By Debbie Schlussel

Occasionally, a commentator feels the need to demonstrate how “moderate” he is toward Islam.

He bends over backward to defend radical Muslims and attack America.  Just to look “balanced”.  And to get the phony mystique and “respect” that go along with it, like fries with a Whopper.

This week, the whopper is a column in the Boston Globe, and the purveyor is Jeff Jacoby.

Normally, Jeff is on the money.  In the past, I’ve defended him against trumped up plagiarism charges, when he was temporarily replaced by actual plagiarist, Cathy Young.

But this time, I can’t defend Jeff.  This time, he’s wrong.  Dead wrong.

Jeff has a problem with female U.S. interrogators using their sexuality to taunt Guantanamo prisoners.

Et tu, Jeff?

He decries female interrogators wearing tight t-shirts, fondling themselves, brushing their breasts against prisoners’ backs, and putting red ink on the face of prisoners.

This is torture?  Puh-leeze.  We know what real torture is.  It goes on in Muslim countries around the globe, every day.  In case you forgot what that is, there’s a video starring Nick Berg all over the Net.

Jacoby doesn’t come up with a better way to get information from terrorists, either.

Instead, he rehearses the same old line about “modesty between the sexes [being] a deeply ingrained religious requirement” for Muslims.

Is it just me, or is it getting beyond  annoying hearing commentators elevate Islam above all other religions?  What—modesty is not important to religious Christians and Jews?  Or are their religious requirements simply not as important as those of the religion of headchoppers?

Jeff Jacoby is a religious Jew.  Does he think his rabbi would like this sexual “torture” any more than a Muslim?

Then again, Jeff’s rabbi isn’t a terrorist—who might have information that could save American lives.  Jeff seems to have forgotten that Gitmo prisoners include guys like  Osama Bin Laden’s personal driver.  They are murderers.

Islam’s supposed sexual “modesty” hasn’t stopped Islamic terrorists from committing depraved homosexual and other sexual acts on plenty of their fellow co-religionists, in addition to Jews and Christians, in the Middle East.

Since Jeff thinks America’s sexual “torture” of Islamic terrorists is so reprehensible, here’s a little tutorial on Islamic terrorists’ own sexual behavior.  Apparently, Jeff needs a refresher course:

• Last year, followers of Iraqi Shi’ite cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr killed and mutilated fellow Muslim Iraqis who opposed his Najaf insurrection.  200 bodies featured males with genitals cut off and shoved in their mouths and evidence of rape to men, women and children, according to U.S. intelligence reports.

• Remember 9/11 and those 19 hijackers?  Remember Mohammed Atta, who was such a religious Muslim and so worried about modesty that, in his will, he forbade women from attending his funeral?  Gee, it’s the same Mohammed Atta who got a lap dance or two from gyrating exotic dancers at Florida’s “Pink Pony” strip club–paying $300 for the pleasure.  Other hijackers visited the Olympic Bar strip club in Vegas and hired prostitutes in Boston just prior to the attacks.

• In January 1976, Yasser Arafat’s PLO massacred 582 mostly Christians in Damour, Lebanon.  Bodies were raped and featured dismembered genitals in their mouths.

• Remember Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah’s 2002 visit to President Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas?  The calorically-gifted Saudi royal demanded that he and his posse be spared the “humiliation” of women on the tarmac or in the control tower when his plane landed in Texas.  Yet, after his visit with the President, his entourage didn’t seem too humiliated when they patronized the women jiggling their silicone valleys at Waco strip clubs.

This is the same terror-funding Saudi Arabia that demands women are covered head-to-toe.  Yet, at the time, Saudi spokesman, Adel Al-Jubeir was “dating” (euphemism?) mini-skirt encrusted NBC Weekend Today anchor Campbell Brown.  Brown covered Abdullah’s visit, yet neglected to mention his misogynist  airport requirements (and her “modesty” experiences with the Saudi flack).  Talk about “sleeping with the enemy.”

• Remember the Church of the Nativity terrorists?  Palestinian terrorists, holed up in the Bethlehem Church in spring 2002, defiled one of the holiest sites in Christianity.  They had sex there, leaving used condoms strewn about the Church.  Radio hosts Opie and Anthony got fired for encouraging a couple to have sex in St. Patrick’s Cathedral.  Yet, the Nativity terrorists got a free trip to Cyprus as a reward for their “deeds.”

• In 1948, Muslims murdered several Israeli men at Gush Etzion, cut off their testicles, and placed testicles in the dead men’s mouths.

Obviously, they are religious hypocrites.  We need not bestow respect on their hypocrisy by worrying about a tight t-shirt on a sexy interrogator in front of a terrorist.

The same people who weren’t bothered by Monica’s thong and Bill’s cigars in the Oval Office seem just a tad fraudulent in their grave concern for sexuality at Gitmo.  These are the same folks who fight for porn purveyors to show unfettered smut all over America.   Yet, they won’t allow our soldiers—who may never see their wives or girlfriends again—to get Playboy in the Middle East, a restriction on our troops unique to this war and geographic area of service.  Lest we offend the Muslims.

Though Jeff doesn’t fall into that category, he cites the ACLU as a source of credibility on America’s sexual “humiliation” of terrorists.  Isn’t this the same ACLU that went to court to defend NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, for its promotion of rape and sexual torture of young boys, which—surprise, surprise—led to exactly that and murder (of 10-year-old Jeffrey Curley), too?

Oh, I get it.  Rape of young American boys – okay.  Displaying a covered female chest in front of Islamic terrorists who aren’t talking – bad, very bad.

Perhaps Jeff hopes that changing our tactics will gain us new-found respect in the Muslim world.  But like Lucy, promising this time she’ll finally let Charlie Brown kick the football, it never works that way.  They hate us, period.  Jeff’s column and making nice with terrorists won’t change that.

Next time Jeff Jacoby spouts off about U.S. treatment of Islamic terrorists, he’d best save it for his lawn.

Maybe something will grow there

By Debbie Schlussel
Martin Luther King, Jr. is one of those images. Everyone wants to jump on the bandwagon.

Especially radical Muslims who support racism, terrorism, slavery, and genocide of Blacks.

Since the 9/11 hijackings by Muslim terrorists, radical Muslims have been desperate to rehabilitate their image.  Their solution:  Hijacking the good name of Dr. King.

While the rest of the nation celebrates King Day and King’s contributions to civil rights, a group of Islamists—who praise HAMAS homicide bombers and Hezbollah terrorists who murdered over 300 Americans—held a Martin Luther King, Jr. essay contest.

The American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) of Michigan, headed by “former” Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terrorist, Imad Hamad, held the contest.  ADC enlisted two prominent Detroit Black personalities to host the contest’s award ceremony, but their roles are merely servile.  The essay contest is only open to Arabs.

So much for King’s dream of the day his children, and the rest of us, to be “judged by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin.”

If Imad Hamad and his ADC were judged by the content of their character, it would be a tough sell.

ADC is one of the most anti-Israel, anti-Semitic organizations in America, today.  And  one of the most anti-American.  While we are fighting terrorists within and abroad, the Saudi-funded ADC is the modern-day equivalent of the German-American Bund.  It defends terrorists and fights for their rights in the courts and legislature.  For years, ADC defended or ignored Sudan’s Arab Muslim gang-rape, torture, and genocidal murder of millions of Black Christians and Animists.  What would Dr. King say about that?

King was adamantly opposed to the views of Hamad and ADC.  At a 1968 Harvard appearance, King rebuked a student who attacked Israel.  “When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You’re talking anti-Semitism,” King said.

(Although an oft-cited “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend,” purportedly by King, may be fabricated, his Harvard quotes are well-documented, in Seymour Martin Lipset, “The Socialism of Fools-The Left, the Jews and Israel,” Encounter, (December 1969), p. 24.)

ADC’s leaders have praised Hezbollah, the group that murdered over 300 Americans, while they were sleeping—and protecting Muslim Arabs.  “We are all proud of the heroic resistance of its [Hezbollah’s] people and their steadfastness,” said one.  “They [Hezbollah] are very respectable,” said another.

Then there’s ADC’s praise for HAMAS, the Islamic Resistance Movement.  “I know many people in HAMAS.  They are very respectable,” an ADC President told the Rocky Mountain News.  “They don’t accept violence.”  Yeah, right.

ADC’s publication, ADC Times, ran ads for the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, which President Bush shut down for funding HAMAS with millions, and which was recently held liable for the HAMAS murder of American teenager David Boim.

ADC constantly accuses America of “genocide”.

Imad Hamad is the same tune, different key.  In 2003, after I wrote about Hamad in the New York Post, the FBI revoked a national award that FBI Director Robert Mueller was to give him.  FBI sources said Hamad is the subject of over a dozen open terrorism-related investigations, including a Detroit “charity” which openly gave money to HAMAS and raised money for “uprisings” against U.S. troops in Iraq.

The federal government fought for over two decades to deport Hamad, because videos showed he is a member of the PFLP terrorist group.  Unfortunately, the Clinton Administration and Janet Reno gave up, and he’s now a U.S. citizen.    Now, this “former” terrorist—who praised as “patriotic” Palestinian Authority TV “Children’s Club” broadcasts teaching young children to become terrorists—has formed an ADC “Children’s Club” to “teach” young Arab American children.

Hamad protested Saddam Hussein’s capture, and threatened a school board member with “serious . . . unhealthy consequences unless Muslim holiday Eid al-Fitr became a school holiday.  A year ago, Hamad called Hezbollah terrorists “heroes,” holding a celebration for them.  He and ADC are busy boycotting and threatening five major Michigan banks for doing business with Israel – an illegal secondary boycott under the federal Anti-Boycott laws.

Would Dr. King support that?  Not likely.  Remember, King said Hamad and ADC are anti-Semites.  And he was right.

Why is Detroit’s Fox News anchor, Fanchon Stinger, hosting this event, scheduled for January 27th (in disrespect, ADC was open for business on King Day)?  Ask her boss, Dana McDaniel (direct dial:  248-552-5138), news director of FOX’s owned and operated WJBK-Detroit, about this breach of journalistic ethics.

The location of the event is equally malignant.  Dearborn’s Bint Jebail Cultural Center is a club for Detroiters from Bint Jebail, the Hezbollah-controlled village on the tip of southern Lebanon, from which Muslim terrorists made attacks on Northern Israel.  Members of the club are Hezbollah-supporting Muslims.  It’s the scene of a number of pro-terrorist rallies and celebrations.

Hamad’s ADC-Michigan predecessor, Terry Ahwal told the Detroit Free Press, “Arabs believe blacks as people will steal from them or even kill them.”  Hamad’s respect for Blacks is not an improvement.  After a series of profiling incidents, in which Detroit Arab gas station owners kidnapped, attacked, and even murdered Black customers, Hamad attacked Black protesters, threatening that they would “escalate tensions.”

Martin Luther King, Jr. is turning over in his grave.

By Debbie Schlussel

“Million Dollar Baby” will win the Academy Awards.

Not because it’s the Best Picture.  But because it’s Hollywood’s best political propaganda of the year.  More effective than “Fahrenheit 911.”

Think “Baby” is about Rocky in a sports-bra—as it’s being marketed?  You’ve fallen for the “Million Dollar” lie.  What it’s really about, has nothing to do with Rocky Balboa or boxing.  That’s just the cover story to suck movie-goers in for a nefarious message.

“Baby”—which has critics gushing all over each other—is a two-hour, twenty-minute exercise in subtle and then not-so-subtle left-wing diatribe.

If you plan to see the movie and don’t want to read a spoiler, stop here.

If you want to know the truth and save your ten bucks, keep reading.

“Million Dollar Baby” will win the Oscar because it supports killing the handicapped, literally putting their lights out.

It features legendary Dirty Harry, Clint Eastwood, as its director and star.  For roughly the first half, viewers are tricked – thinking they are watching a movie about a champion boxer in the making, who just happens to be female.

Even those who find women’s sports to be freakish sideshows of little interest, are rooting for Maggie Fitzgerald (Hillary Swank) to overcome her trailer-

trash background and become women’s Welterweight champion of the world.

But they’ve been defrauded, manipulated into what appears to be “The Champ” with estrogen, but is really a promotional ad for the Netherland’s euthanasia policy.  Movie critics—most of whom are complicit in this deception—only hint at this “unexpected, surprise twist.”

“Baby” begins with the hillbilly Maggie trying to learn boxing and get gym-owner/trainer/manager Frankie (Eastwood) to train her.  At first, he resists, saying he doesn’t train girls.  “Women boxing—that’s a freak show, and freaks are in.  I’m sure you’ll find someone else to train you,” he tells her.  Besides, at 31, she’s too old to become a great boxer.

But then, he loses his champion boxer to another boxing manager, and he takes Maggie on.  Soon, she’s winning fights all over the place, with instant knock-outs, and Frank and Maggie develop a surrogate-father/daughter relationship.  Maggie’s so good she’s in the Women’s Welterweight championship fight in Vegas with a million-dollar pot to split.

Maggie, on the verge of winning the fight, gets blindsided and knocked-out cold.  She hits her head so hard on the stool in the corner of the ring, she’s knocked unconscious.

And that’s where we learn what this movie is really about.  Maggie is paralyzed, a quadriplegic who loses a leg to infection – of sound mind, but almost a vegetable.  And since she can’t fight—she can’t even move—the proverbial “her life isn’t worth living” message is hammered home.

To make the message as black and white as possible, Maggie isn’t just a hillbilly with no future outside boxing.  She’s from a broken home, with family members in prison, a mother defrauding welfare and Medicaid, and the standard trailerhome.  Her abusive family is only after Maggie’s money.  They don’t care about her, nor does anyone in the world.  So, as a quadriplegic, her life isn’t worth living.

Then there’s the religion excuse.  Maggie is eventually euthanized (a sanitized word for “murdered”) by trainer/surrogate-father Frankie.  A devout, but questioning, Catholic, he attends mass every day.  He is no common sinner without a conscience.  He’s the perfect Hollywood murderer of the weak – a whole lot more sympathetic than real-life mercy killers a la Dr. Kevorkian.

Janitors and waitresses die every day, thinking “I never got my shot,” Frankie is told by right-hand man, former boxer Eddie (Morgan Freeman). It’s better for Maggie to die now, having made it to such a high point in her life—the Women’s Welterweight title fight—than for her to face a life of anti-climactic paralysis. Since she’s only from a trailer park anyway, her life is now expendable. Sickening.

“Baby’s” version of euthanasia seems honorable and heroic—a sort of noblesse oblige for the 2000s.  But imagine if the real-life euthanized, victims of the Nazis and the Netherlands, were the “Million Dollar Babies” instead of a pathetic, washed up female boxer from the trailer park.

The Nazis victims didn’t just include six million Jews.  They murdered the handicapped and infirm, some as handicapped as “Baby’s” Maggie.  The handicapped, a burden on society and flaw in the master race, weren’t entitled to live, the Nazis posited.  That disturbing message is more palatable when the victim is “Baby’s” broken female Rocky with no future, and a likeable religious father-figure is the euthanasia-committing hero.

Then there’s today’s Netherlands.  The country that values its legalized prostitutes and drugs has little value for human life.  Anyone can be murdered by their doctors at the request of family members.  There is no requirement the patient’s condition be terminal or the suffering be physical.  Thousands of innocents are euthanized each year at the request of greedy or neglectful spouses and family.  The slippery slope has begun.

Why can’t Warner Brothers—“Baby’s” distributor—say what the movie’s really about, glorifying euthanasia?  Maybe it has something to do with the fact that no-one wants to go see a depressing movie with such stark politicking.  Americans want to see positive movies, not be exploited.  They think they’re going to see one here.  But they’ve been duped.

“Million Dollar Baby” is nothing more than a multi-million dollar fraud.  Sorry, Dirty Harry.  This time, you didn’t make my day

By Debbie Schlussel

When Richard Gere played an “American Gigolo” in 1980, who knew he’d actually become one, twenty-five years later?

This week, Gere is pulling tricks for jihadist Palestinian Johns supporting terror.

Gere’s not just claiming to speak for “the entire world” in ads for Sunday’s Palestinian elections.

He’s co-starring with two Palestinian terrorism supporters, Sheikh Taissir Rajab Al-Tamimi and Atallah (a/k/a Theodosios) Hanna.

In an ad sponsored by “One Voice” (more on that group, below), Gere appeals to Palestinian voters:

“Hi, I’m Richard Gere, and I’m speaking for the entire world.  We’re with you during this election time.  It’s really important:  Get out and vote.”

Give him an Oscar for pretending to support democracy and freedom.  But Gere’s supporting cast belies that:

“Palestine’s” Islamo-Fascist Enforcer

There’s Al-Tamimi, the Palestinian Authority’s Chief of Judges and chairman of its Islamic law high council.

He uttered these words:  “Islam is escalating and cannot be resisted. I pray that Allah may tear apart America just as the Soviet Union was torn apart.”

As the chief Palestinian judge and Muslim cleric, Al-Tamimi frequently appears on Palestinian Authority Television praising homicide bombers and spreading anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and fatwas.

In 1994, Al-Tamimi said, “The Jews are destined to be persecuted, humiliated, and tortured forever, and it is a Muslim duty to see to it that they reap their due.  No petty arguments must be allowed to divide us.  Where Hitler failed, we must succeed.”

In August 2003, Al-Tamimi, a personal friend of Yasser Arafat (who appointed him Chief Islamic Judge), was arrested for inciting terrorism.  Al-Tamimi’s extremist sermons are well-known for urging attacks on Israel and calling upon Arab nations to wage war.  In March 2000, Al-Tamimi delivered a hate speech during the Pope’s visit to Jerusalem, accusing Israel of “genocide” and “strangling Jerusalem.”  He called on Christians to join Muslims in a jihad to oust Jews from all of Israel.

In a recent Palestinian Authority appearance, Al-Tamimi defamed late Israeli Prime Minster Golda Meir, claiming she and the Israelis conspired to burn down the Al-Aqsa Mosque.  He decreed Jews have no right to pray at the “Cave of the Patriarchs,” (where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are buried), one of the holiest of Jewish sites, which Al-Tamimi claims is a mosque.  “Jews have no right to claim any bond or connection . . . . Jews are foreign interlopers.”

Richard Gere’s Phony Church Spokesman

Then there’s Gere’s other co-star in the Palestinian Get-Out-The-Vote ad:  Hanna, the Greek Orthodox Church’s Arab spokesman in Jerusalem.

Well, sort of.

Hanna was fired by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate because of his open support for terrorism.  But Hanna continues to claim he speaks on behalf of the Church, anyway.

He has repeatedly expressed his support for homicide bombers and “all forms and methods” of “resistance,” not only against Israel, but also U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

Hanna proudly paraded his views to HAMAS’ news agency:

‘These martyrdom freedom fighters are the heroes of the people, and we are proud of them. We categorically reject suspicious attempts to cast suspicion on their deeds. They are not suicidal, as some are claiming. Nor are they terrorists, as others are claiming. They are resisting the occupation.”

Hanna also said, “We support the martyrdom [suicide] operations without any reservations, regardless of what skeptics and opponents of this form of resistance are saying.”

In a January 2003 sermon marking the Epiphany and the baptism of Jesus, Hanna said, “We do not believe in so-called ‘peace with Israel’ because peace cannot be made with Satan. Israel is the greatest Satan. No concession and no truce must be made [with Israel]. Any type of peace with this entity is concession, submission, and retreat from pan-Arab and national principles….  We encourage our youth to participate in the resistance, to carry out martyrdom attacks.”

Hanna has repeatedly traveled to Syria and Lebanon to meet with Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah, Secretary-General of Hezbollah, the terrorist group that murdered over 300 U.S. Marines and civilians in Beirut.

Richard Gere claims he and these two terrorism supporters are speaking for the “entire world.” Do they speak for you?

Costanza as Middle East Scholar?

“One Voice,” the sponsor of Gere’s ads is also questionable.  With Middle East experts like Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston, and Gere, the group is the invention of a sleazy, far-left Israeli businessman, Daniel Lubetzky.  Lubetzky’s various “peace” initiatives—pandering to Islamists—have all failed over the years.

This one, Lubetzky’s latest, features board and coalition members like MTV’s “Rock the Vote,” Palestinian homicide bombing supporter Sari Nusseibeh, and Jim Zogby, head of the Saudi-funded (and pro-HAMAS/Hezbollah) Arab American Institute.  It’s based on the dangerous idea that Palestinians from all over the territories should get to vote via computer on all Israeli issues – borders, refugees, water allocation, and Jerusalem.  Actor Jason Alexander (“Seinfeld”) was touting this ludicrous plan on FOX News’ “O’Reilly Factor,” last year.

George Costanza as Middle East Scholar?!

When playing a male prostitute, Richard Gere should stick to the silver screen.  While he may be a newly anointed “Officer” of the jihad, he’s definitely no “Gentleman.”

By Debbie Schlussel

When Richard Gere played an “American Gigolo” in 1980, who knew he’d actually become one, twenty-five years later?

This week, Gere is pulling tricks for jihadist Palestinian Johns supporting terror.

Gere’s not just claiming to speak for “the entire world” in ads for Sunday’s Palestinian elections.

He’s co-starring with two Palestinian terrorism supporters, Sheikh Taissir Rajab Al-Tamimi and Atallah (a/k/a Theodosios) Hanna.

In an ad sponsored by “One Voice” (more on that group, below), Gere appeals to Palestinian voters:

“Hi, I’m Richard Gere, and I’m speaking for the entire world. We’re with you during this election time. It’s really important: Get out and vote.”

Give him an Oscar for pretending to support democracy and freedom. But Gere’s supporting cast belies that:

“Palestine’s” Islamo-Fascist Enforcer

There’s Al-Tamimi, the Palestinian Authority’s Chief of Judges and chairman of its Islamic law high council.

He uttered these words: “Islam is escalating and cannot be resisted. I pray that Allah may tear apart America just as the Soviet Union was torn apart.”

As the chief Palestinian judge and Muslim cleric, Al-Tamimi frequently appears on Palestinian Authority Television praising homicide bombers and spreading anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and fatwas.

In 1994, Al-Tamimi said, “The Jews are destined to be persecuted, humiliated, and tortured forever, and it is a Muslim duty to see to it that they reap their due. No petty arguments must be allowed to divide us. Where Hitler failed, we must succeed.”

In August 2003, Al-Tamimi, a personal friend of Yasser Arafat (who appointed him Chief Islamic Judge), was arrested for inciting terrorism. Al-Tamimi’s extremist sermons are well-known for urging attacks on Israel and calling upon Arab nations to wage war. In March 2000, Al-Tamimi delivered a hate speech during the Pope’s visit to Jerusalem, accusing Israel of “genocide” and “strangling Jerusalem.” He called on Christians to join Muslims in a jihad to oust Jews from all of Israel.

In a recent Palestinian Authority appearance, Al-Tamimi defamed late Israeli Prime Minster Golda Meir, claiming she and the Israelis conspired to burn down the Al-Aqsa Mosque. He decreed Jews have no right to pray at the “Cave of the Patriarchs,” (where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are buried), one of the holiest of Jewish sites, which Al-Tamimi claims is a mosque. “Jews have no right to claim any bond or connection . . . . Jews are foreign interlopers.”

Richard Gere’s Phony Church Spokesman

Then there’s Gere’s other co-star in the Palestinian Get-Out-The-Vote ad: Hanna, the Greek Orthodox Church’s Arab spokesman in Jerusalem.

Well, sort of.

Hanna was fired by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate because of his open support for terrorism. But Hanna continues to claim he speaks on behalf of the Church, anyway.

He has repeatedly expressed his support for homicide bombers and “all forms and methods” of “resistance,” not only against Israel, but also U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

Hanna proudly paraded his views to HAMAS’ news agency:

‘These martyrdom freedom fighters are the heroes of the people, and we are proud of them. We categorically reject suspicious attempts to cast suspicion on their deeds. They are not suicidal, as some are claiming. Nor are they terrorists, as others are claiming. They are resisting the occupation.”

Hanna also said, “We support the martyrdom [suicide] operations without any reservations, regardless of what skeptics and opponents of this form of resistance are saying.”

In a January 2003 sermon marking the Epiphany and the baptism of Jesus, Hanna said, “We do not believe in so-called ‘peace with Israel’ because peace cannot be made with Satan. Israel is the greatest Satan. No concession and no truce must be made [with Israel]. Any type of peace with this entity is concession, submission, and retreat from pan-Arab and national principles…. We encourage our youth to participate in the resistance, to carry out martyrdom attacks.”

Hanna has repeatedly traveled to Syria and Lebanon to meet with Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah, Secretary-General of Hezbollah, the terrorist group that murdered over 300 U.S. Marines and civilians in Beirut.

Richard Gere claims he and these two terrorism supporters are speaking for the “entire world.” Do they speak for you?

Costanza as Middle East Scholar?

“One Voice,” the sponsor of Gere’s ads is also questionable. With Middle East experts like Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston, and Gere, the group is the invention of a sleazy, far-left Israeli businessman, Daniel Lubetzky. Lubetzky’s various “peace” initiatives—pandering to Islamists—have all failed over the years.

This one, Lubetzky’s latest, features board and coalition members like MTV’s “Rock the Vote,” Palestinian homicide bombing supporter Sari Nusseibeh, and Jim Zogby, head of the Saudi-funded (and pro-HAMAS/Hezbollah) Arab American Institute. It’s based on the dangerous idea that Palestinians from all over the territories should get to vote via computer on all Israeli issues – borders, refugees, water allocation, and Jerusalem. Actor Jason Alexander (“Seinfeld”) was touting this ludicrous plan on FOX News’ “O’Reilly Factor,” last year.

George Costanza as Middle East Scholar?!

When playing a male prostitute, Richard Gere should stick to the silver screen. While he may be a newly anointed “Officer” of the jihad, he’s definitely no “Gentleman.”

By Debbie Schlussel
One group of people you won’t see returning holiday gifts, this week, are the animals.

Yes, judging by the extravagant gifts suggested and given to pets, this season, animals are, indeed, the new people.

Thank Hollywood for that.

Where PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) failed, Paris Hilton succeeded.  She and other mindless celebs have succeeded in getting us to think of and treat animals as equals to humans, to spend hundreds on cashmere sweaters and other largesse never before bestowed on pets with such gusto.

Their absurd new levels of pet-worship are now hip.

Take a recent issue of In Style Magazine, a People Magazine spin-off.  In its new “Pet Style” section, the magazine provides “22 wildly luxurious ways to spoil Rover rotten.”  Why buy your pooch a $1,230 set of stainless-steel dog bowls at Barneys, when you can give your dog the ultimate Jackie-O look, pearls.  “Faux pearls are a pup’s best friend,” the magazine claims, touting a $95 necklace made especially for the canine set by Chic Doggie.

Even Ralph Lauren is caught up in this idiocy, with cashmere cable-knit sweater vests for poochie–a cool $95.  “Shopping for your dog is actually more fun than shopping for yourself,” says CeCe Cord, creator of Travels with Tiger, a canine couture collection.

Ms Cord, her customers, and the rest of the pet-gift crowd need to a one-way ticket back to the real world.  Hello, these are animals, not your children.  The In Style profile lists “Booty for Boys” and “Gifts for Girls.”  These are not “boys” and “girls.”  They are animals.  Period.

But magazines, like In Style, and doggie couture fashion are exactly what PETA and other animal rights activists want.  They want us to see pet cats and dogs as our children, as boys and girls, as having the same needs as we do.  That’s where the slippery slope begins.  If we accept that animals deserve the same extravagances that we do, then ultimately, we’ll arrive at the natural conclusion that they deserve the same rights as humans, too.

A recent issue of Star Magazine features a layout of hit TV show “Desperate Housewives” hottest new star.  Not Nicolette Sheridan, but her dog, “Fatty.”  Star Magazine gushes over the arrivals of the two overly pampered stars at a photo shoot.  “Nicolette pulled up in her black BMW and then Fatty arrived separately with her handlers in an SUV . . . .  Fatty likes to make an entrance.”  Readers were treated to details of Fatty’s diet, passions, aspirations, and “doggie diva-ness.”  Puh-leeze.

If vapid fashion and celebrity style magazines alone bought into the animals-are-people ruse, that would be one thing.  But the disturbing delusion is more widespread.

It’s not just the annoying Animal Planet channel.  Last year, cable’s Oxygen Network featured, “ Meow TV,” a show for cats “and the people they tolerate. . . .  The artistic mission was to create programming you could watch with your cat,” said the show’s producer.

No wonder Oxygen—funded by Oprah—is a dog in the ratings.

Then there’s El Al, the Israeli airline known for its high level of security.  Now, the airline that’s never been hijacked, is the pet’s airline.  The Wall Street Journal reported that El Al launched a frequent-flier program for dogs, cats, and even birds.  The airline waived the $35 frequent-flier club membership fee it requires for humans.

It’s bad enough when humans do yoga.  But now, books and gyms nationwide feature yoga instruction for dogs.  Can your dog read yet?

From ionic pet massage devices to organic, gourmet restaurants for pets (New York’s “Meow Mix Café”), there’s a $30 billion dollar industry of pets-as-humans luxuries. Traveling for the holidays with your dog?  New York’s Regency Hotel makes a $25 “Lassie Latkes” meal.  Finally, Spot can celebrate Chanukah in style (complete with OPI nail Pawlish).

Many humans now spend more on their own pets than charity to needy humans.  That’s a sad commentary on the strange new respect society has afforded animals.

It’s also a sad commentary on how we mindlessly emulate celebrities.

Celebrities have long been photographed with their pets.  But now they’re photographed with pets adorned in expensive Gucci necklaces, Burberry trenchcoats, and Coach carriers they bought for them.  Britney Spears was pictured taking her pet dog to dinner at a swanky Malibu restaurant in US Magazine’s “Petite Pet Parenting.”  Martha Stewart’s “Pet Dilemma” was her agonizing plan to care for her four chow chow dogs, seven Himalayan cats, and 50 canaries, while in prison.  Oprah’s dog, Solomon, wears a $135 sterling-silver bone necklace.

Demi Moore, Charlize Theron, and other stars shop at hip LA store, “Puppies & Babies.”  The name reveals their priorities:  Puppies aren’t just equal to babies.  Puppies come first.

What celebrities do today is all the rage tomorrow, no matter how ludicrous.

With pet aromatherapy spas, pet trusts, and pet custody in divorces, tomorrow has arrived.  Is pet citizenship next?

“That line between animal and person is getting cloudy,” a veterinarian told People.

It’s time to draw the line. Otherwise, Million Paw Marches, a la Louis Farrakhan, are in our future.

By Debbie Schlussel

2004’s message was big women are good; big men, not so good.

True, this PC-conventional wisdom was gaining strength before 2004.  But this year, social commentators told us so:

Fat chicks are good, no matter how many unnecessary calories they consume.  But, wealthy, big male athletes are bad–very bad–because they ingest steroids.

The hypocrisy should be alarming.  But in a world where movie stars can call their kids the names of fruit, but America’s major department store can’t utter the name of America’s major holiday, wrong is right, and right is wrong.

That’s exactly why those who can’t control themselves at the buffet are heralded, but those who take chemicals to enhance their athletic prowess are scum.

But what really is the difference?  For one thing, compare the number of pro athletes who’ve died from taking steroids to the number of Americans who’ve died from obesity or related conditions, cancers, maladies, ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

The only pro athlete who comes to mind as hitting rigor mortis early from steroids is former NFLer Lyle Alzado.  But how many Americans have died from caloric over-endowment?  A heck of a lot more.

Yet, instead of outrage over the calorically-gifted segment of the populous and their addiction to muffins and Krispy Kremes, we’re supposed to be upset about Jason Giambi, Bill Romanowski (who isn’t even playing football anymore), Marion Jones, and Barry Bonds.

Are you upset about them?  The media, pop culture, and everyone else is telling you to be angry.

At the same time, they’re asking you to cheer on the fact that there are stores for the size 16 plus set.  Chain stores, like Torrid, growing with the ever-expanding girth of their female customers.  There’s nothing torrid about size 20, not even lukewarm.  Frigid would be a better store name.  But, no, the chain of halter-tops and thongs for the five-chinned, ten-bunned segment of the population has to fool its pathetic customer into believing someone actually wants to see her in that hammock-sized version of Victoria’s Secret fare.   Does hip super-sized clothing encourage fat chicks to lose weight?  Or does it say fat is fab (as opposed to what it really is, flab)?

A recent outing by plus-size “supermodel” Emme with her group of fat chick buddies included a screening of the movie “Curves,” a celluloid celebration of cellulite.  Afterwards, Emme complained that real supermodels (the thin kind) aren’t called “minus-size models.”  How punny.

But those who jump on the anti-steroid bandwagon are full of hypocrisy.  Not just about fat chicks.

There are also the sagging remnants of the bra-burning feminist crowd.

When it comes to abortion and sex, they insist that it’s a woman’s body, and only she can decide what she does with her body.  Yet, mention male athletes on steroids, and the mantra strangely disappears.

On a recent episode of MSNBC’s “Scarborough Country” (on which I appeared), steroids was the topic of discussion.  One half of cable’s Dr. Berman sex show duo (two sisters use their “doctor” degrees to make their sex yenta-fest seem high-brow) insisted that “the government must get involved” to stop pro athletes’ use of steroids.

Gee, isn’t it the MAN’s body?  Doesn’t HE and HE alone get to decide what HE wants to do with HIS body?  If we were talking abortion and women, the Dr. Berman chick wouldn’t hear of the government legislating human biology.

Silly me, wrong gender, right message.

Then, there are those who say we can’t compare the records of today’s baseball players with those of the olden days of the Fifties and Sixties.  USA Today wasted important op-ed real estate, last week, on a writer arguing this point.  Call these people the “asterisk” crowd, because they want an asterisk next to any sports record of significance, circa 1980 and beyond.

But anyone who knows anything about baseball today versus baseball of yesteryear knows that the hits of Mickey Mantle can’t be compared to the hits of Barry Bonds, anyway.

Newsflash:  Since the days of Mickey, the bats are lighter, the balls are made of higher, tech, lighter materials, and the fences have been moved in.  If you don’t believe those things all make it easier for a Sammy Sosa or Mark Mcguire to hit it out of the ballpark, then I have a baseball team from Montreal, by way of Washington, DC, to sell you.

Players in Mickey Mantle’s day didn’t have personal trainers, high-tech physical fitness equipment, nutritionists, and masseurs.  They drank a lot (like Mantle), they ate slothfully, and caroused ‘til all hours of the night.

Yet, Mantle hit 52 homeruns in 1956.  In 1953, the National League homerun king was Eddie Matthews with 47 runs.  In 1951, Ralph Kiner hit 42 homeruns.

Imagine how many home runs they might have hit in those days with the modern day accoutrements and conditioning of pro athletes.  Those are methods of  “cheating,” too.

Sure, steroids are a drug, harmful to the body.  Sure, using them is cheating.  But even caffeine fits that bill.  Are we going to call in the government to regulate usage of that, too?

If President Bush and John McCain are ready to regulate steroid use, they’d better start in the kitchen.  Can they take the heat?

By Debbie Schlussel

The box office flop of “Alexander” is cause for celebration.

That Stone’s pretentious film debuted at a weak sixth place—well behind the animated “The Incredibles” and “The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie”—is even better.

Not because of its debatable portrayal of “Alexander the Great” as bisexual.

But because “Alexander’s” director, Oliver Stone, and star, Angelina Jolie, are Soft On Terrorism.  Extremely soft.  Especially Palestinian terrorism.

OLIVER STONE’S TERRORIST BUDDIES

Remember the 2002 Passover Massacre, when a Palestinian suicide bomber blew up 29 innocent, elderly Israelis celebrating the important Jewish holiday?

Right after that, Oliver Stone paid homage to Yasser Arafat, visiting the now-deceased Palestinian terrorist-in-chief at his Ramallah compound.  As if that weren’t enough, Stone had a friendly visit with Hamas Ramallah chief Hassan Yussef.

Then, Stone made a sympathetic “documentary” on Arafat for HBO (“Persona Non Grata”).  It mimicks Stone’s “talent” for presenting fiction as fact—as he did in “JFK,” “Nixon,” and “Alexander”—and glorifying malefactors and the hate-America crowd, while denigrating American institutions—as he did in “Commandante” (exalts Fidel Castro), “Born on the Fourth of July,” “Natural Born Killers,” and “Platoon.”

Stone said he made the Arafat cellu-lie in a search for “long-term classical values: what your life was like, what the meaning of your suffering was, what regrets you have.”  In case you can’t tell, the “you” and “your” refers to Arafat.  No Stone documentary on the classical values and suffering of any of Arafat’s victims, though.  Instead, Stone’s 80 hours of footage include many interviews with Palestinian homicide bombers.

In an interview with famed Hollywood “Variety” columnist Army Archerd, Stone said of the homicide bombers that he “understands why they feel the way they do.”

Stone denied documented reports that the Palestine Authority used terrorism as a strategic means to get a Palestinian State.  When Archerd told him of the anti-Semitic education of Palestinian youths and the glorification of suicide bombing, Stone both denied and justified it, saying, “The memories are long as are the grudges and feuds.”

Stone also said, “The (Jewish) settlements (on the West Bank)  . . . . The Israelis have no business in the West Bank.  The settlements have to be gotten out of the West Bank.”  How about getting Oliver Stone out of West Hollywood?!  Or better yet, the movie biz.  Stone also likened Jewish residents—including those of suburban Jerusalem—to “vigilantes of the Old West in America.”

So, we know Oliver Stone supports bigoted ethnic redlining in residential areas.  What if the U.S. Government told him he wasn’t allowed to live in his Hollywood mansion because of his ethnicity?  (In a stab at exoticism, he claims to be African-American, Anglo-Saxon, German, Jewish, Irish, and all other ethnicities he could think of.)

ANGELINA JOLIE’S TERRORIST FRIENDS

Then there is Angelina Jolie.

She spends a lot of time in “Alexander” with snakes writhing around her, saying that she “loves” snakes and “understands them.  They became like my family, my accessories.”

That might explain the snakes she’s hanging out with as a “Goodwill Ambassador” for the UN High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR).  In July, Jolie attended the Arab Children’s Congress in Amman, Jordan.

Organized by Jordan’s Queen Noor and billed as a way to support children and protect their rights, it’s really an anti-Israel, anti-Semitic hate-fest.  Several groups which organized the Congress are “charities” known to fund terror.   Dubai, which has strong ties to 9/11 hijackers and other terrorists, funded much of the Congress.

The annual meeting is a kid’s version of the UN Conference on Racism—where any problem for Arab children anywhere in the Arab World (and five European countries, which sent kid delegates) is the fault of the Jews and Israel.  Through drama, dance, painting, and crafts, they teach the children young — all with movie star Angelina Jolie as a willing participant and the guest of honor.  Pictures across the Arab world showed her kissing Queen Noor during the conference.

Angelina Jolie at Arab Childrens Congress hate-fest.

Angelina Jolie kissing Jordan’s Queen Noor at Arab Childrens Congress Hate-fest.

During the conference, Jolie, in a Jordan Times interview, said that she “hoped to be able to bring aid and awareness to conflict zones not covered by the media.”  But Jolie must be blind and deaf, because the only “conflicted” people she speaks of are the most overly media-covered group, the Palestinians.  “Here, so many people have been uprooted for so long and have such terrible living conditions,” Jolie lamented, adding that she planned to travel to “Palestine” soon.

If Jolie were truly interested, she might wonder why Palestinian refugees are still refugees—why they live in such living conditions and why for so long they’ve been without a country.  Instead of commending Jordan “for hosting the world’s largest group of Palestinian refugees . . . for more than 50 years,” it just might occur to her that they are still refugees because Jordan and the other Arab countries represented at the Arab Children’s Conference won’t allow Palestinian refugees to be absorbed—for fear of losing a political tool against Israel.  They won’t allow them to live outside the refugee camps, own property, or use public services as regular human beings.

In Jolie’s favorite Middle East tourist spot—the “Hashemite Kingdom” of Jordan, Palestinians are not allowed to run their own country.  Palestinians are between 70 and 90 percent of Jordan’s population, but are ruled by Hashemites, like King Abdullah.   Instead of recognizing this, Jolie called Palestinian refugees in Jordan “displaced” from their country, thanked Jordan “for keeping its border open,” and commended the Jordanian government “for hosting the world’s largest group of Palestinian refugees  . . . for more than 50 years.”

Jolie claims, “I will always be a great supporter of children’s rights,” but she doesn’t seem to care much about the rights of the child victims of Palestinian terrorism, only the progeny of those who commit and support it.  A much-heralded December 2003 visitor to the Ruweished Palestinian refugee camp in Jordan, Jolie wrote diaries lamenting the treatment of Palestinians.  While she doesn’t mention Israel by name or specifically endorse cold-blooded murder, you get the drift.  She approvingly quotes the kids and a play they do about Jerusalem “about Arab children and how they live”:

“Palestine was sold by merchants.  God knows we are injured and hurt.  Be patient we will take our revenge [sic] we will take our homes back  . . . . (Smiles, fists in the air)  Palestine, your name is in our veins. . . .Their dream is to see their homeland. . . .  It was very moving to hear them speak of the dream.”

Hmmm, Angelina, what do these precious refugee kiddies mean by, “We will take our revenge”?  Which part of that was “very moving?”  No disapproval from Ms. “Tombraider,” anywhere.  Instead, she marvels at and sympathizes with this cute and cuddly group of “frightened” children.  In fact, Ruweished, like all Palestinian refugee camps, is a training ground for terrorists–the future revered profession of Angelina’s new little friends.

And a lot of the refugees at the Ruweished camp, near the border of Iraq, are not even Palestinians.  Some are Somalis.  Others are the hundreds of Palestinians living in Iraq who fled at the start of the U.S. War on Iraq.  When they wanted to return to Iraq, UNRWA (the UN agency we fund with millions, which runs the camp) tried to coerce them to stay at the camp.

But hoping Jolie would get a clue on this is like wishing the contents of her head were as robust as that of her lips.  It’s like hoping she would, indeed be “Gone in 60 Seconds,” instead of helping those who support “Taking Lives.”

With his and Jolie’s “Alexander” a huge flop in America, Stone said the more sophisticated Europeans “tend to see me a little differently than they do in the U.S.”

Wrong.  Americans just see this Emperor-with-no-Clothing’s “films” for what they really are:  cinema not-so-verité.

Instead, they chose to see “SpongeBob,” knowing that Stone’s offerings are the real cartoons.

By Debbie Schlussel

Is it any surprise that NBA player Ron Artest beat up fans in the stands?

It shouldn’t be.

Is it any surprise that NBA Chief David Stern gave him only a season suspension for beating up those fans?

It shouldn’t be.

If you’ve been following the National Basketball Association over the last few years, you shouldn’t be surprised that a player beat up innocent (and not so innocent) fans at an NBA game.

The NBA has become Thuggery, Inc.

And Stern is largely to blame.  That’s because Stern recruits kids from the killing fields of America to play for his league.  And he looks the other way when inbred street behavior manifests itself in these instant-millionaire SOWMBDs (Sons of “Who-My-Baby-Daddy”).  Or worse, he encourages it.

When violence or a hint of violence erupts, Stern sees it not as a bad thing, but as just another notch in the NBA urban, hip-hop marketing campaign – a yet higher level of the street cred Stern and the NBA crave to make their sport more hip-hop in a less hip post-Air Jordan NBA.

Indiana Pacers player Ron Artest should have been banned from the game for life.  Anytime a player goes into the stands to physically attack fans, that player should be gone forever.  Pete Rose is gone from Major League Baseball for a lot less.  But David Stern doesn’t have the guts, doesn’t have the morals, decency, or guts to do so.

Consider Stern’s past record of “discipline”:

• In 2000, Allen Iverson—the Philadelphia ‘76ers star whose basketball skills helped him get away with a life of violence that included maiming others—made a rap CD, “Non Fiction,” urging the murder of gays and Black women.

  Calling Black women “f—[ing] b—-es” and tramps, Iverson urged “Everybody stay fly; Get money, kill and f— b—-es.”  His lyrics for gays was equally non-imaginative:  “Get murdered in the second and first degree;  Come to me with faggot tendencies;  You be sleeping where the maggots be.”  (I’m sure this hoops-Einstein spent all night trying to find a word that rhymes with “faggot.”)

  David Stern’s “discipline”?  He got Iverson to “apologize” – sort of.  Stern also claimed Iverson agreed to change the lyrics, but USA Today quoted Iverson as saying there would be “no change in the lyrics.”  Stern’s October 2000 “Statement on Iverson CD” read like a press release from the Pro-Player Pander Palace.

• In 2001, NBA players Allan Houston and Charlie Ward made anti-Semitic comments, a special chutzpah because they played for the New York Knicks, which has a large Jewish clientele.

David Stern’s response:  Nothing. Ward apologized and had a brief meeting with a Rabbi.  No word on whether he was forced to ingest gefilte fish.

• In 2003, Sacramento Kings player Chris Webber–arrested on various drug and alleged rape charges over the years, but each time, escaping with the skin of his teeth—was indicted for lying to a grand jury about illegal loans he took from a shady booster.  He pled guilty to a lesser charge when the key witness died suddenly.

  Webber was traded to the Kings in the first place because of frequent off-court arrests while a Washington Wizard.  One of those, during a 1998 Maryland traffic stop, involved Webber fleeing police, slapping a police officer, refusing to show his driver’s license, and lacking a license plate.  In fact, Webber’s Lincoln Navigator had devices to quickly obscure the license plate and was equipped with secret compartments to hide the drugs that were found therein.

  Like all suspects caught red-handed, Webber claimed the drugs were left there by a friend.  That excuse didn’t work earlier that year when he was fined $500 when marijuana was found in his carry-on bag at an airport in Puerto Rico.  Despite all that, he had the gall to sue Fila for dropping him as an endorser pursuant to a morals clause.

  David Stern’s actions on any of the above:  A big fat capital Zilch.

  After all, Chris Webber—who grew up not in the streets, but with two parents and attended Detroit’s fanciest prep-school for the kids of gazillionaires (Detroit Country Day School)—needed to establish his ‘hood-ness.

  And wimpy David Stern isn’t about to get in his way.

So, when Ron Artest goes into the stands to fight spectators half his size, David Stern can’t afford to give him the lifetime suspension he deserves for inexcusable violence (regardless of what precipitated it).

Imagine the marketing, the shoes sold, the licensing fees, the sold-out NBA arenas, and the press coverage when Ron Artest enters the basketball court in any market, next season.

Ron Artest, who claims he doesn’t know what the word “integrity” means (he said he needed a dictionary to look up that “big word”), wanted a few months off to promote his new rap CD, a la Allen Iverson.  Now, David Stern has not only given him that reward but more publicity than he could have ever hoped for between now and next season.

David Stern is a smart marketer.  After looking the other way and condoning violence for years, he isn’t about to forgo the sweet sound of that carefully cultivated cha-ching.

Thuggery sells even better than sex.  It’s a slam dunk.

And this season, it’s Artest-ry in motion.

By Debbie Schlussel

Why is the GOP using Don King, a convicted murderer, as its messenger to Black America?

Recent polls show that Blacks may double their vote for George W. Bush over that of 2000.

But if Election Day results in Black America match these polls, it will be because of the GOP’s message of opportunity, self-help, and opposition to gay marriage (on the ballots in many States).

Not because of Don King, the sleazy boxing promoter.

So, why are Republicans touting King as their ambassador to Americas Blacks?  It’s a slap in the face of this important voting bloc, from whom the Republican Party is finally getting some well-earned notice.  They are not attracted to murderers and loan sharks.

Don King is both.  And he’s come under repeated investigation for his shenanigans in the under-regulated world of boxing.

In 1966, King beat a man to death on a Cleveland street.  The victim’s crime?  He owed money to the GOP’s new Black American messiah.  Talk about “the tax man cometh.”

King lucked out.  He was convicted of second-degree murder, but, for no apparent reason, the judge reduced the conviction from murder to manslaughter.  Not only did King serve a short term of 3 1/2 years, he got a pardon from the then Ohio governor.

King’s rap sheet is long.  He:

• Was the subject of an FBI probe, uncovering evidence of payoffs, possible racketeering, and King’s “association” with mob figures like John Gotti and Michael Franzese. When questioned during a 1992 Senate investigation about his Gotti connection, King invoked the Fifth Amendment.

• Was indicted on tax fraud and conspiracy in 1984. The president of his promotion company was convicted.

• Was criminally charged, in 1998, for cheating Lloyd’s of London out of $350,000 in training expenses for a scheduled Julio Cesar Chavez fight in 1991 that was canceled.

• Was an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2000 trial of International Boxing Federation founder Robert W. Lee on 33 counts of bribery, conspiracy, racketeering, fraud and other charges in a federal investigation that uncovered payoffs for ranking fighters.

• Was successfully sued by Heavyweight champion Tim Witherspoon.  King never paid most of the $900,000 judgment.

• Was sued by Muhammad Ali after his 1980 fight with Larry Holmes, claiming King shortchanged his purse by $1.2 million. He settled for $50,000.

• Tried to manipulate the outcome of a 1990 Tokyo bout, in which Mike Tyson was upset by Buster Douglas.

• Was sued by Tyson for a $100 million, which King allegedly stole from him.

• Falsified fighters records in a heavily promoted 1977 heavyweight boxing match on ABC

Is this a Republican record?

Yesterday, most of his victims were minorities.  Today, convicted felon King says President Bush is “committed to reaching out to minorities.”  But do minorities want Don King reaching out to them?

Black Americans do not respect Don King much more than they respect Trent Lott.  He’s thought of as a bozo, a con artist, and, age 70, well past his prime.  Don King is not the Republican antidote to liberal P. Diddy or the anti-Bush NAACP.

So why is he suddenly being so well received by Republicans?  And touted by the GOP everywhere from the Wall Street Journal to the young, male-oriented “Jimmy Kimmel Live” show on ABC’s latenight schedule?

Maybe it has something to do with GOP Chairman Ed Gillespie.  The GOP’s new soulful Prince not-so-Charming, King, treated the decidedly non-phat Gillespie to the glamorous life, giving him an intoxicating taste of ephemeral hipness.  The Wall Street Journal reports that, in December, King took Gillespie, Gillespie’s son, and Gillespie’s brother to a night of championship boxing in Atlantic City.

Through King, the Gillespie Clan got to meet Denzel Washington, Mike Tyson, and rapper Jay-Z (all Kerry supporters, by the way).  King introduced Gillespie to the crowd in between bouts.  “He had ringside seats,” the starstruck Republican chairman gushed.  “It was fantastic.”

“We struck up a common bond,” King said of Gillespie.  Common bond?  Gillespie is a wonkish Irish American politico with a normal haircut.  As King would say, “Only in America.”

The Republicans badly want to be cool, like the Dems are with MTV’s Choose-or-Lose generation.  But stooping to Don King for the holy grail of “street cred” is doomed to failure.

And then there’s King’s sudden financial greasing of the RNC’s campaign skids, to the tune of over $40,000.  All perfectly timed to coincide with boxing regulations and oversight that ex-murderer King badly wants defeated, but which are finally gaining momentum in the U.S. Senate after years of no progress.

Luckily, not all Republicans are so easily fooled.  Senator John McCain, who wrote the legislation that will finally stop King’s scams, calls King one of “the largest exploiters” of “a system that cries out to be fixed.  I think that these people that are using him cannot know anything about his record.”

The choice of Don King as the GOP’s “Soul Man” is also an insult to the many eloquent, brilliant Black commentators in the Republican reserve.

Great minds like Ward Connerly, the brilliant general in the war on racial preferences.  Great commentators like Thomas Sowell, the syndicated columnist.  Commentators like Larry Elder, not only a syndicated columnist, but a successful nationwide radio and TV host.  (He calls himself a libertarian, but helps the GOP significantly with his persuasive viewpoints.)

If the GOP continues to ignore these great Americans in favor of chintzy sideshows like Don King, the party may blow its one chance for electoral entrée into Black America.

Black America deserves better.

And that ain’t no jive, bro.