Once Aryan Skynet Goes Live It Doesn't Matter Who Pulled The Switch
Preeminent garbologist A.J. Weberman, discussed previously at Aryan Skynet, made a startling discovery when he plied his trade in the trash of “Battling Bella” Abzug, a U.S. congresswoman who represented New York’s nineteenth and twentieth districts during the seventies. As Weberman relates in My Life in Garbology:
She’s always been on the left side of the political scene, coming out of the labor movement tradition, leading the Women’s Strike for Peace against the Vietnam War and working hard for good social legislation regarding the rights of minorities and women. For these reasons I’ve always respected Bella. But nobody in the public eye is immune to garbology. That’s why I started to focus on Bella’s barrel. But there were problems right from the start […]1
Weberman first found the refuse of Mr. Abzug, a stockbroker, which included “cardboard stiffeners from professionally laundered shirts”, “a tube from an expensive cigar”, and “a series of memos from C.B. Richard Securities Incorporated”.2
Finally I got down to the part of the trash that was distinctly Bella’s. I noticed something that instantly triggered the muck alarm in my brain: an annual report addressed to her from Litton Industries and an IBM card from American Machine Foundries Incorporated with her name and account number printed on it. Both these giant conglomerates specialize in producing complex weapons systems for the United States military.
Bella had made a political career out of opposing the war in Vietnam and [this position] had been instrumental in winning the votes of the liberal constituency of her congressional district. […] I’d uncovered the fact that Bella Abzug owned war stock.
Since I am always willing to give people like Bella the benefit of the doubt I called her office and asked them to read me a list of the stocks she owned. The gentleman informed me she had shares in a shoe factory, a cement plant, etc. – but he didn’t say a word about Litton Industries or AMF. It looked like a cover-up to me. I made a crucial decision. Much as I liked Bella and everything she stood for, I cannot tolerate hypocrisy. I was angry. I felt lied to, cheated, ripped off, bamboozled. And what about her constituents, the people who believed in Bella, who voted for her because they hated the damned war and wanted it stopped? A bunch of chumps!
So I held a press conference the day before the election. The response to it was generally along political lines – the conservative Daily News interviewed me and took my picture while the liberal CBS-TV newspeople wouldn’t touch the story, accusing me of working for Nixon. […]
The evidence I presented was overwhelming. Bella held a press conference. Her public-relations man had to admit, “We don’t know what stocks she owns anymore.”3
Profiteering from the sale of the lucrative weapons systems then ravaging the Vietnamese countryside while advertising herself as a sincere anti-war liberal firebrand was hardly Bella’s only inconsistency during this period. In addition to these investments, which Bella attempted to conceal, her public political investment in the Zionist enterprise was also at odds with her reputation as a peace activist and champion of the oppressed.
“To New York liberal Democrats Bella Abzug, Benjamin Rosenthal and Edward Koch, some atrocities are more atrocious than others. Some are even worth fighting over,” jabbed conservative columnist John D. Lofton in a December 1973 article.
Congressthing Abzug looking appropriately revulsed, popped up recently in the New York Times pointing to a photograph which she said official Israeli sources said showed Israeli soldiers blindfolded and murdered by Syrians.
During the press conference at her New York office, held solely to display the horror pictures, Mrs. Abzug explained they had been given to her personally by Israel Premier Golda Meir who remarked at the time that the pictures reflected “the deep feelings of the Israeli people.”
Well, it seems the display by Mrs. Abzug of the atrocity photos also caused deep feelings, specifically on the part of Reps. Rosenthal and Koch. The Times quoted both as “outraged” that Bella had hogged the pictures all for herself. Ben and Ed felt the news conference should have been held jointly with them since they were with Mrs. Abzug when she met Mrs. Meir and was given the photos.
“It was a surreptitious, devious, mischievous act,” snapped Rosenthal, referring to what Bella, not the Syrians, had done. “We’re supposed to operate as a team, but she’s not a team player,” he fumed.
Now, there is only one thing in this whole affair more sickening and atrocious than the photos being brandished about by Mrs. Abzug. That is the obscenely hypocritical and morally idiotic double standard demonstrated by the spectacle of these solons fighting over who gets to make public Golda Meir’s atrocity photos.
For years the Communists murdered and maimed tens of thousands of people in South Vietnam, yet neither Bella, Ben, nor Ed once held a press conference to denounce these heinous crimes. The record does not show one trip by any of the three to a South Vietnamese president to view and bring back his or her favorite atrocity photos. But had they made the trip, each could have brought back more than enough pictures to hold several news conferences. […]
Rep. Abzug took to the floor of the House recently to speak in favor of a $2.2 billion emergency security assistance bill to aid Israel. She pointed out that the funds “are critical to the very survival of the state of Israel and the maintenance of her territorial integrity.”
But weren’t the funds she voted against for South Vietnam for identical purpose?
Certainly there can be no “unilateral withdrawals or other concessions” on the part of Israel until the Arab nations are willing to accept Israel’s existence and live peacefully with her, Rep. Abzug declared.
But isn’t this the way South Vietnam feels about North Vietnam?
It is essential Israel enter peace talks from a position of strength, Rep. Abzug said.
Didn’t South Vietnam want to do the same thing?
The Israelis confront sophisticated Soviet weaponry, Rep. Abzug noted.
Don’t the South Vietnamese also?
These are serious and not rhetorical questions. They deserve serious answers.4
Following the Senate’s approval of $2.6 billion in emergency aid to Israel that month, columnist Nick Thimmesch observed that “there is mindlessness among some congressional Doves who objected to the use of antipersonnel weapons, such as cluster bombs and Rockeye rockets, in Vietnam as inhuman but, in effect, vote for their continued use by Israelis on Arabs, as already documented.” “If such weapons are intrinsically evil,” Thimmesch goes on to ask, “aren’t they evil everywhere, including the Middle East?” He also points out that Abzug, “who normally is never at a loss for words,” was one of “those Doves pointedly not offering comments on Israel’s use of ‘evil’ weapons”.5
Abzug’s contortions on the differing ethical ramifications of various wars around the world did not begin with America’s entanglements with Vietnam and Israel. “She became prominent through the Vietnam ‘peace’ movement, but her interest in ‘peace’ and international affairs began early,” George Will recounted in 1978 after Abzug had “lost a congressional election to a Republican whose platform was the promise not to be an Abzug.”
Melvin J. Lasky, now editor of the distinguished British journal Encounter, remembers debating with her when she was defending Stalin’s purge trials. […]
Today Abzug’s bitterest enemies are not conservatives; they know she embarrasses many of the causes she embraces. Her bitterest enemies are democratic socialists […]
In 1970 she ran for Congress. While campaigning at a reform club, she said she opposed sending jets to Israel. Later, she denied having said it. In the fullness of time, Jack Newfield, a [Jewish] journalist, told the truth: “I was there when Bella said … she was against the jets for Israel. And then I watched her deny she ever said it. And finally I lied, and denied she ever said it, so that she might defeat Barry Farber. I am now ashamed of all that.”6
In 1976, when Abzug was battling Daniel Patrick Moynihan in a bid for the Democratic nomination for a U.S. Senate seat, her opponent sensibly asked, “how can she consistently advocate giving Phantom jets to Israel that she voted against building in the first place?”7
It was not only in the matter of military assistance that “liberal” Jewish supremacist “Battling Bella” revealed her ideological hypocrisy, however, as Will humorously reveals.
Her congressional office, as described by some survivors, called to mind Lytton Strachey’s description of pre-19th century Eton: “a system of anarchy tempered by despotism.” She once demanded that an aide come to her apartment at 1 a.m. to fix her toilet.8
“Her personality was the issue” in her political downfall, as Lofton summarizes.
Time magazine has referred to Abzug as an individual with “rhinoceros qualities,” and [an] “interoffice tyrant undreamt of since Caligula,” whom many consider “a sumo liberal, a lady wrestler, Joan of Arc resurrected as an elemental yenta.” […]
Norman Mailer has described the Abzug bellow as a voice that “could boil the fat off a taxi driver’s neck.” During her 1972 congressional primary, Bella verbally assaulted, loudly and at length, journalist Jack Newfield, who, in self-defense, held his ears and retorted: “You know what your campaign slogan should be? ‘Support me or I’ll make you deaf!’”9