BARACK OBAMA….RON PAUL….JAMES KIRCHIK….MORTON KLEIN
Makes Israel nervous? Smeared by Zionists. Zionist propagandist. High-ranking Zionist.
A leading critic of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) is purveying smears of “anti-Semitism” against some influential liberal groups by unfavorably comparing their stance to the nationalist, America-first point of view expressed by The Spotlight, the predecessor of AMERICAN FREE PRESS.
The liberal groups—which are closely associated with the Obama administration—are perceived, like the president and Paul, to be insufficiently supportive of Israel. Washington insiders see this as the latest effort by the Israeli lobby to undermine Obama’s already shaky support among Jewish voters.
A key propagandist involved in the affair is James Kirchik who won widespread media favor for authoring a hit piece on Paul, accusing him of purveying racism and anti-Semitism in Paul’s privately published newsletter—and, yes, attempting to “link” Paul to The Spotlight, among other supposedly horrible things.
One of a select few in the media whose writings appear in both the “liberal” New Republic and the “conservative” Weekly Standard—which, despite differences on domestic issues are otherwise vigorous advocates for Israel (and both of which published Kirchick’s attacks on Paul)—Kirchick used the forum of Israel’s daily Ha’aretz to sling his latest mud.
Describing The Spotlight as “one of the most notorious newspapers ever published in America,” and “for many years the country’s premier hate rag,” Kirchick complained that The Spotlight charged there were high-ranking political figures who, in The Spotlight’s estimation, placed “Israel first.” Now, to Kirchick’s dismay, he claims such liberal groups as the Center for American Progress (CAP) and Media Matters for America (MMA) are echoing such terminology, which, he says, “is an indication of just how deep the rhetoric of the far right has seeped into the discourse of the mainstream left.”
In fact, what this means is that people on both the traditional “right” and “left” are getting fed up with inordinate Israeli lobby influence on American foreign policy.
« It’s no secret that many
Jews believe Obama is
a threat to Israel’s future »
The items in controversy were not even published or endorsed by CAP, but, instead, appeared on the private Internet accounts of two CAP staffers. Yet supporters of Israel cite these items in an effort to smear CAP, and, by extension, the Obama White House.
One of the CAP staffers referred to “Israel firsters”—and he has since left the CAP staff. The second “controversial” item described a member of the Senate as more loyal to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—the lobby for Israel—than to his own constituents. Associates of CAP and MMA were also slammed for openly discussing the clout of Jewish campaign contributions in the American political process, as though such discussion was beyond the pale.
The attacks on the liberal groups originated with Josh Block—a former AIPAC functionary—who packaged an assembly of CAP-connected writings, calling them an “outrageous vilification of pro-Israel Americans.”
The fact that CAP is—as The Washington Post has noted—“closely aligned with the White House” and “an idea generator for Obama’s Washington” is being repeatedly bandied about, to the point that it is now “complicating the president’s reelection outreach to some Jewish voters,” reflecting what another influential Washington daily, Politico, has called “Obama’s Jewish problem.” That problem is that key Jewish groups and leaders view the president to be insufficiently supportive of Israel, and their views are reverberating in the American Jewish community at large.
While—responding to the attacks—CAP declared the private writings of its staffers to be “inappropriate” and rushed to assert its own support for Israel, the Post noted that “the critics are not mollified.” The Postcited Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, who said “the language is corrosive and unacceptable” and Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, who said the statements were “anti-Semitic and borderline anti-Semitic,” adding that the ADL was concerned “this . . . think tank . . . does influence the administration.” FOXMAN FRETS . . .
The Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman (pictured
left) is worried that the policy advice President
Obama is getting may be “anti-Semitic.”
The Post said the controversy “could add friction to the already tense relationship between Obama and many pro-Israel Jews,” which, of course, was reflected in the recent call by a prominent figure in the Atlanta Jewish community for Israel’s intelligence service, Mossad, to assassinate the president.
On Dec. 7, 2011, The Washington Times reported that Doris Wise Montrose—the president of the Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors—charged that there was an “ongoing campaign by the White House to undermine Israel.” At the same time, Morton Klein, the president of the Zionist Organization of America, alleged evidence of “the hostility of the administration to Jews in Israel and its misplaced sympathy for Muslims and radical Muslims.”
• Plutocrats ramp up efforts against Rep. Ron Paul
• Launch media smear campaign in New York Times
Ron Paul – targeted by New York Times
By Michael Collins Piper
December 31, 2011
AMERICAN FREE PRESS got frontline mention as the very first words in the first paragraph of a muddled smear of Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul published as a lengthy hit piece beginning on the front page of The New York Times on Dec. 26. That article was followed up by a lead editorial by the Times in its Dec. 28 issue denouncing what it called “Mr. Paul’s Discredited Campaign,” citing its own article as the evidence. The Times article was clearly a sustained effort to undermine Paul, making no pretense otherwise.
Constituting no less than 80 full column inches, the articled zeroed in on AFP at the get-go and focused on the fact that AFP has promoted the book The Ron Paul Revolution, presenting an overview of Paul’s speeches and writings over the last two decades.*
The Times ranked AFP as its lead “evidence” that—in its view—unseemly groups and individuals endorse Paul’s efforts. The Times said a variety of “white nationalists,” “far right groups,” “white supremacists, survivalists and anti-Zionists”—and other villains—are rallying behind Paul.
Although the Times never categorized AFP per se, it described this paper by reporting that AFP “markets books like The Invention of the Jewish People and March of the Titans: A History of the White Race.”
Obviously seeking to impute “anti- Semitism” to AFP by referencing the book The Invention of the Jewish People, what the Times didn’t mention is that the book was written by an Israeli Jewish academic, first published in Hebrew in Israel where it was a national bestseller. Most people would not know that, and that’s what the Times counted on.
And while the Times was horrified AFP would carry an advertisement from another publisher on the history of the white race—proof somehow that AFP was “racist”—it never occurred to the Times that a book about the white race would seem no more shocking to the average American than books, for example, about the history of Africans, Chinese or Indians, which are in every library and bookstore.
The Times’ smear is an obvious effort to force Paul to denounce those who have united behind him and to divide Paul’s diverse groups of supporters and set them at odds with one another. —— *Call 1-888-699-6397 toll free to charge your copy of The Ron Paul Revolution (softcover, 286 pages, $20 plus $5 S&H; or five copies for $70 plus$10 S&H; inside the U.S.) by calling AFP toll free at 1-888-699-6397 and charge your subscription to a major credit card. See AFP’s website atwww.americanfreepress.net.
Saine critique des idées de Ron Paul et surtout, de la manière dont il prépare le terrain pour son bien étrange fils… plus néocon que les néocons!
Ron Paul supporters do not necessarily support the Tea Party movement; nor any other particular parties and organizations. Mike also explores nefarious bank scam connections held by Christopher Bollyn. Reports from a delegate meeting in Nevada show Ron Paul leading the count for representatives in the electoral college. Download Here
It’s finally happened. On July 25, the U.S. House of Representatives approved by an overwhelming margin a measure calling for an audit of the privately controlled Federal Reserve System banking monopoly, often mistakenly believed to be a “government” entity.
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), a longtime—and for many years virtually the only—congressional proponent of a Fed audit, was the prime mover behind the bill, which was numbered H.R. 459.
Titled the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2012, H.R. 459 calls for “a full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve banks by the comptroller general of the United States before the end of 2012.”
The House approved the bill by a vote of 327-98. Of 240 Republicans, 238 were in favor, with one lone GOP member—Bob Turner (N.Y.)—voting “no.” Another GOP member, Steve Stivers (Ohio) did not vote. House Democrats were essentially split on the issue with a slight majority (97 in number) voting against, while 89 stood with the GOP majority. Five Democrats chose not to vote.
Since 30 years ago—when Liberty Lobby, the Washington-based populist institution, and its national weekly newspaper, The Spotlight, forerunner of AMERICAN FREE PRESS—were urging Congress to rally behind Paul’s efforts to bring public focus on the Federal Reserve System (and the need for an audit thereof), critics called this a “fringe issue.” No more. Instead, a wide range of House members of both parties—“liberal” and “conservative” alike—eagerly joined Paul to co-sponsor H.R. 459, fully conscious of growing public awareness of this issue.
The burgeoning support for the audit-the-Fed measure is the consequence of energetic efforts by patriots nationwide who have, for decades, focused on the problems surrounding essentially unregulated control of the American economic system by this private money monopoly.
The House vote is a landmark event, a tribute to not only Paul’s prescience and persistence on the issue, but also to the passionate efforts of good patriots—like the readers of AFP—who have kept the heat on Congress on this issue.
The Senate is expected to take up its own version, S. 202, soon. Approval there may face an uphill battle since Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has vowed it will never be voted on in the Senate. However, concerted public pressure—particularly during an election year—could turn the tide. To contact your senator, you can call the congressional switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and urge support for S. 202. Call Reid and tell him to bring the issue to a Senate vote.
Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.