Palestine Think Tank site is born today!
May 8th, 2008May 8, 2008
From Gilad Atzmon
giladatzmon@mac.com
May 8, 2008
From Gilad Atzmon
giladatzmon@mac.com
http://zionistwatch.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/the-jewish-durga-and-the-goyim-kleptocracy/
It is clear that the United States government is now wholly in the clutches of a vile cartel of criminal gangsters. These career criminals are, more often than not, Jewish supremacists who operate a sickeningly synergistic relationship between government, media and Israel. American patriot Jack Bernstein, before being murdered by Israel’s Mossad described a connection or an axis between Washington, Tel Aviv and Moscow. These three worked together to advance the goals and aims of world Zionism. Of course Moscow is not nearly so cooperative these days, but who needs them? The Zionist cronyism taking place in DC has no need of the now defunct Communist regime to prop up their wrongdoing, their larceny, their spy games and their two-faced double-dealing, all constants in Jewish history.
No, the Jews-First-Last-and-Always brigade has our government in the palms of their numerous Durga-like [2] hands. These Zionists, neo-conservatives, pseudo-patriot military industrialists, globalists, New World Orderists, devout interventionists, even more devout internationalists, open borders financiers, media kingpins, Talmudic Chabad Lubavitch rabbinical religious swarms along with the Hollywood Left and the New York Weimar Republic-like Jewish intelligentsia have waged a war on both truth and historical memory in the United States. Of course our compliant and compromised Goyim kleptocracy [2] is more than giddy to oblige the Sole Loyalists of Jewry and every career politician and presidential candidate [3] has made this abundantly clear in his/her orations and voting habits, orating and voting against the interests, the future and even the existence of Euro-American men, women and children at every turn.
Canadian Association for Free Expression
Box 332,
Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3
Ph: 905-274-3868; FAX: 905-278-2413
Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director
May 6, 2008
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
160 Elgin Street
11th Floor,
Ottawa, ON.,
re: CHRT File: T1073/5405 . Richard Warman and the Canadian Human Rights Commission v Marc Lemire
Attention: Carol Ann Hartung, Registry Officer
Fax: 613 995-3484
I write in response to Barbara Kulaszka’s motion of May 5, seeking:
1. “An order that the Commission disclose the documents in their original form, with no redactions or, in the alternative, claim a specified privilege;
2. An order that the written submissions and final arguments be rescheduled to a later date to allow the respondent to obtain disclosure or documents in their original form and to apply to file the documents as exhibits.”
In her motion on behalf of Respondent/victim Marc Lemire, she suggested a new summer or Autumn deadline.
CAFE adopts Miss Kulaszka’s submissions. However, we would go further:
1. In light of the massive volume of the recent disclosure (400 pages, with much material missing) and the demand that it be resubmitted in an unredacted form, we recommend setting deadlines in the Autumn.
2. The new disclosures, most of them material in the possession of the Commission when the Tribunal made a specific disclosure Order, August 16, 2006, clarifying material that must be produced, raise important questions about Commission spying and deceit in its “investigations” of alleged “hate” on the Internet. As well, they raise serious questions about the co-operation and information exchange between certain police departments and the Commission in regards to respondent/victims.
This information strongly suggests the calling of certain persons as witnesses or the re-call of previous witnesses. CAFE wants the hearings re-opened to accept new evidence.
These hearings are governed by rules. Repeated and calculated failure to follow the rules must have consequences. It is our submission on the constitutional question that these proceedings are already cryingly unfair to respondent/victims because, inter alia, there are virtually no defences.
The very least a respondent/victim should be able to hope for is procedural fairness. There is an obligation of continuous disclosure under Tribunal rules 6(1) and (4). Disclosure by the Commission has been a live issue throughout these proceedings. The Tribunal’s August 16, 2006 ruling clarified the Commission’s obligations and set a deadline.
Canadian Jewish organizations claim that Section 13 is needed for their “psychological security”
http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/may5-08_section13_for_jewish_psychological_security.html
On April 18, 2008, Bernie Farber of the Canadian Jewish Congress, wrote a letter to the Toronto Star in which he stated that
“The [Canadian Human Rights] commission’s investigation of Steyn shows it has lost sight of the legislation’s original purpose and the narrow fence it establishes against truly discriminatory speech. Such speech violates core Canadian values and has been upheld as a reasonable limitation of free expression precisely because of that incompatibility.
So by all means, let’s tweak the law to eliminate some of its discretionary elements. Amendments could call for an ombudsperson to adjudicate objectively if the complaints meet the high threshold for action, or cost consequences for applicants who bring frivolous complaints.”
But the real truth is that Mr. Farber’s organization, the Canadian Jewish Congress is right now an Interested Party in the Marc Lemire constitutional challenge, and they are seeking to uphold the current version of Section 13. A section they claim is needed for the “psychological security” of the Canadian Jewish community.
B’nai Brith, Canadian Jewish Congress and Friends of Simon Wiesenthal desperately want to keep the Internet censorship bonanza going
In written submissions filed by Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP, the Canadian Jewish Congress, League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada and the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre for Holocaust Studies applied for and received, Interested Party status in the Marc Lemire constitutional challenge of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. They support Section 13 – the notorious censorship provision that has been used to target dozens of Canadians including: Macleans Magazine, The Radical Press and the Christian Heritage Party, just to name a few.
The documents from the self-proclaimed representatives of the “Canadian Jewish community” can be found here:
Some key points:
4: The Applicants represent a group that is a frequent target of hate propaganda. Members of minority groups including the Canadian Jewish community rely heavily on anti hate-speech legislation, such as Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, for their physical and psychological security.
[ Motion to Intervene (emphasis added)]
6 (e): The objective of section 13(1) of the CHRA is sufficiently important to warrant overriding a constitutionally protected right.
6 (g): The impugned legislative measures are carefully circumscribed to appropriately balance freedom of expression and the societal interest in suppressing hate propaganda
7: The Interested Parties seek an order dismissing the constitutional challenge brought on behalf of the Respondent, Marc Lemire.
|
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Active and Past cases: 46 | Cases the tribunal ruled on: 37
· NOT A SINGLE respondent have ever won a section 13 case · 98% of cases have poor or working class respondents · 90.7% of respondents are not represented by lawyers · $99,000 has been awarded in fines and special compensation since 2003. · 35 respondents have lifetime speech bans (Cease and Desist) orders and if not followed the victims could face up to 5 years in prison. |
Groups, Writers and MPs that Support a Repeal of Section 13: http://www.stopsection13.com/repeal_sec13.html
|
Liberal MP Keith Martin Liberal MP Dan McTeague Conservative MP James Rajotte Conservative MP Bruce Stanton Ezra Levant Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (Rex Murphy) Catholic Insight Magazine Catholic Register Halifax Chronicle Herald (Paul Schneidereit) |
PEN Canada CDN Association of Journalists Mary Steyn (Macleans Magazine) Calgary Herald Western Standard Magazine London Free Press B’nai Brith Jewish Tribune Sask Leader-Post Deborah Gyapong Calgary AM770 |
Globe and Mail National Post David Warren (Ottawa Citizen) Eye Magazine (Toronto) Toronto Star Toronto Sun Interim Magazine Sault Ste. Marie – SooToday Winnipeg Free Press Oak Bay News Victoria News The Radical Press |
Constitutional Challenge of Section 13
Devastating motion filed today with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
———–
Attention: Ms. Carol Ann Hartung, Registry Officer
To the Tribunal:
Last week, I received from the Commission further disclosure in the amount of some 400 pages. I was served with two CD’s of documents and further faxed information. The last disclosure was made by fax on May 1, 2008. Ms. Blight has indicated that more material might be coming by May 5, 2008.
The disclosure includes many documents relevant to the constitutional challenge which should have been disclosed by the Commission two years ago.
They include correspondence between Dean Steacy and various police agencies across Canada concerning obtaining police evidence on various respondents and information received by the Commission from police about these respondents. It is the very evidence which the respondent was seeking in 2006 when he made his motion for disclosure from the Commission and obtained the ruling of the Tribunal dated August 16, 2006.
On August 16, 2006, the Tribunal ordered the Commission to disclose the following documents:
[43] On the other hand, I accept that the requests in items (j), (l) and (m) are arguably relevant and are not over-reaching or ambiguous:
j) All documents relating to the Commission’s relations with Internet Service Providers, including attempts to pressure ISPs to shut down websites or remove them;
l) All documents relating to meetings, networking and consultation with any group representing one of the groups protected from discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act, and any police or governmental agencies, relating to hate on the Internet;
m) All documents relating to educative or publicity activities of the Commission with respect to hate.
The documents disclosed fall squarely within the order for disclosure made in that ruling. The disclosure ordered was in relation to the constitutional challenge filed by the respondent under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
They have now been disclosed one week before the final arguments are to be filed by the respondent on the constitutional issue. And they are made with highly relevant information being blacked out or whitened out with no specific claim of privilege being made to justify this action.
There are crucial documents included in this disclosure. The failure of the Commission to disclose these documents in 2006 prior to the hearing of any oral testimony has severely prejudiced the respondent in his constitutional challenge as he was prevented from using them during the hearing and the testimony of Richard Warman, Dean Steacy and Harvey Goldberg.
This is not the first time this has happened. Throughout this case, the Commission has consistently dragged its feet and only disclosed evidence after multiple motions by the respondent and orders of the Tribunal. Last year, many documents were disclosed after Harvey Goldberg gave testimony and the respondent was unable to explore them with the witness.
The respondent requests that the Tribunal order the Commission to disclose the documents in an unredacted form. As well, there are documents that appear to have been double-sided but only one side has been copied for disclosure. The Commission appears to claim no privilege for the portions of the documents that are erased and is therefore bound by the August 16, 2006 order to disclose the documents in their original state. The respondent asks that the Tribunal set a date for the Commission to complete this disclosure.
The respondent will be making a motion to file many of these documents into evidence after they are produced in the proper form. There appear to be close to 200 pages of documents which the respondent will be seeking to enter into evidence. They go to the heart of the respondent’s constitutional argument, that section 13 has become in essence a criminal provision and the Commission is using, in an indirect way, the search and seizure powers of the police.
Secondly, the respondent requests an adjournment of written submissions and final arguments until either the summer or fall.
The Tribunal set dates for final arguments on February 11, 2008. These dates are not set in stone. They were set in good faith, giving the parties ample time given the circumstances then prevailing to make their submissions.
That is not the case today.
The respondent has already been severely prejudiced by the Commission’s failure to make timely disclosure of these documents.
If he is not given time to ask for proper disclosure and time to make a motion to admit the unredacted documents into evidence as exhibits, then he will have been denied natural justice and a fair hearing, as required by section 48.9 (1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act and by the common law governing quasi-judicial tribunals.
There is also great prejudice to the public interest.
In Kulbashian v. Canada (Canadian Human Rights Commission), [2007] F.C.J. No. 475, the court stayed the judicial review application challenging the constitutionality of section 13 pending the outcome the constitutional challenge in this case. The Court held:
12 Although the Attorney General recognizes that the Court has the jurisdiction to consider constitutional challenges, he argues that there was no evidence before the Tribunal relating to the alleged Charter violation or any potential justification about this violation pursuant to section 1 of the Charter. The Attorney General argues that the appropriate remedy is for the Court to decline to hear the Charter issues now being raised and to wait for the outcome in Lemire, where the parties will have the opportunity to submit evidence in respect of this issue. […]
42 In my opinion, a stay of the present proceedings is appropriate on the grounds that the sole issue raised in the Applicants’ Amended Notice of Application is currently the subject of adjudication before a tribunal in the Lemire matter.
43 In WIC Premium Television Ltd. v. General Instrument Corp., [1999] F.C.J. No. 862 (F.C.T.D.) (QL), the Court addressed the factors to be considered in granting a stay when there are proceedings before another court or in another jurisdiction. These criteria include the risk of inconsistent findings, excessive costs and the capacity of the court to grant the complete or comprehensive remedy.
44 These factors are relevant in the present case. The tribunal hearing the Lemire matter is authorized to adjudicate upon the constitutional validity of subsection 13(1) of the Act and that disposition, including any subsequent application for judicial review, will be available for the guidance of the Court when the current matter proceeds. […]
The motion is allowed. The within matter is stayed pending the disposition of Richard Warman v. Mark Lemire, Tribunal File No. T1073/5405 proceedings before the Human Rights Tribunal. [emphasis added]
The evidentiary record of this hearing will be used, not only in any judicial review of the decision of this Tribunal, but also in other cases before the Federal Court.
I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that this case will be the defining decision with respect to section 13’s constitutionality for many years. The record of this proceeding will be the basis for those decisions.
The Tribunal has received recognition of this fact in the application of the Canadian Constitution Foundation for interested party status. This organization can make useful submissions on the constitutional issues and the respondent therefore submits the application should be granted. It should also be allowed time to review the record.
Given the importance to the most basic rights of the respondent, to other respondents and to the Canadian public’s interest in the Charter rights to freedom of expression and conscience, the respondent must be given the opportunity to obtain these documents in an unredacted form and to subsequently apply to enter many into evidence.
I enclose a listing of the documents which accompanied disclosure of the CD’s. The faxed disclosure were emails which are so blacked out it is difficult to know who they are to, but appear to come from the Winnipeg Police Service.
The respondent therefore requests:
1. An order that the Commission disclose the documents in their original form with no redactions or, in the alternative, claim a specified privilege;
2. An order that the written submissions and final arguments be rescheduled to a later date to allow the respondent to obtain disclosure of documents in their original form and to apply to file documents as exhibits in the case.
Yours truly,
Barbara Kulaszka
Groups, Writers and MPs that Support a Repeal of Section 13: http://www.stopsection13.com/repeal_sec13.html
|
Liberal MP Keith Martin Liberal MP Dan McTeague Conservative MP James Rajotte Conservative MP Bruce Stanton Ezra Levant Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (Rex Murphy) Catholic Insight Magazine Catholic Register Halifax Chronicle Herald (Paul Schneidereit) |
PEN Canada CDN Association of Journalists Mark Steyn (Macleans Magazine) Calgary Herald Western Standard Magazine London Free Press B’nai Brith Jewish Tribune Sask Leader-Post Deborah Gyapong Calgary AM 770 Lawyer Karen Selick |
Globe and Mail National Post David Warren (Ottawa Citizen) Eye Magazine (Toronto) Toronto Star Toronto Sun Interim Magazine Sault Ste. Marie – SooToday Winnipeg Free Press Oak Bay News Victoria News The Radical Press |
Constitutional Challenge of Section 13
http://www.stopsection13.com/constitutional_challenge.html
Support Marc Lemire’s Constitutional Challenge
Be part of our team and contribute what you can to defeat this horrible law
and protect Freedom of Speech in Canada !
· Via Mail: Send Cheque or Money Order to:
Marc Lemire
152 Carlton Street
PO Box 92545
Toronto, Ontario
M5A 2K1
Canada
Dear Editor:
RE: The Drugging of Children by Schools & Medical System etc. for $$$
The callous disregard for children that are robbed of their souls and their lives by drugging them has to be stopped.
The reason it’s gone on for so long is because people have blind faith in thinking that “the system” has the children’s best interest at heart. Also so many naive people think “they wouldn’t do that” or if it’s not hurting them they don’t want to get involved.
I believe things would be a lot better if parents interacted socially more with each other, sharing what goes on with the children & sticking together.
I don’t believe “confidentiality meetings” & “confidential papers” are for the parents’ benefit. They are only for the schools’ & medical system’s benefit. When we get papers marked “confidential papers” we share them with most other people because the only people we wouldn’t want to see them probably do anyway.
When useless and dangerous drugs are pushed on children for profit for phony disorders & illnesses many souls are destroyed & lives are lost. And when I say a soul is destroyed I mean the value of their life! When all this happens it means the country is controlled by capitalist drug corporations etc. and the children are considered expendable.
Many children would do a whole lot better if they only ate whole wheat bread instead of that white crap. The same for pop adulterated with aspertime and white sugar and chemical dyes, etc.
Neurologists are just as bad when it comes to ignoring extreme chemicals including “mold sensitivity” which caused the loss of our daughter. It seems like all the neurologist “narcs” want to do is push useless & harmful drugs.
For further information on these issues please see http:www.ablechild.org & click on “Discussion Board”.
Also, another great site and article to check out is: http://www.NaturalNews.com/023121.html
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Jack Cutting,
Parksville, B.C.
From Mohawk Nation News
Please take time to read it. Then help us get a criminal
investigation going. Thank you. MNN
CANADIAN AUDIT OF KANEHSATAKE OPERATIONS
IN 2004 “WHITE WASHES” INDIAN AFFAIRS CORRUPTION
Challenging the Constitutionality of Section 13 The dates for the final arguments in the Richard Warman case against
Marc Lemire under section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act have now been set. Written arguments must be filed in May and oral arguments will
be held before the Tribunal in June.
Marc Lemire has challenged the constitutionality of s. 13 of the CHRA
as a violation of freedom of expression, freedom of the press,
freedom of conscience. A pdf of the written argument can be found here. http://www.stopsection13.com/FACTUM-Written_Submissions_on_Constitutional_Issues.pdf This case will set a crucial precedent in the fight against section 13!
We need support from civil liberties associations! Please write to EACH of them and encourage them to support
Marc Lemire’s fight against Section 13 of the CHRA. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association A. Alan Borovoy, General Counsel 506 - 360 Bloor Street West Toronto, ON M5S 1X1 phone: 416-363-0321 fax: 416-861-1291 e-mail: mail@ccla.org http://www.ccla.org/ e-mail: mail@ccla.org BC Civil Liberties Association 550 - 1188 W. Georgia St. Vancouver, BC V6E 4A2 phone: 604-630-9748 http://www.bccla.org/ Jim Braunagel e-mail: jim@bccla.org PEN Canada 24 Ryerson Avenue., Suite 301 Toronto ON M5T 2P3 Canada (416)703-8448 http://www.pencanada.ca email: info@pencanada.ca The Canadian Association of Journalists Algonquin College 1385 Woodroffe Avenue, B224 Ottawa, ON K2G 1V8 Telephone 613-526-8061 Fax: 613-521-3904 http://www.caj.ca/ John Dickens, Executive Director email: canadianjour@magma.ca –
BOUNTIFUL, BRITISH COLUMBIA’S CHILD GROW OP SCANDAL
Dear Editor:
This scandal has been perpetuated by a long succession of BC Premiers, Attorneys General and Solicitors General, all of whom can take credit for an abysmal record and the outright failure to protect the children of Bountiful. The Canadian children “transferred” or “reassigned parents” from British Columbia’s long standing polygamous compound, may be but the tip of the iceberg of child abuse, inflicted by Bountiful’s felonious, polygamous males together with their numerous enabling and/or brainwashed wives.
In January 2005 BC Bountiful member Mark Edward Calder, 37 pleaded guilty to transportation of more than 600 images of child pornography while driving from Utah into Canada. Utah District Judge David Winder approved a plea deal that imposed a five-year prison sentence. This information was provided to BC police as there were concerns that these 600 images were of BC children sequestered within the BC Bountiful compound. Of course if that were the case, then transferring and or reassigning children to new parents in Texas makes good criminal sense as it impedes police investigations.
The BC Crown Counsel Act has emasculated BC Police power under the Criminal Code of Canada (CCC). This Act in effect allows Crown Counsels and their political masters to secretly control what laws are enforced and to whom they are applied. Bountiful is a perfect example of why our police are unable to do their job. Our local news media have been reporting on this festering cesspool for years. RCMP have time and time again recommended charges be laid at Bountiful, yet Attorney General Wally Opal and the long list of AGs before him, have refused to allow police to lay those charges, let alone instruct prosecutors to proceed to Court.
Attorney General Opal’s position usurps the CCC, our judges, courts and the Parliament of Canada. His excuse for his inaction is based solely on the opinions of other publicly funded lawyers; an opinion that presupposes how our Judges and courts may or may not rule. This is political irony at its best. BC’s once top Justice, now has the unmitigated gall to shed governmental crocodile tears about his inability to act.
Child abuse of any kind, especially sexual abuse under the guise of religious emancipation is unacceptable. BC children are knowingly being abused, sexually and psychologically. These children are being traded like cattle between “religious” men who are openly engaging in plural sex with post-pubescent children. This is a made in BC scandal from Hell. Premier Campbell, the buck stops with you. Inaction is not an option. Protect these children NOW!
Doug Stead
Coquitlam, BC
[Editor’s Note: When the hardcopy of The Radical was in circulation the Letters to the Editor section provided an excellent forum for readers. Now that the news service is online it seems that folks have forgotten that this avenue is still available. Do write in to the Radical Press with your opinions and news articles, etc. Send your letters to radical@radicalpress.com and they will be published online. Thanks.]
————-
Dear Arthur:
Canadian and U.S. aboriginals are getting “Tibetan” abuse. 46% of Canada’s jail population is aboriginal men and 54% of Canada’s jail population is aboriginal women.
My native friend from Canoe Lake Saskatchewan Reserve says there is 90% + unemployed and at the Peigan Reserve it’s 95% unemployed, plus support.
Canadian racism is vile. I used to live in China.
In Alberta the Lubicon have been waiting 70 years for a reserve! It’s all due to bribery, tribe splitting, theft of forests and the P&NG by Klein and federal officials.
No illusions,
Ed Wolf
Calgary, Alberta
Canada
http://www.gilad.co.uk/html%20files/Swindler%92sList.html
Swindler’s List
by Gilad Atzmon
April 3, 2008
It is a common trend amongst rabid Zionists and notorious Islamophobes to quote some isolated and mistranslated verses from the Qur’an for the purpose of collectively libeling Muslims and presenting Islam as a regressive and violent belief system.
Needless to say, so far, such repetitive attempts have been found futile if not actually counter-effective. Not a single Western politician, Zionist campaigner or Neocon think tank has managed to establish a comprehensive case against Islam. The reason is rather simple, in spite of the clear fact that some devastating atrocities have been committed in the name of Islam and in the name of Jihad, these acts were performed by sporadic radicalized and isolated cells. As it seems, in the eyes of the Western masses, it takes more than just a few random acts of a very few to undermine a humanist universal belief system and implicate its one billion followers.
In order to incriminate Islam and to discredit its believers, a broad argument is needed, a conclusive undeniable proof that would establish a continuum between a given immoral religious text, a religious infrastructure and mass following movement of worshipers who behave immorally and accordingly. For the matter, a CIA-created mysterious character who allegedly hides in a cave for 7 years is not nearly enough. What we really want to see is a continuation between a so-called Islamic ‘satanic’ Verses and an Organic active collective set of worshipers who are tempted to follow the very verses and perform horrifically. Somehow, such a conclusive and comprehensive link is always missing in the Zionists’ and Islamophobes’ call for action. A radical Imam in London is not enough, a deliberate mistranslation of Ahmadinejad speeches won’t do either. Even repetitive images of the twin towers being chewed by airliners would not provide the goods.
http://zionistwatch.wordpress.com/2007/06/05/the-ideological-purifiers/
June 5, 2007
The Ideological Purifiers
By Patrick Grimm
There are some within this interconnected network of anti-Zionist activists who are sticklers for what I would dub “ideological purity.” If someone strays from one point of what is deemed to be “holy writ”, then they are scorned, shunned, mischaracterized or worse. I have seen it with my own eyes. The “ideological purifiers” are ready to leap, both physically and logically (sometimes illogically) on those persons who present their arguments in language thought to be too tepid, tame or tolerant.
Perhaps you lean to the left (and I actually lean fairly far to the right) and are a bit too reconciliatory on the issue of race. Get ready for the crush, because you may be falsely labeled as a “Zionist collaborator”, a “multiculturalist” or even worse a “crypto-Jew”. This is the modus operandi of Daryl Bradford Smith and his kind, but I have seen this witch-hunting mentality creeping into other parts of the anti-Zionist movement. Faux insinuations, under-handed smears and other insults await those who don’t seem to conform to 100% pure white nationalism.
What those who demand wholistic ideological allegiance seem not to comprehend is that many of the fighters, those writing warriors who loathe Zionism, come from a multitude of political persuasions. Some are conservatives, some are libertarians, some are even leftists who may be wrong on every count except for their opposition to Zionism. Should we totally shun someone who may not be correct, according to our litmus test, on every count? Or should we take our friends where we can find them, knowing that we must “hang together or hang separately” as one of the Founding Fathers put it?
I, for one, am sick and tired of egotistical people trying to ostracize well-meaning anti-Zionists because every piece of prose they write does not suit their tastes. I have watched it happen recently and it disgusts me. Can’t we see that the big enemy is Zionism, Jewish supremacism and what it is doing as an enervating force that is taking a wrecking ball to our world? Politically, polemically, is anything more important than this to tackle, battle and overcome with the truth? I don’t think so. When we quarrel with each other and “major in minors” we are jettisoning the positive influence we could potentially be having. We need to stop it.
In the past, I have conversed with those who say that they would be glad to join up with this movement, but that it seems that the people involved in it are always fighting amongst themselves and throwing their weight around, jockeying for dominance and are more concerned about personal ambition and ego than actually affecting change or making progress for our people. These are accurate and damaging allegations. What we need to do is to make sure we don’t validate them with our words and our behavior. That will only hurt and denigrate everything we are attempting to do.
Let’s stop slandering each other and start empowering each other. Our foe is well-organized and completely u