Arab-American sues to regain spot on ballot
Arab-American sues to regain spot on ballot
By John Petrick
NorthJersey.com
Posted on Saturday May 27, 2006
Sami Merhi, the Passaic County Arab-American candidate abandoned by the county’s Democratic leaders over comments about terrorism, has sued to reclaim his spot on the party’s primary ballot.
“The stated reason for the withdrawal was ‘politics’, but the underlying basis … is the fact that Merhi is an Arab-American and exercised his constitutional right of freedom of speech,†says the suit, filed in state court Friday...
...Noting that Merhi lost a godson in the Sept. 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center, the suit says: “In September of 2002, Merhi spoke at a fund-raiser for Congressman William Pascrell, Jr.†where he “emotionally expressed his loss and outrage against the cowardice and horrifically senseless violence of 9/11. A reporter for The New York Times, in attendance at said fund-raiser, asked Merhi if his comments regarding 9/11 applied to suicide bombers in Israel. Merhi replied that he could not see the comparison. Merhi later explained that 9/11 was a personal tragedy and an attack against his country, but that all violence is to be condemned.â€
“Nonetheless, because of Merhi’s Arab ancestry, his political opposition maliciously used the unspoken, seemingly acceptable prejudice against Arab-Americans flowing from 9/11 and the war on terror as a political tool to transform Merhi’s otherwise innocuous words into a statement of apparent support of terror against Israel. Nothing could be further from the truth,†the suit states...
Continued at link.
- Login to post comments
"Muslim enemy creation" has
"Muslim enemy creation" has been a staple of Israeli propaganda within Israel. Remember Ashley Banfield? The reporter with the square eyeglasses that MSNBC did a lot of promoting a few years back? She had her own show after 9/11 and did some segments (which probably hurt her career plenty) where she had young 20-something Palestinians and Israelis on a panel together. That "marrying 72 virgins in Paradise" propaganda had seemed strange to me already, like where is our media getting this? There was nothing in the "19 hijacker's" effects that said "we're doing this to get the 72 virgins."
One of the young Palestinian men on Ashley's program got very agitated and blurted out that Palestinians don't aspire to getting 72 virgins and no Palestinian he'd ever known ever mentioned that bit of arcanum but that the Israeli press always used it to humiliate and demonize them.
And our media picked it up so quickly after 9/11. And regurgitated it over and over and over.
Really, this is one of the pieces that sways me toward an Israeli connection to 9/11, along with the "dancing Israelis," and the "art students" and Netanyahu's statement and the way our own politicians jumped on 9/11 to ally themselves with the Likud party, because they KNOW the US policy for decades has been a betrayal of American interest and down deep they are very ashamed but here was an opportunity to fog that up with deception. And all the intellectuals coming out of the woodwork to warn us about "Islamo-fascism."
And the dog that didn't bark aspect: If Israel had no role in 9/11, they would have demanded a full, thorough, complete investigation and they have the power to get it. They would have demanded it because they'd know that "conspiracy theories" would eventually arise to challenge the official version and there would be a danger of the American public looking for another suspect and there is Israel, with so much more means, motive and opportunity than the ludicrous Al Qaeda scenario. Plus the likelihood of exposing more Americans to what Israel has done in the past, the Lavon Affair, the Liberty, Pollard, selling our secrets to the Russians, etc. etc. Israel would be sitting there as far and away the most likely suspect.
from the post: the unspoken,
from the post:
the unspoken, seemingly acceptable prejudice against Arab-Americans flowing from 9/11
I learned from 911 University that [Muslim] enemy creation was Job One of the False-Flag Attacks of 9/11.
_______________________________________
Tonight: S9/11T's David
Tonight:
S9/11T's David Hawkins to discuss 6/6/06 threat assessment
http://valis.gnn.tv/B15833
Does anyone know if there is
Does anyone know if there is a new deadline for the DOJ to release 84 video tapes taken from Pentagon on 9/11?
www.flight77.info writes the following:
'please note that we still have a second FOIA request active for the other 84 flight 77 recordings. we WILL get those as well. they should include the citgo tape and the doubletree hotel tape (there's no sheraton hotel tape, BTW).'
And they go onto write:
'the only reason the other 84 recordings are being withheld is because we were too specific with the term impact in our original FOIA. the other recordings simply don't show the impact. it's not a conspiracy thing as judicial watch is suggesting. it was our lawsuit that revealed the other recordings, and now to get them we have a second FOIA request.'
Does the second FOIA request have a deadline like the first request? (first request deadline was May 26, 06)
no Sheraton? wtf?
no Sheraton? wtf?
Chris: no sheraton
Chris:
no sheraton apparently it was doubletree hotel and not sheraton.
and also apparently none of
and also apparently none of the 84 other videos show impact.
and also apparently none of
and also apparently none of the 84 other videos show impact.
DHS | Homepage | 06.03.06 - 9:29 pm | #
where did you hear that? that sucks if true.
http://julyseventh.co.uk/inde
http://julyseventh.co.uk/index.html
IMO, they will never release
IMO, they will never release any video clearly showing what really struck the Pentagon. They know what hit, and it wasn't AA77.
Even Michael Moore of all
Even Michael Moore of all people pointed out that the Pentagon has high-tech security cameras all over the place. (Why would anyone expect it would not???)
Chris: from
Chris:
from http://flight77.info
here is the reason behind the timing, and the reason why the DOJ released the latest video (and is withholding the other 84): in our original FOIA request we asked for recordings of the IMPACT of flight 77. the DOJ replied that they had only 1 video responsive to our original request and that was the video they just released; the only recording of the impact. they released this video now due to the may 26th deadline our judge gave to the DOJ. it had nothing to do with any outstanding action by judicial watch. (judicial watch's FOIA lawsuit was filed a full year after we filed our suit. it was a piggie-back lawsuit in anticipation of the resolution of our lawsuit - intended to gain media attention.)
the only reason the other 84 recordings are being withheld is because we were too specific with the term impact in our original FOIA. the other recordings simply don't show the impact. it's not a conspiracy thing as judicial watch is suggesting. it was our lawsuit that revealed the other recordings, and now to get them we have a second FOIA request.
Ok DHS, but it sounds like
Ok DHS, but it sounds like they're playing "stall by semantics" by not releasing the videos.