Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
israeli terrorists let go to strike again!
elderly woman who (supposedly) provided the two Israelis arrested in Oak Harbor Washington (with explosives traces on them and in their truck) with their alibi has—just one week later—moved, or disappeared, and cannot be found to corroborate her account.
WHERE DID THE ISRAELIS TERRORISTS STASH THE EXPLOSIVES THEY WHERE MOVING IN THAT TRUCK!!! MAYBE SOMEONE SHOULD BE CHECKING THAT OUT!!
The MadCowMorningNews has learned that the elderly woman who (supposedly) provided the two Israelis arrested in Oak Harbor Washington with their alibi has—just one week later—moved, or disappeared, and cannot be found to corroborate her account.
May 20--Venice Florida
The MadCowMorningNews has learned that the elderly woman who (supposedly) provided the two Israelis arrested in Oak Harbor Washington with their alibi has—just one week later—moved, or disappeared, and cannot be found to corroborate her account.
In Oak Harbor, Washington, Fox News reported last week that two Israelis with altered passports were apprehended in a rental truck containing traces of TNT and plastic explosives on a state highway running past the home of a fleet of U.S. electronic spy planes, Whidbey Island Naval Air Station.
According to an FBI spokesman in Seattle, local police had pulled the Israelis over for speeding, and then became suspicious after one of the men was found to be in possession of an altered passport and the other was unable to produce any identification other than an Israeli driver's license.
Suspicion was heightened because the Israelis were driving on a state road running past a Naval Air Station housing electronic warfare Prowler jets, as well as because of the truck driver's insistence that they were moving furniture—a claim that did not seem to mesh with the late hour.
Local police made an arrest. The local press reported it.
The backpedaling which followed, however, was fast, furious—and national.
Involved in the subsequent investigation were Naval Intelligence, the FBI, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
Tests revealing traces of explosives were ‘in error.’
They showed ‘false positives.’
The Israelis alibi had ‘checked out.’
It was a ‘non-story.’
There were no follow-ups.
The story was reported uncritically in the mainstream press (Seattle Post) even as the Navy dogs who had provided the 'false positives' were being praised by local newspapers. ("Navy Canines Help Keep Base Safe.")
It faded faster in the news than that of the Kamikaze Kid pilot who wasn’t taking acne medication but was still somehow provoked by it to express his desire for self-termination by flying into a skyscraper after heaping praise on Arab terrorists-turned-drug merchants.
Meanwhile, the FBI was issuing a "general, uncorroborated and nonspecific" warning to terrorist task forces and owners and managers of apartment buildings across the nation, based on information that al Qaeda members planned to blow up apartment buildings with plastic explosives.
There was more than enough to pique our interest...even before we discovered that the story may involve what we have come to refer to as "The Venice Connection.’
"When people lie, its always for a reason."
Seemingly coincidentally, the Israelis had been pulled over in Oak Harbor, Wa., home of a commuter airline which had been run by the business partner of Venice flight school owner Rudi Dekkers.
Harbor Air—known locally as the "Navy’s airline" because its function was to serve personnel flying in and out of the nearby Naval Air Station—was owned by one Richard Boehlke, a con artist extraordinaire, even by the standards of the Venice Magic Dutch Boy.
Dekkers’ connection with Boehlke is, of course, of intense interest to anyone interested in possible ‘global networks’ aiding the terrorists, since Boehlke had recently participated in the massive Mob-led ($352 million) looting of pension funds in Portland, Or., another non-story you probably haven’t read about.
Dekkers, of course, is the Dutch national owner of a Venice flight school with the unique distinction of having, for sums far in excess of normal, trained both of the pilots crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center.
Together with Boehlke, he started an unsuccessful airline, Florida Air, whose only accomplishment, other than having been publicly endorsed by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, seems to be to have provided a rationale for the presence of several British Aerospace Jetstreams poised on the tarmac of an airport within easy reach of Caribbean hot spots.
Still, what—if anything—do Richard Boehlke and Rudi Dekkers have to do with Israelis running around in empty Budget rental trucks containing traces of TNT and plastic explosives?
Consider:
The two Israeli’s alibi ‘checked out,’ according to authorities, after they had spoken to an elderly woman living in an elder-care facility nearby, who stated the men resembled individuals who dumped a load of furniture in her front yard in the middle of the night…
And before going bankrupt last year Richard Boehlke made his millions operating elder-care facilities, first in Washington state and then nationally.
Did the woman live in one of Boehlke’s facilities?
Was there a ‘story behind the story?’
We recalled that although Rudi Dekkers claimed he met his partner Boehlke through a mutual friend in Ohio, he had been lying...
Boehlke’s company, Alterra, had a gleaming facility located just a hundred yards from Dekkers’ Huffman Aviation at the Venice Airport.
What had Dekkers been lying to protect?
Was there a connection between the assisted living industry and covert operations?
Well… yes.
"Nothing to See Here. Move Along."
Just down the block from Boehlke’s assisted living home in Venice Florida, a stone’s throw from the Venice Airport, is a stately complex that was built to house the national headquarters of nursing home giant Beverley Enterprises, then owned by a name often linked with America’s super-secret National Security Agency, Jackson Stephens.
Gleaming like a movie set basking under Florida's sunshine is a building which still houses Stephens former law firm, which according to local observers runs the town of Venice.
Jackson Stephens, Rudi Dekkers, Richard Boehlke, and a no-doubt sweet little old lady living in elder care beside the Navy's electronic spy plane base...
No doubt it is all just a coincidence.
Just a small world.
When reporters initially asked about the furniture moving story they were told investigators had already followed up on this angle, speaking with an elderly lady at an elder-care housing facility who claimed she had had furniture delivered in the middle of the night by two men fitting the description of the Israelis.
The MadCowMorningNews was skeptical, and made enquiries.
We discovered that the woman cited by authorities and used by the FBI to discount the FOX NEWS report on the incident (Police Seize Rental Truck With TNT Traces) has—just one week after providing the Israelis’ alibi—moved.
Mary Williams cannot be found to verify her account. She no longer lives at the Cam Bey Senior Living Facility, the retirement home where the men allegedly dumped furniture on the front lawn in the middle of the night, before heading for the Canadian border via a road bordering the nearby Naval Air Station.
A spokeswoman at the facility declines to give out any information concerning her present whereabouts, citing privacy concerns.
Located in (aptly-named?) Coupeville, Washington, the retirement facility is owned and operated by a non-profit company, Senior Services of Island County, which receives HUD block grants.
It has no apparent connections with Boehlke.
It is all just sheer coincidence.
It is a ‘non-story.’
Nothing to see here.
Move along.
The MadCowMorningNews has learned that the elderly woman who (supposedly) provided the two Israelis arrested in Oak Harbor Washington with their alibi has—just one week later—moved, or disappeared, and cannot be found to corroborate her account.
May 20--Venice Florida
The MadCowMorningNews has learned that the elderly woman who (supposedly) provided the two Israelis arrested in Oak Harbor Washington with their alibi has—just one week later—moved, or disappeared, and cannot be found to corroborate her account.
In Oak Harbor, Washington, Fox News reported last week that two Israelis with altered passports were apprehended in a rental truck containing traces of TNT and plastic explosives on a state highway running past the home of a fleet of U.S. electronic spy planes, Whidbey Island Naval Air Station.
According to an FBI spokesman in Seattle, local police had pulled the Israelis over for speeding, and then became suspicious after one of the men was found to be in possession of an altered passport and the other was unable to produce any identification other than an Israeli driver's license.
Suspicion was heightened because the Israelis were driving on a state road running past a Naval Air Station housing electronic warfare Prowler jets, as well as because of the truck driver's insistence that they were moving furniture—a claim that did not seem to mesh with the late hour.
Local police made an arrest. The local press reported it.
The backpedaling which followed, however, was fast, furious—and national.
Involved in the subsequent investigation were Naval Intelligence, the FBI, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
Tests revealing traces of explosives were ‘in error.’
They showed ‘false positives.’
The Israelis alibi had ‘checked out.’
It was a ‘non-story.’
There were no follow-ups.
The story was reported uncritically in the mainstream press (Seattle Post) even as the Navy dogs who had provided the 'false positives' were being praised by local newspapers. ("Navy Canines Help Keep Base Safe.")
It faded faster in the news than that of the Kamikaze Kid pilot who wasn’t taking acne medication but was still somehow provoked by it to express his desire for self-termination by flying into a skyscraper after heaping praise on Arab terrorists-turned-drug merchants.
Meanwhile, the FBI was issuing a "general, uncorroborated and nonspecific" warning to terrorist task forces and owners and managers of apartment buildings across the nation, based on information that al Qaeda members planned to blow up apartment buildings with plastic explosives.
There was more than enough to pique our interest...even before we discovered that the story may involve what we have come to refer to as "The Venice Connection.’
"When people lie, its always for a reason."
Seemingly coincidentally, the Israelis had been pulled over in Oak Harbor, Wa., home of a commuter airline which had been run by the business partner of Venice flight school owner Rudi Dekkers.
Harbor Air—known locally as the "Navy’s airline" because its function was to serve personnel flying in and out of the nearby Naval Air Station—was owned by one Richard Boehlke, a con artist extraordinaire, even by the standards of the Venice Magic Dutch Boy.
Dekkers’ connection with Boehlke is, of course, of intense interest to anyone interested in possible ‘global networks’ aiding the terrorists, since Boehlke had recently participated in the massive Mob-led ($352 million) looting of pension funds in Portland, Or., another non-story you probably haven’t read about.
Dekkers, of course, is the Dutch national owner of a Venice flight school with the unique distinction of having, for sums far in excess of normal, trained both of the pilots crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center.
Together with Boehlke, he started an unsuccessful airline, Florida Air, whose only accomplishment, other than having been publicly endorsed by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, seems to be to have provided a rationale for the presence of several British Aerospace Jetstreams poised on the tarmac of an airport within easy reach of Caribbean hot spots.
Still, what—if anything—do Richard Boehlke and Rudi Dekkers have to do with Israelis running around in empty Budget rental trucks containing traces of TNT and plastic explosives?
Consider:
The two Israeli’s alibi ‘checked out,’ according to authorities, after they had spoken to an elderly woman living in an elder-care facility nearby, who stated the men resembled individuals who dumped a load of furniture in her front yard in the middle of the night…
And before going bankrupt last year Richard Boehlke made his millions operating elder-care facilities, first in Washington state and then nationally.
Did the woman live in one of Boehlke’s facilities?
Was there a ‘story behind the story?’
We recalled that although Rudi Dekkers claimed he met his partner Boehlke through a mutual friend in Ohio, he had been lying...
Boehlke’s company, Alterra, had a gleaming facility located just a hundred yards from Dekkers’ Huffman Aviation at the Venice Airport.
What had Dekkers been lying to protect?
Was there a connection between the assisted living industry and covert operations?
Well… yes.
"Nothing to See Here. Move Along."
Just down the block from Boehlke’s assisted living home in Venice Florida, a stone’s throw from the Venice Airport, is a stately complex that was built to house the national headquarters of nursing home giant Beverley Enterprises, then owned by a name often linked with America’s super-secret National Security Agency, Jackson Stephens.
Gleaming like a movie set basking under Florida's sunshine is a building which still houses Stephens former law firm, which according to local observers runs the town of Venice.
Jackson Stephens, Rudi Dekkers, Richard Boehlke, and a no-doubt sweet little old lady living in elder care beside the Navy's electronic spy plane base...
No doubt it is all just a coincidence.
Just a small world.
When reporters initially asked about the furniture moving story they were told investigators had already followed up on this angle, speaking with an elderly lady at an elder-care housing facility who claimed she had had furniture delivered in the middle of the night by two men fitting the description of the Israelis.
The MadCowMorningNews was skeptical, and made enquiries.
We discovered that the woman cited by authorities and used by the FBI to discount the FOX NEWS report on the incident (Police Seize Rental Truck With TNT Traces) has—just one week after providing the Israelis’ alibi—moved.
Mary Williams cannot be found to verify her account. She no longer lives at the Cam Bey Senior Living Facility, the retirement home where the men allegedly dumped furniture on the front lawn in the middle of the night, before heading for the Canadian border via a road bordering the nearby Naval Air Station.
A spokeswoman at the facility declines to give out any information concerning her present whereabouts, citing privacy concerns.
Located in (aptly-named?) Coupeville, Washington, the retirement facility is owned and operated by a non-profit company, Senior Services of Island County, which receives HUD block grants.
It has no apparent connections with Boehlke.
It is all just sheer coincidence.
It is a ‘non-story.’
Nothing to see here.
Move along.
For more information:
http://www.madcowprod.com
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
yes the more you focus on the Isralis the lest you have to focus on the racism perpetuated by Muslims and their lefty minons here in the Bay Area.
The liberal Bay Area ilk have demonstrated that they want to extermine Jews worldwide. Their goal is nothing less than total destruction of my race. That's okay, we have faced these people for 6,000 years and have always won.
I know using a Hebrew name REALLY pisses of the liberal hate mongers, but the Idaho neo-nazis and the new liberal front have a lot in common, they both are in union to destroy goodness in this planet.
I know using a Hebrew name REALLY pisses of the liberal hate mongers, but the Idaho neo-nazis and the new liberal front have a lot in common, they both are in union to destroy goodness in this planet.
more chest beating from zionist simpltons. I find your kind truely pathetic. Citizising Israel for commiting a slow genocide on the Palestinian people is not wishing to destroy all Jews. I hope you are not truely this insane to believe such idiocy, I feel sorry for someone who would be this stupid... you are obviously just throwing out such rhetoric to cloud the issue of Israel massive war crimes which you will do anything to hide. I have seen this tactic for far too long and if zionists continue to do it they will only lose all credit to your twisted persepectives. This is the main reason that people in the US are changing their attitudes towards Israel, because of this type of bullshit that they are bombarded with daily from zionist liars. All they need is an "ah hah!," a mental awakening, a moment of clearlity to look back on all the lies, then it becomes all to clear to them who are the real criminals in this conflict, the zionist colonists.
Zionism - A movement that promotes Jews to return to their ancient homeland of Israel.
Zionism is the belief that Jews are superior to Arabs and have a God-given right to STEAL Palestinian land, water resources, homes, and property. And then to lie about it.
In short, Zionism is a racist ideology no different then Apartheid.
In short, Zionism is a racist ideology no different then Apartheid.
This cite continues to misrepresent Zionism. It is not racism. It is simply the movement of Jews to return to their ancient homeland, Judea.
What about Islamism? In it's extreme form, it calls for the elimination of "infidels" defined as anyone who is not a Muslim. Is this racism? Is this intolerance? Is terrorism prompted by this philosophy genocide? Do lefties really want to support and defend this idea?
From secularislam.org:
The totalitarian nature of Islam is no where more apparent than in the concept of Jihad, the Holy War, whose ultimate aim is to conquer the entire world and submit it to the one true faith, to the law of Allah. To Islam alone has been granted the truth - there is no possibility of salvation outside it. It is the sacred duty - an incumbent religious duty established in the Koran and the Traditions - of all Muslims to bring it to all humanity. Jihad is a divine institution, enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam. Muslims must strive, fight and kill in the name of God:
ix.5-6:"Kill those who join other gods with God wherever you may find them"
iv.76:"Those who believe fight in the cause of God..."
viii.12:"I will instill terror into the hearts of the Infidels, strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every fingertip."
viii.39-42:"Say to the Infidels: If they desist from their unbelief, what is now past shall be forgiven them ; but if they return to it, they have already before them the doom of the ancients ! Fight then against them till strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it God's.
ii.256:"But they who believe, and who fly their country, and fight in the cause of God may hope for God's mercy: and God is Gracious, Merciful"
It is a grave sin for a Muslim to shirk the battle against the unbelievers, those who do will roast in hell:
viii. 15, 16:"Believers, when you meet the unbelievers preparing for battle do not turn your backs to them. [Anyone who does] shall incur the wrath of God and hell shall be his home: an evil dwelling indeed."
ix.39:"If you do not fight, He will punish you severely, and put others in your place."
Those who die fighting for the only true religion, Islam, will be amply rewarded in the life to come:
iv.74:"Let those fight in the cause of God who barter the life of this world for that which is to come; for whoever fights on God's path, whether he is killed or triumphs, We will give him a handsome reward"
It is abundantly clear from many of the above verses that the Koran is not talking of metaphorical battles or of moral crusades; it is talking of the battle field. To read such blood thirsty injunctions in a Holy Book is shocking.
Mankind is divided into two groups - Muslims and non-Muslims. The Muslims are members of the Islamic community, the umma, who possess territories in the Dar ul Islam, the Land of Islam, where the edicts of Islam are fully promulgated. The non-Muslims are the Harbi, people of the Dar ul Harb, the Land of Warfare, any country belonging to the infidels which has not been subdued by Islam but which, nonetheless, is destined to pass into Islamic jurisdiction either by conversion or by war (Harb). All acts of war are permitted in the Dar ul Harb. Once the Dar ul Harb has been subjugated, the Harbi become prisoners of war. The imam can do what he likes to them according to the circumstances. Woe betide the city that resists and is then taken by the Islamic army by storm.In this case, the inhabitants have no rights whatsoever, and as Sir Steven Runciman says in his "The Fall of Constantinople, 1453": "The conquering army is allowed three days of unrestricted pillage; and the former places of worship, with every other building, become the property of the conquering leader; he may dispose of them as he pleases. Sultan Mehmet [after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 allowed] his soldiers the three days of pillage to which they were entitled. They poured into the city...They slew everyone that they met in the streets, men, women and children without discrimination . The blood ran in rivers down the steep streets...But soon the lust for slaughter was assuaged. The soldiers realized that captives and precious objects would bring them greater profits."
In other cases, they are sold into slavery, exiled or treated as dhimmis, who are tolerated as second class subjects, as long as they pay a regular tribute.
What about Islamism? In it's extreme form, it calls for the elimination of "infidels" defined as anyone who is not a Muslim. Is this racism? Is this intolerance? Is terrorism prompted by this philosophy genocide? Do lefties really want to support and defend this idea?
From secularislam.org:
The totalitarian nature of Islam is no where more apparent than in the concept of Jihad, the Holy War, whose ultimate aim is to conquer the entire world and submit it to the one true faith, to the law of Allah. To Islam alone has been granted the truth - there is no possibility of salvation outside it. It is the sacred duty - an incumbent religious duty established in the Koran and the Traditions - of all Muslims to bring it to all humanity. Jihad is a divine institution, enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam. Muslims must strive, fight and kill in the name of God:
ix.5-6:"Kill those who join other gods with God wherever you may find them"
iv.76:"Those who believe fight in the cause of God..."
viii.12:"I will instill terror into the hearts of the Infidels, strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every fingertip."
viii.39-42:"Say to the Infidels: If they desist from their unbelief, what is now past shall be forgiven them ; but if they return to it, they have already before them the doom of the ancients ! Fight then against them till strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it God's.
ii.256:"But they who believe, and who fly their country, and fight in the cause of God may hope for God's mercy: and God is Gracious, Merciful"
It is a grave sin for a Muslim to shirk the battle against the unbelievers, those who do will roast in hell:
viii. 15, 16:"Believers, when you meet the unbelievers preparing for battle do not turn your backs to them. [Anyone who does] shall incur the wrath of God and hell shall be his home: an evil dwelling indeed."
ix.39:"If you do not fight, He will punish you severely, and put others in your place."
Those who die fighting for the only true religion, Islam, will be amply rewarded in the life to come:
iv.74:"Let those fight in the cause of God who barter the life of this world for that which is to come; for whoever fights on God's path, whether he is killed or triumphs, We will give him a handsome reward"
It is abundantly clear from many of the above verses that the Koran is not talking of metaphorical battles or of moral crusades; it is talking of the battle field. To read such blood thirsty injunctions in a Holy Book is shocking.
Mankind is divided into two groups - Muslims and non-Muslims. The Muslims are members of the Islamic community, the umma, who possess territories in the Dar ul Islam, the Land of Islam, where the edicts of Islam are fully promulgated. The non-Muslims are the Harbi, people of the Dar ul Harb, the Land of Warfare, any country belonging to the infidels which has not been subdued by Islam but which, nonetheless, is destined to pass into Islamic jurisdiction either by conversion or by war (Harb). All acts of war are permitted in the Dar ul Harb. Once the Dar ul Harb has been subjugated, the Harbi become prisoners of war. The imam can do what he likes to them according to the circumstances. Woe betide the city that resists and is then taken by the Islamic army by storm.In this case, the inhabitants have no rights whatsoever, and as Sir Steven Runciman says in his "The Fall of Constantinople, 1453": "The conquering army is allowed three days of unrestricted pillage; and the former places of worship, with every other building, become the property of the conquering leader; he may dispose of them as he pleases. Sultan Mehmet [after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 allowed] his soldiers the three days of pillage to which they were entitled. They poured into the city...They slew everyone that they met in the streets, men, women and children without discrimination . The blood ran in rivers down the steep streets...But soon the lust for slaughter was assuaged. The soldiers realized that captives and precious objects would bring them greater profits."
In other cases, they are sold into slavery, exiled or treated as dhimmis, who are tolerated as second class subjects, as long as they pay a regular tribute.
Did you know that over 3 million Jews were expelled from their lands of birth during the first half of the 20th century? Did you know that one million of them were expelled from Arab lands? Expelled from homes and property that they had occupied for centuries? Where did they go? The went back to their original homeland - the land of Judea (called Palestine by the British colonial rulers). Also, did you know that there have been Jews living in the land of Judea continuously since 3000 BCE? Did you know that Arab peoples are relatively new to this land? Did you know that at the turn of the 20th century, this land was a barren wasteland? Did you know that the Jews occupied most of the cities and there were some Arabs living as nomadic sheep herders in the desert? Did you know that as soon as the Jews began to return in large numbers to this land and conditions improved, Arabs began to flock to this land?
Check your history sometime, you might find that the "Palestinian" propaganda isn't always accurate.
Check your history sometime, you might find that the "Palestinian" propaganda isn't always accurate.
How do you begin to counter Zionist lies?
They have been spreading their lies here in the states ever since the creation of that racist state Israel.
Lie #1:
"A land without a people for a people without a land."
Truth is Palestinians were kicked out violently in order to create the state of Israel.
Vicious massacres were conducted in numerous Palestinian villages by Jews in order to expedite the departure of Palestinians.
In one example (Deir Yassin), Jewish gangs killed 254 people slitting the abdomens of pregnant women with bayonets:
http://www.jerusalemites.org/yassin.html
Over 800,000 Palestinians were expelled this way in 1948 alone.
Hundreds thousands more were evicted in subsequent wars that Israel started in order to grab more land (of the six wars, only the 1973 war was not started by Israel).
Jews by and large left of their countries for Israel of their own free will. Many, in fact, returned to their Arab countries of origin out of disgust with the racist Israelis.
For a background of this conflict, please see Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle".
They have been spreading their lies here in the states ever since the creation of that racist state Israel.
Lie #1:
"A land without a people for a people without a land."
Truth is Palestinians were kicked out violently in order to create the state of Israel.
Vicious massacres were conducted in numerous Palestinian villages by Jews in order to expedite the departure of Palestinians.
In one example (Deir Yassin), Jewish gangs killed 254 people slitting the abdomens of pregnant women with bayonets:
http://www.jerusalemites.org/yassin.html
Over 800,000 Palestinians were expelled this way in 1948 alone.
Hundreds thousands more were evicted in subsequent wars that Israel started in order to grab more land (of the six wars, only the 1973 war was not started by Israel).
Jews by and large left of their countries for Israel of their own free will. Many, in fact, returned to their Arab countries of origin out of disgust with the racist Israelis.
For a background of this conflict, please see Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle".
I must address the Irgun attack on Deir Yassin. First of all, you fail to place the attack within the context of the 1948 War of Independence during which Jews fought the Arabs and the British in defense of Israel's right to exist.
The assault on Deir Yassin was part of this war and was carried out by approximately 100 men. According to witnesses, a small open truck fitted with a loudspeaker was driven to the entrance of the village before the attack and broadcast a warning to civilians to evacuate the area, which many did. Some historians say the warning was never issued because the truck with the loudspeaker rolled into a ditch before it could broadcast the warning. One of the fighters said, the ditch was filled in and the truck continued on to the village. "One of us called out on the loudspeaker in Arabic, telling the inhabitants to put down their weapons and flee. I don't know if they heard, and I know these appeals had no effect." In any even, the intention was to warn the civilian population, not to "wipe it out."
Contrary to revisionist histories that the town was filled with peaceful innocents, residents and foreign troops opened fire on the attackers. One fighter described his experience:
"My unit stormed and passed the first row of houses. I was among the first to enter the village. There were a few other guys with me, each encouraging the other to advance. At the top of the street I saw a man in khaki clothing running ahead. I thought he was one of ours. I ran after him and told him, "advance to that house." Suddenly he turned around, aimed his rifle and shot. He was an Iraqi soldier. I was hit in the foot (Milstein, 1999)."
The battle was ferocious and took several hours. The Irgun (Jews) suffered 41 casualties. Surprisingly, after the “massacre,” the Irgun escorted a representative of the Red Cross through the town and held a press conference. The New York Times' subsequent description of the battle confirmed the above reports. The Times said more than 200 Arabs were killed, 40 captured and 70 women and children were released. No hint of a massacre appeared in the report. “Paradoxically, the Jews say about 250 out of 400 village inhabitants [were killed], while Arab survivors say only 110 of 1,000” (Kurzman, 1970). A study by Bir Zeit University, based on discussions with each family from the village, arrived at a figure of 107 Arab civilians dead and 12 wounded, in addition to 13 "fighters," evidence that the number of dead was smaller than claimed and that the village did have troops based there. Other Arab sources have subsequently suggested the number may have been even lower.
The Palestinians knew, despite their rhetoric to the contrary, the Jews were not trying to annihilate them; otherwise, they would not have been allowed to evacuate Tiberias, Haifa or any of the other towns captured by the Jews. Moreover, the Palestinians could find sanctuary in nearby states. The Jews, however, had no place to run had they wanted to. They were willing to fight to the death for their country. It came to that for many, because it was the Arabs who were conducting ethnic cleansing, only interested in annihilating the Jews, as Secretary-General of the Arab League Azzam Pasha made clear in an interview with the BBC on the eve of the war (May 15, 1948): “The Arabs intend to conduct a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades.”
Sadly, references to Deir Yassin have remained a staple of anti-Israel propaganda for decades. As the truth about Jenin emerges, we have discovered that there was no massacre there either. It is truly amazing how many people feel inclined to revise historical fact to support their twisted portrayal of Jews as mass killers when they act to defend themselves against ethnic cleansing conducted by Arabs!
The assault on Deir Yassin was part of this war and was carried out by approximately 100 men. According to witnesses, a small open truck fitted with a loudspeaker was driven to the entrance of the village before the attack and broadcast a warning to civilians to evacuate the area, which many did. Some historians say the warning was never issued because the truck with the loudspeaker rolled into a ditch before it could broadcast the warning. One of the fighters said, the ditch was filled in and the truck continued on to the village. "One of us called out on the loudspeaker in Arabic, telling the inhabitants to put down their weapons and flee. I don't know if they heard, and I know these appeals had no effect." In any even, the intention was to warn the civilian population, not to "wipe it out."
Contrary to revisionist histories that the town was filled with peaceful innocents, residents and foreign troops opened fire on the attackers. One fighter described his experience:
"My unit stormed and passed the first row of houses. I was among the first to enter the village. There were a few other guys with me, each encouraging the other to advance. At the top of the street I saw a man in khaki clothing running ahead. I thought he was one of ours. I ran after him and told him, "advance to that house." Suddenly he turned around, aimed his rifle and shot. He was an Iraqi soldier. I was hit in the foot (Milstein, 1999)."
The battle was ferocious and took several hours. The Irgun (Jews) suffered 41 casualties. Surprisingly, after the “massacre,” the Irgun escorted a representative of the Red Cross through the town and held a press conference. The New York Times' subsequent description of the battle confirmed the above reports. The Times said more than 200 Arabs were killed, 40 captured and 70 women and children were released. No hint of a massacre appeared in the report. “Paradoxically, the Jews say about 250 out of 400 village inhabitants [were killed], while Arab survivors say only 110 of 1,000” (Kurzman, 1970). A study by Bir Zeit University, based on discussions with each family from the village, arrived at a figure of 107 Arab civilians dead and 12 wounded, in addition to 13 "fighters," evidence that the number of dead was smaller than claimed and that the village did have troops based there. Other Arab sources have subsequently suggested the number may have been even lower.
The Palestinians knew, despite their rhetoric to the contrary, the Jews were not trying to annihilate them; otherwise, they would not have been allowed to evacuate Tiberias, Haifa or any of the other towns captured by the Jews. Moreover, the Palestinians could find sanctuary in nearby states. The Jews, however, had no place to run had they wanted to. They were willing to fight to the death for their country. It came to that for many, because it was the Arabs who were conducting ethnic cleansing, only interested in annihilating the Jews, as Secretary-General of the Arab League Azzam Pasha made clear in an interview with the BBC on the eve of the war (May 15, 1948): “The Arabs intend to conduct a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades.”
Sadly, references to Deir Yassin have remained a staple of anti-Israel propaganda for decades. As the truth about Jenin emerges, we have discovered that there was no massacre there either. It is truly amazing how many people feel inclined to revise historical fact to support their twisted portrayal of Jews as mass killers when they act to defend themselves against ethnic cleansing conducted by Arabs!
you are all so tragically pathetic and small and bitter -- you should have held israeli and palestinian flags during the protest and work to show unity and that both deserve a state of their own but you all have to simplify issues into your own little one-sided comfort zone
Jews go hysterical when revisionists deny the holocaust. Yet they consistently deny all their own crimes including massacres at Deir Yassin and Jenin.
I think Zionists are pathetic and their time is running out. People are waking up and realizing they are no different than the racist white South Africans during Apartheid.
I think Zionists are pathetic and their time is running out. People are waking up and realizing they are no different than the racist white South Africans during Apartheid.
by MICHAEL A. HOFFMAN II
The New York Times, liberal voice of obsessive Holocaustianity, as well as the other corporate media who take their cues from New
York, use Orwellian doublethink to describe Jewish assassinations of Arabs. The New York Times minces no words about German
crimes, but when it comes to Jewish assassins, the Times sanitizes Jewish murders. When is assassination not assassination? Why, when
Jews do it, of course; then it is merely "targeted killing."
Assassination is too harsh a word for the NY Times to use with regard to the actions of God's Master Race: "The Israeli pattern in recent
months of targeting specific people for death has outraged Palestinians." -New York Times, August 1, 2001, p. A6.
Nowhere in the Aug. 1 article does the NY Times term what the Israelis did "assassination." That word is only used in connection with
reports of allegations: "...Palestinian charges of assassination."
On Aug. 2 the Times reported, "In a five-hour session ...the security cabinet of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon affirmed the policy of picking out targets for killings."
The Aug. 2 article in the NY Times rather awkwardly avoids terming what the Israelis did "assassination." That word is, again reserved only for accounts of
allegations by others: "..what Palestinians call cold-blooded assassinations."
The Times even reports on the Jewish search for a means to make palatable the assassinations: "...Israeli officials recognized that they had a problem selling their
tactics elsewhere in the world. (Israeli) Ministers at the security cabinet meeting were reported to have debated what to call their policy. 'Liquidation' is one word the
government has frequently used. So is 'interception'...Neither word pleased some ministers today, according to Israeli radio reports. A new phrase said to have been
proposed was: 'actions to prevent the killing of Jews." N.Y. Times, Aug. 2, 2001
What the Times does not say (though it reveals as much by its journalistic practice), is that the newspaper itself conforms to this Israeli doublethink "selling tactic."
For example on Aug. 6, 2001 the New York Times minced words again: "The missile strike was the third in less than a week, part of Israel's pattern of singling out
certain Palestinians for death."
"Singling out Palestinians for death"-- another N.Y. Times euphemism for the A-word. The Aug. 6 article repeats the pattern: the NY Times does not refer to the
Israeli assassinations as assassinations. The word is mentioned only in connection with an allegation made by others: "To Palestinian leaders, such attacks amount to
a policy of state-sponsored assassination." But not to New York Times reporters or editors.
The Wall Street Journal in an Aug. 2, 2001 editorial concerning Israeli policy, in strict conformity with the N.Y. Times' Orwellian thought code, does not use the
forbidden assassination word either. According to the Wall Street Journal, Palestinians "...are being brought down en route to their mischief... This is war waged in
twilight ... subtle..."
I have news for Wall Street: Several Arab women and children and at least one dentist, have also been "brought down" by Israeli assassins and their only "mischief"
was to be Palestinian, but they are unmentioned and nameless in the Wall Street Journal editorial because being Arabs they are not fully human. In the same way,
the supreme Jewish Talmudic teacher Moses Maimonides stipulated that black people are not quite human, in his sacred rabbinic book, Guide of the Perplexed.
On Aug. 4, 2001, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) issued a "new edict from their London editors that they must in future refer to the Israeli
assassinations as 'targeted killings." (Cf. The Independent, [London], Aug. 5, 2001).
The Associated Press refers to Israeli assassinations of Palestinians as "Israeli military raids" (cf. AP Jerusalem dispatch, Aug. 7, 2001). The Boston Globe, which is
owned by the N.Y. Times Company, uses similar cosmetic "denier" phraseology.
On Aug. 9, 2001 the N.Y. Times continued to studiously avoid the dreaded assassination word, referring to "..Mr. Sharon's policy of sending the army to kill specific
Palestinian leaders..."
On Aug. 9, 2001 the Jerusalem Post reported, "Minister Matan Vilna'i, a security cabinet member, told Army Radio that he favors continuing the policy of targeted
killings..."
"The implication was that, at the least, Israel would continue to single out certain senior Palestinian figures for death..." N.Y. Times, Aug. 10, 2001.
"..targeted Israeli killings of suspected Palestinian militants..." Reuters, Aug. 10, 2001
"In recent months, Israel has killed more than 50 Palestinians...in targeted attacks...The targeted killings have been widely condemned..." Associated Press, Aug. 15,
2001
"Israel's combination of two controversial tactics--targeted slayings and incursions..." Los Angeles Times, Aug. 29, 2001
"Targeted slayings,""Targeted killings," "picking out targets for killings," "singling out Palestinians for death," "brought down" and "military raids" are Big Brother's
preferred doublespeak for Israeli assassination. The NY Times, the L.A. Times, the BBC, the AP, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal have self-censored their
reporting to eliminate the word "assassination" as their own description of what the Israelis are doing, because this is what the ruling Israeli Likud has dictated as
public relations policy. These Zionist house organs -- "our" supposed "unfettered" media -- have fallen on their knees in abject submission to the Jewish fiat.
So why this reluctance to call a spade a spade? Because the word assassination is too obviously freighted with moral evil to be used in a Jewish context. It
represents too much of a potential wake-up call to the goyim. Consequently, reality itself must be universally falsified. Sanitized terms must be substituted by
corporate media such as the N.Y. Times, a newspaper that reports at least weekly and often daily on a 56 year old "Holocaust." As it shrilly demands that the
"Holocaust against the Jews" must never be minimized one iota, the Times and allied media, whitewash Israeli crimes in front of our eyes, and do so with an arrogant
contempt for the chilling parallels to "1984"-style thought control that is their lingua franca.
Furthermore, if an Arab, German or white Christian government were to adopt a policy of assassination, the N.Y. Times and the rest of the conforming media
monopoly would immediately and boldly headline the word "assassination" in their reports of any such policy, without qualification of any kind.
Moreover, the New York Times and other media actually advocate assassinations of Palestinian leaders: " ...Israel's military response to further attacks should be
measured and targeted directly at those responsible for the violence." (N.Y. Times editorial, June 5, 2001).
Dick Cheney, the Vice-President of the United States, who is himself protected around-the clock from assassination by the U.S. Secret Service, agrees that
assassinations of Arabs are justified: "...Cheney told Fox News last week that Israel might have 'some justification' for the killings..." (Jewish Telegraph Agency,
Aug. 7, 2001).
What if the Arabs decided that their 'military response' to 'further attacks' should be to 'target directly...those (Israelis) responsible for the violence' against Palestinian
civilians? Would the N.Y. Times endorse assassinations of Jewish war criminals? Or does the N.Y. Times push the monster of assassination out of Pandora's box
only on Talmudic terms--okay to assassinate the goyim, but not the Chosen?"
The Washington Post actually endorses the extermination of the Palestinians. In the Aug. 15, 2001 edition, Post columnist Michael Kelly urged the Israelis to
"unleash an overwhelming force" against the Palestinians, "go right ahead and escalate the violence" and "destroy, kill, capture and expel..."
Can one imagine the Washington Post, or any other mainstream American newspaper, printing a column that calls for Palestinians, in order to gain their
independence and freedom from foreign occupation, to "go right ahead and escalate the violence" and "destroy, kill, capture and expel" Jews? If Palestinians spoke
like this, the United States would demand their arrest and Israelis would place them on assassination hit lists and send death squads after them.
Execution without trial, without ascertaining that a suspect really is a perpetrator of armed resistance and not a political activist, lets loose the demon of lawlessness.
Palestinians insist that Jamal Mansour, who was killed by the Israelis, was involved in political agitation only, and not with the military wing of Hamas. Yet the
sycophantic American media simply took the Israelis word as infallible and labeled Mansour a guerrilla "mastermind," rather than someone who had been accused
by the Israelis of such notoriety.
If Americans were to break out of the claustrophobic media monopoly they would find that Cheney, Bush, Powell, Berger, William Cohen and William Clinton are
regarded as terrrorists by hundreds of millions of people in the Third World.
When American leaders fund Israeli assassinations of Arab leaders with taxpayer dollars, those American leaders are complicit in those assassinations, and since
turnabout is fair play, U.S. leaders open themselves up to their own assassination by the very demon of lawlessness their Israeli partners in crime unleash in the
occupied territories.
Lest the U.S. secret police accuse this writer of advocating or apologizing for the assassination of Americans, I will point out the obvious. All assassinations are
wrong. But the spread of the contagion of Israeli doublethink in the U.S. has caused Americans to subscribe to the racist Talmudic/Zionist double-standard, that it is
permissible, indeed perhaps even laudable, to assassinate Arab goyim, whereas the assassination of the Chosen terrorist Ariel Sharon, or his patrons in the U.S.,
would be deemed a moral outrage of the highest order by the guardians of public opinion in the West.
"Our" media drum up a non-stop chorus of pompous propaganda about an antique "Holocaust" from 56 years ago, in which the most finite detail of absolute moral
perfection is urged upon percipients with tiresome homiletic admonishment. These drippy little media "Holocaust" sermons are perhaps a cut above the inspirational
platitudes found on greeting cards. At the same time that they drown us in their bucket of crocodile tears, the media concoct, on their editorial and news pages, a
tenor of acceptance and advocacy for state-sponsored Israeli assassinations, for the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, in a word, for the holocaust of any Arab
who dares to countenance a revolt against Zionist troops in the Gaza ghetto.
As the Israeli missiles fly and the tanks roll, let us divert ourselves with some dumbed-down movie-of-the-week entertainment, perhaps the latest film saluting the
Jewish revolt against Nazi troops, "Uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto," starring Ben Affleck, introduced by Tom Brokaw, and written, produced and directed by
flagrant Jewish blowhards.
The New York Times, liberal voice of obsessive Holocaustianity, as well as the other corporate media who take their cues from New
York, use Orwellian doublethink to describe Jewish assassinations of Arabs. The New York Times minces no words about German
crimes, but when it comes to Jewish assassins, the Times sanitizes Jewish murders. When is assassination not assassination? Why, when
Jews do it, of course; then it is merely "targeted killing."
Assassination is too harsh a word for the NY Times to use with regard to the actions of God's Master Race: "The Israeli pattern in recent
months of targeting specific people for death has outraged Palestinians." -New York Times, August 1, 2001, p. A6.
Nowhere in the Aug. 1 article does the NY Times term what the Israelis did "assassination." That word is only used in connection with
reports of allegations: "...Palestinian charges of assassination."
On Aug. 2 the Times reported, "In a five-hour session ...the security cabinet of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon affirmed the policy of picking out targets for killings."
The Aug. 2 article in the NY Times rather awkwardly avoids terming what the Israelis did "assassination." That word is, again reserved only for accounts of
allegations by others: "..what Palestinians call cold-blooded assassinations."
The Times even reports on the Jewish search for a means to make palatable the assassinations: "...Israeli officials recognized that they had a problem selling their
tactics elsewhere in the world. (Israeli) Ministers at the security cabinet meeting were reported to have debated what to call their policy. 'Liquidation' is one word the
government has frequently used. So is 'interception'...Neither word pleased some ministers today, according to Israeli radio reports. A new phrase said to have been
proposed was: 'actions to prevent the killing of Jews." N.Y. Times, Aug. 2, 2001
What the Times does not say (though it reveals as much by its journalistic practice), is that the newspaper itself conforms to this Israeli doublethink "selling tactic."
For example on Aug. 6, 2001 the New York Times minced words again: "The missile strike was the third in less than a week, part of Israel's pattern of singling out
certain Palestinians for death."
"Singling out Palestinians for death"-- another N.Y. Times euphemism for the A-word. The Aug. 6 article repeats the pattern: the NY Times does not refer to the
Israeli assassinations as assassinations. The word is mentioned only in connection with an allegation made by others: "To Palestinian leaders, such attacks amount to
a policy of state-sponsored assassination." But not to New York Times reporters or editors.
The Wall Street Journal in an Aug. 2, 2001 editorial concerning Israeli policy, in strict conformity with the N.Y. Times' Orwellian thought code, does not use the
forbidden assassination word either. According to the Wall Street Journal, Palestinians "...are being brought down en route to their mischief... This is war waged in
twilight ... subtle..."
I have news for Wall Street: Several Arab women and children and at least one dentist, have also been "brought down" by Israeli assassins and their only "mischief"
was to be Palestinian, but they are unmentioned and nameless in the Wall Street Journal editorial because being Arabs they are not fully human. In the same way,
the supreme Jewish Talmudic teacher Moses Maimonides stipulated that black people are not quite human, in his sacred rabbinic book, Guide of the Perplexed.
On Aug. 4, 2001, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) issued a "new edict from their London editors that they must in future refer to the Israeli
assassinations as 'targeted killings." (Cf. The Independent, [London], Aug. 5, 2001).
The Associated Press refers to Israeli assassinations of Palestinians as "Israeli military raids" (cf. AP Jerusalem dispatch, Aug. 7, 2001). The Boston Globe, which is
owned by the N.Y. Times Company, uses similar cosmetic "denier" phraseology.
On Aug. 9, 2001 the N.Y. Times continued to studiously avoid the dreaded assassination word, referring to "..Mr. Sharon's policy of sending the army to kill specific
Palestinian leaders..."
On Aug. 9, 2001 the Jerusalem Post reported, "Minister Matan Vilna'i, a security cabinet member, told Army Radio that he favors continuing the policy of targeted
killings..."
"The implication was that, at the least, Israel would continue to single out certain senior Palestinian figures for death..." N.Y. Times, Aug. 10, 2001.
"..targeted Israeli killings of suspected Palestinian militants..." Reuters, Aug. 10, 2001
"In recent months, Israel has killed more than 50 Palestinians...in targeted attacks...The targeted killings have been widely condemned..." Associated Press, Aug. 15,
2001
"Israel's combination of two controversial tactics--targeted slayings and incursions..." Los Angeles Times, Aug. 29, 2001
"Targeted slayings,""Targeted killings," "picking out targets for killings," "singling out Palestinians for death," "brought down" and "military raids" are Big Brother's
preferred doublespeak for Israeli assassination. The NY Times, the L.A. Times, the BBC, the AP, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal have self-censored their
reporting to eliminate the word "assassination" as their own description of what the Israelis are doing, because this is what the ruling Israeli Likud has dictated as
public relations policy. These Zionist house organs -- "our" supposed "unfettered" media -- have fallen on their knees in abject submission to the Jewish fiat.
So why this reluctance to call a spade a spade? Because the word assassination is too obviously freighted with moral evil to be used in a Jewish context. It
represents too much of a potential wake-up call to the goyim. Consequently, reality itself must be universally falsified. Sanitized terms must be substituted by
corporate media such as the N.Y. Times, a newspaper that reports at least weekly and often daily on a 56 year old "Holocaust." As it shrilly demands that the
"Holocaust against the Jews" must never be minimized one iota, the Times and allied media, whitewash Israeli crimes in front of our eyes, and do so with an arrogant
contempt for the chilling parallels to "1984"-style thought control that is their lingua franca.
Furthermore, if an Arab, German or white Christian government were to adopt a policy of assassination, the N.Y. Times and the rest of the conforming media
monopoly would immediately and boldly headline the word "assassination" in their reports of any such policy, without qualification of any kind.
Moreover, the New York Times and other media actually advocate assassinations of Palestinian leaders: " ...Israel's military response to further attacks should be
measured and targeted directly at those responsible for the violence." (N.Y. Times editorial, June 5, 2001).
Dick Cheney, the Vice-President of the United States, who is himself protected around-the clock from assassination by the U.S. Secret Service, agrees that
assassinations of Arabs are justified: "...Cheney told Fox News last week that Israel might have 'some justification' for the killings..." (Jewish Telegraph Agency,
Aug. 7, 2001).
What if the Arabs decided that their 'military response' to 'further attacks' should be to 'target directly...those (Israelis) responsible for the violence' against Palestinian
civilians? Would the N.Y. Times endorse assassinations of Jewish war criminals? Or does the N.Y. Times push the monster of assassination out of Pandora's box
only on Talmudic terms--okay to assassinate the goyim, but not the Chosen?"
The Washington Post actually endorses the extermination of the Palestinians. In the Aug. 15, 2001 edition, Post columnist Michael Kelly urged the Israelis to
"unleash an overwhelming force" against the Palestinians, "go right ahead and escalate the violence" and "destroy, kill, capture and expel..."
Can one imagine the Washington Post, or any other mainstream American newspaper, printing a column that calls for Palestinians, in order to gain their
independence and freedom from foreign occupation, to "go right ahead and escalate the violence" and "destroy, kill, capture and expel" Jews? If Palestinians spoke
like this, the United States would demand their arrest and Israelis would place them on assassination hit lists and send death squads after them.
Execution without trial, without ascertaining that a suspect really is a perpetrator of armed resistance and not a political activist, lets loose the demon of lawlessness.
Palestinians insist that Jamal Mansour, who was killed by the Israelis, was involved in political agitation only, and not with the military wing of Hamas. Yet the
sycophantic American media simply took the Israelis word as infallible and labeled Mansour a guerrilla "mastermind," rather than someone who had been accused
by the Israelis of such notoriety.
If Americans were to break out of the claustrophobic media monopoly they would find that Cheney, Bush, Powell, Berger, William Cohen and William Clinton are
regarded as terrrorists by hundreds of millions of people in the Third World.
When American leaders fund Israeli assassinations of Arab leaders with taxpayer dollars, those American leaders are complicit in those assassinations, and since
turnabout is fair play, U.S. leaders open themselves up to their own assassination by the very demon of lawlessness their Israeli partners in crime unleash in the
occupied territories.
Lest the U.S. secret police accuse this writer of advocating or apologizing for the assassination of Americans, I will point out the obvious. All assassinations are
wrong. But the spread of the contagion of Israeli doublethink in the U.S. has caused Americans to subscribe to the racist Talmudic/Zionist double-standard, that it is
permissible, indeed perhaps even laudable, to assassinate Arab goyim, whereas the assassination of the Chosen terrorist Ariel Sharon, or his patrons in the U.S.,
would be deemed a moral outrage of the highest order by the guardians of public opinion in the West.
"Our" media drum up a non-stop chorus of pompous propaganda about an antique "Holocaust" from 56 years ago, in which the most finite detail of absolute moral
perfection is urged upon percipients with tiresome homiletic admonishment. These drippy little media "Holocaust" sermons are perhaps a cut above the inspirational
platitudes found on greeting cards. At the same time that they drown us in their bucket of crocodile tears, the media concoct, on their editorial and news pages, a
tenor of acceptance and advocacy for state-sponsored Israeli assassinations, for the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, in a word, for the holocaust of any Arab
who dares to countenance a revolt against Zionist troops in the Gaza ghetto.
As the Israeli missiles fly and the tanks roll, let us divert ourselves with some dumbed-down movie-of-the-week entertainment, perhaps the latest film saluting the
Jewish revolt against Nazi troops, "Uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto," starring Ben Affleck, introduced by Tom Brokaw, and written, produced and directed by
flagrant Jewish blowhards.
Please forgive us if we pass on the neo-Nazi Michael Hoffman II. We have read his drivel before and we reject attempts to claim the holocaust never happened. Please crawl directly back under the rock you emerged from when you smelled a potential pogrom.
What massacre happened in Jenin?
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$160.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network