THE NECKTIE JOHN KERRY WEARS during the next two presidential debates might be a secret semaphore revealing where his loyalty lies. During much of the campaign Kerry has worn neckties whose pattern, suggests New York journalist Joan Swirsky, is like a secret signal of support to the Muslim world.
“Why else would the richest man in the Senate – a man whose pricey wardrobe is laid out for him daily by his personal valet – wear only one necktie during almost all of his public appearances?” asked Swirsky in a September 20 column. “And that necktie – albeit not in a thin muslin or coarse cotton but probably woven from the finest silk – a replica in its pink and white pattern of the Arabs’ favorite headdress, the kefiyyah.”
An examination of campaign photographs shows Kerry wearing several neckties with pink or red patterns resembling the familiar kefiyah Arab male headdress. By itself, this could be dismissed as mere coincidence having no signal significance.
Perhaps Kerry merely likes pink, and in his family his powerful wife Teresa wears the male-color blues. And Kerry has always demonstrated an affinity for reds.
John Kerry’s campaign, however, has quietly built bridges to Muslim voters, Muslim money and a hidden connection with the Ayatollahs of Iran that should concern everyone who supports Israel and is uncertain what policies a President Kerry might adopt in the Middle East.
One key battleground state in this election is Michigan, which has the highest proportion of Muslim voters in the United States. Last October 17 Kerry traveled to Dearborn, Michigan to speak before the Arab American Institute National Leadership Conference. (The Arab American Institute is headed by James Zogby, brother of pollster John Zogby.)
“We do not need another barrier to peace,” Kerry told the Arab-American group in a speech criticizing Israel’s terrorism-thwarting, life-saving security fence. The Masschusetts Senator described the fence as “provocative and counterproductive,” adding that it would “increase hardships to the Palestinian people.”
(Five months later, in February 2004 the always-duplicitous John Kerry days after a Jerusalem suicide bombing told the Jerusalem Post that Israel’s security fence was a “legitimate act of self-defense.”)
Kerry operatives have worked hard behind the scenes to win Muslim voters, a bloc George W. Bush won in the 2000 election. Muslim-Americans are now more numerous than Jews in Michigan and a significant voting bloc in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. More than half a million Arab-Americans are expected to vote in these four battleground states.
Kerry’s Dearborn speech, widely reported in Arab-American community media, suggested that a President Kerry might not share President George W. Bush’s unwavering support for Israel.
Until recently, polling suggested that Kerry might win almost 80 percent of Muslim-American voters – roughly one percent of all American voters – but this number is now falling rapidly as these Americans, too, wake up and smell the Kerry.
(President Bush has many Arab-American supporters. The President liberated 50 million Muslims from tyrannical governments in Iraq and Afghanistan, and named Republican Arab-American Spencer Abraham of Michigan to his cabinet as Secretary of Energy.)
One little-noticed reason why the Kerry campaign has used every dirty trick it could devise to keep Ralph Nader off state ballots is not only that he siphons away leftwing voters but also that this Lebanese-American siphons off Arab-American votes. Nader on the ballot likely would win between nine and 20 percent of the votes of his fellow ethnic Arab-Americans. But despite these anti-democratic Democrat dirty tricks, Nader is presently on the ballot in Florida, Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Money may explain some of Kerry’s support among Muslim-American activists. The Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), for example, has pocketed grant money from the leftwing Tides Foundation. The Tides Foundation, wrote FrontPage Magazine’s Ben Johnson, has been generously supported with fungible money from the Heinz Endowments controlled by John Kerry’s wife Teresa.
But Kerry receives far more Muslim money than his wife’s foundations give. As this column documented last January, one of Kerry’s biggest money men, who bankrolled the Senator’s primary campaign with more than $180,000, is Hassan Nemazee. This Iranian-American investor raised a cool $250,000 for Al Gore in November 1995. Nemazee and his family slushed another $150,000 to Democrats during the mid-1990s. Six Nemazee family members and friends (including the caretaker of his 12-acre Katonah, N.Y., estate) donated a total of $60,000 – the maximum legally allowed -- to Bill Clinton’s legal defense fund.
In the closing days of 1998 Clinton named Nemazee his Ambassador-designate to Argentina. Hillary Clinton embraced the Muslim moneyman at a January 1999 White House celebration of the Islamic holiday Eid. The Senate, however, refused to confirm the controversial nominee after a Forbes Magazine investigation exposed Nemazee’s questionable business dealings. “He was,” said a bitter former business partner, “the Iranian equivalent of J.R. Ewing.”
The Forbes magazine investigation also documented how, in order to get his hands on public-employee pension fund monies allocated for minority managers, the U.S.-born Nemazee had falsely claimed to be a Hispanic of Venezuelan background and, on another occasion, an Asian-Indian.
But Nemazee’s cynical lust for money can be frightening as well as laughable. He is a founding board member of the Iranian American Political Action Committee [IAPAC], which seeks to create friendly and lucrative business relationships with the medieval theocratic dictatorship now ruling Iran. Iran is, of course, an “Axis of Evil” nation that seeks to acquire nuclear weapons and is on our State Department’s official list of nations that support terrorism. Nemazee seeks to enrich himself by further enriching the power-mad Mullahs ruling Iran.
“The founding member of this group is Mr. Hassan Nemazee, an American of Iranian origin and one discredited, and well-known agent of the Islamic Republic, within the Iranian community in the United States,” wrote opponent of the Iran regime Aryo B. Pirouznia of the Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran. “Their [IAPAC’s] agenda in their own words is: ‘…how relations between the Islamic Republic and the United States can be restored in support of the Islamic Republic and the revolution.’”
Pirouznia wrote this in an open letter to Senator Edward Kennedy urging the Massachusetts Democrat to dissociate himself from Nemazee. The more-leftward senator from the Bay State, John Kerry, continues to embrace Nemazee and the suitcases full of money that he donates.
Following this column’s lead, investigative reporter Kenneth R. Timmerman last March tracked the Kerry-Nemazee link to expose two other Kerry “Iranian Sugar Daddies” with links to the Shiite Ayatollahs’ theocratic dictatorship in Teheran.
In an October 2004 American Spectator investigation titled “Dirty Moolah,” Timmerman looked into Nemazee friends Faraj Aalaei and his wife Susan Akbarpour. This couple also has close ties to Iran, is working to get U.S. sanctions against its regime lifted, and may have funneled up to $200,000 to the Kerry campaign.
Has this flow of Iranian money into his campaign coffers prompted John Kerry to make his positions more Ayatollah-friendly? Last December 3 Kerry told the Council on Foreign Relations that as President he “will be prepared early on to explore areas of mutual interest with Iran.”
Senator Kerry has proposed not only to open a “dialogue” with the Islamist dictators of Iran if he is elected President, but also to help the Iran theocracy become a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO).
“It is in the urgent interests of the people of the United States to restore our country’s credibility in the eyes of the world,” wrote Kerry in an email his campaign sent to the Mullahs in Iran. “America needs the kind of leadership that will repair alliances with countries on every continent that have been so damaged in the past few years, as well as build new friendships and overcome tensions with others.”
On April 7, 2004 in an interview with leftwing National Public Radio, John Kerry described the fanatical Shiite imam Muqtada al-Sadr (who has murdered American soldiers and Iraqi civilians, and has armed his militia with weapons almost certainly supplied by neighboring Shiite Iran) as a “legitimate voice” in Iraq.
Several pro-Kerry leftwing propaganda operatives have claimed that President Bush is not a “legitimate” President. But Kerry described terrorist Muqtada al-Sadr as apparently more “legitimate” in Iraq than the U.S. troops sent there by President Bush, who liberated the country from the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. Kerry’s statement gave propaganda support and encouragement to this power-mad killer cleric and his murderous militia.
Senator Kerry has said: “A nuclear armed Iran is an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States and our allies in the region.” But his vacillating flip-flops concerning Iraq, Israel and the rest of the Middle East – and his cozy relationship with big money contributors with close ties to the Iranian Ayatollahs – raise serious doubts about Mr. Kerry’s willingness to act decisively to pull the radioactive fangs of this monster.
“With respect to Iran,” Kerry said during the September 30th first presidential debate, “I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes.”
Kerry’s proposal, which he first mentioned in a June speech, was cheered by unnamed senior German and Dutch spokesmen in the European Union (EU), according to London’s Financial Times.
But on Sunday Iran officially rebuffed Kerry’s idea. Its foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi declared that it would be “irrational” for Iran, reported Reuters, “to put its nuclear program in jeopardy by relying on supplies from abroad.” But in Teheran they must have been pleased by Kerry’s eagerness to avoid conflict, serve the interests of his Iranian paymasters and appease the Ayatollahs.
Kerry supported a similar Clinton Administration program to provide reactors and fissionable materials to Communist North Korea. Former President Jimmy Carter brokered this plan to give these things to Kim Jung Il in exchange for a signed scrap of paper on which North Korea promised not to use them to make nuclear weapons.
North Korea lied, of course, and used the time this Democrat agreement gave them to produce up to seven nuclear weapons. Kerry now proposes making the same arrangement with the Islamist dictatorship in Iran that President Carter’s moronic foreign policy brought to power.
North Korea, an energy-poor country, at least had a plausible reason to seek nuclear reactors to generate electricity. Iran, by contrast, is one of the world’s largest oil producers and exporters. Iran flares enough natural gas off its oil wells as a waste by-product to generate all the electricity it will need for the next several centuries.
Senator Kerry’s proposed costly gift of reactor fuel to Iran to “test” whether their aim is peaceful is as unnecessary and unwise as it is absurd. With easy access to all the nearly-free oil and natural gas they could ever use, Iran’s rulers obviously want nuclear reactors not for energy but for political power.
“We must have two [atomic] bombs ready to go in January or you are not Muslims,” Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei recently told a group of Iran’s senior government and military leaders, according to an unnamed U.S. official quoted by the news service Geostrategy-Direct.
Iran’s nuclear reactor program, moreover, is controlled and administered not by the nation’s energy bureaucracy but by its military. So when Senator Kerry speaks of giving nuclear materials to Iran, these materials would be put directly into the hands of Iran’s military.
The Ayatollahs of Iran, with their long track record of arming and funding Hizbollah (“the Party of God”) and aiding other international terrorists, want nuclear weapons so that they can threaten Israel as well as other nations of the Middle East and Europe. Iran’s theocratic rulers may already have developed a missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead as far as Europe. Iran might have had North Korean help in testing its missiles. Iran today has several hundred nuclear-capable HY-2 Chinese Silkworm missiles and other missiles aimed at U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf and may soon acquire its more advanced offspring the Raad missile.
Iran’s ambition to become a nuclear superpower, as anyone can see from the June 2004 testimony of Undersecretary of State for Arms Control & International Security John Bolton, is self-evident.
The Ayatollahs came to power in Iran because of Democratic President Jimmy Carter’s steps to undermine America’s ally the Shah of Iran. The Communist madman who today rules North Korea acquired nuclear weapons with the help of Democratic President Bill Clinton and his left-loving emissary Jimmy Carter. And the nightmare of the Vietnam War was precipitated by the Democratic President John F. Kerry likes to call the “first JFK,” John F. Kennedy, who sent the first 17,000 armed U.S. troops into Vietnam. Those who know this might think
Knowledgeable people might wonder why John Kerry has raised these issues that ought to remind the world how dangerous it is to elect a Democrat as President.
But John Kerry has the advantage of an electorate “educated” mostly in socialist government schools by union members of the National Education Association. And Kerry’s ignorant voters generally exhibit the blend of low I.Q. and high ideology that define today’s leftward-trending Democratic Party.
President Bill Clinton gave many important speeches while wearing the necktie given to him by his mistress Monica Lewinsky. It was, he told her, a signal that he was thinking about their secret relationship.
If John Kerry wears one of his kefiyah-patterned red or pink neckties during either of the two remaining presidential debates, it might be a friendly wink, a signal to the Muslim world confirming his secret relationships with its interests. To paraphrase CBS’s Dan Rather, even if the meaning of Kerry’s necktie choice is misinterpreted, the facts behind it are true.
Whatever colors he puts on for those two nights, chameleon Kerry grew up in Europe speaking and thinking in French and has a European French view of Jews and Muslims, of Israel and the Arab world. France, which took the side of Saddam Hussein against the U.S. in Iraq, shipped 75,000 French Jews in railroad cattle cars off to Nazi death camps.
France is the culture Kerry deems so superior to ours that he once said, in effect, that he would give France a veto in the United Nations Security Council over America’s ability to use force in our, or Israel’s, defense. We have just passed the anniversary of the 1973 Yom Kippur War in which France refused permission to fly over its territory to American aircraft sent to help save Israel. And influenced by its fast-growing Muslim population, France (and Europe in general) again is exhibiting open anti-Semitism.
The survival or death of Israel if Kerry becomes President could be decided by the highest bidder.