This is part five of six of “Evidence of Revision,” an eight-hour video collection which covers many a taboo subject in American history including the assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK, the causes of the Vietnam war, the social uprisings of the 1960s and ’70s, the Jonestown massacre, government mind control programs such as MKULTRA, and vote rigging and political corruption at the highest levels. This installment continues with part four’s discussion of the RFK assassination as it pertains to the unusual behavior of Kennedy’s presumed killer, Sirhan Sirhan, and moves into a discussion of mind control “doctors” such as the once highly regarded Ewan Cameron, who destroyed the lives of countless hundreds of psychiatric patients through exotic forms of scientifically administered torture aimed at complete and total brainwashing of the victim. Finally, part five covers possible CIA operative Jim Jones and his highly abusive “Peoples Temple” cult, which was destroyed in a mass suicide in 1978 — or was it mass murder? [END] Permalink: Evidence of Revision 5: RFK Assassination, MKULTRA and the Jonestown Massacre
“Enemy Image” is a history of the American media’s presentation of U. S. wars and the U. S. government and military’s fight to control that presentation, beginning with Vietnam and moving on through the 2003 war in Iraq. While early newsreels, with their patriotic narrative overdubs, presented a polished and sterile image of heroic troops bravely fighting like a well-oiled machine, the relatively unregulated television journalism of the later 1960s showed the common soldier up-close and personal, without the touch-ups of Hollywood. Although the film has a curious lack of mention of the late ’90s war in eastern Europe, it does a good job of comparing the Vietnam era to the much more heavily controlled time from the 1980s to today. “Everybody just wants to go home and go to school. [...] The whole thing stinks.” – U. S. soldier in Vietnam [END] Permalink: Enemy Image
“The Ground Truth” documents the stories of American soldiers who have been involved in the war in Iraq and their experiences both at abroad and after their return from the Middle East. They discuss the indoctrination and personality restructuring they experienced upon entering the military, beginning with the deceptive enticements of the recruitment table on through the suffering of combat and finally in the shattered lives they lead after their tours are over. [END] Permalink: The Ground Truth: The Human Cost of War
“Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre” is a short (28 minutes) documentary concerning the U. S. armed forces’ use of the incendiary weapon known as white phosphorous (a. k. a. “Whiskey Pete”) in the Iraqi town of Fallujah. It is an international war crime to use white phosphorous against civilians or against military forces in areas with high civilian concentrations. Israel also used this weapon in their 2008-2009 massacre of 1400 Palestinians in Gaza, most of whom were civilians. [END] Permalink: Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre
In October 2007, I released a video called “The Columbine Cause”, which discusses many reported features of the 1999 Columbine High School attack which were never fully discussed in major media. Some of these features include reports of additional dead, additional shots fired, and above all, additional attackers other than the two found in the library, the alleged suicides and Columbine High School seniors, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.
While doing research for the presentation, I came across an internet site called Judicial-Inc.biz. The site features discussions of many acts of terrorism including the attack on Columbine. The site is popular and well-known; a web search on the word, “Columbine”, for example, will usually bring up Judicial’s main page on the attack within the top ten to twenty results.
Judicial has published information concerning the many well-grounded reports which conflict with the official story of the attack, many of which are substantiated by information found in the police and FBI’s own records. However, their presentation is riddled with either incredibly sloppy fact-checking or a conscious attempt to distort the facts in favor of pointing a finger toward the Jewish in a false way.
In light of this realization, I contacted an individual called “The_Skunk”, who runs the site, and shared with him some of my concerns, and him asked for some sources on what I knew to be fraudulent portrayals of Columbine information. “The_Skunk” responded that my questions might be, quote, “right on” and suggested that I publish a web site to counter his. Below are some of Judicial’s main claims about the Columbine attack, followed by my commentary.
Assertion One: Eric Harris was Jewish.
Judicial’s source for this statement is a Salon article by Jill Wolfson called “Hurting Young Men Put Pen to Rage” which contains the quote, “My mother is Jewish! [...] Dreydl power!” However, a careful read of the article, or even a not-so-careful read of the article, reveals that, although she was writing about him, Wolfson was not quoting Eric Harris but rather, an unnamed boy in one of her writing classes. If Harris was Jewish, Judicial’s source doesn’t show it.
Assertion Two: Harris’ diaries contained a plan to escape to Israel after the attack, which would be helpful to him because Israel considers all Jews automatic citizens and will not extradite them to foreign nations to stand trial for crimes committed in those nations.
For the reason stated in the response to assertion one above, this policy of Israel’s would probably not have been helpful to Eric Harris. Nevertheless, in 2006, a nearly one thousand page file of diaries and other writings attributed to Harris, Dylan Klebold and others was released by law enforcement authorities (part one | part two). However, the only escape fantasy it seems to contain is a piece attributed to Harris which described escaping after a violent attack to, “some island somewhere or maybe mexico (sic), new zelend (sic) or some exotic place where americans (sic) can’t get us”. This is found on pages JC-001-026343 to JC-001-026344. If anyone can find a page number for the Israel entry, please share it.
Assertion Three: CHS class of 1998 Joe Stair claimed that the Trench Coat Mafia group was founded to protect a “gay Jewish kid”.
Judicial provides a link to another Salon article by Dave Cullen called “Inside the Columbine High Investigation” which contains the sentence, “The rumors seem to have originated two years ago, with a single member of the Trench Coat Mafia who may have been gay or bisexual.” As you will notice, the member is not named.
Assertion Four: The three boys arrested in a field during the attack, the so-called “Splatterpunks”, were named “Siegel, Cohen and Smith”.
All of the police files and media coverage, including an appearance on Sally Jesse Raphael’s talk show, indicates that these individuals’ names were Matt Akard, Jim Brunetti and Matt Nalty, except some media reports which had “Christianson” as Nalty’s last name. Judicial gives no reason as to why it falsely gave these individuals Jewish names.
Assertion Five: An older-looking male named Nathan Klein was publicly arrested for having some connection or alleged connection to the attack.
The name, “Nathan Klein”, appears nowhere in the police documents related to the attack, nor in any media articles about it. While several witnesses who took cover in the science rooms during the attack reportedly told police that they saw an older individual who appeared to be balding and in his thirties holding a sawed-off shotgun in the halls of Columbine, the individual in Judicial’s picture does not match his description, nor a witness’s sketch of the gunman. Judicial does not give any further explanation but Columbine shooting researcher Rolf Zaeschmar informs me that the image is of Larry Scott Petty, an armed individual who was arrested on-scene that day.
Assertion Six: Some police connected with the “investigation” of the attack believed that the Jewish Defense League, or JDL, was involved in constructing some of the bombs used against the school.
While some reports surfaced that some law enforcement agents at the scene remarked that some of the bombs used in the attack appeared to have been too sophisticated for two teenagers to have built themselves, I was unable to find any articles mentioning the JDL specifically. Judicial provides no source for the statement.
Judicial-Inc’s authors are mixing important information about major cover-ups with a high percentage of misinformation. I strongly suggest that anyone using Judicial-Inc as a reference seek outside verification of its statements. As you can see, the research quality on their well-read Columbine pages is laughably poor to outright farcical. It is high time that the silence surrounding the Columbine cover-up is broken in a widespread manner but Judicial-Inc is not helping in this regard. [END] Permalink: Judicial-Inc’s Columbine Shooting Pages
In 1996, an Australian historical attraction called Port Arthur, located on the southeastern coast of Tasmania, was rocked by killings. More than just a mass shooting which claimed the lives of thirty-five and shattered many more, the Port Arthur massacre was a political event which was leveraged by the anti-gun lobby into a complete and total Australia-wide ban on private firearm ownership. Since violent crime in Australia has increased in the years since the ban went into effect, just as it has in the UK following similar legislation which was put into effect around the same time, this matter is of concern to all Australians. Likewise, as arguments continue to rage concerning the possibility of a prohibition on private gun ownership in the United States and other nations where men and women are currently legally able to defend themselves with guns, this matter is of concern to non-Australians as well.
What’s perhaps more disturbing than the rise in crime, however, are allegations made by a team of investigators and attack survivors headed by retired Tasmanian police officer Andrew MacGregor in a 2008 video called “A Question of Guilt: The Massacre at Port Arthur.” Over the presentation’s 61 minute run time, the group makes a case that the true guilt for the massacre lies with parties not yet identified and that the feeble-minded Martin Bryant — one psychiatrist’s estimate put Bryant’s IQ at 66 — who pled guilty under questionable circumstances of having planning and executed the plot single-handedly, was probably a mere patsy in the grander scheme of events surrounding this crime.
The video opens with a quote from former Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who lamented the loss of life in the massacre but praised the governments of the Australian states for uniting in their support for, quote, “tougher and more effective gun laws.” It was never explained, however, how the massacre had resulted from a lack of gun control, since Bryant had no history of violence, and even a greater mystery remains as to why a complete and utter national ban on privately owned guns was an appropriate response to the death of thirty-five people at the hands of one lone madman, as the people of the world were told.
As the video explains, Bryant was born in 1967, making him 29 years old at the time of the shooting. From his first years of school, Bryant was recognized as being unusually slow and clumsy and later in life, he received government benefits on the basis of his mental handicap. Later inheritances and accident damage awards left Bryant a fairly wealthy young man, however, with over $500,000 and a house coming to him in his twenties. In all, “Simple Marty,” as he was known, lived a quiet, childlike life, was frequently visited by his mother who helped care for him, had a girlfriend named Petra Wilmott, and enjoyed playing games with the children next door.
Despite this unlikely portrait of a mass murderer, however, it has been alleged that on the 26th of April 1996, the childlike Bryant drove up to the historic site at Port Arthur, shot and killed over thirty strangers and stole a vehicle before holing up in a nearby cottage with hostages for several hours. It is then suggested that after a shootout with police, Bryant set fire to the house and emerged. And ever since, Bryant has sat in jail.
The Australian government stands firm in its allegations but some survivors and witnesses were not satisfied with this description of events. One such witness is Graham Collyer, who described the gunman, whom he saw at close range in Port Arthur’s Broad Arrow Cafe, where a majority of the shooting took place, as having had a “pitted face”, as if he had had a lot of acne. As photographs of the accused show, Bryant did not fit this description.
When requests by skeptical survivors for a post-trial coronial inquiry into the shooting were met with alleged concerns over the emotional wear and tear this might cause them, some grew quite suspicious that the Australian government was mainly interested in putting the issue to bed and reaping certain political gains which had arisen as a result of the massacre and not with uncovering the full truth of the circumstances of it. A television interview with government attorney Ray Groom which catches Groom in a lie is put to excellent use here and calls attention to the duplicity which has made the Port Arthur aftermath what it is.
An Oklahoma City bombing-style “trial by media” was also in full effect in the Port Arthur case and is well-exposed in the video as several Australian newspapers all but declared Bryant guilty in full-page cover stories run just a few days after the shooting which featured altered photographs in which Bryant’s eyes appeared wild and distorted. Some even went as far as to argue that there should be no trial or due process for Bryant.
In the second half of the presentation, the pace changes considerably with presentations by Andrew MacGregor, the author of a Port Arthur e-book titled Deceit and Terrorism, which probe more deeply into the specifics of the evidence and pose questions about the official timeline. Prominent questions here concern the Port Arthur gunman’s expert-level accuracy in the Broad Arrow Cafe and the sudden and unexplained change in council on the part of Martin Bryant which led to a guilty plea and the closing of the case.
“A Question of Guilt” is a worthwhile view for anyone concerned about the details of the Port Arthur shooting and the resulting political fallout. While some might find the revelations within it shocking, those of us who have studied the particulars of other high-profile “lone nut” mass shootings such as the Columbine High School attack may recognize a pattern. A DVD copy can be purchased from Sunrise Audio Visual Productions. [END] Permalink: A Question of Guilt: The Massacre at Port Arthur
In 1996, a horrible shooting took place at Australia’s Port Arthur Historical Site, located near Hobart in Tasmania. The crime, which took some thirty-five lives, was pinned on a twenty-eight year-old man named Martin Bryant. As of early 2009, Mr. Bryant, who pled “not guilty” almost thirty times before being pressured to change his plea and forfeit his right to a trial, continues to sit in jail as a result.
Not all who have investigated the massacre agree with the perception that Bryant was the gunman. At the 2001 convening of the Inverell Forum, an Australian forum for information and viewpoints suppressed by the mainstream media, Port Arthur shooting survivor Wendy Scurr presented information concerning the shooting and contested the official line.
The presentation was filmed and above is a recording of Wendy’s speech and question and answer session with an introduction and moderation by Master of Ceremonies Dennis Stevenson. The official Forum summary of the event is located here and my summary follows. For those familiar with my 2007 presentation of suppressed information related to the 1999 Columbine High School shooting, the topic may be somewhat familiar. Thanks to YouTube user mashj50 for having kept this video available.
Introduction
As a tour guide and medical attendant at Tasmania’s Port Arthur Historical Site, Wendy Scurr witnessed the devastation of the 1996 massacre there firsthand and suffered extremely severe stress as a result. It was her take that justice was blocked in the case and that many of those most directly affected by the attack were ignored and shunned by the government agencies charged with overseeing the recovery. As of 2001, there had yet to be performed a Coronial Inquiry into the crime and few, if any, survivors received aid or compensation.
Wendy Scurr’s Morning
Between 11:00 and 11:30, Wendy was on a ferry, giving tours. Between 12:00 and 1:00, she took a group to the “Isle of the Dead”, a convict burial ground. At about 1:10, she noticed a young man with blond hair staring at her near the on-site Broad Arrow Cafe. She nodded to him, and he replied. At 1:20, she got some food and took it with her as she walked to the information center, located in a separate building.
Sounds of a Shooting
A few minutes later, Wendy heard bangs. Something flew past her head and she thought there might be a brawl in the cafe. Someone came running out quickly and told her to run and that people were being shot. Wendy ran back into the information center with the thought of phoning the police and did so. The time was now 1:32 PM and other staff began phoning other areas of the site to tell them what was going on and not to let any more cars in.
Outside the Cafe
Wendy led the other staff toward some bushes, dove in and laid flat. On the way there, the group was shot at. When the shooting ceased, they went toward the cafe to inspect the damages and encountered dead and injured people. They were told that the vehicle the gunman had used was still on-scene and they told the survivors to hide in the bushes.
Inside the Cafe
Wendy’s companions knew several employees who worked inside the cafe and gift shop where the shooting had occurred and the three decided to go in and look for them. When they opened the door to the cafe, Wendy saw blood, bodies and body parts everywhere, including on the walls and ceiling. The two girls they were looking for in the gift shop had been killed. There was a back exit near where they were located; five others had been killed in its vicinity but since the door was broken, none of them had been able to escape that way. Since part of Wendy’s job at the site was first aid duties, she decided to help any survivors she found in the cafe.
Cafe Survivor Graham Collier
Wendy first encountered Graham Collier, who had been shot in the neck and was choking on his blood. She couldn’t do much for him but instructed a Victorian policeman, Dennis Gaberdy (sp.), to scoop the blood out of his mouth. Graham survived, partly due to the help of a Victorian nurse named Lin, and partly by playing dead so that the gunman passed by shooting him again, but his injuries caused enduring pain and paralysis.
Cafe Survivor Caroline Walton
Caroline Walton was a traveling companion of Graham’s and was shot from the front straight through her left shoulder blade. She was making a lot of noise due to fear so Wendy instructed to keep quiet lest the gunman return to kill anyone who’d survived. Her fifteen year-old daughter, Sara, had been killed by a head shot in another part of the room. A man came to help stem Caroline’s bleeding and Wendy pressed on.
Cafe Survivor Rob Elliott
Rob Elliott had attempted to jump the gunman and was shot in the back of the head. This caused a serious injury which was causing him a lot of pain. His wife was with him and had succeeded at keeping the bleeding under control.
Phoning the Ambulance
At around 2:00, Wendy proceeded to the phone in the middle of the cafe to call for ambulances. She told the dispatcher that she could see at least a dozen dead from where she was standing and requested ambulances, helicopters and police. The ambulances soon arrived from Hobart and Wendy learned of dead in other areas of the site. By 3:30, the thoroughly traumatized people on-site had mostly come out of hiding and were asking questions about what had happened. However, the gunman had not yet been found, nor had police arrived to secure the scene. A policeman did arrive at 4:30 but he was unarmed and was only collecting names.
Coming Down
Wendy and other staff took some of the next of kin to a nearby cottage to begin recovering from the attack. This did not include the management-level staff of the site who had been sent off to the east coast at 11:00 that morning for a special overnight function. According to Wendy’s supervisor, Robin Cooper, this was the first such function in eighteen years. As evening set in, only a handful of policemen were yet on-site and those who were were performing only preliminary duties. Meanwhile, the television news was reporting that the Port Arthur gunman had been surrounded by law enforcement agents in a cottage north of the site. Inexplicably, at around 6:30, three shots were heard near an administration building where several staff were having a break on the patio. No official explanation for these shots was given.
“Help” Arrives
At 7:30, six hours after they had been called, police finally arrived to secure the site, and they did so in a swarm. According to Wendy, “Trauma Counselors” with “no compassion” entered the place where she and the others were recovering and treated them “like children”. The authorities expressed no interest in taking Wendy’s statements about what she had seen in the cafe, one of the main sites of the killing.
The Aftermath
Wendy contested the official ninety second to two minute duration of the shooting as being too short and also stated she did not believe the authorities’ claims that twenty-nine bullets killed twenty and injured twelve, a 110% accuracy rate. She also stated that since the official “lone nut” gunman, Martin Bryant, reportedly had an IQ of 66 and a mental age of 11, it was her belief that he could not have carried out the shooting as it is alleged to have transpired. She said that although the surviving staff were largely kept separated from each other after the funerals, Salvation Army staff who intervened to bring them together were very helpful. Like many of the witnesses, Wendy was thoroughly scarred by what she saw and even contemplated suicide as a result. Although Wendy said she feared that those upholding the official story would attempt to disparage her credibility due to the distress she experienced, she assured the audience that she was very sane and furthermore, that she had no political interests which would be motivating her to have called the official story into question. Wendy spoke wonderfully clearly about her awful experiences and should be honored for her courage in doing so when most would have kept silent. [END] Permalink: Port Arthur Massacre: Wendy Scurr at the 2001 Inverell Forum
Today has been chosen by the Palestine Legal Aid Fund for a blog campaign to raise awareness about the blockade on Gaza and I have chosen to participate by writing a piece which discusses Palestine and the Zionists. I would like to say to the people of Palestine today that, from my seat in a historically comfortable but increasingly troubled America, I am thinking of you, urging the U. S. government officials in my area to drop whatever support they are showing for the Zionist effort, and considering other political actions I can take to help to bring a rapid end to the horrific conditions to which you have been subjected at the hands of the Zionists. Since American social studies and history classes generally do not teach anything about Palestinian-Zionist relations, it has only been relatively recently that I have become aware of the specifics of your plight. The currents of pro-Zionist propaganda in the American school system and television and print media are very strong and effectively blanket out any voices speaking narratives other than those approved by the Zionists, as they have done for decades. However, since the radical shift in the balance of media power recently brought about by the opportunities for free communication afforded by the Internet and inexpensive printing technology, I, like many others, have gained access to previously suppressed viewpoints such as those questioning and condemning the Zionist occupation of Palestine. I would like to take advantage of this window for expression right now by sharing some of what I have learned about your history with the Zionists and America’s history with the Zionists so that others who may not have come across such information as of yet might do so. To reiterate my earlier point about the general state of knowledge in America, where we Americans have been told anything at all, we have been raised mostly on lies regarding the Zionist regime which has terrorized Palestine and her neighbors, one of the foremost of these being that the United Nations gave the Zionists a state called “Israel” in Palestine because they felt sorry for them after many Jews were killed during World War II. However, the United Nations does not have the authority to create nations. Rather, in 1946, Zionist terrorists who had disguised themselves as Arabs smuggled a bomb into the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, then controlled by the British, and exploded it, killing dozens of civilians, including 17 Jews. In the wake of the shock and awe caused by this violence, the Zionist terrorists, including future Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir, would go on to declare the creation of a state called “Israel,” originally intended by the official founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, to include all land between the Nile and Euphrates rivers. This declaration was then recognized, but not authored, by U. N. officials. United States President Harry Truman was especially quick to recognize the Zionists’ creation, giving his recognition a mere eleven minutes after the pronouncement by the Zionists. Despite this warm beginning, international relations with the Zionists quickly turned south for a time when a failed Zionist terrorist plot in Egypt with American facilities as its target was exposed. This incident, which was known as the Shameful Affair and also the Lavon Affair after the Zionist leader, Pinhas Lavon, upon whom official blame for the conspiracy was placed, occurred in 1954. Zionist willingness to endanger and even kill Americans became even more apparent in 1967, when Zionist forces strafed, napalmed and torpedoed the American ship, USS Liberty, in international waters, and then fired upon the lifeboats as the American crew tried to escape. Somehow, despite these attacks, despite the decades of war between the Zionists and the formerly peaceful Arab nations surrounding Palestine, and despite espionage scandal after espionage scandal of Zionist agents in the U. S., many top U. S. officials remained, for the most part, strongly pro-Zionist. By the end of the 20th century, the U. S. government was full of individuals who seemed much more attached to the Zionist agenda than to projects which would ensure peace for America. This point is perhaps best illustrated by the quote-unquote “neoconservative” group which surrounded George W. Bush during his days in the White House, many of whom held membership in policy groups such as the strongly pro-Zionist American Enterprise Institute, Hudson Institute, and Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which, in September 2000, called for a massive U. S. military buildup which, it conceded, could likely gain public support only by a disaster on the scale of, quote, “a new Pearl Harbor.” As a 2003 BBC Panorama documentary called “War Party” demonstrates, key individuals in this group include Paul Wolfowitz, who had previously worked directly to set Zionist policy aimed at causing, quote, “A Clean Break” with the peace process in Palestine, and Richard Perle, who had been investigated by the U. S. on suspicion of espionage in 1983. These were the individuals who perhaps most directly laid the groundwork for the broad U. S. military offensives collectively termed the “Global War on Terror” which have been continued in large part by the Obama administration during its rule. Last month, for instance, a seaborne humanitarian aid convoy was launched from Turkey to Gaza with the intention of circumventing the blockade on basic goods imposed by the Zionists upon the residents of the Gaza Strip. When the ships were forcibly boarded by armed Zionist commandos in international waters and several among the crew were shot and killed, the Zionists drew ire from all corners of the world, even prompting a boycott of Zionist-produced goods from occupied territories in the West Bank from UK Methodists. The U. S. government, on the other hand, has refused even to seriously criticize the Zionists’ use of lethal violence in this way, even though Americans were among those killed and seriously injured. A full investigation of the flotilla attack is still forthcoming. However, prior to the flotilla raid, Israel also received tremendous scorn for its bloody 2008-2009 military offensive in Gaza which left approximately 1,400 Palestinians, many of them civilians, dead, and the Palestinian infrastructure in ruins. A few years prior to that, the Zionists also unleashed bewildering violence against Lebanon, leaving it devastated as well. For a comprehensive look at the 2008-2009 Gaza massacre, there is the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, also known as the Goldstone Report, written by Richard Goldstone for the United Nations’ Human Rights Council. Goldstone’s team included among their findings that the Zionists had repeatedly and deliberately made Palestinian civilians and civilian facilities a target of their military offensives in contravention of international law. In response, the Zionists, who, according to the report, refused even to meet with the U. N. mission, created several web sites lamenting the “bias and discrimination” of the U. N. against them. Despite the droning cries of “neo-Nazi” and “anti-Semite” by the Zionists and by innocent Jews who mistakenly look to them for leadership, I, like many who have emphasized these points in recent years, am not a fascist by any stretch of the term, nor I am anti-Jewish, but I believe that the complex phenomenon known as Zionism, which was funded from its inception by wealthy bankers and political figures in the West such as the Rothschild family and which was quite distinct from the small and peaceful settlements of Jewish religious pilgrims living in Palestine in the early twentieth century and prior, may, itself, be both. The rulers of the Zionist entity have repeatedly put Jewry in harm’s way for political purposes while maintaining a racist apartheid system in which Arabs are treated as subhuman in much the same way that slaves were treated in early America (and indeed, that some non-whites in America are still treated on the basis of race today). In America, the ground is still bloody from the massacres of the First Nation peoples who once inhabited this land in large numbers but whose ancestors today have been herded into patches of ghetto called “reservations” and been subjected to constant low-level warfare on a variety of fronts. The shame and horror of the founding of the United States in this regard is now widely, if somewhat shallowly, recognized. As Americans, how can any of us who have attempted at all to come to terms with our own history in this regard look upon the imposition of the Zionist program of terror in Palestine, which is dependent on U. S. aid for its very existence, as anything but a technologically updated but otherwise near-exact repeat of our own atrocities and worthy of absolute condemnation and a total withdrawal of support? [END] Permalink: Palestine, the Zionists and America