and that by having made anti-Islamic comments, the concern is there are people there…there are Islams(sic) in the US military who are offended by what you have said.”

Graham: “Well, you know, I’m offended by what Islam’s done, what Islam’s said. You have to understand, I know Islam very well and I work all over the world. I love the Muslim people but I disagree with the religion of Islam. I do not believe it is the truth. I don’t believe that Muhammed(sic) is a prophet of God. Now, I know they believe it and that’s fine and they can believe it. But I’m a Christian and I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of the living God…and we care for Muslim people and we love them and we want them to know the truth. So, coming to the Pentagon, we’re not attacking the Muslims, we’re praying for our Nation. So, you have a couple of people that have a fax machine and a letterhead and they’ll fax a letter to someone, making a complaint. I think it would be a slap at Christians all across this country if the Pentagon listened to these people. It would be a slap in the face of millions of American Christians, hundreds of thousands of Christian families in the military…”

Male reporter: “But you can understand why people of the Muslim faith would be insulted if you called Islam a “very evil and wicked religion,” even if only a handful of people of the Muslim faith actually carried out evil deeds. I mean, you might disagree religiously on the concept of God, but they feel insulted. How do you assuage that fear of “them” (I think he meant “theirs”) and do you agree that pehaps(sic) your son and other American troops would be in danger if you made an appearance?”

Graham: “No, let me tell you something, my son is in danger every day from Muslims that are wanting to take the lives of American troops. So, it’s not going to have anything to do with what I say or don’t say. We’re at war with Islamic Fundamentalists‚Äìthat’s what we are doing and we can’t ignore that. We certainly can’t allow a few Muslims in this country to deny Christians the right to pray for its leaders and to pray for its nation. I love the Muslim people, I really do. I care for them and I work in many Muslim countries and I’ve spent tens of millions of dollars helping Muslim people…”

Female reporter: “Briefly, before we go…”

Graham: “…I care for them and love them.”

Female reporter: “You do seem to be saying, though, there’s a place for prostelytizing (sic) at the Pentagon.”

Graham: “Well this isn’t prostelytizing (sic)…we’re not prostelytizing (sic). And the Muslims, they go to the Pentagon they have Ramadan and they have Islamic prayers at the Pentagon. But here’s a handful of Muslims saying that we cannot pray at the Pentagon like they do? We can’t have the same rights in our own country? This is ridiculous! I just think it would be a slap in the faceof millions…tens of millions of Christians if the Pentagon did this…and the Christian families in the US military. It would just be a real offense and I just hope that the Pentagon doesn’t even consider this. This would be a great mistake.”

Male reporter: “OK, Reverend Graham, thanks so much for joining us to present your side of the story. We appreciate it.”

Graham: “Well thank you and God bless.”(

Perhaps it was Graham’s mention of Ramadan that drove Obama over the edge; perhaps Obama WAS privy to the interview.

There can be no doubting the palpable charge in the air in New York City today. This feverous pitch can be felt across the country as Americans from both sides of the political fence wrestle not only with one another but within themselves as well over the proposed mosque being planned only blocks from Ground Zero. Thousands of words have been spoken. Countless hours of television time have been dedicated to the people whose passions require face time for the clear expressions of their mutual causes. Millions of dollars are invested by those who would benefit from the completion of the plans to build; likewise millions have been spent by those who would benefit from the scrapping of those plans to build. Lines have been drawn in the concrete; battle lines are no longer hypothetical—you know where you stand on this issue.

Organizations in favor of the mosque—and it IS a mosque (by definition: any place wherein more than one Muslim gathers en mass to pray, in a pre-planned, scheduled and ordained way, is a mosque)—are dubious in nature at best. One such group in favor of the building—known as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), directed by National Executive Director Nihad Awad—recently scalded not only Republicans, but the Obama administration as well, for what they perceive as complacency towards the enforcement of their community rights. Speaking for CAIR, Awad said:

“The Democratic leadership also could have been more forceful in defending the American Muslim community’s rights (one notices the obvious lowering of the head by Awad here—a tell-tale sign of Taqiyya) uh, to freedom of religion.”

As the leader of CAIR, he—and CAIR itself with him as the head of the organization—flagrantly tosses about such bigoted rhetoric as “Islamophobia”, “Islama-phobe” and other such words of the ilk. Nihad Awad has been allowed to deceive without remorse (a well-known practice taught in the Qur’an, identified as Taqiyya): (Video)

Practice of Taqiyya

This practice of Taqiyya leads to the acceptance in his mind and heart of the use of such deceptive terms as “moderate” to describe himself and CAIR when Awad speaks to American journalists. When in reality, CAIR, Awad, and other groups he is affiliated with have been condemned by the FBI to such extents that all relationships have been officially severed between CAIR and the Feds; a direct order from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. These actions, to include a now alleged co-conspiracy between Awad and the imam funding the mosque near Ground Zero, Feisal Abdul Rauf, unequivocally establish him and his groups as extreme: (Video)

One last matter of utmost importance as it relates to the false truths so frequently spoken by Nihad Awad. The vast majority of readers will have never cracked the pages of the Qur’an; much less have studied it as this author has. It is a disturbing piece of work. If no other nugget of educational information is extrapolated from this article, may the sole message be this: (Video)

The imam, whom has become the face of the mosque near Ground Zero, too is shrouded in mystery to the average American; spending more time on “missions of understanding” overseas than here in the States answering questions regarding the money trail. Research into Feisal Abdul Rauf reveal precisely the same double speak one unearths when delving into the despicable world of his counterpart in deceit, Nihad Awad—indeed, two peas in a pod. Rauf’s words to the English speaking world would have those of us so inclined towards freedom of religion, tolerance and other such Constitutional aspects believe he’s a classic example of misunderstood intentions; a man scorned and persecuted for his religion.

On one hand, he preaches to a New York paper thus:

“My colleagues and I are the anti-terrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric. Our purpose is to interweave America’s Muslim population into the mainstream society.”

Yet, as truth has revealed, through reading numerous quotes of his, written in Arabic on his websites, Arabic news-sites, and in Arabic newspapers, Rauf’s true intentions actually align more with the teachings of the Qur’an: the complete subjugation of all religions worldwide (particularly Christianity and Judaism in America—known as the infidels in the Qur’an) to Islam. Considering that Americans have neither the requisite time for scanning the internet in search of every news-worthy source of Arabic-written Islamic propaganda, nor—more than likely—a solid working knowledge of the language, how then are we to know of Rauf’s printed words as found in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere “over there”?

Glad you asked:  (Video)

Considering these issues now come to light, it begs the question: in what manner, precisely, Mr. Awad—and you as well Rauf, considering you fellows are considered co-conspirers by the FBI—would you have liked to see Obama “be more forceful”? Did you not recall that Mr. Obama worked VERY hard at the secularization of this nation’s National Day of Prayer? Did it escape you that number 44 does NOT condone a religious figure of any kind being associated with this nation’s most sacred days? Can you not understand that a day as important as the National Day of Prayer, or 9/11—as has already been established by Obama’s actions back in April—simply MUST be devoid of religious leanings, implications or references to God, Godliness or worship of any kind? (Video)

Obama’s actions on the mosque near Ground Zero, plainly stated, can no longer be considered political correctness. Waffling, flip-flopping, back-tracking be damned—Obama’s first response was his answer. From centrists to radical right wing nut jobs, America was outraged, and rightly so. This statement from Obama—a nation splitting, spirit eviscerating, scathing comment along the lines of “Let them eat cake”—was so unbelievable, so surreal that no other president in history could have uttered those words.

Should we have been so shocked? Consider what the man has done to the Jews of this nation; another dubious achievement award he’ll have a stupendously hard time fitting into the trunk as he drives off the front lawn in 2012. Bibi has a framed photograph of Winston Churchill prominently placed upon his office wall. Churchill, Britain’s father of Zionism, the man who wrote the Churchill White Paper of 1922 that was to establish peace, unity and mutual respect between the Jews and Arabs of Palestine at his meeting of the Zionist Organization in 1921, is one of 2 of Netanyahu’s great heroes. After the devastation of 9/11, the United States was proudly presented with a bust of the great Churchill—a bust that has graced the Oval Office for a decade. Obama’s first order of business upon taking up residence was to return the beloved gift so graciously dedicated to our country. Obama’s first insidious gesture would be far from his last.

At the end of March 2010, Bibi was scheduled to meet with the chosen one to present plans that would satisfy Obama’s demand for the cessation of Israeli plans for growth. Typical for such meetings are the proverbial photo shoots with the media—scrapped for this event. Also customary, polite, and well, down-right expected, is dinner between the heads of state. So dissatisfied with the first moments of their meeting was Obama however, that he literally left the room, stating crudely, “let me know if there is anything new”. So infuriated was the Jewish community that Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America called the insult, “racist”. So infuriated was Netanyahu by his treatment that it led to accusations of “hazing”, with Netanyahu’s newspapers stating it was “treatment reserved for the President of Equatorial Guinea”. Faux pas? Gaffe? NO; a trend in the making!

As I reported just days after the incident occurred:

“A Turkish backed flotilla, against the warnings of Israel (also ignoring the invitation by Egypt), and harboring what many reports called mercenaries (confirmed as carrying gas masks and other non-humanitarian related cargo), under cover of nightfall, sailed towards Gaza at the end of May, 2010. Sailing into hostile waters, the flotilla was warned to turn back, as this region has been sealed off by blockade to secure Israel from further bloodshed as it endured when Hamas took control of Gaza three years ago. When the flotilla continued its course, Israeli troops descended and took control of the flotilla. International outrage against Israel ensued, as the world was convinced this flotilla was humanitarian in nature, yet Obamarefused to weigh in for days; other than to, in classic form, throw Hillary under the bus, having her comment that this situation in Gaza was, “unsustainable and unacceptable.” When Obama finally DID gesture towards the Middle East, his response was NOT a gesture towards the true victim, Israel. It would be to invite Mahmoud Abbas to the White House—the first week of June 2010—to sign a taxpayer backed check for nearly a billion dollars for “aide” to the Palestinians.” (

This check to Abbas, these actions against Israel and Netanyahu, these blatant, arrogant ally-destroying maneuvers by Barrack Hussein Obama—not to mention the removal of Christianity and Judaism from the one day Obama was forced to leave in place (very much to his chagrin)—serve to etch into stone the promise made when he swore to Abbas, Palestine, Arabs, and the world that: “Jerusalem will belong to the Palestinians”.

As the Holy day of Rosh Hashanah quickly approaches—officially beginning in 2010 at sunset September 8—Americans of faith are encouraged, once again, to observe the divider-in-office.

Not a single important national holiday has been observed by this president.

Memorial Day and D-Day were snubbed. The Fourth was blasphemed by his verbal assault on the Constitution and very near cursing of the Founding Fathers from his balcony overlooking pre-selected guests. The National Day of Prayer came and went with nary a mention; yes, the Proclamation was written—but the crass actions, secular vernacular and insults leveled against a prominent religious figure spoke volumes as to Obama’s TRUE intentions for our day of Prayer.

And what of the days Obama has celebrated? Never in 65 years of its remembrance has a president of this country attended the celebrations marking the Hiroshima bombings. Yet on August 6, 2010, that’s precisely what Obama called for; sending a representative from his administration on the road—to continue along with the “apology tour du Obama 2010.”

And, lest we forget, there is this, all important, extremely American past time—an event that every president should consider as a unifying moment in our nation’s new destiny: (Video)

So, as we search this week for those sweetest apples, remembering the customs of this most Holy time of the year, let not your hearts be weary—nor let your minds be even a fraction of a bit shocked—when the least-holy and most un-patriotic president to ever have the audacity to sit within that hallowed place called the White House completely overlooks Rosh Hashanah 2010—he’ll probably be golfing with Rauf.


Iran and Yet Another Nuclear Facility

Filed under: Ahmadinejad, Iran, Muslim Brotherhood, National Security — Tags: — - @ 12:26 pm

Written By Walt Long

Here we go again with Iran having yet another Nuclear facility. When will our government start taking this madman from Iran Ahmadinejad seriously?  Do more than just sit down and have a cup of tea and eat cookies with him.

In Islam there is a Mahdi ( , also Mehdi; “Guided One”) he is the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will stay on earth seven, nine, or nineteen years (depending on the interpretation) before the coming of the “Day of the Resurrection”. In other words an Islamic Messiah.

Ahmadinejad has gone on record of actually believing it is his duty to bring about the Mahdi. In his speech before the UN General Assembly in September of 2005 at the end of his speech is stated the following:

“From the beginning of time, humanity has longed for the day when justice, peace, equality and compassion envelop the world. All of us can contribute to the establishment of such a world. When that day comes, the ultimate promise of all divine religions will be fulfilled with the emergence of a perfect human being who is heir to all prophets and pious men. He will lead the world to justice and absolute peace. O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace.”

Ahmadinejad has repeated the Mahdi talk several times in 2007 and in  2009 .

Many want to throw this madman aside and just shrug it off as being just that a “madman” speaking. The only thing is that this “madman” could or will have access to a nuclear bomb.


I am a refugee


Print Edition

Photo by: Ariel Jerozolimski/The Jerusalem Post

I am a refugee

As a descendant of a family forced out of Algeria, my father and I – and the millions of other Jews from families who were expelled from Arab countries after 1948 – are entitled to redress.
As a sitting member of a democratic government, it might appear strange to declare that I am a refugee. However, my father, his parents and family were just a few of the almost one million Jews who were expelled or forced out of Arab lands. My father and his family were Algerian, from a Jewish community thousands of years old that predated the Arab conquest of North Africa and even Islam. Upon receiving independence, Algeria allowed only Muslims to become citizens and drove the indigenous Jewish community and the rest of my family out.

While many people constantly refer to the Arab or Palestinian refugees, few are even aware of the Jewish refugees from Arab lands.

While those Arabs who fled or left Mandatory Palestine and Israel numbered roughly 750,000, there were roughly 900,000 Jewish refugees from Arab lands. Before the State of Israel was reestablished in 1948, there were almost one million Jews in Arab lands, today there are around 5,000.

An important distinction between the two groups is the fact that many Palestinian Arabs were actively involved in the conflict initiated by the surrounding Arab nations, while Jews from Arab lands were living peacefully, even in a subservient dhimmi status, in their countries of origin for many centuries if not millennia.

In addition, Jewish refugees, as they were more urban and professional, as opposed to the more rural Palestinians, amassed far more property and wealth which they had to leave in their former county.

Financial economists have estimated that, in today’s figures, the total amount of assets lost by the Jewish refugees from Arab lands, including communal property such as schools, synagogues and hospitals, is almost twice that of the assets lost by the Palestinian refugees. Furthermore, one must remember that Israel returned over 90 percent of blocked bank accounts, safe deposit boxes and other items belonging to Palestinian refugees during the 1950s.

EVEN THOUGH the number of Jewish refugees and their assets are larger than that of the Palestinians, the international community only appears to be aware of the latter’s plight.

There are numerous major international organizations devoted to the Palestinian refugees. There is an annual conference held at the United Nations and a refugee agency was created just for the Palestinian refugees. While all the world’s refugees have one agency, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the Palestinians fall under the auspices of another agency, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).

UNWRA’s budget for 2010 is almost half of UNHCR’s budget.

Equally impressive is the fact that UNHCR prides itself on having found “durable solutions” for “tens of millions” of refugees since 1951, the year of its establishment. However, UNRWA does not even claim to have found “durable solutions” for anyone.

If that is not distorted enough, let’s look at the definitions and how they are applied: normally the definition of a refugee only applies to the person that fled and sought refuge, while a Palestinian refugee is the person that fled and all of their descendants for all time. So, according to the UNRWA definition of conferring refugee status on descendants, I would be a refugee.

However, I do not consider myself so; I am a proud citizen of the State of Israel. The Jewish refugees found their national expression in Israel, so to, the Arab refugees should find their national aspirations being met by a Palestinian state.

WITH DIRECT negotiations about to resume between Israel and the Palestinians, the spotlight will be returned to this issue. The so-called Palestinian ‘right of return’ is legal fiction. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194, the supposed source for this ‘right’ does not mention this term, is not legally binding and, like all other relevant United Nations resolutions uses the intentionally ambiguous term ‘refugees’ with no appellation.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, still seen as the primary legal framework for resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict asserts that a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement should necessarily include “a just settlement of the refugee problem.”

No distinction is made between Arab refugees and Jewish refugees.

In fact, one of the leading drafters of the resolution, Justice Arthur Goldberg, the United States’ Chief Delegate to the United Nations, said: “The resolution addresses the objective of ‘achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem.’ This language presumably refers both to Arab and Jewish refugees.”

In addition, every peace conference and accord attended or signed between Israel and its Arab neighbors uses the term “refugees” without qualification.

During the famous Camp David discussions in 2000, president Clinton, the facilitator and host of the negotiations said: “There will have to be some sort of international fund set up for the refugees. There is, I think, some interest, interestingly enough, on both sides, in also having a fund which compensates the Israelis who were made refugees by the war, which occurred after the birth of the State of Israel. Israel is full of people, Jewish people, who lived in predominantly Arab countries who came to Israel because they were made refugees in their own land”.

In 2008, the US Congress passed House Resolution 185 granting, for the first time, equal recognition to Jewish refugees, while affirming that the US government will now recognize that all victims of the Arab-Israeli conflict must be treated equally.

I am proud of the fact that the Knesset passed a resolution in February of this year that will make compensation for Jewish refugees expelled from Arab countries after 1948 an integral part of any future peace negotiations. The Israeli bill stipulates that “The state of Israel will not sign, directly or by proxy, any agreement or treaty with a country or authority dealing with a political settlement in the Middle East without ensuring the rights of Jewish refugees from Arab countries according to the UN’s refugee treaty.”

Before 1948 there were nearly 900,000 Jews in Arab lands while only a few thousand remain. Where is the international outrage, the conferences, the proclamations for redress and compensation? While the Palestinian refugee issue has become a political weapon to beat Israel, the Arab League has ordered its member states not to provide their Palestinian population with citizenship; Israel absorbed all of its refugees, whether fleeing the Holocaust or persecution and expulsion from Arab lands.

People like my father, the hundreds of thousands who came to Israel and the millions of Israelis descended from these refugees are entitled to redress. It is vital that this issue return to the international agenda, so we don’t once again see an asymmetrical and distorted treatment of Arabs and Jews in the Israeli-Arab conflict.

The writer is Israel’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Anti-Semitic Cartoons on Progressive Blogs

Source: JCPA

by  Adam Levick

Published September 2010

The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Fellows of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

No. 101, 1 September 2010 / 23 Elul 5770

Anti-Semitic Cartoons on Progressive Blogs

Adam Levick

  • Political cartoons often have more of an immediate impact in reinforcing negative stereotypes about Jews than a lengthy essay. By far the largest output of anti-Semitic cartoons nowadays comes from the Arab and Muslim world. A yet uncharted field of hate cartoons against Jews is that in progressive blogs.
  • Anti-Semitic cartoons found – and seemingly tolerated – on progressive blogs such as Daily Kos, MyDD, Mondoweiss, and Indymedia are mainly expressions of anti-Israelism, a more recent category of anti-Semitism than the religious and ethnic-nationalist versions.
  • Traditionally the core motif of anti-Semitism is that Jews represent absolute evil. The cultural notion of what that means has changed over the centuries. Nowadays absolute evil is often expressed as Jews or Israelis being Nazis. Indeed, the cartoon motif most frequently appearing on the progressive blogs is imagery equating Israel with Nazi Germany. Others reflect Jewish conspiracies, Zionists controlling the world, the blood libel, or show Jews as animals.
  • Most of the progressive blogs discussed, containing such anti-Semitic imagery cited in this essay, generally fail to remove such hateful cartoons, despite blog policies expressly prohibiting posts that contain “hateful” or “inflammatory” content.

Cartoons have to express ideas in an easy-to-understand way. Therefore they are often accessible even to people who cannot read. Cartoons are also an efficient way to transmit hate and prejudices, including anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism in cartoons has been investigated, among others, by the Belgian political scientist Jöel Kotek in his book Cartoons and Extremism.[1] Political cartoons often have a more immediate impact in reinforcing negative stereotypes about Jews than a lengthy essay.

The largest output of anti-Semitic cartoons nowadays comes from the Arab and Muslim world. Outside it one also finds a significant number of anti-Semitic cartoons in many countries. In Europe, for instance, over the past decade such imagery has been particularly strong in countries such as Norway and Greece.[2]

A yet uncharted field of hate cartoons against Jews is that in progressive blogs. They are mainly expressions of anti-Israelism, a more recent category of anti-Semitism than the religious and ethnic-nationalist versions. Traditionally the core motif of anti-Semitism is that Jews represent absolute evil. The cultural notion of what that means has changed over the centuries. In current times absolute evil is often expressed as Jews or Israelis being Nazis. This charge is usually identified with the virulent anti-Semitic cartoons on right-wing extremist sites and in Arab media. This motif, however, is also the main one found in anti-Semitic cartoons on progressive blogs.

Also the three major submotifs of anti-Semitism are expressed in cartoons on progressive blogs. The first one is that Jews lust for power. In progressive blogs this is manifested mainly as caricatures on Jewish conspiracies and Zionists controlling the world. The second major anti-Semitic submotif is that Jews lust for blood, and progressive blogs include cartoons accusing Jews of infanticide. The third anti-Semitic submotif, namely, that Jews are inferior beings, is expressed on these blogs in cartoons showing Jews as animals.

The cartoonist most frequently appearing on the progressive blogs analyzed here is Carlos Latuff. He is an extreme left-wing political activist who won second place in the notorious Iranian Holocaust Cartoon Competition. Latuff is one of the more prolific anti-Semitic cartoonists on the web, with a staggering amount of work dedicated to advancing explicitly anti-Semitic political imagery.

Israel as a Nazi State

The U.S. State Department’s 2008 report[3] on “Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism” asserts regarding the new anti-Semitism:

Comparing contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis is increasingly commonplace. Anti-Semitism couched as criticism of Zionism or Israel often escapes condemnation since it can be more subtle than traditional forms of anti-Semitism…those criticiz­ing Israel have a responsibility to consider the effect their actions may have in prompting hatred of Jews. At times hostility toward Israel has translated into physical violence directed at Jews in gener­al.

The European Union Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia presents a similar definition.[4]

The 2009 report on anti-Semitism by the Stephen Roth Institute noted that anti-Semitic attacks on Jews worldwide doubled from the previous year. The study also points out that extreme anti-Israel sentiments, such as equating Israel with Nazi Germany, are often the catalyst for such attacks.[5] As the report observes, “The dramatic increase in anti-Semitic manifestations in West European countries was influenced considerably by the virulently anti-Israel discourse and propaganda that portrayed Israel as a Nazi state and consequently delegitimized its right to exist.”

As analyzed in an interview with Kotek in 2004,[6] as well as by Arieh Stav in his 1999 book on anti-Semitic cartoons in the Arab world,[7] the charge that the behavior of the Jewish state is similar to that of Nazi Germany has been a staple in the Arab media for years, used as a tool for demonizing and delegitimizing Israel. As Kotek noted, “Long before [Ariel] Sharon came to power [as prime minister], the theme of the Israeli as a Nazi was well-represented in the Arab caricature. According to it, all Zionists from Peres and Barak to Sharon are inspired by Nazi methods.” As Stav pointed out, “The idea of NaZionism…was a central theme of the Soviet Press [during the Cold War] and had considerable impact on Egypt and Syria…particularly during the Lebanon War and the Intifada, as well as in the Western Press. The Arabs…are in the vanguard of this trend. The Judeo-Nazi Motif is among the central themes of Arab propaganda.”[8]

The following cartoons illustrate how the hate motif of Israel as a Nazi state appears regularly on progressive blogs. As Kotek remarks, “Cartoons [that] convey the idea that Jews behave like Nazis [would] lead readers to conclude that Israel, alone among the nations, has no right to exist. Such cartoons represent a continuation and rebirth of the malicious Zionism=Racism charge codified in 1975 – later repealed – by UN member states (Arab and Soviet bloc) who at the time were openly dedicated to Israel’s destruction.”

The above cartoon, showing a bloodstained Israeli flag with the Magen David morphed into a swastika, is posted[9] on the progressive blog Daily Kos. It accompanies a column by a Kos blogger entitled: “Eulogy before the Inevitability of Self-Destruction: The Decline and Death of Israel.” While it is important to note that this post elicited an overwhelmingly negative response by Kos readers, it is also certainly worth noting that the graphic and accompanying story – which warns of “A Zionist movement multiplying like cancer cells” – was still posted on the site as of August 2010.  The section on “posting privileges” at Daily Kos clearly stipulates that “hateful” or “inflammatory” posts will be deleted.[10]

The cartoon above by Derkaoui Abdellah, presumably comparing Israel’s security fence with Auschwitz, won first prize at the abovementioned 2006 Iranian Holocaust Cartoon Competition in Tehran.[11] It was also posted on Daily Kos, and is still up at the site as of August 2010.[12] The Kos blogger who posted the cartoon referred to it as “merely” depicting “a political statement that what the Israelis are doing in building the wall around the Palestinian territories echoes what was done to them in the past.” While much of the commentary regarding the cartoon was negative, it needs to be asked why – again, given that Daily Kos reserves the right to delete material that is hateful – such a hideous cartoon would appear at this progressive site at all, let alone remain there to this day.

In a post entitled “Zionism was and remains a racist ideology,” Daily Kos blogger Ben Heine – who also participated in the Iranian Holocaust Cartoon Competition[13],[14] – shows Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman as Adolf Hitler. Any pretense that this cartoon only vilifies Lieberman can be refuted by the word Zionism colored in blood in the background, along with the vicious-looking skull in Lieberman’s hand wrapped with the Israeli flag. Though the image, and accompanying text, was removed[15] from Daily Kos, merely citing “copyright reasons,” the post attracted 564 comments, many of them defending the cartoon. One such comment suggested that “the artist was not claiming Jews are Hitler. He was [merely] comparing the behavior of Avigdor Lieberman to Hitler.”[16]

The Latuff cartoon above, showing Sharon kissing Hitler, appeared on the (Washington) DC Indymedia site.[17]

The above is another Latuff cartoon on the DC Indymedia site[18] comparing the war in Gaza with the genocide of Jews by the Nazis.[19]

The above Latuff cartoon was published by Indymedia[20] on Holocaust Remembrance Day.

The above is yet another Latuff cartoon on Indymedia.[21] It makes sure there is no doubt that the Jewish state has morphed into the new Nazi Germany by showing the tracks of the Israeli tank shaped like swastikas.

The above cartoon by Pat Oliphant, portraying Israel as a jackbooted, goose-stepping, mindless Nazi-like monster, was initially published in the New York Times and the Washington Post.[22] Eventually it was reproduced on several extremist right-wing websites, as well as in a publication of the terrorist organization Hizballah with the heading “Zionist Nazism.”[23] The progressive blog Mondoweiss reprinted the cartoon and defended it by saying, “Considering the next foreign minister [Avigdor Lieberman] has been widely called fascist, and recommended nuking Gaza, I see no reason to criticize it.”[24]


The blood-libel motif originated in the twelfth century in Christian England.[25] It alleged that the Jews needed Christian blood for their Passover service and, clearly, were evil. In today’s Arab world this staple image of unbridled hatred has mutated into the alleged quest for Palestinian blood.[26] The blood libel sees Jews not only as murderers, but murderers who prefer to target children.

The abovementioned U.S. State Department report on anti-Semitism notes, for instance: “In Bahrain, in June 2002, the independent news­paper Al-Wasat published a cartoon depicting a Jewish man impaling a swaddled infant on a spear, furthering the anti-Semitic blood libel that Jews kill children” (emphasis added).

The cartoon above by Latuff, depicting former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert cradling a dead Palestinian baby, was published on Indymedia.[27] It suggests that not only do Israeli leaders intentionally kill Palestinian children, but also that such child murder is popular among the Israeli public and helps Israeli politicians get elected.

The Latuff cartoon above was posted by MyDD blogger shergald, and is still up at the progressive blog as of August 2010. It is posted under the title “Gaza Holocaust Has Begun.”[28] While the theme of the cartoon is child murder, the title corresponds to the Israel-as-Nazi theme. The appearance of more than one anti-Semitic motif is not an isolated phenomenon.

The hate motif of infanticide also appeared in a 2003 cartoon by Dave Brown in the progressive British daily The Independent. The cartoon shows Sharon eating the head of a Palestinian baby and saying, “What’s wrong? Have you never seen a politician kissing a baby?”[29] It won Britain’s 2003 Political Cartoon of the Year Award. After receiving numerous complaints, the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) decided that the cartoon did not breach its code. In the wake of the controversy surrounding the publication, a blogger at Daily Kos – who goes by the name “Neocons will ban me” – posted the same cartoon under the heading “Champions of Free Expression.”

This Latuff cartoon above, appearing on the Indymedia site,[30] is clearly meant to evoke the iconic Holocaust photo (below)[31] of a little Jewish boy in the Warsaw Ghetto raising his hands in surrender to the Nazis. The Israeli soldier in the cartoon has a look of pleasure as he terrorizes a Palestinian child.

Jews Control the Government/Zionist Conspiracy

The term ‘‘Zionist Occupation Government” (or ZOG) has been a staple of right-wing extremists for some time.[32] The State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism includes: “stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective – such as, especially but not exclusively, a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.”

The above cartoon[33] was posted on Daily Kos but was eventually taken down for reasons that were never clearly stated.[34] It was accompanied by a story by the author alleging that the vast Jewish conspiracy was preventing Dr. Juan Cole from being appointed to a position at Yale. The Kos blogger, named “Grand Moff Texan,” made the following comments that are still up at the site (as of 1 August 2010): “I have a problem with the fact that Yale decided not to hire someone because a bunch of Israel-first, rightwing flacks went and scared Yale’s Jewish donors, and they in turn scared administrators at Yale.  That’s three groups of people right there who need to reconsider what country they live in.”

The above image – commenting on efforts by the pro-Israel media watchdog group, CAMERA, to challenge anti-Israel distortions on Wikipedia – suggests a Jewish-Zionist world conspiracy to “rewrite history,” and was posted by shergald on MyDD.[35] The image was still up at the site as of August 2010. The post contains a title, “Zionist Infiltration,” that is the kind of rhetoric typically also used by right-wing extremists such as David Duke. The title has not been deleted despite the blogger user agreement at MyDD prohibiting the use of “inflammatory titles.”


Zoomorphism is a common theme throughout the world. As Kotek noted in the abovementioned interview, “To abuse one’s adversaries, one dehumanizes them by turning them into animals. In Nazi and Soviet caricatures, the Jew is often depicted as a spider or an octopus – perceived as an evil animal.”

The anti-Semitic idea of Jews, or Israel, as savage beasts is not typically expressed on the mainstream web.  However, a regular Mondoweiss[36] blogger, called Seham, linked to a Latuff cartoon within his “Flotilla News List” post.  Mondoweiss is funded by The Nation Institute.

The cartoon above represented a commentary on the May 2010 flotilla incident off the coast of Gaza. It combines both the cartoonist’s frequent claim that Israel has become a Nazi-like state and imagery portraying the Jewish state as a beast, with its tentacles wrapped around the flotilla – which is emblazoned with the word freedom. The ten comments in the thread below were all positive.

The Nazis often portrayed the Jews as an octopus with tentacles wrapped around the world. The above caricature, however, is updated to include the post-Holocaust anti-Semitic notion that the Jewish state has morphed into the old Nazi state. Below, for comparison, is a Nazi anti-Semitic cartoon from about 1938 in which an octopus with a Star of David over its head encompasses the world with its tentacles.


The use of such extreme and hateful cartoons by a site as radical and open to expressions of outright anti-Semitism as Indymedia is not unexpected. The site has even been criticized by the socialist Left[37] for its defense of expressions of Holocaust denial. The use of such images by such “mainstream” sites as Daily Kos and MyDD[38] is much more surprising, and may represent an ominous development within a significant segment of the progressive community. (One blogger at another mainstream Democratic blog, Democratic Underground, linked to the main Carlos Latuff site and said Latuff was a “radical” but “great” – a post that is still up at the site as of August 2010.)[39]

This author’s 2009 report on anti-Semitic themes in the progressive blogosphere found both “Israel as a Nazi state” and “excessive Jewish control/conspiracy” to be present to varying degrees at the three most popular progressive blogs: Daily Kos, Salon, and Huffington Post.[40] Although Mondoweiss does not have a fraction of the traffic of Daily Kos and MyDD, the blog’s creators and contributors have posted on the most widely read progressive blog, Huffington Post. In addition, the influential Talking Points Memo (the twelfth most popular political website),[41] and via it TPMCafe, now syndicate Mondoweiss’s posts.[42] The Nation, which, as noted, funds Mondoweiss, has been one of the standard-bearers of liberal-Democratic thought for years and is the twenty-fourth most popular political website overall.

As Indymedia Watch, an Indymedia watchdog group, noted,[43] “Indymedia was set up to fill a void in the corporate media. Unfortunately, as a largely un-moderated, unrestricted medium it was promptly over-run by bigots…who confuse free-speech with hate-speech. I believe the Indy Media [sic] experiment has failed.”

The question of how the more mainstream liberal-Democratic blogosphere will respond to the continuing presence of such hate speech in their own ideological community remains open. Indeed, given these blogs’ increasing power and influence within the progressive “activist” circles, the way they respond may affect the broader acceptance of such hateful canards for generations to come. For committed antiracists – or anyone, for that matter, truly concerned about the values of tolerance and diversity, and the future direction of the entire “progressive” movement – the seeming refusal to take such trends seriously represents, at the very least, an egregious case of hypocrisy.

More important, the failure to act in the face of such clear expressions of Jew-hatred constitutes a shameful – and potentially calamitous – moral abdication.


Progressive Blogs in This Report

Daily Kos: Daily Kos[44] is an American progressive blog publishing news and opinion.  It was recently ranked as the tenth most popular political website in overall traffic. Daily Kos functions as a discussion forum and group blog for a variety of activists, whose efforts are primarily directed toward influencing and strengthening the Democratic Party.

The site makes clear that “This is a Democratic blog, a partisan blog…with one goal in mind: Electoral victory.” Additionally, the site features a participatory political encyclopedia, glossaries, and other permanent content. Daily Kos was founded by Markos Moulitsas in 2002. In June 2006, members of Daily Kos organized the first-ever political blogger convention, called YearlyKos, in Las Vegas, Nevada. The event was attended by approximately one thousand bloggers and featured appearances by prominent Democratic Party leaders. Subsequent annual conventions became known as Netroots Nation and also were attended by an array of prominent Democratic leaders.

As this author’s report on progressive blogs demonstrated, some bloggers on Daily Kos freely advance narratives of a moral equivalence between Israel and Nazi Germany, as well as more general tropes suggesting Jewish conspiracy. The impunity they seem to enjoy in engaging in such toxic commentary about Jews, and the Jewish state, is notable given the site’s explicit warning that posts or comments may be deleted that: “Contain hateful or defamatory writing; Are deliberately designed to inflame; Contain deliberately inflammatory titles.”

MyDD: MyDD is one of the more popular and influential progressive blogs on the web.[45] MyDD describes itself[46] as “a group blog designed to discuss campaigns, the progressive movement, and political power. We do polling, research, commentary, analysis, and activism.” Jerome Armstrong, the founder of MyDD, has consulted and worked for many organizations and campaigns, including Jon Corzine’s successful 2005 campaign for governor of New Jersey and the presidential efforts of Howard Dean and Mark Warner. Armstrong coauthored the acclaimed book Crashing the Gate. The site prohibits comments and posts that contain inflammatory titles or remarks. Yet, as this report demonstrates, posts containing political cartoons advancing the infanticide and conspiracy narratives about Jews are still found on the site. MyDD is ranked fifty-seventh in overall web traffic among liberal political blogs.

Mondoweiss: The site, funded by The Nation Institute,[47] is an openly anti-Zionist Jewish blog.[48] Philip Weiss, an investigative journalist who, together with Adam Horowitz, runs the blog, does not think Israel should exist. Mondoweiss consistently advances, among other classical anti-Semitic tropes, the argument that Jews exercise too much power over U.S. foreign policy[49] and that Jewish progressive voices on the Middle East are censored, or at least muzzled, by the “right-wing” organized Jewish community. Further, the site argues, accusations of anti-Semitism are cynically used to stifle debate.

Weiss, the main blogger, states that “Zionism privileges Jews and justifies oppression, and this appalls me. Saying I’m anti-Zionist is a sincere expression of my pluralist, minority-respecting worldview.” Weiss has complained of the “suffering of Palestinians that has been perpetrated politically in large part by empowered American Jews who are all over the media and political establishment.”

Weiss also called for a quota on Jews who work in the media, saying, “I would like Jewish participation in mainstream media roundtables on the Middle East held to 50 percent or lower. That is my quota.” He refers to Zionism as an ideology of “apartheid and ethnic cleansing,” and even stated his support for Hizballah when it competed in the 2009 Lebanese elections.[50]

Interestingly, Weiss (like fellow anti-Israel liberal Glenn Greenwald)[51] also has published essays at Patrick Buchanan’s paleoconservative magazine The American Conservative.[52] This odd political alliance seems to find common cause in their mutual hostility toward Israel and willingness to propagate classic anti-Semitic tropes – such as the charge of dual loyalty – while engaging in such rhetoric.[53] [54]

Fellow Mondoweiss blogger Adam Horowitz has said, “[if] they are asking if I support a Jewish state…the simple answer is no.”[55] Cartoons have appeared at Mondoweiss that equate Israel and Nazi Germany, and one recently appeared that falls under the zoomorphism category (Israel as a bloodthirsty animal).

Indymedia: According to its homepage, “Indymedia is a collective of independent media organizations and hundreds of journalists offering grassroots, non-corporate coverage. Indymedia is a democratic media outlet for the creation of radical, accurate, and passionate tellings of truth.”

Indymedia was founded as an alternative to government and corporate media, and seeks to enable people to publish their media as directly as possible. The site, however, has become a forum for hate-mongers and conspiracy theorists.[56] The uses of terms such as ZioNazis is common.[57]  9/11 Truth narratives are advanced frequently.[58] [59] According to traffic statistics from Alexa, Indymedia is the tenth most visited liberal website.

Carlos Latuff

Carlos Latuff is a Brazilian political activist and cartoonist with a staggering portfolio of political cartoons, many of which openly express anti-Semitic themes. He advances the narrative that Israel is a unique and immutable evil in the world.[60]  His work includes imagery clearly indicating moral equivalence between Israel and Nazi Germany, which he has explicitly acknowledged to be his view.[61] The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism noted that Latuff’s “portrayal of [former] Israeli Prime Minister Sharon is reminiscent of the antisemitic caricatures…in Julius Streicher’s [Nazi publication] Der Sturmer.”[62]

Latuff’s works have been posted on various Indymedia websites and blogs as well as several newspapers and magazines such as JAMI, the magazine of the Islamic Front for the Iraqi Resistance,[63] the Lebanese newspaper Al Akhbar,[64] and other formats such as anti-Israel academic Norman Finkelstein’s official website.[65] Latuff participated in the 2006 Iranian International Holocaust Cartoon Competition, and won second place for his cartoon comparing Israel’s West Bank barrier with the Nazi concentration camps.

Ian Black, writing for The Guardian, a daily not known for its philo-Semitic tendencies, noted that Latuff was among those cartoonists “drawing, without inhibition, on judeophobic stereotypes in the service of the anti-globalisation movement.”[66] Latuff also has employed antiblack racist themes in criticizing President Barack Obama.[67]

*     *     *


[1] Jöel Kotek, Cartoons and Extremism (London: Vallentine Mitchell, 2009).


Manfred Gerstenfeld, “Analyzing Cartoons to Capture the Essence of Anti-Semitism” (review of Jöel Kotek, Cartoons and Extremism: Israel and the Jews in Arab and Western Media), Jewish Political Studies Review, vol. 21, nos. 1-2 (Spring 2009)


“Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism: A Report Provided to the U.S. Congress,” U.S. State Department, 2008


Working Definition of Anti-Semitism, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2005

[5] “Anti-Semitism Worldwide,” Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism and Racism,” 2009.


interview with Jöel Kotek, “Major Motifs in Anti-Semitic Cartoons,” Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism 21, 1 June 2004


Arieh Stav, Peace: The Arabian Caricature – a  Study of Anti-Semitic Imagery (Jerusalem: Gefen, 1999)

[8] Ibid., 183.


Nepos Libertas, “Eulogy before the Inevitability of Self-Destruction: The Decline and Death of Israel.” Daily Kos, 13 May 2008


Markos Moulitsas, “Meta Madness Diaries,” Daily Kos, 3 January 2006

[11] http:/

Website of Iranian Holocaust Cartoon Contest, 2006


Jerome A. Paris, Daily Kos, 3 November 2006



Ben Heine, “Zionism Was and Remains a Racist Ideology,” Daily Kos, 5 April 2007


Ben Heine, “The Artwork That Ate Israel,” 6 April 2007


Reader comment by “glow dog,” Daily Kos, 5 April 2007


DC Indymedia, 3 November 2003


Indymedia, November 2007



UK Indymedia, 28 January 2009


UK Indymedia, 4 January 2009


“SWC Denounces  Oliphant Anti-Israel Cartoon That ‘Mimics the Poison of Nazi and Soviet Propaganda’; Urges Nytimes.Com and Other Websites to Remove It,” Simon Wiesenthal Center, 25 March 2009


Tom Gross, “WaPo/NY Times Anti-Semitic Cartoon Becomes Hezbollah Propaganda,” National Review Online, 12 April 2009


Philip Weiss, “Is It Just a Star of David or a Flag,” Mondoweiss, 26 March 2009


“Blood Libel,” Jewish Virtual Library


Menachem Milson, “What Is Arab Anti-Semitism?” MEMRI, 27 February 2004


“Ehud Olmert’s Dreams,” UK Indymedia, 15 January 2009


Shergald, “The Gaza Holocaust Has Begun,” MyDD, 1 March 2008


“A Century of Satire, Wit, and Irreverence,” The Independent, 27 November 2003


“Gaza Ghetto,” DC Indymedia, 24 December 2008


“The Boy in the Photo,” Holocaust Education and Archive Research Team


“A Visual Database of Extremist Symbols, Logos and Tattoos,” Anti-Defamation League


“Downsizing Anti-Semitism,” Judeoshpere, 5 July 2006


Grand Moff Texan, “Isryale,” Daily Kos, 14 June 2006


Shergald, “Zionist Infiltration at Wikipedia,” MyDD, 22 April 2008


Seham, “My Flotilla Newslist,” Mondoweiss, 31 May 2010


Andy Newman, “Fallout as Indymedia Embraces Anti-Semitism,” Socialist Unity, 12 February 2008


“The 50 Most Popular Liberal Sites,” Right Wing News (per Alexa), 26 May 2009


SteeplerOt, “The Art of Resistance,” Democratic Underground, 28 December 2006


Adam Levick, “Anti-Israelism and Anti-Semitism on Progressive U.S. Blogs/News Websites: Influential and Poorly Monitored, Post Holocaust and Anti-Semitism 92, 1 January 2010


“The 25 Most Popular Political News Websites,” EBiZ, August 2010


“You Can Now Follow Mondoweiss at Talking Points Memo,” TPM Café, 25 May 2009


“The End,” Indymedia Watch, 16 March 2007


“About Daily Kos,” Daily Kos


Evan Carmichael, “The Top 50 Political Blogs of the Year,” 2009


“About MyDD,” MyDD


“Journalism Fellows at The Nation Institute,” The Nation Institute


Philip Weiss, “What J Street Is Up Against,” Mondoweiss, 17 March 2009


Philip Weiss, “Liberals Like to Deceive Themselves about Jewish Power,” Mondoweiss, 22 October 2009


Philip Weiss, “On the Verge of Lebanese Elections Nasrallah Defies Obama and Israel,” Mondoweiss, 19 May 2009



Philip Weiss, “The Long Fuse to the Iraq War,” The American Conservative, 28 January 2008




Philip Weiss, “Mr. Horowitz: Tell Us What You Think of the Two-State Solution,” Mondoweiss, 15 March 2009


Michael Totten, “Portland Indymedia Speaks,” Middle East Journal, 7 July 2005


“Zionazis Fires on Jenin Market, Many Hurt, Two Killed,” Chicago Indymedia, 1 June 2002


“9/11 Truth Conference,” Radio Indymedia, 6 June 2006


“9/11 Truth Conference” (audio file), Radio Indymedia


“Latuff Palestine Cartoons,” ArtIntifada, 10 January 2009


“Interview with Carlos Latuff,” Intifada (Voice of Palestine), 17 April 2010


“Annual Report: General Analysis 2003,” Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Antisemitism and Racism


“The Interview I Gave for the Magazine of The Islamic Front for the Iraqi Resistance (JAMI),” Tales of Iraq War by Latuff, 2 June 2008


“Article about My Art in the Lebanese Newspaper ‘Al Akhbar,'” Tales of Iraq War by Latuff, 15 April 2008


“Latuff Gallery,” Official Website of Norman G. Finkelstein


Ian Black, “Cartoon Symbols of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict,” The Guardian, 19 December 2008


Harry A., “Latuff: Anti-Jewish and Anti-Black Racist,” Harry’s Place, 9 February 2010

*     *     *

Adam Levick is the Managing Editor of CiF Watch. His essays have been published in the Jerusalem Post and The Guardian, as well as the blogs: Elder of Ziyon and Z Word. Before moving to Israel in 2009, Adam Levick worked in the Civil Rights Division at the National Office of the Anti-Defamation League, where he was responsible for monitoring progressive journals and political blogs in the U.S.


Flotilla focus turning to terror ties

U.S. investigation is moving into high gear

By Joel Mowbray

This image made from video provided by the Israeli Defence Force on Monday, May 31, 2010 shows what the IDF says is the Mavi Marmara ship, part of the aid flotilla in the Mediterranean Sea. Israeli commandos rappelled down to an aid flotilla sailing to thwart a Gaza blockade on Monday, clashing with pro-Palestinian activists on the lead ship in a raid that left at least nine passengers dead. (AP Photo/Israel Defence Force) AP HAS NO WAY OF INDEPENDENTLY VERIFYING THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE VIDEO PROVIDED BY THE ISRAELI DEFENCE FORCE

The fallout from the ill-fated “Freedom Flotilla” appears far from over. The initial reaction focused on Israel’s raid of the ship attempting to break the blockade of Gaza, which killed nine. Now, however, the Turkish charity that sponsored the flotilla is being investigated by the United States for its possible ties to terrorism.

Key congressmen are pushing the Obama administration to complete its investigations “swiftly.” House Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard L. Berman, California Democrat, and Ed Royce, California Republican, the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs terrorism subcommittee, sent a letter last week to the Treasury Department stating that publicly available information “strongly supports designating” as a terrorist entity the Foundation for Human Rights and Humanitarian Relief, also known as the Turkish IHH.

Although they referenced “the group’s sponsorship of the provocative flotilla in May,” Mr. Berman and Mr. Royce relied mostly on the group’s reported connections to Hamas and al Qaeda, which predated the incident.

For example, the letter cites the statement of French counterterrorism magistrate Jean-Louis Bruguiere, who said that in the case of the millennium bombing plot that targeted Los Angeles in 1999, the Turkish IHH was “basically helping al-Qaida when [Osama] bin Laden started to want to target U.S. soil.”

The letter’s timing was opportunistic. Just one week earlier, the State Department sent a letter to Rep. Ron Klein, a hawkish Florida Democrat, in which it admitted that “U.S. government agencies are taking a close look at IHH” for terrorist designation because “serious questions of support to terrorist organizations have been raised.”

While it appears that the group has been pushing the terrorism envelope for years, it likely has become a priority for U.S. investigators now because of its sponsorship of the flotilla.

Judging by the recent rash of terrorism designations for Iranian-linked entities, the Obama counterterrorism team has been focusing these days primarily on the Iranian mullahs. The Treasury Department, which is responsible for most designations, recently pulled analysts off other investigations to focus on Iranian-related cases, according to a former Treasury official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Designating the Turkish IHH would help thwart its ability to assist terrorists. If it is named a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, the Turkish IHH would be shut out from the U.S. financial system, and it could not work with U.S. charities, nongovernmental organizations or governmental agencies, nor could it raise money here. Such a designation also could help in freezing IHH money flows in the United States and elsewhere.

The greater impact of designation, though, would be political. In branding the Turkish IHH a terrorist entity, the United States would be sending a signal that it supports the Egyptian-Israeli blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza and that efforts to break it will not be taken lightly.

Though the current inquiries were triggered by the flotilla, Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey is a serious professional known for being meticulously careful. “This would not be a political designation; the evidence would need to meet the approval of Justice Department lawyers, based on the facts of the case and available intelligence,” explains former Treasury analyst Jonathan Schanzer, who is vice president of research at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (where this journalist is an adjunct fellow).

For the rest of the article Click Here