Archive | November 11th, 2012

On This Veterans Day, Remember the USS LIBERTY


Of all the American fallen who will be remembered on this solemn and somber day, there are 34 who will not (at least officially speaking) and it is those men who were killed aboard the USS LIBERTY when it was deliberately and brutally attacked by IsraHell for over 2 hours on June 8, 1967

Below are photos rarely seen before detailing the damage that took place that day. Our great thanks to Dennis Eickleberry who served aboard the LIBERTY and sent these pics in.






Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI1 Comment

The Victory Hour with Max French / Resistance is Gentile with Dana Antiochus


by crescentandcross

Double header Saturday–

1st hour–The Victory Hour with Max French–


Download Here

2nd Hour–Resistance is Gentile with Dana Antiochus along with guest ‘Roman’


Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on The Victory Hour with Max French / Resistance is Gentile with Dana Antiochus

“Zionism is Not an American Value”


Artwork courtesy of al-Sayyida Zainab.

1. CNI’s  most excellent Alison Weir is concerned that Mossad Jane Harman will be come the next CIA director. We here at Mantiq al-Tayr thoroughly support Harman’s being put in that post because we believe in complete transparency in government.  We’ve covered Mossad Jane in detail before.

However, and it pains me to inform you that according to the Jerusalem Washington New York Times Post (JEWNYPT), the front runner for the job is the CIA’s deputy director.  That was in today’s Post and you all can look for the link.

And if you think that Petraeus quite just because he had an affair with a woman whose goal was to write a book to make him look cooler than the other side of the pillow you should join the Shas Party.

In fact, even JEWNYTP reports that yet another woman, unnamed woman is involved.

“When Petraeus’s name surfaced, FBI investigators were concerned that the CIA director’s personal e-mail account had been hacked and that national security had been threatened.”

Really? Who could hack the personal email account of the most powerful (and evil) intelligence organization in the world? A fawning Paula Dean Kranz Broadwell having an affair with the head of said organization? (And writing a book about him with Vernon Loeb) Really. Well maybe, especially if she had help.

Maybe someone’s having access to his personal email is why he resigned.  Wonder what they found?

2. Zionism is Not an American Value”

Sample quote:

5) (Unnamed Zionist asshole) “Because I’m an American. My values- democracy, love of freedom, commitment to education, pursuer of peace, success in a multi-cultural environment, and love for mankind- are synonymous with an Israeli’s.”

(Zainab) “Where were you? Saturn? Israel is NOTHING like America. Here, nobody gets denied the right to housing based on race or religion, there are no permits needed to live in cities, people live where they want, our soldiers don’t shoot our own citizens at will for sport, and education is free to ALL people, regardless of religion, and although we have nuclear weapons, we aren’t itching to use them on our neighbours, and may I ask….what the hell is so “multicultural” about a purely Jewish state!

“Zionism is not an American value”

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI2 Comments

Former Mossad chief: Israel, Jewish people benefitted from 9/11

Video and text found at ZionCrimeFactory:

Interviewer: That reputation could also backfire can’t it? After 9/11, for instance, there were conspiracies all over, certainly within the Arab world but even beyond that, that Mossad was the only one who had the power and the strength and the organizational skills to pull off something that spectacular — somehow Israel was behind that for political gain. Do you feel that’s the dark side of the reputation of Mossad?

Efraim Halevy: Well, like everything in life, there’s a downside to the mystique as well. On 9/11, I was head of the Mossad. And within hours of the event becoming public there were rumors flying around the Middle East that this was a Mossad operation because, after all, one of the immediate result of the 9/11 was clearly a very very severe backlash of international approbation of Islam in general. Islam had a very bad day. The Saudis had a very bad day. Muslim countries had a very bad day, including moderate countries. So who benefits from it? And as you know in a crime the immediate question is asked: “Who benefits? Who benefits from something?” Obviously Israel benefited, the Jewish people benefited. So it was the Mossad. This of course was a very vicious libel, it was a clear lie. . . . But yes, in situations like this obviously it is easy to pin things on the Mossad.

Notice that right after the question above, the interviewer detailed how Washington fully adapted the Israeli paradigm in fighting “terrorism” – the legalization and institutionalization of torture, rendition, assassinations, the use of drones, blatant departure from the Geneva Conventions and international legal standards, and other tyrannical and depraved measures.  It’s been reported that Israeli is involved training U.S. military and intelligence personnel in torture and detention techniques, and they essentially have a lock on the drone industry, a truly horrific and cowardly method of murdering people anywhere in the world.  Jews and Israeli agents make our foreign policy, and largely control the United States federal government.  American police and security officials are trained by the ADL and the Israeli military.  The illegitimate terrorist state occupying Palestine even specifically geared it’s economy toward the “Global War on Terror” and “Homeland Security” industry shortly before 9/11, as Naomi Klein documents in her book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism:

The reasons for Israeli industry’s comfort level with disaster are not mysterious. Years before U.S. and European companies grasped the potential of the global security boom, Israeli technology firms were busily pioneering the homeland security industry, and they continue to dominate the sector today. The Israeli Export Institute estimates that Israel has 350 corporations dedicated to selling homeland security products, and 30 new ones entered the market in 2007. […]

With the most tech-dependent economy in the world, Israel was hit harder by the dot-com crash than anywhere else. The country went into immediate free fall, and by June 2001, analysts were predicting that roughly three hundred high-tech Israeli firms would go bankrupt, with tens of thousands of layoffs. The Tel Aviv business newspaper Globes declared in a headline that 2002 was the “Worst Year for Israeli Economy Since 1953.”

The only reason the recession was not even worse, the newspaper observed, was that the Israeli government quickly intervened with a powerful 10.7 percent increase in military spending, partially financed through cutbacks in social services. The government also encouraged the tech industry to branch out from information and communication technologies and into security and surveillance. In this period, the Israeli Defense Forces played a role similar to a business incubator.

Young Israeli soldiers experimented with network systems and surveillance devices while they fulfilled their mandatory military services, then turned their findings into business plans when they returned to civilian life. A slew of new start-ups were launched, specializing in everything from “search and nail” data mining, to surveillance cameras, to terrorist profiling. When the market for these services and devices exploded in the years after September 11, the Israeli state openly embraced a new national economic vision: the growth provided by the dot-com bubble would be replaced with a homeland security boom.

Israeli Mossad agents were arrested in New York City on 9/11, and hundreds more were arrested due to an elaborate DEA/FBI investigation into organized crime, drug running, and espionage across the country in the weeks leading up to 9/11 and after.  Jews controlled all aspects of the official 9/11 “investigation” and sold the fraudulent narrative that bin Laden and Muslims attacked America to the public.  As Halevy, the former Mossad chief, himself said, “Israel benefitted, the Jewish people benefitted,” from the events of 9/11.

In a nutshell: the Jews were behind 9/11 from start to finish.  There is absolutely no doubt about this one folks, the debate is over.  If you are too stupid to recognize this fact or to cowardly to face reality, you are part of the problem, and will be dealt with as such.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Former Mossad chief: Israel, Jewish people benefitted from 9/11

Qatar, Zio-Nazi regime discuss plans to assassinate Syrian president: Report

A Lebanese Newspaper has disclosed that Zionist Amir of Qatar and Zio-Nazi Gestapo Mossad have held a secret meeting to review plans to assassinate Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Arabic-language Ad-Diyar Newspaper said the meeting which was held in the occupied lands included Qatar’s Prime Minister Zionist Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jaber Al-Thani, Qatari intelligence chief Zionist Ahmed Nasser bin Jassim al-Thani, head of Nazi spy agency the Mossad Nazi Tamir Pardo and Nazi Prime Minister Benjamin Naziyahu.

The report added that Nazi Mossad chief also offered several proposals for assassination of the Syrian president.

The Zionist Qatari premier also said that his country is ready to supply IsraHell with free natural gas and very low-priced gasoline for two years after the assassination is carried out.

Naziyahu also asked the Qatari officials whether the [Persian] Gulf Cooperation Council ([P]GCC) is ready to recognize the illegal Zionist regime after the collapse of Bashar al-Assad.

Syria accuses Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey as well as some Western countries of fanning the flames of violence that have erupted in the country since mid-March 2011.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar also publicity announced that they are supporting and arming the Zio-NATO insurgents in Syria.

Posted in Middle East, ZIO-NAZI, SyriaComments Off on Qatar, Zio-Nazi regime discuss plans to assassinate Syrian president: Report

Rejection of Obama by Electoral College


Winner, 332 to 206


By Michael Shrimpton

That rather silly woman, with respect, Anne Applebaum, has had another go at the so-called ‘birthers’ in her typically ill-informed column in today’s Daily Telegraph.  She regards the views of those who believe that Barack Hussein Obama was born in the United States as rational.  By implication she also criticises the many Republicans who consider that Obama was born in what is now Kenya for rejecting the legitimacy of his claim to the presidency.

For a view to be rational it must be based on the evidence.  Like most pro-Obama commentators Applebaum does not condescend to consider the evidence, indeed I have not seen rational discussion of the issue anywhere in the mainstream media.  For a serious consideration of the issue you have to go online, onto reputable websites like Veterans Today.

The competing theories may be shortly stated.  President Obama and the Democratic Party claim that he was born in Honolulu in the State of Hawai’i on August 4th 1961.  They have been consistent about the date but not the place.  Two different hospitals were put forward at different times in the 2008 election (I have been tracking this issue since Obama first came on my radar, as a state senator in Illinois, about ten years ago).  The President and the Democrats have now settled on the Kapio’lani Maternity Hospital in Honolulu.   Mainstream media commentators like Anne Applebaum are seemingly unaware that two different US birthplaces have been put forward by the President and his supporters.  They tend to take the latest White House position as fact.

The Kenya theory, supported by many Republicans, a broad swathe of the international intelligence community (behind the scenes) and, in the public domain, by the entrepreneur Donald Trump, asserts that the President was born in or near Mombasa in what is now Kenya.  Within this group there are five main sub-groups – those who say that the date of birth is correct but not the place, those who put the birth in 1960, those who say that the claimed maternal relationship is true but not the paternal relationship, those who put it the other way round and those who accept the claimed parentage but not place of birth.  There is of course cross-over between these groups on the date of birth.

The CIA, semi-publicly, accepted maternity but challenged paternity.  Two names for the father, including the radical black activist ‘Malcolm X,’ were privately circulated by ‘sources close to the CIA’ in 2010 and 2011.  The CIA’s true position, supported I am told by a DNA test, is that the claimed paternity is correct but not maternity.  Their official position is of course the White House line, i.e. that President Obama is eligible to be sworn in as President on January 21st.   The CIA were actually quite slow to get to grips with the issue.  So far as I know no work was done on it until I briefed them in, in 2007.  Both MI5 and MI6 held out on them for some months afterwards, indeed I don’t think MI6 made full disclosure of their position until CIA had the DNA test done (I am told they used wine and water glasses, with the DNA swabs verified by fingerprints).  Homeland Security are said to agree with the CIA’s internal assessment.  They of course have access to the immigration and passport records, which have never been disclosed publicly and are apparently troubling for the Democrats.

The Mossad, DGSE, BND, SVR, MI5 and MI6 go with Mombasa, although there is some disagreement between the agencies about date of birth.  SVR are rumored to favour 1961, e.g., whereas MI6 and Mossad are said to go with 1960.  MI5 have a file because the colonial internal security files came over from Nairobi in 1963.  Since Obama’s father and grandfather were both linked to the Mau-Mau terrorist organization they were very properly made the subjects of intelligence and police surveillance.

There is actually very little evidential support for the Honolulu theory.  The document the media refer to as a ‘birth certificate’ is nothing of the sort.  It is an electronic facsimile, unsupported by matching Hawai’i file entries, which are sealed.  I respectfully associate myself with the criticisms of this document by the forensic specialists who examined it at the behest of Arizona lawman Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  It consists of multiple layers and appears to have been generated by software.  It is not an original, nor even a photocopy of an original.

It does not take the case very much further, save that its production is damaging to the White House’s credibility, as was the production of a shorter-form purported certificate in 2008, which was denounced at the time as a forgery by a Hawai’ian official, although the state then backtracked, under intense political pressure.  The older fabrication was a two-dimensional computer file, which appeared to have been photo-shopped.  The purported official seal lacked depth, a common mistake by forgers.

There is a self-serving entry in the Honolulu Advertiser, which again takes the case no further, since it has always been clear that the ‘parents’ were claiming the birth of a baby boy named Barack in Honolulu on 4thAugust 1961.  The address in that advertisement was not real however, an odd feature.

There are some surprising lacunae in the evidence produced.  The claimed mother’s medical records, e.g., have never been released.  That calls for comment, since in the US there would have been an attending physician. One would expect to see some reference in the medical records for a teenage girl undergoing her first pregnancy.  There are no photographs showing Ann Dunham whilst pregnant, and no evidence that she took ‘her’ child with her to Washington State, after she left school in Honolulu.  There are no photographs of Barack Obama in the US before the age of about two.

Neither of the alleged places of birth has a record of Ann Dunham being admitted in the first week of August 1961, hospital admission records being something investigators have been calling for over four years.  There are no supporting records from the attending physician, whose name was suppressed for some three years after the issue started to gain traction.  There are issues over the numbering of the long form birth certificate produced, which does not appear to be in sequence.  The relevant immigration records are sealed, something which troubled Sheriff Arpaio, an experienced lawman, and his investigating posse.  I know some have challenged the sheriff’s good faith, but I see no reason to question it.  He is a man of the highest integrity  –  we are not talking Thames Valley Police here.

The passport records are relevant, because President Obama cannot have visited Pakistan during the al-Huq dictatorship on a US passport.  On what basis was he issued a passport by another state?  If Indonesian what was said to the Indonesian authorities about his date and place of birth?

The President’s college records are relevant because he appears to have received scholarship funding for which he would not have been eligible had he been born in the USA.  It is also a valid point that he took no steps to correct a book-cover bio describing him as Kenyan-born, a fact of which Anne Applebaum seems to be unaware.

Article 2 of the US Constitution seems to me to be clear enough.  To be eligible for the presidency a candidate presented to the Electoral College has to be an American Citizen, born in the United States.  It is a matter entirely for them but I see no reason why the Electors could not ask for evidence of Barack Obama’s eligibility.  That applies to all candidates of all races from all parties by the way.

I don’t accept that Senator McCain was eligible to be sworn-in, as in my opinion he was born in a hospital in downtown Colon, in Panama.  It wouldn’t matter if he were born on Coco Solo Marine Corps Air Base, as he claims, as that was not in the United States.  Quite where on the base he was born is a moot point, since the hospital was not built for another five years.  I don’t accept that Senator Goldwater qualified for the presidency either – his eligibility was queried at the time, as he was born in a territory, not a state.

If I am right in my conclusion that President Obama was born in what is now Kenya (it was then the Coastal Protectorate) he cannot have been born to Ann Dunham, as there is no evidence she was in Kenya in 1960 or 1961.  Since she is his route to US citizenship (a somewhat doubtful route at best, since his father was already married and the form of ceremony of marriage between Ann and Barack Hussein Senior was bigamous) birth in the Protectorate would also take down his US Citizenship.  He has never naturalized and is not in my opinion a US Citizen by birth (jus soli) or descent (jus sanguini).

If those conclusions are right Vice-President’s Biden suitability to be President might be called into question, on the ground that he either knew or ought to have known that the President was ineligible, although that would more properly be a matter for Congress on impeachment, not the Electoral College, as I read the US Constitution, not least as some states bind their electors to follow the popular vote.

We might see the House Speaker as President before next year is out.  He might want to look out his birth certificate, a document the Democratic Party could have called for before nominating Barack Obama in 2008 (it’s odd that there is almost no due diligence on presidential candidates, but there is for presidential nominees once they’ve been elected).

9th November 2012

Posted in USAComments Off on Rejection of Obama by Electoral College

New York Times Opposes Palestinian Self-Determination


by Stephen Lendman


Longstanding NYT articles, op-eds, and editorials are notoriously one-sided for Israel. Palestinian rights don’t matter, only Jewish ones.

Life in Occupied Palestine harshness goes largely unreported. Crimes of war and against humanity are ignored. An earlier If If Americans Knew report explained “highly disturbing patterns” of distorted, one-sided coverage.

Little changed from then to now. In February 2012, Jodi Rudoren became Times Jerusalem bureau chief. Like earlier ones, she’s Jewish. A previous article quoted Alison Weir asking “(w)ho is Jodi Rudoren?”

Previously she reported on domestic issues. It’s unclear what she knows about Israel/Palestine. She admits having little regional knowledge. She hopes to be a fast learner. Her marching orders are clear.

She’s uncomfortable addressing Israeli torture, murder, and other lawless policies. At best she says some call West Bank settlements “controversial.” International law calls them illegal. No ambiguity exists.

Early in her tenure, she connected with David Ha’ivri. He’s an extremist settler rabbi. He’s involved with Jewish Defense League founder Meir Kahane’s Kach group.

Kahanism is known for racist, ultranationalist, terrorist policies. Israel, America, EU nations and Canada declared Kach a terrorist organization. Kahanists call Arabs enemies of Jews and Israel.

Times editors bear full responsibility for pro-Israeli bias. On November 4, their editorial headlined “Palestinians at the UN, Again.” The title alone expresses arrogance and dismissiveness.

“With peace negotiations at an impasse since 2008 and unlikely to resume any time soon,” it said, “the Palestinians have only one diplomatic card left — their status at the United Nations — and once again they are trying to play it.”

Fact check

On and off for nearly four decades, so-called “peace” talks were stillborn from inception. Illusion masks an Israeli/Washington partnership intolerant of peace.

Israeli and US leaders don’t negotiate. They demand. Palestinians get nothing but take-it-or-leave it diplomacy. Conflict resolution isn’t possible because Palestinians have no legitimate peace partner.

Privately, Netanyahu calls talks a waste of time. Going through the motions assures institutionalized injustice. Times editors don’t notice or care.

“Last year, the Palestinian Authority toyed with submitting an application for full United Nations membership, but backed off in the face of overwhelming opposition from the United States and Israel.”

Now they plan to seek “nonmember observer state” status. They’ll likely get it. “It is not a move that will do anyone any good. It will not change facts on the ground, and it will come at a cost.”

“Israel and the United States say unilateral moves like these by the Palestinians violate the 1993 Oslo accords, which were intended to pave the way to a ‘final status agreement’ within five years.”

“And it is clear that a negotiated deal is the only way to ensure the creation of a viable Palestinian state and guarantee Israel’s security.”

Fact check

Previous articles explained that Palestinian statehood was established on November 15, 1988. At the time, the PLO adopted the Palestinian Declaration of Independence. It’s official and binding. Palestine satisfies all essential criteria for sovereign independence and full de jure UN membership.

On May 11, 1949, General Assembly Resolution 273 recommended UN membership for Israel. On November 5, 1949, it was officially granted. It was conditional on its government accepting and implementing Resolutions 181 and 194.

On November 29, 1947, the General Assembly passed Resolution 181, the Palestine Partition Plan.

It granted 56% of historic Palestine to Jews (with one-third of the population) and 42% to Palestinians.

It designated Jerusalem international city (a corpus separatum – separate body) under a UN Trusteeship Council. It called for an Independent Arab state by October 1, 1948.

It asked “all Governments and peoples to refrain from taking any action which might hamper or delay the carrying out of these recommendations.”

It called for the Security Council to be empowered with “the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation.”

Israel’s 1948 “War of Independence” intervened. On May 14, 1948, a Jewish state was proclaimed. It’s on stolen land. It’s on 78% of historic Palestine.

International law affirms the universal right of return. It’s not negotiable.

UN Resolution 194 (December 1948) said “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage which, under the principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the governments or authorities responsible.”

The General Assembly affirmed the right of return 135 or more times. Residents everywhere outside their native lands for any length of time have similar rights. Diaspora Palestinians have no fewer ones than others.

They’re not negotiable. International law affirms them. They’re binding and won’t change. Oslo Accord provisions represented unilateral Palestinian surrender. Negotiating terms were vaguely defined.

Timelines and outcomes weren’t specified. Israeli officials obstruct and delay. Concessions aren’t made. They never will be.

Official policy reflects occupation harshness and land theft. It’s hard-wired and unchanged. Negotiations accomplish nothing. Times reports don’t explain.

Perhaps as an afterthought, its editorial admitted that Netanyahu refuses serious compromise. Uniting with Avigdor Lieberman suggests “even more hard-line” policies ahead.

The Times shamelessly endorsed Obama. It did so for the wrong reasons. It ignored nearly four years of unprincipled leadership. It said, “Whatever chance exists of a new American peace initiative after the election is likely to vanish if Mitt Romney wins.”

Implied is that Obama’s reelection holds the best chance for Israel/Palestinian conflict resolution. Ignored is why no progress occurred during his first term.

He rejects Palestinian self-determination. He won’t accept full or partial UN membership. He’s one-sidedly pro-Israel. Rhetoric alone separates him from Romney. Both represent rogue governance.

The Times also rejects Palestinian statehood. It does so by ignoring what’s existed for 24 years. Dismissiveness defines longstanding editorial policy. Palestinians have no friend in Times Square.


Posted in Palestine Affairs, USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on New York Times Opposes Palestinian Self-Determination

9/11: Civil Court Finds Against Arrested “Dancing Israelis”


“Dancing Israelis” Arrested On 9/11 Later Sued The Govt, But Lost Their Case

By Martin Hill

Martin Hill will be my guest on Truth Jihad Radio next Monday, November 12. Listen live 3 to 5 pm Central -KB

Remember the Israelis who were arrested by New Jersey Police on 9/11/01 as the attacks occurred? They were arrested, interrogated, held for 71 days and eventually all sent back to Israel under suspicous circumstances.

Many researchers have documented this as evidence of Israeli complicity in the attacks. But did you know that the Israelis later sued numerous government employees for civil rights violations? This is not widely known.

More Arrested Israelis…With Explosives? (Ed)


There is a lot of information which outlines the initial stories of the “Dancing Israelis”, including WhatReallyHappened and KillTown. The website 911Myths, while defending the establishment’s story, also has a lot of good information on the case. disagrees with 911Myths conclusions and analysis but credits them with providing links to some information that many other sites do not have.

This article will give an update on the “Dancing Israeli” situation, with new information which hasn’t been reported by anyone previously, to our knowledge. What has not been reported at all, either in the mainstream media or alternative media, is the conclusion of their civil case. The Israelis federal civil rights lawsuit was tossed out of court!

The viral youtube video “History they don’t Teach you In school covers a brief history of Israeli false-flag terrorism operations. There is an amusing backstory about this. The video, made by ZionCrimeFactory, was the video that spawned a call to police by a Texas Rabbi in 2010. Rice University Jewish Studies Professor Shira Lander called the police after a Houston man e-mailed her a link to ZCF’s youtube video.

The Rabbi had advertised a public lecture series entitled “The History of Anti-Semitism” with a flier that asked “Why did some blame Jews for 9/11?” and the man simply responded to her question via e-mail correspondence. After that story broke, Dr. Kevin Barret invited Rabbi Lander, his academic colleague, to engage in some “interfaith dialogue” on his radio show regarding the matter, but she didn’t accept the offer for some reason.

Nevertheless, ZCF’s video features numerous mainstream news reports of Israelis being arrested by police that day, including footage of an interview with the New Jersey cop, Scott DeCarlo, who arrested the dancing Israelis at gunpoint. We will recap a bit here regarding the “Dancing Israelis”:

5 men in a van owned by URBAN MOVING SYSTEMS were spotted by New Jersey residents following the 9/11 attacks dancing, laughing, posing for pictures, smiling and exchanging high-fives. A woman named Maria called the police. New Jersey police officer Scott DeCarlo told of how he had to arrest them at gunpoint after they failed to comply with his orders. History Commons has an excellent detailed account of events involving DeCarlo that day with news links.

Ten years after the attacks, in September 2011, AmericanFreePress later conducted an exclusive interview with DeCarlo, now a Sergeant, who told AFP that this will be his first and last statement on the matter: 9-11 Cop Breaks Silence

The actual police and FBI reports were declassified and released in 2011, and can be read in their entirety through the following links. (911Myths notes that they originally retrieved the 6 documents from

East Rutherford police documents View on Scribd 
FBI Documents, section #1 View on Scribd 
FBI Documents, section #2 View on Scribd 
FBI Documents, section #3 View on Scribd 
FBI Documents, section #4 View on Scribd 
FBI Documents, section #5 View on Scribd

CBS reported “A truckload of explosives” and CNN reported “a ton of explosives” in a van stopped “near the George Washington Bridge”, with three men arrested and in custody. Later, CNN ran a press conference with Mayor Rudolph Guliani and Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik in which Kerik denied that any exposives were found. All three news videos can be seen at the very bottom of this page.

An Irish news agency also ran the story ‘Three arrested with van full of explosives (see video above that debunks retraction..Ed) but later ran an update, Police confirm arrests but deny explosives find. There is contention about whether the van with reported explosives was the same van with the five Israelis. However, as we will discuss berlow, note that the Jewish publication reporting on the civil lawsuit on 9/14/04 ran the headline Israelis detained on George Washington Bridge on 9/11 sue Department of Justice.
The Owner of Urban Moving Systems, an Israeli citizen named Dominick Suter, left the country immediately following the arrests, and abandoned his business entirely:
State Granted Access to Moving Company’s Storage Facility


December 13, 2001

“NEWARK- The State Division of Consumer Affairs (“Consumer Affairs”) is asking all citizens who have goods stored at Urban Moving Systems’ Weehawken warehouse to immediately contact Consumer Affairs, Attorney General John J. Farmer, Jr., and New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs Director Mark S. Herr announced today. The State on Wednesday obtained a court order giving inspectors from Consumer Affairs access to the facility allowing consumers access to retrieve their goods and belongings. The State, at the same time, filed a lawsuit in Hudson County Superior Court against Urban Moving Systems and its owner Dominick Suter alleging violations of both the State’s Consumer Fraud Act and regulations set forth in the Public Movers and Warehousing Licensing Act. According to the complaint, on or about September 14, 2001, Suter departed from the United States and left no one acting as an agent for Urban.”

On September 15, 2001, ‘The Record’ of Bergen County, NJ), reported FIVE HIJACK SUSPECTS HAD LINKS TO N.J.; ‘MATERIAL WITNESS IN CUSTODY IN N.Y.C.; THE INVESTIGATION, which read, in part. “An employee of Urban Moving Systems, who would not give his name, said the majority of his co-workers are Israelis and were joking on the day of the attacks. “I was in tears,” the man said. “These guys were joking and that bothered me. These guys were like, ‘Now America knows what we go through.”

ABC’s TV News Program 20/20 did an episode on the matter June 21, 2002,: “Five Israeli men arrested soon after 9/11 might have been working for Israeli intelligence, but likely did not know beforehand about the attacks”.

They also ran a news story titled The White Van. ABC’s 20/20 interviewed a former CIA chief for the segment:
“Vince Cannistraro is a former chief of operations for counter-terrorism with the Central Intelligence Agency. Now he’s a consultant with ABC News. He says many in the US intelligence community believe that some of the men arrested in the white van were in the US working for Israeli intelligence. They speculate that Urban Moving was being used by Israel as an intelligence front.”

I suggest reading the entire transcript of the 20/20 segment because it is very interesting and gives a lot of details. The five Israelis were eventually released after lengthy interrogations: “Sources tell 20/20, after high-level negotiations between Israeli and US government officials, a settlement was worked out.” ABC interviewed two of the Israelis, brothers Paul and Sivan Kurzberg. Paul is quoted as telling 20/20 “(Through translator) I went to work over there because, I don’t know, the situation here is not the best.” Sivan Kurzberg said “(Through translator) They took away two months of my life. During that time I was supposed to be on a trip that I had planned when I started my military service.”
20/20 transcript excerpt:

MILLER: (VO) This is Kurzberg’s younger brother, Sivan, who was one of the three men on top of the van that morning. Although Paul and Sivan would not talk with us about the incident, Sivan and two of the other detainees did go on an Israeli talk show after their return. Oded Ellner denied they were laughing or happy that today.
Mr. ODED ELLNER: (Through translator, from Israeli talk show) Nothing of the kind, the fact of the matter is, we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event.”

The mens’ defense attorney Ram Horvitz, who was also interviewed by 20/20, denied all wrongdoing and denied the men were Mossad agents: “This story about the five boys being connected with Israeli intelligence is the most stupid and ridiculous story that I ever heard, and it is nonsense. I don’t know who invented this story.” Mark Regav, the spokesman for the Israeli embassy in Washington, also spoke with 20/20 and denied any Israeli intelligence connection to the five men, claiming “The story is simply false.”

Channel 4 in the UK later produced a documentary called “The 9/11 Conspiracies”. They interviewed Maria, the woman who initially called the police on the men, and also interviewed three of the Israelis. While the Israelis didn’t talk to 20/20 about the incident in June 2002, they did speak about it in the UK documentary. It is an excellent must-see segment and can be found towards the bottom of the page here.

In 2004, four of the Israelis, Paul Kurzberg, Silvan Kurzberg, Israelis Yaron Shmuel, and Omer Gavriel Marmari filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Attorney General John Ashcroft and wardens of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The four were represented by New York attorney Robert Joseph Tolchin and Israeli attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner. They claimed that their detention was illegal and that their civil rights were violated, suffering racial slurs, physical violence, religious discrimination, rough interrogations, deprivation of sleep, and many other offenses. The lawsuit also stated “As Israelis and as Jews, plaintiffs themselves are sworn enemies of al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden.”

Regarding the “dancing Israelis”, notes “One curious footnote to this story appeared three years later, when four of the Israelis filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice. We’ve not yet discovered what happened to the case, and the lack of information suggests it never reached court. Still, bringing the case at all is hardly what you’d expect if these really were Mossad agents somehow connected to 9/11. Surely three years on they’d want to keep their heads down, not re-open the whole affair?”

There are three archived news reports on the lawsuit from September 2004. The first is an Kokhaviv Publications IMRA Newsletter titled “Israelis detained on George Washington Bridge on 9/11 sue Department of Justice” dated September 14, 2004. The 2nd is an archive of a Jerusalem Post article titled Four Israelis sue Ashcroft dated September 14, 2004. The 3rd is from the Jewish news weekly of Northern California, titled Four Israelis sue Ashcroft, FBI director over 9/11 treatment dated Friday, September 17, 2004.

The Public can access Federal Court records by registering with a system called PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) at There is a fee for this service and a charge for each paid viewed. Sometimes, litigants or others may choose to post legal documents from civil cases for the public on other sources outside of the PACER system, on their own sites or websites such as
LibertyFight regularly reviews various legal filings and writes about interesting cases, such as the case involving the Oregon man who sued the police for falsely arresting him after he flipped them off (he won), the woman who was arrested for allegedly avoiding jury duty in Colorado, the lawyer from Los Angeles who beat her red light camera ticket, or the U.S. Department of Justice’s letter to the cops outlining the people’s right to film police.

In the case of the Israelis arrested on 9/11, some of the documents have been made public on The case is KURZBERG v. ASHCROFT 619 F.3d 176 (2010). The document is from the United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. The Docket No. of the case is 07-0542-cv. It was argued on November 17, 2009 and decided on August 30, 2010.

To put it plainly, the case was dismissed not because of any of the issues involved or merits of the case, but because the plaintiffs failed to serve the defendants properly as per the rules of the Federal Court. Because the plaintiffs sued Attorney General John Ashcroft along with many others working for the government, as the appeals court put it, “the plaintiffs were required to serve process on both the individual defendants and -because the individual defendants were sued for acts or omissions occurring in connection with their performance of their duties – the United States.”

Ashcroft early in the proceedings actually waived his right to be personally served, but the plaintiffs had to officially serve the U.S as well. As the court explained, “by its plain text, requires service both upon the individual defendant and upon the United States officially; one will not suffice for the other.” They actually gave the plaintiffs numerous chances to accomplish this, which was literally as simple as going down to any post office and mailing a certified letter! As the court further explained in their ruling,

“In order to serve process on the United States, the plaintiffs were required to deliver a copy of the complaint to the United States attorney for the district in which the action was brought and also send a copy of the summons and complaint by registered or certified mail to the Attorney General. Here, the plaintiffs failed to comply with Rule 4(i) because they did not effect service on the United States. The plaintiffs failed to do so despite receiving repeated reminders from the defendants that left the plaintiffs with sufficient time to complete service.”

The court also noted:

“The time period for completion of service extended under Rule 4(m) elapsed without the plaintiffs serving process on the United States through service on the Attorney General by registered or certified mail. They did, however, attempt to serve the United States three days before the time period expired by sending a copy of the summons and complaint by first-class mail to the mailing address for the Attorney General at the Department of Justice; the attempt was insufficient because it did not make use of registered or certified mail.

After the time period granted by the court had expired, several of the defendants, including Ashcroft, moved in the district court to dismiss the action on grounds of improper service of process, including failure to serve the United States through service on the Attorney General by registered or certified mail. The district court (John Gleeson, Judge) dismissed the case with respect to all of the defendants, including those who had not raised an improper service defense by pleading or motion. See Kurzberg v. Ashcroft, No. 04 Civ. 3950, 2006 WL 2738991, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68680 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2006)…

“Serving process on the United States through service by registered or certified mail on the Attorney General might seem, from a practical standpoint, to be nothing more than a formality inasmuch as the Attorney General, who is charged with determining whether the United States will provide representation to individual defendants, was himself an individual defendant in this lawsuit. That does not, however, excuse noncompliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The district court did not err in so holding. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”

This seems like an unbelievable and absurd thing to happen when there are at least two professional lawyers handling the case for the plaintiffs. It might be understandable if a person was trying to wade through the courts and represent themself. Federal court rules can be very complicated and burdensome to the average person not versed in the legal system. Many times, cases are thrown out even when plaintiffs do have attorneys, such as in the case of when Jesse Ventura tried to sue the TSA or the ridiculous case of when Ron Paul tried to sue a youtube user (that case was rightly tossed out).

Many times, the court will dismiss a case based on what seems like a “technicality”, such as “standing”, “jurisdiction” “Venue”, failing to respond on time, etc. Fred Rodell, Law Professor at Yale University, wrote a classic essay in 1939 on the fraud and pig-latin type jibberish used by lawyers and judges. It’s titled WOE UNTO YOU, LAWYERS! and is an excellent, must-read treatise. (The phrase is from Luke 11:46:“But he said: Woe to you lawyers also, because you load men with burdens which they cannot bear and you yourselves touch not the packs with one of your fingers.”)

But for a team of international lawyers in a high profile case, to let the case be tossed out literally because they failed to serve the U.S. Attorney general properly? According to press reports at the time the case was first filed in 2004, the plaintiffs’ lawyer Nitsana Darshan-Leitner said:

“The infamous arrest of these young Israelis on 9/11 has been used by anti-Semites worldwide as ‘proof’ of Israel’s involvement in the World Trade Center attack. Our clients are seeking compensation for the harm they suffered in the MDC by prison officials. In addition, the law suit will serve as an important public forum to debunk the lie that Israel or the Mossad was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It will show that there was no Jewish conspiracy as the Arab world continues to claim and put an end to this racist blood libel.”

If it were so important to have a public hearing and “debunk the lie that Israel or the Mossad was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks”, why would the lawyers allow the lawsuit get tossed out for such an absurd and avoidable reason?! In 2004 when the suit was filed, many people across the U.S. and the world were researching and finding out the truth about 9/11. Could it be that the lawsuit was filed at a time to deflect attention away from Israeli complicity and paint them instead as the abused victims?
It was tossed out for not sending a certified letter. Do you know how simple it is to send a certified letter, with a return reciept? You can do it at any U.S. Post office for usually less than $5 bucks. Strange days indeed.
At the bottom of this page in the green section are some relevent excerpts from the Appeals Court’s 2010 ruling.



Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on 9/11: Civil Court Finds Against Arrested “Dancing Israelis”

Bibi Bombs with Romney – Uri Avnery


 Are the Israelis Ready to Put the Romney Kabosh on Netanyahu?

“We need an Israeli Obama, who will work with the U.S. Obama for peace before it is too late, please.” …Uri Avnery

by  Jim W. Dean, VT Editor

‘Myth’ Romney and Bibi – (odd) Birds of a Feather?

I had been waiting for Uri Avnery’s reflections on our past election, with an Israeli orange twist, of course. I knew it would be good and was not disappointed.

Netanyahu is thoroughly despised by the Israeli peace movement, but their divide and conquer political structure provides for some unholy coalitions. These have beaten back those who want to live in peace with the Palestinians on just terms, not as conquerors.

If we had real freedom of the press here, Uri Avnery’s image would have been plastered all over at least one corporate media network keeping us filled in on what the Israeli reaction would be to the upset election. But Uri has a total media black out over here. His article below is just another example why.

Allow me to admit that we VT folks are a bit biased when it comes to anything Bibi or Likudnik. We find them not only appalling but a national security threat as well.

The worse part is the 5th column they have working with them here in the States. And by that I don’t mean just Jews, but large numbers of non Jews who have assisted them in their desire to use American troops and treasure in the interest of  a Jewish homeland, one taken after a World War for justice and with the UN participation.

I do disagree with Uri’s comparison below on ethnic cleansing regarding what the Zios did in the 2oth Century and America did in the 16th and 17th.  American Indians were pretty good ethnic cleansers themselves, and if they had had the technical ability to have crossed the seas the slave trade would have been going that other way.

But this is not a time to be picky as the War Lovers have to have their wings trimmed or they will continue their wicked game.  We don’t let the little things get in the way as that is what the divide an conquer boys want.

We hope to not hear any more about Romney other that his being arrested for money laundering and treason. The same goes for Bibi, other than he his being transferred to stand trial at the Hague. Living in a no Newt Gringrich world has been wonderful, but I fear the Sheldon Adelsons will be looking for new talent. There are always new takers.

Shelly the Godfather

Those of you who have been reading VT for a good while know that we are more and more coming to see the international criminal powers as our main national security threat.

Unlike a good honest outside enemy, these folks have their hooks deep into our political system, and even own a good part of our defense industries.

Their penetration into government has allowed them to put blocks in place from being prosecuted, the horrible situation we are in now even though we have what we need to nail them cold.

There just isn’t anywhere to go to have them prosecuted. They are, as we have been told, ‘protected entities’, too powerful to even suffer the indignity of a criminal trial, much less be convicted and serve time. They just pay fines, usually with other people’s money, which is a pretty good scam when you think about it.

Surprisingly, Israel is different. They are often indicting and putting high government officials on trial there, although as in Olmert’s case they sometimes beat the wrap.

Here, we are reduced to chasing Jesse Jackson, Jrs. around for paying mistresses out of his campaign funds, and since July, taking ‘depression leave’ while being seen out partying on the town with the babe of the day.

I can hear his defense now, that it is an old African treatment for depression. I just wish I was making this all up, but sadly I am not.

Goodbye to a War

             … by  Uri Avnery    November 10, 2012

Age 85 and still fighting for peace

BINYAMIN NETANYAHU and his patron, Sheldon Adelson, bet on Mitt Romney, with the State of Israel as their chip.

They lost.

For Adelson, the betting tycoon, that doesn’t amount to much. Some you win, some you lose.

For Netanyahu, it’s a different matter altogether. He grew up in the US (where he got to know Romney in 1976) and prides himself as a great expert on America. It was one of his strongest cards, since relations with the US are vital for Israel.

Now he stands exposed as a know-nothing, together with his ambassador in Washington DC, who was recommended by Adelson.

Does this hurt Netanyahu’s chances in the upcoming Israeli elections? Perhaps. But only if a credible counter-candidate is found, who could repair relations with Barack Obama.

Ehud Olmert is presenting himself as such, and may now join the fray. Some dream of Shimon Peres giving up the presidency to run as a candidate. Peres, who is two weeks older than I, has never won an election in his fifty years in politics. But there’s always a first time, isn’t there?

ISRAELIS ARE, of course, interested mainly in the Jewish vote. It is indeed revealing.

Netanyahu made no secret of supporting Romney to the hilt. US Jews were told that voting for the Republican candidate was voting for Israel. So did they? They did not.

I don’t yet have the detailed statistics, but from results in Florida and other states it seems that the great majority of Jews supported the Democratic candidate, as they have always done.

What does that mean? It means that one of the most basic contentions of Netanyahu and Co. has been shown to be fallacious.

The Kingmaker who fumbled the ball

Netanyahu declares almost hourly that Israel is the “nation-state of the Jewish people”. This means that Israel belongs to all the Jews in the world, and that all the Jews in the world belong to Israel.

So he speaks not only for the six million Jewish citizens of Israel, but for all the 13 million or so Jews around the globe. (Assuming that no Jews are discovered on Mars.)

Again, this has been proven a fiction. American Jews (or, rather, Jewish Americans) voted as members of the American nation, not of the non-existent Jewish nation. Many of them are certainly sympathetic to Israel, but when it comes to voting, they vote as Americans.

Israel plays a very minor role in their concerns. They may give a standing ovation to Netanyahu when he visits, as American Catholics would to the Pope, but they ignore his instruction to vote for a candidate.

This has great implications for the future. In any clash between vital American and Israeli interests, Jewish Americans are first of all Americans. In such a future situation, a similar miscalculation by Netanyahu or his successors may prove fatal.

FOR EXAMPLE, about the Iran war. Israeli hawks can kiss it goodbye. I doubt that even Romney, had he been elected, would have allowed Netanyahu to attack. Campaign speeches would not have trumped the vital interests of the USA. He, too, would have taken one look at the map of the Strait of Hormuz and shuddered.

Be that as it may have been, there is no chance whatsoever that Obama will now tolerate an Israeli attack. It would have ignited a large scale war with incalculable consequences for the US and world economy.

Americans don’t want another war. They want to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, in practice ceding both countries to their adversaries. Starting another, and far bigger war in Iran is unthinkable. This may be, for us, the most important result of these elections.

Will the world someday do to the Israelis, what they have done to the Palestinians?

WHAT ABOUT Israeli-Palestinian peace? No doubt, chances have picked up. I don’t want to sound too optimistic. The usual cliché says that US presidents in their second term are free of political pressures and can at long last act according to their conscience. That is certainly true – up to a point.

The President is the leader of a party, and from the first day after an election the party starts to think about the next election.

Powerful lobbies like AIPAC don’t cease to exist and will continue to exert a lot of pressure for the Israeli right. Big donors will still be needed. In two years, mid-term elections will come up.

But I hope that Obama will return to his starting position and try to compel both sides to commence serious negotiations. The forthcoming Palestinian application to the UN General Assembly to accept it as a state (with observer status) may be a test.

Its acceptance is of great importance, since it would put the two-state solution squarely back on the international table. The US has no veto power there, and it is up to the president to decide whether to apply pressure or not.

The US is like a huge aircraft carrier. To turn around it needs a lot of time and space. But even a slight change of course can have a major impact on our lives.


IN ISRAEL, the major question is: Will He Take Revenge? No doubt, Obama hates Netanyahu, and with good reason. Netanyahu will not receive a warm welcome in the Oval Office. But Obama is a cold fish. He will keep his personal feelings in tight check.

But how tight? Will he change his attitude towards Netanyahu and his policies enough to give encouragement or even support to Israeli peace forces? Will he influence the Israeli elections as Netanyahu tried to influence the American ones? Frankly, I hope so. For Israel’s sake.

Obama’s victory will reinforce the liberal, democratic, secular, social-minded, less-militant spirit throughout the world. If the Israeli government continues on its present course, its isolation in the world will increase dangerously, unless we do to Netanyahu what the Americans just did to Romney.

Will America be occupied – or is it already?

AS EVERYBODY knows, there are some basic similarities between the US and Israel.

Both are immigrant nations. Both were built by white settlers who carried out ethnic cleansing. Both glorify their huge achievements while keeping quiet about the darker sides of their past.

The elections in both countries illuminate another similarity: the ever-growing split between the various “sectors” of society. White male Americans rallied behind Romney, colored Americans and women behind Obama.

Demographic factors played a major role. To some extent it was a rearguard action by the dominant white male elite against the new majority of blacks, Hispanics, women and the young.

The split was exacerbated by the Tea Party fanatics. It seems that every few generations the American nation is afflicted by a new wave of insanity – the anti-Anarchist hysteria after WWI, McCarthy after WWII, the Tea Party now. To its immense credit, America has a knack of overcoming these waves. But the Tea Party killed Romney, in spite of all his desperate flip-flopping.

Israel has a similar split. Society is divided into sectors, which cast their votes on sectoral lines: Whites (Ashkenazim), Orientals, Ultra-Orthodox (Haredim), National-Religious, Russian immigrants, Arabs. The Likud is a party of Orientals dominated by white males. Lieberman’s is the party of the “Russians”.

Together with the religious of various stripes they constitute a powerful coalition. Unlike Obama, the Israeli left has not been able up to now to build an effective counter-coalition.

We need an Israeli Obama, who will work with the U.S. Obama for peace. Before it is too late, please.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Bibi Bombs with Romney – Uri Avnery

Zen and Henry Waxman’s Legacy


Henry Waxman won and homeless Veterans lost.

by Robert Rosebrock

Wei Wu Wei, the legendary Zen Master profoundly noted:


“When you give a shilling to a beggar do you realize that you are giving it to yourself?

When you help a lame dog over a stile do you realize that you yourself are being helped?

When you kick a man when he is down do you realize that you are kicking yourself?

Give him another kick – if you deserve it!”

So what’s that got to do with Henry Waxman’s legacy?

Well, if you voted for Mr. Waxman to a 20th consecutive term in Congress, then you teamed up with Henry to continue kicking our downtrodden and downhearted homeless Veterans.

Congratulations!  Keep kicking the neediest of our Veterans because you deserve it.

Members of the Old Veterans Guard worked hard toward defeating Mr. Waxman at the ballot box so we could rid him from furthering his abuse and neglect toward our homeless Veterans, but 54% voted against homeless Veterans while 46% voted in their favor.

Thus, Mr. Waxman will continue with his secretive, backroom wheeling-and-dealing as he uses Veterans property to reward special favors for his voters and cronies.

Fellow Veterans now look forward to initiating serious Congressional and FBI Investigations into what is clearly the biggest land fraud scandal in American history that produced some of the most heinous crimes against humanity … against our disabled and disadvantaged homeless Veterans.

As chairman of the Committee on Government Oversight and Reform, Henry Waxman investigated allegations of abuse against terrorist detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, but he never once investigated the actual abuse of disabled and homeless Veterans in his own Congressional District.

Amazingly, Mr. Waxman had the temerity to state:  “The reports of detainee abuse are undermining one of our nation’s most valuable assets: our reputation for respect for human rights.” 

Huh? This, coming from the person who is solely responsible for some of the greatest abuse against human and civil rights on American soil when he refused to provide humanitarian relief and care for disabled and disadvantaged Veterans and forced them to live homeless and hungry in unsafe and inhumane conditions.

Mr. Waxman’s cronyism and malicious conduct have been going on for nearly four decades since he took office about the same time the Vietnam War ended in 1975.

Congressman Waxman, who is not a Veteran, likes to boast about fighting against the Vietnam War during his college years. Meanwhile those who fought in the Vietnam War and came back seriously disabled have been shamelessly abused and abandoned by the Congressman.

In sum, Mr. Waxman fought against the Vietnam War and then failed to defend our disabled and homeless Veterans who fought in that War.

As a result, 47 percent of today’s homeless Veterans are from the Vietnam War era with many in their 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, and in frail and declining health.  Incredulously, Henry has refused to stand up in their defense and continues to kick them while they’re down.

On the other hand, Henry defended thug terrorists who purportedly were being abused as detainees at Abu Ghraib and Camp Gitmo. Correspondingly, he irreverently investigated our men and women in the military who were fighting the war against terrorism in our behalf.

Henry even subpoenaed the Secretary of Defense during the terrorist wars but never once investigated a Secretary of Veterans Affairs on behalf of disabled war Veterans.

Mr. Waxman continuously defended violent terrorist detainees who wanted to destroy America even as they had shelter, beds, showers, meals, etc., but he never once defended our military Veterans who protected America and became homeless and destitute from their war injuries.

In fact, during his 38 years in Congress, Mr. Waxman never once investigated the misuse of Veterans property in his own District that led to Los Angeles becoming our nation’s capital for homeless Veterans.

Even worse, Henry never appropriated $1 for a bed or a blanket for homeless Veterans in Los Angeles.

That’s Henry Waxman’s true legacy.

So, why would anyone ever vote for someone with this kind of callous and unpatriotic history unless they get a kick out of kicking themselves while bankrupting their good Karma account?

Thanks to the 46% who voted to help our homeless Veterans.  You will get a kick out of knowing this:  You invested wisely in your good Karma account.

God Bless America and the Veterans Revolution!

Posted in USAComments Off on Zen and Henry Waxman’s Legacy

Shoah’s pages


November 2012
« Oct   Dec »