web analytics
August 30, 2014 / 4 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Constitution’

Elections Bring Egypt to the Edge of Abyss

Sunday, May 6th, 2012

About a year after the fall of Hosni Mubarak’s regime, the crisis in Egypt has brought the country to the edge of abyss.

The political crisis escalated shortly after the Muslim Brotherhood decided to appoint its own candidate for presidency. This decision came after the Brotherhood, together with the Salafists, obtained an overwhelming majority in the Egyptian parliament.

Shortly after this decision it became clear that the Brotherhood and the Supreme Council for the Armed Forces (SCAF), which has governed Egypt since Mubarak’s fall, are not on the same page any more. Their differences involve key issues such as the drafting of a new constitution and the power of the Egyptian parliament.

In addition, negotiations regarding a much needed IMF loan ended without a deal because of lack of political support for acceptance of the IMF conditions.

Another complicating factor is the lack of progress in drafting the new constitution.

Tensions further increased after several presidential candidates, including Khairat al-Shater, the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate, and Salafist leader Abu Ishmail, were disqualified as presidential candidates.

The disqualified candidates appealed against the decision of the supervisory body of Egypt’s election committee, but their appeals were dismissed. The Muslim Brotherhood then simply appointed a new candidate: Mohammed Mursi, the leader of the Freedom and Justice Party.

Last Wednesday unknown assailants shot dead 11 Salafist protesters in Cairo’s Abbaseya neighborhood. The Salafist protesters demonstrated against the disqualification of Abu Ishmail.

On Friday new clashes broke out in the same neighborhood prompting the army to impose a curfew. Most Egyptian media accused the SCAF of being behind the bloodbath in Abbaseya.

Several political parties, among them the Muslim Brotherhood Freedom and Justice Party, announced new demonstrations in Tahrir Square and decided to boycott meetings with the SCAF.

Constitution

As a result of the increasing violence it seems all but sure that the presidential election, which starts May 24-25, will take place as scheduled.

To complicate matters, Islamists and liberals are demanding that there should first be an agreement on the new constitution before the presidential elections can take place.

The Islamists, who have a large majority in parliament, want to use the new constitution to minimize the power of the new president, and to increase of the power of the Egyptian parliament.

The SCAF recently decided to dissolve the parliamentary committee that was in charge of drafting a new constitution. This decision was made after a disagreement over the composition of the council, which consisted mainly of Islamists, whereas liberals, Copts and women were under-represented.

The SCAF in turn had its own reasons for dissolving the Constitutional Council. In this way it is trying to influence the drafting of the new constitution and the scope of presidential power.

Transfer of power

Both liberals and Islamists fear that the Army will not really transfer all its power to the democratically elected parliament and president.

This distrust is also evident from the recent demonstrations that call for the resignation of the SCAF. During these demonstrations the protesters also demanded that Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi resigns and even called for his execution.

On April 13 for example, Islamists held a mass demonstration in Tahrir Square against members of the Mubarak era, meaning SCAF officials and the now disqualified presidential hopeful Omar Suleiman.

The protesters shouted that the people “will force the Field Marshal (Tantawi) to resign” and that “the remnants of the old regime should be removed.”

Suleiman

Omar Suleiman is the former vice president and director of Egypt’s intelligence service (Muchabarat), who recently signed up as a candidate for the presidency.

Suleiman is considered to be a henchman of Mubarak, and was accused of being an ‘Israeli agent’. He and Mubarak were pictured on placards together with a Star of David.

In turn, in an interview with the Egyptian newspaper Al-Youm Al-Saba’a Suleiman accused Israel of trying to look for reasons to reconquer the Sinai desert.

Disqualification

The April 14th decision by the Election Committee of the Supreme Court to disqualify a large number of presidential candidates has significantly aggravated tensions.

Omar Suleiman was disqualified because he did not have enough signatures from supporters (according to Egyptian law, a presidential candidate must have at least 30,000 signatures).

The Salafist Abu Ismail (al-Nour party) was rejected because his mother was a U.S. citizen (according to Egyptian law, the presidential candidate, his parents and his spouse should all hold Egyptian nationality).

The Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate, Al-Shater, was disqualified because he supposedly had a criminal past.

The disqualifications came at a time when Egypt was already struggling with severe tensions between the various political and religious groups.

The Salafist leader Abu Ishmail even predicted an Islamic revolution if the decision to disqualify him was not reversed.

Economy

Besides the political crisis, there is Egypt’s economic mayhem which has brought the country to the brink of disaster.

Bill to Impeach Obama for Bombing Syria without Congressional Authorization

Tuesday, March 13th, 2012

Drew Zahn of World News Daily reports that Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., R-N.C., has introduced a resolution declaring that the president’s use of offensive military force  without Congressional authorization would be considered “an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”

Jones cites Obama’s authorization of military force in Libya as an example for such unilateral action.

Former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo wrote in WND: “This week it was Secretary of Defense Panetta’s declaration before the Senate Armed Services Committee that he and President Obama look not to the Congress for authorization to bomb Syria but to NATO and the United Nations. This led to Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., introducing an official resolution calling for impeachment should Obama take offensive action based on Panetta’s policy statement, because it would violate the Constitution.”

Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution reserves for Congress alone the power to declare war.

Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed

Thursday, July 7th, 2011

PA Explores Alternatives Sources Of Funding
 
   The Palestinian Authority is studying the possibility of relying on Arab money instead of regular financial aid from the U.S. and Europe should it persist with its plan of unilaterally declaring a state at the United Nations in September.
 
   Sources close to PA President Mahmoud Abbas told this column the Palestinian leader even is willing to give up his job as a result of backlash regarding his drive to declare a state at the UN.
 
   “Abu Mazen [Abbas] wants to go down in history as the one who led this UN process. He doesn’t mind giving up his role in office, leaving his job as a consequence,” said one PA official.
 
   PA officials said that at Abbas’s behest, the PA leader’s chief of staff, Mohammed Shtayyeh, established a committee to investigate the possibility of giving up financial aid from the U.S., European Union, and Russia as a result of the UN drive.
 
   The officials said the immediate results of Shtayyeh’s commission were not encouraging.
 
   Revealed one official: “The conclusion so far is not encouraging, but still we are studying the possibility of looking for independent and Arab money and other sources to replace U.S. and Western money if the PA faced sanctions.”
 
   Currently, the vast majority of all aid to the PA comes from the U.S. and EU. According to figures released by the PA, only 22 percent of the $530,000,000 received since the beginning of 2010 came from Arab donors.
 
   The PA fears financial sanctions if it persists with its UN unilateral declaration plan.
 

   Last week, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution threatening to suspend financial assistance to the PA if its leaders “persist in efforts to circumvent direct negotiations by turning to the United Nations or other international bodies.”

 

More White House Ties

To Soros-Funded Organization
 
   Still more White House officials, including Attorney General Eric Holder, have ties to an effort funded by billionaire George Soros to push for a new, “progressive” U.S. Constitution.
 
   This column previously reportedthat President Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, maintained extensive ties to Soros’s funding, particularly with regard to a movement that openly seeks to create a “progressive” consensus on what the U.S. Constitution “should” provide by the year 2020.
 
   Now, it has emerged that Lisa Brown, Obama’s staff secretary, served as executive director of the Soros-funded American Constitution Society, ACS, a progressive legal organization that was behind the Constitution scheme.
 
   Also, Holder has been closely tied to the ACS, serving on the group’s board of directors and even keynoting its 10th anniversary national convention earlier this month.
 
   In 2008, Holder also keynoted its convention. At that event, he reportedly urged young lawyers to get involved in the liberal legal network, saying America would soon be “run by progressives.”
 
   In April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled “The Constitution in 2020,” which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.
 
   The event was sponsored by Soros’s Open Society Institute and the Center for American Progress, which is led by John Podesta, who served as co-chair of Obama’s presidential transition team. Podesta’s center is said to be highly influential in helping to craft White House policy.
 
   The Yale event on the Constitution was also sponsored by the ACS, which has received more that $2.2 million from Soros’s Open Society since 2002.
 
   Sunstein himself has been pushing for a new socialist-style U.S. bill of rights that, among other things, would constitutionally require the government to offer each citizen a “useful” job in the farms or industries of the nation.
 
   According to Sunstein’s new bill of rights, the U.S. government can also intercede to ensure every farmer can sell his product for a good return. It also is granted power to act against “unfair competition” and monopolies in business.
 
   All this and more is contained in Sunstein’s 2004 book, The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever.
 

   In the work, Sunstein advanced the idea that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state.

 

Van Jones Launches New Leftist Movement

 

   A new movement led by communist revolutionary group founder Van Jones seeks to counter the Tea Party while petitioning for a progressive agenda that includes “making Wall Street and the super-rich pay their fair share.”
 
   The organization, dubbed “The American Dream Movement,” is partnered with a slew of radical groups funded by billionaire George Soros.
 
   Last Thursday, Jones officially launched his “American Dream Movement” at a New York City event co-sponsored by MoveOn.
 
   The movement has been described as a grassroots progressive group seeking to emulate the success of the Tea Party. The movement, however, is anything but grassroots. It is already partnered with two of the nation’s largest unions, the AFL-CIO and the SEIU, who boast an army of millions of public employees.
 
   AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka recorded a web video for the campaign.
 
   Also signed on to the movement are the Soros-funded groups, Campaign for America’s Future and the Center for Community Change.
 
   Campaign for America’s Future was co-founded in 1996 chiefly by Robert Borosage, who previously served as director of the Marxist-oriented Institute for Policy Studies.
 

   The CCC boasts a board filled with radicals, including socialist activists.

 

 

   Aaron Klein is Jerusalem bureau chief and senior reporter for WorldNetDaily.com. He is also host of an investigative radio program on New York’s 770-WABC Radio, the largest talk radio station in the U.S., every Sunday between 2-4 p.m.

The Ignorant American

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011
Two days after the 9/11 attacks, CNN and Time magazine released a joint poll asking whether the U.S. should declare war. Sixty-two percent of respondents said yes. Asked whom war should be declared against, 61 percent said they didn’t know.
That, in a nutshell, is why most polls are an exercise in frivolity – a depressing if sometimes perversely entertaining reflection of Americans’ constantly shifting, poorly informed, half-baked and often contradictory collective mindset.
Three years ago the historian Rick Shenkman released a slim but information-packed and thought-provoking volume titled Just How Stupid Are We? in which he lamented a generation of Americans “far less equipped than their grandparents were to grapple with the challenges facing the nation.”
Among the dozens of examples cited by Shenkman, he noted that “Sandra Day O’Connor was the first woman appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Fewer than half of Americans could tell you her name during her entire tenure.”
He also pointed out that just “35 percent know that Congress can override a presidential veto” while 49 percent think the president can suspend the Constitution.”
The idea that we are living in a confederacy of dunces is nothing new; Mark Twain and H.L. Mencken were just two of many men of letters who almost from the nation’s founding never tired of excoriating the ignorance of their countrymen. Imagine what they’d think upon making the acquaintance of the current crop of Americans.
In his 2002 book MobocracyHow the Media’s Obsession with Polling Twists the News, Alters Elections and Undermines Democracy, Matthew Robinson highlighted the following:
            ● Twenty-nine percent of the American public believes the Constitution guarantees everyone a job; 42 percent believe it guarantees health care; 75 percent believe it guarantees a high school education.
● Nearly half – 45 percent – of all Americans believe the Marxist axiom “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” is in the Constitution.
● A January 2000 Gallup Poll found that 66 percent of Americans could name the host of TV’s “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” (Regis Philbin), but just 6 percent knew the name of the speaker of the House of Representatives (Dennis Hastert).
● Political scientists Michael X. Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter attempted to get a handle on the public’s political knowledge by studying thousands of questions asked in polls beginning back in the 1930s. Among their findings: more people had heard of John Lennon than Karl Marx; more Americans could identify actor Bill Cosby than could name either of their U.S. senators; and more people knew who said “What’s Up, Doc,” than “Give me liberty or give me death.”
● A 1986 survey found that almost 24 percent of the American public did not know who George H.W. Bush was or that he was then serving his second term as vice president of the United States.
● The Vanishing Voter Project, a program of Harvard’s Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, conducted a running survey of randomly selected registered voters during the 2000 presidential campaign. Respondents were asked six questions on the policy positions of Republican George W. Bush and six on the positions of Democrat Al Gore. Of the twelve questions – which covered a broad range of topics including defense spending, campaign financing, offshore drilling and affirmative action – only one was answered correctly by a majority of Americans. The rest of them weren’t even a close call.
The mindlessness works both ways: pollsters can be just as frivolous as the people they’re paid to question. A Time/CNN poll in 2002 asked, “Just as your best guess, do you think Osama bin Laden is alive or dead?” Meanwhile, TV Guide actually did a poll to learn whether Americans would prefer Barbara Walters or Dianne Sawyer to interview bin Laden (assuming he was alive, of course).

The distinction for the all-time mindless poll question was no doubt earned by the ABC News/Washington Post polling unit, which in July 1985 asked people whether they thought President Reagan would suffer a recurrence of cancer before leaving office three and a half years later. (For the record, 54 percent were certain he wouldn’t, 33 percent said he would, and an intelligent sliver, 12 percent, said they had no idea.)

 

 

Jason Maoz can be reached at jmaoz@jewishpress.com

Quick Takes: News You May Have Missed

Thursday, April 28th, 2011

Obama Releases Birth Certificate;

Questions Still Remain
 
   Although President Obama released a purported long-form birth certificate this week indicating he was born in Hawaii, he still might not fit the constitutional eligibility requirement that stipulates only “natural born” citizens can serve as U.S. president, according to this reporter’s recent bestselling book.
 
   An investigation found that according to correspondence from the original framers of the Constitution as well as multiple Supreme Court rulings and the legal writings that helped establish the principles of the Constitution, Obama may not be eligible to serve as president since his father was not a U.S. citizen.
 
   With nearly 900 endnotes, the book, The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists, contains a chapter investigating eligibility issues. The book concludes that Obama may not be eligible regardless of his place of birth, recommending further legislative and judicial debate.
 
   “It is undisputed that Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen,” this reporter wrote, “a fact that should have led to congressional debate about whether Obama is eligible under the United States Constitution to serve as president.”
 
   Obama was born Aug. 4, 1961, to Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. Dunham was an American of predominantly English descent from Wichita, Kan., and was 18 years old at the time of Obama’s birth. Obama Sr. was a member of the Luo tribe from Nyang’oma Kogelo, Nyanza Province, Kenya, which at the time was still a British colony.
 
   Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution stipulates that the nation’s elected chief be a “natural born citizen.”
 
   The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution specifically defines “citizen” but not “natural-born citizen” – which is only used in the presidential requirement clause. To this day the precise meaning of the term is still being debated.
 
   According to correspondence from the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia as well as from the founding framers, “natural born” may mean that both parents must be born in the U.S.
 
   Representative John Bingham of Ohio, a principal framer of the Fourteenth Amendment, for example, offered some definition for presidential qualifications in a discussion in the House on March 9, 1866: “Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”
 
   Also, The Law of Nations, a 1758 work by Swiss legal philosopher Emmerich de Vattel, was read by many of the American Founders and informed their understanding of the principles of law, which became established in the Constitution of 1787.
 
   De Vattel writes in Book 1, Chapter 19, of his treatise: “In order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
 

   However, some Supreme Court rulings disputed the meaning of “natural born” with some concluding it means anyone born within the U.S. while other cases found both parents must be U.S. citizens to fit the presidential requirement.

 

New Egyptian Government Refuses To

Share Intelligence With Israel
 
   The new Egyptian government has refused to share important intelligence information with Israel, including details of a terrorist plot against Israelis thought to be imminent, this column has learned.
 
   Last week, officials in Jerusalem warned of the possibility of Hizbullah terrorist attacks against Israeli targets overseas, saying “a planned attack is already in motion,” Israel’s Channel 2 reported.
 
   Security officials believe Hizbullah is not planning an attack so large that it would lead to another war with Israel, but they said the Iranian-backed group would attempt a hard hit on overseas Israeli targets in the immediate future.
 
   In light of the immediate threat, Israel requested an exchange of information on Hizbullah with Egypt’s intelligence apparatus, but Cairo refused to cooperate, according to security officials.
 

   The officials said such information sharing was routine under the previous regime of President Hosni Mubarak.

 

Danny Danon: Israel Should React To Unilateral
Palestinian Steps With Annexation
 
   If the United Nations unilaterally declares a Palestinian state, Israel should respond by immediately annexing the Jewish communities in the strategic West Bank, declared a Knesset member from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud party.
 
   Danny Danon, the deputy speaker of Israel’s parliament, pointed out that the 1993 Oslo Accords restrict both Israel and the Palestinian Authority from taking unilateral action outside of negotiations.
 
   However, he contended that if the PA follows through with seeking a UN declaration of a Palestinian state, and the international body approved the motion, the Jewish state should take unilateral measures of its own.
 
   “We should [then] announce that we are annexing the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, immediately. The same way [Prime Minister] Menachem Begin did it with the Golan Heights and we did it in Jerusalem, we should do the same with the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria.”
 
   Danon was speaking on this reporter’s WABC Radio show.
 
   The Likud Knesset member was referring to the Israeli annexation of the eastern sections of Jerusalem, which contain the Temple Mount, after Israel recaptured the territory in the 1967 Six-Day War. In 1981, Israel annexed the Golan Heights, which looks down on Israeli population centers, after neighboring Syria twice used the plateau to mount ground invasions into the Jewish state.
 
   Danon told Klein that any UN-created Palestinian state would be “like a state on Facebook.”
 

   “They will get a lot of ‘likes,’ ” he said. “People will support them. Countries will support them. But on the ground we will have to make sure that we control the borders. We control the security issues.”

 

 

   Aaron Klein is Jerusalem bureau chief and senior reporter for Internet giant WorldNetDaily.com. He is also host of an investigative radio program on New York’s 770-WABC Radio, the largest talk radio station in the U.S., every Sunday between 2-4 p.m.

The Problem With Polls

Wednesday, October 25th, 2006

If most of the public opinion polls are to be believed, the Republican Party is careening toward a shellacking of historic proportions in next month’s midterm elections. Given the state of the Iraq war, a series of scandals involving Republicans, and the general mood of discontent that seems to have settled over the country, few will be surprised if the polls prove accurate. Then again, voters are notoriously fickle and uninformed, and polls often miss the mark – the 1994 Republican takeover of the House and Senate caught pollsters by surprise, as did the GOP’s success in the 2002 midterms.

What polls do consistently reveal is a constantly shifting and often contradictory collective mindset, one easily influenced by newspaper headlines and the monologues of late-night comics.

The polls currently showing a sizable Democratic advantage in the upcoming Congressional sweepstakes are based on questions many, if not most, voters are unqualified to answer – questions that presuppose a respondent’s familiarity with his or her incumbent congressman, with their challengers, and with the party affiliation of incumbent and challenger alike. According to survey after survey, such presuppositions have little basis in fact.

And bear in mind that for years now polls have been indicating that self-described fed-up voters – the kind who every election cycle pronounce themselves irredeemably dismayed, disgusted, and disgruntled with Congress as an institution – overwhelmingly support the reelection of their own representatives. So while Republicans have good reason to dread the electoral drubbing the media are all but declaring a certainty, there are enough caveats in the polling data and in recent voter behavior to offer even the most despondent GOPer some hope.

Oh, and lest some tender-hearted readers accuse the Monitor of excessive cynicism regarding the limitations of the typical American voter, here are some tidbits to chew on, from Matthew Robinson’s 2002 book Mobocracy: How the Media’s Obsession with Polling Twists the News, Alters Elections and Undermines Democracy:

● Twenty-nine percent of Americans believe the Constitution guarantees everyone a job; 42 percent believe it guarantees health care; 75 percent believe it guarantees a high school education.

● Nearly half – 45 percent – of all Americans believe the Marxist axiom “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” is in the Constitution.

● A January 2000 Gallup Poll found that 66 percent of Americans could name the then-host of TV’s “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” (Regis Philbin), but just 6 percent knew the name of the Speaker of the House of Representatives (Dennis Hastert).

● A 1986 survey found that almost 24 percent of the American public did not know who George Bush was or that he was then serving his second term as vice president of the United States.

● According to “Losing America’s Memory: Historical Illiteracy in the 21st Century,” a 2000 study of college seniors, barely one in three knew that George Washington was the American general at the battle of Yorkstown – the decisive battle in the U.S. war for independence; more than one in three were unaware of the division of power set forth in the U.S. Constitution; only 22 percent of those seniors – from elite universities such as Harvard, Stanford and the University of California – knew the source of the phrase “government of the people, by the people and for the people” (taken from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address); but 98 percent could identify gangsta rapper Snoop Doggy Dogg.

● The Vanishing Voter Project, a program of Harvard’s Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, conducted a running survey of randomly selected registered voters during the 2000 presidential campaign. Respondents were asked six questions on the policy positions of Republican George W. Bush and six on the positions of Democrat Al Gore. Of the 12 questions – which covered a broad range of topics including defense spending, campaign financing, offshore drilling and affirmative action – only one was answered correctly by a majority of Americans. The rest of them weren’t even a close call.

Traveling Jewish: Philadelphia Revisited

Wednesday, August 4th, 2004

Last month, my husband and I spent a couple of days revisiting the ‘city of brotherly love.’ Here are some of the highlights:

National Constitution Center on Arch Street (866.917.1787) opened its doors on July 4, 2003. Close to one million people have visited it since. The museum is a marvel of 21st century technology. In the museum’s Kimmel Theater, visitors are presented with a unique multi-media presentation on major constitution themes from 1787 to the present day. In the
American Experience, the way the Constitution has changed, and been changed by, American life, is laid out in family-friendly interactive stations.

Right across the street is the U.S. Mint (215.408.0112), which is celebrating its 210th birthday. The current building, opened in 1969, is the Mint’s fourth location in the city. At the
Mint, visitors can learn about the coin production, from the original design process to the actual ‘striking of the coins.’ Presently, the museum is open to school and veteran’s groups,
however, two week’s advance notice in required. In the aftermath of September 11th, the U.S. Mint has tightened security extensively and for groups smaller than six, there is a special form to be filled out by your Congressman or Senator before a tour can be arranged. The form can be found at www.usmint.org.

A little further down on Arch Street is the home in which Betsy Ross (215-686-1252) lived from 1773 to 1786. On a self-guided tour through the house visitors can see samples of Betsy’s work, the rooms in which she and third husband, John Claypoole lived, and towards the left of the courtyard, their graves.

At the Philadelphia Visitor’s Center (215. 597.8974), the very knowledgeable staff can help plan any visit to the historical district. There is a half-hour video presentation on our founding
fathers and many maps and brochures on all the locations visitors to Philadelphia would want to see.

Editors Note: The main gallery of The National Museum of American Jewish History featured in Traveling Jewish (Feb 20, 2004) is currently closed in preparation for a new exhibit. Visitors to the museum can view models, plans and photos of the new museum, and a movie on the search for Jewish American Identity entitled “It’s Your Story.” The museum’s newest exhibit, Theatrical Realism: The Art of Inez Storer will run from March 14 through June 27. For more information on the exhibit, please visit their website at www.nmajh.org.  

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/sections/travel/traveling-jewish-philadelphia-revisited-2/2004/08/04/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: