The US State Department has a long history of antagonism towards the Jews and Israel. Often, it has successfully promoted a separate agenda than that of the elected government.
The PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) is certainly everything but a pro-Israel media outlet. However, it produced a report and subsequent video called America and the Holocaust - Deceit and Indifference. This is an account of the horrible activities of the US State Department, their lies and indifference to the Holocaust, and their intentional stonewalling and withholding information while they knew that thousands of Jews were being killed in the death camps.
Six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust. Even then, the State Department tried to prevent the establishment of a final refuge for the pitiful remnant of survivors who tried to make their way to Israel. The Arabist State Department intended to vote against the rebirth of Israel in the General Assembly, and were prevented from doing so by virtually last minute instructions from President Harry Truman himself.
In November of 1966, Yehuda Avner, a veteran Israeli diplomat, was asked to personally deliver a letter to former US President Harry Truman from Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol. This is a verbatim excerpt from their conversation (Jerusalem Post, August 3, 2004, "A Walk With Harry Truman"):
"Truman began to speak about his own State Department as if it was a hostile power:
"'Those State Department fellows were always trying to put it over on me about Palestine, telling me that I really didn't understand what was going on there, that I ought to leave it to experts. Some were anti-Semitic, I'm sorry to say. Dealing with them was as rough as a cob. They didn't want instant recognition of statehood.
"'I had my own second thoughts, too. But I'd made my commitment to Dr. Weizmann. And my attitude was that as long as I'm president, I'd see to it that I made policy, not the second or third echelons at the State Department.
"'So, on the day the Jewish state was declared, I gave those officials about 30 minutes notice. And then, exactly 11 minutes after the proclamation of independence, I had my press secretary, Charlie Ross, issue the announcement that the United States recognizes Israel.'" (emphasis mine - RM)
And ever since that fateful vote at the United Nations, the State Department has waged an unremitting war against the Jews and Israel. The State Department has always had a separate agenda towards Israel. The Middle Eastern desk employs many so-called Arabists. Many of these are people whose parents were ambassadors to Arab States, who were brought up there.
The following are examples of US Secretaries of State who were, to say the least, antagonistic toward the Jewish State of Israel: George Marshall, John Foster Dulles, Henry Kissinger, James Baker, Colin Powell and others.
And even today, after the horror of the 9/11 terror attack, the US State Department continues its long history of covering up the misdeeds of Saudi Arabia and that nation's sponsorship of worldwide terror.
Let us not forget the Jewish graduates of State Department indoctrination: Martin Indyk, Sandy Berger, Aaron Miller, Dennis Ross and Daniel Kurtzer. (Former Secretary of State James ("F*** the Jews") Baker called them his "Jew-boys".) It seems that the State Department believes it is easier to do the Jews in if you use other Jews to do the dirty deed.
I was shocked to receive the following fax from one of my email friends. The fax was very brief: "Dear Ruth, you probably heard by now that Martin Indyk is going to be a Senior Foreign Advisor to John Kerry, should he win the election."
Let me tell you about Martin Indyk and his relationship and dealings with Israel. Indyk was appointed as Ambassador to Israel by President Bill Clinton. Clinton then used Indyk as his point man to push through a game plan to re-partition Israel.
Indyk's background: He was born in 1951 in London, England. He was raised and educated in Australia. According to the New York Times of September 23, 2000, he was an intelligence agent in Australia, and served as Deputy Director of Australia's Intelligence for the Middle East. (He may also have been working for British Intelligence.) He was brought to the US, given instant citizenship and made Ambassador to Israel in 1995. Middle East experts, who knew that Indyk had a separate questionable agenda towards Israel, were not allowed to testify regarding his appointment. He was the first Jew to serve as the American ambassador to Israel.
Indyk became the most objectionable and provocative Ambassador that any country, let alone Israel, had to put up with. He did not even attend Israel's Independence Day celebrations, which was intended as a big insult and polished his image as an Arabist working for the Arab nations. (He said that he had a previous appointment.)
He was recalled by the United States from his position as Ambassador when Netanyahu became Prime Minister in 1996, and sent back for his second stint in the year 2000.
In February of the year 2000, Martin Indyk showed his true colors and his animosity toward Israel, as he tried to buy Israeli Arab votes with US Embassy funds for a referendum on whether Israel should give the Golan to Syria, in order to advance the "peace process". (Yediot Aharonot, February 11, 2000, "U.S Embassy Tries to Mobilize Arab Support in the Referendum")
Knesset Member Uzi Landau, (now a Minister in the Sharon Government) wrote a letter to President Clinton in this regard: "[This] would constitute an unprecedented and intolerable act of gross interference in Israel's internal affairs. I can not emphasize enough the severity of this act, which demonstrates blatant disregard for the most elementary norms of accepted international behavior between states and nations. ...We have the right to expect that our closest friends and allies will allow us to make such decisions by ourselves."
Subsequently, in the same year, September of 2000, Martin Indyk, was charged with mishandling security information by using a laptop computer considered insecure. He was then recalled from his position as Ambassador to Israel.
Will Martin Indyk's questionable past as the United States Ambassador to Israel make John Kerry somewhat hesitant about making him his Senior Advisor on Israel Issues?
Another State Department man, Sandy Berger, served as Clinton's Deputy National Security Advisor. He was also certainly not a friend of Israel. Sandy Berger told an audience at Tel Aviv University: "[The current violence in the territories] is both the curse and the blessing of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
Interestingly enough, Sandy Berger, who until recently served as one of John Kerry's Senior Advisors, was also accused of mishandling security information. He was caught stuffing 50 highly classified papers into his pants. This was done, of course, "inadvertently". (Needless to say, Sandy Berger is no longer one of the top advisors of Presidential Candidate John Kerry.)
Does the State Department give their people a special course in filching secret information from their own government?
Why does Kerry unfailingly pick State Department enemies of Israel as his Senior Advisors? Will Martin Indyk meet the same fate as Sandy Berger?
Another one of the diplomats actively antagonistic towards the State of Israel is Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, William Joseph Burns.
In May of 2003, Assistant Secretary of State William Burns came to Israel and secretly met with a coterie of Israeli doves and Palestinian ministers and officials under the banner of "Peace Now" at the US Consulate in western Jerusalem. This secret discussion was about the "Road Map".
The following is a quote from the JINSA Report #332, dated May 12, 2003:
"No one was supposed to know that according to the minutes, Burns stated his view that 'the common sense of all peoples will override the conservative and Christian viewpoints once they see the Road Map's potential.' He told the anti-Government group to continue with their political activities 'as new peace attempts reflects the people's will and will result in fundamental changes.'"
Thus, we have two examples of State Department personnel, former Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk and Assistant Secretary of State William Burns, who are exhibiting their own antagonism toward Israel, without White House sanction. Assistant Secretary of State William Burns, in addition, shows arrogant disdain for both American conservatives and Christians, strong supporters of both Israel and President Bush.
The Assistant Secretary of State came to Israel on August 3 to pressure Israel with regard to building 600 homes in Maaleh Adumim, a city with 28,000 inhabitants, which is only 10 minutes' drive from Jerusalem. I am not claiming here that President George W. Bush is free of blame in this continued pressure on Israel. Every American Administration since the rebirth of Israel has put pressure on Israel for their own geo-political reasons. As it is said: "Countries have no friends, only interests."
Successive Israeli Prime Ministers have tried to withstand this American pressure with varying degrees of success. I blame Israeli Prime Minister Sharon just as much as George W. Bush for the current situation. When Arik Sharon defended his people, he was a hero and he was loved by his people. Sadly, Sharon, as a politician, has emerged as a leftist, dedicated to repartitioning the Land of Israel. He wants to de-Judaize Israel by transferring Jews out of their homes, schools, synagogues, farms, factories, businesses and even their graves. He's starting with the 8,000 Jewish men, women and children in Gaza and intends to continue with the so-called outposts in Judea and Samaria.
Does anybody in his right mind believe that President George W. Bush is enthusiastic about the present tense relationship between the US and Israel, especially before a closely fought election?
I firmly believe that Ariel Sharon has misled President Bush into thinking that the majority of the Israeli people agree with the policies of wholesale retreat in the face of Arab terror, and of repartitioning the Land of Israel. This is absolute misinformation fostered by Ariel Sharon, Shimon Peres and the rest of the Oslo Architects, Israeli leftist media, American and Israeli liberal "intellectuals" and the "analysts" of the US State Department.
Do you want to know the real feelings of the Israeli people? Then consider the 200,000-strong Human Chain holding hands on the 90-kilometer distance from Gaza to the Western Wall. Jews from all around the world flew in for the day to join this Human Chain. This was the most inspiring event I have ever taken part in. This Human Chain expressed the real feelings of the Jewish people - the pundits who sit on their backsides and pontificate don't have a clue.
We hope and pray that President George W. Bush will, like President Truman, decide that he himself should decide on foreign policy toward Israel, "not the second or third echelons at the State Department."
Finally, George W. Bush may not be the best possible US president for Israel. However, the reality is that the choice is between Bush and Kerry. If Kerry becomes President and Teresa Heinz Kerry his First Lady, it may well be Israel that is told to "shove it." The danger signs are all there. John Kerry seems to be choosing senior advisors on Israeli issues who have a track record of antagonism toward Israel.
The PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) is certainly everything but a pro-Israel media outlet. However, it produced a report and subsequent video called America and the Holocaust - Deceit and Indifference. This is an account of the horrible activities of the US State Department, their lies and indifference to the Holocaust, and their intentional stonewalling and withholding information while they knew that thousands of Jews were being killed in the death camps.
Six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust. Even then, the State Department tried to prevent the establishment of a final refuge for the pitiful remnant of survivors who tried to make their way to Israel. The Arabist State Department intended to vote against the rebirth of Israel in the General Assembly, and were prevented from doing so by virtually last minute instructions from President Harry Truman himself.
In November of 1966, Yehuda Avner, a veteran Israeli diplomat, was asked to personally deliver a letter to former US President Harry Truman from Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol. This is a verbatim excerpt from their conversation (Jerusalem Post, August 3, 2004, "A Walk With Harry Truman"):
"Truman began to speak about his own State Department as if it was a hostile power:
"'Those State Department fellows were always trying to put it over on me about Palestine, telling me that I really didn't understand what was going on there, that I ought to leave it to experts. Some were anti-Semitic, I'm sorry to say. Dealing with them was as rough as a cob. They didn't want instant recognition of statehood.
"'I had my own second thoughts, too. But I'd made my commitment to Dr. Weizmann. And my attitude was that as long as I'm president, I'd see to it that I made policy, not the second or third echelons at the State Department.
"'So, on the day the Jewish state was declared, I gave those officials about 30 minutes notice. And then, exactly 11 minutes after the proclamation of independence, I had my press secretary, Charlie Ross, issue the announcement that the United States recognizes Israel.'" (emphasis mine - RM)
And ever since that fateful vote at the United Nations, the State Department has waged an unremitting war against the Jews and Israel. The State Department has always had a separate agenda towards Israel. The Middle Eastern desk employs many so-called Arabists. Many of these are people whose parents were ambassadors to Arab States, who were brought up there.
The following are examples of US Secretaries of State who were, to say the least, antagonistic toward the Jewish State of Israel: George Marshall, John Foster Dulles, Henry Kissinger, James Baker, Colin Powell and others.
And even today, after the horror of the 9/11 terror attack, the US State Department continues its long history of covering up the misdeeds of Saudi Arabia and that nation's sponsorship of worldwide terror.
Let us not forget the Jewish graduates of State Department indoctrination: Martin Indyk, Sandy Berger, Aaron Miller, Dennis Ross and Daniel Kurtzer. (Former Secretary of State James ("F*** the Jews") Baker called them his "Jew-boys".) It seems that the State Department believes it is easier to do the Jews in if you use other Jews to do the dirty deed.
I was shocked to receive the following fax from one of my email friends. The fax was very brief: "Dear Ruth, you probably heard by now that Martin Indyk is going to be a Senior Foreign Advisor to John Kerry, should he win the election."
Let me tell you about Martin Indyk and his relationship and dealings with Israel. Indyk was appointed as Ambassador to Israel by President Bill Clinton. Clinton then used Indyk as his point man to push through a game plan to re-partition Israel.
Indyk's background: He was born in 1951 in London, England. He was raised and educated in Australia. According to the New York Times of September 23, 2000, he was an intelligence agent in Australia, and served as Deputy Director of Australia's Intelligence for the Middle East. (He may also have been working for British Intelligence.) He was brought to the US, given instant citizenship and made Ambassador to Israel in 1995. Middle East experts, who knew that Indyk had a separate questionable agenda towards Israel, were not allowed to testify regarding his appointment. He was the first Jew to serve as the American ambassador to Israel.
Indyk became the most objectionable and provocative Ambassador that any country, let alone Israel, had to put up with. He did not even attend Israel's Independence Day celebrations, which was intended as a big insult and polished his image as an Arabist working for the Arab nations. (He said that he had a previous appointment.)
He was recalled by the United States from his position as Ambassador when Netanyahu became Prime Minister in 1996, and sent back for his second stint in the year 2000.
In February of the year 2000, Martin Indyk showed his true colors and his animosity toward Israel, as he tried to buy Israeli Arab votes with US Embassy funds for a referendum on whether Israel should give the Golan to Syria, in order to advance the "peace process". (Yediot Aharonot, February 11, 2000, "U.S Embassy Tries to Mobilize Arab Support in the Referendum")
Knesset Member Uzi Landau, (now a Minister in the Sharon Government) wrote a letter to President Clinton in this regard: "[This] would constitute an unprecedented and intolerable act of gross interference in Israel's internal affairs. I can not emphasize enough the severity of this act, which demonstrates blatant disregard for the most elementary norms of accepted international behavior between states and nations. ...We have the right to expect that our closest friends and allies will allow us to make such decisions by ourselves."
Subsequently, in the same year, September of 2000, Martin Indyk, was charged with mishandling security information by using a laptop computer considered insecure. He was then recalled from his position as Ambassador to Israel.
Will Martin Indyk's questionable past as the United States Ambassador to Israel make John Kerry somewhat hesitant about making him his Senior Advisor on Israel Issues?
Another State Department man, Sandy Berger, served as Clinton's Deputy National Security Advisor. He was also certainly not a friend of Israel. Sandy Berger told an audience at Tel Aviv University: "[The current violence in the territories] is both the curse and the blessing of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
Interestingly enough, Sandy Berger, who until recently served as one of John Kerry's Senior Advisors, was also accused of mishandling security information. He was caught stuffing 50 highly classified papers into his pants. This was done, of course, "inadvertently". (Needless to say, Sandy Berger is no longer one of the top advisors of Presidential Candidate John Kerry.)
Does the State Department give their people a special course in filching secret information from their own government?
Why does Kerry unfailingly pick State Department enemies of Israel as his Senior Advisors? Will Martin Indyk meet the same fate as Sandy Berger?
Another one of the diplomats actively antagonistic towards the State of Israel is Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, William Joseph Burns.
In May of 2003, Assistant Secretary of State William Burns came to Israel and secretly met with a coterie of Israeli doves and Palestinian ministers and officials under the banner of "Peace Now" at the US Consulate in western Jerusalem. This secret discussion was about the "Road Map".
The following is a quote from the JINSA Report #332, dated May 12, 2003:
"No one was supposed to know that according to the minutes, Burns stated his view that 'the common sense of all peoples will override the conservative and Christian viewpoints once they see the Road Map's potential.' He told the anti-Government group to continue with their political activities 'as new peace attempts reflects the people's will and will result in fundamental changes.'"
Thus, we have two examples of State Department personnel, former Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk and Assistant Secretary of State William Burns, who are exhibiting their own antagonism toward Israel, without White House sanction. Assistant Secretary of State William Burns, in addition, shows arrogant disdain for both American conservatives and Christians, strong supporters of both Israel and President Bush.
The Assistant Secretary of State came to Israel on August 3 to pressure Israel with regard to building 600 homes in Maaleh Adumim, a city with 28,000 inhabitants, which is only 10 minutes' drive from Jerusalem. I am not claiming here that President George W. Bush is free of blame in this continued pressure on Israel. Every American Administration since the rebirth of Israel has put pressure on Israel for their own geo-political reasons. As it is said: "Countries have no friends, only interests."
Successive Israeli Prime Ministers have tried to withstand this American pressure with varying degrees of success. I blame Israeli Prime Minister Sharon just as much as George W. Bush for the current situation. When Arik Sharon defended his people, he was a hero and he was loved by his people. Sadly, Sharon, as a politician, has emerged as a leftist, dedicated to repartitioning the Land of Israel. He wants to de-Judaize Israel by transferring Jews out of their homes, schools, synagogues, farms, factories, businesses and even their graves. He's starting with the 8,000 Jewish men, women and children in Gaza and intends to continue with the so-called outposts in Judea and Samaria.
Does anybody in his right mind believe that President George W. Bush is enthusiastic about the present tense relationship between the US and Israel, especially before a closely fought election?
I firmly believe that Ariel Sharon has misled President Bush into thinking that the majority of the Israeli people agree with the policies of wholesale retreat in the face of Arab terror, and of repartitioning the Land of Israel. This is absolute misinformation fostered by Ariel Sharon, Shimon Peres and the rest of the Oslo Architects, Israeli leftist media, American and Israeli liberal "intellectuals" and the "analysts" of the US State Department.
Do you want to know the real feelings of the Israeli people? Then consider the 200,000-strong Human Chain holding hands on the 90-kilometer distance from Gaza to the Western Wall. Jews from all around the world flew in for the day to join this Human Chain. This was the most inspiring event I have ever taken part in. This Human Chain expressed the real feelings of the Jewish people - the pundits who sit on their backsides and pontificate don't have a clue.
We hope and pray that President George W. Bush will, like President Truman, decide that he himself should decide on foreign policy toward Israel, "not the second or third echelons at the State Department."
Finally, George W. Bush may not be the best possible US president for Israel. However, the reality is that the choice is between Bush and Kerry. If Kerry becomes President and Teresa Heinz Kerry his First Lady, it may well be Israel that is told to "shove it." The danger signs are all there. John Kerry seems to be choosing senior advisors on Israeli issues who have a track record of antagonism toward Israel.