Jewish Russian Telegraph

Terrorist Groups Linked to Counterfeit Operations

CNET reports:

  Counterfeit DVDs and cigarettes may be funding terrorists.

That's what the Senate Homeland Security committee heard Wednesday from John Stedman, a lieutenant in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department who's responsible for an eight-person team of intellectual property (IPR) investigators.

  "Some associates of terrorist groups may be involved in IPR crime," Stedman said. "During the course of our investigations, we have encountered suspects who have shown great affinity for Hezbollah and its leadership."

Even though Stedman's evidence is circumstantial, his testimony comes as Congress is expected to consider new copyright legislation this year. An invocation of terrorism, the trump card of modern American politics, could ease the passage of the next major expansion of copyright powers.

Steadman said he saw Hezbollah flags and photographs of the group's leader in homes that he raided, coupled with anti-Israel sentiments on the part of those arrested.

But another witness, Kris Buckner, the president of a private investigation firm that looks into intellectual property violations, said: "I am also frequently asked if terrorist groups profit from the sale of counterfeit goods. I do not know the answer to that question." Buckner has, however, heard "subjects make anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish statements" on raids.

The 9/11 Commission never managed to link Hezbollah to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. But the commission claimed that Iran and Hezbollah provided assistance to al-Qaida on other occasions, including joint training exercises.

Matthew Levitt, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who also testified, said that "Hezbollah depends on a wide variety of criminal enterprises, ranging from smuggling to fraud to drug trade to diamond trade in regions across the world, including North America, South America and the Middle East, to raise money."[link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

When Washington Post Looked the Other Way

EyeOnThePost is a great site watching, documenting and fighting  Washington Post's deep anti-Israeli bias. Washington Post that can not get enough coverage of alleged Koran abuse cases refused to see the obvious. This is from a recent alert sent by EyeOnThePost:

Monday, May 30, 2005                   
Video Now Available With Subtitles of Official Palestinian Authority Sheik's Sermon  Calling for Extermination of Jews - Post Still Silent on This And Other Evidence of Continued Palestinian Incitement of Hatred

                  The Post has continued its failure to report  anything about Palestinian Authority Sheik  Ibrahim Mudeiris's fiery sermon on official Palestinian Authority TV on May 13 in which he called for Muslim conquest of all Western nations and the extermination of all Jews. Click  here for our May 18 Alert on this subject.                   

A video of this horrifying sermon with English subtitles is now available online, courtesy of MEMRI. For anyone tempted even for a moment to think there is nothing to fear from such sermons, it is powerful and should be viewed.  Click here to view the video.               

Peace will never be possible as long as Palestinian leadership continues to sponsor and encourage hate, and the "roadmap" recognizes this by imposing an obligation on the PA to take steps to end incitement. The Post doesn't hesitate to regularly trumpet on the front page what it perceives to be Israeli failure to adhere to its "roadmap" obligations with regard to construction in settlements, yet the Post continues its abject silence in the face of Palestinian sponsorship and encouragement of hatred.[link]

Come on Washington Post! You don't need a Deep Throat to notice this. Just stop looking the other way.

posted by: jrtelegraph

Israeli Democracy - in Danger?

The letter below is by a guest blogger -- Professor Gene Itkis:

Israeli Democracy - in Danger?

What would you say if a US Congressman were removed from a Congress session because he is wearing a tie of a particular color? Or if members of public denied access to public events and/or public areas because of a particular color in their garments? Or foreign diplomats stopped because of the same color scarves they were bringing as their gifts?

Sounds paranoid, does it not? Yet this is exactly what is happening today in Israel, where Sharon is methodically destroying the remnants of Israeli democracy in his fight with his opposition.

Sharon's disengagement plan - whether one supports it or not - envisages forced transfer of law-abiding Jews from the homes they have built while enduring constant (since the start of the "peace process" - actually increasing) terror. One would think that such controversial, fateful and painful decisions should be made with the maximum effort at the national dialog, openness and consensus. Yet, is this what Sharon is doing?
Sometimes it takes a ridiculous incident to illustrate the extent of a problem.
Such a case happened two days ago when a delegation of Indian diplomats were visiting the Knesset  The diplomats were bringing gifts to their Israeli colleagues - scarves of saffron color. But this color happened to be too close to orange - the color chosen by the opposition to Sharon's Gaza evacuation plans. So, scrupulously following their instructions, the Knesset guards stopped the delegation and demanded that they remove the orange scarves. Of course, in this case the problem was quickly settled, though some of the Indian guests were unpleasantly surprised:  "I found it to be ridiculous not to allow a piece of cloth," one of the Indian delegation members told the radio. "Those are messages of intolerance."
But this is not an isolated incident: on the same day, Member of Knesset M. Gorlovsky was told to remove his orange cap. And when he refused, he was escorted by the Knesset guard out of the Knesset. A week earlier a similar incident took place with MK Gila Finkelstein. Many other such incidents were reported, including denying access to public areas (such as the Wailing Wall, Kotel) to those who wear orange garments. Today police arrested two people for handing out orange ribbons near Mt. Meron. And so on and on.

Unfortunately, this "orange paranoia" is not the only worrisome trend. Even more serious is that of administrative detentions. Administrative detentions allow imprisonment without trial for up to 6 months - with possible renewals - without any indictments, without presenting any evidence to the accused (or his lawyers), and thus without the ability of the detainee to refute the charges. This dangerous power of a state is a leftover of the British colonial system and has being a part of Israel's State of Emergency first proclaimed in 1948 for a period not to exceed one year, but, unfortunately, routinely extended every year ever since. This extreme measure always felt uncomfortable. But it was still uneasily justified by the threat of terrorism - the normal legal routes would be likely compromise information sources, and if these could not be used repeatedly many of the terrorist attempts that could be prevented would be likely to succeed. In a small country where there are dozens of terrorist attempts daily, this can be a powerful and compelling argument, even in the face of the likelihood of its abuse.

However, over time, instead of curtailing the use (and abuse) of the administrative arrests, their use was extended, and today seems to be increasingly used against the political opposition. A number of Jews have been detained under this procedure - in those cases the uneasy justification of the administrative detentions does not apply and the regular legal system should be sufficient to handle those. This trend to resort to such extreme measures seems to be growing, with the public opinion being carefully prepared for a larger scale use of the administrative detentions, where their use is clearly of a political nature. This is a dangerous trend that must be stopped! And yet, we hear no strong voices addressing the problem. Neither in Israel, nor in US.

Is this the democracy that we wish to bring to the Middle East?

posted by: Professor Gene Itkis

Red and Brown United in Somerville

Red and Brown are united in targeting Somerville in their anti-Semitic hate of Jews and Israel. Could it be possible? What about the fact that some of the ultra-leftists are Jewish? Forget about it. There is nothing Jewish about scum like Noah Cohen -- a rabid hater of Israel, Jews, and America. He is a Communist through and through, people like him have their roots in hatred, hatred replaced for them family, country, and all human relations. Now they are in a block with Nazis. Is it a surprise? Not at all for any half-decent student of history.
Molotov-Ribbentrop during the infamous pact.

Below is a letter written by a reader of the Jewish Russian Telegraph:

Unmasked in Somerville - the leaders of the hate campaign

A new anti-Israel campaign is being waged in Somerville by outsiders. Perhaps it is not surprising that after a spectacular defeat of divestment last year, any pretense of peacemaking and human rights advocacy are gone. Now, revisionist history and fraudulent claims are accompanied by hateful sloganeering and calls for destruction of Israel. This stand is typified by a recent letter in the Somerville Journal from Noah Cohen, who happens to be a co-founder of the Boston-based OnePalestine - As his organization's name suggests, Mr. Cohen allows no place for democratic Israel in his vision of the Middle East.

Though Amer Jubran, OnePalestine's other co-founder, was deported from the US to his native Jordan, Noah Cohen and his cohorts presided over the Somerville Divestment kick-off event this March, as was reported by the Jewish Advocate. While campaigning in Somerville for economic sanctions based on fabricated "apartheid" charges, Mr. Cohen's web site www.onepalestine.org is clear on the group's true agenda, stating "We oppose the existence of the colonial-settler state of Israel" and advocating "the necessity and legitimacy of an armed anti-colonialist Palestinian resistance" toward that end.

Extolling terrorism, OnePalestine reports on the head of Hamas, "Sheikh [Ahmed] Yassin always stood straight and tall in his inspirational spirit of resistance to the Zionist project called Israel." Noah Cohen also advises in his recent manifesto: "Colonial regimes do not negotiate themselves out of existence in the interest of peace; they yield land when the cost of holding it-measured in lives and in privileges- is too high for their footsoldiers and their ordinary citizens to bear."

It seems incredible that certain self-described "vibrant, diverse and very opinionated" Jews still hide behind the language of humanism to condone and support this murderous agenda, of which divestment is just another tool. With both, OnePalestine and skinheads staging counter-rally at last year's Boston Celebrates Israel, it is hardly coincidental that Billy Roper's national neo-Nazi group come only to Somerville last week, before proceeding to protest the Holocaust Memorial in Boston.The people of Somerville and the Boston Jewish community at large, have a right to know just what lurks behind the Somerville Divestment campaign.

This is a picture of Nazis demonstrating with the leftists of the OnePalestine. The picture (click to enlarge) is from the site of Land of Israel committee. It was taken two years ago. AP, Boston Globe, and local TV news all refused to publish it. It did not fit into the usual framework of the story about Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We actually had a chance to talk to a friendly TV cameraman and asked him to record the scene. He agreed. When we expressed skepticism about the picture appearing in the news, he agreed once again.

posted by: jrtelegraph

Jewish Vote is Up for Grabs

Rick Richman has an informative post on his Jewish Current Issues about the changing Jewish-American vote and the possible impact. Here it is:

Democrats and the Jewish Vote

By Rick Richman

Kenneth Baer, writing in The New Republic on Democrats and the Jewish vote:

    For the 5,000 pro-Israel activists attending the AIPAC Policy Conference this week in Washington, his story was a familiar one: born and raised in the suburbs of New York City in a staunchly liberal Democratic household; pushed right by Jimmy Carter's lukewarm support for Israel; heard Ronald Reagan talk about "peace through strength" and crossed over to the Republican camp; and now George W. Bush's war on terrorism has kept him there.

    That Ari Fleischer, President Bush's former press secretary, was the one describing this journey should give no one pause.
     But that his remarks were met with knowing laughter and, at times, thunderous applause points is a growing problem for Democrats:

    Jewish-Americans, one of their most loyal constituencies, are now up-for-grabs.

Baer notes that six congressional districts inNew York and
New Jersey (all in the metropolitan New York area) flipped from Al Gore to George Bush in 2004, and Bush had double-digit percentage gains in several other districts.
Moreover:

    Kerry lost more than 250,000 votes from Gore's total in Kings (Brooklyn), Queens, Nassau, and Suffolk counties, four of the most Jewish counties in the country. The impact of this shift could affect the future makeup of the U.S. Senate:

    With the potential for two open Senate races in New Jersey in 2006 and 2008 . . . and another open seat one year later in New York if Hillary Clinton vacates it to run for President, the shifting of hundreds of thousands of votes in New York and New Jersey could hurt Democrats . . .
And not just in New York and New Jersey:

    Beyond that, don't forget that the New York area is the center of the Jewish-American world.  Opinions there shape opinions throughout the community (especially in places like Broward and Dade Counties,
    Florida, otherwise known as the sixth and seventh boroughs of
    New York) which could not only move votes in critical states, but also deny Democrats millions of dollars in political donations.

For the future, Democrats may want to think of leaders other than HowardEven-Handed" Dean and John "Jimmy Carter or Jim Baker" Kerry.[link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Alan Dershowitz: Noam Chomsky is Out to Get Me

Alan Dershowitz is a victim of leftist witch-hunt for daring to defend Israel.

Dershowitz: "The Case for Israel" has put me at risk
By: Israel Insider staff and partners   
Published: May 27, 2005   

Alan Dershowitz has released a report entitled "The Hazards of Making 'The Case for Israel'".

In it, he writes, "Publication of The Case for Israel has made me the target of vicious personal attacks. A systematic effort to discredit the book, and me, has been undertaken by a well-organized group of Israel bashers led by Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, and Alexander Cockburn. As soon as the book reached the bestseller lists and began to get good reviews around the country, this triumvirate went to work. They had a model for their attack going back 20 years.

"The mode of attack is consistent. Chomsky selects the target and directs Finkelstein to probe the writings in minute detail and conclude that the writer didn't actually write the work, that it is plagiarized, that it is a hoax and a fraud. Cockburn publicizes these "findings," and then a cadre of fellow travelers bombard the Internet with so many attacks on the target that these attacks jump to the top of Google. Because no one has thus far exposed the pattern, each attack! may seem plausible on first impression. But when the pattern is examined and exposed, the entire enterprise becomes clear for what it is: a clear attempt to chill pro-Israel advocacy on university campuses by a form of literary McCarthyism." [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

 

American Taxpayers' Money Feeding Palestinian Corruption

We often don't know how taxpayers' money is spent by Uncle Sam. At least in this case there is clarity.

Reuters reports:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush said on Thursday the United States would provide $50 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority.

"To help ensure that the Gaza disengagement is a success, the United States will provide the Palestinian Authority $50 million to be used for new housing and infrastructure projects in the Gaza," Bush said.

"These funds will be used to improve the quality of life of the Palestinians living in Gaza, where poverty and unemployment are very high," Bush said at a White House Rose Garden appearance with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

The administration had faced opposition to providing direct assistance with no strings attached to the Palestinian Authority from Texas Republican Rep. Tom DeLay, the majority leader in the House of Representatives. [link]

Here are a couple of related posts on this blog:

The Magic Number:$22 Million, Roger Clemens and Suha Arafat

According to news reports, after Arafat's death, Suha met with leaders of the Palestinian Authority and insisted that she needed the financial security to continue to live in the lifestyle she'd become accustomed to. The PA  leaders reportedly agreed to pay her $22 million a year out of secret  accounts held by Arafat believed to hold at least $4 billion. In exchange, Suha was told she would have to reveal all of her husband’s bank accounts and investments, and allow the money that belonged to the Palestinian people to be transferred to the PA.[link]

and this one:

Don't Cry for Her Palestina: $7Mil for Suha Arafat

French probe links PLO treasurer to payments to Arafat's wife    : 

[World News] Washington, Apr 20 : French investigators probing embezzlement of Palestinian Liberation Organization's funds have said its Treasurer was the pointman for $7 million paid to Yasser Arafat's wife Suha Arafat through a Paris bank account, a report said today.

Nizar Abu Ghazaleh, head of PLO finances, played a key role in the transfers to Suha, according to Palestinian officials and Paris judicial officials probing PLO funds, The Wall Street Journal reported from Ramallah, West Bank.

Back to the opening premise: we know how the money will be spent. It will pay for two years of Suha Arafat's contract and will leave some spare change for assorted terrorist activities.

Mr. President, we are supposed to support democracy, not kleptocracy. Somebody needs to explain the difference to the President.

Democracy : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
Kleptocracy :  A government characterized by rampant greed and corruption

posted by: jrtelegraphizle

Baghdad Laughs

Baghdad Laughs at the former Fuhrer. Tim Blair posts:

They’re laughing at Saggy Hussein. AP reports:

Hamza Adnan, 8, Jinan Jassim, Ayah Faiz, 5, and Duha Munaf, 16, from left, watch Dubai-based satellite television station al-Arabiya in a house in the Karada area of Baghdad, Friday May 20, 2005, as it broadcasts Friday’s front page of Britain’s mass circulation tabloid newspaper, the Sun, showing Saddam Hussein standing in his white underwear while folding what appears to be a brown pair of trousers.

The Sun should launch an Arab-language edition. Looks like they’ve got a large potential readership. [link]

posted by: jrtelegraph

Russian Born MK Thrown Out of Knesset for Wearing Orange

Remember the time when blue and white was our color? Well, now our color is orange.

Arutz Sheva reports:

Knesset Expels MK for Orange Hat
14:08 May 24, '05 / 15 Iyar 5765

   

Knesset Member Michael Gorlovsky (Likud) was evicted from the Knesset Monday after refusing to remove his orange hat. Orange is the color symbolic of opposition to the government evacuation plan.

The ouster of the MK came one day after guards blocked visiting Indian legislators from entering the Knesset while wearing orange scarves. Orange is emblematic of their party, and the Foreign Ministry later officially apologized. In addition, on Remembrance Day, guards at the Western Wall (Kotel) forced teenagers to take off orange shirts before being allowed to enter the area.

MK Gorolovsky was not able to convince Knesset Speaker Reuven (Ruby) Rivlin (Likud) to allow him to stay in the legislative chamber. He had put on the orange hat during a speech by Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. When Rivlin ordered Gorlovsky to remove the hat, he replied. "First of all, there are people here with skullcaps (kipot). Second, this is my protest."

Rivlin, who himself opposes the disengagement, unenthusiastically called Gorolovsky to order three times, and then, according to Knesset regulations, called upon the ushers to remove his colleague from the plenum. [link]

The old Soviet joke comes to mind -- why Indians? What wrong did they do?
Good for you, Michael!

posted by: jrtelegraph

Unequal Protection or Islamist Manipulation?

Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chadha discuss at FrontPageMagazine.com Islamist practice of manipulation, encouraged and abeted by the complacent mainstream media:

CAIR's Hate Crimes Nonsense

by Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chadha
FrontPageMagazine.com
May 18, 2005
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2627
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=18109

Should you read Unequal Protection: The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States 2005, an annual report issued last week by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), you'll learn how the Muslim experience in America is worsening. Specifically, the number of "anti-Muslim hate crimes in the United States" has gone up dramatically: from 42 cases in 2002, to 93 cases in 2003, to 141 in 2004.

This news prompted headlines in the mainstream media. "Muslims Report 50% Increase in Bias Crimes," announced the New York Times; "Crimes, Complaints Involving Muslims Rise," broadcast the Washington Post; and "Muslims Cite a Rise in Hate Crimes," echoed the Los Angeles Times. That these leading newspapers treated the CAIR study as a serious piece of research served as an important endorsement.

But CAIR is part of the Wahhabi Lobby, so (unlike the mainstream media reporters) we thought it a good idea to take a closer look at the report. We examined in detail some "examples of anti-Muslim hate crime reports received by CAIR in 2004," on p. 43, plus some "samples" on p. 53 and discovered a pattern of sloppiness, exaggeration, and distortion:

1. CAIR cites the July 9, 2004 case of apparent arson at a Muslim-owned grocery store in Everett, Washington. But investigators quickly determined that Mirza Akram, the store's operator, staged the arson to avoid meeting his scheduled payments and to collect on an insurance policy. Although Akram's antics were long ago exposed as a fraud, CAIR continues to list this case as an anti-Muslim hate crime.

2. CAIR also states that "a Muslim-owned market was burned down in Texas" on August 6, 2004. But already a month later, the owner was arrested for having set fire to his own business. Why does CAIR include this incident in its report?

3. CAIR lists the March 2005 lawsuit filed by the Salmi family for the firebombing of their family van as one example of a hate crime reports it received in 2004. However, the crime named in the lawsuit occurred in March 2003, was already reported by CAIR in 2003, and should not have been tabulated again in the 2004 report.

4. CAIR reports that "a home-made bomb exploded outside of the Champions Mosque in the Houston suburb of Spring, Texas," staking its claim on eyewitness reports that on July 4, 2004, "two white males" were seen placing the bomb. We inquired about the incidents and found that Spring's sheriff department could not locate any police files about an explosion. Further inquiries to the mosque and an e-mail to CAIR both went unanswered. There is scant evidence that any crime even occurred.

5. CAIR notes that "investigators in Massachusetts are still investigating a potential hate-motivated arson against the Al-Baqi Islamic Center in Springfield." However the case was long ago ruled a simple robbery, news that even CAIR's own website has posted. The Associated Press reported on January 21, 2005, that prosecutors determined the fire was set by teen-age boys "who broke into the Al-Baqi mosque to steal money and candy, then set the fire to cover their tracks." The boys, they clarified, "weren't motivated by hatred toward Muslims."

6. CAIR describes what happened to a Muslim family in Tucson, Arizona: "bullet shots pierced their home as they ate dinner in October 2004" and two months later their truck was smashed and vandalized. But the only evidence that either incident was motivated by hate of Muslims is the Dehdashti family itself, not the police. Detective Frank Rovi of Pima County Sheriff's Department, who handled the shooting investigation, said that according to the neighbors, the desert area by the Dehdashti house was often used for target practice. Neither incident was classified as a hate crime and both cases were closed by February 2005, long before the CAIR report went to press.

Of twenty "anti-Muslim hate crimes" in 2004 that CAIR describes, at least six are invalid – and further research could likely find problems with the other fourteen instances.

Nor is this the first unreliable CAIR report; earlier ones were just as bad. Speaking about the 1996 CAIR report, terrorism expert Steven Emerson noted in congressional testimony that "a large proportion of the complaints have been found to be fabricated, manufactured, distorted or outside standard definitions of hate crimes." The 1996 report included the arrest of Musa Abu Marzouk, a Hamas leader, and the trial of Omar Abdul-Rahman, the blind sheikh and ringleader of the foiled "Day of Terror" plot to blow up New York City landmarks.

Even more absurdly, CAIR classified as an American hate crime the shooting of Ahmed Hamida in Jerusalem on February 26, 1996, as he fled after driving his car into a crowd of Israeli civilians, killing one and injuring twenty-three others. One wonders why the killing of a terrorist in Israel would be classified as an American issue; more of CAIR's sloppiness?

Indeed, very little of what CAIR asserts checks out. CAIR's significant inaccuracy has potentially great consequence. Note what happened after Newsweek reported in its May 9 issue that the Koran had been desecrated at the U.S. military prison in Guantánamo, Cuba. Protests raged in the Muslim world, including demonstrations that turned violent in Afghanistan and killed at least sixteen people. Newsweek eventually retracted the story, but a bit late. Had things turned out otherwise, CAIR's erroneous report could have provoked similar violence.

The staff at CAIR does not divulge to us its reasons for not retracting at least the provably false incidents embedded in its inflated "hate" figures, but we can think of two reasons: to scare its constituency, thereby raising more money; and to put the American public on the defensive, thereby winning more privileges for Islam, such as the 2000 U.S. Senate resolution inveighing against the "discrimination and harassment" suffered by the American Muslim community.

But why do journalists report the results of CAIR's survey – as though it came from a source without a viewpoint bias, as though past studies had been reliable, as though its polls are scientific, as though it has not been party to threats against an American Muslim dissident, and as though it has not protected Osama bin Laden's image, as though five of CAIR's staff and board members have not already been associated with terrorism, and as though it is not named as a defendant in 9/11 terror lawsuit?

One wonders what it will take for old media to ignore CAIR's unreliable research and instead start reporting the words of Steven Pomerantz, a former chief of the FBI's counterterrorism section, that CAIR's activities "effectively give aid to international terrorist groups."

posted by: jrtelegraph