Home Featured Stories Did You Know? Readers' Blog-Eds Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 31, 2003.
This is an article by Arnold Beichman that appeared in the Washington Times today. It makes the important point that Israel could kick out the quarter of a million Jews living in Biblical Israel but that won't bring peace, because the Palestinians want to destroy Israel, not make peace with her. Mr. Beichman is a Hoover Institution research fellow and a columnist for The Washington Times.

I wonder why the thesis is rarely examined publicly that the Palestinians will never never never never never never never be allowed to make peace with Israel even if the Palestinians wanted to. Yasser Arafat, Hamas, Hezbollah and free-lance terrorists won't allow it to happen because they believe victory is at hand. The reason this thesis is not on anybody's public agenda is that were it considered a reality it would mean recognizing the futility of Oslo-Camp David-shuttle diplomacy.

To operate from such an approach would mean accepting that peace and stability in the area is inconceivable. I believe that Israel could close down all the settlements, home to 220,000 Jews, in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and still the three-year Palestinian uprising would continue and intensify. Why? Because the PLO regards Israel as the Settlement, which has to be "relocated," as the PLO constitution has it, right into the Mediterranean Sea.

And the PLO's dedication to terrorism is fully supported by its neighbors. Their revolting propaganda, directed at their Arab citizenry and future generations of suicide bombers, underscores that belief. I have seen translations of schoolbooks used by Egyptian, Syrian and Palestinian students. The books are anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli tracts. I have just seen on Syrian TV a horrible movie showing Arab actors costumed as bearded, nightmarish rabbis wielding butcher knives as they slash the throat of a Syrian Christian boy lashed on a gurney in order to drench matzoh flour in Christian blood. In other words, upcoming generations are being trained as future guerrilla warriors against Israel. I have seen translations of Friday mosque sermons that could easily compete with the worst obscenities of Julius Streicher's Nazi newspaper, Der Steurmer.

The latest piece of evidence of the unwillingness of the Palestinians to consider a peaceful settlement with Israel is what happened a few days ago to Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher when he came to pray at Jerusalem's al-Aqsa Mosque. He was pelted with the shoes of his co-religionists and had to be dragged out by his bodyguards and hospitalized. His crime? At Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's direction Mr. Maher had met with senior Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, to see if the so-called peace process could be revivified. The attack was a warning to Mr. Maher: shoes today, bullets next time. It was a reminder of the 1981 assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat after he signed an accord with Israel in 1979. The PLO will not allow the intifada, which began in October 2000, to end. Oh yes, I forgot to mention: Mr. Arafat criticized the shoe-pelters.

Why should the Palestinians give up hope and make peace where anti-Semitism has seen its biggest growth since the Hitler era, not just among skinheads but also among "the best people?" I'm thinking of those who use Israel as their cover for anti-Semitism, as the French ambassador to Britain did a few weeks ago. Why should the Palestinians give up hope when Matahir Mohammed at an international conference talks about Jewish control of the world and there is applause? Or when the best-selling book in Egypt is the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," a century-old forgery created in the tsarist era by the Russian gendarmerie?

The real problem for Israel is not that the Palestinians will not or cannot make peace with Israel but that a world of otherwise intelligent, literate people will not make peace with an entity called "the Jews."

Anti-Semitism is now globalized as it never has before in modern history and it has its effects. My granddaughter, Abbie, who has become a devout orthodox Jew (she's a grad student at Berkeley) plans a trip to Paris in the Spring. I have advised her not to wear her Star of David necklace - in Paris 2004. Why take chances?

If there were no globalized Judeophobia an Israeli-Palestinian armistice could be achieved, but this epidemic is spreading just at a time when even the century-old conflict between India and Pakistan, yesterday considered unresolvable, seems to be drawing to a close.

Will there never be peace between Jews and the rest of the world? It cannot be the mere existence of Israel, which is responsible for the globalization of anti-semitism. After all, Auschwitz and the other death camp furnaces were operating at full blast when there was no Israel. Hitler wrote "Mein Kampf" when Zionism was an insignificant credo. The Iron Guard flourished in Romania and similar groups flourished in Hungary, Austria and especially Poland well before 1933, the year of Hitler's triumph.

It was a lot easier to catch Saddam Hussein than it will be to fashion an Israeli-PLO armistice. Saddam's trial, which will last over many years, will arrive at a final verdict but the war against Israel's existence will go on and on and on.

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 31, 2003.
2003 will be remembered as the year that the Likud party in Israel adopted the "Unilateral disengagement - Gaza first" plan that had been the Labour party platform in the last elections. Though rejected by the Israeli public, the plan has now become "our only hope for peace" according to the Israeli Government of Ariel Sharon.

Ultra-Leftist serial-loser Yossi Beilin, and a coalition of defeatists, anti-Zionists, and ex-communists have come up with another "only hope for peace" plan - this one with the sober-sounding title of the "Geneva Accords".

Both plans offer the Palestinian terror-meisters instant Statehood, unconditionally, and in the case of the "Geneva Double-cross", er, I mean "Accords", foreign troops will be deployed to defend the PLO state from the neighbourhood bully that is Eretz Israel.

President Bush has promised an International Conference: Convened by "The Quartet", in consultation with the parties, at beginning of 2004 to endorse agreement reached on an independent Palestinian state with provisional borders and formally to launch a process with the active, sustained, and operational support of the Quartet, leading to a final, permanent status resolution in 2005, including on borders, Jerusalem, refugees, settlements; and, to support progress toward a comprehensive Middle East settlement between Israel and Lebanon and Israel and Syria, to be achieved as soon as possible. [The "Road Map"]

To that end, the White-house and State Dept. have welcomed the Geneva Travesty, and are open to any other non-democratic proposal for establishing an official "Terror State" 8 miles from my front door.

On this New Year's Eve, we should look back on the past 12 months and try to understand what the PLO-PA and their supporters have done to demonstrate their commitment to a peaceful resolution of the "Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

"Give 'em a State" indeed!

Jan 2, 2003 - The charred body of Massoud Makhluf Alon, 72, from Menahemiya in the Lower Galilee, was found in the northern Jordan Valley in his burned out car. The Fatah Al-Aqsa Brigades claimed responsibility for the murder.

Jan 5, 2003 - Twenty-three people - 15 Israelis and 8 foreign nationals - were killed and about 120 wounded in a double suicide bombing near the old Central Bus Station in Tel-Aviv. The attack was apparently carried out by two members of the Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, with the help of the Islamic Jihad. The Israeli victims: Moshe (Maurice) Aharfi, 60, of Tel-Aviv; Mordechai Evioni, 52, of Holon; Andrei Friedman, 30, of Tel-Aviv; Meir Haim, 74, of Azor; Hannah Haimov, 53, of Tel Aviv; Avi Kotzer, 43, of Bat Yam; Ramin Nasibov, 25, of Tel-Aviv; Staff Sgt. Mazal Orkobi, 20, of Azor; Ilanit Peled, 32, of Azor; Viktor Shebayev, 62, of Holon; Boris Tepalshvili, 51, of Yehud; Sapira Shoshana Yulzari-Yaffe, 46, of Bat Yam; Lilya Zibstein, 33, of Haifa; Amiram Zmora, 55, of Holon; Igor Zobokov, 32, of Bt Yam. Foreign workers: Krassimir Mitkov Angelov, 32, of Bulgaria; Steven Arthur Cromwell, 43, of Ghana; Ivan Gaptoniak, 46, of Ukraine; Ion (Nelu) Nicolae, 34, of Romania; Guo Aiping, 47, of China; Li Peizhong, 41, of China; Mihai Sabau, 38, of Romania. Zhang Minmin, 50, of China died of her wounds on January 13.

Jan 12, 2003 - Eli Biton, 48, of Moshav Gadish was killed and four people wounded when terrorists infiltrated the community and opened fire. Two terrorists were killed by Israeli forces. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

Jan 12, 2003 - Cpl.(res.) Mikhail Kazakov, 34, of Jerusalem was killed by terrorists who infiltrated across the Israel-Egypt border, near the Negev town of Nitzana.

Jan 17, 2003 - Netanel Ozeri, 34, was killed when terrorists entered his home, in an outpost north of Kiryat Arba, and opened fire. His 5-year-old daughter and two friends were wounded. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Jan 23, 2003 - Cpl. Ronald Berer, 20, of Rehovot; Cpl. Assaf Bitan, 19, of Afula; and St.-Sgt. Ya'akov Naim, 20, of Kfar Monash were killed by terrorists while on patrol south of Hebron. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Feb 6, 2003 - 2nd Lt. Amir Ben-Aryeh, 21, of Maccabim, and St.-Sgt. Idan Suzin, 20, of Kiryat Tivon were killed and two more soldiers were wounded in a shooting attack in the area of Nablus. Both gunmen were killed by return fire from IDF troops. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Fatah-Tanzim claimed responsibility for the attack.

Feb 11, 2003 - Maj. Shahar Shmul, 24, of Jerusalem was killed by a Palestinian sniper near the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem while checking a suspicious vehicle. The PFLP and the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

Feb 15, 2003 - Cpl. Noam Bahagon, 20, of Elkana; Sgt. Tal Alexei Belitzky, 21, of Rishon Lezion; St.-Sgt. Doron Cohen, 21, of Rishon Lezion; and Sgt. Itay Mizrahi, 20, of Be'er Sheva were killed when their tank drove over an explosive device weighing 100 kgs while on patrol in the Gaza Strip. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Feb 23, 2003 - Sgt. Doron Lev, 19, of Holon was shot and killed when a Palestinian sniper opened fire at an army position in the southern Gaza Strip. The PFLP claimed responsibility for the attack.

Mar 5, 2003 - Seventeen people were killed and 53 wounded in a suicide bombing of an Egged bus #37 on Moriah Blvd. in the Carmel section of Haifa, en route to Haifa University. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. The victims: Maryam Atar, 27, of Haifa; Smadar Firstater, 16, of Haifa; Kamar Abu Hamed, 12, of Daliat al-Carmel; Daniel Haroush, 16, of Safed; Mordechai Hershko, 41, of Haifa; Tom Hershko, 15, of Haifa; Meital Katav, 20, of Haifa ; Elizabeta Katzman, 16, of Haifa; Tal Kerman, 17, of Haifa; St.-Sgt. Eliyahu Laham, 22, of Haifa; Abigail Litle, 14, of Haifa; Yuval Mendelevitch, 13, of Haifa; St.-Sgt. Be'eri Oved, 21, of Rosh Pina; Mark Takash, 54, of Haifa; Assaf Tzur (Zolinger), 17, of Haifa. Anatoly Biryakov, 20, of Haifa, died of his injuries on March 8. Moran Shushan, 20, of Haifa, died of her injuries on March 11.

Mar 7, 2003 - Rabbi Eli Horowitz, 52, and his wife Dina, 50, of Kiryat Arba, were killed and five wounded Friday night by armed terrorists disguised as Jewish worshippers who infiltrated Kiryat Arba, entered their home and murdered them while they were celebrating the Sabbath. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Mar 10, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Tomer Ron, 20, of Moshav Moledet, was killed and four soldiers were wounded - one seriously - in Hebron, on the road between the Cave of the Patriarchs and Kiryat Arba, when Palestinian terrorists opened fire on a foot patrol. Two organizations - Hamas and Ahmed Jibril's Popular Front-General Command - claimed responsibility for the attack.

Mar 12, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Assaf Moshe Fuchs, 21, of Kibbutz Gvat was killed and another soldier wounded Wednesday morning in an exchange of fire with wanted terrorists from the Islamic Jihad in the West Bank village of Saida, near Tulkarm.

Mar 18, 2003 - Sgt.-Maj. (res.) Ami Cohen, 27, of Netanya was killed and another soldier wounded south of Bethlehem when Palestinians opened fire during a search for wanted terrorists.

Mar 19, 2003 - Zion Boshirian, 51, of Mevo Dotan was shot and killed while driving in his car between Mevo Dotan and Shaked in northern Samaria. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

Apr 10, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Yigal Lifshitz, 20, of Rishon Lezion, and St.-Sgt. Ofer Sharabi, 21, of Givat Shmuel were killed and nine others wounded when Palestinian terrorists opened fire before dawn on their base near Bekaot in the northern Jordan Valley. The PFLP and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

Apr 15, 2003 - Lt. Daniel Mandel, 24, of Alon Shvut was killed and another soldier was wounded in an exchange of gunfire during a search for wanted Hamas terrorists in Nablus.

Apr 15, 2003 - Zachar Rahamin Hanukayev, 39, of Sderot and Ahmed Salah Kara, 20, of Shuafat in northern Jerusalem were killed and four Israelis were wounded when a Palestinian terrorist opened fire at the Karni industrial zone crossing in the Gaza Strip. The gunman was killed by security personnel. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

Apr 20, 2003 - IDF photographer Cpl. Lior Ziv, 19, of Holon, was killed and three other soldiers were wounded during an operation to destroy a Hamas smuggling tunnel in Rafah, in the Gaza Strip.

Apr 24, 2003 - Alexander Kostyuk, a 23-year-old security guard from Bat Yam, was killed and 13 were wounded, two seriously, in a suicide bombing outside the train station in Kfar Sava. Groups related to the Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the PFLP clamied joint responsibility for the attack.

Apr 30, 2003 - Ran Baron, 23, of Tel Aviv, Dominique Caroline Hass, 29, of Tel Aviv, and Yanai Weiss, 46, of Holon, were murdered and about 60 people were wounded when a suicide bomber blew himself up at a beachfront pub, "Mike's Place," in Tel Aviv. The Fatah Tanzim and Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack, carried out as a joint operation.

May 5, 2003 - Gideon Lichterman, 27, of Ahiya, was killed and two other passengers, his six-year-old daughter Moriah and a reserve soldier, were seriously wounded when terrorists fired shots at their vehicle near Shvut Rachel, in Samaria. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

May 11, 2003 - Zion David, 53, of Givat Ze'ev near Jerusalem, was shot in the head and killed by Palestinian terrorists in a roadside ambush half a kilometer from Ofra, north of Jerusalem. Both Fatah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine claimed responsibility for the attack.

May 17, 2003 - Gadi Levy and his wife Dina, aged 31 and 37, of Kiryat Arba were killed by a suicide bomber in Hebron. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

May 18, 2003 - Seven people were killed and 20 wounded in a suicide bombing on Egged bus no. 6 near French Hill in Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. The victims: Olga Brenner, 52; Yitzhak Moyal, 64; Nelly Perov, 55; Marina Tsahivershvili, 44; Shimon Ustinsky, 68; and Roni Yisraeli, 34 - all of the Pisgat Ze'ev neighborhood in Jerusalem; and Ghalab Tawil, 42, of Shuafat. A second suicide bomber detonated his bomb when intercepted by police in northern Jerusalem. The terrorist was killed; no one else was injured.

May 19, 2003 - Kiryl Shremko, 22, of Afula; Hassan Ismail Tawatha, 41, of Jisr a-Zarqa; and Avi Zerihan, 36, of Beit Shean were killed and about 70 people were wounded in a suicide bombing at the entrance to the Amakim Mall in Afula. The Islamic Jihad and the Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades both claimed responsibility for the attack.

June 5, 2003 - The bodies of David Shambik, 26, and Moran Menachem, 17, both of Jerusalem, were found near Hadassah Ein Karem Hospital in Jerusalem, brutally beaten and stabbed to death.

June 8, 2003 - Sgt. Maj. (Res.) Assaf Abergil, 23, of Eilat; Sgt. Maj. (Res.) Udi Eilat, 38, of Eilat; Sgt. Maj. Boaz Emete, 24, of Beit She'an; and Sgt. Maj. (Res.) Chen Engel, 32, of Ramat Gan were killed and four reserve soldiers were wounded when Palestinian terrorists wearing IDF uniforms opened fire on an IDF outpost near the Erez checkpoint and industrial zone in the Gaza Strip. Three terrorists were killed by IDF soldiers. The Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad issued a joint statement claiming responsibility for the attack.

June 8, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Matan Gadri, 21, of Moshav Moledet was killed in Hebron while pursuing two Palestinian gunmen who earlier had wounded a Border Policeman on guard at the Tomb of the Patriarchs. The two terrorists were killed.

June 11, 2003 - Seventeen people were killed and over 100 wounded in a suicide bombing on Egged bus #14A outside the Klal building on Jaffa Road in the center of Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. The victims: Sgt. Tamar Ben-Eliahu, 20, of Moshav Paran; Alan Beer, 47, of Jerusalem; Eugenia Berman, 50, of Jerusalem; Elsa Cohen, 70, of Jerusalem; Zvi Cohen, 39, of Jerusalem; Roi Eliraz, 22, of Mevaseret Zion; Alexander Kazaris, 77, of Jerusalem; Yaffa Mualem, 65, of Jerusalem; Yaniv Obayed, 22, of Herzliya; >Bat-El Ohana, 21, of Kiryat Ata; Anna Orgal, 55, of Jerusalem; Zippora Pesahovitch;, 54, of Zur Hadassah; Bianca Shahrur, 62, of Jerusalem; Malka Sultan, 67, of Jerusalem; Bertine Tita, 75, of Jerusalem. Miriam Levy, 74, of Jerusalem died of her wounds on June 12. The 17th victim, male, who has not yet been positively identified, is believed to be a foreign worker from Eritrea.

June 12, 2003 - Avner Maimon, 51, of Netanya, was found shot to death in his car near Yabed in northern Samaria. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

June 13, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Mordechai Sayada, 22, of Tirat Carmel, was shot to death in Jenin by a Palestinian sniper as his jeep patrol passed by. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

June 17, 2003 - Noam Leibowitz, 7, of Yemin Orde was killed and three members of her family wounded in a shooting attack near the Kibbutz Eyal junction on the Trans-Israel Highway. The terrorist fired from the outskirts of the West Bank city of Kalkilya. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command claimed responsibility for the attack.

June 19, 2003 - Avner Mordechai, 58, of Moshav Sde Trumot, was killed when a suicide bomber blew up in his grocery on Sde Trumot, south of Beit Shean. The suicide bomber was killed. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

June 20, 2003 - Zvi Goldstein, 47, of Eli, was killed when his car was fired upon in an ambush by Palestinian terrorists near Ofra, north of Ramallah. His parents, Eugene and Lorraine Goldstein, from New York, were seriously wounded and his wife lightly injured. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.

June 26, 2003 - Amos (Amit) Mantin, 31, of Hadera, a Bezeq employee, was killed in a shooting attack in the Israeli Arab town of Baka al-Garbiyeh. The shots were fired by a Palestinian teenager, who was apprehended by police. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

June 27, 2003 - Sgt. Maj. Erez Ashkenazi, 21, of Kibbutz Reshafim, an Israeli navy commando, was killed in an operation in Gaza to capture a Hamas cell, believed responsible for several bombings and the firing of anti-tank missiles in the Netzarim area.

June 30, 2003 - Krastyu Radkov, 46, a construction worker from Bulgaria, was killed in a shooting attack on the Yabed bypass road in northern Samaria, west of Jenin, while driving a truck. The Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack, in opposition to the declared ceasefire.

July 7, 2003 - Mazal Afari, 65, of Moshav Kfar Yavetz was killed in her home on Monday evening and three of her grandchildren lightly wounded in a terrorist suicide bombing. The remains of the bomber were also found in the wreckage of the house. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

July 15, 2003 - Amir Simhon, 24, of Bat Yam was killed when a Palestinian armed with a long-bladed knife stabbed passersby on Tel Aviv's beachfront promenade, after a security guard prevented him from entering the Tarabin cafe and was wounded. The terrorist, who was shot and apprehended, is a member of the Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

July 21, 2003 - The body of IDF soldier Cpl. Oleg Shaichat, 20, of Upper Nazareth, abducted and murdered on July 21 while on his way home, was found on July 28, buried in an olive grove near Kafr Kana, an Arab village in the Lower Galilee.

Aug 8, 2003 - Third Petty Officer Roi Oren, 20, an Israel Navy commando, was shot in the head and killed in an assault on a Hamas bomb factory in Nablus.

Aug 10, 2003 - Haviv Dadon, 16, of Shlomi, was struck in the chest and killed by shrapnel from an anti-aircraft shell fired by Hizbullah terrorists in Lebanon, as he sat with friends after work. Four others were wounded.

Aug 12, 2003 - Yehezkel (Hezi) Yekutieli, 43, of Rosh Ha'ayin, was murdered by a teenaged Palestinian suicide bomber who detonated himself as Yekutieli was shopping for his children's breakfast at his local supermarket.

Aug 12, 2003 - Erez Hershkovitz, 18, of Eilon Moreh, was murdered by a teenaged Palestinian suicide bomber who detonated himself at a bus stop outside Ariel less than half an hour after the Rosh Ha'ayin attack. Amatzia Nisanevitch, 22, of Nofim, died of his wounds on August 28.

Aug 19, 2003 - Twenty-three people were murdered and 134 wounded when a Palestinian suicide bomber detonated himself on a No. 2 Egged bus in Jerusalem's Shmuel Hanavi neighborhood. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. The victims: Avraham Bar-Or, 12, of Jerusalem; Binyamin Bergman, 15, of Jerusalem; Yaakov Binder, 50, of Jerusalem; Feiga Dushinski, 50, of Jerusalem; Miriam Eisenstein, 20, of Bnei Brak; Lilach Kardi, 22, of Jerusalem; Menachem Leibel, 24, of Jerusalem; Elisheva Meshulami, 16, of Bnei Brak; Tehilla Nathanson, 3, of Zichron Ya'acov; Chava Nechama Rechnitzer, 19, of Bnei Brak; Mordechai Reinitz, 49, and Issachar Reinitz, 9, of Netanya; Maria Antonia Reslas, 39, of the Philippines; Liba Schwartz, 54, of Jerusalem; Hanoch Segal, 65, of Bnei Brak; Goldie Taubenfeld, 43, and Shmuel Taubenfeld, 3 months, of New Square, New York; Rabbi Eliezer Weisfish, 42, of Jerusalem; Shmuel Wilner, 50, of Jerusalem; Shmuel Zargari, 11 months, of Jerusalem. Fruma Rahel Weitz, 73, of Jerusalem died of her wounds on August 23; Mordechai Laufer, 27, died of his on September 5; and Tova Lev, 37, died on September 12.

Aug 29, 2003 - Shalom Har-Melekh, 25, of Homesh was killed in a shooting attack while driving northeast of Ramallah. His wife, Limor, who was seven months pregnant, sustained moderate injuries, and gave birth to a baby girl by Caesarean section. The Fatah al-Aqsa Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

Sept 4, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Gabriel Uziel, 20, of Givat Ze'ev was shot and mortally wounded by a terrorist sniper in Jenin; he died en route to the hospital. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

Sept 5, 2003 - 2nd Petty Officer Ra'anan Komemi, 23, of Moshav Aminadav, from the Naval Commandos was killed in a clash with armed Palestinians in Nablus. A senior Hamas bomb-maker, believed to have orchestrated several fatal suicide bombings, was also killed in the clash. Four soldiers were wounded, one seriously.

Sept 9, 2003 - Eight IDF soldiers were killed and 32 people were wounded in a suicide bombing at a hitchhiking post for soldiers outside a main entrance to the Tzrifin army base and Assaf Harofeh Hospital. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. The victims: Senior Warrant Officer Haim Alfasi, 39, of Haifa; Chief Warrant Officer Yaakov Ben-Shabbat, 39, of Pardes Hanna; Cpl. Mazi Grego, 19, of Holon; Capt. Yael Kfir, 21, of Ashkelon; Cpl. Felix Nikolaichuk, 20, of Bat Yam; Sgt. Yonatan Peleg, 19, of Moshav Yanuv; Sgt. Efrat Schwartzman, 19, of Moshav Ganei Yehuda; and Cpl. Prosper Twito, 20, of Upper Nazareth.

Sept 9, 2003 - Seven people were killed and over 50 wounded when a suicide bomber at Cafe Hillel on Emek Refaim St., the main thoroughfare of the German Colony neighborhood in Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack. The victims: Dr. David Appelbaum, 51, and his daughter Nava Appelbaum, 20, of Jerusalem; David Shimon Avizadris, 51, of Mevaseret Zion; Shafik Kerem, 27, of Beit Hanina; Alon Mizrahi, 22, of Jerusalem; Gila Moshe, 40, of Jerusalem; and Yehiel (Emil) Tubol, 52, of Jerusalem.

Sept 25, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Avihu Keinan, 22, of Shilo was killed and six soldiers wounded in an IDF operation to arrest wanted Islamic Jihad and Hamas terrorists in the El Boureij refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip.

Sept 26, 2003 - Eyal Yeberbaum, 27, and seven-month-old Shaked Avraham, both of Negohot, south of Hebron, were killed during the holiday meal on the eve of Rosh Hashana in the Yeberbaum home when a Palestinian terrorist who infiltrated the settlement opened fire with an M-16 assault rifle. The terrorist was killed by IDF forces. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.

Oct 4, 2003 - Twenty-one people were killed, including four children, and 58 wounded in a suicide bombing carried out by a female terrorist from Jenin in the Maxim restaurant in Haifa. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack. The victims: Admiral (res.) Ze'ev Almog, 71, of Haifa, and his wife Ruth Almog, 70; their son Moshe Almog, 43, and grandsons Tomer Almog, 9, and Assaf Staier, 11, all of Haifa; Zvi Bahat, 35, of Haifa; Mark Biano, 29, of Haifa, and his wife Naomi Biano, 25; Hana Francis, 39, of Fassouta; Mutanus Karkabi, 31, of Haifa; Sharbal Matar, 23, of Fassouta; Osama Najar, 28, of Haifa, cook; Nir Regev, 25, of Nahariya; Irena Sofrin, 38, of Kiryat Bialik; Bruria Zer-Aviv, 59, her son Bezalel Zer-Aviv, 30, and his wife Keren Zer-Aviv, 29, with their children Liran, 4, and Noya, 1, all of Kibbutz Yagur. Lydia Zilberstein, 58, died on October 10 and George Matar, 57, died October 15.

Oct 15, 2003 - Three American diplomatic personnel - John Eric Branchizio, 37, of Texas, John Martin Linde, Jr., 30, of Missouri, and Mark T. Parson, 31, of New York, were killed and one was wounded at the Beit Hanoun junction in the Gaza Strip when a massive bomb demolished an armor-plated jeep in a convoy carrying U.S. diplomats.

Oct 19, 2003 - St.-Sgt. Erez Idan, 19, of Rishon Lezion, Sgt. Elad Pollack, 19, of Kiryat Motzkin, and Sgt. Roi Ya'acov Solomon, 21, of Tel Aviv, were killed and another soldier was seriously wounded while on patrol in Ein Yabrud, north of Ramallah, when terrorists fired on them from behind. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

Oct 24, 2003 - Three IDF soldiers - St.-Sgt. Alon Avrahami, 21, of Or Yehuda, Sgt. Adi Osman, 19, of Kfar Sava, and Sgt. Sarit Schneor-Senior, 19, of Shoham - were killed and two others wounded when a Palestinian terrorist infiltrated the army base in the Gaza Strip settlement of Netzarim and opened fire on the soldiers' barracks. Hamas and the Islamic Jihad claimed joint responsibility for the attack.

Nov 18, 2003 - Two IDF soldiers, Sgt.-Maj. Shlomi Belsky, 23, of Haifa, and St.-Sgt. Shaul Lahav, 20, of Kibbutz Shomrat, were killed by a Palestinian terrorist who opened fire with an AK-47 assault rifle, hidden in a prayer rug, at a checkpoint on the tunnel bypass road, linking Jerusalem and the Gush Etzion bloc. The Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack.

Nov 19, 2003 - Patricia Ter'n Navarrete, 33, of Ecuador was killed and four other tourists, pilgrims from Ecuador, were wounded when a terrorist entered the Israel-Jordan border crossing terminal north of Eilat from the Jordanian side and opened fire. The terrorist was killed by Israeli security guards.

Nov 22, 2003 - Two Israeli security guards, Ilya Reiger, 58, of Jerusalem, and Samer Fathi Afan, 25, of the Bedouin village Uzeir near Nazareth, were shot dead at a construction site along the route of the security fence near Abu Dis in East Jerusalem. The Jenin Martyrs' Brigades, affiliated with Fatah, claimed responsibility for the attack.

December 25, 2003 - A suicide bomber killed four people and wounded more than 20 in an explosion near a bus stop at Geha Junction in Petah Tikvah, a suburb of Tel Aviv. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine claimed responsibility. For a list of Palestinian fatal Terror-attacks against Israelis go to; http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Terrorism/victims.html Palestinian Arab Violations of President Bush's "Road Map" Plan A Survey of Week #34: December 16, 2003 - December 22, 2003.

This is crossposted on IsraPundit.

Posted by Ted Belman, December 31, 2003.
The debate on this one is all over the block. Did the IDF violate the rules of engagement? Are there different rules for dealing with protests by Arabs and by Jews? The rules should be changed to make sure it doesn't happen again, but are they looking for rules that make sure such protests don't happen again or that such protestors aren't shot? What is acceptable protest? What should be done to prevent unacceptable protest? Etc, etc.

I detect a tendency on the part of the Israelis, to apologize or feel guilty or to worry about international reaction. What I don't see enough of is confidence in the Israeli cause or methods. Israel is easy pickings. And the Left and the Arabs know it.

Throughout the last few years, the world has done everything it can to tie Israel's hands. "There is no military solution.". "Exercise restraint." "Don't use excessive force." "Don't act unilaterally." "Don't prejudge the outcome by putting facts on the ground." "Don't do a land grab." "Don't build the fence." "Don't set up blockades or restrict Palestinians." "Stop targeted killings." Ad nauseum.

It is one thing for the Left to buy into these restrictions. It's another thing for the Right to do so.

What is happening here is an attempt to prevent Israel from using its military strength to get a better result in the final settlement. Mind you, the Arabs are allowed to do everything in their power to get a better result, such as incitement, terror, propaganda, anti-Semitism, UN resolutions etc.

If that weren't enough, the Roadmap that was dreamed up by the Quartet with the Saudi's approval, further favours the Arabs with a better result then they could achieve with negotiations. It mandates that there should be a Palestinian state, that it should be "viable" and that it should be "contiguous." Whereas Res. 242 mandates "secure and recognized borders," the Roadmap has finessed this requirement into an Israeli entitlement to "peace and security." So security must come from peace rather than from secure borders. Nowhere does one hear anything about Israel's rights to any part of Yesha. There are none, so they say. We are expected to give back all the land and are told that security will come from peace.

Israel must choose between dancing this tune and marching to its own drummer.

This is the context in which the debate above mentioned must be resolved. Imagine, if you will, a major assault upon the fence by 10,000 unarmed protestors over a distance of 100 miles with the intent of destroying the fence. What should the rules of engagement say then? For Israel to allow the fence to be destroyed would be a major setback both militarily and psychologically. So the fence is our line of defence. It must be protected at all costs, even if it means killing such saboteurs. Let's not dignify them by calling them "protesters."

People who violate military curfews are often shot. People who violate orders to stop at barricades are shot. Boats that come too close to warships are blown out of the water. Planes that violate orders can be shot down even if they contain innocent passengers. There is no shortage of precedents. And people, whether Arab or Israeli, who enter restricted military zones, such as exist along the fence, should be shot. The rules of engagement should provide for it. Such rules are already in place along the Gaza fence where Arabs, whether terrorists or labourers, have been shot attempting to cross the fence.

The rationale for doing this should not be limited to whether one's life is in danger. To expect Israel to have thousands of troops along the fence, prepared to do battle with the saboteurs for a number of days running without the use of lethal force, is to put Israel at an untenable disadvantage. Israel must play by its own rules and the rules must be drawn up to ensure Israel comes out the winner.

Whether the Left likes it or not, winning is everything. There is no duty to compromise. Whether in defense of one's life or one's country, killing is acceptable. Values such as "thou shalt not kill" or any other value that the Left wants to hold over Israel, give way to her duty to survive.

The Left argues that Israel is losing her soul to save her body. Quite the contrary. Only if Israel fights to save her body will she save her soul. Her "soul", should one worry about it, should include such values as pride, love of self, self respect, honour, patriotism, courage and the like. If Israel is not for herself, then she has lost her soul.

Ted Belman is co-publisher of IsraPundit (http://israpundit.com), which is "dedicated to pro-Israel advocacy through the presentation of news and views." This article is archived at http://israpundit.com/archives/004049.html#more

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 31, 2003.
Just as the US got Israel to abandon its superior Lavi fighter plane, now it is getting Israel to abandon its superior Merkava tank. The US motive is both mercenary and anti-Zionist. A strong Israeli military industry competes with the American one and helps shore up the Jewish state financially and militarily.

The Lavi jet combined excellent ground support and air superiority. It is the type of plane that meets Israeli needs as does no other plane. Former Sec. of Defense Weinberger had pressured Israel to cancel production of that plane (and to cancel some naval projects) in favor of US-made F-16s. The F-16 is not designed for close ground support.

The Lavi (which had development cost overruns) would have cost $17 million each, including spare parts, or half what other countries charge for their planes. The Lavi was lighter and faster than the F-16, showed up less on radar, carried heavier armaments, and was a good training vehicle. Congress had helped finance the Lavi, because hundreds of Americans would have been employed making parts for it. PM Rabin, however, slighted a warming Congressional relationship by getting his Cabinet to drop the Lavi. Israel lost many jobs as a result.

Now the Merkava tank, in which Israel has invested $6.5 billion, is to be sacrificed for lighter US tanks. The US needs light tanks, transportable by air; Israel does not. Israel's enemies present themselves at the border. The heavy Merkava is designed to meet and thwart them. It affords better protection from small-arms attack, roadside bombs, and shoulder-fired missiles, can transport troops, and has better offensive capabilities. It costs half as much as the main US tank, that is not designed for desert warfare. The US Abrams tank breaks down in the sand.

Incidentally, the US does not make Abrams tanks any more. It proposes to sell Israel used ones. How Israel would replace them, and why it should become dependent upon a foreign (and capricious) foreign supplier for spare parts, is not sensible.

During several war games, the Merkava one-sidedly beat the US tank. News of US tank inferiority would have embarrassed the US, so it was suppressed. Due, again, to an underhanded scheme of Sec. Weinberger, Egypt manufactures the Abrams tank. Israeli generals want the Merkava, to keep their qualitative edge against Egypt, armed with US weaponry.

Merkava sales abroad earn hundreds of millions of dollars. By abandoning that tank, "Israel will lose its status as one of the leaders of the world in tank technology and will, therefore, lose projects of co-development and co-production of armored systems with other nations." (Winston Mid East Analysis, 12/16, e-mail, with last quotation from Brig. Gen. (Res.) Ze'ev Bar-Gil.)

The Merkava tank is worth about as much as the total US military aid to Israel. If Israel has to sacrifice something, let it be US military aid! Israel must not let its ordnance become dependent upon the US, which in the past has threatened to withhold it unless Israel gave in to the Arabs.

Posted by Women In Green, December 31, 2003.
This was written by Shalom Freedman.

There were no settlers in Judea and Samaria and Gaza in 1967. There were none in 1956. Those Jews who lived there in 1947 and 1948, and were murdered or driven out by the Arabs, were not called "settlers", but rather Jews of Palestine living in Eretz Yisrael. Yet, even without the settlers, the Arabs tried to destroy the Jewish presence in the Holy Land, managed to kill Jews in whatever cruel ways they could. This is also true in the 1920s and 1930s. It did not take 'settlers to create a quarrel' between the Jews and their Arab neighbors. And it did not take settlers to induce the Arabs to try to make all of Israel/Palestine Judenrein.

The settlers are not now, and have never been the real cause of Arab hostility to Israel, unless, that is, you regard every Jew in the Holy Land as a settler. In that case, it really is the settlers with whom the Arabs are not willing to live in peace, at all.

Despite this, the world media, under Arab propaganda instruction, see the settlers as the main obstacle to peace. And this despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of them live on land that no Arab lived on. In fact, many of those very left-wing Jews who also "blame the settlers" do live on properties that Arabs once lived on; while the settlers live on state lands, which were never settled before.

Arab hatred of the settlers comes, I suspect, in part because they understand that the settlers share a certain value with them. The settlers value 'the land' and the Arabs value land above all. The settlers are their rivals in a way that Jews content to dwell in high-rises in the cities are not. The Arabs hate the settlers, because they consider them their real rivals in claims of possession of state lands, which no one really owns.

The scapegoating of the settlers is also the means by which the Israeli Left makes the conflict a 'rational' and 'solvable' one. In order to be balanced, in order to give justification to their vision of peace, the Israeli Left must find the Jewish bad-guys. The settlers are given this role. The Israeli Left, because of this vision of 'balancing it out', has made terrible mistakes of judgment, which have caused Israel many lives. The Left does not understand that the heart of the conflict has nothing whatever to do with the settlers, but has everything to do with the right of Jews to have a state of their own in the holy land.

The world too, in order to be fair, has to find a Jewish source of evil to balance against Arab evil, such as Palestinian suicide bombers. The settlers play that role. The absurdity of comparing people whose major crime is living in their ancestral homeland with terrorists, who deliberately kill Jews wherever they can, does not seem to deter Middle East pundits. They know if the settlers would only go away, real peace would be established.

The truth is that it is not because there are too many 'settlers', but because the Jewish people failed to bring another two million people into Judea and Samaria, we continue to hear demands to make these parts of the ancestral Jewish homeland free of a Jewish presence. The great shame and error is not that there are too many settlers, but that there are too few Jews in those parts of the land of Israel that are closest to us historically and religiously.

Women in Green is an activist group of Jewish women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 31, 2003.
I'm forwarding this. It was send to Ellen by a friend.

It is time to take a serious look at our involvement there.

Every day there are news reports about more deaths. Every night on the TV are photos of death and destruction. Why are we still there?

The land is too large to secure all of it. The bad people causing this damage can roam anywhere, and we can't possibly police the whole place. Why are we still there?

We occupied this land, which we had to take by force, but it causes us nothing but trouble. Why are we still there?

Their government is unstable, and in the process of changing. Why are we still there?

Refugees are fleeing by the thousands, driven from their homes. Why are we still there?

It will cost billions to rebuild, which we can't afford. Why are we still there?

There are more than 1000 religious sects.

We can't even secure the borders. Why are we still there?

And to repeat. Every day we hear of more Americans killed in this dangerous land.

It is clear!   We must abandon California.

Posted by CAMERA, December 31, 2003.
Syndicated Cartoonist Stephan Pastis, creator of the cartoon strip "Pearls Before Swine," deserves praise for his Sunday, Dec. 28 cartoon which humanizes Israeli child victims of Palestinian terror. Perhaps as part of a letter-writing campaign by anti-Israel activists, Pastis has received many letters protesting his Dec. 28 strip. Pastis, who is syndicated by United Media, has rarely if at all focused on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Please let him hear from more than just members of the public who can't bear for anyone to show sympathy or compassion for Israelis. Let him hear from people who share his view that terrorism against children is unacceptable. His email address is stpastis@yahoo.com

The Dec 28 cartoon showed a TV with the following news report being read throughout the various segments of the strip: "Leading off the news tonight, six Israeli children died early today when the bus they were riding in exploded in downtown Jerusalem...They were little kids...with backpacks filled with sandwiches and juice and gym shoes and math books...They had bedrooms with posters of race cars and soccer players, and they had unmade beds with spiderman sheets...They had little sisters and dentist appointments and cats and jeans with holes in the knee...They took piano lessons on Tuesday and spent Sunday afternoons with their dads, who made them hold hands whenever they crossed a street...And on the wall of the hall to their bedrooms was a long line of photos, with each of their annual school pictures placed chronologically...By a Mom...Who kissed her son goodbye that morning and watched him board the bus...That exploded in downtown Jerusalem."

United Media's website describes "Pearls Before Swine" as "the comic strip tale of two friends: a megalomaniacal Rat who thinks he knows it all and a slow-witted Pig who doesn't know any better...While Pig is content with his humble status in life, Rat is always on a futile search for fame, riches and immortality." The Dec. 28 cartoon about Israeli terror victims can be viewed at www.unitedmedia.com/comics/pearls/archive/pearls-20031228.html

The cartoon strip reportedly appeared in the Washington Post on Dec. 28 and appeared in hundreds of other newspapers across the country in the Sunday comic strip section.

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reoorting in America (CAMERA) monitors bias and unfairness in the news and broadcast media. Their website address is http://www.camera.org

Posted by MEMRI, December 31, 2003.
Egyptian and Arab Press Reactions to the Attack on Egypt's Foreign Minister Inside Al-Aqsa Mosque Special Dispatch - Egypt/ Palestinian Authority, January 1, 2004, No. 636.

While visiting the Al-Aqsa Mosque on his recent trip to Israel, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Maher was attacked by a group of Palestinians who cursed him, threw shoes at him, and called for the resumption of Jihad in Egypt. According to media reports, the assailants belonged to Hizb Al-Tahrir (the Islamist "Liberation Party"). The following is a compilation of Arab media reactions to the attack, which was highly critical of the Palestinians:

'You Have Cast Shame and Disgrace on Yourselves and Your Cause'

Two days after the incident, many articles and op-eds concerning the attack on Maher appeared in the Egyptian press.

Ahmad Ragab, who provides a daily comment for the op-ed page of the government daily Al-Akhbar, stated that the problem begins at an early age and emanates from the Arab world's curriculum: "In Arab language classes, the pupils are taught [the sentence] 'Omar hit Zayd,' but never [the sentence] 'Omar hit Cohen.'"(1)

In the Egyptian daily Al-Masaa, columnist Muhammad Foudah tried to stir a sense of shame among the Palestinians: "Did those Palestinians who attacked the Egyptian foreign minister ... ask themselves why Maher agreed to take upon himself the suffering of going to Israel and meeting with Sharon and his cabinet? Did he go just to tour a country with which we have cut off relations and gotten into political crisis for the sake of Palestine...? Do the Palestinians want Egypt to keep its hands off the Palestinian issue? This would be the easiest thing to do and has already been done by many Arab countries... You beat the man who came on your behalf, and it is Israel that takes him to the hospital for treatment. What shame and disgrace you have cast upon yourselves and on your cause!..."(2)

'There's Nothing Unresolved Between Egypt and Israel But the Palestinian Cause'

The editor of Al-Akhbar, Galal Duweidar, wrote: "... The whole world, including the Palestinians, knows that there is no unresolved problem between Egypt and Israel after the [1973] October victory and the signing of the peace agreement... The only [remaining] reason [for problems between Egypt and Israel] is the defense of the rights of the Palestinians, and not the defense of any direct Egyptian interests...

"Despite [Egypt's] ongoing sacrifice [for the Palestinians] which spoils Egypt's relations with Israel and with the Zionist lobby, and thus with the U.S., we were surprised by this rogue rebellious Palestinian group that carried out the barbaric and mean attack on the foreign minister of Egypt - which is the only base of support for the Palestinian people. How can we, the Egyptian columnists who every day defend the rights of this people by confronting the Israeli aggression, [how can we] explain this despicable act?... This group of criminals ... is treacherous and works for Israel and for all the enemies of the Arab nation... Yes, these sinning assailants are deserving of the curse of 70 million Egyptians who yesterday watched this cowardly act on television..."(3)

'Hasn't the Time Come to Focus on Our Domestic Problems?'

Also in Al-Akhbar, columnist Said Sunbul wrote: "... Accusing the Egyptian foreign minister of betrayal means accusing Egypt of betrayal. This is not the first time that Egypt has been accused of betrayal, despite all that it did and does for the Palestinians. 'Betrayal' is a most used word in the Palestinian dictionary. They used it against former [PA] prime minister Abu Mazen, who preferred to resign; they used it against former minister Yasser Abd Rabbo and his colleagues, who went to Geneva to agree on a peace document that would guarantee a life of dignity for the Palestinians.

"Even before then, the Palestinians accused [Egyptian president Gamal] Abd Al-Nasser of betrayal for accepting U.S. Secretary of State Rogers' plan. They accused Anwar Sadat of betrayal when he invited them to the conference at Mina House. Had they agreed to participate in this conference, or to accept the principles of the Camp David agreement, they would not have made it possible for Israel to establish the settlements and the separation fence, and would not have needed to make all these concessions!...

"The contemptible attack on the Egyptian foreign minister ... causes many to ask whether the time has not come to focus on our domestic problems - many of which stem from the wars in which we participated for the sake of Palestine - instead of wasting efforts [in an attempt] to solve the problem of a people who are at odds among themselves and accuse each other, and others, of betrayal."(4)

'No More Will We Turn the Other Cheek'

The most scathing commentary came from Ibrahim Sa'dah, editor of the Akhbar Al-Youm weekly. Sa'dah wrote that he was "unconvinced" by the Egyptian foreign minister's attempts to downplay the severity of the incident. He called for convening the Egyptian Parliament in order to discuss Egyptian policy on the Palestinian issue, in the wake of "the assassination attempt on the Egyptian foreign minister." Sa'dah reviewed the history of Egyptian-Palestinian relations from the time of President Sadat, and wrote: "Despite the contemptible attacks planned and carried out by the Arabs, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat, against the [peace] initiative of the Egyptian president, Sadat attached no importance to this nastiness, and continued courageously on the path of peace...

"I do not think that the Egyptian people can forget or disregard those years when its political leadership was the target of the ugliest of attacks - not only by the Arab media but also by some rulers, led by Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat... The Egyptian people will also not forget that Yasser Arafat danced with joy when the assassination of President Sadat was announced...

"The time has come to tell the Palestinian Authority, 'No! A thousand times no!'... No more will we turn the right cheek to take the same slap that the left cheek has taken time and again. We are fed up, Your Excellency, sole spokesman of the Palestinian people, with your repeated statements [blaming] any anti-Egyptian act on the part of the Palestinians on a tiny, stupid minority...

"Personally, I do not accept the apology of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat... I demand that Parliament convene for a special session, with the presence of the foreign minister, to be dedicated to examining our policy regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict... Perhaps its members will think otherwise, but I also propose as a solution for this dispute ... to conduct a poll among the sectors of the Egyptian people regarding our policy in the Palestinian issue..."(5)

In the Al-Ahram daily, columnist Salah Muntasir used more restrained language: "I am trying, instead of arousing additional rage, to maintain restraint. Egypt will not permit those who are the enemies of their own cause, the enemies of their own rights, the enemies of their own struggle, to accomplish their goals. This is the tax that we have paid and are paying, while those hostile and ungrateful people who tarnish their own image belong in [the] garbage bin of history."(6)

The liberal-leaning Hazem Abd Al-Rahman wrote in his Al-Ahram column: "... Are these scum of the earth capable of accomplishing something for the Palestinian people? It is reasonable to assume that they, like the supporters of suicide bombings, are the first to damage the Palestinian cause, and are bringing death upon the Palestinian people..."(7)

Mursey 'Atallah, editor of the Al-Ahram evening edition, wrote: "...This rabble, that patronizes others and claims it is more patriotic, still seeks to trap the nation in a cycle of conflict just to inflame the emotions. Everything that happened to the Palestinians as a result of their being dragged after the leaders of words, who for over half a century waved the motto of complete liberation from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea, until we lost nearly everything and Palestine was left practically without a river and without a sea, was not enough for them..."(8)

'This Attack Should Be Condemned By Anybody With A Brain Or Half A Brain'

The Arab press's condemnation of the attack on Foreign Minister Maher was nearly unanimous. For example, in the Qatari daily Al-Raya, columnist Abd Al-Karim Hashish wrote: "I don't need to repeat what others have said, that is, that the attack was organized by the Israelis. Such an allegation is first of all nonsense, and emanates from some peoples' addiction to turning the facts upside down, and burying their heads in the sand. Those who attacked the Egyptian foreign minister... are flesh-and-blood Palestinians, and the Israelis had nothing to do with it... The truth is, I don't care which faction they belong to. This attack should be [condemned] by anybody with a brain, or half a brain. What I wanted to emphasize is that this stupid behavior will have serious ramifications for the status of Al-Aqsa Mosque, and might give legitimacy to Israeli intervention and Israeli security supervision over it..."(9)

'The Arabs Are Their Own Worst Enemy'

In the Lebanese daily Al-Nahar, editor Jubran Tuweini wrote that the attack on Maher was "the height of baseness and of Arab humiliation. It was a free gift to the enemies of the Arabs, headed by Israel. Once again, we realize that the Arabs are their own worst enemy - just as the worst enemy of the Palestinian cause is the Palestinians, who have endorsed a policy of refusal and fundamentalist extremism as a way of behavior. How many times have they already served Israel with their deeds? How many times has the behavior of these groups already saved Ariel Sharon and his government?

"What happened to Minister Maher reminds us of the history of inter-Arab relations... A simple calculation reveals that the number of instances of Arab-Arab aggression surpasses the number of Arab-Israeli wars..."(10)

Al-Quds Al-Arabi: A Pro-Saddam Position

A different opinion was expressed by the pro-Saddam editor of the London daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi, Abd Al-Bari Atwan. The morning after the attack, he wrote in an article titled "Shoes of Early Warning:" "The shoes that were pelted like rain on the head of Ahmad Maher... are a lesson to all Arab leaders and their representatives who scorned the Arab street, its demands, and its sentiments, and who listen today only to the American administration and its humiliating demands to normalize relations with the Hebrew state, serve its interests, and conceal its terrorist policy.

"Mr. Maher humiliated the Egyptian people and its living national forces when, against their will and out of disdain for its sentiments, he went to Tel Aviv to meet with the Israeli prime minister, whose hands are drenched with the blood of Palestinian fighters and of the Egyptian soldiers who martyred themselves in defense of the honor of their nation and their country.

"When the Egyptian foreign minister becomes neutral in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the Egyptian government becomes 'an honest broker' between the parties, we should not be surprised that Foreign Minister Maher is hit by shoes..."(11)

An Egyptian Response to Atwan

In response to Atwan's article, columnist Kamal Abd Al-Raouf wrote in the Egyptian Akhbar Al-Youm weekly: "I regret that most of the commentary I heard on international radio from Palestinians was lukewarm rather than powerful. Some of them clearly blamed our foreign minister [Ahmad Maher]. One of these was Abd Al-Bari Atwan ... who condemned Ahmad Maher. This was to be expected from Atwan, who for many years has been fighting for the cause from the saloons of London. Nobody knows with whom or against whom this Atwan stands. The only thing I know is that he gives foreign radio a reason to believe that Israel is right."(12)

Liberal Arab Website: 'Those Behind This Aggression Are Not A Minority'

On the liberal Arab website Elaph, Egyptian columnist Sami Buheiri wrote: "We should be frank with ourselves: Those behind this aggression are not a minority, as the official Palestinian and Egyptian statements claim. Unfortunately, they represent the rabble majority of the Arab and Palestinian street today. They refuse to accept any kind of a peace agreement with Israel... It is they who applaud the bus and restaurant bombings in order to destroy any spark of hope for peace... They are Arab nationalists who have failed completely in all their wars with Israel and in all attempts to achieve peace with Israel, because they were not serious, and they were not men - neither in fighting nor in peacemaking... The flying shoes at Al-Aqsa Mosque represent the Arab mind that has flown off into the air and not returned."(13)

(1) Al-Akhbar (Egypt), December 25, 2003.
(2) Al-Masaa (Egypt), December 24, 2003.
(3) Al-Akhbar (Egypt), December 24, 2003.
(4) Al-Akhbar (Egypt), December 24, 2003.
(5) Akhbar Al-Youm (Egypt), December 27, 2003.
(6) Al-Ahram (Egypt), December 24, 2003.
(7) Al-Ahram (Egypt), December 24, 2003.
(8) Al-Ahram Al-Masaai (Egypt), December 23, 2003.
(9) Al-Raya (Qatar), December 24, 2003.
(10) Al-Nahar (Lebanon), December 24, 2003.
(11) Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), December 23, 2003.
(12) Akhbar Al-Youm (Egypt), December 27, 2003, as cited in Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London), December 29.
(13) http://www.elaph.com.:8080/elaph/arabic/archives/oldindex.html, December 30, 2003.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. Its website address is http://www.memri.org

Posted by Barry Shaw, December 31, 2003.
Zvi Hefetz, Israel's choice to be its next Ambassador to the Court of St.James, will be our prime representative to the United Kingdom. He will be our leading advocate, our face, our voice, to make Israel's case to an increasing antagonistic British public. He must be the man to help sway public opinion in Britain.

His candidacy was overwhelmingly approved all the way from the Foreign Office to the office of the Prime Minister. One of the Foreign Office officials on the selection committee said, "I came away with no reservations about him. We were impressed by Mr. Hefetz's C.V. and by his appearance before our panel. He will be successful as our Israel Ambassador in Britain".

Fine words, indeed. Words that display full confidence in the selected candidate after a lengthy selection process by top Israeli officials. There is only one small matter that needs raising. THE NEW AMBASSADOR TO BRITAIN CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH!!!!

Really Foreign Office! Is this a New Year's joke on the British? Or on us? It should give our enemies in our hasbara war a good belly laugh.

Putting aside the fact that Zvi Hefetz has absolutely no ambassadorial experience. Overlooking the fact that he has no diplomatic experience save for just one month work as an emissary for Nativ in Moscow. Let's concentrate on one fact. HE CAN'T SPEAK ENGLISH!

Is this the way that the Israeli Government select its leading advocates? This is, literally, decision making at the highest level of incompetence!

Is this the very best candidate in the State of Israel that they can find to champion our cause in Britain? How will he fight our case in the corridors of Whitehall? By organizing courses in Hebrew for British civil servants? How can he convince a biased media? Or inform a misinformed public? How can he even ask key questions, and personally speak to and understand the feelings and fears of members of the Jewish community?

For those of us who care so much about Israel's image abroad this selection is a tragedy. It is not only the Palestinians who miss an opportunity for missing an opportunity. In public affairs, we are far worse.

No wonder we're in trouble!

Barry Shaw writes "The View From Here." Write him at netre@matav.net.il to subscribe.

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 31, 2003.
I sent this to the Washington Post.

Robin Wright misses the mark when she blames President Bush's "moribund" diplomacy for stalling his Mideast peace plan ("Palestinian State Remains Bush's Unfulfilled Goal", Dec. 31). The reason for lack of progress is the "moribund" conduct of Yasir Arafat and the Palestinian Authority, which have left Israel and the United States without a reliable negotiating partner to move the process forward. As long as Palestinian leaders refuse to acknowledge the permanence of Israel and embrace terrorism as a strategic option, Palestinians can kiss statehood goodbye. Just as Britain and the United States insisted on the Irish Republican Army putting down its weapons as a pre-condition for a peace deal in Northern Ireland, there can be no two-state solution for Israelis and Palestinians if Hamas and Islamic Jihad are free to pursue their murderous campaign against the Jewish state.

Posted by Judy Balint, December 31, 2003.
This was written by Moshe Kempinski of Jerusalem. He can be reached at http://www.shorashim2u.net.

Every weekday morning, Reb Gil arrives at the western wall for pre- dawn prayers.He attempts to arrive earlier than most of the others in order to help setting up the chairs for those arriving for Neitz Prayers. Since ancient days, Jewish people have been awakening the dawn with prayer, not awakening with the dawn but awakening the dawn.

Last week a new person joined the group at the wall. He was visiting from America and very soon became a regular with this special group.

The man, known as Leibel, began to help Reb Gil in the setting up of the chairs. As they were working he asked Gil "what exactly do you do?" Gil smiled and answered that "I help people put on their tefilin (phylacteries) here at the Kotel." Laibel's eyes opened wide and he responded, "well I helped people put on tefilin in the death camps."

Gil stared at him for a while and then quickly had him sit down and tell his story.

When Laibel was a young boy, the Germans came to take him and his family to the death camps during one of the "aktions". Just as he was leaving the house Laibel's father gave him large boots to keep his feet warm. Laibel ran to his room and grabbed the tefilin and siddur (prayerbook) he had recently acquired at his bar-mitzva and stuffed them into his new oversized boots.Then the family left their home and their past forever.

The cattle car train ride to the camp was horrific and Laibel soon found himself separated from his family.Because of his small size, he was told to gather with many of the other children on the left side of the ramp.

It was already known amongst the Jews that the left side led to the ominous building that meant death. As they gathered in the room where they were told to remove their clothes to prepare for the "showers" the children stood there transfixed in shock.Laibel turned to the others and declared that this was not the way Jews were meant to enter heaven. He asked them to form rows of five and march together. They would enter the gas chambers singing "Ani Maamin( I Believe)."

As the german guards stared in disbelief, this group of young Jewish children formed rows of five and defiantly began singing as loud as they could. As they began to move in the direction of the doors one of the officers began screaming at them to be silent. For some unknown reason he then barked at them to turn to a different direction and to gather their prison clothes.

Stunned, the group turned away from death.

As they stood in line to recieve their striped rags. Laibel saw his fathers boots standing at the edge of the pile of all their old clothes.He turned to some of the other children and asked them to help him.

He asked them to begin bickering and fighting amongst themselves.They could not refuse the boy whose inspiration saved their lives.

In the midst of the noise Laibel was able to retrieve both the tefilin and the siddur.

Throughout the remaining years in the camps Laibel succeeded in hiding his treasure. As a result he and many that were with him succeeded, as well, in putting on the tefilin whenever the opportunity arose.

In the midst of the fires of hell, young Jews were fulfilling G-d's will and wrapping themselves up in the tefilin. In the midst of the pit of darkness they recited the following prayer from the book of Hoshea and enacted the act of betrothal so integral to the Tefilin ritual.

"And I will betroth thee unto Me for ever; yea, I will betroth Thee unto Me in righteousness, and in justice, and in lovingkindness, and in compassion. And I will betroth Thee unto Me in faithfulness; and thou shalt know the LORD".

Gil and Laibel continued talking until it was time to begin the morning prayers as the dawn quickly dispelled the darkness of the night and the memories.

Later that day, Reb Gil was back at his stand at the western wall asking people if they were interested in putting on tefilin. He began talking to a soldier visiting the western wall with his unit. The soldier looked at Gil with a certain air of ridicule and said," sorry not me."Gil replied, " I need to tell you a story I heard just this morning." He repeated Laibel's story.

The soldier looked down, and then towards the heavens. With eyes slightly moist with tears, this young soldier wrapped the tefilin on his arms and on his head and read the Shma.

Next morning Gil rushed up to Laibel and told him the story. Laibel just smiled and shook his head. A simple young child helped Jewish prisoners in a death camp to

connect with their Creator. That simple eloquent act did the exact same thing sixty years later to a Jewish warrior in the reborn state of Israel.

The author is one of a group of diarists, who are recording their experiences living in Israel right now. "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com.

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, December 31, 2003.
As Syrian President Bashar Assad spouts anti-Semitic epithets, the Arabist U.S. State Department is investigating whether his father, Hafez al Assad had finalized 80-90% of a peace agreement with Israel. You remember, Hafez al Assad, the mirror image of Saddam in terms of his horrific record of Terror and even murdering his own people.

Most of us who write about the Middle East knew it would be just a matter of time before President Bush, family, oil friends and the U.S. State Department would get around to shoving the evacuation of the Golan Heights down Israel's throat. Something like he is doing with the Palestinian Terror State.

Have you ever wondered about the Bush family's support of Arafat, Saddam (under Bush Sr. and James Baker's administration), Hafez al Assad (under several American Presidents) - but always the same ever present Arabist U.S. State Department? I suppose one could throw in the Saudis, Noriega, Pinochet, and most of the dictatorial thugs we seem to have buddied up with over the past several decades.

Now we hear that 'somehow' the mere discussions (all inconclusive) that took place under former Prime Ministers Rabin, Peres and Barak were not 'discussions' but actually finalized agreements now to be pocketed by Bashar Assad and the State Department. Then there only remains 10-20% to discuss - according to the twisty State Department.

Bashar and his controlling Generals continue to task Terrorists to attack Israel, supply them with weapons - including 10,000 missiles, some with chemical warheads, for Hezb'Allah (Iranian backed Terror organization) which is now mobilized on the Lebanese border with Israel. Bashar says there is a "standing 80-90% Agreement for Peace" left over from past discussions. I guess only an Arab/Muslim can revise history and believe it himself. In this case, the stink of betrayal hangs like an odious gas over the Golan.

I recall the cowardly Leftist, PM Ehud Barak in lockstep with the U.S. State Department, threatening Israeli citizens that Syria could overrun the Golan, killing all the soldiers and Israeli civilians and, therefore, we must evacuate very soon. Barak, as you may recall, ran like a scared mouse from Lebanon, deserting Israel's Christian Lebanese allies for the promise that President Clinton would compensate Barak for his perfidious retreat. Barak did run but, nothing was ever paid by the Clinton Administration for Barak's ignominious exit.

Now the U.S. State Department wants Israel to abandon the Golan to a nation that has exhibited extraordinary savagery toward the Jewish State. When I talk of savagery, I mean torturing Israeli prisoners, tasking its 10 or 12 resident Terrorist organizations to kill Israeli civilians and - let's not forget its tasking the truck bomb attack against the American barracks that killed 241 Marines in Beirut while they slept. Then it was Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger who countermanded President Reagan's orders to shell Syria. Although Syria was as corrupt a regime as Saddam Hussein's Iraq was, Syria has been a special 'protectorate' of Bush/Baker and the U.S. State Department and no one knows why!

Indeed, the stink of betrayal is suffocating! Now the question is: Would Prime Minister Ariel Sharon go along with this charade about 80/90% prior agreement of transferring Jews off of the Golan and giving Syria the land down to Lake Kinneret and possibly into Israel's only fresh water reservoir?

If Sharon and his Leftist leftovers already have been in discussion over this 80/90% gambit, then there is no doubt he has betrayed the Jewish nation and should be removed from office.

As for the Jew-hating U.S. State Department, they have been an advocate for the removal of the Jewish State since 1947 til today. Nothing they would do against the Jewish State would surprise me.

I still wonder why there has been no investigation of the State Department by the American Congress for their acting as the enabler for the U.S. to be flooded with Arab Muslim Jihadists which gave us 9/11. But, then again, they have friends in high places who acted in cahoots to accommodate rogue Arab/Muslim nations and thus have a certain self-serving reason to not allow open hearings.

Be assured, it wasn't the FBI or CIA who were at fault for NOT investigating the 9/11 Arab/Muslims. Before 9/11, every investigator was slapped down by the State Department for daring to start tracking suspicious behavior by Arab/Muslims who immigrated so freely into these United States. Tracking or profiling Arab Muslims was not exactly a smart career move if you were in any of the American Intelligence Agencies. It wasn't considered PC: Politically Correct.

For Israel, it really wouldn't matter if Bashar shook the hand of Sharon - much as Arafat shook the hand of Rabin. The Golan Heights is an irreplaceable natural barrier to any attack from the North. No early alert electronics could replace the physical presence of Israeli controlled tanks, mines, observation posts that look directly into Damascus. Nor could Israel rely on any other nation to occupy those vital high ground positions and hope that they would relay warnings in real time.

If the Arabist State Department had their way, the warning would be issued only after Syrian tanks were pouring down the slopes of the Golan into Israel.

If Sharon has gone belly up on both Judea/Samaria and the Golan, then he has become a clear and present danger to the safety of the nation. So, let's ask him: Arik have you been secretly discussing a Barak-like bug-out from the Golan?

Posted by Judy Balint, December 31, 2003.
This is a Jerusalem diary page written by Laura, who made aliya with her family from the U.S. to Neve Daniel, Gush Etzion.

"How embarrassing that my baby, a sabra, has been living his whole life (7 and 1/2 months) a mere 25 minutes from the Kotel, the Wall, at the holiest site on this earth - and I've never taken him there!!

Jews all over the world pray three times a day towards this spot, and I couldn't take an afternoon and bring him there? (Well, you see, the parking is terrible there, and there are all these stairs, and the stroller... okay, I'll stop.)

Today was the perfect opportunity. I was in Jerusalem, my baby was with me, I didn't have a car to deal with parking, and I had TIME - a precious commodity.

So we hopped into a cab and were driven way closer than I ever could have parked. My older sons Eitan and Ezra marched off to the men's side. They wanted to bring Yaakov since he is a (very) little man, but I waited 7 and 1/2 months for this, it was my moment.

The Kotel plaza was rather crowded today, but the moment my sons walked off, the rest of the people melted away. It was just me and my Yaakov as I softly explained to him where we were and why this place is so special to us.

I brought him right up to the wall and patiently waited for an opening in the sea of praying women. When it came I placed Yaakov's little hand on the stones and savored that special moment. Then I slowly backed away, Yaakov staring silently ahead, as if he, too, felt the extraordinary feelings that were washing over me.

I know Yaakov won't remember today. We don't even have any pictures to prove he was there. But if it is important to speak to a baby, to play with him, let him hear music, see colors, have experiences, then what more meaningful experience is there to have then to go to the spiritual center of the world?

The Jerusalem Diarists are a group of people living in Israel, who record how it is to live in Israel right now. "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com.

Posted by Isralert, December 31, 2003.
Isralert's source for this item was www.meed.com/nav?page=meed.backgrounder.news.detail&fixture_story=669664&newsletterId=627725

Israel aims to increase the size of the Jewish population in the Golan Heights, reported the local Yedioth Aharonoth daily on 31 December. The report said that a cross-ministerial commission had ratified a plan to speed up the building of some 900 homes in the area, increasing the Jewish population to 15,000 from 10,500 over three years. "The aim is to send an unequivocal message: the Golan is an integral part of Israel and we will continue to develop the settlements," said the head of the commission, Agriculture Minister Israel Katz. The new homes will cost about $60 million and will lead to at least nine new settlements.

However, local councillors in the Golan Heights have denied that any new settlements are to be built and say that the money is for a planned tourist project. "This is a project that we have been working on since May," said the head of the Golan Regional Council, Eli Malka. "We want to bring 1,000 people to the Golan every year for the next five or six years to rejuvenate the population." About 17,000 Israelis live in the disputed Golan area.

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 31, 2003.
Another one of Sharon's goon squads harassing decent, law abiding Jews. This is a news item from Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=55435).

Police Arrest 3 at Gilad Farm in the Shomron

(IsraelNN.com) Three police jeeps arrived at Gilad Farm in the Shomron this morning. Three residents were arrested. Two of the suspects stand accused of attacking an Arab during the Sabbath. The third suspect is a grandchild of Moshe Zar, who owns the farm that was named after his son, the father of the suspect. Zar's grandchild is being charged with possessing an unlicensed weapon.

The elder Zar denied the charges of the two involved in an assault, explaining they were in Hevron during the Sabbath. As far as the so-called unlicensed weapon he explained the gun is licensed but the permit has expired and they are unable to renew it due to the Ministry of the Interior strike now in its fourth month.

The suspects were taken to the police station in Ariel.

Posted by Eliezar Edwards, December 31, 2003.
This was a news item in today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com). It's interesting that so many of farmers who live in Biblical Israel are willing to do the hard work of farming without pesticides. Of course, nothing they do wins them praise from the Israeli Marxists.

Jewish farmers in Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) produce much of Israel's organic fruits, vegetables, eggs and dairy products. Left-wing activists, however, are trying to pressure distributors to launch a boycott.

Organically grown fruits and vegetables have become a major source of income for Jewish residents of Yesha. A quick browsing of licensed organic vegetable growers in Israel reveals a disproportionate number of organic farmers located in Jewish towns and hilltops across Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Minister of Trade Ehud Olmert recently decided to agree to the European demand that made-in-Yesha products be specially marked, leading to higher tariffs on these products and their likely exclusion from European markets. Left-wing leaders in Israel have often called for an internal boycott of Yesha products within Israel as well.

An article in Monday's edition of Ha'aretz newspaper lamented the fact that health-conscious Israelis are often faced with the choice of supporting Yesha farmers with their purchases or giving up on their health preferences. The Ha'aretz reporter was not bashful about taking sides. She noted, for instance, that seven of eight egg-suppliers for one company are safely within the Green Line; "however, the eighth grower is Ran Avri from Itamar, a Jewish settlement in the West Bank, who is considered a leader among the Jewish settlers, strikes fear into the hearts of his Palestinian neighbors and has been accused in the past of beating leftist activists."

She also wrote that "there is a problem" regarding fresh organic fruits and vegetables, in that "30% of the lettuce that is marketed under the Adama brand name comes from grower Pinhas Eidan from the Jewish settlement of Itamar." The reporter noted that many "concerned consumers" have informed grocers and asked, successfully, that they find alternatives to Yesha-grown products.

Land of Israel supporters and members of Israel's Organic Association have suggested that those wishing to support Yesha's organic farming can similarly inform their grocer of their desire to purchase such products. Harduf, a major distributor of organic foods, buys from many smaller farms and hatcheries, repackaging the produce under its own label. Left-wing activists are pressuring Harduf to boycott Yesha products; the same phone number - 1-800-388-001 - can be used to show support for their policies as well.

Organic-farming student Miriam HaLevi emphasizes that Yesha farmers and Kibbutz Sde Eliyahu in the Beit She'an Valley "continue to adhere to the ideological underpinnings of organic farming striving to provide health and environmental harmony." Many Yesha farmers use the natural enemies of certain harmful insects, instead of pesticides, to ward them off. The religious Kibbutz Sde Eliyahu raises both these bugs and bees that aid in the cross-pollination necessary for fruit growth. Sde Eliyahu also happens to be home to the founder of Israel's Organic Association, 80-year-old Mario Levi, who introduced organic farming in Israel and has taught many of Yesha's organic farmers their trade.

Many fruits and vegetables grown in the organic farms of Yesha can only be found in the heartland of Judea and Samaria. Some varieties of exotic mushrooms, for instance, are only available through the Tekoa Mushroom Farm, located in Gush Etzion. The farm was named "Enterprise of the Year" in the Advanced Agriculture category by the Israeli Journal of Agricultural Settlements.

Why is it that so many organic farms are located in the Jewish hilltops of Judea, Samaria and Gaza? HaLevi attributes this to an ideological connection between the motivation to settle the Land of Israel and the motivations behind organic farming. "It is always an ideological decision to do without pesticides," she said. "It is therefore no surprise that the same people willing to sacrifice for the ideal of a complete Land of Israel are also willing to forgo the easy answers that modern chemical farming supplies in favor of farming organically, which requires the same traits of patience, faith, and idealism while refusing to use poisonous means to reach questionable ends."

Posted by David Frankfurter, December 31, 2003.
A year ago I was in correspondence with a leader of the French Jewish community, discussing efforts to encourage the European Parliament to curb the Palestinian Authority siphoning off of European money to corruption, hatred and terrorism.

I tried to point out the importance of the issue to diaspora Jewry. I said "Time is of the essence for us - but also for you. I was in Paris in May & was told to put a cap over my kippa [Jewish skullcap - also known as yarmulke] in order to avoid a beating or worse."

He answered: "Concerning antisemitism in France it is obvious that it has increased but there is no problem concerning kipat and personal security."

The French, struggling with the rise of Christian-Muslim racial tensions, are introducing secularist legislation to restrict Muslim girls from wearing traditional headscarves - which will also restrict other outward signs of religious faiths, such as large crucifixes, Stars of David and Jewish skullcaps. The Grand Rabbi of France opposes the legislation, although, for their own safety, he has recently advised Jewish Frenchmen to wear a cap rather than the identifying kippa.

Middle Eastern anti-Semitism has been exported to France in a big way. A lengthy article in Ha'aretz [1] tells of the fear of the local community. A year ago the Jewish leadership in France was so sure that personal security in France is not a problem. Today, Ha'aretz reports, that a high school of 650 Jewish students in the Paris suburbs is now "guarded like a military site" and encourages its students to hide all signs of their Jewishness when in public. The headmistress reports that this doesn't always help: "There isn't a student in the school who has been spared an anti-Semitic incident."

Anti-Semitic broadcasts are beamed in from the Middle East, to join other forms of exported racism which cannot be contained. The content is crude and frightening - drawing on the best European anti-Semitic fabrications of the last centuries. The Tsarist Russian forgery "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is produced in Egyptian UNESCO sponsored museums [2], newspapers [3] and television [4] as a true version of the Zionist attempt at world domination. Syrian movies [5] are broadcast, portraying the medieval blood libel of Jews drinking Christian children's blood and using it to bake Passover Matzas.

London has become base for worldwide distribution of Hamas [6], Muslim Brotherhood [7] and other [8] radical Islamic propaganda supporting terrorism.

The adoption by large portions of Europe of the Palestinian narrative, delegitimising the State of Israel and pouring money into the radicalisation of the next generation is bearing its fruits. Let's hope that Europe wakes up before the street-cry of Islamic extremists becomes a reality. "First the Saturday People [Jews] and then the Sunday People [Christians]!"

Last year, the urgency was for Jewish leadership to act. As we enter 2004, it would seem just as urgent for Christian leadership to act.

One has to wonder though, whether young Muslims who are being deliberately radicalised will interpret banning their traditional garb as an example of tolerance to be emulated. Wouldn't it be better to educate to tolerance and cut off the sources and funding of racist education?

1. http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/376203.html

2. http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/000311.php

3.  http://www.danielpipes.org/article/499

4.  www.memri.de/uebersetzungen_analysen/themen/antisemitismus/ as_ramadantv_06_12_01.pdf

5.  http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/sib/t_as12_03/as_tv.htm

6.  http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/bu/britain/sib2_10_03.htm

7.  http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/bu/britain/sib10_03.htm

8.  http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/bu/britain/suicide.htm

David Franfurter writes "Letter From Israel". To subscribe, send an email to David.Frankfurter@iname.com.

Posted by Israela Goldstein, December 31, 2003.
This article is by Marc Tobiass and is archived on the Front Page Magazine website (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11495). It was originally in French in Proche Orient (http://www.Proche-Orient.com) and was translated into English by David A. Harris.

A Catalan from Barcelona, Pilar Rahola is a highly colorful figure on the Spanish scene. She is known for her feminism, as well as for her frank and direct manner. A former parliamentarian, Pilar Rahola sat in the national legislature in Madrid for eight years, first as part of the republican left, then as the founder of the Independence Party. However, she decided to leave political life just over a year ago to devote more time to her other passions. She has just published "The History of Ada," a metaphor for abandoned children, those child-slaves or children-soldiers one finds all over the world, that is, when they are not turned into human bombs.

She has also decided to step forward to denounce the flagrant imbalance in the handling of information from the Middle East. Her most recent piece, "In Favor of Israel," is to be published in a book in which fifteen Spanish intellectuals, including Jon Juaristi, president of the Cervantes Institute and Gabriel Alviac, a well-known journalist with El Mundo [translator's note : a Spanish daily newspaper], seek to re-establish the facts.

Marc Tobiass (of proche-orient.com) talks with Pilar Rahola.

Marc Tobiass: Why did you feel the need to write "In Favor of Israel"; to participate in the publication of this book?

Pilar Rahola: Since the start of the second intifada, the Spanish press, on the right as well as the Left, has taken a particularly aggressive approach toward Israel, an approach that leaves out the reasons for Israel's actions and tends to ignore the Israeli victims in this conflict. In this situation, a small minority of intellectuals, public personalities - sensitive to the Jewish question in general and to Israel in particular - felt deeply touched by this problem. Outraged by the return of Judeophobia in Spain, we, each in our own way, began to write articles; to use the media to condemn this situation. And then Oracia Vasquez Real, an important writer in Spain, suggested that we coordinate our activity; that we collect into one work the vision of the Middle East conflict held by fifteen well-known intellectuals.

Marc Tobiass: For whom did you write this book, and with what objective?

Pilar Rahola: Fundamentally, this book is addressed to the anti-Jewish school of thought in Spain. The goal of our book is to launch a debate about Judeophobia in Spain. We are convinced that the current view of the conflict, so Manichaean - with the good, always the Palestinians, and the evil, always the Israelis - has deep roots. It comes from an ancient anti-Jewish feeling that exists in Spain and that also explains the history of Spain. This feeling softened slightly after the Franco era [translator's note: post-1975], but today there is a virulent resurgence of this savage feeling to the point where one can find genuinely anti-Semitic expressions in the Spanish press. In essence, this is a provocative book in the face of totally pro-Arab thinking in Spain, that is completely uncritical of the mistakes of the Arab world in general and of the Palestinians in particular. We want to counter this flagrant imbalance...

Marc Tobiass: This imbalance is not specifically Spanish, nor, for that matter, is the Judeophobia. You rightly recall in your piece the troubling remark of Hermann Broch [translator's note: Austrian anti-Nazi novelist, 1886-1951] denouncing the indifference of Europe as the worst of the crimes in the bloody madness of the Hitler era?.

Pilar Rahola: Yes, I think that Europe was indifferent on the surface because it felt guilty within. I believe that this indifference unquestionably comes from Judeophobia. And in the ultimate paradox, the Jewish soul is part and parcel of Europe. Europe cannot be explained without its Jewish soul, but it is also explained by its hatred of the Jews. Thus, all the repeated attempts of Europe to get rid of its Jewish soul are, in fact, a kind of suicide.

After the Holocaust, after Auschwitz, that is, after the ultimate stage in the destruction of the Jewish soul - a process which lasted for centuries in Europe - Europe is shattered, many of its elements are dead, but it also has a bad conscience; it knows it is guilty. Since then, Europe has looked for and found in the Palestinian cause the expiation for its guilt. It is from this that the uncritical and Manichean attitude toward the Palestinian cause emerges - it is, primarily, the last heroic (European) adventure. Further, the more the Jews are presented as being the evil party, the bad ones, the less difficult it is to carry the responsibility and the guilt. This is a process of collective psychology. From such a perspective, there essentially is no difference between France, for example, and Spain... It is unbelievable how Europe continues to hate its Jewish soul, even after it has expelled it!

Marc Tobiass: According to you, it is this Judeophobia that explains the "pro-Palestinian hysteria" that exists in Europe.

Pilar Rahola: I am sure of it... There is undeniably of late a very serious effort at disinformation about everything to do with the Middle East. There is a kind of madness that excuses all the crimes, abuses, and errors of the Palestinian side, and, at the same time, there is a historical predisposition that condemns any single error of the Israeli side - and this to the point where the Palestinian victims are given maximum attention and the Israeli (victims) are ignored. It is as if the Jewish victims didn't exist, on the pretext that they were responsible for their own deaths!

The worst thing is that there is also a problem of terrorism in Spain, but when the crimes of ETA [translator's note: the Basque terrorist group] are mentioned, one speaks of terrorism, while when the crimes of Hamas are mentioned, one speaks of militants, activists, resistance, struggle... When one mentions the Palestinian victims, one speaks of children, civilians, innocents, but when one mentions the Israeli victims, one speaks of people without a name, as if to suggest that they are only soldiers, members of the army. There is a distortion in the presentation of the conflict, a dangerous manipulation that feeds the hatred and the anti-Semitism.

Marc Tobiass: Your remarks add up to an indictment of the European media.

Pilar Rahola: What I want is to launch an appeal to the collective European way of thinking, and especially to the intellectuals and journalists, because, from my point of view, they are in the process of creating a collective reality that is Judeophobic. Today one must prove oneself to be on the left ; it is necessary to be anti-Semitic to have credibility. Things have reached the point where, for instance, Sharon is always guilty of being guilty, while Arafat is seen as an honest figure, innocent, a tireless old resistance fighter, a heroic figure, a kind of Gandhi - in brief, a person gussied up in romantic finery, when in reality he is head of an oligarchy that has so much blood on its hands.

Israel is not (just) a country that is trying, for better or worse, to survive for fifty years, but it is reduced to one sole image: a country that occupies the territories and whose vocation is to make life miserable for the poor Palestinians. The history of the Holy Land is being reinvented. Everything takes place as if there were instructions: Never recall the faults and errors of the Palestinians, never recall their alliances with dangerous countries such as Iraq, in order to heap more shame on the United States and Israel. The profound reasons for this war are never made clear, never discussed.

Marc Tobiass: There is a comment in your text that sent shivers down my spine. You say that Judeophobia is, in the final analysis, the common denominator between Europe and the Palestinians.

Pilar Rahola: It's true that there are in Europe non-Jews who are sensitive and respect the Jewish soul, which is also part of the foundation of Europe, but they constitute a minority. The majority, the unconscious European collective, does not understand, does not absorb, nor accept, the Jewish phenomenon. And it is there that the essential meeting point between the European and the Palestinian takes place. Palestinian identity is not just a recent phenomenon, but it is, above all, built on hatred of Israel, hatred of the Jews.

If Europe can be explained by its Jewish component and by its hatred of the Jews, as if they were two sides of the same coin, Palestinian identity can essentially be explained only by its anti-Jewish component. It is for this reason that the Palestinians have such difficulty putting an end to their violence.

If the Palestinians renounced their hatred of the Jews, they would at the same time lose a significant part of their identity. To get beyond this violence, they would have to get beyond the hatred and thus change their identity. In other words, they would have to reinvent themselves. It is on the basis of this hatred that the Palestinian meets and agrees with the European. Often, this takes place with people of the Left, which is a veritable calamity for people like myself, as we are of the Left. We are Europeans, but we do not accept Judeophobia, just as we do not accept the anti-Zionism that justifies and nourishes the anti-Semitism of the Spanish Left today.

Marc Tobiass: Isn't this legitimization of hate the true obstacle to peace?

Pilar Rahola: Without doubt. I believe that Europe is directly responsible, and not only for the conflict. In the final analysis, who, if not Europe, created the Jewish problem in the world? In a certain sense, one can even say that Europe is the actual founder of the State of Israel. Europe expelled its Jews - its Spanish Jews, its Russian Jews, its French Jews, and its German Jews. It expelled them from its body, even though these Jews felt themselves to be European to the core?.

Marc Tobiass: You describe yourself as being on the Left and, for you, being a leftist is above all an existential position toward life, toward society. Yet, you yourself say that when this position turns into ideology, at times it becomes an excuse for channeling uncritical dogma, a simplistic Manichaeanism, indeed racism. You, who were a parliamentarian of the Left, how can you handle this contradiction?

Pilar Rahola: Those on the Left in Spain have a real problem. In some respects we are the heirs of the French Revolution ; we have been influenced by the great ideologues like [Jean-Paul] Sartre and [Albert] Camus, and also by May 1968. That is to say, the overall thinking of the Spanish Left comes from France. Now, France is fundamentally anti-American... from which (comes) our anti-Americanism, that at times borders on the pathological, an anti-Americanism which is also anti-Semitic. This explains why to a certain extent the Spanish Left is anti-Semitic. Obviously, people like myself have great difficulty with this state of affairs.

I believe that if the Left has failed as a great world ideology, it is because the Left did not succeed in breaking with the worst of its dogmatic thinking. The Left can be very progressive, but it can also be very dogmatic. Unfortunately, the Left became infatuated with such infamous dictators as Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin, and now it is in love with Arafat. The Left should be critical, and in the first place, self-critical.

Marc Tobiass: And what is the dogma that worries you the most today?

Pilar Rahola: The most absurd thing is to watch leaders of the Left today greet and celebrate Arab leaders, even when they are fundamentalists. For example, in the debates that followed the attacks of September 11, we heard an anti-American discourse here, pooh-poohing the victims, something which is in and of itself terrible! And there were those who tried to downgrade - with that tawdry third-worldism which characterizes some circles of the Left - the danger embodied in individuals like bin Laden, who is, in fact, an authentic fascist. I believe that for the moment the world remains blind to the biggest totalitarianism of the twenty-first century, which is Islamic fundamentalism. Now we must prepare ourselves seriously to face this danger: For me, this totalitarianism is without any shadow of a doubt comparable to Stalinism and Nazism, the biggest scourges of the twentieth century.

Marc Tobiass: To finish this interview, Pilar Rahola, I would like to cite a sentence from your text: You say that to be "in favor of Israel" is the most intelligent, rational, prudent, and honest way to be in favor of Palestine.

Pilar Rahola: First of all, I do not accept the use of defense of the Palestinian cause as a pretext for a new epidemic of anti-Semitism. If Europe had had a critical discussion that did not hesitate to condemn the grave and permanent mistakes of the Palestinian side; if Europe had been more critical of the Palestinians, we would be closer to a solution today. But Arafat enjoys support and legitimacy in Europe which allows him to never miss an opportunity for missing the opportunity of peace. I believe that if Europe had been more critical toward Arafat, toward the different aspects of Palestinian violence, if Europe had been tougher in its statements, the Palestinians would have been compelled to step back from the violence and the suicide attacks.

A sense of justice calls for the establishment of a Palestinian state next to the State of Israel, but not in its place. Yet, at its core, Europe is ill at ease with the existence of Israel, and one can even say that the existence of this state provokes resentment and anger on the European left. Even if this is not acknowledged, many Europeans contend that a Palestinian state must replace the State of Israel.

But for those of us who support Israel, who are in favor of good neighborly relations - for coexistence between the State of Israel and a Palestinian state - our way of saying YES to a Palestinian state is also a way of saying YES to the existence of the State of Israel. ( http://www.MidEastTruth.com

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 31, 2003.
Libel suits for the purpose of suppressing free speech are common in the world and they have become known in the US as SLAPP Suits. Many states in the US now have anti-SLAPP laws. For an excellent web site that reviews these and legal cases involving suppression of free speech through suing for libel, see http://www.gjs.net/web-slap.htm You can see that Israel is desperately in need of an anti-SLAPP law. You might want to write your Knesset member and urge that these be passed in Israel.

As you know, I am being harassed by just such a SLAPP suit by an extremist leftist employed by Ben Gurion University, and there are several other similar suits now in progress against others.

Meanwhile, I would like to invite all Plaut listers to write to the heads of Ben Gurion University (addresses below) and tell them what you think of Neve Gordon, political science lecturer, using SLAPP suits as a tactic to suppress free speech of his critic (me). While you are at it, let them know what you think of Gordon calling Israel a fascist country, a terrorist state, an apartheid state, his insisting that terror is caused by injustice, his sympathy for a bi-national state solution, his belief that Israel "only understands violence", and his praising the ideas and book by Norman Finkelstein, universally seen as a fraud and anti-Semite and pro-nazi. Reprint of Daniel Doron's article on Gordon follows below.

Finally you might comment on the fact that Gordon lists quite a few Israel-bashing political pieces as part of his academic publication record. Gordon's record appears at http://www.bgu.ac.il/politics/fac/gordon/publications.htm Have a look and make up your mind about him! (The Palestine Israel Journal is regarded by many as a PLO front) (Note the review of Norman Finkelstein listed on the page as an academic publication)

Officials at Ben Gurion University:

Professor Avishay Braverman
President, Ben-Gurion University
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Beer-Sheva 84105, Israel
Fax: 972-8-647-2937

Professor Jimmy Weinblatt
Rector, Ben-Gurion University
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Beer-Sheva 84105, Israel
Tel. 972-7-6461105
Fax: 972-7-6472945

Professor Avishai Henik
Dean of Social Sciences
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, P.O.B. 653
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Be'er-Sheva 84105, Israel.

Letters to the American Associates of Ben Gurion University (AABGU) should be sent to 1430 Broadway, 8th Floor, New York, NY 10018. Zvi Alon is President of AABGU and Vivien Marion is the Executive Vice-President. (phone: 212-687-7721; fax: 212-302-6443; email: info@aabgu.org)


by Daniel Doron, December 18, 2003

Political pathology is to be found at both extremes of the political spectrum. It was a right-wing fanatic who assassinated a prime minister and his likes are committing outrages against innocent Arabs in Judea and Samaria, thus discrediting a Jewish community acting with extreme restraint in face of Arab terrorism.

However, since the Left has become the dominant force in Israeli politics, it is the chief carrier of political pathology. The Left gained its dominance since the early 1920s when the Zionist organization's immigration policies, funded by Jewish capitalists, favored young pioneers who were settled in collectivist namely communist settlements. Ben-Gurion and his comrades were true Bolshevik believers then. They fashioned Zionism as a spearhead for a Middle East communist revolution, practicing a violent class struggle against the middle classes, destroying their economic bases and institutions and becoming the dominant force in the life of the mandatory Yishuv. Ben-Gurion and his party became gradually disenchanted with Soviet communism, but up until the mid-1950s, about 30% of the Israeli electorate voted for Stalinist parties. This caused Ben-Gurion great anxiety. He worried about the spread of pro-Stalinist sympathies (which he claimed destroyed the true Leninism that he upheld) among the highest echelons of the IDF as well as among intellectuals, academicians, media persons and artists, who were molding the consciousness of the young. So he took two politically dangerous steps: He disbanded the Palmah, the elite unit of the Hagana, because it was totally dominated by pro-Moscow generals. And he sacrificed and disbanded one of his own proud creations the Labor-affiliated school system.

The scions of the Stalinists whom Ben-Gurion fought still dominate life now in the guise of a post-Zionist New Left in academia, the media and among intellectuals and artists.

Ben-Gurion considered the pro-Moscow, Stalin-worshiping radical Left pathological apostates, betrayers of Zionism and Judaism who sought to convert Jews to the secular faith of Stalinism (several kibbutzim held Seder ceremonies in which a Haggada was recited that was dedicated to "the rising sun of humanity, Comrade Joseph Stalin"). THIS IS not the occasion to delve into the etiology of the violent and destructive nature of the political pathology inflicting utopian movements from the French Revolution onward. Freud's most original successor, Wilhelm Reich, analyzed it in his seminal The Mass Psychology of Fascism. Later works, Theodore Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality and Erich Fromm's The Fear of Freedom, further elaborated the relationship between personality disorders and political extremism. Radical movements seem to attract personalities that seethe with explosive rage. Their rage is attached to a cause as Dostoevsky so memorably limned in The Devils giving its destructiveness an appearance of virtue and legitimacy.

This may explain why, despite their protestations that they defend freedom, so many leftists actually support the most murderous tyrants from Stalin to Arafat, and why some liberals give aid and comfort to aggressive, oppressive and corrupt dictatorships such as the Palestinian Authority.

Neve Gordon is a prime example of this paradox. Gordon, one of the rabidly post-Zionist revisionist historians who teaches political science at Ben-Gurion University. Most of the articles Gordon has published are devoted to denouncing Israel as a fascist terrorist state. Gordon would probably claim that he is fighting for the rights of oppressed Palestinians, but tellingly he devotes most of his energy to recycling calumnies that subvert Israel's legitimacy. Gordon does not seem to care for the Palestinians except as instruments of his rage. He goes beyond the radical-chic support for the PLO given by most Israeli academic leftists. On a visit to Ramallah he embraced Arafat and implicitly protected with his body the terrorists hiding in the compound. Gordon has expressed understanding for terrorism because it is caused by "injustice." He does not seem to care that the Palestinians are subjected to the most brutal and oppressive dictatorship so long as they are nominally "independent."

He was among the signers of the petition before the recent Iraq war declaring that Israel was planning to perpetrate atrocities and massive crimes against humanity once the war broke out. He also endorsed boycotts against Israel.

Had Israel enjoyed an open, pluralistic public debate especially in the media and the universities one could let the pathological defamers do their thing. But the public arena in Israel is dominated by politically correct leftists who silence any opposition. Like the Islamic fundamentalist parties in countries such as Iran or Algeria where democratic elections have been exploited to abolish democracy so does the pathological Left exploit democratic freedoms, including academic freedom and freedom of speech, in order to defy the majority will and subvert it from within. The post-Zionists and neo-Marxists on the Ben-Gurion University faculty, that Gordon exemplifies, are true believers. They are capable of calling for a boycott of Israeli universities for alleged crimes against humanity; they are not promoters of free speech or pluralism. This is, alas, also true of many other social-science and humanities departments in Israel where, in the words of the (Meretz) former minister of education Amnon Rubinstein "a unison choir" of political correctness suppresses free debate.

In fact, several attempts have been made by BGU leftists to use the law to intimidate adversaries and suppress criticism. The most recent, a frivolous libel suit filed by Neve Gordon against Prof. Steven Plaut of Haifa University, a stalwart defender of free speech. Those who support freedom for terrorists cannot stomach any opposition. They file suits simply to harass critics and intimidate potential adversaries by causing them great expense and loss of time. Serious consideration must therefore be given to the protection of academic freedom and free speech from a pathological Left that is so adept at abusing them.

Daniel Doron is president of The Israel Center for Social and Economic Progress, an independent pro-market policy think tank.

Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com.

[Ed. Note: Additional material on the SLAPP suit against Professor Plaut can be found in Lakisher's article "The David Irving Trial in Israel", December 17, 2003, the December 2003 Blog-Ed page (http://www.think-israel.org/dec03bloged.html), this issue.]

Posted by Michael Freund, December 31, 2003.
There is a new breed of racism afoot in the land, and it emanates from the most unexpected of quarters.

The odium, while packaged in flowery language and universalist rhetoric, is nevertheless strident and uncompromising.

Israel's new band of bigots is the racist Left, and its power seems to be growing.

At first glance, the very idea of a racist Left might seem preposterous. After all, these are the people who profess a belief in the most profound and noble of principles, who march on behalf of the rights of others and cling to a vision of reconciliation and peace under the most trying of circumstances.

The Left is the first to cry racism when any distinction is made between Israeli Arabs and Jews, sometimes with good reason. Yet it is the Left itself that is advocating the most sweeping distinctions between how Jews and Arabs are treated under the law.

Take, for example, the question of illegal building in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Over the past year, the far Left has vociferously called for uprooting the dozens of outposts erected by Jewish settlers throughout the territories. They send teams of monitors to track the growth and expansion of these budding communities, utilize satellite photographs and imagery to keep an eye on their development, and compile and issue reports and press releases on the subject.

The reason? Ostensibly, it is about law and order. Many of the Jewish outposts are said to have been built without the necessary permits from the government; hence, the Left demands that they be taken down.

Now, I am all in favor of respecting the law, but a key element, in democracies at least, is the idea that all are equal before it. And yet, when it comes to illegal building in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, the Left only seems to make noise about Jewish structures, not Arab ones.

As anyone who has driven through the territories knows, there are untold thousands of illegal buildings that have gone up in recent years in Arab villages and towns and along roads overlooking Jewish settlements.

If the law is supreme, then it should not matter who erects an illegal structure. Whether he follows Moses or Muhammad, he has violated the law.

But to Israel's racist leftists, this is simply not the case. They apply their principles selectively, demanding legal action against one ethnic group while ignoring the violations of another. They insist on holding Jews to one standard and Arabs to another. Isn't that racial discrimination?

And then there is the issue of demography. At the Herzliya conference earlier this month, Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu suggested that the growth rates of Israeli Arabs pose a demographic threat to the Jewish nature of the state. He was immediately pounced on by various members of the Left, who ridiculed his remarks and denounced them as racist.

And yet, when it comes to Israel's ultra-Orthodox community, many on the Left have little compunction about making exactly the same remarks, warning that the high birthrate of the ultra-Orthodox threatens to tilt the balance against the secular and in favor of religious Jews.

In other words, as far as the racist Left is concerned, you can voice concern about Jewish population growth, but not Arab expansion.

There are plenty of other examples. Administrative detention without trial disturbs the Left when those imprisoned are Palestinian Arabs, but not when a Jewish settler from Hebron is detained. Incitement to violence by Israeli Jews is treated differently from incitement by Arabs, as are unruly protests and dissent.

To be fair, not all of the Left is plagued by such two-faced beliefs. There are plenty of thoughtful and reasonable people who lean to the left and still believe in maintaining one standard for all. Unfortunately, though, their voices seem to have been drowned out, as the more extreme fringes of the Left have come to the fore.

Indeed, across the board, the far Left speaks of equality for Arabs and Jews even as it practices inequity and discrimination. For, implicit in the double standard applied to Arabs is the paternalistic belief that one cannot expect very much from "such people," as though Arabs were somehow innately inferior. This, of course, is racism in its purest and ugliest of forms, the type of thinking that is incapable of looking beyond a person's origins and judging him or her as an individual.

Whether they will admit it or not, extreme leftists have become infected with this pernicious ailment, advancing a narrow form of chauvinism and prejudice under the guise of progressive values and beliefs.

It is time to tear off their mask of respectability, and see them for what they are: Israel's racist Left.

This appeared today in the Jerusalem Post. Michael Freund served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu.

Posted by Yigal Carmon, December 30, 2003.
Recently there has been an increase in postings on Islamist Web forums regarding imminent large-scale terror attacks in the U.S. However, beyond their general religious leanings, it is not known whether these forums are actually affiliated with Al-Qa'ida. In order to assess the credibility of these threats, there is a need to examine their content. The following are three examples:

I. Operation Cave of Darkness

In late December 2003, a Web site called Global Islamic Media posted a communique warning of an imminent large-scale attack in the U.S. called Operation Cave of Darkness. [1]

An examination of the text of the posting reveals that:

The communique makes several demands, suggesting that meeting these demands will eliminate the threat of attack. Such bargaining is unknown in the Al-Qa'ida modus operandi, and has never appeared in any bin Laden speech to date. Among these demands are "returning all monies, but in gold and not in paper, as we have demanded from you in the past;" "restoring all old borders... particularly the northern one;" and "dismantling what are unjustly and oppressively called the Oppressed Nations [i.e. the U.N.] and the Satanic Council [i.e. the U.N. Security Council]." The communique also states that "the price of oil will be set by us, and we promise not to stop the flow and not to create a monopoly." Such attempts to bargain have never appeared in the Al-Qa'ida ideology and modus operandi; Al-Qa'ida's attacks are motivated by religious ideology and by the promised reward in the afterlife - not material reward in this world.

The communique is not written in the Islamist style. The text includes not a single Qur'anic quote, and no mention of the Prophet's conduct. Rather than call the Americans infidels and enemies of Allah, as is common in the Islamist discourse, it asserts that the Americans are "taking over the world dictatorially, in a senseless and infantile manner reminiscent of the behavior of infants or madmen."

It is noteworthy that on the Islamist Web forum Al-Qal'a, some members dismissed this communique as a fake. Based on all the above, this communique should not be regarded as a valid threat made by elements genuinely affiliated with Al-Qa'ida and Osama bin Laden.

II. Countdown to an Imminent Attack

Following the many reports in the American media about Operation Cave of Darkness, Islamist forums began posting follow-up reports. One of the more prominent of these was the countdown to an upcoming attack titled "End U.S." which appeared on the Islamist www.khayma.com. It read as follows:

"In the name of Allah, the all-merciful and compassionate, [this is] the countdown for the biggest event, the defeat and collapse of America, the Hubal of this generation. [2] According to the predictions [on the Web site] Al-Sayf Al-'Aasim, 36 days, 13 hours, and 23 seconds at most remain [as of time of publication] until the prediction is fulfilled. God willing, the collapse of America is nigh." [3]

Members of Islamist forums such as Al-Qal'a determined that this countdown referred to Operation Cave of Darkness. [4]

An examination of the text of this posting reveals that:

The warning is based on the Al-Sayf Al-'Aasim Web site, which features a Nostradamus-style compilation of prophesies and futuristic predictions. Recently, this site was hacked and replaced by a pornography site. This warning contains no Islamist discourse, no Qur'anic quotes, no reference to the Prophet's conduct, etc. A video clip depicting America's end that accompanies the posting is comprised of segments of Hollywood disaster films, particularly one about a meteor striking the Earth.

Based on the above, this threat is not credible.

III. Threats of Attacks in an Ongoing Battle

In late December, another type of threat appeared, on the Global Islamic Media site. It is authored by Abu Abd Al-Rahman Al-Turkemani (most likely an alias). This posting is aimed at reinforcing the morale of Islamist activists in their ongoing struggle. Al-Turkemani threatens attacks - but unlike the other threats, he sets no target date, explaining that perhaps the attacks will take a long time to prepare, and perhaps they will not take the form of military clashes. The following are the main elements of this posting, which was titled "The Final Blows in the Decisive Battles Are At Hand:" [5]

"The final blows in the crucial battles are at hand. We are now living in crucial days and we are seeing how the government of the idol of this age [i.e. the U.S.] is filled with fear and dread, dreaming of obtaining security and calm, and spending a billion dollars every week in order to protect itself from the imminent unknown danger coming from the direction [of the enemy] that they claimed to have completely destroyed years ago...

"We are seeing that they have [finally] understood the oath of the commander of the Jihad army [bin Laden] and they now know that he meant exactly what he said [when he was valiantly facing the armies of the new Crusade]: We are now engaged in Jihad between the armies of faith, truth, and goodness as opposed to the armies of unbelief, falsehood, and evil...

"The crucial battle is about to begin. The swords have been drawn from their scabbards, and the fingers are on the triggers. Happy are those who choose [to join] the camp of the believers and choose the profitable deal [i.e., to sacrifice themselves in Jihad], and woe to those who join the losers [the armies of unbelief] who are in the lowest compartment of Hell.

"This is a crucial issue in a crucial battle in crucial days. The great harvest [of the enemies of Allah] is at the gates. And who knows - it may be imminent...

"On the other hand, who knows, perhaps it is not imminent. There may be blows not by firearms to weaken the great serpent [i.e. the U.S.] as silent blows which do not require military skirmishes and without threatening...

"Those who ask, "When will the crucial battle and the final blows come?" and keeps waiting for the event to come, without carrying out his own duties to prepare for it - are not of the armies of truth. They are merely onlookers, who have failed to join the Jihad - which is a personal duty for all Muslims...

"The war between us and unbelief and the people of unbelief is a war between two unequal forces. They surpass us in material preparedness, and we surpass them with the preparedness of belief, and courageous resolve...

"The crucial battle is at hand, and the fruits of the great harvest are ripe, and the column of the men who are faithful to their promise to God [i.e. the Jihad warriors] continues on its way to destroy the idol of the present age and its values...

"This continuing column of the Jihad warriors shall not stop, but it may sometimes weaken, [even] for years, and sometimes become stronger... But the crucial battle is undoubtedly coming, God willing."

An examination of this posting reveals that:

Unlike the other postings, it uses the style commonly used by known Al-Qa'ida supporters.
It includes Qur'anic verses and even direct references to bin Laden's speeches.
As is common in bin Laden's addresses to Muslims, the posting calls on Muslims to remember their religious duty to wage Jihad, and not to wait to watch it on television as onlookers.

Based on all the above, the credibility of this posting is much greater than that of the others.

[1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/globalislamicmedia/message/262.

[2] Hubal was an ancient Meccan idol of the pre-Islamic era, and his name is commonly used among Islamists to denote the U.S.

[3] http://www.khayma.com/iraqihell/End%20US.htm.


[5] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/globalislamicmedia/message/2623.

Yigal Carmon is President of The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), an independent organization that translated and analyzes the media of the Middle East. Its website address is http://www.memri.org

ARUTZ 7: A Prisoner Of Conscience
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, December 30, 2003.

Ida Nudel, one of most famous Soviet Jewish prisoners of conscience (refuseniks) had deep experience with corrupt governments and biased courts virtually owned by the system in the Former Soviet Union. Ida Nudel has correctly expressed shame as a citizen of a Jewish state which is exhibiting "totalitarian" policies. She also strongly decried the continued incarceration of Hebron resident Noam Federman, without charge, and sent a letter to Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz deploring the government's actions against Federman. (1)

Nudel accused the Israeli government, run by Arik Sharon, and the Jerusalem Magistrates' Court for their trials and sentencing of 10 broadcasters and directors of Arutz 7, plus 750,000 Shekels ($166,666 US Dollars) of fines. Arutz 7 broadcast news, listened to by hundreds of thousands of people in Israel and around the world, was shut down because they broadcast "fair and balanced" news plus Jewish education and music all day long. Never in the history of the nation has any broadcaster charged with running a pirate radio station been sentenced to jail or fined such high amounts of money. Clearly, both the sentences and the fines are intended to force the Arutz 7 station and individuals into silence through bankruptcy. A Radio Free Israel is not to be tolerated by this government which operates in the shadows.

"The sentencing judge proudly stated: 'the voice of Arutz 7 was silenced' is evidence that the atmosphere in the judicial system is poisoned". (2)

No one is confused as to why Sharon behaved like many Soviet despots. On 10/25/03 Russia's President Vladimir Putin (formerly in the KGB) arrested Mikhail Khodorovsky, the owner of Yukos/Sibnieft (Russia's biggest oil producer and fourth in the world). Khodorovsky was funding right wing opposition to Putin and planned to become Prime Minister of Russia thereby challenging Putin's Presidency. Others have been fled from Russia because Putin wouldn't tolerate being exposed as the KGB operative he once was, now in control of the entire Kremlin.

So, too did the Courts of the Left in Israel attempt to stifle Arutz 7's freedom of speech for what Sharon is about to do in order to accommodate President George Bush by re-partitioning the Jewish State of Israel in time for Bush's 2004 election. Bush wants bragging rights with the false claim that he "civilized" the Arab/Muslim Palestinians and brought peace to the region. Clearly, shutting down and shutting up the only non-Leftist media voice in Israel was important to both Sharon and the Arabist U.S. State Department.

We all remember how Rabin, Peres and Beilin as well as most of the Left when in authority, desperately tried to close down the Arutz 7 broadcasts from a ship at sea. Every dirty trick possible has been done, like raids and destroying transmitters, no different than any dictatorship. Now, Sharon and Ehud Olmert have maneuvered to close-down the only Free Voice in Israel with cruel sentences for its directors and broadcasters, plus draconian fines amounting to 750,000 Shekels ($166,666). (3) Indeed, Sharon and Olmert appear to be merely empty suits walking and their once famous names now bring only shame and disgust.

The nine men and one women, all of whom have impeccable records of serving the State, have been sentenced to jail (or perhaps community service) by a Leftist Court and a supposedly Rightist government. That Sharon and Olmert have made common cause with the Left, the Osloids, the new assembly of those rejected by the public and out of government who secretly evolved the Geneva Accords, tell much about them.

But, their corruption was not hidden from the knowing eyes of those such as Ida Nudel, and probably the other refuseniks such as Natan Sharansky, Yosef Mendelevitch, and all the others who suffered under the Soviet dictatorship which similarly closed down any voice which disagreed with their government corruption.

Political corruption is like pornography - you know it when you see it.

There should be an immediate appeal to Israel's President Moshe Katsav for a full pardon and dismissal of fines. Fines like these can insure financial ruin so that Arutz 7 cannot be re-started again within the time-span that Sharon needs to subvert YESHA (Yehuda, Shomron and Gaza). These men and woman should receive medals for bravery and service to their country plus a full license to broadcast as was legislated by the Israeli Knesset years ago. Regrettably, they may not be able file an appeal to the Supreme Court which has become infamous as a radically Leftist Court, ruled by Aharon Barak, Chief Supreme Court Judge. If they lost that appeal, it is possible that Barak could even increase their jail sentences to a more harsh level.

President Putin of Russia drove out one media giant, Vladimir Gussinsky, a couple of years ago, who used his TV station to speak out against the Kremlin's corruption.(4) Following that he arrested Khodorovsky, an oil billionaire, who similarly challenged Putin and paid for ads telling the truth about Putin's governance. Here, too, the Courts belong to the Kremlin and Putin.

Clearly, Sharon and the activist Supreme Court led by far Leftist Aharon Barak needed Arutz 7 out of the way along with those whose ingenuity made the station so popular.

Compare Sharon's tactics in Israel to those of the Kremlin who, over the past three years took control over television stations, openly manipulated the judicial system and strengthened its regional administration. In the eyes of many political commentators, the Kremlin under Putin now aims for greater influence over business - which may be why Putin had Khodorovsky arrested. Khodorovsky is said to the richest Russian, estimated to possess over $8-12 Billion. Siberia is to be the oil industry's salvation. Is the world witnessing the emergence of a new energy colossus to rival Saudi Arabia? The Russian Stock Exchange reached an all time high on October 20, 2003 with Yukos/Sibnieft accounting for 35% of the RTS index at its peak value. But, with Khodorovky's arrest and the freezing of his stake in Yukos, the market fell perhaps 58%. Russia is expecting a net capital flight of more than $13 Billion in the second half of 2003, sharply reversing the trend in the first 6 months which saw the first sustained inflow of capital since the collapse of Communism. (5)

This information many seem unrelated to Israel, except the ethics of the Kremlin in many ways have been imported to Israel and only Arutz 7 was courageous enough to speak about it. How many foreign companies will invest in Israel when they see that the ruling clique is no different in its ethics and principles than Putin's Russia or the surrounding Arab dictatorships?

We are all awaiting for Sharon's heavy hand to fall on YESHA (as it did when he dismantled Yamit) and the true patriots of Israel. Sharon says he will take down many settlers' communities. Sharon has been preparing for this betrayal - given his frequent speeches about making "painful concessions". He desperately needs the silence of the one voice which reached millions all over the world who pointed out that Sharon's "painful concessions" would not bring peace but will bring only pain to those who invested their life's savings in their homes. Sharon knew that the Leftist media would NOT complain about transferring Jews from their homes but would congratulate him for bonding with the aberrant Left.

Sharon's reputation and historical legacy are fast approaching that of those seduced by foreign interests over the vital needs of his own people. Tell us, Arik, do you really believe that you are a cut above Vladimir Putin or those others who sent the refuseniks like Ida Nudel to prison camps in Siberia? Putting genuine heroes of the nation into prison, or bankrupting them because they spoke the truth in public about the Left and now the dictatorial Right is a crime of such disgust that this government seems nothing more than a walking dead thing. Go away, Sharon and drag with you the carrion who assemble at your feet for whatever political scraps you can throw them. You have made the nation of Israel into a banana republic whom few nations respect. Just go away! In Hebrew they say: "Sharon HaBayta!" (Sharon, Go Home!)

Sharon, Olmert, Peres, Beilin, Tomy Lapid and others are merely empty suits walking and are beneath the word "contempt". Olmert's bid to retrieve his status of one to be trusted by "offering" to license Arutz 7 in a bidding war is a dirty trick no one will believe. (6)

Arutz 7 may receive a limited license to broadcast long after those mentioned above have accomplished their dirty work. How will Arutz 7 put itself back together after you have bankrupted the company and individuals who worked so hard and so long to give Israel the Free Voice she needs and deserves?

I am sure that Sharon, Olmert and the biased Judiciary will want to hear from you all - day and night. Never forget them and let them know frequently what you think about them.


1. "Former Prisoner of Zion on Federman Detention" IsraelNN.com Dec. 27, 2003

2. "AFSI Deplores Arutz-7 Sentencing" Americans for a Safe Israel Dec. 30, 2003

3. "Arutz-7 Ten: Sentenced by Jerusalem Magistrate Court" IsraelNN.com Dec. 29, 2003

4. "Kremlin Plays Games with Oligarchs: Khodorovsky under fire" by Stanislav Menshikov MOSCOW TRIBUNE July 11, 2003

5. "The Yukos Crisis" By Filip Lachowski Nov. 10, 2003 content/

6. "Arutz 7 Not Yet Legalized" IsraelNN.com December 30, 2003

Emanuel A. Winston is a Middle East analyst and commentator. His essays appear frequently on the Freeman Center Maccabean-Online (http://www.freman.org/online.htm) and on Gamla (http://www.gamla.org.il/english).

THE WESTERN DISEASE: The Strange Syndrome of Our Guilt and Their Shame
Posted by Tamar Rush, December 30, 2003.
This article is by Victor David Hanson. It appear on the National Review website and is archived as: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200312300000.asp I found it at the underground command centre of Little Green Footballs (http://littlegreenfootballs/weblog).

After watching a string of editorial attacks on America both at home and from abroad in the aftermath of Saddam's capture, I thought back to the actual record of the last two years. In 24 months the United States defeated two of the most hideous regimes in modern memory. For all the sorrow involved, it has already made progress in the unthinkable: bringing consensual government into the heart of Middle Eastern autocracy, where there has been no political heritage other than tyranny, theocracy, and dictatorship.

In liberating 50 million people from both the Taliban and Saddam Hussein it has lost so far less than 500 soldiers - some of whom were killed precisely because they waged a war that sought to minimalize not just civilian casualties but even the killing of their enemies. Contrary to the invective of Western intellectuals, the American military's sins until recently have been of omission - preferring not to shoot looters or hunt down and kill insurgents - rather than brutal commission. While the United States has conducted these successive wars some 7,000 miles beyond its borders, it also avoided another terrorist attack of the scale of September 11 - and all the while crafting a policy of containment of North Korea and soon-to-be nuclear Iran.

Thus by any comparative standard of military history, the last two difficult years, despite setbacks and disappointments, represent a remarkable military achievement. Yet no one would ever gather even the slightest acknowledgment of such success from our Democratic grandees. Al Gore dubbed the Iraqi liberation a quagmire and, absurdly, the worst mistake in the history of American foreign policy. Howard Dean, more absurdly, suggested that the president of the United States might have had foreknowledge of September 11. Most Americans now shudder at the thought that the former might have been president in this time of crisis - and that the latter still could be.

Often American and European writers echo the fury of Gore and Dean. For example, on the day before Saddam Hussein was captured, one could reread in the International Herald Tribune a long reprinted rant by Paul Krugman, the Princeton professor. He exclaimed, "In the end the Bush doctrine - based on delusions of grandeur about America's ability to dominate the world through force - will collapse. What we've just learned is how hard and dirty the doctrine's proponents will fight against the inevitable." Krugman was apparently furious that American taxpayer dollars were going to be used to hire exclusively American and Coalition companies to rebuild Iraq rather than be paid out to foreign entities whose governments opposed the removal of Saddam Hussein. "Hard and dirty?"

On the same page Bob Herbert assured his foreign audience that "The Republicans are hijacking elections and redistricting the country and looting the Treasury and ignoring the Constitution and embittering our allies." That outside entities and media have confirmed the vote counts of the Florida election, that Congress must approve federal spending and pass laws, that an independent judiciary audits our legislation, and that 60 countries are now engaged in Iraq meant nothing. "Hijacking and looting?"

The next day after Saddam's capture I channel surfed global cable TV. A rather refined-looking French self-described expert in jurisprudence was lecturing his audience about the proper legal framework that was "acceptable" to the international community. From his dandified look he appeared a rather different sort from the Americans who crawled into Saddam's spider hole to yank him out. Soft power I suppose is the glib pontification from the salon; hard power is dragging out mass murderers at night in Tikrit.

Next channel: Another worried-looking European analyst was raising the specter of a potential oppressed prisoner suffering at "Guantanamo" - in voicing concern for the rights of Saddam Hussein! French trading with a mass murderer, profiting from selling him arms to butcher his own people is one thing; worrying that the same monster fully understands the nuances of Western jurisprudence while in the docket is quite another. Of course, our European humanist never noted that his own country's pusillanimity over the last decade was responsible for abetting Saddam's reign of terror even as someone else's audacity was for ending it.

I could go on, but you get the picture of this current madness. There is something terribly wrong, something terribly amoral with the Western intelligentsia, most prominently in academia, the media, and politics. We don't need Osama bin Laden's preschool jabbering about "the weak horse" to be worried about the causes of this Western disease: thousands of the richest, most leisured people in the history of civilization have become self-absorbed, ungracious, and completely divorced from the natural world - the age-old horrific realities of dearth, plague, hunger, rapine, or conquest.

Indeed, it is even worse than that: a Paul Krugman or French barrister neither knows anything of how life is lived beyond his artificial cocoon nor of the rather different men and women whose unacknowledged work in the shadows ensures his own bounty in such a pampered landscape - toil that allows our anointed to rage at those purportedly culpable for allowing the world to function differently from an Ivy League lounge or the newsroom of the New York Times. Neither knows what it is like to be in a village gassed by Saddam Hussein or how hard it is to go across the world to Tikrit and chain such a monster.

Our Western intellectuals are sheltered orchids who are naive about the world beyond their upscale hothouses. The Western disease of deductive fury at everything the West does provides a sort of psychological relief (without costs) for apparent guilt over privileged circumstances. It is such a strange mixture of faux-populism and aristocratic snobbery. They believe only a blessed few such as themselves have the requisite education or breeding to understand the "real" world of Western pathologies and its victims.

If we accept that our aristocratic Left mutters exactly the sort of nonsense described by a host of critics from Aristophanes to Juvenal to Tom Wolfe, then just as bizarre is the Muslim world's reaction to capture of the murderer of more Muslims than any living Muslim in the Muslim world. On reports of Saddam's demise the same networks that aired Western professors fretting about his rights were interviewing weeping women in Palestine, somber coffeehouses in Cairo, and pompous intellectuals in Lebanon. In lockstep concern they all bemoaned the ignominious circumstances of his capture: He was found in a hole! He was dirty! And an American medic inspected him like an infected deportee! Alas, he fired not a shot.

To sum up the Arab street: It appears to care not a whit that a native psychopath butchered hundreds of thousands of its own - only that his anti-American braggadocio was revealed to be a sham to millions and that Americans of all people had to free Iraqis from such a menace. Honor and shame - the stuff of tribal societies - matter more than the lives of innocents. If a pundit from Paris was riled that Saddam was not yet advised by an international human-rights lawyer, the masses on the West Bank trumped that concern by lamenting that he had not even machine-gunned an American on his way out - or indeed done anything to restore Arab tribal pride. Lost between the shared loony sympathies of the first-world elite and the third-world clan, between refined postmodern and uncouth premodern societies, was an iota of lamentation for the dead, those rotting and dried-out bones that appear in the thousands in desert sands outside Baghdad.

Both Western pontificators and the mob in the Middle East feed off each other. Paul Krugman would rarely write a column about how abjectly immoral it was that thousands mourned the death of a mass murderer when one can say worse things about an American president who chose not to use American dollars to hire French companies to rebuild Iraq. Bob Herbert can falsely rant about a Florida election "rigged," but seldom about an election never occurring in the Arab world.

The so-called Arab street and its phony intellectuals sense that influential progressive Westerners will never censure Middle Eastern felonies if there is a chance to rage about Western misdemeanors. It is precisely this parasitic relationship between the foreign and domestic critics of the West that explains much of the strange confidence of those who planned September 11. It was the genius of bin Laden, after all, that he suspected after he had incinerated 3,000 Westerners an elite would be more likely to blame itself for the calamity - searching for "root causes" than marshalling its legions to defeat a tribe that embraced theocracy, autocracy, gender apartheid, polygamy, anti-Semitism, and religious intolerance. And why not after Lebanon, the first World Trade Center bombing, the embassies in Africa, murder in Saudi Arabia, and the USS Cole? It was the folly of bin Laden only that he assumed the United States was as far gone as Europe and that a minority of its ashamed elites had completely assumed control of American political, cultural, and spiritual life.

Hatred of Israel is the most striking symptom of the Western disease. On the face of it the dilemma there is a no-brainer for any classic liberal: A consensual government is besieged by fanatical suicide killers who are subsidized and cheered on by many dictators in the Arab world. The bombers share the same barbaric methods as Chechens, the 9/11 murderers, al Qaedists in Turkey, and what we now see in Iraq.

Indeed, the liberal Europeans should love Israel, whose social and cultural institutions - universities, the fine arts, concern for the "other" - so reflect its own. Gays are in the Israeli military, whose soldiers rarely salute, but usually address each other by their first names and accept a gender equity that any feminist would love. And while Arabs once may have been exterminated by Syrians, gassed in Yemen by Egypt, ethnically cleansed in Kuwait, lynched without trial in Palestine, burned alive in Saudi Arabia, inside Israel proper they vote and enjoy human rights not found elsewhere in the Arab Middle East.

When Europe frets over the "Right of Return" do they mean the over half-million Jews who were sent running for their lives from Egypt, Syria, and Iraq? Or do they ever ask why a million Arabs live freely in Israel and another 100,000 illegally have entered the "Zionist entity?" Does a European ever ask what would happen should thousands of Jews demand "A Right of Return" to Cairo?

Instead, the elite Westerner talks about "occupied lands" from which Israel has been attacked four times in the last 60 years - in a manner that Germans do not talk about an occupied West they coughed up to France or an occupied East annexed by Poland. Russia lectures about Jenin, but rarely its grab of Japanese islands. Turkey is worried about the West Bank, but not its swallowing much of Cyprus. China weighs in about Palestinian sovereignty but not the entire culture of Tibet; some British aristocrats bemoan Sharon's supposed land grab, but not Gibraltar.

All these foreign territories that were acquired through blood and iron and held on to by reasons of "national security" are somehow different matters when Jews are not involved. Yet give Israel a population of 250 million, massive exports of oil and terrorists - and wipe away anti-Semitism - and even the Guardian or Le Monde would change its tune.

Perhaps the most pathetic example of this strange nexus between first- and third-world Western bashing was seen in mid-December on television. Just as the United States government declared a high alert, one could watch a replay of the Indian novelist Arundhati Roy trashing America to a captivated, near-gleeful audience in New York. Her dog-and-pony show was followed by pathetic pleading from her nervous interrogator, Howard Zinn, not to transfer her unabashed hatred of the Bush administration to the United States in general.

Mimicking the theatrics of American intellectuals - Roy's hands frequently gestured scare quotes - she went from one smug denunciation to another to the applause of her crowd. Little was said about the crater a few blocks away, the social pathologies back home in India that send tens of thousands of its brightest to American shores, or Roy's own aristocratic dress, ample jewelry, and studied accent. All the latter accoutrements and affectations illustrated the well-known game she plays of trashing globalization and corporatization as she jets around the Western world precisely through its largess - all the while cashing in by serving up an elegant third-world victimization to guilt-ridden Westerners.

Is it weird that Western perks like tenure, jet-travel, media exposure, and affluence instill a hatred for the West, here and abroad? Or rather for a certain type of individual does such beneficence naturally explain the very pathology itself?

Posted by Arlene Peck, December 30, 2003.
After three years of unrelenting terrorists attacks against Israeli civilians I have begun to notice that these same savages who attack "the Jews" are also directing their mindless and cruel behavior on the Christians also.

For the first time I noticed on the American television references to how the Christians have been terrorized, raped, plundered and systemically removed from the little town of Bethlehem.

When it was under Israeli control, the homeland of Jesus was open to all and a wonderful place to be. Once the PLO took over, the Christian population quickly dropped and now it is a sad and empty place. Except for the Arab population of course who now blame the situation on Israel because the "intafada" has caused tourism to disappear.

Recently I spoke with Father Keith Roderick who is the umbrella head of over seventy Christian organizations. He was lamenting to me that it's not only the Jews who are the victims of Arab terrorism. He and many others of his ilk are very fearful of what's happening. We all know about the vicious and frequent acts of anti-Semitism in Europe. However, not too much is said about how they are tearing down churches at every opportunity and replacing them with Mosques.

I remembered how in June of '82 when I was in Lebanon as a journalist how the Israelis were the only ones who were helping the beleaguered Christians at the "Good Fence" and saving them from sure death. At that time, I wondered where the outcry was about the treatment of their own people from the Christian community. Why were they so complacent? Didn't they care? And, now that the Muslim plan is one that is and has systemically removed the Christian community why aren't they out there protesting the fact that Bethlehem has gone from the birthplace of Jesus and a population of 95% Christians to twenty-five percent and, rapidly going down.

I don't know who's worse. The complacent or the self-haters, Recently, I wrote some of my usual words of wisdom about what and who the terrorists are. I described in detail my thoughts on the 72 virgins. Anyway, I received a 'hate letter' from someone named Ilan Hartuv who wrote me a profanity laden letter saying how my writings about the Arabs were "racist S. ..t." He then continued how he resented my thoughts as most other Israelis would. Then came the topper. He wrote me that he was a "retired Israeli ambassador/Naval NCO in Israelis war... and a hater of racists" Apparently Hartuv takes me to be a racist because I am a strong supporter of Israel and not Oslo as he can be found on the internet supporting.

What I found most alarming about this appalling man is how he gleefully quoted four other former chiefs of the Shabak (Israel's general security services who wrote in Yedioth Aharonoth) that people like me may bring Israel to utter ruin and an untimely end. "My views are exactly those of Amnon Lipkin-Shakhak, one of our best chiefs of staff of hundreds of retired generals. Who the hell are you? How I hate ignorant racist. Pick somebody else! Signed, Ilan Hartuv

Frankly, when I received his nasty email, I first assumed that he was an Arab writing me and trying to disguise himself as an Israeli. But, could it really be possible that he was a retired ambassador? Then upon further checking, I found he was the son of Dora Bloch who was one of the hi-jacked on the Entebbe raid!

How do men like Ilan Hartuv ever get into power in Israel? I found it interesting that he was glorifying the four former chiefs of the Shabak as these are men who, in my opinion, should be arrested for treason, or at least deported when they give press conferences to demean the IDF or government in Israel.

The foreign press had a field day with their ramblings. And although they and others like those pilots and soldiers in the IDF who signed that protest that went out around the world are few, they do tremendous damage. Not to mention the morale that they bring down. Don't people like this realize the damage that they do? Do they care?

When I'm fighting the Arab Islamic Fundamentalist I understand the enemy. However, what I cannot fathom are the self-hating Jews and especially people like Belin, Peres and "retired Ambassadors" like Hartuv, I know by birth they're Jewish. But, somewhere along the way they turned into the enemy.

Terrorism against the Jewish State and anti-Semitism against the Jews in general are at an all time high. Yet, these self-serving and in my opinion evil people are running around protesting the plight of the "poor down-trodden Palestinians" It makes me want to gag.

Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com

Posted by Isralert, December 30, 2003.
This was written by Dennis Prager and appeared on the Townhall website (http://www.townhall.com) today.

If you want to understand the Middle East conflict, Iran has just provided all you need to know.

A massive earthquake kills between 20,000 and 40,000 Iranians, and the government of Iran announces that help is welcome from every country in the world... except Israel.

This little-reported news item is of great significance. It begs commentary.

Israel not only has the world's most experienced crews in quickly finding survivors in bombed out buildings, it is also a mere two-hour flight from Iran. In other words, no country in the world would come close to Israel in its ability to save Iranian lives quickly.

But none of this means anything to the rulers of Iran. The Islamic government of Iran has announced to the world that it is better for fellow countrymen and fellow Muslims - men, women and children - to die buried under rubble than to be saved by a Jew from Israel.

That is how deep the hatred of Israel and Jews is in much of the Muslim world.

Hundreds of millions of Muslims - Arab and non-Arab, Sunni and Shi'a - hate Israel more than they love life. Leaders of the Palestinian terror organization Hamas repeatedly state, "We love death more than the Jews love life." And now, Iran announces that it is better for a Muslim to asphyxiate under the earth than be rescued by a Jew from Israel.

Naive Westerners - which includes most academics, intellectuals, members of the international news media, and nearly all others on the Left - refuse to acknowledge the uniqueness of the Arab/Muslim hatred of Israel and Jews. Yet, there is no hatred in the world analogous to it. Not since the Nazi hatred of Jews has humanity witnessed such hate.

That is why finding survivors from earthquakes, creating a Palestinian state and life itself are all far less important in much of the Islamic and Arab worlds than killing Jews and destroying the little Jewish state.

That is why Arab newspapers run articles by Arab professors describing how Jews butcher non-Jewish children to use their blood for holiday meals.

That is why Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad could get a standing ovation from the heads of every Muslim country when he told them "the Jews rule the world by proxy."

That is why Palestinian parents celebrate the suicide terror of their sons - the joy of killing Israeli families far outweighs the pain of the death of their child.

Western naifs like to believe platitudes such as "Deep down, all people are really the same," "All people want peace," and the great untruth of multiculturalism that no culture is morally superior to another. That is why they choose not to face the truth about the Nazi-like hatred that permeates the Arab/Muslim world and the consequent moral gulf that exists between it and Israel. It shatters too many of their illusions.

Surely the Iranian refusal of rescuers from the Jewish state ought to help all these people acknowledge the unique hatred that is at the root of the Arab-Israeli dispute and recognize that it is therefore a conflict unlike any other on earth.

So, too, the immediate and sincere Israeli offer of rescuers to Iran should make the moral gulf between Israel and its enemies as clear as day. Despite the fact that Iran is the greatest backer of anti-Israel (and anti-American) terror and despite the fact that Iran repeatedly declares that Israel must be annihilated (in other words, seeks a second Jewish Holocaust), Israel offered to send its people to save Iranian lives.

The two reactions - Iran's preference for Iranian deaths to Israeli help and the Jewish state's instinctive offer to help save Iranian lives - ought to be enough anyone needs to understand the source of the Middle East conflict. But they won't. Because those who are anti-Israel or "evenhanded" are not so because of the facts, but despite them.

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 30, 2003.
This was sent to me with the request that I forward it to as many people as I can because my friend didn't think the public is aware of what CAIR is trying to do. She pointed out that CAIR's top leadership has stated that they intend to make Islam the driving force in America and their actions prove this. CAIR is an openly Muslim fundamentalist organization, with ties to terrorists. They are opening offices in many of our major cities. Andrew Whitehead of the Anti-CAIR organization (http://www.anti-cair-net.org) wrote this essay about CAIR. It's called "In Defense of the Constitution."

What do the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Development Bank (IDB), and the Al-Aqsa Fund have in common?


1. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has just finished making the final installment on a payment to the Al-Aqsa Fund and Intifada Funds.

The name of the bank handling the money for these two Islamist terror groups? The Islamic Development Bank.

2. The governments of the United States, Great Britain and other countries have banned Al-Aqsa Fund from raising/banking in their countries and have seized funds.

3. The Council on American Islamic Relations has stated that they received funding for their DC headquarters from "a loaned grant mortgage from the Islamic Development Bank."

The end result? CAIR gladly received funding from a banking institution that also processes funds for Islamist terrorists who bomb, murder, dismember and terrorize innocent people while they profane the name of Allah.

How can peaceful followers of the Islamic faith rationalize associating with an organization such as CAIR that not only supports Islamist terror, but does business with banks that fund terror?

How can any member of the press or public rely on the words of a CAIR leader while CAIR engages in business with terrorist supporters who provide funds to groups that have, on several occasions, terror- murdered Americans?

Where is the shame? Where is the outrage?

General Electric Caves to CAIR Threats

On December 16, 2003, Anti-CAIR (ACAIR) issued a press release regarding the actions taken by the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in response to statements made by nationally syndicated radio commentator, Mr. Paul Harvey.

In response to CAIR's call for "action," several hundred people contacted General Electric (GE), with the end result that GE pulled their sponsorship of the program.

While we of ACAIR fully support the right of any company to support the programming of their choice, we question whether GE should have taken any action in response to CAIR's actions. CAIR represents the very worst aspects of Islamist fundamentalism, does not represent the majority (or even a significant minority) of Muslims in the US and also supports Islamist terrorism. For a corporation such as GE to acknowledge, or respond to, entreaties made by CAIR is an insult to peaceful people of every religion.

We hope that, in future, any US corporation having any type of relationship with CAIR realizes that they are dealing with Islamist terrorism supporters and that the American people will not trade with corporations that do not reflect traditional American values.

ACAIR assistant director, Mr. John Rudolph, sent an e-mail to Mr. Gary Sheffer outlining his opinions regarding GE's position regarding Mr. Harvey's comments and received the following response:

"Mr. Rudolph,

Thanks for your note. You should know that we decided last week to resume advertising on Mr. Harvey's program.

Also, our decision was our own. We thought Mr. Harvey's remarks were inappropriate. He himself issued a statement clarifying his remarks.

Happy New Year.

Gary Sheffer"

We hope that, in future, any US corporation having any type of relationship with CAIR realizes that they are dealing with Islamist terrorism supporters and that the American people will not trade with corporations that do not reflect traditional American values.

There are plenty of other Islamic groups in the United States that do not ascribe to the Wahhabi branch of radical Islam. GE should be able to find a responsible Islamic group to handle any concerns they have in dealing with Muslim-Americans.

ACAIR is pleased to answer any questions from the public and press. Your comments, suggestions and tips are appreciated and all e- mail is read. You may request our press releases by writing: Andrew Whitehead, ACAIR.
email: ajwhitehead@anti-cair-net.org
net: http://www.anti-cair-net.org


Subscribers are warned that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) may contact your employer if CAIR believes you are using a work address to receive any material that CAIR believes may be offensive.

CAIR has been known to shame employers into firing employees CAIR finds disagreeable. For that reason, we strongly suggest that corporate e-mail users NOT use a corporate e-mail account/address when communicating with ACAIR. We make every reasonable effort to protect our mailing list, but we cannot guarantee confidentiality. ACAIR does not share, loan, sell, rent or otherwise publicize our mailing list. We respect your privacy!

TIPS: All persons are invited to submit tips and leads. ACAIR will acknowledge receipt of all tips/leads, but we will NOT acknowledge the source of ANY tip or lead in our Press Releases or on our web site.

Exceptions are made for leading media personalities at the discretion of ACAIR and only on request of the person(s) submitting the tip or lead.

Posted by Isaac Judah, December 30, 2003.
My friend, John J. Adams, sent me a copy of the letter he sent to General Electric Corporation (GE). He sent it to the CEO and all the big shots of GE for whom he could find email addresses.

As a former GE employee, I am ashamed of GE for caving to CAIR, a front for an Islamic Terrorist group, that objected to a true statement Paul Harvey said about Islam being a "Religion of Death." What other religion brainwashes its children to strap explosives to themselves and blow themselves up to kill a few innocent people who don't happen to believe their Satanic religion?

GE pulled its sponsorship of Paul Harvey. What an incredibly STUPID thing to do! What liberal idiot made the choice to kowtow to a bunch of Satanic Islamists at the expense of a great American like Paul Harvey??!! Until and unless GE apologizes to Paul Harvey and reinstates him on their roster of spokesmen, my family and everyone at our church will avoid buying anything GE. We already avoid GE's liberal NBC and all of its blame-America-first associates.

Remember, this is America, not some Islamic Dictatorship. At least 80% of your customers are loyal Americans, and Christians or Jews, and we are offended by the 3000 Americans killed by Islamists on 9/11, and daily attacks on our troops, and innocent Israelis, by the same champions of that "religion of peace." In our book, Islamists have no right to complain about anything. If they don't like it here, they can go back to driving camels in their dung-heap former dictatorship. The tail is waging the dog in this country, and it's high time it stopped.

God Bless America, and all LOYAL Americans.

Posted by Linda Olmert, December 30, 2003.
The so -called liberal, western democracy ideologues, of the post Holocaust era, have mixed their cliches. they insist on equating downtrodden with Islam, and assumming that all people are alike, or in other words ; my agenda must be your agenda.

People living under Muslim rule are downtrodden BECAUSE of Islam and the way it is interpreted. Liberal, western democracy ideologues do not see eye to eye with the interpreters of Islam vis a vis their treatment of women, civil rights, gay rights, freedoms (speech, worship, etc) social conscience, etc. And yet, they refuse to hold the culprit accountable: Islamic countries are the way they are because of their agenda, nor because of the west, Israel, America, Christianity, of Judaism.

The agenda of the Islamic world is first the Saturday people, and then the Sunday people! Joseph Farrah tells of the Christian minority in the Palestinian Authority in this, the season of good will to men. It is archived at http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36367

You saw the images on television this Christmas season - Israeli soldiers patrolling Bethlehem.

You heard the Jews blamed for the unrest in the city of David - the birthplace of Jesus.

This column is about what you didn't see or hear in those reports - something of an annual journalistic ritual.

The Christian population of the Palestinian Authority, once representing 20 percent of the region, is down to 2.4 percent. There are fewer than 50,000 Christian Arabs living within the Palestinian Authority.

In 1948, Bethlehem was 80 percent Christian. Today it is 80 percent Muslim.

Where do they go?

Are you ready for a shock?

Many of them prefer life in Israel to life under the rule of Yasser Arafat and his friends in Hamas and Islamic Jihad. In fact, life would be better just about anywhere else, and those who have the ability to leave have left.

This massive display of ethnic cleansing and population movement has been totally obscured by the Palestinian Authority and covered up by the international media. Worse yet, it has even been blamed on Israel.

But Christians fleeing the Holy Land know why they are leaving. All one needs to do is ask them. It began a long time ago. I know, because my grandparents fled for the safety, security and freedom of America. Christians in the Middle East know very well who their enemy is. They know why are they are oppressed. They know who is attacking them. They know who is occupying them.

And it's not Israel.

Here are the facts. Some 2 million Christians have fled the Middle East in the past 20 years. Some estimates are much higher than this. Since Arafat took over administration of the Palestinian territories from Israel, the Christian population has dropped from 15 percent to 2 percent.

They are being driven out. They are being murdered. They are being raped. They are being systematically persecuted. They are being harassed. They are being intimidated.

Such is life for Christians now in Bethlehem and other formerly Christian towns in the West Bank. Just imagine what it will be like when Palestine becomes a real state.

If these people were fleeing Israeli oppression, why did they leave after the Israelis left? It makes no sense. The only way Israel has fed the exodus of Christians from the Middle East is by withdrawing from territories in Judea, Samaria, Gaza, southern Lebanon and elsewhere. When Israel administered those areas, Christian Arabs lived in safety and security.

The truth is the Christian population in Israel has more than quadrupled since 1948. Why? Israel guarantees religious freedom - whereas the Palestinian Authority offers an official religion of Islam.

What has happened in the Palestinian Authority is that the protective hand of Israel has been lifted as it has - under international pressure - given Arafat and the Palestinian Authority more and more autonomy to run its own territory.

Question: What's worse than being bullied, harassed, intimidated and persecuted for your faith?

Answer: Being bullied, harassed, intimidated and persecuted for your faith - and watching the perpetrator of these crimes against humanity successfully blame someone else for committing them.

It's time for the whole world to recognize the mini-holocaust taking place against Christians in the Middle East. It's time to punish those guilty of these atrocities specifically those in charge of the Palestinian Authority. For God's sake, they must not be rewarded with a state of their own.

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 30, 2003.
Jonathan Kay is Editorials Editor of the National Post. This appeared in the National Post.

It is a starting point for debate about the Middle East that one can oppose Israeli policies without being anti-Semitic. Jews and Palestinians are locked in a violent, complex dispute. Reasonable people can disagree about, say, whether Ariel Sharon's counter-terrorism strategy is too aggressive - or whether roadblocks used to control the movement of Palestinians are inhumane.

But since the Al-Aqsa intifada broke out in 2000, hard-left academics and activists have sometimes blurred the distinction between hatred of Israeli policies and hatred of Jews. To excuse suicide bombings as a legitimate option of the "oppressed" (so long as the victims are Jewish), to recycle the lies of Jenin and other modern-day blood libels, to demonize Israel as "genocidal" while ignoring the far worse calamities in Chechnya, Sudan, Algeria and elsewhere - all these tactics reflect a mindset that many Jews find indistinguishable from plain bigotry.

Exhibit A here in Canada is Michael Neumann, a philosophy professor at Trent University in Peterborough, Ontario. Since last year, the educator has been posting his essays on the left-wing Web site Counterpunch.org. The articles vary in subject: terrorism, U.S. foreign policy, the Middle East, etc. But they are all soaked in a single, dominant motif: a shrill, virtually pathological hatred for the state of Israel.

Neumann seems to view the Jewish state as a real-life Mordor populated by ghoulish orcs who seek nothing but the stench of death. Israel, the Trent educator says, is "a growing evil" whose campaign against the neighboring Arabs is "vengeful, relentless [and] sadistically gradual." The country's "crimes," he writes, reflect "a cold-blooded, calculated, indeed an eagerly embraced choice of war over peace, and an elaborate plan to seek out those who had fled the misery of previous confrontations, to make certain that their suffering would continue."

Neumann believes Israel is plotting a "catastrophic assault" on the Palestinians. And its hope, he says, is that, "at some point, [it] will be able to kill many tens of thousands."

Naturally, comparisons to the Nazis and their eugenics agenda abound. Israeli settlers want peace "just as Hitler wanted peace," Mr. Neumann says. The Jews see the Palestinians as "lice," and are seeking their "extinction." Because the Jewish state is built on "vicious ethnic nationalism," it "thinks all Palestinians should vanish or die." The army, meanwhile, serves "the higher purpose of clearing away the vermin who resist the implantation of superior Jewish DNA throughout the occupied territories."

Are Prof. Neumann's views anti-Semitic? The answer to this question does not appear to trouble him much. His theory is that Jews bear a collective responsibility to speak out against Israel. And if they fail to acquit themselves of that duty, then they have fairly earned the world's hatred. As usual, he sees a comparison with the Nazis as apt: "If it is not racist, and reasonable, to say that the Germans were complicit in crimes against humanity, then it is not racist, and reasonable, to say the same of the Jews."

Thus, he writes in his June 4, 2002 Counterpunch essay What is Antisemitism?, "we should almost never take anti-Semitism seriously, and maybe we should have some fun with it."

Trent is a respected university. So how does Prof. Neumann get away with this hate-fuelled claptrap?

For one thing, he is a Jew by birth - even if he talks about his ancestral culture disdainfully, like an abolitionist describing his slave-holding forebears. As with every minority group, Jews get wider latitude to criticize their own than outsiders.

Another factor is "academic freedom." Earlier this year, the Canadian Jewish Congress wrote to the President of Trent University, Bonnie Patterson, expressing concern about the professor's views. She demurred that "the free expression of ideas in universities [is] essential to our teaching."

A noble thought. But one wonders if Mr. Neumann would still be working at Trent if he'd instead argued that anti-black hatred was acceptable because of what Robert Mugabe was doing in Zimbabwe.

The President also noted there had been no complaints against Mr. Neumann's classroom behavior. The Trent philosophy prof may be anti-Israel - but, as the university sees things, his feelings aren't interfering with his role as an educator.

Or are they? This summer, it came out that Prof. Neumann had recently engaged in a revealing e-mail debate about Israel and Judaism with the "webmaster" of an Internet site called Jewish Tribal Review (JTR).

In the exchange - which JTR subsequently published - the webmaster pushes Mr. Neumann to expand his critique of Israel to include "Jewish/Zionist hegemony" in America's "media/government" machine. To his credit, Prof. Neumann declines. But his response, as reported by JTR, contains this admission: "My sole concern is indeed to help the Palestinians, and I try to play for keeps. I am not interested in the truth, or justice, or understanding, or anything else, except so far as it serves that purpose. This means, among other things, that if talking about Jewish power doesn't fit my strategy, I won't talk about it."

This statement can be read narrowly or broadly. So the JTR webmaster asks him for clarification: "Am I reading this right? ... You say you are 'not interested in the truth, or justice, or understanding ... except so far as it serves that purpose.' Is this the foundation of your teachings as a philosopher?"

In his response, Prof. Neumann reportedly writes: "If an effective strategy means that some truths about the Jews don't come to light, I don't care. If an effective strategy means encouraging reasonable anti-Semitism, or reasonable hostility to Jews, I also don't care. If it means encouraging vicious, racist anti-Semitism, or the destruction of the state of Israel, I still don't care."

(Prof. Neumann admits he spoke "carelessly" during his exchange with JTR, which he regarded as confidential; and insists "I do not lie or obfuscate in anything I write, because that would hurt the Palestinians." Regarding the above-cited statements, he told me he would "neither confirm nor deny having made" them.)

As his Trent University Web page illustrates, Prof. Neumann is an accomplished scholar with a lengthy publication record. But I think it is an open question whether someone who would apparently subordinate all to the vilification of a single country belongs in a classroom. Certainly, it is a question Trent officials will have to wrestle with in coming weeks.

Posted by Aryeh Zelaska, December 30, 2003.
This is the same Army that believes in "purity of arms" but will gleefully sacrifice the lives of Jewish soldiers so as to not endanger "innocent" Arabs. Also, prior to destroying the homes of convicted, terrorist murderers, they will humanly allow the family to remove all their belongings so as to not punish the "innocent."

The evil and viciousness of the Sharon regime is beyond belief and tolerance. Not only has Sharon allowed and encouraged the murder of hundreds of Jews and the maiming of thousands more but he has also sent his goon squads of psychopaths to destroy the homes and steal the property of widows and orphans; attack, terrorize and illegally imprison young children; kidnap, torture and illegally imprison totally innocent citizen and other crimes too numerous to list.

Sharon has not been able to do all of this on his own. Without the support of all the great, patriotic, lovers of Yeshah, Right-wing parties in his regime, he would not have been able to get away with all of this. They can demonstrate and play act all they want in front of Sharon's office but they are still sitting with him in his Government.

While these great defenders of the Land of Israel will be chauffeured about in their publicly paid for luxury cars, protected by their publicly paid for bodyguards and enjoy a five star meal at a quality restaurant, also at public expense, decent, dedicated Jews will have their homes and lives destroyed. They will have to watch while the few possessions they have will be looted by one of Sharon's goon squads and then be forced to pay for it all.

This news item is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=55332

Residents Threatened with Eviction - at their Own Cost

(IsraelNN.com) Yesterday, the army's central district commander presented Yesha (Judea, Samaria & Gaza) officials with eviction orders for four outposts. Today, the orders will be posted on the doors of each resident of each community. This will set the stage for the outposts being declared "closed military zones" and from thereafter, subject to eviction at any time.

In addition to being thrown out of their homes, the residents targeted for eviction will also be billed for the "service" by the IDF. Until such time they pay for being thrown out of their homes, their belongings will be held in a military storage facility.

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 30, 2003.
Should auld accomplice be forgot,
And never brought to trial?
Should auld Osloids, friend, be forgot,
And days of auld lang Zion?

For betraying auld lang Zion, my dear,
For abasing auld lang Zion.
Should their accomplice be forgot,
And days of auld lang Zion?

We all hae run aboot the world,
Under fire the whole time.
We've wandered mony a weary foot,
To reach auld lang Zion.

Save auld lang Zion, my dear,
Save auld lang Zion,
Indict those Oslo blaggards, dear,
For auld lang Zion!!!

Posted by Israel Update, December 30, 2003.
Shabak (General Security Service) chief Avi Dichter said at the Herzliya Conference that the Shabak "has failed to provide its citizens with the defense envelope over the past three years that they deserve." In a normal country, this statement alone would have led to the immediate dismissal of the Shabak head. After all, he is admitting his failure. But in Israel, he becomes a hero for it!

Dichter's speech was received by the press with such fanfare, that one can't help but think that his failure was intentional. After all, what does his failure mean? It means that if someone was naive enough to think that we can beat the Arabs, Dichter and his buddies in the security elite have proven otherwise. Because if we, the cream of the crop, the proud, the brave, the talented, and the ones with the fat salaries tried to crush the terror and could not - then it's obvious that we need a new way. We need a separation fence, we need to uproot settlements. And there is something else we may need. If our memory hasn't deceived us, the words of former Shabak chief, Ami Ayalon still rings in our ears: "We must not be afraid of another Altalena" that is, we may need to point a cannon towards the settlers.

So let's set the record straight. The Shabak failed! They did not stop the Arab murderers. They did not stop the fifth column of Jews like Beilin and Peres from walking around freely. And sometimes we wonder if the Shabak, in its present state, is not also a sort of fifth column? Israel Update provides news items. Subscribe by sending an email to IsraelUpdate@hameir.org

Posted by Isralert, December 29, 2003.
David M. Jacobs is writing a study of the Middle East Propaganda War. This article was first published The Salisbury Review Winter (1998). It was subsequently reprinted as the editorial of Christian Action for Israel (1st Quarter Newsletter 1999).

Anyone reading the World's press or listening to radio broadcasts during the past decade would get the idea that Israel is one of the worst violators of human rights. This impression would have been backed up by the fact that Israel has been condemned at the United Nations more than any other country - more than China, Iraq or Iran. However anyone with direct knowledge of Israel or who has taken some trouble to analyse the facts would have realized that Israel's human rights record, and standard of democracy, is far higher than that prevailing in any of its neighbouring states.

How has this extraordinary situation come about? The clue lies in the way that the Israeli government and Jewish communities throughout the World have responded to the enemy propaganda onslaught. They have tried to defend themselves by using Public Relations. Now Public Relations were designed for purely peacetime, mainly commercial, purposes. In a conflict situation they are useless. The Israeli Foreign Ministry even calls the department handling counter propaganda the Department of Hasbarah. This Hebrew word, always mistranslated by Israeli diplomats as 'information', actually means 'explanation'. This shows the subconscious defensive role that they take when they 'explain' themselves in public.

The problem is that propaganda or Psychological Warfare, PW for short, is an effective weapon of war, and has little in common with PR. In fact during the Second World War the Americans found that PR specialists tended to be ineffective at propaganda (see Daniel Lerner, Psychological Warfare against Nazi GermanyThe purpose of PW is the same as that of all warfare. It is in fact one of the arms of a war machine, and has been referred to as the Fourth Arm, following the Army, Navy and Air Arms. The aim of war as summarized by Clausewitz is 'an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.' PW is more gentle. It employs persuasion and psychological manipulation to achieve the same end. The ancient Chinese sage Sun Tzu, who lived in the Fifth Century BC, who is often considered to be the greatest of all writers on war, wrote: 'To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.' This statement is a good summary of modern propaganda warfare.

PW is operated through Front Organisations and Agents of Influence. There are three types of Front Organisation. Firstly the overt organizations such as the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding or the British Soviet Friendship Society. Secondly the covert ones such as Medical Aid to the Palestinians, which appears to be about giving help to suffering Palestinians whilst its real aim is to rally support for the Arab and Palestinian campaign against Israel. The third type is the infiltrated organization. This is where agents of influence have infiltrated an organization set up for another purpose, and then used it to promote their own cause. The Arabs have been very successful in infiltrating many charities and Church groups in this way. Government departments may also find themselves subject to this type of treatment. There are two types of agents of influence. Firstly the 'useful idiot'. This uncomplimentary term was coined by Lenin to describe the kind of naive ass, often a person in a prominent position, who fell for his propaganda and could be manipulated to publicly aid his campaign. The second type is the conscious agent who fully understands what he is doing and works behind the scenes. Often referred to in the press as a 'mole', he has nothing to do with espionage and his job is to influence policy.

There are various actions that propagandists have to carry out. Some of which need to be described here. One of these is Concealment of Motive, that is pretending to be supporting something, but in reality promoting something else. Next comes Demonisation, this is an unpleasant operation which involves vilification of the opposing side. Then comes an obvious operation, namely Repetition. This is vital in getting ideas across to the public by continuously returning a simple message. Finally comes a complicated concept known as the 'Holy Phrase'. Lasswell (Propaganda Technique in World War, New York 1927, p.66) says of this: - A propagandist must always be alert to capture the holy phrase which crystallizes public aspiration about it, and under no circumstance permit the enemy to enjoy its exclusive use and wont.'

The great masters of PW were the Soviets. The department concerned with what the Soviets called 'Active Measures' was the First Chief Directorate of the KGB. From there were run all the agents of influence and the front organizations. They were extraordinarily effective in getting their propaganda across. It was they who invented the concept of dezinformatsia, or disinformation. This was not exactly lying, but the putting out of distorted information to confuse, or alter, an opponent's policy.

The reason for the Soviet involvement in Arab PW is that the Arab defeat of 1967 was felt by the Soviets to be a major defeat for Soviet policy and a triumph for the United States. The Soviets also had a traditional Russian reason for supporting the Arabs. For two hundred years the Russians had wanted a 'warm water port' which would give them the opportunity of operating freely in the Mediterranean without worrying about an opponent blocking the Dardanelles. There were a number of Arab ports which could be ideal for this role. Before 1967 Arab propaganda had been totally ineffective. After 1967 with Soviet help Arab PW increased by leaps and bounds. The Arabs were able to use the Soviet front organizations for their own PW as well as many of their agents of influence. Some of the most effective of these were the church organizations, in particular the World Council of Churches which had been set up in Prague in 1948. From that base it was possible to infiltrate not only other church bodies, but the various international charities, especially those giving aid to the Third World.

We now come to the core element in the Arab-Israeli Conflict, which is the Islamic dimension. Mohammed got his basic monotheistic ideas from the Jewish and Christian tribes living around him in the Hejaz. He therefore felt that he should get support for his new religion from the Jews. When this failed to materialize it led to bitterness. Islam's relationship with Jews and Judaism thus started off in the Seventh Century very badly, with attacks by the nascent Muslim war band on the local Jewish tribes in the Hejaz, eventually driving all the Jews out of the region. Following these events came the very rapid creation of a mighty Moslem empire stretching from the Indus in the East to the Atlantic in the West and including virtually the whole of the Iberian peninsula, its expansion only being stopped by Charles Martel at Poitiers in 732. This vast conquest took place within a century of Mohammed's revelation. The Moslems regarded the territory they had conquered as the House of Islam and considered it inalienable. The territory outside was regarded as pertaining to the House of War.

With this conquest came the regulation of the status of the non-Moslems, more particularly the Christians and Jews, within the Domain of Islam. These were regarded as the People of the Book as they already had scriptures of their own. They were given an inferior status as dhimmis or protected people. They were protected as long as they accepted this secondary status towards their Moslem overlords. The pact, dating rom the Eighth Century, under which this was laid down was known as the as the Pact of Omar. The Jews were automatically regarded as inferior to the Christians as, unlike the Christians, there were no Jewish military powers against whom the Moslem forces were fighting.

Islam and the Arabs had traditional PW techniques long before the modern concept of propaganda had been invented. There are two concepts in particular. These are the idea of Taqiya, or dissimulation, and that of the hila, or ruse. Taqiya implies outward conformity to alien customs whilst remaining faithful to Muslim beliefs. Thus the Arabs are able to maintain outward agreement with Western concepts of international law and practice, whilst keeping faith with Islamic tradition which says that Israel is a dhimmi state and stands on which is part of the Domain of Islam, and therefore must be removed. The doctrine of the hila is based on the saying of the Prophet Mohammed when he stated 'War is a series of actions for deceiving the enemy'. Another statement by the general and politician Al-Muhallab in the generation following that of Mohammed was: 'Have the heart to use deception in war, for it enables you to arrive at your goal more certainly than in a bloody body to body battle.'

The combination of traditional ideas of taqiya and the hila combined with Soviet dezinformatsia have enabled the Arabs to run rings round, not only the Israelis, but the whole of the West.

The reason that I stated that the Islamic component constitutes the core of the Arab-Israeli Conflict now becomes clear. It is essentially the resentment of Islam at the rule of the Jews over part of what they regard as the Domain of Islam, not only that but by setting up a Jewish state in such an area in such an area, defeating several Muslim armies, and ruling over Muslims, the Jews have abrogated their dhimmi status and thus torn up the Pact of Omar. It is this, not the percentage of Israeli withdrawal on the West Bank, which has brought about the sense of Moslem fury and humiliation, which is what the conflict is about. By making the World think that the conflict is about the Palestinians, or the minutiae of Oslo, is thus an excellent demonstration of the PW doctrine of Concealment of Motive.

The term Palestine is a post-Biblical expression. It was originally coined by the Romans following the fierce wars that they had to fight against the Jews in the First and Second Centuries AD. In the early part of this century the concept of Palestine was automatically associated in everybody's mind with the Jews. This continued throughout the 1940s. In 1938 when George Antonius wrote his famous book 'The Arab Awakening', in support of the Arab Nationalist position, he made no mention of the existence of a Palestinian People, because at that time such a concept had not come into being. The first moves in this direction were made at an Arab League Council meeting in Cairo in March 1959, and in September 1963 the Council appointed Ahmed Shuqairi as the 'representative of Palestine' to the Arab League. This was the same man who, as the representative of Syria, had said in the Security Council in May 1956 that 'It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria.' In October 1965 the PLO was still being referred to by the Arab states as representing 'the Arab people of Palestine'. It was not until 1974 that the PLO was invited to participate in a General Assembly debate as 'representing the Palestinian People'. The PLO had managed to gain a platform within the United Nations normally reserved for sovereign states. It subsequently built an impressive power base at the UN, including in the establishment in 1977 of a 'Special Unit on Palestinian Rights'. This meant that the UNICs (United Nations Information Centres) throughout the world were forced to carry PLO propaganda. The final passing of the name Palestine to the Arabs came when Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in September 1993 stated that 'the Government of Israel has decided to recognise the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian People..." The Arabs had captured the Jewish 'Holy Phrase'. The Israelis however seemed sublimely unaware that anything had happened, in what had been a brilliant Arab PW operation carried across several decades. The result of this particular PW operation in the military and political spheres has been considerable. It means that the Israelis instead of having merely a frontier problem with the neighbouring Arab states are confronted with a land and people which is virtually coterminous with their own. The PLO issued its Covenant calling for the destruction of Israel in 1968. This, though they agreed to change it at Oslo, has never been changed. In 1974 the Palestine National Council had issued a 10-point programme, in which Article 8 had stated that 'the Palestinian national authority, after its establishment, will struggle for the unity of the confrontation states for the sake of completing the liberation of all Palestinian soil and as a step on the path of comprehensive Arab unity.' This doctrine has been reiterated many times by Arafat and Palestinian officials since Oslo, but only to their own people. To the West they say something rather different. This is why, until these ideas have been genuinely given up, any withdrawals by Israel constitute a foolhardy strategic risk. However the Israelis seem unable to get this point across to the outside World, nor even to many of their own people, particularly to those on the Left.

One of the aims of a good PW campaign is to get behind your opponents' guard. Here the Peace Campaign comes in. Targeted at the Left Wing of both the Israeli and wider Jewish communities it has had a lot of success. The desperate desire of all Israelis and Jews for peace has been successfully exploited by the Arabs, who have copied the old Soviet Peace Campaigners. It is interesting to note that in Daniel Lerner's book (see above) on PW written originally in 1947, he wrote: 'The will to resist dissolves into a desire for 'peace soon', and finally crumbles into a desire for 'peace now'.' It is interesting to note that these words were used many years before the Israeli Peace Now movement came into being. Although Peace Now is very much a minority movement in Israel, its influence is widespread, and many of the Left refer to themselves as the 'Peace Camp', which gives the impression that only they want peace. In their desperation these people have swallowed the PLO propaganda line put forward to the West. The Peace Now propaganda line gets widely reported in the Western media, and helps to undermine the Israeli government's position.

Another facet of the Israeli Left is its secularism. Because they themselves have largely abandoned Judaism, they cannot accept that Arab policy has an Islamic basis. This enables the PLO to emphasise more effectively the Palestinian Nationalist position. Though a Palestinian identity has been created now, while Article 12 of the Palestine National Covenant stresses that this is just temporary, the ultimate loyalty remains to Islam. The PLO regularly use Christians to front their propaganda operations. The Christians are a tiny minority in the Arab population and need, for their own political security, to keep in with the Muslims. By using them the PLO is able to emphasise the nationalist position, which the Israeli Left, as well as the international Left who share their secularist attitudes, easily swallow.

An important development in the propaganda war has been the affair of Mordechai Vanunu. He was convicted of high treason by publicizing Israel's nuclear secrets abroad. High treason in time of war in virtually all other countries, besides Israel, carries the death penalty. Vanunu was thus very lucky that the country he betrayed was Israel. Instead of being sentenced to death he received a long prison sentence. Nonetheless a huge campaign was launched to free him. It was presented as a humanitarian campaign, but its prime purpose was to deprive Israel of its nuclear deterrent. The 'Campaign to free Vanunu and for a Nuclear-Free Middle East' is another example of the PW principle of Concealment of Motive. Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a nuclear deterrent. The object of the campaign is to shift the balance in favour of the Arabs and Iran with their much larger conventional forces. The campaign, apart from the usual CND crowd, was operated through the 'useful idiot' type of agent of influence. Many of these were actors, who can be very useful in this role, being as articulate as they are politically ill-informed.

In order to deal with the problem of Israel's lack of a propaganda section in the style of Britain's wartime Political Warfare Executive or the post-war Information and Research Department of the FCO, it will be necessary to change the Jewish and Israeli mindset. This is going to be difficult, as centuries of irrational hatred directed at the Jewish People have resulted in a desire to be loved. Hence the emphasis on PR as opposed to PW. Some of the problems of Jewish identity that were examined by the Chief Rabbi in his article in The Salisbury Review (Summer 1998), are very relevant to the ability of Jews to deal with their neurotic block against using PW.

The other issue that has to be faced is the nature of the conflict itself. This is that it is primarily a conflict between Judaism and Islam. Most Jews and Israelis, even those who are not secularists, are very scared of this fact. Once they are prepared to admit it, the problem can be handled in a more intelligent manner. If Israel's long term diplomatic and strategic position is not to be further undermined, thus putting the whole state in danger, then Israel and the Jewish People will have to copy the rest of the World and run their own PW agencies.

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 29, 2003.
This item is archived at http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/377281.html

Prince Hassan bin Talal, uncle of Jordan's King Abdullah and a former heir to the throne of the Hashemite kingdom, has told an Italian newspaper that he sees Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as a pragmatic man, who wants security for his people, but is unable to find a partner on the Palestinian side with whom to conduct negotiations.

In comments published Monday by La Stampa, Prince Hassan said that "Arafat is at a transitory stage, but, unfortunately, we can see the growing influence of Hamas and Hezbollah among the Palestinians."

Hassan, the younger brother of Jordan's deceased monarch King Hussein, also said that "the Palestinians continue to talk about Palestinian unity. The Palestinian question has never been resolved. From my perspective, Jordan should include all the Palestinians, and Israel, Palestine and Jordan should enjoy the same sort of interdependence as there is in the Benelux countries."

When asked whether he was planning on establishing a new political party, Prince Hassan replied that he preferred to start a political movement, at the center of the political spectrum. "There are Christian Democratic, so where should there not be Muslim Democrats," he added.

Hassan said that there are currently three phobias afflicting the world: "anti-Semitism, anti-Arabism and anti-Americanism. This is because the Americans should not be talking about a new world order, but about a new international alliance for peace."

Posted by Eliezar Edwards, December 29, 2003.
This article was written by Yehoshua Amishav and was on the Ha'aretz website today. Mr. Amishav is the director of the department of marketing and communication in Keren Hayesod (United Israel Appeal) and was Israeli embassy spokesman in Paris and Rome.

The press briefing held this month by the French government spokesman at the end of the first session of the special Interministerial Committee to Fight Racism and Anti-Semitism included a recommendation to teach more Holocaust studies, as an educational tool to fight this harsh phenomenon. The panel was established to conduct the war against increasing anti-Semitism in France. There seems to be an accepted axiom that historical knowledge of the attempt to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth in an unprecedented, orderly, scientific manner, will make those causing the ugly new wave to rethink their behavior. And if not - at least it will encourage those surrounding them, and the governments of countries tainted by anti-Semitism, to confront the anti-Semites. It is very doubtful, however, whether this assessment can pass the test of reality.

In effect, the central question is where the greatest danger to Jews in Europe comes from today: from the incidental groups of young people consumed by hatred, who occasionally desecrate a Jewish cemetery, or from the academic and cultural elites, which are well aware of the history of the Old World? The answer would seem to be clear.

When Mikis Theodorakis, the creator of the masterpiece "Mauthausen," calls the Jewish people "the root of evil," he isn't doing so from lack of knowledge about the Holocaust. Even an arch-anti-Semite such as the former prime minister of Malaysia, Mahathir Mohammed, didn't deny the Holocaust in his famous speech of incitement; on the contrary, he specifically mentioned it when he pointed out that it didn't prevent Jewish domination of the world. And Portuguese Nobel Prize laureate Jose Saramago knows exactly what Auschwitz was, but that didn't prevent him from saying the abominable things we recall from his last visit to our region.

At least in Europe there is no lack of knowledge today about the Holocaust. Many survivors are still with us, a great deal of literature and many museums provide information to anyone who wants it. A European Holocaust remembrance day has been officially declared. And even if it's true that younger generations don't know enough about it, that's a general problem.

The dramatic development of the past three years is that blaming Israel, and condemnation of the Jews' support for Israel, are based with increasing frequency on the use of the memory of the Holocaust. It began during the Lebanon War about 20 years ago, until it grew and became a social consensus. Thus, almost any Israeli representative can hear remarks like: "You are doing to the Palestinians what they did to you in the Holocaust."

This phenomenon is so widespread that a spokesman for the Israeli embassy in Belgium asked two years ago that Yad Vashem discontinue the ceremonies for honoring the "Righteous of the Nations" (non-Jews who saved Jews during the Holocaust), because at almost every ceremony there was an incident involving such disgraceful comparisons by one of the participants.

As for the memory of the Holocaust, clear rules have been set: Supporters of Israel are forbidden to mention it, since it is "a perverse exploitation of the blood of the victims to justify the horrors that Israel is committing," but its enemies are allowed to use it - to beat up on Israel and to prove that the Israeli government is a new Nazi regime.

This approach shows just how strong the memory of the Holocaust is in Europe. Were that not the case, there would be no point in the mass marketing of comparisons of the Israelis to the Nazis, who represent absolute evil.

As attorney Arno Klarsfeld wrote (Jerusalem Post, December 12) - the moment is fast approaching when the Jews will have to leave Europe or live as "political Marranos."

That is the essence of the new anti-Semitism. No French scientist has ever been required, even at the height of the Algerian war, to issue a condemnation of his government's policy to be accepted among his colleagues. No Oxford professor has announced that he won't teach any Belgian student who served in the army, even after the responsibility of Belgium and its army for the 1994 Rwandan genocide became clear. But the very identification of an Israeli as such already spells trouble.

The chair of Amnesty-Israel, Miriam Shlesinger, was expelled from the editorial board of a British linguistics periodical; they wanted to take away the Nobel Peace Prize from Shimon Peres. From here it's a short distance to signaling the Jews: Keep your distance from Israel, or you won't be able to go on living as you did till now. Your safety is at risk.

These signals come from the heart of the Western European cultural world, from circles that are in no need of any lectures about the Holocaust. These people, the educators of the next generation and the symbols with which the young people identify, are now the greatest threat to the daily lives of hundreds of thousands of Jews in Europe. It is very doubtful whether increased Holocaust studies will solve anything in this tragic situation.

Posted by Isaac Kohn, December 29, 2003.
[June 20, 2018, El-Kuds Radio & Television Authority, Ramallah, Palestine. 4:05 PM DST]

This just in! The United Nations General Assembly, in a unanimous vote of 197-0, has voted today to expel the State of Israel from the United Nations and to impose severe economic and political sanctions.

US Ambassador to the UN, James Carter III, who wrote the resolution's tough language, with us on the phone directly from UN headquarters in New York City, in order to elaborate and explain the dramatics that have occurred. Mr. Ambassador, please proceed.

Carter: "Thank you. The American Government loudly and vigorously applauds the just concluded dramatic vote as 'the final step towards righting the wrong of the 1947 United Nations resolution' in which Palestine was wrongfully partitioned. With this vote, the world declares that the State of Israel was illegally established on Palestinian lands; thank heavens, today, saner heads prevailed as the final step towards the ultimate goal of returning all of the occupied lands to the rightful owners is on our doorsteps. We had no other choice, as every political nicety was already tried and exhausted; Israel rejected the 'Revised Road Map', which was presented as a just and final solution to the never-ending conflict between Israel and the State of Palestine."

Mr. Ambassador, would you please be so kind as to spell out for the listening and watching audience the main points of the 'Revised Road Map' in order to clarify to one and all what the so-called 'sticking points' were. Why was Israel so obstinate in refusing to accept the President's 'expanded vision for peace', as you dubbed it?

Carter: "With pleasure. The President has declared over and over that Israel has nothing to fear but fear itself. The United States was guaranteeing Israel's safety, should she accept the President's revised vision. I believe that the audience will agree (as we see from the amazing vote in the UN) that justice must prevail. Had Israel accepted these 'concessions for peace', this vote wouldn't have been necessary.

"The 'Revised Road Map' spelled out the following 'points towards a final peace':

1) The following cities, towns and other areas, currently occupied by Jewish settlers, must be evacuated: Jaffa, an Arab populated suburb of Tel-Aviv, is to be conceded to the State of Palestine and all Jewish neighborhoods there are to be dismantled (these neighborhoods were built on occupied Arab lands). Acre, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Degania, Haifa, Herzliya, Holon, Naharia, Nahalal, Natanya, Rehovot, and the Jordan Valley - per PLO and Hamas charters, these cities are built on waqf lands and all of the Jewish residents are to be evacuated within six months of Israel's acceptance of the RRM.

2) Kiryat Shemona, Rosh Pina and Ma'alot are to be evacuated, dismantled and turned into a demilitarized, no-man's land supervised by the multinational force. Since the majority of those populating the Galilee are Arabs, Tzfat and Tiberias are to be evacuated and all Jews transferred to B'nei B'rak (the Palestinians have no claims against this city). These steps are necessary in order to create a 'positive atmosphere' for negotiations with Hizbollah. This humanitarian organization has been demanding the return of this area for the last 20 years.

3) All of Israel's governmental buildings that were built on Greek Orthodox lands are to be evacuated as all leases are hereby canceled and the lands returned. Such a 'positive concession' towards the Orthodox Church will firmly establish Israel's desire to calm the clamor and demands of the Church for the return of its properties and re-establish the Church's good will.

4) Jerusalem is to be turned over to the government of Palestine. Continuing to live with a wall in the center of the once-united eternal city has created tremendous logistical hardships for the Arab population of El-Quds. This 'confidence-building concession' will end the restrictions imposed on individuals attempting to cross over. The blockades, searches and general humiliation of the Arab populace will come to an end.

5) Three million Arab refugees waiting in UN-sponsored refugee camps must be allowed into Israel proper; the humanitarian gesture Israel conceded to during the implementation of the original 'Road Map', by taking in one-and-one-half million refugees, has proven insufficient. Too many families remain to be united with their loved ones already in Israel.

6) Israel is to transfer immediately the entire sum of Arab tax money (estimated at $40 billion) it has been collecting and holding in trust for the State of Palestine. In order to begin rebuilding the infrastructures that Israel destroyed during the Oslo War, Palestine needs a tremendous infusion of money and the lack of these funds has delayed the rebuilding 'til this very day (unfortunately, the $350 billion contributed over the years by the US, UN and European Union have disappeared without trace).

7) On the Syrian front: Israel is to evacuate the entire area called the 'Golan Heights' and return it to the government of Syria. Unfortunately, Jews wishing to remain in their homes under Syrian jurisdiction, can not do so; Syria refuses to allow even one single Jew to remain. The Syrian government has been kind enough to offer twenty-two cargo boats ready and willing to ship the Jews to any country that will take them. Syria will forgo any compensation for her gesture.

8) Once the above points are accepted and realized within a the time allotted (six months from the date of introduction of the RRM), the State of Palestine will declare a hudna and all homicide bombings and other 'acts of violence' will halt."

Mr. Ambassador, these points sound very fair. Why did Israel refuse to accept the Revised Road Map? Doesn't Israel want peace? How is she going to achieve peace and quiet coupled with security for its citizens? I believe that since the implementation of the original 'Road Map', the acts of terror have been greatly reduced. There were only 17 bus-bombings in the last three years. Only 3,800 Jews were killed since 2003, compared to almost 1,000 in the three years of the Intifada. Hamas, Fatah, Tanzim and the other 'freedom fighters' have curtailed their violence only to those cities and areas mentioned in the above points. Palestinian President Dahlan is so forthcoming in demanding so little from Israel. Isn't it time to finally end the occupation and allow the oppressed Palestinians to live in peace on their lands?

Carter: "This is exactly why the UN voted as it did. The world is sick and tired of such a tiny, rotten little country creating so much trouble. Israel's obstinate refusal to move forward towards an atmosphere for peace has forced our hand. As such, its very existence can no longer be tolerated; its place among the nations will end soon. The expulsion and sanctions are here to guarantee that the world will no longer have to contend with Middle East violence. Seventy years was mentioned as the end of the first Exile; seventy years of Jewish self-rule is long enough. A new era of peace and tranquillity is about to dawn."

Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. This is Radio El-Quds, broadcasting from Ramallah.

Mr. Kohn lives in Brooklyn, New York. This article appeared in Arutz Sheva (http://www.IsraelNN.com), July 16, 2003.

Posted by Isralert, December 29, 2003.
This was written by Ephraim Inbar and appeared on Ha'Aretz yesterday. Inbar teaches political science at Bar-Ilan University and is director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Research.

Many Israelis believe time is not on their side and are therefore looking to change the status quo, even unilaterally. And yet, an analysis of Zionist action rather than Zionist rhetoric reveals that playing for time was one of the mainstays of Israel's national strategy. David Ben-Gurion understood that Israel was too weak to impose a peace settlement on the Arabs and that it would simply have to wait until the other side would recognize perforce the reality of a Jewish state.

Unfortunately, Palestinians still have their pipe dreams of inundating Israel with refugees or winning sovereignty over the Temple Mount. Despite the festive declarations from the Israeli peace camp that we have a partner, it is obvious that peace cannot be achieved today. This is mainly because of the Palestinians' inability to establish a stable political entity that would be willing to suppress those who oppose Israel's existence.

The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has also concluded that before 2020 there is no chance of seeing a Palestinian leadership ready to make the concessions that are necessary for a comprehensive agreement. What this means is that Israel has to go on playing for time until the Palestinians are ripe for the kind of peace that will be acceptable to Israel.

Past conjectures about demographic trends that affect the numerical relationship between Jews and Arabs have generally turned out to be wrong. But even if they turned out to be accurate this time, they do not add up to a demographic threat and are not relevant to preserving a Jewish majority in the Land of Israel.

It makes no difference how many Palestinian babies are born in the Gaza Strip, in Nablus or in Jenin, if Israel has no intention of annexing those areas. The Jewish majority in Israel is not affected by the number of Arabs who live outside the country.

Since 1993 the political leadership in Israel has moved in the direction of partitioning the Land of Israel. The majority of Likud leaders have also accepted the partition idea and ruled out the possibility of permanent Israeli rule over the Palestinian population centers.

However, as long as Palestinians continue to offer a fertile ground for terrorism against Israel, Jews will have to intervene militarily within the Palestinian population, including their urban centers. Israel will have to get used to living with fluctuations in the Israeli presence in the territories, unless Egypt and Jordan assume responsibility for the Palestinian territories in the near future. The demography issue is not relevant to the need to defend Israel.

Palestinians themselves should have a clear interest in drastically reducing their consistently high birthrate. According to Palestinian economists, the current birthrate will oblige the Palestinian economy to grow permanently by seven to eight percent a year just to supply work to all the young people who will enter the labor force. A growth rate on that scale is not within the grasp of the Palestinian economy, even if the flow of money from abroad increases.

Indeed, we can expect a reduction of this aid to the Palestinians as a result of the demand for greater transparency and as a result of the appearance of other areas of need, such as Iraq. The Palestinians, like the Egyptians and other Muslim countries, will be obliged to encourage supervision over the birth rate if they want to escape protracted poverty. Time will thus weaken the Palestinian entity unless time is exploited intelligently for a change in the demographic trends.

Time is also on Israel's side because the majority of the civilized world has at long last understood that the Palestinian national movement is in need of a thorough reform and new leadership. The Palestinians' main method of operation - terrorism - does not enjoy international legitimacy.

Moreover, the Palestinians have not moved any closer to establishing a state than they were in September 2000. In fact, their condition is worse from every point of view and there are no signs of improvement on the horizon.

Finally, the spirit of the time, which lauds the values of democracy and the free market, leans more to the Israeli side than the Palestinian. The Jews have exploited time better than the Arabs, and this seems set to continue.

Posted by Marco Delmar, December 29, 2003.
An Associated Press story by Gavin Rabinowitz that appeared on the Yahoo news today said: "JERUSALEM - Israeli soldiers Sunday killed three Palestinians near a Jewish settlement in the Gaza Strip (news - web sites)..." Only later on inside the article do we learn that the 'Palestinians' were armed. armed is the MISSING PART in the headline.

Note: When Palestinians claim responsibility for blowing up unarmed Israeli kids, AP writes that the "explosion killed..." followed by the usual ugly phrase. They don't say what's true: "Palestinians-killed." Never! Palestinians just don't kill according to "objective' AP's saturated False-Headline-industry.

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 29, 2003.
Israel closed down the Arutz-7 broadcasting station, which had been broadcasting without an (unobtainable) licence from an offshore ship. They failed to say why Leftwinger Abie Nathan was able to broadcast from his offshore pirate radio station for 20 years without interference. This story appeared on the Arutz-7 website (http://www.IsraelNationNews.com) today.

Justice Yoram Noam of the Jerusalem Magistrates Court handed down this afternoon the sentences of the ten Arutz-7 directors, broadcasters, and employees who were convicted of operating an illegal radio station. Four defendants will perform community service for 3-6 months each. The ten defendants were also fined between 20,000 and 50,000 shekels each, in addition to the fine imposed on Arutz-7 to the tune of 450,000 shekels. The judge noted that the fines and/or community service can be served in the form of prison sentences.

Yaakov Katz, known as Ketzaleh - indefatigable Executive-Director of Arutz-7 and Beit El Yeshiva Center Institutions, wounded as an IDF officer during the Yom Kippur War and bound to a wheelchair for months afterwards, a founding member of the community of Beit El - was sentenced to a six-month term, commutable to public service, as well as a fine of 50,000 shekels and a suspended sentence of six months. On his way out of the courtroom, Ketzaleh said, "All my life I have been doing public service work. Neither would I have been afraid of actual jail time; I would have been able to study Torah there. The most important thing is the preservation of freedom of speech." He said that Arutz-7 would appeal the "unprecedentedly stiff fines," and the State Prosecution, as well, has said it will appeal.

Arutz-7 Directors Mrs. Shulamit Melamed and Yoel Tzur, and engineer Ya'ir Meir, were each sentenced to three months in prison, also executable in the form of public service. They were fined between 25,000 - 30,000 shekels each.

The seven other defendants were sentenced to pay fines and/or serve suspended sentences. They are: Rabbi Zalman Baruch Melamed, Rabbi of Beit El since its inception in 1977, Dean of Yeshivat Beit El and Beit El Yeshiva Center Institutions, leading member of the Yesha Council of Rabbis, and co-founder of Arutz-7; Haggai Segal, Arutz-7 News Director; Gidi Sharon, veteran music broadcaster; David Shapira, broadcaster and director of Arutz-7's French department; Adir Zik, veteran fiery nationalist broadcaster; Sha'ul Avni, captain of Arutz-7's Eretz HaTzvi ship.

The three broadcasters received four-month suspended sentences, as well as fines of 20,000 shekels each. Rabbi Melamed received the same sentence, though his fine was for 25,000 shekels. News Director Haggai Segal was sentenced to a six-month suspended term and a fine of 30,000 shekels. The ship's captain Sha'ul Avni was sentenced to a three-month suspended term and a fine of 20,000 shekels.

Justice Arnon noted today that he took into account the fact that as soon as the conviction was handed down, Arutz-7 ceased its broadcasts and sold the ship from which the broadcasts emanated. He further said that Arutz-7 consistently paid royalties, and noted that there was no proof that Arutz-7 ever interfered with air-traffic communications. "The fact that the government did not enforce the law against the station over the course of many years," he stated, "gave its operators the impression that their sin was not grave - especially when important public figures, including MKs and ministers, were interviewed on the station."

Some 3,000 fans of Arutz-7, including several Knesset Members organized by MK Uri Ariel (National Union), demonstrated outside the courtroom prior to the sentencing. "No to Shutting Mouths!" was the theme. Among the participants were also Rabbi Dov Lior of the Yesha Rabbinical Forum and Tourism Minister Benny Elon. Ariel said, "Arutz-7 is the mouthpiece of a very large public sector, and its silencing is a grave blow at the right to freedom of speech."

The Arutz-7 management has consistently denied the accusations against it. Many Arutz-7 listeners continue to enjoy the station's broadcasts via the internet and over regular phone lines. One of Israel's leading internet providers is now offering special deals for internet connectivity tailored to the Arutz-7 listening public. For example, one deal for families that don't want exposure to the internet enables tuning into the webcast using a computer with no screen.

Haggai Segal said afterwards, "The real punishment was the trial itself, which lasted almost six years... The sentences were not light; a 30,000 shekel fine for a reporter whose only sin is broadcasting the public voice is not light."

Noam Arnon, spokesman for the Hevron Jewish Community who spoke regularly on Arutz-7, delivered a moving public statement after the sentence was handed down: "This group of defendants saved the honor of the Nation of Israel, and instead of being brought to trial, they should have been on their way to the President's Home to receive the Israel Prize. They are like an air-freshener, purifying the media air that is all but conquered and polluted by the left side of the political spectrum. No punishment will break them, and they will continue, with G-d's help, to work for the good of the Jewish people... We here today who escorted them to the courthouse represent the hundreds of thousands of Arutz-7's loyal listeners."

Asked afterwards about the sentences, Arnon said, "I spoke with legal experts, and they said that these sentences are not at all light. True, they won't be going to jail, and for this we are grateful, but they were sentenced to months in prison that can be commuted to public service - whoever heard of such a thing for actions of this type? The fines, too, are very heavy, and we should not make light of this."

Posted by Donna Hadida, December 29, 2003.
May God Bless the Eternal Existence of Israel.

In the meantime destroy all the enemies of Israel. Don't be too shy. They(the PLO) are still teaching their children lies and to hate us even more and to promote more antifadah against Israel now and in the future. Gaza City is full of terrorists. Just wipe it out and send them back to Egypt where they really belong - in the jails of Egypt. These people are such liars, I would not even bother with their frigging state.

Posted by Honest Reporting, December 29, 2003.
On Dec. 28, The Los Angeles Times published two, opposing op-ed pieces on the resurgent wave of worldwide anti-Semitism. Remarkably, the debate wasn't about what to do about the problem, but rather if a problem exists at all.

ADL Director Abraham Foxman cited, among other recent events, the viciously anti-Jewish statements of the Malaysian Prime Minister, the synagogue bombings in Istanbul, and the burning of an Indiana holocaust museum, to conclude:

Anti-Semitism is not a relic of history but a current event. Its resurgence is stronger and more widespread than even the most pessimistic among us predicted. And the threat is growing...Democratic leaders and good people must stand up - for their own sake as well as for the sake of Jewish communities - so that the theme of "never again" will be a living reality.

Foxman's words were deemed debatable by the Times, who invited Michael Neumann, a philosophy professor at Ontario's Trent University, to counter Foxman with an article entitled "A Minor Problem, Overblown." Neumann claims that anti-Semitism just shouldn't concern us today, and supports his view with arguments such as this:

Concentration camp survivors still alive deserve sympathy and justice, but they are few. Myself, I'd feel a bit embarrassed saying to a homeless person on the streets of Toronto, much less to the inhabitants of a Philippine garbage dump: 'Oh yeah? You think you know suffering? My grandmother died in a concentration camp!'... Perhaps anti-Semitism is not, after all, a high priority.

The LA Times accorded Neumann a prominent space to air his views, despite the fact that Neumann has an established record of actively supporting (in Neumann's own words) "vicious racist anti-Semitism" to bring on the destruction of the Jewish state. Last year, Neumann had a correspondence with an anti-Semitic web site called the Jewish Tribal Review in which Neumann wrote:

My sole concern is indeed to help the Palestinians, and I try to play for keeps. I am not interested in the truth, or justice, or understanding, or anything else, except so far as it serves that purpose...I would use anything, including lies, injustice and obfuscation, to do so. If an effective strategy means that some truths about the Jews don't come to light, I don't care. If an effective strategy means encouraging reasonable anti-Semitism or reasonable hostility to Jews, I don't care. If it means encouraging vicious racist anti-Semitism, or the destruction of the State of Israel, I still don't care.

In response to this outburst, the Canadian Jewish Congress wrote a letter of complaint to Neumann's employer, Trent University. As the matter attracted greater attention, Neumann repudiated the statement (without denying its authenticity), then apologized to the CJC.

The Jewish Tribal Review originally contacted Neumann after another article of Neumann's claimed that "we should almost never take anti-Semitism seriously, and maybe we should have some fun with it." In that article, Neumann goes so far as to not only compare Israel to Nazi Germany, but to indict world Jewry for complicity with Israel's "crimes against humanity":

[A]t present, the case for Jewish complicity seems much stronger than the case for German complicity. So if it is not racist, and reasonable, to say that the Germans were complicit in crimes against humanity, then it is not racist, and reasonable, to say the same of the Jews.

Read the full text of Neumann's LA Times op-ed can be read at http://www.latimes.com/services/site/premium/access-registered.intercept

Our questions to the LA Times:

- If Michael Neumann's nihilism and deep hatred for Israel are a matter of public record, why did the LA Times grant his voice the legitimacy of their opinion page?

- Would not a more responsible debate for the Times op-ed page have been: How to deal with the troubling new wave of anti-Semitism?

Comments to LA Times: letters@latimes.com

Honest Reporting monitors the media. Their website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. They recently released an excellent documentary film, "Relentless: The Struggle For Peace In Israel," which can be ordered by visiting their website.

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 29, 2003.

I guess you can't keep a good terrorist down for too long. It would seem that all those nations that have been supporting terrorism against the Jewish people are about to reap the full harvest of their efforts. This was written by Joseph Farah and is called "Islam's unholy alliance with neo-Nazis, leftists Western-made terrorists plot joining al-Qaida in 'Red Jihad." It appeared on the World Net Daily website today and is archived at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36350

Western-made terrorists motivated by Marxist, anarchist and neo-Nazi ideology are forming alliances with jihadists and are planning copycat-style attacks and others utilizing funding from Islamists, according to intelligence sources, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

While old-line non-Muslim terrorists seem to have been in hibernation, since Sept. 11, 2001, they are waking up to the need to act and the availability of funds from al-Qaida and other similar jihadist groups, according to the premium, online intelligence newsletter.

Danger spots were recently identified in Europe, Asia and North America. Recent assessments indicate that daily reports on the success of Islamic terror in disrupting normal life are creating an urge within the ranks of western terrorists to return to action.

Such groups dominated the terror scene in the 1960s and 1970s. The U.S.-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the resistance to globalization, xenophobic tendencies and anti-Semitism have all combined to pour oil on old flames, encouraging new alliances as a result.

Experts attempting to draft the profile of non-Islamic terrorism in the 21st century are turning their interest toward militant Muslims' efforts to recruit terror contractors and to use the services of European terrorists and anarchists.

Intelligence sources say they expect the jihadists to sub-contract terrorist attacks to small cells of two to three people familiar with their modus operandi. These groups sometimes operate in gangs of more than 10 individuals. European-style terrorism differs from the Islamic jihad type in that it often targets individuals to be assassinated or kidnapped. It has also been marked by taking large groups of innocent hostages for negotiation purposes.

Jihad organizers are acquainted with the sleeper terror groups of Europe and North America, and they know these groups are in dire need of funds. These "underground" groups need to travel and change their identities frequently.

Sleeper terror groups are careful not to deal directly with money laundering, drug dealing or organized crime. This is due in part to ideological beliefs, but more because of the need to keep a low profile, away from the eyes of law enforcement agencies.

Interrogation of non-Muslim terrorists apprehended during the last two years in Europe and Asia, reveals a desire to become copy-cats of the Islamic jihad and a growing need to be placed once again on the international scene. Intelligence agencies are beginning to dust files of old-style terror organizations, which some agencies now describe as the "Red Jihad."

Israeli, British, Turkish and Greek counter-terror experts, have warned of signs pointing to jihadi groups trying to establish contacts with European and American organizations. The technique of hiring terror services, or partnerships with other terror operators was once popular with the Palestinians. The results of these unholy unions in the past have been the Air France hijacking by a group of Arabs and Germans to Entebbe, Uganda, in 1976, the Lufthansa hijacking to Mogadishu in 1977, and the Japanese Red Army attack on Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv in 1972.

Al-Qaida, Jamaah Islamiah and Wahabbi groups see nothing wrong in using non-Muslims to further their cause. As the origin of most anti-terror activities focuses mainly on the Middle East and Asia, it is clear a western terrorist could be more successful in penetrating a number of security and defense circles. In cases of a precision attack against individuals or institutions, European or American Caucasian terrorists will be more successful in disappearing from the radar screen.

Over the years, scores of Europeans, Americans and Asians, have been trained in Arab terror bases in Lebanon, Syria, Sudan, Libya and Iraq. A number of those were later involved in attacks on international air traveling, including airports.

Meanwhile, Marxist terror and guerrilla attacks in Latin America and Asia have never ended. A former supporter of international terrorism, Cuba's Fidel Castro, is showing signs of re-involvement in regional violence, manifested through his support to Colombian terrorists and even connecting them to Irish bomb experts of the Irish Republican Army. Castro's efforts also continue to target the cooperation of President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela as part of his renewed plan to sway political alliances. Intelligence schools in North Korea were never closed and they continue to produce saboteurs and agents originating from many countries. The North Koreans may also return to the business of producing terrorists for hire, not unlike the way they handle their development of weapons of mass destruction.

Western intelligence services have identified a number of warning signs as they emerged following 9/11:

* The arrest and trial in Greece of 15 Marxists of the N-17 terror group. Expectations that a wave of arrests finished the group were premature. Lately Greece is once again the stage for renewed, low-intensity terrorist and anarchist activities, aimed mainly against U.S. and British targets. This may escalate towards the 2004 Olympic Games.

* The re-surfacing of German and other west European sympathizers of ultra-left terror groups and their cooperation with Marxists of a specific ethnic background, such as the Kurds. Germany is also involved in combating hate terror, specifically by armed neo-Nazi groups and nationalists.

* Activity of left-wing terrorism is reported increasing in Turkey. Such terrorists pose a danger not only to Turkey, but also on a regional scale. This includes cooperation with Marxist Kurds and Arabs.

* Reports are filtering out of Egypt about left-wing terrorism. These days a member of the Egyptian Revolutionary Socialist Group is facing a Cairo military court as three of his comrades are tried in absence.

* The arrest of members of the Spanish First of October Anti-Fascist Resistance Group, or GRAPO, who were involved in two bank and armored car robberies, is another indication this group is in need of funds as part of an attempt to re-surface or to lease their services to whoever will pay, as long as the target is in the western industrialized world.

An Oregon based on-line paper, the Portland Independent Media Center, carried a headline on Dec. 1 calling readers "to send support letters for comrades facing trial in Egypt." The drive is supported by the Socialist Arab Coalition in North America. On the day Saddam Hussein was captured the organization flashed an Iraqi Baath flag saying: "Resistance will continue until victory!" Articles and pictures do not disguise the potential of such support. Together with slogans such as: "Long live the resistance, no turning back," and "Death to the imperialists, death to the collaborators," the site includes pictures of heavily armed comrades, their faces covered with Arab kefiyah headdresses, and stories such as "the tactics of resistance."

This short list does not include other terror threats coming from separatists, nationalists and religious groups. Some examples are: The Basque Fatherland and Liberation operating from the Basque region in Spain or the Irish Protestants or Catholics in Northern Ireland and the French Corsicans.

New evidence in a book to be published next year will point to an alliance between Iraqi-sponsored terrorists and Timothy McVeigh, the man executed for the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building.

In a related development, last Month, G2B reported Carlos the Jackal, the legendary terrorist of the 1970s, has converted to Islam and pledged his allegiance to Osama bin Laden.

Carlos, aka Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, has just published a book in French to announce his conversion to Islam and present his strategy for "the destruction of the United States through an orchestrated and persistent campaign of terror."

Titled "Revolutionary Islam" and published under the name Ilich Ramirez Sanchez-CARLOS, the book urges "all revolutionaries, including those of the left, even atheists," to accept the leadership of Islamists such as bin Laden and so help turn Afghanistan and Iraq into the "graveyards of American imperialism."

Son of a militant Communist, Ilich was sent to Moscow to study at Patrice Lumumba University, an institution set up by the KGB to train terrorists from the Third World. That was in the 1970s, when the most fashionable cause was opposition to the U.S. intervention in Indochina.

Ilich opted for the less-fashionable cause of Palestine, and soon moved to Lebanon, where he trained for operations organized by George Habash's People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Western intelligence services first noticed Carlos when he murdered two French policemen and a Lebanese informant in Paris in 1975. But the peak of his career came in 1975, when he led the team that took 11 OPEC oil ministers hostage in Vienna, then flew them to Algiers.

He spent most of the next 20 years on the run, living under assumed identities, constantly changing protectors, until his Sudanese friends finally betrayed him six years ago, when they allowed French authorities to abduct him from his home in Khartoum and fly him to Paris for trial.

Carlos claims that terrorism is "the cleanest and most efficient form of warfare."

Carlos, was arrested in Sudan in 1994 and turned over to France, where he is serving life for the 1975 murders of two French secret agents and an alleged informer.

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 28, 2003.
This is an article by Jeff Jacoby and it appeared today in the Boston Globe.

IN DECEMBER 1994 I wrote the first of what would become a yearly series of columns on the subject of liberal hate speech. That was the year Republicans swept the midterm elections to win control of Congress, and ideological passions were running high. I had noticed that when a prominent Republican or conservative said something offensive about liberals, it typically set off a storm of media condemnation, while an anti-conservative smear voiced by a liberal or a Democrat rarely drew any protest. There was no end of sour commentary, for example, when Newt Gingrich recommended that Clinton Democrats be portrayed as "the enemy of normal Americans." It was an outrageous remark, and Gingrich deserved the drubbing he received.

But when Jesse Jackson explicitly likened the proposals of the new majority to Nazism and apartheid - "If this were Germany, we would call it fascism. If this were South Africa, we would call it racism" - there wasn't even a ripple of disapproval. Julianne Malveaux, a radio host and USA Today columnist, caught no flak when she prayed aloud for the death of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. "I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease," she snarled on PBS.

What was true in 1994 remains largely true today. MSNBC fired right-wing talk host Michael Savage in July, and rightly so, when he told a gay caller to "get AIDS and die, you pig." The liberal Nina Totenberg, on the other hand, suffered no ill effects for saying, during the flap over General Jerry Boykin's views of Islam and the war on terrorism, "I hope he's not long for this world." When the startled host asked if she were "putting a hit out on this guy," Totenberg backtracked and said she only wanted to see him expire "in his job."

But this isn't the first time the NPR diva has publicly wished death on a conservative. "I think he ought to be worried about what's going on in the Good Lord's mind," she said of Senator Jesse Helms in 1995, "because if there is retributive justice, he'll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will."

Such venom should be beyond the pale. But too many liberals would still rather dismiss conservative ideas with an ugly slur than actually grapple with them on the merits. Debating the pros and cons of racial preferences or US foreign policy can be difficult; much easier to simply hiss "Racist!" or "Nazi!" or some equally poisonous insult.

"What you have now" - this is left-wing activist and actress Janeane Garofalo, analyzing the Republican Party during an appearance at the 92d Street Y in New York this year - "is people that are closet racists, misogynists, homophobes, and people who love... the politics of exclusion identifying as conservative." That was apparently enough to win her a guest-host slot on CNN's "Crossfire," where she offered this thoughtful critique of the Patriot Act: "It is in fact a conspiracy of the 43d Reich."

Ah, yes, the reductio ad Hitlerum. Why meet a conservative with facts or logic when you can simply tar him with the Nazi brush? Thus we had Nancy Giles on the "CBS Sunday Morning show" sourly tying Rush Limbaugh's "edgy" radio manner to you-know-who's. "Hitler would have killed in talk radio," Giles declared. "He was edgy, too." Ellen Gray of the Philadelphia Daily News struck a similar note in commenting on "The Reagans," the canceled miniseries. "If Hitler had more friends," she told The Washington Post, "CBS wouldn't have aired [its Hitler miniseries] either."

Of course no one came in for more Hitler comparisons this year than George W. Bush. Third Reich references were practically a staple of antiwar rhetoric.

The president "is not the orator that Hitler was," acknowledges leftist commentator Dave Lindorff at Counterpunch.org. "But comparisons of the Bush administration's fearmongering tactics to those practiced so successfully and with such terrible results by Hitler and Goebbels... are not at all out of line."

Such repugnant comparisons are in fact wildly out of line. But so long as the double standard persists, liberals will continue to make them with impunity.

Of course this complaint can be taken too far. Ed Gillespie, the Republican Party's chairman, has been accusing Democrats of engaging in "political hate speech" when they call Bush a "liar" or a "miserable failure." But there is a world of difference between labeling someone a failure and labeling him Hitler. My objection has never been to political elbow-throwing. What I have tried to argue is that certain kinds of insult - those that fantasize about people's deaths, or slime them as racists or fascists or terrorists - do such violence to our public discourse that they should simply be shunned.

Ten years ago almost no one was calling attention to this liberal slander problem; now magazine articles and even books are being written about it. Progress of a sort, I guess. There's room for a lot more.

HENRY FORD'S 'LEGACY': The foundation he created gets into Middle East trouble
Posted by Heshy Riesel, December 28, 2003.
This was a REVIEW AND OUTLOOK essay on the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page, on December 26th.

The quip going around nonprofit circles these days is that the Ford Foundation's support for Palestinian extremists is the one area of funding it could defend on the grounds of donor intent - an allusion to the notorious anti-Semitism of automaker and founder Henry Ford.

But Chuck Grassley, for one, is not amused. In response to a Jewish Telegraphic Agency series detailing Ford's support for Palestinian NGOs crusading against Israel, the Iowa Republican has announced that the Senate Finance Committee will review the matter. In so doing, we hope it raises a question long overdue for Congressional scrutiny: How U.S. tax laws intended to encourage charity have had the unintended effect of spawning a foundation priesthood funded into perpetuity and insulated from public accountability.

This lack of accountability is bad enough even when it involves small foundations that stray from their benefactor's purposes. But with $10 billion in assets and offices that stretch from Santiago to Hanoi, Ford today has become a major player in international affairs - with the potential to run afoul of U.S. interests abroad.

That's precisely what happened in Durban, South Africa, in 2001, where a U.N. conference ostensibly called to combat racism became a world stage for anti-Americanism and the crudest kind of anti-Semitic imagery. So ugly did Durban become that Secretary of State Colin Powell ordered the American delegation to return home.

In his "Funding Hate" series for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Edwin Black quotes some of those who had witnessed the Durban spectacle as originally guessing that the funding for all this anti-Semitic propaganda must have come from, say, Saudi Arabia. In fact, he says, much of it came from Ford. In 2000 and 2001 alone, Mr. Black notes, Ford distributed $35 million to 272 Arab and pro-Palestinian organizations - with at least some of these millions going to those that transformed Durban into a circus.

Among the noisiest of these recipients was the Palestinian Committee for the Protection of Human Rights and the Environment (LAW), which since 1997 has received $1.1 million from Ford. Mr. Black reports that LAW's officers assumed leadership positions on the Durban steering committees that were instrumental in making the thrust of that conference an international indictment of the state of Israel.

Or take PNGO - an umbrella group of 90 Palestinian NGOs that's also received more than $1 million from Ford. Its director is quoted as admitting that PNGO gets almost no Arab support and that Ford is its biggest funder. Yet this is the same group that denounced as "unacceptable" a U.S. government requirement that Palestinian NGOs partnering with tax-exempt American charities sign a pledge promising that no funds would ever find their way to "advocate or support terrorist activities."

After first digging in her heels, Ford President Susan Berresford acknowledged in a November 17 letter to Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.) that she and her colleagues at Ford "now recognize that we did not have a clear picture of the activities, organizations and people involved."

Funding for LAW, she tells us, has been cut off because of financial irregularities, and Ford is in the midst of investigating its other grantees. Not only does Ford abhor any anti-Semitism, she says, the funding that was featured in Mr. Black's series represents only a fraction of what is really a broad Ford effort to build a moderate Palestinian civil society.

Sounds good. But it's not as if this is the first time Ford has been questioned about its Middle East funding. The New York Sun reports that as far back as 1999 editors at the Jewish weekly Forward ran a story entitled "Latest Ford Foundation Grantees Would Sure Make Henry I Proud." Nothing happened. The difference today is a post-9/11 environment, where the combination of press exposure and Congressional pressure has made it harder for Ford to look the other way.

Mr. Black's articles report that State, Justice and the IRS are looking into the matter, as well they should. But Congress has a special responsibility with regard to foundations, because Congress writes the tax laws that spawned these empires. Not least of the perverse incentives here is a provision in the tax code - one that Ford lobbied hard to preserve - that allows foundations to count office expenses against the 5% of their assets they are required to give out each year to charity.

We hope Senator Grassley goes through with hearings, not only to find out where all that Ford money ended up in the Middle East but also to raise the larger public issue of whether the tax code is being used to subsidize attacks on American interests. Foundations are a growing part of U.S. life and are playing an ever larger role in political debate. Under current law they are also tax subsidized for eternity. Congress hasn't revisited that policy since 1981, and it's about time it did.

Posted by Marco Delmar, December 28, 2003.
How dare some tarnish Israel's extremely human-lives' struggle for defense into ugly slogans?

How dare they twist the fence around, when the fence is exactly what it is. Should Israel apologize for shielding against those child-mass-murderers?

How far can low propaganda go?

If that "apartheid-vicious-lie" were true, no Arab Genocide Bomber would have ever succeeded in mingling in that Democratic, Beautiful Victim-Society!


Now, show me another situation throughout history worldwide that shielding from killers has been portrayed in a negative light. That's a first and it's darn criminal-stained propaganda typified, the most well-oiled Goliath Arabist machine, and the least humane that would turn good and human struggle into bad and dark.

PS. No wonder it took the 'palestinian' oiled propaganda machine some time (many months) to invent something about Israel's defense (as well as conflicting 'reasons' for their 'objection' to it). They saw their bloody-convenient used free-ride of attacking innocent unarmed suddenly collapsing. Moreover the fence exposed the real problem: Israel's routine demand for simple safety.

Posted by David Ben-Ariel, December 28, 2003.
William Manchester's book, The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill; Visions of Glory, is quite remarkable considering its principles pertain to Israel's situation today. Churchill was considered an "enemy of peace" by those who failed to recognize the German threat. He was basically abandoned in a political wilderness until the time came for him to come out in the spirit of the judges of Israel and deliver Great Britain from the Nazi menace.

Don't we realize that whenever we warn about the Beast Power rising in Europe that we'll be falsely accused of hating Germans, Europeans, and Catholics? Years ago certain ones on AOL accused my book, Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise & Fall, of hating Catholics and German-bashing. I replied that it's actually because I LOVE THE GERMANS, the Europeans and the Catholics that I want to help warn them to not blindly follow their leaders! It's not only because I love our British-Israelite and Jewish brethren that the warning message must go out! Both Israelites and Europeans must be warned!

I'm of German descent, in part, from the Palatinate in West Germany. I certainly don't hate Germans, but I do hate what the Nazis did and what Bible prophecy clearly says a German-led Europe will do again on an even greater scale! This time their Satan inspired hatred and murder won't just be against our Jewish brethren but against Joseph: the Anglo-Saxons!

Consider this excellent quote from The Last Lion: Speaking of the type of leader necessary to stand up to Hitler: "England looked for another Alfred, a figure cast in a mold which, by the time of the Dunkirk deliverance, seemed to have been forever lost. England's new leader, were he to prevail, would have to be everything England's decent, civilized Establishment had rejected (sound familiar? those impotent ones who worry about reputation and remaining polite and respectable aren't effective in facing the Challenge)... Their successor would have to be a passionate Manichaen who saw the world as a medieval struggle to the death between the powers of good and the powers of evil, who held that individuals are responsible for their actions and that the German dictator was therefore wicked...Like Adolf Hitler he would have to be a leader of intuitive genius, a born demagogue in the original sense of the word, a believer in the supremacy of his race and his national destiny (not one who has forgotten or miserably doubts his Identity), an artist who knew how to gather the blazing light of history into his prism... Such a man, if he existed, would be England's last chance. In London there was such a man."

The question begs to be answered whether or not there's such a man in Jerusalem today; whether Israel will finally have a leader who will boldly reclaim Judaism's holiest site, the Temple Mount, and will refuse to tolerate Amalekites claiming Jerusalem as their capital! A leader who knows and understands that the Holy Land was promised to Israel and not to Ishmael. If not, and Zion and Jerusalem fall to Catholic Europe because we've failed to heed Churchillian warnings, and shamefully despised those Christian-Zionists and Jews who delivered them, then the Messiah will surely save us out of the dreadful "Time of Jacob's Trouble" - but we'll have first suffered the greatest tribulation to strike planet earth.

Posted by Hillel Frisch, December 28, 2003.
Abstract: This article examines a case study of Palestinian media attitudes toward the United States by analyzing one typical week's coverage by al-Hayat al-Jadida, the most "official" Palestinian daily. The author's analysis shows that while articles relating to the U.S. overwhelmingly condemn its regional policies and usually only reprint foreign writers critical of U.S. policy, the newspaper's anti-Americanism tends to be somewhat veiled and pales in comparison to treatment of Israel.

Broadly speaking, there are two basic reasons for growing anti-Americanism amongst Arab Palestinians. The first is that Arab Palestinians had little affinity to the democratic and liberal values the United States represents; the second is that they often had divergent interests.

Arguably the most popular Arab Palestinian leader of all times, Hajj Amin al-Husayni, had much to say on pan-Arabism, pan-Islamism and local nationalism in his writings. By contrast, he said virtually nothing on democracy and liberalism, allying with Nazi Germany.(1) Yasir Arafat, founder of resurgent Palestinian nationalism, also never indicated any views that drew him to the American vision of civilization.(2) In recent decades, the main new development in Palestinian political thought has been the rise of a radical Islamist movement. The proportion favoring liberal standpoints has remained minute, as shown by surveys conducted by Palestinian research centers.

In such a normative and ideological setting, there are no shock absorbers that can in any way soften the effects of substantial differences between the policies of the United States and the Palestinians' worldview, despite the Palestinian realization that only the United States can deliver for them the prospect of the state.

Through such a normative prism, it is difficult for Palestinians to acknowledge that the United States forced Israel to vacate the Sinai in 1956; refrained all these years from moving its embassy to Jerusalem; consistently regarded the territories beyond the1967 armistice lines as "occupied territories" and the settlements there as illegal; and has since the Madrid peace process, pressured Israel to "roll back," as well as engineered two major offers of a Palestinian state on good terms in 2000 at the Camp David talks and in the Clinton Plan. Most recently, the United States has repeatedly saved Arafat from a more severe siege or expulsion by Israel and pressed Israel on several occasions into returning to the pre-September 2000 lines.

Divergence over interests and ideology between Palestinians and the United States, of course, extends far beyond the Palestinian-Israeli arena. Both Palestinian officials and the media take a radical pan-Arab stance on almost all issues related to the Arab world. The basic view that Western imperialists are bent today, as they have been in the past, on dividing and subordinating the Arab world, and that the United States leads this campaign is as prevalent in Fatah as it is in the more radical factions. This is why Arafat and the PLO backed Saddam Hussein in the 1990-1 Gulf War.

Almost nothing the United States does in the Middle East is regarded as above suspicion. In this sense the Palestinian press is little different from its Syrian and (former) Iraqi counterparts. Adherence to the pan-Arab formula became clear in the course of al-Hayat al-Jadida's coverage during the first week of February, which is subsequently analyzed in this paper.


It is not surprising that under these ideological and political conditions, groups such as MEMRI or Palestinian Media Watch find numerous and rabid displays of anti-Americanism in the official and officially supported Palestinian media to translate and disseminate.

For example, a feeling that the United States' involvement in Palestinian politics reflects an historic and bitter clash of civilizations may be found in a sermon broadcast on the Palestinian Authority (PA) television station on September 5, 2003 by Ibrahim Madiras:

If we go back 1400 years in time, we find that history is repeating itself, worshipers of Allah. The Prophet Mohammed...was besieged by two powers, Persia in the east and Rome in the west. These represent the Soviet Union and America of today.... Persia fell first in the east, just as Russia fell first in the east, and America will fall, may it be Allah's will, just as Rome fell in the west. However [the fall of] Rome necessitated further challenges, closing of ranks and Muslim sacrifices. The battle with Rome, in which its power ceased, necessitated challenges and resistance from the Muslims, just as America today, her allies and proteges, the Zionists and others, necessitate further sacrifices from our side and closing ranks, oh Muslims, and we will be victorious.... By closing ranks the prophet succeeded in overcoming Rome, the strongest state, which is equivalent to America today, without the fall of even one Muslim shahid [Martyr]... The Prophet succeeded, through Muslim unity and arousing faith, in overcoming the America of then, just as we will defeat America, as long as it supports our enemy, as long as it adheres to its positions against our people, our issue and our holy places, and against our people and its leadership, as long as it adheres to these wicked positions. We will defeat her, may it be the will of Allah. We see America as the number one enemy, as long as it supports our enemy. Aren't we killed by American planes? Are our homes not being destroyed by American tanks? Are we not being bombed by American missiles...(3)

Where official Palestinian sentiment lies in the context of post-war Iraq is equally clear. In his piece entitled "Shaa'hid and the Shahid" [The Witness and the Martyr - a play on words], one writer in the Palestinian daily al-Ayyam condemned Iraq's Shi'a religious leaders for standing on the sidelines when morally they should join the ranks of the martyrs in killing American soldiers to fight against Iraq's occupation:

There is consensus in Iraq that American and British forces symbolize military occupation of Iraqi territories... Recent activities against [American] forces including helicopter interception, bombing of command centers and convoys and attacking political targets undoubtedly prove that the resistance is getting stronger. And that there are many reasons, foremost among them the occupation's fascism and cruelty, which helps the flow of many to the Iraqi resistance... The Khawza [Shiite religious institutions] admit publicly - and cannot do otherwise - that the U.S. forces are invading forces, but they [the Khawza institutions] offer unclear and unconvincing ways for the long run concerning the attitude towards them [the U.S. forces]. The Khawza Shiite institutions try to achieve historic benefit from the presence of these forces... even if this involves participation in the Ruling Council, which is appointed by the American Governor!!!

Are the [institutions of the] Khawza capable of maintaining this dangerous balance? Are they capable of reaping substantial achievements... in this way; after all, the people of the Shiite Congregation historically have been Martyrs [Shahids] and view the Martyrdom [Shahada] - since their first Martyr [Shahid], Ali, as a sacred obligation. Can the Khawza convince the Shiites to [merely] witness [Shaa'hid] the increasingly fierce armed resistance due to the increased American repression and humiliation of the entire Iraqi people... Will the Khawza keep silent and [merely] witness [Shaa'hid], leaning toward the American occupier in the middle of a sea of Martyrs [Shahids]?(4)

Palestinian anti-Americanism is also reflected in cartoons. Particularly striking are a series using the image of the Twin Towers to portray Iraqis and Palestinians as the victims of United States policies and actions, in an obvious and deliberate twist of history.

The cartoon of two smoldering towers of "Iraq" and "Palestine" for example, appearing in late 2003, was so well received after it was printed in al-Quds, that it was reprinted two days later in al-Hayat al-Jadida, the semi-official daily. Other cartoons were copied from other Arab dailies. For instance, in one a fearful Uncle Sam runs away in terror being chased by the date "September 11."(5) In another, the U.S. response to 9-11 is said to be immoral and imperialistic: the Twin Towers are depicted over a mass of dead bodies, victims of American "imperialism."(6) Another variation of these included the twin towers that form a hammer which attacks the Muslim-Arab world in a cartoon marking the second anniversary of the attack, with the text reading: "September 11 - the day of the greatest conspiracy against the Arabs and Muslims."(7)

Though such media items might be numerous and emanate from the official and semi-official media, they do not necessarily indicate the intensity of anti-American sentiments and their propagation. The method of random choice still leaves the possibility (weak as it is given the absence of democratic and liberal practices in the PA) of different and competing views of the United States being expressed as well.

Methodologically, and more important normatively, the appearance of specific items may indicate intention but not overall impact of these articles, news items and cartoons. The effect of an anti-American article once a week is different than such an article on a daily basis; different weights must be given according to where it appears in the newspaper. What must be done then is to engage in content analysis of the media over time. The sample for the following analysis is the first seven days of February 2003 of al-Hayat al-Jadida, which is the most "official" newspaper of the three Palestinian dailies that also include al-Quds and al-Ayyam.


Counting articles versus engaging in a subtle content analysis of the paper's coverage of the United States yields slightly different pictures. A quantitative account clearly demonstrates a strong anti-American bias. Over three-quarters of the forty-nine news items and articles regarding U.S. policy and actions printed in al-Hayat al-Jadida during that week were anti-American. Only 10 percent either objectively represented the incumbent U.S. administration's perspective on Iraqi affairs - the issue most of these news items addressed during that week - or related positively to American considerations or actions.

Articles on the United States by Author's Origin and Content(8)

























However, taking into consideration the type of criticism that was aired in these articles yields a slightly different picture. Overall anti-American sentiment may be divided into two types. The first is civilizational - a perspective that assumes an innate enmity between the United States and its objectives with those of the Palestinians in particular and Arabs in general. The second type is instrumental - those criticisms related to specific policies of specific administrations. During the period under consideration, the newspaper mostly aired articles of the latter, milder variety.

Generally speaking, the articles from foreign sources, most of which were translations of articles from the United States and Western press, were mild in tone and substance.(9) By contrast, the Arab and Palestinian articles and news items tended to reflect the more hostile civilization perspective. Most neutral were short new items usually reported by foreign new wire services. Considerations of space (measured by square inch) or placement in the newspaper (headlines, front versus back pages etc.) did not have any impact on the general findings.

Nor is anti-American sentiment, prevalent as it may be, the major theme of the Palestinian media. The reason is simple: hatred of Israel is by far its all-consuming focus. Of the approximately 150 articles and news items that appear daily in al-Hayat al-Jadida (minus culture, sports and business items) over one-third are devoted to hatred of Israel. By contrast, there were a total of only 49 news items and articles relating to the United States over one week - which equals one day's coverage of Israel.

The difference is also qualitative. On Israel, almost all the coverage is vociferously anti-Israeli. By contrast; coverage on the United States is more variegated even though it is overwhelmingly negative as well. The contrast is highlighted best in comparing the two headlines, which appeared on February 1, the first issue analyzed. The headline regarding Israel was entitled "The Leadership Emphasizes its Adherence to the Choice of Peace Despite Israeli Arrogance (Ghatrasa) and Barbarism." The headline concerning United States policy was more veiled: "The President [Arafat] criticizes the Silence of the International Community Regarding the Israeli Government's Infringement of the Accords." In the body of the news item it becomes clear that what was meant was an alleged U.S. criticism of Israel: "The President asked, 'How could... Israel be allowed to violate agreements signed at the White House?'"

Even when the headlines later in the week regarding Iraq clearly expressed a position opposing moves by the United States, they were still mild in comparison to coverage of Israel. On February 5, a main headline read: "The War Plan: The Occupation of Iraq and Its Division into Three States." It is extremely doubtful whether United States officials ever expressed such a desire, let alone construed it as a policy objective of the U.S. government. Casting aspersions that the United States was eager to divide Iraq into three "duwaylat" (the pejorative term for a balkanized state in pan-Arab rhetoric) fits well into the "Sykes-Picot" prism through which so many American moves in the Middle East are construed. The main headline appearing on February 6 was entitled "Most of the States in the Security Council are Not Convinced by 'Proof' of Powell against Iraq." Quotation marks in Arabic as well as in other languages, is a means of casting doubt on the word within them. In this case doubt was being expressed regarding the quality of the evidence Powell presented.

Anti-Americanism is also less blatant because the top Palestinian leadership, Arafat and the personalities involved in international negotiations such as Abu Ala'a, Abu Mazen, Sa'ib Ariqat, Nabil Abu Rudayna, and Yasir Abd al-Rabbu refrain as a general rule from disparaging or condemning the United States. For the media, this effectively means that the considerable criticism of the United States does not often appear as a leading headline or on the front page.


Al-Hayat al-Jadida relies mainly on foreign and Arab sources in its coverage on non-Palestinian affairs. The overriding issue during the week surveyed was Iraq, particularly United States preparations for war and Powell's attempt to curry support for such a policy within the United Nations. One could safely assume that had a time period in which the United States was involved in mediation between Israel and the Palestinians been chosen, more Palestinian commentators would have written on the United States as well.

Most of the articles on the subject were taken from the foreign press. As a general rule, they reflected a list of distinguished analysts writing in equally prominent newspapers. Four articles by John Alterman, head of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, David Francis in the Christian Science Monitor, Nicholas Kristoff culled from the International Herald Tribune and Patrick Seale's "The American Empire on the Eve of a Strike," appeared on the same page in the February 1 edition. All were critical of U.S. policies in Iraq. On February 2, it was the turn of Paul Kennedy, a well-known professor of history from Yale University, to argue on the basis of historical precedent against getting involved in Iraq. Three other articles, which appeared in the middle section of the newspaper, two by Americans, one by a Spanish analyst, concurred. Geoffrey Kemp, another prominent American policy analyst, took a mildly anti-administration approach the following day. On February 4, the paper translated six articles authored by Americans and European analysts and thinkers. The piece by Michael Walzer, a well-known political philosopher, could be considered mild, even bordering on neutral. Walzer, though opposed to direct United States intervention, called upon the international community to acknowledge the threat Iraq posed and called for a strong international authority to impose all sanctions short of war, including military means, against Saddam. James Zoghby, the veteran Arab lobbyist in Washington, authored one of the more militant articles.

The two pro-administration news items aired in the newspaper were both connected to senior administrative officials. On February 6, a half-page interview with Condoleezza Rice was culled from the Egyptian al-Ahram. A lengthy article written by Colin Powell stating the administration's position appeared the next day.

All in all, the newspaper's choice of articles in the international press, though biased against the administration, was probably little different from the fare presented in the average European newspaper. However skewed, it was nevertheless impressive in quality and even slightly variegated. At least two of the other types of coverage under review, articles authored by Arabs and the news items, presented a less benevolent perspective regarding the United States and its interests in the area.


To be exact, the only Palestinian commentators who wrote on United States policy in Iraq dealt with it solely through the prism of Palestinian interests. Nabil Amer, the former Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and a former confidante of Yasir Arafat argued that the war was likely to increase the Palestinian predicament in the face of an even greater imbalance of power between a state supported by an even more powerful superpower and a national movement. He argued that only reform and real institution-building will address this increasing imbalance - an obvious jab to his former mentor, Arafat. He warned that the Israelis were likely to try to use the time they gained by the focus on Iraq to create facts on the ground inimical to Palestinian interests. Amer argued that only putting an end to the armed conflict would serve Palestinian interests during this difficult experience. Hasan al-Kashif presented a similar argument.

These almost neutral perceptions contrasted sharply with a long, bitterly critical article written by Muhammad Hasanin Heikal, a prominent journalist and confidant of former Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel-Nasser, which appeared in the newspaper on February 1, 2003. Identifying the United States' wars as imperial and wasteful, he claims that the Arabs can react to such imperialism and hegemony in three of four ways, all with dubious effectiveness. The first is by extending the arm of friendship, a strategy which has become impossible since 1948. Equally implausible is reacting by outright confrontation. The third is slowly sliding into a confrontation and the fourth, the most plausible, is sweating it out.

Even the latter alternative he argued was difficult to achieve since the United States is so intermeshed in the affairs of the Arab world. In short, the Arabs are in a difficult predicament. Heikal's analysis of the United States is unflattering, to say the least. The United States, he claimed, runs its affairs like a business, bereft of soul and dignity and driven exclusively by the calculation of costs and benefits. He offers as proof its treatment of the late shah of Iran. Heikal claimed that the United States drains the Third World of its finest brains without investing a cent and exploits its immigrants to death as slaves. Politically, the U.S. does not recognize borders and is forever engaged in conducting wars.

On the following day, former Egyptian Field Marshal Halim Abu-Ghazzaleh claimed that the U.S. goal was not the mere removal of Saddam but to create a state that will be under its own control. In another article entitled "The State of the Union - or the State of Iraq," Ahmed Umrabi tried verifying who was the real aggressor: "You would think that Saddam had encircled the United States by land, air and sea! Is Iraq really threatening?" Obviously, he concluded, hidden agendas such as Iraqi oil, Israel, and the resolve to maintain the present state of Arab weakness were the determining factors behind the U.S. drive against Iraq and Saddam Hussein.

On a slightly different issue, a professor from Qatar in an article published on February 3 reacted to Colin Powell's statement regarding American plans of democratization in the region by asking how the United States was only willing to spend $29 million to democratize the Arab world compared to the billions it expended on Israel. Powell's initiative also placed the Arab intellectual in a catch-22 situation, the author maintained. He ought to support democratization but how can he support it when it is seen as a directive from outside, especially when it is part of a larger American imperial plan in the Arab region to force the Arabs to abandon the rights of the Palestinian people? Look, he argued, what happened to the Palestinian leadership which placed its trust in the Americans. Only deep reform of individual Arab regimes and Arab collective action could counter imperialism in general and American imperialism in specific.

There were also Arab analysts who wrote milder articles. A Saudi Arabian political scientist could not understand how Uncle Sam could stop the zakat (charity) from flowing to groups accused of terrorism and also claimed the United States had accused Islam of terrorism. Khairi Mansur in his "America... and the Forty Noble Souls" praises the forty Nobel Prize winners who had decided "to stand up against the madness in the White House since 9-11." They are warning "of the follies of going into war without assessing its ramifications. Why should the United States citizen think that the generals are any smarter in strategy than these men of such intellectual stature?" Buhan Salih, joint prime minister in the regional Kurdish government in Iraq wrote the only article in support of war authored by a resident in the area. He, however, is not Arab.


One can safely assume that only a small, though perhaps influential, elite read the long articles by Western, Arab or local Palestinian commentators, which account for most of the news items surveyed. This is perhaps why it is so important to take into account the nature of the short news items, particularly those focusing on Palestinian involvement in developments related to Iraq. These suggest not only the prevalence of anti-Americanism in Palestinian political circles, but its propagation by the official leadership. In fact, it was the Palestinian Authority and the PLO who, in organizing "the street" or "the masses," caused anti-Americanism to take on a rabidly radical coloration.

On February 4, secondary students organized what was described as a "massive" procession in northern Gaza in solidarity of the Iraqi people. An accompanying photograph showed demonstrators with posters of Saddam Hussein. A similar news item covered a demonstration in Qalqilya organized by the Popular Committee of Support for Iraq. In the context of Palestinian media behavior, the very fact that the newspaper covered these events reflected official approval. After the capture of Saddam Hussein, for example, al-Hayat al-Jadida did not cover much larger demonstrations that occurred in Gaza. On February 5, the same day in which the headline "The War Plan: The Occupation of Iraq and Its Division into Three States" appeared, a lengthy news item reported that Interior Minister Hani al-Hasan warned that preparations must be made to confront the difficulties that Palestinians will face "in the wake of the aggression on Iraq." He was addressing the graduation ceremony of a military training program in Ramallah. The affair was organized by the Commission of Political and National Guidance for the PA's security forces.

On the same day, the National Center for Research and Documentation, an official PA body, organized, in conjunction with a private research group a roundtable to discuss events in Iraq. The newspaper reported that "political speakers and jurists emphasized that Iraq and Palestine face the same enemy and that their resolve and steadfastness in the face of aggression is the common denominator in bringing about the defeat of the enemies of the Arab nation, renewing their call to strengthening the spirit of steadfastness and resistance and [the obligation] of the Arab masses in bearing their historical responsibility in blocking the aggression on sisterly Iraq."

On the following day, it was the turn of the National and Islamic Forces, the loose coalition between Fatah, the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, which called for a procession in Ramallah in support of Iraq and against the aggression. They condemned the vicious campaign of preparations for aggression against Iraq. When the procession did take place, Sakhar Habash, a veteran member of the Fatah Central Committee, the keynote speaker, described the U.S. president as "no more than an oil merchant and a trader in the blood of peoples." "The Iraqis were able to win through steadfastness 12 years ago and they will do so now," he promised.

In Qalqilya at a conference held under the slogan "In steadfastness and resistance we will defeat the plot of American and Zionist aggression against Palestine and Iraq," the governor of the province, Mustafa al-Maliki, condemned the American attack on Iraq and the double standard concerning weapons of mass destruction and Israel. He produced a long list of America's "true" motives behind the aggression against Iraq. They included: stealing Iraqi oil, protecting Israel, dividing Iraq into three confessional and weak states as a preparatory move in doing much the same in other Arab states (the Sykes-Picot paradigm), drawing away scientists and controlling the world, and finally, finishing off the Palestinian problem according to Zionist desires. The mayor of the town spoke as well. Needless to say, both officials would have never attended without Arafat's approval. After all, they are beholden to him for their positions.


The Palestinian leadership, based on analysis of the semi-official al-Hayat al-Jadida, is clearly anti-American. Probably the most striking finding is the difference in the intensity of the expression of anti-Americanism between the PLO and the PA on the one hand, and the newspaper itself on the other. The newspaper tries to present a variety of viewpoints although they are hardly balanced. This is reflected in its extensive use of articles appearing in the foreign press. Unfortunately, the small airing of opinions expressing a deviation from the common anti-American content of most of these articles appears in the most "elitist" type of journalistic writing - the long analytical articles that are probably the least read. Even so, the overall message of the newspaper remains anti-American. Suffice to note that throughout its coverage, the term used to describe the approaching United States campaign against Iraq was the "American aggression ('udwan)."

Palestinian anti-Americanism was far more prominent in institutions related to the PA, especially those with a mass base or deep reach into Palestinian society such as Fatah or the security forces. Not only do these organs reflect anti-Americanism, they propagate it. That these institutions are related to the PA, which enjoys direct and indirect U. S. aid - and, in the case of the Palestinian security forces, have even been the beneficiaries of U.S. professional training - has had no bearing on their actions or positions.

1. For an analysis of Husayni's writings see the author's "Territorializing a Universal Religion: The Evolution of Nationalist Symbols in Palestinian Fundamentalism," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism, vol. 21, nos. 1-2 (1994), pp. 45-50.
2. See the chapter on Fatah in Ziyad Abu 'Amer's Usul al-Harakat al-Siyasiya Fi Quta' Ghazza 1948-1967 [The Origins of the Political Movements in the Gaza Strip 1948-1967], (Acco: Dar al-Aswar, 1947). Abu Amer is a member of the Palestinian Legislative Assembly.
3. Itamar Marcus, "Palestinian Authority Hatred of USA Continues," Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, September 11, 2003.
4. Al-Ayyam October 27, 2003. Quoted in Itamar Marcus, "Palestinian Incitement to Kill and Hate Americans," Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, November 5, 2003.
5. Quoted in Itamar Marcus, "PA Uses Twin Tower Image to Mock USA," Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, September 16, 2003.
6. PA official daily al-Hayat al-Jadida, September 11, 2002, reprinted from the UAE's al-Khalij. Also see Al-Hayat al-Jadida, September 11, 2002, reprinted from Kuwait's al-Watan. Both quoted in Itamar Marcus, "PA Uses Twin Tower Image to Mock USA."
7. Al-Hayat al-Jadida, September 13, 2002. Another cartoon of this variation can be found in Al-Quds, September 11, 2002 and al-Hayat al-Jadida, September 13, 2002. All quoted in Itamar Marcus, "PA Uses Twin Tower Image to Mock USA."
8. Author's analysis of Al-Hayat al-Jadida, February 1-7, 2003.
9. In distinguishing between the foreign and Arab press, I am merely following common practice in states in the Middle East of distinguishing between "foreigner" (ajnabi) and either Muslim or Arab. Such categorization is found even on the sports pages to describe the origins of the player of the team.

Hillel Frisch is a senior lecturer in political studies and Middle East history at Bar-Ilan University. He is author of "Countdown to Statehood: Palestinian State Formation in the West Bank and Gaza" (State University of New York Press, 1998) and many articles on Palestinian and Arab politics in leading political science and area journals such as Journal of Peace Research, Journal of Strategic Studies, International Journal of Middle East Studies and others.

This article was "Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal" (MERIA), Volume 7, Number 4 (December 2003).

Posted by Steve Stalinsky, December 28, 2003.

The following report consists of Palestinian sermons from 2000-2003. Each Khatib (preacher) is a paid employee of the Palestinian Authority (PA). The sermons are broadcast live every Friday at noon from mosques under control of the PA and are shown on PA television. Part I of this report includes the common themes of the sermons, such as: calls for the destruction of the U.S., the perceived American Crusader war against Islam, honoring Shahids and the rewards of the martyrs, educating children to martyrdom, and antisemitism, including calls for the killing of Jews.

Part II, which includes Palestinian leaders being questioned by Western journalists about the content of the sermons, and Part III, the transcripts of the Friday sermons, can be read by visiting http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SR2403 . To view streaming video of the sermons, please visit http://www.memri.org/video/archives/oldindex.html .

Part I: Common Themes

Calls for the Destruction of the U.S.

"Allah wreak vengeance on the Jews and the Americans" is a common theme heard in PA sermons, as with Sheikh Ahmad Abd-Al-Razek's sermon on October 4, 2002.(1) Frequent calls for the destruction of the main allies of the U.S. - Britain and Israel - are also heard. As Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi stated, "Allah willing, this unjust state will be erased - Israel will be erased; this unjust state, the United States, will be erased; this unjust state, Britain, will be erased."(2)

Themes of Arab hatred of the U.S. within sermons often have Islamic historical undertones. For example, the leading Palestinian religious figure, Mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian Territories Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri, stated in a sermon on PA radio, "Allah, destroy the U.S., its helpers and its agents. Allah, destroy Britain, its helpers and its agents. Allah, prepare those who will unite the Muslims and march in the steps of Saladin. Allah, we ask you for forgiveness before death, and mercy and forgiveness after death. Allah, grant victory to Islam and the Muslims..."(3) The U.S. and its allies are also commonly referred to as Christian and Jewish Crusaders who must be fought. For example, Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, speaking at a mosque named after UAE President Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan, stated, "Allah the almighty has called upon us not to ally with the Jews or the Christians, not to like them, not to become their partners, not to support them, and not to sign agreements with them... Allah, deal with the Jews, your enemies and the enemies of Islam. Deal with the Crusaders, and America, and Europe behind them..."(4)

2003: The Year the American Crusader War Against Islam Began

In the year 2003, a common theme which emerged in PA sermons is that the U.S has begun a Crusader war against the Arabs. Sheikh Muhammad Abu Al-Hunud stated in a sermon on March 28, 2003, "If, God forbid, something happens to Iraq, the aggression and the Crusade will turn tomorrow against the Koran... God forbid, his second assault is on the Koran, [he wants] to change verses and to mess with Allah's book, to Americanize the region, Americanize the religion, Americanize the Koran, Americanize Muhammad's message... To my brothers in Iraq, to the President of Iraq, to the Iraqi leadership, to the Iraqi people... Strike, my brother; may your right arm, oh proud Iraq, be strong... strike Allah's enemies with it. Strike with it the enemies of humanity... from the pulpits of Al-Azhar and other mosques around the world, that any Muslim who does not stand by Iraq and support it against the American-British-Crusaders cruel attack... Allah, grant victory to the Iraqi army... Allah, defeat America and its allies... Allah, purify the Islamic soil from the American and British treason and defilement... Allah, make their possessions a booty for the Muslims, Allah, annihilate them and their weapons, Allah, make their children orphans and their women widows..."(5)

Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris also frequently states that the battle between Muslims and the U.S. is a religious war that has its roots centuries ago. In a sermon on September 5, 2003, he stated, "If we go back in the time tunnel 1400 years, we will find that history repeats itself... Byzantium represents America in the west... America will collapse, as Byzantium collapsed in the west... The Prophet [Muhammad] could, by means of unbroken ranks, conquer Byzantium, the greatest power compared to today's America - and this without a single martyr falling from among the Muslims... The Prophet could, by means of the unity of the Muslim ranks and its awakening, defeat the America of that time, as we will defeat America as long as it supports our enemy, as long as America insists on being against our people and against our cause and our holy places, and against our people and our leadership... Indeed, we consider America to be our No. 1 enemy... America is our No. 1 enemy, and we see it as our No. 1 enemy as long as we learn from the lessons of the Battle of Tabouk [which took place in October 630 AD]: 'Make ready for them whatever you can of armed strength and of mounted pickets' [Koran 8:60]. We are prepared and ready, but victory is from Allah..."(6)

On another occasion, on March 21, 2003, Sheikh Mudeiris called President Bush a "dwarf" and a "Pharaoh" who would be defeated in Iraq: "... Allah drowned Pharaoh and those who were with him. Allah drowns the Pharaohs of every generation. Allah will drown the little Pharaoh, the dwarf, the Pharaoh of all times, of our time, the American President. Allah will drown America in our seas, in our skies, in our land. America will drown and all the oppressors will drown. Oh, people of Palestine, Oh, people of Iraq. The Crusader, Zionist America has started an attack against our Iraq, the Iraq of Islam and Arabism, the Iraq of civilization and history. It opened a Crusader Zionist war against Iraq. If Iraq is defeated, if the nation [of Islam] is defeated in Iraq - this will be our last breath of life... This is a Zionist Crusader war. It is not I who say this, it was the little Pharaoh [Bush] who announced it when he stated that this was a Crusader attack... You all know about the slap in the face which Iraq gave America at the time of the first invasion, when Iraq gave a knock out [punch] to America, the result of which was that Pharaoh the father [George Bush, Sr.] lost the presidency. This is a mark of shame on this family and therefore Pharaoh the son returned to power in order to take revenge. The only way to remove the shame is to topple down the Iraqi regime... This is also a religious war. What is the connection between Iraq and the Crusaders' wars? Just as Palestine is sacred so is also the land of Iraq, because the Prophet said so... America will be destroyed, Allah willing, and Palestine, Iraq, and the Middle East will become a cemetery for oppressors..."(7)

Shahids & the Rewards of Martyrdom

Sermons often call for Palestinians to become martyrs, or Shahids. Within the sermons, it is told that those who become a Shahid feel no pain and receive rewards in the afterlife, such as 72 black-eyed virgins. Family members of the Shahids are also praised in sermons. As Sheikh Isma'il Aal Radhwan stated, "[Even when] a martyr's organs are being chopped off, and he turns into torn organs that spread all over, in order to meet Allah, Muhammad, and his friends, it would not be [considered] a loss... This is the honor given to our martyrs, the martyrs of the Islamic nation, who were killed due to their loyalty to Allah... The sacrifice of convoys of martyrs [will continue] until Allah grants us victory very soon. The willingness for sacrifice and for death we see amongst those who were cast by Allah into a war with the Jews, should not come at all as a surprise... Oh believing brothers, we do not feel a loss... The martyr, if he meets Allah, is forgiven with the first drop of blood; he is saved from the torments of the grave; he sees his place in Paradise; he is saved from the Great Horror [of the day of judgment]; he is given 72 black-eyed women; he vouches for 70 of his family to be accepted to Paradise; he is crowned with the Crown of glory, whose precious stone is better than all of this world and what is in it..."(8)

The virtues of martyrdom are the subject of many of Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris's sermons: "Blessings to those who wage [Jihad] with their body... Blessings to our Shahids who sacrifice their souls easily for the sake of Allah... Blessings to the happy Shahids within the entrails of the green bird in Paradise. Blessings to the Shahids whose sins are forgiven with the first drop of their blood."(9) On another occasion, he stated, "Know that a Shahid [who falls] on this land is considered more than one Shahid someplace else. Yes, there are traditions that a Shahid here [in Jerusalem] is worth 70 Shahids in a place other than this good land..."(10)

Regarding the rewards of the martyrs, Sheikh Mudeiris stated in a sermon on May 2, 2003: "No preacher or sermonizer has right to begin his words without blessing all our Shahids... The Jews cannot influence the actions of our youth and children. But for you, Allah has chosen Shahada... Allah had honored our youth... by choosing you and by choosing from among you the Shahids... Is the Shahid dead like other dead, which requires us to offer condolences and mourn with his family, friend and relatives? Or is the Shahid enjoying virtues and the ability to perform miracles, which gives us the right to congratulate the Shahid and his family?... We have the right to congratulate the Shahids' families, and not extend condolences and sorrow of our Shahids, if they [sacrifice themselves] to Allah... But the Shahid is spared the agony of death. This is one of the miracles of the Shahid. Is it not enough that the Shahid weds 72 black eyed [virgins]?... When the Shahid sees the grace of martyrdom and death for the sake of Allah he will wish to return to this world to be killed in it ten times... The Shahid - is it enough for him that he does not feel the blow of the sword or the pain of death or of the killing rather, as one of you feels a [wasp] sting..."(11)

Palestinian Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri also praises martyrdom in his sermons: "We tell them: in as much as you love life - the Muslim loves death and martyrdom. There is a great difference between he who loves the hereafter and he who loves this world. The Muslim loves death and [strives for] martyrdom. He does not fear the oppression of the arrogant or the weapons of the blood-letters. The blessed and sacred soil of Palestine has vomited all the invaders and all the colonialists throughout history and it will soon vomit, with Allah's help, the [present] occupiers."(12)

Educating Children to Martyrdom

The concept of educating children to become martyrs occurs regularly in PA sermons. Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, one of the most popular Imams, is especially vocal on this issue. During one sermon, he repeats the following discussion he had with a child who approached him about becoming a suicide bomber: "A young man said to me: 'I am 14 years old, and I have four years left before I blow myself up'... We, the Muslims on this good and blessed land, are all - each one of us - seekers of Martyrdom... The Koran is very clear on this: The greatest enemies of the Islamic nation are the Jews, may Allah fight them... Blessings for whoever assaulted a soldier... Blessings for whoever has raised his sons on the education of Jihad and Martyrdom; blessings for whoever has saved a bullet in order to stick it in a Jew's head..."(13) On another occasion, Madhi stated, "Shame and remorse on whoever refrained from raising his children on Jihad... Blessings to whoever waged Jihad for the sake of Allah; blessings to whoever raided for the sake of Allah; blessings to whoever put a belt of explosives on his body or on his sons' and plunged into the midst of the Jews, crying 'Allahu Akbar, praise to Allah, There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger'... Allah, show us a black day for the Jews, like the day of 'Aad and Thamud.(14) Allah, turn them into pillage for us. Allah, we strive for martyrdom for your sake..."(15)

Even if there was only one Palestinian child left, he or she would sacrifice himself for the sake of Jihad, Madhi stated in another sermon: "Even if they slaughter all of the Palestinian people and the only survivors will be one single Palestinian baby girl and one single Palestinian baby boy, the baby boy will marry the baby girl and they will give birth to the one who will liberate Jerusalem from the defilement of the Jews... While they [the Palestinians] sacrifice the last Palestinian child and the last Palestinian fetus, they [the Arab nations] will satisfy themselves with victories on the soccer courts... It was rightly claimed that a thousand verbal shells cannot compare to one shell made of iron. It was rightly claimed that what was taken by force will be regained only by the use of force. We must prepare ourselves in accordance with the religion of Allah and the Law of Allah. We must educate our children on the love of Jihad for the sake of Allah and the love of fighting for the sake of Allah."(16)

The importance of educating youth for battle has also been the topic of sermons by Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris: "And here, I want to emphasize, oh people of Palestine, that our children, the fruit of our loins - we must protect them... The children need proper education because it is they who will lead the struggle after us, on the day when they will grow up and become strong and we will grow old. They are our children, who will conduct the battle after us."(17)

On this subject, Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri stated his thoughts on child martyrs, as well as the joy of their mothers: "I feel the martyr is lucky because the angels usher him to his wedding in heaven. I feel the earth moves under the occupiers' feet... There is no doubt that a child [martyr] suggests that the new generation will carry on the mission with determination. The younger the martyr - the greater and the more I respect him... They [mothers of martyrs] willingly sacrifice their offspring for the sake of freedom. It is a great display of the power of belief. The mother is participating in the great reward of the Jihad to liberate Al-Aqsa... I talked to a young man... [who] said: '... I want to marry the black-eyed [beautiful] women of heaven.' The next day he became a martyr. I am sure his mother was filled with joy about his heavenly marriage. Such a son must have such a mother."(18)

Antisemitism and Calls to Kill Jews

"Annihilating" Jews by Palestinians becoming suicide bombers and "detonating" themselves in their midst, and by saving "a bullet is order to stick it in a Jew's head," are examples of the many calls for killing Jews in Palestinian sermons. Islamic Hadiths are often cited as inspiration for such actions. Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi explained, "Palestine will be, as it was in the past, a graveyard for the invaders - just as it was a graveyard for the Tatars and to the Crusader invaders, [and for the invaders] of the old and new colonialism... A reliable Hadith [tradition] says: 'The Jews will fight you, but you will be set to rule over them.' What could be more beautiful than this tradition? 'The Jews will fight you' - that is, the Jews have begun to fight us. 'You will be set to rule over them' - Who will set the Muslim to rule over the Jew? Allah... Until the Jew hides behind the rock and the tree. But the rock and tree will say: 'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, a Jew hides behind me, come and kill him.' Except for the Gharqad tree, which is the tree of the Jews. We believe in this Hadith. We are convinced also that this Hadith heralds the spread of Islam and its rule over all the land... Oh Allah, accept our martyrs in the highest heavens... Oh Allah, show the Jews a black day... Oh Allah, annihilate the Jews and their supporters... Oh Allah, raise the flag of Jihad across the land... Oh Allah, forgive our sins..."(19)

Similarly, Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya stated, "O brother believers, the criminals, the terrorists - are the Jews... They are the ones who must be butchered and killed, as Allah the Almighty said: 'Fight them: Allah will torture them at your hands, and will humiliate them and will help you to overcome them... The Jews are like a [gas] pedal - as long as you step on it with your foot, it doesn't move, but if you lift your foot from it, it hurts you and punishes you. This is the case of the Jews."(20)

Within sermons, Jews are commonly referred to as the descendants of pigs and apes, and as calf-worshippers. As Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi stated, "All spears should be directed at the Jews, at the enemies of Allah, the nation that was cursed in Allah's book. Allah has described them as apes and pigs, the calf-worshipers, idol-worshipers... Whoever can fight them with his weapons, should go out [to the battle]; whoever can fight them with a machinegun, should go out; whoever can fight them with a sword or a knife, should go out; whoever can fight them with his hands, should go out; This is our destiny... The Jews have exposed their fangs. Nothing will deter them, except the color of their filthy people's blood; nothing will deter them except for us voluntarily detonating ourselves in their midst. They have nuclear power, but we have the power of the belief in Allah... We blow them up in Hadera, we blow them up in Tel Aviv and in Netanya."(21) On another occasion, Sheikh Madhi added: "Oh beloved of Allah... One of the Jews' evil deeds is what has come to be called 'the Holocaust,' that is, the slaughter of the Jews by Nazism. However, revisionist [historians] have proven that this crime, carried out against some of the Jews, was planned by the Jews' leaders, and was part of their policy... These are the Jews against whom we fight, oh beloved of Allah. On the other hand, [what is our belief] about the Jews? Allah has described them as donkeys."(22)

Re-conquering Palestine

Sermons include calls for the expulsion of Jews from Israel and for their "return to Europe." According to the sermons, this will be done by re-conquering Jerusalem, Haifa, Safed, Jaffa, Ramle, and other Israeli cities and districts such as the Negev and the Galilee. For example, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris stated, "We love you Jerusalem, We love you Jerusalem, we will return to you oh Aqsa, and we will return to you oh Aqsa, we will return to you Haifa and Jaffa, Lod and Ramle, Nablus from which we were expelled. Oh Safed, oh all cities of Palestine and its villages, we will return to you with Allah's help. We will return to Ashdod and Ashkelon, and Harbiya and Na'aliya and all the cities and villages of Palestine, we will return to you as conquerors and liberators... If we hold onto our land, we will return to our country... Moreover, there is no solution to the Palestinian problem without the return of the refugees. The refugees were those who were driven out of their homes at gunpoint. They will return here and we will build our state together."(23)

Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya similarly stated, "We shall not forget Haifa, and Acre, and the Galilee, and Jaffa, and the Triangle and the Negev, and the rest of our cities and villages. It is only a matter of time. The weak will not remain forever weak, and the strong will not remain forever strong... If we are weak today ... and we are not able to regain our rights, then at least we have to pass on the banner - waving high - to our children and grandchildren... Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them. Wherever you are, kill those Jews and those Americans who are like them... We will not give up a single grain of soil of Palestine, from Haifa, and Jaffa, and Acre, and Mulabbas [Petah Tikva] and Salamah, and Majdal [Ashkelon], and all the land, and Gaza, and the West Bank..."(24)

The sermons of Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi also commonly refer to this topic. On one occasion, he stated, "Our belief is that this war, between us and the Jews, will continue to escalate until we vanquish the Jews and enter Jerusalem as conquerors, [and] enter Jaffa as conquerors. We are not merely expecting a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital; we are heralding [the creation of] an Islamic caliphate with Jerusalem as its capital..."(25) Similarly, he stated in another sermon, "We are convinced of the [future] victory of Allah; we believe that one of these days, we will enter Jerusalem as conquerors, enter Jaffa as conquerors, enter Haifa as conquerors, enter Ramle and Lod as conquerors, the [villages of] Hirbiya and Dir Jerjis and all of Palestine as conquerors, as Allah has decreed... 'They will enter Al-Aqsa Mosque as they have entered it the first time...'"(26)

On this subject, Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri added, "We haven't sacrificed enough yet to be worthy of liberating Al-Aqsa. To liberate Jerusalem, Salah Al-Din Al-Ayyubi made great sacrifices for a long time, and we have to sacrifice until Allah's victory is completed... Our campaign is definitely religious and emanates from belief, although we try to avoid this slogan. The current Intifada of the [Arab and Islamic] world is a religious outburst, because it relates to the Al-Aqsa mosque... The land of Palestine is not only Jerusalem; this land stretches from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea. Naturally, the [Palestinian] problem relates to all of this land..."(27) On another occasion, elaborating on the borders of a future Palestinian state and the Jewish residents of Israel, he said, "From an Islamic point of view, it stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan [River]. It is Palestine in its entirety... all those Jews who came here from all over the world, must return to the places from where they came. The Jews from Germany should return to Germany."(28)

On the September 11th Attacks

Conspiracy theories against America and Jews are the subject of many sermons dealing with the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 and the September 11, 2001 attack. Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri, speaking about the first attack, stated, "Oh those who pray, you have brothers wrongly and aggressively jailed in America. They have been forgotten. They were charged with false claims about the bombing of the World Trade [Center] in New York. We, from the Al-Aqsa Mosque and on your behalf, demand the release of these prisoners, who are monotheistic Muslims."(29) Weeks after September 11th, Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri stated again that Muslims were not involved, and in fact that Americans were responsible: "Oh Muslims, oh brothers, believers, everywhere, our Prophet used to deal in Friday's sermons with current events of his time and I will follow him and also discuss some religious rulings connected to the current international events following the [attacks] that took place in America on the 11th of this month. First, there is a religious legal rule that man is innocent, namely, in Islam, a human being is innocent until he is proven guilty. It is not allowed to blame a human being and then tell him 'prove you're innocent.' Therefore we tell America: 'It is forbidden to accuse a person before the beginning of the investigation.' Until now, the American administration could not present proof to convict the accused in the [attacks] in New York and Washington, [because] it is possible that there are other elements inside America who carried out these [attacks]."(30)


(1) October 4, 2002, Sheikh Ahmad Abd Al-Razek, Sheikh 'Iljin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(2) June 8, 2001, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheik 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(3) August 24, 2001, Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri, Al-Aqsa Mosque, PA Radio.
(4) October 13, 2000, Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan Mosque in Gaza.
(5) March 28, 2003, Sheikh Muhammad Abu Al-Hunud, Khalil Al-Wazir Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(6) September 5, 2003, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(7) March 21, 2003, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris, Sheikh 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(8) August 17, 2001, Sheikh Isma'il Aal Ghadwan, Sheik 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(9) August 22, 2003, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris, Sheikh 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(10) August 15, 2003, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris, Sheikh 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(11) May 2, 2003, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris, Sheikh 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(12) May 25, 2001, Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri, Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, PA Television.
(13) August 3, 2001, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheik 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(14) Two pre-Islamic Arab tribes that refused to convert to Islam, and were punished by annihilation.
(15) June 8, 2001, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheik 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(16) July 6, 2001, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheik 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(17) February 28, 2003, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris, Khalil Al-Wazir Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(18) Al-Ahram Al-Arabi (Egypt), October 28, 2000. See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 151, November 9, 2000, 'PA Mufti of Jerusalem and Palestine Discusses the Intifada.'
(19) April 12, 2002 Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheikh 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(20) October 13, 2000, Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(21) August 3, 2001, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheik 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(22) September 21, 2001, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheikh 'Ijlin mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(23 February 28, 2003, Sheikh Ibrahim Mudeiris, Khalil Al-Wazir Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(24) October 13, 2000, Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(25) September 21, 2001, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheikh 'Ijlin mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(26) April 12, 2002 Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi, Sheikh 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza, PA Television.
(27) Al-Ahram Al-Arabi (Egypt), October 28, 2000. See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 151, November 9, 2000, 'PA Mufti of Jerusalem and Palestine Discusses the Intifada.'
(28) Die Welt (Germany), January 17, 2001. See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 182, January 24, 2001, 'The PA Mufti: Jews from Germany Should Return There.'
(29) May 25, 2001, Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri, Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, PA Television.
(30) September 28, 2001, Mufti Sheikh Ikrimeh Sabri, Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, PA Television.

*Steven Stalinsky is Executive Director of Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). The Institute is an independent, non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. MEMRI's website address is http://www.memri.org.

Posted by Itamar Marcus, December 28, 2003.
PA TV cited again this morning the infamous forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, as an authentic document. This was part of an educational program, the objectives of which were to deny the existence of the Jewish nation and to deny Israel's right to exist.

As background, it should be noted that a foundation of Palestinian Authority (PA) ideology is that the Jews do not comprise a nation but only a religious group, and therefore do not have a right to a national home. This foundation of PA ideology is taught regularly by educators and political leaders, and was recently reiterated by the current PA Prime Minister, Ahmad Qurei:

"President Bush said that Israel is a Jewish state, which is a cause for our concern. This should not have been said ... What is the meaning of the concept of a Jewish state... Does this mean that this is a Jewish state, this is Sunni, this is Shi'ite, this is Alawite, and that one is Christian... These differences could plunge the region into a whirlpool ..." [Al-Nahar-Lebanese and Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 15 2003]

Today on PA TV, three senior historians, including the Chairman of the PA Public Library, and Arafat's Advisor on Education, Dr. Jarir Al-Kidwah, again taught this delegitimization of Israel's existence with significant elaboration and detail. Using the denial of Jewish nationhood as a starting point, they taught that modern Jews have no connection to the Land of Israel, and the early Zionists were therefore not interested in returning to Israel. Any country would have satisfied the Jews, who feared European anti-Semitism. However, it was the Europeans - Britain in particular - who directed the Jews to Israel, with two goals:

1- Britain wanted to control the natural resources of the Middle East, and by planting a foreign "cancer" they could control the Arab states;

2 - The Jews were such a detriment to European society that sending the Jews to the Middle East was an ideal way to "rid Europe of the burden of its problematic Jews."

As part of today's discussion, a historian explained that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, (the Russian forgery that was presented as the Jews' secret plan to rule the world), played a role at the first Zionist Congress in 1897. The PA often teaches that Zionist ideology is based on The Protocols.

The following is the transcript from today's "history" program, followed by two items from the PMW archives that document the repetitive nature of this de-legitimization of Israel in PA teaching:

First, the same teaching taught more than three years ago on PA TV by two of the same historians; second, an article from the official PA daily dating back five years ago, long before the violence started, explaining that Hitler and Britain's Foreign Secretary Balfour, who signed the "Balfour Declaration" promising the Jews a Jewish state in British Palestine, were both motivated by the same need to "rid Europe of the burden of her Jews."

Todays "history" program on PA TV:

Dr. Riad Al-Astal, history lecturer at Al-Azhar University in Gaza: "In these circumstances [of European nationalism] developed what is known as the Zionist Renaissance, and the seeds of what is called The Protocols of The Elders of Zion appeared at the end of the 18th century. They are the Protocols that were presented in the Basel Congress in Switzerland [the First Zionist Congress in 1897]"

Dr. Jarir Al-Kidwah [Arafat Advisor on Education and Head of the PA Public Library]: "Theodore Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, did not believe in Judaism. He strongly opposed any who claimed Judaism was a religion... He believed that the Jews around the world were one nation just because they were Jews... [and] here is the danger."

Dr. Isam Sisalem [Senior Historian and Educational TV host]: "The Jews lived in isolated areas, in ghettos in Poland and in Russia. They were the remains of the Khazars ... with no connection to our land and the history of our land [Palestine]... and even those who live with the name have no history or connection to this land." [He then explains that as a result of the pogroms in Russia the Zionist wanted Jews to emigrate.]

"At that time, Britain wanted to plant a cancer [in the Middle East to control it]. It did not occur to them [the Zionists] that Palestine would be theirs. They wanted... any Homeland. Our people wisely sensed this, as they planted on the land and lived in peace and security, continuing a 12 thousand year journey on this land. They sensed the danger, the moment the first settlement appeared. The first settlement appeared in 1842, when Moses Montefiore bought it in Jaffa under a false name, and they [the Zionists] would use French false names and others."

Moderator [Albaz]: "Dr. Riad, the year 1897 is considered a crossroads... and we regard this date as a black one in our lives..." Al-Astal: "... the Zionist Movement began at the Basel Congress to plan the exploitation of the powers' struggle and the struggle of Europe over the Middle East - the European states of course welcomed this idea and were striving to plant Israel as a functional state, which will serve the Imperialism, and as a bridgehead for ruling over the world, the Near East and therefrom the Middle East and the Far East... the international conspiracy was bigger than us [the Palestinian People]."

Sisalem: "Britain wanted to plant here the Jews in order to protect the Suez Canal... Max Nordau, the deviser, the planner of the idea [the idea of settling the Jews in Argentine, Italy, Mozambique, Angola, al-Arish and so on] at the Basel Congress, decided that they [the Jews] will immigrate to here [to Palestine], and that is why they clothed the issue in a fictitious religious and false [manner]... Britain decided to plant in this land a foreign secluded entity - a cancer - in order to drive a wedge between the [Arab] nation... Al-Astal: "There are two major elements for which Britain and the other European states were striving: the first element was to get rid of the Jews, who were known as those who provoke civil wars, disturbances, and financial crises in Germany, in France and in other European states. Regarding the second point... it is: the European plan, the British-French plan... to torpedo any hope for an Arab unity."

Sisalem [talking about a battle in which 150,00 British soldiers were defeated by the Turks]: "... alongside the British army there was a fighting Jewish regiment - this cancer began with them, [in] this land to which they have no connection..."

Archive Materials:

1. PA TV November 9, 2000 Program: Pages from our History

Dr. Jarir Al-Kidwah [Arafat Advisor on Education and Head of the PA Public Library]: "The Europeans were afraid of Arab unity, which would have hurt their colonialism in our region, and so they decided... to prevent Arab unity by placing a foreign body in the heart of the Arab nation, and that is the Zionist body manifested by the Jews in Palestine..."

Dr. Isam Sisalem [Senior Historian and Educational TV host]: "The Zionists and Colonialists met in Brussels and decided to establish a cancer in the land .. They [the Jews] thought of Uganda, Cyprus, Argentina. Palestine was not a goal... But British interests caused the establishment of this cancer here... hence the Crusader wars continue..."

Dr. Isam Sisalem: "In 1927 they named the region the Land of Israel." Moderator: "We hope our nation will be able to overcome the cursed Balfour Declaration ..." [PA TV November 9, 2000]

2. "The difference between Hitler and Balfour" - PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 12, 1998

"The difference between Hitler and Balfour was simple: the former [Hitler] did not have colonies to which to send the Jews and so he destroyed them, whereas [according to] Balfour's plan... Palestine turned into one of his colonies and he began to send the Jews there. Lord Balfour is Hitler with colonies, while Hitler is Balfour without colonies. They both wanted to get rid of the Jews ... Zionism was crucial to the defense of the West's interests in the region, [by] ridding Europe of the burden of her Jews." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 12, 1998]

Comment: Even as the PA purports to embrace the peace process, it is clear that the PA leadership, including Prime Minister Ahmad Qurei, continues to refuse to recognize Israel as a legitimate state. Indeed, PA leaders and educators rely on known distortions of history to teach the Palestinian people that Israel does not have the right to exist.

Posted by Aaron Lerner, December 27, 2003.
Although Labor and the Likud differ in their views on the solution to the Palestinian question, we both oppose in the strongest terms the creation of a Palestinian "mini-state" in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, first and foremost because it cannot solve anything. It certainly will not be able to absorb the almost million and a half Palestinians who currently reside beyond these two areas; and just as surely it will be ruled by the most extreme faction in the Palestinian political spectrum - the PLO. Such "internal" Palestinian politics might not be any of Israel's business were it not for the fact that the leaders of the PLO have declared - and I believe them - that they view such a "mini-state" as but the first phase in the achievement of their so-called secular, democratic Palestine, to be built on the ruins of the State of Israel once all the Jews who arrived after 1917 (or, with slight modification, after 1948) have been expelled. Given that scenario, there is little wonder that the overwhelming majority of Israelis are so strongly opposed to this "option." And though attitudes have changed before and may very well change again in the next few years, I doubt that my countrymen are likely to mellow toward the prospect of their own destruction."
Yitzhak Rabin, The Rabin Memoirs 1979, page 334.
Posted by Gavin Rabinowitz, December 27, 2003.
SHAVEI SHOMRON, West Bank - Some 2,700 years ago, 10 of the 12 biblical tribes of Israel were driven from the Holy Land into exile and the mists of history. Now, a group claiming descent from one of the lost tribes can be found sitting in a bomb shelter in a West Bank Jewish settlement, learning Hebrew.

Members of the group from northeastern India call themselves the "Bnei Menashe," or children of Menashe, and believe they are descendants of the Israelite tribe of Manasseh.

The return of the "lost tribes" to their ancient homeland is viewed by some as the fulfillment of biblical prophecy and a herald of the Messiah.

Others see the return as an opportunity to boost the numbers of Jews living in Israel in what they see as a demographic war with the Palestinians.

However, the Israeli government, while also concerned about the demographic question, is equally perturbed by the thought of thousands of refugees from developing nations flooding into the country with dubious historical links to the Jewish people.

Leaders including Prime Minister Ariel Sharon have talked of the necessity of pulling out of parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to ensure that a minimum number of Palestinians will end up under Israeli rule.

However, Michael Freund, who heads an organization responsible for bringing the Bnei Menashe and similar groups to Israel, feels Israel needs to be more creative in its efforts to enlarge the Jewish population instead of giving up land.

"Israel needs to think more creatively. We need to reach out to groups around the world who have a historical connection," Freund said.

The Bnei Menashe claim this connection.

After the reign of the biblical King Solomon, the tribes of Israel split into two kingdoms, Israel in the north and Judea in south. In 723 B.C. the Assyrians conquered the kingdom of Israel and took the 10 tribes into exile, where they dispersed among the nations.

Living in the northeastern Indian states of Mizoram and Manipur, the Bnei Menashe, who number about 6,000, were originally animists who were converted to Christianity by British missionaries in the 19th century. In 1953, a tribal leader named Mlanchala had a dream in which his people would return to Israel, which led the tribe to adopt Jewish tradition.

However, their links to the Jewish people could not be proven, so they were not eligible to emigrate to Israel under Israeli law, which gives Jews the right to automatic citizenship.

Nevertheless, Freund's group, Amishav - or "my people returns" - brought about 800 of the Bnei Menashe to Israel in the last decade and helped them undergo Orthodox conversions to Judaism.

Freund says he is convinced they are a lost tribe, pointing to many of their customs, including family purity laws, mourning rights and the use of a lunar calendar that closely mirror Jewish traditions.

Also, Freund says, the Bnei Menashe have ancient songs and chants that echo the Biblical themes of crossing the Red Sea and returning to Zion.

Finding a home in the West Bank settlement of Shavei Shomron - on the outskirts of the Palestinian city of Nablus - the latest group of 80 Bnei Menashe to come to Israel have just completed their conversion course.

Now they spend most of their days studying Hebrew in a converted bomb shelter that serves as a classroom.

"It is a very hard language for us," says Shimon Chenkwal, 25, an ambulance driver who came to Israel with his wife and three small children.

Sitting in the family's simple prefab home, a map of Israel the only decoration on the bare walls, Chenkwal says the Bnei Menashe are content. "It is good that we are in the land of Israel, it is good for our souls."

Not only are the Bnei Menashe a potential weapon in the demographic conflict, but they have also ended up strengthening the settlements.

Netanel Hnamte, 49, one of the newest arrivals, said he knew before he came that he would be going to a settlement and was not bothered by living near Nablus, despite frequent Palestinian attacks. Palestinians consider the settlements illegal encroachment on land they claim for a state.

"I am not afraid," Hnamte said.

However, Freund said the decision to place the Bnei Menashe on settlements was not political, but economical. The settlements are the only communities willing to host the Indian settlers, who are getting no financial support from the government, he said.

After completing their conversion, the Bnei Menashe live observant Jewish lives. The men wear large skullcaps and traditional fringes on their shirts. The married women all have their heads covered with wigs or scarves.

However, this group could be the last to come to Israel. Six months ago, Interior Minister Avraham Poraz froze the program indefinitely.

Freund is determined to bring the rest of the Bnei Menashe to Israel in the next 10 years. "People speak with disdain about the Third World. People should not be judged geographically but by character," he said. "If they have a sincere commitment to Judaism, the color of their skin does not matter."

Tibi Rabinovitch, a spokesman for Poraz, said the minister needed time to examine the issue.

"When we get all the details we will make a decision," Rabinovitch said, but conceded the ministry was concerned by an influx of people seeking Israeli citizenship through claims to an ancient connection.

"It is clear that Israel as a developed country is a very attractive place to people from the Third World," Rabinovitch said.

Posted by Isralert, December 27, 2003.
This was written by an Isralert member, Designnut

To our big surprise we discovered that there exist some fences and barriers in the world, outside of Israel. Some of them even can be found at major UN members.

First, we start with the fence between Mexico and the USA. There is really no need for this fence since the millions of illegal Mexicans in the United States do not commit suicide bomb attacks in American restaurants. Write to Mr. Bush and Mr. Powell today. (Nobody told them about this fence.) President George W. Bush, Postal address: The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20500, Fax: (202) 456 - 2883, E-mail: president@whitehouse.gov.
U.S. Secretary of State Collin Powell Postal address: Department of State, 2201 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20520, Fax: (202) 647 - 1533, E-mail: secretary@state.gov.

Then we continue with the fence between North and South Korea. A totally useless fence since the regimes of both countries share the same democratic values. Remind their representatives about this: Permanent Representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to the UN ,820 Second Avenue, 13th Floor, New York, NY 10017, Telephone: (212) 972-3105/3106/3128, Telefax: (212) 972-3154. Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea to the UN, 335 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 439-4000, Telefax: (212) 986-1083

A fence in Europe! Could it be? But those people live in peace! The fence between Cyprus and the Turkish occupied territory should be removed at once, not only opened during daytime. Write about this to: Permanent Representative of Turkey to the UN, 821 United Nations Plaza, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 949-0150, Telefax: (212) 949-0086 Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the UN, 13 East 40th Street, New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 481-6023/6024/6025, Telefax: (212) 685-7316.

Another fence in Europe!

In Northern Ireland this time, where thanks to wise British policy, Catholics and Protestants live in peace together for centuries. Let's get rid of this fence! Write to Mr. Blair. He does not know of these fences in Belfast! Rt Hon Tony Blair MP, Prime Minister, Postal address: 10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA, Fax: 0207 925 0918.

This is a good fence, as friendly Dutch people know how to build. It is only meant to keep illegal immigrants from leaving the harbor area of Hoek van Holland. But the purpose is like any other fence: keep the wrong people out of your country. Write to Minister President, J.P. Balkenende, Ministerie van Algemene Zaken, Postbus 20001, 2500 EA Den Haag, Nederland, Fax +31-70 - 356 46 83.

Now, this is really bad, A fence between 2 major United Nations members, India and Pakistan. Write your letter to: Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the UN ,Pakistan House, 8 East 65th Street, New York, NY 10021 Telephone: (212) 879-8600, Telefax: (212) 744-7348 Permanent Representative of India to the UN, 235 East 43rd Street, New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 490-9660, Telefax: (212) 490-9656

Another one in Europe! Is it possible? In Solana's own country! Spain erected a barbed wired fence, guarded by soldiers, in Ceuta, on the border with Morocco, in order to keep illegal workers (without bombs) out of Spain.

Write to: Presidente del Gobierno de Espana, Jose Maria Aznar Lopez, Complejo de La Moncloa, 28071 Madrid, fax 91-335-32-15

Only after we get rid of all these fences, one could ask Israel not to build a fence that protects her citizens from Palestinian terrorists.

Isralert provides essays and articles to a subscription list. Contact them by writing isralert@aol.com and putting "SUBSCRIBE" in the subject box. The original of this article has pictures of some of the fences discussed.

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 27, 2003.
Iran has just been devastated by a massive earthquake that took more than 20,000 lives, yet its government refuses to accept disaster relief from the "Zionist regime" in Israel. When in the midst of such enormous tragedy a country's leaders put a higher value on their hatred of the Jewish state than on saving the lives of their own people, you have to wonder about the threat it poses to regional peace and stability.

Because of its own suffering, Israel has developed unparalleled expertise in the search for and treatment of disaster victims. It also has a well deserved reputation of being among the first members of the international community to rush highly trained relief units to places ravaged by natural or man-made disasters. But Iran, which helps foment terrorism in Iraq and Israel, would rather stick to its agenda of destabilizing the Middle East than caring for tens of thousands of earthquake-shattered lives. Such behavior fully validates President Bush's description of its rulers as "evil."

Posted by Tamar Rush December 27, 2003.
This is by Naomi Ragen and it appeared on the Little Green Footbals website (http://LittleGreenFootballs.com/weblog) yesterday.

Who will write the elegies for Jewish
girls and a Jewish boy, murdered in Tel Aviv on Christmas day, 2003?

Who mourns lovely Rotem? Bright eyed Angelina? And warm Edva? And handsome
Who mourns them, slaughtered as they stood, waiting for the bus to taken them

Nineteen years old.
Nineteen years old.
Twenty years old
Twenty-one years old.

Murdered, because we opened our gates.
Because our walls are not high enough.
Because we let them in, to kill and maim.
Let them in to take our children, in the streets. Our kind young men.
Our beautiful girls.
Helped them to serve their stone-hearted god, their evil prophets who despise
Stone-hearted, like the idols of old, who
reveled in human sacrifice.

They claim a land. They claim a culture. These stone-hearted hordes
who love
gravestones and bombs and iron-nails and exploding flesh and
dead children.

Who will sing for Rotem, Angelina, Edva, Noam, killed in Tel Aviv
on Christmas Day, 2003?

Who will write the elegies?

Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and columnist, who lives in Jerusalem. Her website address is http://www.naomiragen.com

Posted by David Ben-Ariel, December 26, 2003.



The exiled Israelites were to become one of the most numerous groups of people on earth (Genesis 15:5 22:17 24:60 32:12 Numbers 23:10 Deuteronomy
1:11 Isaiah 10:22 24:16 26:15 Hosea 1:10); to be the most powerful (Genesis
27:9 Numbers 24:7 Michah 5:7-9), to be the richest, to possess the most mineral and agricultural resources (Genesis 27:28 49:25 Deuteronomy 33:13-16 Hosea 2:8), to live in the best places (Isaiah 41:8-9), to be in islands (Isaiah 42:4 49:1-6 Jeremiah 31:9-10), peninsulas (Jeremiah 31:8), and at continental extremities (Deuteronomy 33:13 Isaiah 24:16 26:15 41:8-9 49:6), to be sea-farers (Isaiah 42;6), to gain control over strategic points regarding their potential adversaries (Genesis 22:16-17 24:60), to be like a lion, unicorn (Numbers 24:8-9), and bald-headed eagle (Micah 1:16). They were also to be largely unaware of their Israelite identity and to practice a non-Jewish religion (Hosea 2:8, 2:13, 2:16 11:12). Judah at first would not know who they were (Isaiah 49;21). Scripture gives numerous other identifying characteristics that taken as a whole can only fit one group of peoples.

1. Ends of the Earth: Deuteronomy 33:13 on, Isaiah 24:16, 26:15, 41:8-9 43;6 49:6
2. Bald-Headed Eagle Micah 1:16
3. Isles Isaiah 24;15 49:6 60:9 Jeremiah 31; 9-10
4. Cyrus: Messiah son of Joseph see Josephby Yair Davidiy, Isaiah (44:28)
5. Thighs, Peninsulas, and Coasts: Jeremiah 31:8
6. Brit-Am Isaiah 42:6 49:8 Covenant of the People
7. Tarshish Isaiah 60;9
8. Seafarers Isaiah 42:10
9. Rule Over Peoples Genesis 27:29 48:19 MULTITUDE OF NATIONS (Malo HaGoyim), Psalms 47:3
10. Be the Dominant World Power (Balak, Ephraim): Numbers 24:7-9 Micah 5:7-9
11. Military Power: Deuteronomy 33:27 33:29 Jeremiah 51:20-21 (battle-ax) Zechariah 10:7
12. Defeat Edom (Germany and Europe) Ezekiel 25:14 Obadiah 1:18
13. Light for the Gentiles Genesis 12:2-3, 18:18-19, 22:18 24:4 Isaiah 42:1 42:6 Amos 6;15
14. Separate from Judah. Isaiah 11:12-13 49:21
15. Not known to Judah Isaiah 49:13-14, 21. Hosea chapter one: Judah excepted 1:7
16. Numerous: Genesis 15:5, 22:17, 24:60, 32:12, Numbers 23:10, Isaiah 10:22, 24:16, 26:15 Hosea 1:10
17. West Isaiah 24:14 (sea in Hebrew is yammeaning west); Hosea 11:10 18. Northwest Isaiah 49:12
19. North Jeremiah 3;18 31; 6-10
20. Agricultural Plenty Genesis 27:28 49:25 Deuteronomy 33:13-16 Hoshea 2:8
21. Mineral Resources Genesis 49:25 Deuteronomy 33:13, 15
22. Australia (Sinim, Codes) Isaiah 49:8
23. Best Places (Atziliyah) Isaiah 41: 9
24. Christianity Hosea 2:8, 2:13, 2:16 11:12 Notsrim (see our book Ephraim)
25. Fires in the Isles referring to Celtic Britain Isaiah 24:15
26. GATE(s) OF YOUR ENEMIES Genesis 22:17 24:60
27. John Bull Deuteronomy 33:17 Jeremiah 31:18 Aegel
28. Nobility Ephraim Jeremiah 31:20
29.Representative Democracy Manasseh Genesis 41:51
30. Dolmens: Jeremiah 31:21
31, 32, 33. Cush, Egypt, Chains See no.4 Cyrus Isaiah 44:28 also Isaiah 43:3 45:14
34: Zarephath Obadiah 1:20
35: Alcoholic Drunkards Isaiah 28:1, 3
36. Ruled by Sons of David Jeremiah 33:22, 26
37. Kings Genesis 17:6, 16, 35:11
38. Many Waters Numbers 24:7
39. Gomer Hosea chapter one
40. The name Hebrew: Genesis 14:13 Genesis 14:13 (on Joseph) 39:17 40:15
41:12 43:32 Jonah 1:9
41-111. Seventy Tribal and Clan Names 112. Jacob: Isaiah 49:6 Tribes of Jacob: Union Jack, Yankee, King James 113. Lion and Unicorn Numbers 24:7-9

Points to Note: The Bible says that towards the End Times the Lost Tribes will return and re-unite with Judah (Isaiah 11:12-13 Ezekiel 37) . There will be no complete Redemption for Judah without the return of the Ten Tribes (Ezekiel 16:53, 55, 61). Judah will be obligated to go unto the Ten Tribes and bring them back (Jeremiah 3:18 31:8). The Ten Tribes are also called upon to seek their God and their ancestry (Jeremiah 31:9-10, 21) and affirm it. Ezekiel (11:18) hints that first the exiles will return to the Land of Israel and after that they shall put away their idols and keep the Law (Ezekiel 11:20). The complete return of Judah is dependent upon the return of Samaria (Ezekiel 16:53, 55, 61) meaning the Ten Tribes especially Manasseh of the USA. God will renew His covenant with Judah and with Israel (Ezekiel 16:62). Part of Judah will return to the Land and begin to build it up. Then the Lost Ten Tribes will return in two stages together with the remnant of Judah (Isaiah 56:8 and Hosea chapter six, see "Ephraim" by Yair Davidiy). Identity Lost: Hosea (chapter one) predicted that the Lost Ten Tribes would be considered non-Israelites and (Hosea 7:8 Isaiah 11:11 49:21 ) distinct from Judah: Census lists of Ezra and Nehemiah do not mention anyone from the Ten Tribes amongst Judah. Their religious Membership was Suspended: Jeremiah 3:8 (divorced, cf. Yebamot 17), Hosea 1:9. They would combined with Gomer (Hosea ch.1) but later Re-Unite with Judah (Hosea 3;18 Isaiah 11:11). In the Last Days they will Return by Aeroplanes (Isaiah 60:8). Initially they will not be accepted by Judah (Isaiah 49;21). Both Judah and Joseph will seek God in the Last Days (Jeremiah 50:4). Ephraim will return to Bashan and Gilead (Micah 7:14) meaning Syria and Lebanon (Zechariah 10:10). The Lost Ten Tribes are exhorted to take heed of historical and archaeological evidence concerning their origins and to return to their cities in Samaria (Jeremiah 31:12).


1. Commentators (Rashi, Iben Exzra, Radak, Nachmanidres, Abarbanel) on Obadiah 1:20 indicate that the Lost Tribes settled in the West.

2. Mashiach ben Yoseph: Traditions spoke of a future Anointed Leader who would lead the Lost Tribes in the Last days and who also epitomized and culminated a process of support for Judah and ingathering the Jews to Israel. This description is only applicable historically to Britain and the USA.

3. Midrashim and Rabbinical sources also interpreted the texts the same way as Brit-Am has done. Our interpretations of the Biblical Text according to its literal meaning prove Brit-Am Identifications.

4. Hebrew Meanings of Names and Tribal Characteristics in the light of Rabbinical Commentary confirmed Brit-Am Identifications, e.g. Machir first born son of Manasseh gave his name to America. Machir means Capitalism. Manasseh means Responsible Representations, Ephraim means Aristocracy.

5. Jewish Philosophy: Helps explain the separate roles of Judah and Joseph.


(1). Movement by Sea: A portion of the Hebrew Exiles was transported overseas in Phoenician and Philistine ships working for the Assyrians. They were taken to Spain, Gaul, and Britain. Those taken to Spain later moved northward into Gaul or crossed over to Britain and Ireland.

(2). Movement by Land Northward: Ca.740-720 BCE: The Assyrians moved masses of Northern Israelites to Northern Mesopotamia and to Hara in eastern Iran where they became identified with Cimmerians, Scyths, and Goths.

(3). Cimmerians to Europe and Galatian-Gaul: Ca. 640 BCE: The first waves of Cimmerians via the Anatolian Bosporos (Turkey) were driven into the European Balkans whence they made their way west to Gaul and Britain becoming identified as Celts and Galatians. The Galatians were identifiable in Europe with both part of the Celts and Belgae and with early groups in Germany.

(4) Scythian Movements to Europe: Ca. 550 BCE to ca. 500 CE. The Scythians moved from the Middle East to north of the Caucasus. They then moved in stages westward into Europe and the British Isles.

(5). The Khazars: They belonged to the Lost Ten Tribes and a portion of them converted to Judaism.

(6) From Europe to North America: Apart from the British Isles and the West members of the Lost Israelite were scattered throughout Europe including Germany. These groups had often remained separate from their non-Israelite neighbors and later moved en masse to North America and similar regions.

(7) Judah: Descendants of Jews who had been forced to become Gentiles are to be found in many regions and will also return with the Lost Ten Tribes.


Proofs that Brit-Am is correct are also available from (a) the study of linguistics: Western Celtic is Semitic in structure, Germanic tongues, especially English have a strong Hebraic component, etc; (b) Hebraic type culture, (c) comparative religion, (d) self-identification as the Chosen People of Israel; (e) Contemporary affairs: (f) relative degrees of anti-Semitism and philo-Semitism; and several other fields.

The aims of Brit-Am are to encourage:
1. The spread of Identity Awareness.
2. Increased Identity research and clarification.
3. Association of members together for the sake of mutual-empowerment, learning and fellowship.

The Brit-Am website addresses are http://www.geocities.com/hiberi and http://www.britam.org/.

Brit-Am is an association of people with a common interest in determining who among the peoples of the world may be descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes.

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 26, 2003.
This is a typical Washington Post (WP) response - smug, self-righteous and totally blind to the writer's shortcomings (or bias if you prefer). The exchange was between David Ignatius of the WP and myself.

Dear Mr. Ignatius:

By all means, continue to write about Israeli victims of terrorism. But you missed the main point of my letter. I have no objection whatsoever to your writing about the plight of Palestinians. My objection is when Israel is depicted as the principal cause of that plight instead of Palestinian terrorism. There would be no need for military incursions, roadblocks and other impediments to regular Palestinian life if Israel were not threatened on an almost daily basis by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the other terrorist groups trying to send suicide bombers to kill and maim as many Israelis as possible. That's what I meant when I criticised you for not properly connecting the dots. What surprises me (and I spent 45 years in journalism) is that most Western reporters, when interviewing Palestinians living under difficult circumstances, fail to ask a basic journalistic question: "Would you be better off if terrorism stopped and Israel could take down the barrier, the roadblocks and the other things that make your life so difficult?" Some Palestinians have begun to see this causal connection, but their anti-Hamas feelings are largely ignored by not just the Post, but most U.S. media. For example, Palestinian farmers in the Gaza Strip a few months ago staged demonstrations AGAINST Hamas for using their orchards as launching sites to lob missiles into southern Israel and prompting Israel to take down many of their trees in an effort to deprive Hamas of camouflaged places from which to attack Israelis. Did you see that reported in the Post? Did you write about that?

So by all means, show your readers the plight (and real causes thereof) endured by people on both sides of this conflict. Good luck! Leo Rennert

From: David Ignatius
To: Leo Rennert

I have written about Israeli victims of terrorism and will continue to do so. Why should you object to my attempt to describe what life is like for Palestiians under occupation? David Ignatius

Dear Mr. Ignatius:

I sympathize with Leila Kashkeesh, who has to spend nearly two hours traveling on a circuitous route to go to classes at Bethlehem University. I sympathize with your sympathy for her. But I find it very disingenous for you to write about the plight of Palestinians in the West Bank and then just tacking on as an afterthought, "That doesn't in any way excuse terrorist attacks on Israelis."

Forget about "excusing" terrorist attacks. There's nothing in what you write to suggest that you sympathize with terrorists or would "excuse" their foul deeds. But what you utterly fail to do is to connect the dots: The discomfort of Leila Kashkeesh is the direct result of Palestinian terrorism. You're smart enough to realize that this is so, yet somehow you can't bring yourself to say it outright. So you dance around the edges by acknowledging that before the intifada, Leila Kashkeesh was not as hemmed in as she is today. Actually, in the 1990s when Oslo seemed promising, Israel pulled out of most of the West Bank to the point where more than 90 percent of Palestinians were governed by Palestinians. Yet, you make it seem as if Israel is responsible for the intifada and not Arafat and his terrorist partners.

On a human level, I would ask you just one question: While Leila Kashkeesh's discomforts certainly should be reported, she's apparently alive and well. So when will you write a parallel column about a Jewish family in Israel that mourns a mother, father, son or daughter killed by terrorists, or who nurses a family member forever confined to a wheelchair and whose pain is incomparably more severe and permanent than Leila Kashkeesh's?

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 26, 2003.
I have a pet peeve, and that is the mindless habit, in fact what has become the unchallenged convention in Israel and the world, of counting the victims of the Oslo carnage from the start of the misnamed "Al Aqsa Intifada", beginning in September 2000. By that reckoning, the number of Israelis murdered by the implementation of the policies of Israel's Left is a mere 904, as of yesterday's atrocity on the Tel Aviv beltway.

But counting in this way makes it seem that the carnage is something that just began in 2000, and hidden behind the system of counting is the Left's assertion that the entire bloodbath was caused by Ariel Sharon going for a stroll on the Temple Mount in September 2000. You know, that walk that was almost as controversial as would have been a walk by an Italian politician in the Vatican....

This is not just a technical mathematical debate. The proper way to count the Olso carnage body count is from the time of the pawshake on the White House lawn, when Rabin signed the first Oslo "Accord" with Arafat, and the Labor Party decided to turn the West Bank and Gaza over to the terrorists to become nazi terror bases and cities of refuge for mass murderers, while importing the terrorist leadership from Tunis into the Lands of Israel, and by arming and bankrolling the Palestinian nazis.

The correct body count is close to 1400, not 904, where the exact figure is never reported by the Israeli media, under the near-totalitarian hegemony of the Israeli Far Left. Reporting things that way might clarify for the confused public that the Oslo carnage was produced by the policies of the Israeli Left, starting with the Peres-Rabin decision to impose Oslo on the country. And we sure would not want the Israelis reminded that the Left is directly to blame for the 1400 deaths of Israelis.

Speaking of the near-totalitarian hegemony over the media by the Left, a serious crack has opened up in that hegemony recently, because the new chair of the Israel Broadcasting Authority has been ruffling the feathers of the pink flamingos, the Far Leftist media moguls who have controlled Israeli TV news and electronic broadcastings since, well, since forever.

Several of the leading talking heads have gotten the bum's rush or been forced to resign. Now the Left is all enraged because the new boss is appointing Uri Dan to be the chief reporter on a couple of news documentary shows on Channel One TV. Dan is a vintage ace Israeli reporter and columnist, but the Left despises him because he is personally friendly with Ariel Sharon and approves of many things Sharon does. That, in the "minds" of the Left, should disqualify him for any media position. Note that for the past generation, when Far Leftists mouthed their biased monologues all over the Israeli media, no one ever complained that biased leftists should be excluded. Indeed, for years, the news service on Channel One was the personal fiefdom of Leftist Czar Moti Kirshenbaum, who openly stated that non-leftist opinion would not be permitted on the screen as long as he was in charge (and back then Channel One was the ONLY TV station broadcasting in Israel).

Kirshenbaum is one of the characters no longer with us at Channel One. He moved to the "privatized" Channel Ten, a failing insolvent new station with an invisible market share, where he shares the rocking chair on the news and commentary broadcasts with fellow geriatric far leftist Yaron London. The two old pharisees sit and chat between themselves in an endless dialogue of the dumb, in what always reminds me of those two puppets of the old geezers on all the Muppet Shows, who sit in the balcony and issue cynical pronouncements and then laugh to themselves.

Posted by Voice of Judea, December 26, 2003.
The following are from Imra and are the results of a poll of a representative sample of 602 adult Israelis (including Israeli Arabs) carried out by New Wave for Maariv the week of 26 December 2003, before the suicide bombing in Petach Tikvah.Survey error +/- percentage points.

If an agreement is not reached between Israel and the Palestinians, would you support or oppose unilaterally evacuating settlements in the territories?

Oppose 51% Support 37% Don't know/refuse reply 12%

Are you satisfied with the performance of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in general?

Yes 38% No 51% Don't know/refuse reply 11%

Compared to last year, do you feel more or less safe going around public places?

More 15% Less 24% Same 59% Don't know/refuse reply 2%

Compared to last year, did your standard of living rise or fall in 2003?

Rise 7% Fall 48% No change 43% Don't know/refuse reply 2%

Asked to Jews: Did you light Chanukah candles this year?

Yes 90% No 10%

Sharon's recent threats to dismantle "settlements" may have sounded an awakening call to many in Israel. Thousands of Jews converged upon Migron and Sanur over Hanukah to inaugurate Torah scrolls donated to the two towns and to show solidarity with the "settlers".

Next Sunday, immediately following the fast of the Tenth of Tevet (Jan. 4) at 5:15 PM, thousands are expected to attend the ground-breaking ceremony of a new synagogue being built on the Tapuach West Hilltop and the inauguration of a new Torah scroll that will be marched up to the hill and placed in the temporary sanctuary. Both the synagogue and the Torah are being dedicated in memory of Rabbi Meir Kahane, Binyamin Zev kahane and Talya Kahane, HY'D. This is the first building to be named after the Kahanes, who were murdered by Arab terrorists in two separate attacks.

ANYONE WISHING TO HELP SPONSOR THIS HISTORIC EVENT OR TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION TO THE KAHANE BUILDING FUND CAN EMAIL jsid@dorsai.org or call in the USA 718 874 2057 or in Israel 067 910 341. Funds are desparately needed to cover building costs. Additional information on the events and building can be found at http://www.kahane.org/shul.html

Bullet-proof buses will be bringing participants who wish to attend the Hachnasat sefer Torah from major cities throughout Israel. Call 067 910 341 to find out about buses in your area.

The Voice Of Judea website address is http://www.voiceofjudea.net

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 26, 2003.
This is a pretty typical example of how the American Government handles its responsibilities to Israel. After the peace (?) treaty with Egypt, American peace monitors were suppose to keep the Egyptian from introducing forces into the Sinai. There is already at least one full army in the Sinai. There are, unfortunately, many many other examples as well. This article was on the IMRA website.

[Excerpts from "Four killed, 20 hurt in Geha bombing, Haaretz Staff and Agencies, 26 December 2003, www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/376178.html]

PFLP Terror Coordinated By Terrorists Under British and American Supervision." It is excerpted from "Four Killed

Four people were killed and 20 wounded in a suicide bombing at the Geha Junction between Petah Tikva and Bnei Brak yesterday...The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) claimed responsibility for the attack

Most of the PFLP cells' orders, defense officials say, still come from a group of PFLP leaders who have been in a Palestinian jail in Jericho, under British and American supervision, for more than a year. The Palestinian Authority jailed these men due to Israeli and American pressure following the PFLP's assassination of minister Rehavam Ze'evi in October 2001, but they have been given virtually unrestricted telephone access, issue frequent press statements and receive regular visits from other PFLP members.

IMRA (Independent media Review Analysis) features a digest of media news, polls, significant interviews and events.

Posted by Rabbi Ilana Rosansky, December 25, 2003.

This month, we celebrate Martin Luther King Day. In 1967, Martin Luther King Jr published his Letter To An Anti-Zionist Friend:

"Anti-Zionism is inherently anti-semitic, and ever will be. What is anti-Zionism? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the globe. It is discrimination against Jews... because they are Jews. In short, it is anti-semitism."

What a mensch was Martin Luther King! Would that the rest of the world had 'got it'!

When bad things happen to us as individuals or to us a Jewish communal whole, about the worst thing we can do is to deny it has happened or is in the process of happening. Sometimes we say that when bad things happen, like a door closing, a window opens. That is, sometimes, something that seems 'bad' may not be so bad, and indeed it leaves us open to a world of opportunity. But sometimes, 'bad' is really 'bad'; it's evil.

In early December, the ADL jointly called for an emergency meeting of the Jewish community with a host of area synagogues on a Wednesday evening, at Kehilath Israel in Brookline. There was serious security there. Abe Foxman, the Director of the ADL and Father Robert Drinan were the featured speakers, along with Rabbi Bill Hamilton. The sanctuary was packed - including about 40 students from a Hebrew High School. I recognized perhaps a half a dozen individuals from the North Shore.

In the 1930's when Jews were whispering that the tide of anti-Semitism was on the rise, many Jews refused to listen. In essence 6,000,000 of our brothers and sisters died in Nazi Europe because so much of the world was in denial. Abe Foxman put it aptly when he said, after describing his own early childhood "on loan" to his non-Jewish nanny for four years while his parents were carted away, "I never expected in my lifetime to witness such a profound rise in anti-Semitism again, nor the concomitant denial." His new book is entitled: "Never Again."

Can we American Jews really be so foolish as to close our minds, ears, eyes and hearts to what is going on throughout Europe and Turkey and elsewhere and pretend that everything is "allright" as we go on with our tennis dates and our complacency? That's what the Jews of Berlin did. They said, 'Ach - I'm a German; none of this can happen to me.'

Now I am not just schrei-ing 'gevalt' about your average run of the mill sort of injustices here (though Lord knows we grow numb and inured to all sorts of unethical and immoral acts within and around us, all the time). Everyone is susceptible to deception and the lures of immorality. We hardly blink. And that is surely grist for another mill.

What I am talking about here, is outrageous, unconscionable and growing waves of overt and violent Anti-Semitism, the likes of which have not been seen in over 50 years. It's happening. It's happening all over Europe and no one is enraged. No one is indignant. No one is sounding the alarm and the UN won't even condemn it.

In an article in the British paper, The Guardian (December 6, 2003), perhaps Julie Burchill says it most juiciest!

So emboldened by the filthy free-for-all, the danse macabre of resurgent Judeophobia - attacks on Jews in this country have risen by 75% this year; and since 2000, there has been a 400% increase in attacks on synagogues - are the ignorant armies of darkness that even Germans are opening their yaps on a subject that you'd have thought they'd have the sense, if not the decency, to keep away from. Just a few weeks ago, a German MP was forced to resign after claiming that the Jews were responsible for Soviet army "atrocities" against the defeated Nazi state .... And ... Greek composer Mikis Theodorakis weighed in with his carefully considered view that the Jews are at the root of all evil. So, presumably, he won't be wanting the royalties from one of his most notable works, which documents the tragic love story of two young Jewish inmates of a concentration camp. Or maybe he can rejig it, to show how evil this pair were, and how they deserved what they got.

To contemplate the thought processes of such individuals makes any decent person want to wash their hands until the slime of hypocritical hatred is swept away. But when whole sections of society peddle such lies, it's scarier still. And when carriers of the disease are shielded by those who govern us, you start to believe the lunatics have taken over the asylum: the EU's racism watchdog recently suppressed a report on the rise of anti-semitism because it con-cluded that Muslims were behind many incidents. What sort of world do we live in, when racism is "allowed" to be reported only if it comes from the white and the right? What about a stubborn, shimmering little thing called truth?

To which I say: AMEN !!

WAKE UP!! Wake up Jews of America... Find out what you can do to help.

Posted by Eliezar Edwards, December 26, 2003.
This appeared today in the Jerusalem Post and was written by Douglas Davis. Notice the evidence that Syria has been involved in the attacks on Americans in Iraq. Why am I not surprised? I'm waiting for them to identify some of the other 'foreigners' as Palestinians.

The Iraqi Governing Council is considering returning properties that were confiscated from departing Jews after the establishment of Israel, a senior source within the council told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday.

He said a 1951 law, which had deprived fleeing Iraqi Jews of their properties, is now under review. The aim of the revision is to restore the properties to their rightful owners.

"We are determined to return all the properties that were taken from the Iraqi Jews and all the others," he said.

In the meantime, he said he had assured representatives of Iraqi Jews who want to visit Iraq that they would be welcome and that the council would ensure their security.

He also said that Israel is to be frozen out of the bidding for lucrative reconstruction contracts: "We have no problem dealing with Jewish businessmen or with Israelis as private citizens," he said, "but we do not feel we owe anything to the State of Israel."

The source said there have been no contacts with Israeli officials since they were recently rebuffed while attempting to negotiate a "back-door" oil deal with the Kurds in northern Iraq.

Also to be denied access to contracts by the governing council are France, Russia, and China, the three permanent members of the UN Security Council that obstructed a UN resolution to legitimize military action to topple Saddam Hussein.

The source also said he believes both the Syrian and Jordanian regimes are now extremely vulnerable - Jordan, because of its activities before Saddam was overthrown, and Syria because of its activities since his downfall.

He revealed that the US administration in Iraq and the council have solid evidence of direct, top-level Syrian complicity in attacks against American and Iraqi security forces.

One of the two Iraqis captured with Saddam in the Tikrit area had acted as Saddam's personal envoy to Syrian President Bashar Assad until just six weeks before his arrest.

He also said that suicide bombers from various Arab countries had crossed into Iraq from Syria, carrying Syrian documents.

In one case, a Yemeni suicide bomber's mission was aborted when the massive bomb concealed in the truck he was driving failed to detonate. The would-be attacker, who had arrived in Iraq less than 48 hours before embarking on his mission, was carrying Syrian documents.

He said he believes the Syrian regime has attempted to make life as difficult - and as bloody - as possible for the Americans to dissuade them from turning their sights on Damascus once the security threats in Iraq are contained.

He also said that the governing council has acquired evidence that incriminates the most senior members of the Jordanian royal family in allegedly illegal and corrupt dealings with Saddam.

The council, he added, had acquired thousands of documents which expose a network of politicians throughout the Arab world and Europe - including the Vatican - who had accepted huge payments from Saddam in the form of "oil contracts" which were traded by the Iraqi regime on their behalf.

The documents, which were unearthed from the files of the Mukhabarat (secret police), the state oil company, and in Saddam's personal office, expose a vast and complex paper trail that reveals not only the identity of the corrupt politicians, but also how their cash was laundered.

One leading Jordanian politician received more than $3 million in a bank account in Cyprus, the favored first stop in the laundering process. There is also evidence, he said, the Jordanian authorities had established a sophisticated operation for providing front companies that allowed Saddam to trade on the international market in defiance of UN sanctions. Vast "commissions" were paid to individual Jordanians for this.

The source said he believes it unlikely the Hashemite throne will survive the detailed revelations that will emerge in the coming months. The governing council, he said, has already informed the Jordanian government that it has halted the arrangement by which Jordan was permitted to purchase Iraqi oil at substantial discounts.

"We will sell to them on the same terms as we sell to Guatamala," he said. "They will not have another cent from us."

And he said Iraq will end all exports of oil through the port of Aqaba, a major source of Jordanian income, within two years, by which time Iraq will have completed the reconstruction of its own storage and export facilities.

Saying that the absence of a hostile regime in Baghdad has reduced Israel's strategic dependence on the Hashemite kingdom as a buffer against Iraq, he predicted that Jordan would, sooner rather than later, become a Palestinian state.

He also revealed that Palestinians who had been living in Iraq - and who were perceived to have been among Saddam's staunchest champions - have been stripped of their Iraqi citizenship and ordered to leave the country. Most are believed to have settled in Jordan.

He laughed when asked whether there has been any communication between the new Iraqi leadership and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat. He said many members of the governing council are personally well-disposed toward Israel, and he insisted that the new Iraq would not be hostile to it.

At the same time, however, he said Israel had failed to provide any assistance to the Iraqi National Congress, or even take up its offer of cooperation, while it was operating in exile.

Earlier, Ahmed Chalabi, head of the INC and now the most senior member of the Iraqi Governing Council, told the Post he feels he was ill-treated when he visited Israel to meet with then-prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

At a time when the INC was seeking to build alliances in the region, he had proposed cooperation between it and Israel. Netanyahu's immediate response, he said, was to suggest that he arrange for Chalabi to meet with the head of the Mossad.

Chalabi was deeply offended by the suggestion and said he felt Netanyahu's response to his offer was "racist," indicating that he regarded him as nothing more than a potential Arab spy for Israel.

The source added that when senior members of the Iraqi Governing Council, led by Chalabi, were taken to see Saddam under arrest, he justified his past actions and insisted that all his decisions had been taken "for the sake of Baghdad and Jerusalem."

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 26, 2003.
Last month Popular Science Magazine published a collection of their covers from the past 60 years. Most of the cover art illustrated aeroplanes or "flying craft of the future", and nearly all of the aeronautical predictions were incorrect. Most of those fantastic machines never made it off the drawing boards.

The "Road Map to Peace" is very much like those long-forgotten flying machines on the covers of Popular Science. That particular "Peace-plane" was never destined to fly.

As you may recall, the signing of the "Road Map" agreement in Aqaba was held-up for several hours because the Palestinian representatives refused to utter the words "Jewish State". In the end, neither the Palestinian representative [Mahmoud Abbas], nor George Bush, could summon the courage to say "the Jewish State of Israel". The "Road Map" was revealed as a mere presidential pipe-dream before its signatories even left the podium.

Arik Sharon's much awaited "Herzliya speech" affirmed once again his commitment to that grounded "Road Map" signed in Aqaba last year.He was obviously aiming his remarks at the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia which drafted the "Roadmap". Any intelligent citizen of Eretz Israel realised several bus-bombs ago that such a map can only lead to a violent end of the Jewish State.

In the collectivist minds of the US-EU-UN-and Saudi-Russian sponsors however, the Jewish people remain gullible and naive enough to accept the Aqaba agreement as the final solution to Arab violence against Israeli citizens.

At the four-day "Herzliya Conference", European representatives dangled promises of wealth and economic bliss before an assemblage of Israeli politicians and the Leftist press. E.U. Ambassador Marc Otte offered the tantalising prospect of Israel joining the "New Europe" as he spoke of "Cyprus becoming a member and Israel would be just a few kilometres away." .

Ambassador Otte's carrot left Israeli politicians drooling. All we have to do is follow the "Road Map".

Then came the E.U. stick.

After upsetting the conference schedule by his deliberate tardiness in taking the podium, German Foreign Minister Joshke Fischer gave his "Israeli friends" a good whacking, as he accused "Both sides" of a return to violence after the breakdown of the Camp Davis talks. Fischer reiterated his support for the "Road Map" - saying that it is the only possible chance for peace.

After listening to Fischer I have a deeper understanding of the Holocaust. Human-beings, represented by officials such as Fischer, are capable of rationalising just about any policy that claims to be a cure for the "Israeli-Palestinian Conflict", (A 21st century version of the "Jewish problem"?)

Unfortunately, some on the the Israeli "Right" have been working overtime to rationalise their support for the "Road Map" and the annulment of our long-standing policy of no negotiations under fire, and never rewarding terrorism. To punish those who have murdered over 1,300 of our citizens since Oslo, our "Right-wing" government intends to hand the disputed territories, including most of historic Jerusalem, to the blood-soaked regime of Yassir Arafat.

According to Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert "When we faced the choice of the complete land without a Jewish state, or a Jewish state without the complete land, we chose a Jewish state".

"We chose?"

Just who "we" is, was left to our imagination. The citizens of Eretz Israel have not been consulted on the matter of withdrawal or further moves to appease the terrorist leadership and their International supporters. There has been no talk of referenda or other such niceties common to Western democracies, our future, and that of our beloved country is to be decided behind closed doors, by a few ambivalent party hacks.

I have been criticised for repeating the views of the Israeli public as expressed in our Hebrew language press, and on web-sites such as YNET, Ha'Aretz, and Walla. It seems that many well-intentioned people in the Diaspora have convinced themselves that the "Road Map" and its various detours, i.e., unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza, is the only option now left for the people of Eretz Israel, even if we, who must pay for our mistakes with the blood of our children, don't agree. I intend to continue presenting the seldom heard views of the Israeli public as long as I have a forum to do so.

Much of the Israeli public does not trust Arik Sharon, Yassir Arafat, G.W. Bush, the Europeans, or their "Road Map". We feel that we have been manipulated and coerced into agreeing to the establishment of a terror state a few steps from our own homes, without any means to prevent its proxy attacks upon our people.

Since rumours began to circulate about the Likud's "unilateral disengagement" plan (The Labour Party platform in the last election, and overwhelmingly rejected by the Israeli public), the Palestinian terror machine has increased its attempts to cause heavy losses within the Israeli population. There have been dozens of intercepted suicide bombers, soldiers killed, and a disgusting attempt to capture and decapitate our soldiers, holding their severed heads for ransom. This has culminated in an attack on a crowded bus stop this evening that killed 4 innocent commuters and left 15 seriously injured.

Still, we are told that the "Road Map", combined with a unilateral withdrawal, is our only hope for the future.

The "Road Map" was grounded in Aqaba; it never stood a chance. The PLO-PA "leadership of the moment" realised before they signed that farcical agreement that only Israel would be required to follow the route prescribed by the "International Community." And so it has been. Nothing will be allowed to obstruct plans to impose a terror state on our doorstep.

We in Israel feel betrayed. We have been deceived by our own leadership, and hoodwinked by the "International Community." Tomorrow will be another day of funerals and grieving families in this neighbourhood, and Arafat will be eating Christmas leftovers in the Muqata, safe in the knowledge that our Israeli leadership has guaranteed his safety to the American President and the "International Community."

The roads and motorways in my neighbourhood are now filled with police searching for two terrorists that were seen leaving the site of the latest bombing. It's the Chanukah school holiday and cautious parents will be making their kids stay at home.

We shouldn't have to live like this, not to please the U.S. President, the Europeans, or even well-intentioned Diaspora Jews who are safe in the knowledge that the bill for this road work will not be paid with their own children's blood.

The "Road Map" never took off, and it's time that we all come to terms with that fact. Over a decade of appeasement and funerals should have taught us all that as long as the PLO-PA exists, there will never be peace in Eretz Israel.

Merry Christmas and Chanukah Sameach

Posted by Isralert, December 25, 2003.
Arab and Muslim dictatorships aren't what they were. The Americans are making their point about democracy faster than anyone could have imagined. This article was written by David Pryce-Jones, and appeared in "The Australian" yesterday. Pryce-Jones is the author of "The Closed Circle: An Interpretation of the Arabs."

The Arab and Muslim world stands at a crossroad. One direction indicates dictatorship. A mixed bag of absolute rulers and Islamists have different aims, but a common belief in their right to be wielding power and killing anyone in their way, with weapons of mass destruction if they can acquire them.

Taken together, they are condemning their own and other people to permanent violence and regression. And in the other direction, reform.

A different mixed bag of Arab and Muslim oppositionists, intellectuals, dissidents and exiles are trying to devise the sort of pluralist or open society that alone is able to liberate the energies of all.

September 11 was an aggression typical of dictatorial power. Unexpected by everybody, it has had the effect of entwining the US in the destiny of Arabs and Muslims everywhere to make sure that no such aggressions take place again, and certainly not with weapons of mass destruction.

The US is giving local reformers a helping hand - or, more exactly, a push hard enough to send dictatorships, both of the political and the Islamist kind, reeling. Freed from the Taliban by the US military, Afghanistan - historically more an assortment of ethnicities, sects and tribes than a country - is in the process of adopting a constitution.

Iraq has always been divided between Arabs and Kurds, and further between Sunni and Shia Arabs. Freed from Saddam Hussein by the US military, Iraq is due to start self-government next June. Supporters of Saddamite or Islamist dictatorship are clinging to their guns to sabotage any move towards democracy. Still, nobody can doubt that efforts are being made for the first time in history to allow Sunnis, Shias and Kurds to have fair political representation.

The 20th century may have seen the end of imperialism, but the new century has brought Westerners and unbelievers back to control the streets of Baghdad, capital of the great Abbasid rulers of the Middle Ages to whom Arabs look back with pride. Of course the Arab and Muslim world is in turmoil at the sight, but it is a creative turmoil.

If the disparate elements in a country such as Iraq can't create an open society for themselves, then only the Americans, it is understood, can stand guarantee for such an epochal experiment. The capture of Hussein did not spark a single protest or riot against the US in any Arab or Muslim capital.

True, some commentators in the Arab media lament that he did not have the courage to die gun in hand or to put a bullet into his head, as cornered dictators are supposed to do. But many more are pointing out that Arabs have only themselves to blame for the dictatorships that oppress them and the remedy lies in their own hands.

The knock-on effects of the US response to September 11 have been quickening. Turkey has an Islamist government, but it nonetheless condemned the attack and has subsequently been the target of al-Qa'ida bombs. Pakistan also condemned it. Most astonishingly, here comes Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan President, offering to voluntarily surrender his weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear bomb still in development.

Gaddafi seized power in a coup in 1969, and has treated Libya as his fiefdom ever since. His heir apparent is his son Seif, a chip off the old block. Gaddafi has sponsored terrorism internationally, as a result of which sanctions were imposed on Libya. Internally, he has made sure that any opponents, including a popular Shia cleric, disappear without trace. When the campaign in Iraq opened in March, Gaddafi tellingly admitted he felt afraid. No doubt he would like sanctions to be lifted, but he also wants to make quite sure his weapons of mass destruction will not lead him to end up in a hole in the ground, like his fellow dictator Hussein.

Hemmed in by US forces across their frontiers with Iraq and Afghanistan, the ayatollahs of Iran similarly seem to be deciding to permit international supervision of their nuclear program, generally suspected to have military purposes that threaten not just the Middle East but also Russia and Europe.

Syria, Iran's ally, is also under pressure on account of its chemical and biological weapons. A classic Arab dictatorship, Syria has a President, Bashar Assad, who inherited absolute power without the least legitimacy from his father. He, too, sponsors terrorism on a wide scale and eliminates all critics. George W. Bush's recent move to legislate against Syria is causing panic there. Baghdad and Damascus are historic rivals, and the freedom of the former is already humiliatingly exposing the backwardness of the latter.

It's the same in Cairo, where popular opinion is turning against President Husni Mubarak, who has ruled by emergency decree for more than two decades and hopes to put his son in as his successor.

In Saudi Arabia, the huge royal family exercises the most complicated and complete of dictatorships, and even there civil rights groups are springing up and the first tentative protests have hit the streets. Municipal elections are to be held in that country for the first time. Arab and Muslim dictatorships aren't what they were. The Americans are making their point about democracy faster than anyone could have imagined.

To subscribe to Isralert, send an email to Isralert@aol.com

Posted by Helen Freedman, December 25, 2003.
Mayor Bloomberg had been lifted up in a cherry-picker to light the fifth candle on the huge Chabad Chanukah menorah on Tuesday evening, Dec. 23, at Fifth Avenue and 59th Street in New York City. Below him stood a crowd of onlookers, and in the crowd was a small band of AFSI 'Maccabees',  thirty members of Americans For A Safe Israel, who had responded to the rallying cry to demonstrate there on behalf of Israel.

We were there proudly waving the Israeli flag and carrying signs with the overall message that Israel was the holy land of the Jewish people, and not one inch could be given away. We had pictures of Rabbi Goren, blowing the shofar on the Temple Mount in 1967. Our signs declared that the Temple Mount 'was,' but tragically no longer 'is,' in Jewish hands. We had photos of Israel's 911 murdered victims of Arab terror, which brought some onlookers to tears. Enlarged photos of Israeli soldiers at the Kotel in 1967, after reuniting Jerusalem, carried the question, "Was it all in vain?" Photos of concentration camp survivors arriving by ship to Israel, proudly carrying the Israeli flag, carried the caption, "Transfer Jews? - NEVER AGAIN!" There were reminder signs that people should "Read the Bible and learn that The Land of Israel belongs to the People of Israel." And our ever-present signs, "The World Does Not Need Another Arab Terrorist State," along with "NO PALESTINIAN STATE", carried their clear message.

Mayor Bloomberg caught the message of AFSI and Chanukah in his courageous words. He declared that there can be no negotiations with terrorists, that terror must be defeated, and that the United States and Israel were both involved in the same battle against terror. This clear, unequivocal message gave heart to our AFSI group, and hopefully to others assembled there. AFSI has never wavered in our message that evil is evil and must be eradicated before good can be implemented. It is AFSI's contention that Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and Yasser Arafat are a triangle of evil that must be fought in only one way - a battle to defeat the enemy. The United States has attacked in Afghanistan and Iraq with much success. It is now Israel's turn to destroy the Arab enemy within its own borders.

As the crowd dispersed, still listening to the wonderful Chanukah songs being played over the loudspeaker, our AFSI group disbanded, planning to meet again that evening at the concert for Jonathan Pollard, at the W. 91st. Street Young Israel. That concert turned into a moving and enthusiastic tribute to Jonathan Pollard, a symbol of the persecuted Jew. Assisted by Rabbi Pesach Lerner, a telephone call from Esther Pollard became the highlight of the evening. There was also a cogent statement from Jonathan's attorney, Jacques Semmelman, explaining the involuntary or deliberate ineptitude of Jonathan's original attorney, which accounts for many of the legal difficulties which now impede his release. Shmuel Sackett gave a fiery speech. Wonderful music was provided by Ira Heller, Shimon Kugel, and a host of musicians who had volunteered their time and talents to make the concert a huge success. We pray that such efforts will pay off in the only meaningful way possible - the release of Jonathan Pollard after serving 18 years in prison. Dayenu!!

Helen Freedman is Executive Director of Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI), an activist group, which publishes OUTPOST, an informative internet magazine. AFSI's internet address is http://www.afsi.org

Posted by Ricki Hollander, December 25, 2003.
Measuring the effects of CAMERA's work - to foster sound reporting and to ensure that public discourse about Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict be informed by accurate and unbiased news reports - varies with the nature of the problem. Some results are straightforward and easily measurable, such as the number of corrections of factual errors elicited by CAMERA staff and members and improved reporting on the same topic thereafter. But other changes, including eliminating slanted, opinion-laden language, require close analysis of coverage over time to evaluate.

A recent effort to elicit redress of biased language by Reuters is indicative. Reuters, the European-based news wire service whose influence is magnified through a global reach to hundreds of millions, has presented a significant and ongoing challenge in its use of partisan pro-Palestinian language. Yet even here, there is progress.

*On October 23, CAMERA sent an Alert ("Reuters' Questionable Integrity") asking our team to urge Reuters executives to honor their own editorial guidelines by stopping the use of partisan language in news stories that whitewash the clearly stated goal of Palestinian terror organizations to destroy Israel. This followed a campaign consisting of CAMERA's direct communication with Reuters editors, CAMERA articles informing the general public of the issues, and letters sent to Reuters executives by our letter-writing team. CAMERA explained how the use of such terminology as "uprising for independence" to describe the goals of Palestinian suicide bombers was misleading, in light of the terrorists' avowed purpose. Moreover, such language totally disregarded Israel's Camp David/Taba offer of a state - and the Palestinian Authority's rejection of it. Reuters' repetition of distorted language obscuring Palestinian rejectionism and omitting the actual motives of violence could have only served to mislead the public regarding Palestinian action and aims.

While Reuters initially refused to accept responsibility for its use of editorial language, there has, in fact, been a noticeable decrease in the news agency's use of this language since publication of a CAMERA commentary in National Review Online (appearing on numerous Web sites and distributed by weblogs) and the Alert.

A review of over 500 Reuters articles referring to the Palestinian "uprising" from September 1 until October 20, 2003 (the publication date of NRO's CAMERA commentary), and from November 1, 2003 (after the CAMERA alert was sent out and members had a chance to write to Reuters executives) until December 20, 2003 underscores the change.

In the first period (Sept.1-Oct.20), Reuters articles referring to the Palestinian "uprising" included such phrases as "uprising for an independent state," "uprising for statehood," "uprising against Israeli occupation," and so on, 83% of the time. The word "uprising" alone or "uprising against Israel" was used only 14% of the time (except for articles about Israel's economy which used the word "uprising" alone to denote a time frame).The terminology "uprising in the West Bank and Gaza" - which does not directly attribute motive but implies one by incorrectly limiting Palestinian violence to that location - was used in 3% of the articles.

After the Op-Ed appeared and in the wake of the CAMERA Alert (Nov. 1-Dec. 20), the results were reversed. Reuters articles referring to the Palestinian "uprising" included the tendentious language regarding Palestinian motive only 15% of the time, and instead used the more neutral "uprising against Israel" or simply "uprising" 84% of the time (again not including articles about Israel's economy). The incorrect term "uprising in the West Bank and Gaza" was used in less than 2% of the articles.

Before and After Examples


Typical of past Reuters statements, effectively rationalizing terrorism, were the following:

"Palestinian militants fired at an Israeli car south of Jerusalem, wounding a woman and a nine-year-old girl, rescue workers said on Sunday. It was a rare flare-up of violence since Palestinian militants waging a 34-month-old uprising for statehood declared a three-month truce on June 29." ("Palestinians fire at Israeli car, at least 2 hurt," August 2, 2003) [emphasis added]


"Palestinian militants waging an almost 35-month-old uprising for independence have frequently bombed Israeli buses..." ("Bomb wrecks Jerusalem bus, seven dead," Barry Moody, August 19, 2003)[emphasis added]

and, as documented in the National Review Online article by CAMERA and the CAMERA alert:

"Hamas has spearheaded a 28-month-old Palestinian militant uprising against Israel for a state in Gaza and the West Bank." ("Israeli Tank in Flames After Hitting Bomb in Gaza," Shahdi al-Kashif, February 15, 2003) [emphasis added]


Since the CAMERA alert and article, Reuters has generally refrained from describing the uprising as being "for statehood" or "for independence." And Reuters has more often included context and/or accurately portrayed the goals of Palestinian terrorist groups. For example:

"Israel, battling a three-year-old Palestinian uprising, says roadblocks and other travel restrictions on Palestinians are necessary to stop suicide bombers from reaching its cities. ("Palestinians say Israeli troops kill West Bank man," November 1)

"Palestinian militants have killed hundreds of Israelis in a string of suicide bombings mostly in Israeli cities since a Palestinian uprising began three years ago." ("Palestinian bomber blows up near soldiers in W. Bank," November 3, 2003)

"A violence-stalled U.S.-backed road map for peace calls on the Palestinian Authority to dismantle militant organizations behind suicide bombings that have killed hundreds of Israelis since the start of a Palestinian uprising in September 2000." ("Israel, U.S. resigned to Arafat security powers," Jeffrey Heller, November 11, 2003)

"The graphic accounts of the bombings on Israeli radio stations soured a sunny Sabbath day in Jerusalem, which has grown only too used to militant attacks during a three-year-old Palestinian uprising." ("Israeli Jews feel vulnerable after Istanbul bombings" Maia Ridberg, November 15, 2003)

"Sworn to Israel's destruction, Hamas and Islamic Jihad opposed 1993 interim Middle East peace deals and have spearheaded a Palestinian uprising raging since September 2000. ("Islamists assail unofficial Mideast peace proposal," Nidal al-Mughrabi, November 21)

"Hamas, sworn to the Jewish state's destruction, has led the three-year-old Palestinian uprising. It views with suspicion the U.S.-led 'road map' to peace calling for steps leading to a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, alongside Israel." ("Hamas slams Mideast peace moves, vows more attacks" Nidal al-Mughrabi, December 12, 2003)

"The two-day talks, to be held in Gaza City, will involve Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other factions that have spearheaded a suicide bombing campaign during a three-year-old uprising." ("New Mideast talks broached despite Gaza violence" by Matt Spetalnick, December 15, 2003)

*The infrequent articles that do include inaccurate terminology now often include qualification about the motives of terrorist groups. For example, a December 15 article using the phrase "uprising for independence" included as well the stated aim of the Hamas terrorist organization:

"Hamas, sworn to Israel's destruction, has led a suicide bombing campaign during the three-year-old Palestinian uprising for independence." ("Israel remands Arab-Canadian in alleged bomb plot," Rami Amichai, December 15, 2003)

The net effect of this change is that Reuters' huge global audience is presented with a clearer, more accurate picture of Palestinian terrorist goals and violence.

*Similarly, over two years ago, CAMERA waged a nearly year-long campaign for Reuters to be more accurate in its designation of Israeli settlements. Reuters had routinely labeled settlements as "illegal under international law," as in:

"Jewish settlements, illegal under international law, are built on land Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war and which Palestinians want for an independent state." (June 26, 2001)

"Jewish settlements, illegal under international law, are at the heart of a Palestinian uprising that began last September." (July 1, 2001)

In private communications, alerts, and articles, CAMERA insisted that regardless of differing political views on settlement policy, information about the issue should be factual and balanced, and Reuters eventually replaced their blanket labeling of settlements as illegal with more nuanced language, such as:

"Much of the international community regards as illegal Israeli settlements in areas occupied by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war. Israel disputes this." (July 4, 2001)

The following examples compare Reuters' earlier partisan but deceptive wording, mimicking Palestinian rhetoric with a recent example of its more objective language.


"Palestinians see settlements, illegal under international law, as legitimate targets in their struggle for independence..." (July 20, 2001)


"Settlements on occupied land have been frequent targets during a three-year-old Palestinian uprising. They are considered illegal by most of the international community but Israel disputes this." (December 15, 2003)

This example of joint action by CAMERA staff and letter-writers in eliciting more accurate and fair terminology by Reuters is representative of the positive effects of careful monitoring, persistence and public involvement.

In the season of Hanukkah and Christmas, it is especially welcome good news!

Ricki Hollander is Senior Research Analyst for CAMERA, which monitors the media for anti-Israel bias and factual errors and distortions.

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 25, 2003.
Let's be fair to our dedicated and hard working Defence Minister. How can we expect him to concentrate on keeping track of terrorism when he is so busy planning the destruction of Jewish towns and the deportations of their inhabitants? There are, after all, only so many hours in the day. This news item was on the IMRA (Independent Media Review and Analysis) website (http://www.imra.org.il) today. Less than an hour after a suicide bomber murdered at least 3 in Petach Tikvah by blowing up by a bus stop on Jabotinsky Street as it passes under Route 4, Israel Radio defense correspondent Carmella Menashe reported that Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz has just ordered full closure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, rescinding the various decisions lifting security measures.

For over a month Israel has been lifting security measures in response to pressure from the Bush Administration.

Carmella Menashe noted that in the recent period Israel foiled 24 terrorist attacks.

Posted by David Bedein, December 25, 2003.
This is the first Christmas since the Palestinian Authority adopted an official constitution based on Koranic "Sharia" Law, which means that all Christians who live under the PA are now subject to Islamic Law.

Over the past three years, while attention has focused on Israeli and Palestinian casualties of the current war, at least one hundred Christians who live in areas ruled by the Palestinian Authority have been arrested and imprisoned for holding church services or conducting public Christian practices without authorization.

Some of these Christians were set free when the Israeli army liberated the jails in the Palestinian Authority at the time of the Israeli army incursion into Palestinian cities in April, 2002.

Those freed Christian prisoners from the Palestinian jails now take refuge by hiding throughout Israel, as they surreptitiously work to try to get their families out of Palestinian cities to join them and emigrate to any safe haven they can find in the West

I have met with a few of these Christian Palestinians. One of them, whom I shall call Joseph to protect the confidentiality of his identity, described the ordeal that he has experienced. He and his brother live in hiding while badgering the US consulate for help to try to get US visas for their families, and have done so ever since their liberation by Israel more than 18 months ago. Joseph described to me how his family cannot openly practice Christian holidays in Bethlehem under the watchful eyes of the PLO's Islamic police force. After all, the only place in the West Bank where the PLO army currently operates is in the Bethlehem area. Joseph also described how the US-funded Palestinian public school system has become Islamicized, and how his late nephew was literally tortured to death at age 12 by his schoolmates because he expressed love and respect for his uncle as a practicing Christian.

Last Spring, the Vatican Ambassador to the Holy Land, Archbishop Msgr. Pietro Sambi, known as the Papal Nuncio, warned a US Congressional delegation that the new Palestinian Authority's approved state constitution, funded by US AID, provided no juridical status whatsoever for any religion other than Islam in the emerging Palestinian Arab entity. The Papal Nuncio also expressed his concern to visiting US lawmakers that the PA had adopted "Sharia" Islamic Law, based on the model of the "Sharia" from Koranic edicts as practiced in Iran or in Saudi Arabia.

Article (5) of the official Palestinian State Constitution reads as follows: "Arabic and Islam are the official Palestinian language and religion. Christianity and all other monotheistic religions shall be equally revered and respected".

In other words, As Archbishop Sambi noted, "other" religions such as Christianity, let alone Judaism, are only to be "respected", while being denied any juridical status under the new Palestinian State Constitution.

The status of Islam as the official religion of any future Palestinian Arab entity is also expressed in Article (7) of the official Palestinian State Constitution which states that "The principles of Islamic Sharia are a major source for legislation. Civil and religious matters of the followers of monotheistic religions shall be organized in accordance with their religious teachings and denominations within the framework of law, while preserving the unity and independence of the Palestinian people."

The constitution's translation can be accessed on the home page of the website www.israelbehindthenews.com.

Islamic nations which have adopted the "Sharia" law, have mandated the absolute supremacy of Muslims over non-Muslims as matter of law, more than of simply of attitude.

What worried the Archbishop was that all Christian churches and all Christian schools will be placed under the arbitrary authority of Islamic Fundamental Law, which allows nothing more than "tolerance" of other religions at best.

For the past seven months, the US embassy has been asked to comment on the US-funded Palestinian State Constitution. No response has been forthcoming from anyone in the US government, except for denials that it exists. Yet the author of the PA State Constitution, Mr. Nabil Shaath, affirms the existence of the PA State Constitution, as presented by the Vatican's ambassador.

The PA state constitution's imposition of Sharia Islamic Law is most certainly in effect.

Calls to the US embassy and US consulate to determine whether the US government is looking into the situation of Christians under the rule of the Palestinian National Authority have not been answered.

After all, it was US AID which financed the creation of the PA State Constitution, which meant the imposition of the Islamic Law throughout the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority.

Middle Eastern countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran which have adopted Sharia Islamic Law, have made life quite difficult for Christians. Under Sharia Islamic Law, Christians are considered "dhimmis", second class citizens.

A research study released last Christmas by the Jerusalem Center For Public Affairs entitled "The Beleaguered Christians", notes that in Egypt, "Muslim, but not Christian, schools receive state funding....It is nearly impossible to restore or build new churches....Christians are frequently ostracized or insulted in public, and laws prohibit Muslim conversions to Christianity.".

That same study notes that Saudi Arabia "is one of the most oppressive countries for Christians. There are no churches in the whole country. Foreign workers make up one-third of the population, many of whom are Christians. For their entire stay, which may be years, they are forbidden to display any Christian symbols or Bibles, or even meet together publicly to worship and pray. Some have watched their personal Bibles put through a shredder when they entered the country." In Iran, "the printing of Christian literature is illegal, converts from Islam are liable to be killed, and most evangelical churches must function underground."

Bethlehem is understood by Christians to be the birthplace of Jesus. When Israel retook control of Bethlehem in 1967, the majority of Bethlehem's residents practiced various denominations of the Christian faith. However, with Israel's withdrawal due to the Oslo Accords and after less than ten years of Palestinian Authority rule the Middle East has witnessed a dramatic exodus of Christians from the city. This Christmas, less than 5% in the city of Jesus's birthplace is Christian. The mainstream media have hesitated to report that fact.

President George W. Bush's administration has envisioned a democratic Palestinian entity that is devoid of terror. Instead, officials of US AID have fostered a constitution which envisions creation of the Islamic totalitarian state of Palestine, completely devoid of religious freedom and human rights.

This Christmas, an Islamic army occupies Bethlehem. This Christmas, no Church can operate in Bethlehem without Islamic approval.

And Christians in the Palestinian Authority are not seeing a Merry Christmas as a result.

This is the legacy of what the US AID has facilitated, with or without the knowledge of the White House.

This appeared today on Front Page Magazine (http://www.frontpagemag.com).

Posted by Prof. Paul Eidelberg, December 25, 2003.
On December 23, 2003, Ha'aretz's  Baruch Kra published a summary of a video that links the entire Sharon family to a Greek island tourist resort project. If this summary is accurate - and if it isn't, Ha'aretz can expect a massive libel suit - mass demonstrations should be organized demanding Prime Minister Sharon's immediate resignation. Here are the main points of the incriminating video.

"In October 1999, Omri Sharon said that if the Greek island project succeeded 'there would be enough money to pay us all and get us out of here' (emphasis added).

The Prime Minister's son is heard saying this to security firm owner David Spector on a videotape obtained by Ha'aretz... It contradicts Sharon's statement to police, when they questioned him on this issue, that he was never involved in this so-called Greek island affair. "Omri Sharon's meeting with Spector was several months before Spector was to meet Sharon's other son, Gilad, to help him collect money that real estate contractor David Appel owed him. Police suspect that payments made to Gilad Sharon were intended as indirect bribes to Ariel Sharon - then holding the foreign and national infrastructures portfolio - in exchange for his help to get permission from the Greek government for Appel to develop the Greek island tourist resort. The permission never came.

"In the [video] recording Omri mentions the real estate corruption Appel was allegedly involved in, including the Ginaton lands near Lod. Today it is known that the primary suspect in the Ginaton affair, apart from Appel, is Prime Minister Sharon, who is suspected of exerting pressure to expand Lod to include Ginaton. This would allow Appel, who had bought lands there, to avoid incurring financial losses.

"At a certain stage Omri asks Spector if he knew of "the 'megalomaniac project in Greece.' Omri said the chances of carrying out the project were slim but if it succeeded, 'there would be enough money to pay us all and get us out of here' (emphasis added).

"The police are expected to charge Appel in the Greek island affair soon - probably with bribing Sharon when he was Foreign Minister in Netanyahu's cabinet. Appel is suspected of transferring millions of dollars to Gilad Sharon by means of a fictitious contract. This was in exchange for obtaining various favors from Sharon, including the promotion of the Greek tourism venture and political help to Appel's real estate ventures. Police suspect that Sharon gave this help when he was already Prime Minister."

Here the reader should focus on the key phrase linked to the Greek island tourist project: "if it succeeded, there would be enough money to pay us all - the Sharon family - 'and get us out of here,'" meaning, to leave the sinking ship of Israel.

Apparently, Israel's days are numbered. It cannot possibly overcome the fact that 50% of the babies born in the country are non-Jewish, that the Arabs in Israel are never going to be assimilated and become bourgeois democrats, that they will never give up their nationalist aims, and that their higher birthrate will allow them to gain control of the Knesset and the country given the democratic principle of one adult/one vote.

Therefore, if the above mentioned video is genuine, Prime Minister Sharon is selling Israel down the tubes, preparing for his and his family's getaway like a thieves in the night.

Instead of standing up to foreign pressure, Mr. Sharon pursues a policy of unilateral withdrawal under fire, abandoning Jewish land and tens of thousands of Jews, all the while knowing that the Arabs have no intention of giving Israel peace. If Israelis have resigned themselves to a Palestinian state on their doorstep, it is only because they have been anesthetized by Sharon who obviously lacks the courage to win the war against Arafat and his gang of terrorists. This is defeatism. Instead of defeatism, Yamin Israel offers a detailed plan of action leading to Jewish victory, a plan published by the Ariel Center for Policy Research.

Remember: Even the American people - 70% - oppose a Palestinian state, a fact that bolster's Yamin Israel's Jewish Victory Plan. The public must react vigorously against Sharon's cowardly policy. The video reported by Ha'aretz makes his policy appear as sheer treachery.

Massive demonstrations should be organized calling for his resignation, the formation of a new government, and the adoption of Yamin Israel's Jewish Victory Plan.

Posted by Barry Shaw, December 25, 2003.
This week the media displayed Palestinians being rushed to hospitals after being shot by Israeli soldiers as the troops searched for smuggling tunnels.

Conclusion: Brutal Israelis were killing and injuring innocent Palestinians on the pretext that they were looking for holes in the ground.

The facts: As part of ongoing activities to uncover and prevent weapons smuggling in tunnels along the Egypt-Israel border, I.D.F. forces entered the Rafah area on 23rd December. During these operations soldiers carried out searches in a residential building and discovered a tunnel 800 meters [Ed note: A meter is roughly 1.1 yards] in length and 17 meters deep. I.D.F. forces destroyed this tunnel. During the operation, heavily armed terrorists surrounded the soldiers and opened fire on the troops. This was not a minor skirmish. The Palestinian terrorists fired 15 anti-tank missiles, hurled dozens of grenades, as well as attacking with close weapons fire. In the exchange, several Palestinian terrorists were killed and injured. The IDF captured large amounts of weapons and explosives.

This gives a slightly different complexion on the event, don't you think?

Fact 2: The discovery of yet another weapons smuggling tunnel under a residential building is another example of the cynical use by Palestinian terrorist organizations of using human shields and the protection of their own civilians to carry out their lethal activities.

Another fact: Since the beginning of the current intifada, terrorists have fired 298 anti-tank missiles, 892 mortars, 143 Kassam rockets, detonated 347 explosive devices, hurled 908 grenades, opened fire in over 4000 incidents against innocent Israelis and IDF soldiers.

Yet another fact: IDF forces have discovered over 40 weapons smuggling tunnels along the Israel-Egypt border. The Egyptians have done little (read nothing) to prevent the smuggling of lethal weapons to Palestinian terrorists.

Why isn't the Egyptian Government being held accountable for the resulting instability and violence caused by their tacit cooperation with terrorist activities?

As usual, it suits the liberal media to bury the facts and the truth under the ground of Palestinian suffering. They don't have money for food, we are led to believe, but they have plenty of cash for guns, bullets, explosives, anti-tank missiles, rockets, etc.

Barry Shaw writes the "The View From Here." To subscribe, write netre@matav.net.il

Posted by Radio Rote, December 24, 2003.
If you are an AOL Reader, we would like you to know that AOL has been blocking out most of the RadioRote (RR) Middle East and Israel RR Updates we send to subscribers. AOL cannot claim spam policy, because we do not spam and The Middle East/Israel Update Readers are the only Readers that AOL is making an effort to target and censor. We are at the point of threatening to sue AOL if their Anti-Zionist policy of blocking information about Israel is not lifted. They have not made an effort to re-connect our AOL Readers with RadioRote/MidEast.

Readers who visit the AOL Israel billboard are already familiar with AOL's arbitrary censorship of pro-Zionist messages, and their blind eye towards terrorist trabants [fellow-travelors] who post there and trash Jews. We had a similar experience with Lycos a few years - again, it happened only with the Middle East/Israel Readers list. Lycos blocked all of them and closed the Israel e-mail site completely, leaving the other Lycos RR mail lists untouched.

Once in a while, an AOL e-mail may go through, and perhaps this one shall make it.

If you are on AOL and receive this - or if you has a website or blog - please send this message to other RR Readers on AOL, to alert them that over the past few months, AOL has denied them a service to which they have subscribed.

You can contact us at radiorote@hotmail.com


[update: At this point, AOL wants us to call their Gauleiters and explain why RadioRote should be allowed to contact AOL members who subscribe to our Updates. This will not happen.]

[Addendum by Jack Golbert. Not part of original message: AOL-Time-Warner is largely owned and controlled by members of the House of Saud.]

Posted by Marco Delmar, December 24, 2003.
Our enemies use the POWER of IMAGES. The mainstream media very seldom show us pictures of Jewish victims of terror. We see the clean-up squads and the ambulances. These are pictures of some of the Terror Victims.

The site address is: http://www.geocities.com/thepoweroftruth/VictimsOfArabMuslimPalestinians

Posted by Zionist Organization of America, December 24, 2003.
NEW YORK- The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has strongly protested the remark, as reported by the Israeli media, that U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer said it would be "unacceptable" if Israel's courts rule that the community of Migron is legal.

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said: "Imagine the outcry if there was an issue before an American court, and Israel's ambassador to the U.S. demanded that the U.S. government take action on the issue, regardless of the court's ruling. Ambassador Kurtzer demand that Israel expel and transfer Jewish men, women, and children from their homes in Migron is blatant interference in Israel's internal affairs. It also smacks of a troubling double standard - because he has never called for the expulsion of Palestinian Arabs from their homes in legally-questionable areas."

The ZOA notes numerous previous instances in which Ambassador Kurtzer interfered in Israel's internal affairs:

* In August 2001, Kurtzer publicly criticized Israel for striking at Abu Ali Mustafa, head of the terrorist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), which has murdered 14 U.S. citizens and numerous Israelis. The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations issued a statement on August 28, 2001, saying it was "surprised and dismayed" that Kurtzer "felt compelled to raise the issue with Prime Minister Sharon [while] we did not hear of any similar actions when American citizens were the victims of terror attacks over the past few months."

* Kurtzer demanded that Israel stop spending government funds on Jewish communities in Judea-Samaria and Gaza, and "take care of the disabled and or economic development" instead. (Washington Times, Jan.9, 2002)

* The Israeli (Labor) government's ambassador to Washington, Itamar Rabinovich, has described a "stormy dispute" between Kurtzer and the head of Israel's negotiating team, in which "Kurtzer thought that Israel was not going far enough with the Palestinians. There were sharp exchanges between them [and Kurtzer] rebuked" the Israeli negotiators. (Ha'aretz, April 6, 2001)

* Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir has said: "Kurtzer frequently pressured Israel to make one-sided concessions to the Arabs; he constantly blamed Israel for the absence of Mideast peace, and paid little or no attention to the fact that the Palestinians were carrying out terrorist attacks and openly calling for the destruction of Israel."

* Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "has said more than once that with Jews like Kurtzer, it is impossible to build a healthy relationship between Israel and the United States." (Ha'aretz, April 6, 2001)

* Morris Amitay, former executive director of AIPAC, has said: "Kurtzer has a track record of pushing for Palestinian rights. He will use his Jewishness as a protective cover for his anti-Israel views." (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, March 29, 2001)

* The Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot (August 9, 1991) reported: "Possibly more than any other U.S. State Department official, Kurtzer has been instrumental in promoting the goals of the Palestinians and in raising their afflictions to the center of the U.S. policymakers' agenda. Kurtzer's poor relations with Jerusalem's political bureaus reached a new climax" in 1990, when he authored a speech by James Baker strongly criticizing Israel, which was delivered at an AIPAC conference, "causing a commotion among the conference participants...A Jewish community leader told Kurtzer (shortly afterwards], 'Your children will bear the consequences of the Israeli policy you are encouraging.'"

This article, "Ambassador Dan Kurtzer Demands Transfer of Jews" by Emanuel A. Winston, Middle East commentator and analyst, provides background.

The attached news release detailing Ambassador Kurtzer's interference in Israel's governmental affairs is not unusual. But, perhaps we had better take a deeper look at Kurtzer and his friends - or rather his bosses.

Recall that Kurtzer, along with Dennis Ross, Aaron MIller and later Martin Indyk were hand-picked mostly for James Baker's State Department team to penetrate Israel. Their record is quite clear as representing Arab Palestinians and other Arab country's interests, while undercutting Israel at every opportunity.

The question is, Are they still working for James Baker III directly or indirectly? Take an even harder look at James Baker's Rice University Institute for special arrangements for the State Department.

Then there is Edward Djerijian who seems to be a part of a tight inner circle of 'almost' pas agents of the Arabist State Department.

Kurtzer's telling Israel to ignore her own laws and evacuate the village of Migron is indicative of a carefully constructed choke chain, with one of its links suddenly broken. It would appear that the Jewish group of Ross, Miller, Kurtzer and Indyk is still in business with Baker, Djerian and the ever-present State Department.

Then look a little deeper and you may see Herbert Walker Bush, Dick Cheney and the oil boys with the same interests in the Middle East and eliminating Israel as an irritant to their Arab friends or as its partners.

It is not over until the fat man gives in.

The Zionist Organization of America, founded in 1897, is the oldest pro-Israel organization in the United States. The ZOA works to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations, educates the American public and Congress about the dangers that Israel faces, and combats anti-Israel bias in the media and on college campuses.

Posted by Tsesvan Vulf, December 24, 2003.
During the period of 1990-2003, a great number of new immigrants, the former residents of the Soviet Union, arrived in Israel. Many of them (according to statistical data, more than one million) are engineers and scientists who so far have not been able to realize completely their creative potential. After terrorism, unemployment and underemployment are the second biggest problem in Israel.

A new initiatives group consisting of engineers and scientists started up in 1997 in the northern Israeli cities and Haifa. The Engineering Association called MATAM (Engineers - Repatriates - For The New Technology) was created on the base of this group. This association was registered on December 1, 1998: No #58-0332278 in the List Of Israeli Associations.

The aim of the Association is the promotion of engineering and technological projects, leading to the creative and productive employment of engineers and scientists. Many engineers and scientists have participated.

We conducted a course in technical Hebrew. Projects developed by our members - Dr. Efim Sultanovich, design engineer Iliya Tamarkin and Dr. Benzion Telyaner and others - have been shown at different exhibitions. We also support the development of advanced technologies, particularly joint projects in medicine and technology. These include a project on the use of lasers in medicine by Dr. U. Lerner, Dr. V. Gluzman and Dr. L. Dvorkin. Another project, by Dr. D. Maister on the programming and development of new algorithms, was recognized at numerous international exhibitions in Turkey, Norway and Canada.

Unfortunately, we lack the financial resources for MATAM to continue its work much longer. At present MATAM is busy organizing a House of Technology and Science in Kiriyat-Yam. The head of the city council, Mr. Sh. Siso, is interested in the realization of this project and is ready to provide us the necessary space. But to conduct this project, we need $164,000 for two years. Of the $82,000 per year, $42,000 is for salary for three employees and $40,000 is for computers, equipment and office expenses.

We have highly qualified scientists and engineers. During these two years, we will conduct a number of design projects - developing specifications and prototypes for actual production.

We expect that in two years a House of Technology and Sciences will be capable of supporting itself financially, with no outside help. But right now, we need starter funds. We need your financial help. Our bank account address is:
Bank Leumi (# 10), "Swift code" - LUMI IL IT,
Branch # 899, Account # 2430681

Mr. Vulf is the Manager of the MATAM Association. Their address is Shvil A-Gefen Str. 13/8 Kiriat-Mozkin 26398. Tel: 972 52 417948. Email: amuta_matam@hotmail.com.

Posted by Resa LaRu Kirkland, December 24, 2003.
I stand with Israel. I said it, I mean it and I don't care who knows it.

My reason is the best one of all - because not only is it right, but because Israel is right, and Islam - and for that matter, anyone who lines up against Israel - is so wickedly wrong.

Look at some harsh facts here. First, the land of Israel has been the target of Arab nations since its recent re-inception in 1948 - yes, in spite of People Magazine's claims this past year, it did exist before the 20th century - and Jews in general worldwide since the 1920s. Not only does Islam and the entire Arab world despise with a red-hot hatred the nation and people of Israel, they go beyond that by refusing to recognize Israel's right to exist!  That is not only in outright defiance of logic and reason, it is way in the outfield of any token of sanity. Hating them is one thing ... refusing to recognize the first inalienable right - the right to life - is sheer madness. Standing with Israel and against Islam, therefore, becomes a matter of sanity vs. insanity.

By this first reason, Islam is meshuga - crazy.

Second, Islam's religion specifically states that in order to be a member in good standing, in order to please Allah, they must kill not just Jews, but all Israel, and anyone who supports Israel. For those of you who have forgotten, Israel encompassed 12 brothers, of which Judah was only one. There are 11 other brothers out there, and given the massive branches that the House of Israel has, I am willing to bet that there isn't a modern-day people outside of the Arab world who doesn't have lineage back to the House of Israel somewhere within their genealogy. That means that eventually, Islam's ire could - and given their history, will - be turned against you and me. Standing with Israel and against Islam, therefore, is a matter of self-preservation.

By this second reason, Islam is our oyev - enemy - a fact they have proven in attacks against America at home and abroad.

Third, it is an absolute impossibility to separate Judaism from Christianity. I know many Christians who have tried, but they can never get past a certain point ... the birth of Jesus Christ. There never would have been Christianity without Judaism first, because the man at the center of Christianity was born through Judah's line and raised in the Jewish religion. Judaism is the foundation of Christian belief, and if you remove the foundation, the rest cannot stand.

My Jewish friends have asked me why I, as a Christian, am so fervent in my devotion to Judaism and Israel. It is because we really aren't that different in what we believe. When you get past the different prayers, chants and religious rhetoric, the foundation of both is exactly analogous: Both religions believe that the Son of God - the Messiah - will be born through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, through Jacob's son Judah, and that He will come to save us. Christians believe He has already been born and is coming for the second time; Jews believe He has yet to be born. The only difference in this basic cornerstone of both religious beliefs is the timing.

By this third reason, standing with Israel is a matter of emunah - faith, and achvah - brotherhood.

My fourth reason became even clearer in recent times. Two years ago, I met a dear woman I have grown to love named Andy, and it is she who inspired this article. Andy is Jewish, and her son Michael has chosen to go to Israel and fight for the Israeli Defense Force. How is it that a boy raised in North America in American neighborhoods playing Nintendo chose to fight for Israel?

Some would say it is because he is a Jew. I say it is because Michael - taught by a good mother - knew that Israel was not the aggressor, not the evil one here. Michael - taught by a wise mother - has a soul that recognizes justice. Michael chose a life dedicated to the fight for right. Way to go, Andy.

By this fourth reason, fighting for Israel is mutsdak - justified, by a mother's torot - teachings, and a son's unselfish brayrah - choice.

Then there is the plethora of reasons such as the constant attacks by Palestinians/Islam against the civilians of Israel - not the IDF or military targets, but everyday people going to work, school, or to play - the regular promises to stop said perpetrators, only to stall for time and attack again, and their illogical justifications of igniting the world's anger against Jews when Israel has the nerve to defend itself. Israel has shown remarkable restraint despite being surrounded and vastly out-numbered by a backward and vicious people hell-bent on their annihilation.

Six months ago, I bought a small, sterling silver Star of David to wear around my neck. You see, not only do I fully support Israel because they are right, but because I, too, come through that mighty House. If you'll travel back in time for a moment to Sunday School, it should ring a bell in your mind that Judah had a little brother named Joseph. You remember him ... kind of a dreamer, dressed colorfully, held a high political office (eventually) in Egypt, and saved his family from a devastating famine? I come through his line, through his son Ephraim. So if Islam succeeds in destroying Judah, what will stop them from next targeting Joseph? Or Levi? Or Gad? Or Dan? Or the tribe from which you descended?

The truth of this is that Israel has been repeatedly attacked and murdered by one evil enemy after another - between communism and Islam, they should have died out long ago. But they didn't. They have not only survived, they have flourished. Why? How is this possible when so many have plotted and sought their demise? They are so much smaller than those who want them wiped off the face of the earth ... what has kept them so resilient?

That one is easy: God. You see, unlike Jimmy Carter, I do believe that God, being on the side of Israel, is more than enough reason to support them. God has made it abundantly clear that He is madly in love with the line of Judah, and terrifyingly clear what will happen to anyone - including us - who raises their hand against His chosen. Face it, Hamas ... God has chosen, and it ain't you.

But even without God, here are the facts: It is Muslims who have repeatedly broken the cease fire. It is Muslims who have repeatedly attacked - unprovoked, no less - the peaceful Israel night. It is Muslims who have made it abundantly clear that they will only be stilled when Israel is no more. It is Islam, people, not Israel.

Israel has consistently gone above and beyond; Islam has proven that they will sink to the lowest depths. The writing is on the wall as to who is most definitely in the right here. I can read and comprehend - it is plain to see and time to choose sides. As for me and my house, we stand with Israel - not because we fear God, but because we love Him, because He loves Israel and because Israel is in the right.

So given the recent - and fully deserved - response by Israel to that evil bombing by Hamas, I have these words: Ani itach Yisra'el - I am with you, Israel.

And to the wretched Palestinians who continue to break the cease fire, I also have some words: Lech La'azazel - Go to hell.

Keep the faith, bros, and in all things courage.

Resa LaRu Kirkland is an avid military historian, with her main focus being on the Korean War and its forgotten warriors. She has been given many names by her beloved Korean War Vets, her favorites being "The Pitbull," "Rambo Brockovich," "Hellraiser," "Tiger" and "D-Day." This letter appeared originally on World Net Daily (http://www.wnd.com), August, 29, 2003.

TERROR-DEE AND TERROR-DUM: Dealing With Arab Terror
Posted by Ruth Matar, December 24, 2003.
Dear Friends,

It grieves me to watch Fox TV News today with the repeated warnings from Homeland Security, and the justified fear that there might be another 9/11 type attack. As an American, I fear as much for the safety of my brother's family in New York and New Jersey, and the safety of my sister's family, in Maryland, Illinois and Florida, as I fear for the safety of my children and grandchildren, who live in Israel.

What is not to be understood is: How can the U.S. hope to deter terrorism when it itself is actively involved in the rapid establishment of a terrorist State? When the U.S. itself is undermining its own strategic posture by genuflecting to the Palestinian terrorist agenda?

When the Bush Government speaks about the need for reform of the Palestinian Authority, no mention is ever made of the simple fact that every Palestinian political party is a terrorist organization. That every faction represented in the PA's legislature is an armed group, and that every one of the PA's "Security Forces" is involved in terrorist attacks against Israel.

Not withstanding, hundreds of millions of Dollars in annual U.S. aid for the PA and President George W. Bush's support for a Palestinian state, the PA's message remains staunchly anti-U.S. A poll by Palestinian Media Watch indicates that Palestinian hatred of the U.S. is deep and ingrained. The poll found that 42% of Palestinians support attacks on American forces in Iraq; 74% said they had supported Saddam Hussein in the war; and only 37% felt the World Trade Center bombers were "terrorists".

After Saddam's capture by the U.S., the PA newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Yadida wrote the following on December 18: "When the tragic fall of Baghdad took place and it became the second Arab capital to fall under occupation after Jerusalem, the traitors considered it an official holiday. This is your day, traitors. Dance to the tune of Bush's drums and time your prayers on Sharon's trumpets. But remember, that the Arab masses, especially in great Iraq, may have their backs to the wall, but they know that you are the enemy."

In Kahn Yunis (Gaza) Palestinians demonstrated in support of Saddam after his capture, shooting in the air from M-16 rifles (gift from Shimon Peres) and burning American and Israeli flags. They also burned George W. Bush in effigy.

President Bush and his State Department, keep insisting that all Jewish (not Arab) settlement activity in the Holy Land must stop. In fact, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer, (who frequently issues orders to Israel as if he were the High Commissioner rather than the U.S. Ambassador) has issued a dictate to Israeli courts: do not to let the fact that Migron has submitted documents proving that it is a legal community on Jewish owned Land, prevent its uprooting! Why is U.S. Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer focusing on Migron? It seems that he had previously instructed Israel Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz that Migron has to be the first Jewish "settlement" to be evacuated, so as to make possible a contiguous Palestinian State.

It is difficult to understand President Bush's insistence on creating a Palestinian terrorist state in the Holy Land and thereby depriving the Jewish People of their rightful heritage.

But, as it has often been said, in politics there are no friends, only interests. And unfortunately, the United States perceives its interests to be to placate Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Muslim world.

But it is impossible to understand what has happened to Ariel Sharon, our erstwhile hero. He was elected by an overwhelming majority, because he promised security. But more civilians had been killed on his watch, than in all the years of Israel's statehood.

He has undergone a complete metamorphosis. First he agreed to the "Road Map", which is even worse than the Oslo Accords. It is important to remember that the "Road Map" was NEVER approved by the Israeli Knesset. Sharon said that it was not a formal agreement, just a "direction" or a "frame", and hence there was no need to bring it to the Knesset for approval. Very clever strategy on Sharon's part. And now, his pretence is that the Israeli People have already agreed to the "Road Map"!

He promised that Israel would not become another Czechoslovakia, and then he voluntarily agrees in his Herzliya speech in December 18 to "Unilateral Disengagement" and "Relocation" of tens of thousands of his countrymen.

Ariel Sharon, why not be honest with yourself and the Israeli People? Why do you hide behind phrases that attempt to mislead the public instead of using words that we all know and understand? "Unilateral Disengagement" really means "Retreat" (and the first step of defeat is retreat) and "Relocation" of Jews means TRANSFER of Jews.

Let Sharon's words written in the not too distant past speak for themselves. On September 29, 1995, an Op-Ed article by Ariel Sharon was published in the Jerusalem Post. The following is a reprint of this article in its entirety.

Jerusalem Post, September 29, 1995. pg. 07

The foreign minister helps the Palestinians rewrite history. The writer, a Likud MK, is a former defense minister.

I felt pain after the agreement was signed this week [Oslo 2]; pain caused not merely by the government's mistaken, irresponsible decisions, but chiefly by its ministers' devilish joy at the "defeat" of their foes - the settlers. A very premature joy, I believe.

Sometimes, you have no choice but to retreat; sometimes you hold on to something not yours for bargaining purposes. But to give up something that's entirely yours with cries of joy - the joy of retreat - is a sick phenomenon.

The devil's advocates like to make comparisons: distorting history, they have made the late Menachem Begin their symbol.

At Camp David, they contend, president Carter imprisoned Israel's premier and his advisers with Egypt's president and his aides for 13 days until they reached agreement. But at Camp David, despite American pressure, the hours of sleep were normal, and Begin conducted consultations with his government every day.

At Taba, on the other hand, Israel chose this mode of negotiations of its own free will, without outside pressure. And it surrendered, too, of its own free will.

Today, through cooperation with the US, Israel can obtain almost anything it wants. But, instead of promoting the country's interests, the government is busy helping Arafat, despite his violation of almost every clause of the Oslo agreement; it works for Jordan's benefit; and it aids President Mubarak, even though he now leads the anti-Israel Arab bloc.

The government hasn't demanded the release of Jonathan Pollard, nor has it pressed for the return of MIAs about whom Arafat has information. It refrains from demanding, in return for releasing Palestinian terrorists, the extradition of murderers who now roam free in the PA-ruled areas, or take short vacations in prison.

Terrorists, murderers with blood on their hands, will soon be freed. That is the height of abomination.

IN A campaign to mislead the public, Arafat's Israeli advocates claim there is no other way. They don't want a binational state, they don't want to rule over another people, they say.

What do they really mean? Are they planning a divided Jerusalem? After all, about 150,000 Arabs live in the city. Do they intend to "transfer" 850,000 Israeli Arabs?

We have never proposed granting Israeli citizenship to the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria: all have Jordanian passports. And there are other peaceful, acceptable solutions to the threat of binationalism.

The prime minister continues to talk about the Jordan River as Israel's security border, and mentions the Jordan Rift. He should know what any divisional commander knows: To wage a defensive battle there, forces must be deployed to a depth of at least 40-50 km. from the Arava. For this, a permanent foothold is needed on the mountain ridge, and west of it.

Even the Taba signing ceremony was shameful. Arafat, proud of his language, spoke in Arabic. Our foreign minister, a prisoner of inherent servility, spoke English.

Nor can one ignore the minister's bon mot: "Two peoples born in the same cradle." As though it were at all possible to compare the two histories!

The Jewish people settled in Eretz Yisrael 2,500 years before the Moslems ever reached it. That 2,000 years later the Moslems adopted our forefather Abraham as one of their prophets doesn't grant them preferred status here. Nor does the Koran, written a millennium after the Bible, and which never mentions Jerusalem, give them privileges in this country. Since when must an Israeli minister help the Palestinians rewrite history?

This is a Jewish state in which Arabs can live in dignity if they abide by the law. They can, of course, practice religious ritual according to their faith. We shall never emulate Arafat's "Minister of Religious Affairs" Hassan Tahboub, who recently said, "Jews will not be able to pray on the Temple Mount, the Machpela Cave, or Rachel's Tomb, once these shrines come under Palestinian control."

Hebron must remain in our hands: not because of the 400 Jews who live near the cave, but because of the 4,000 years of Jewish history; because of the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, that glorious monument whose like no other city can boast; because of David's kingdom in Hebron.

Neither the Israel of the left nor that of the National Camp has the right to concede Hebron, Rachel's Tomb, Shilo, Beit El and Joseph's Tomb. Certainly no government has the right to give up the Temple Mount.

Governments come and go, and so do generations: it is our great privilege to hold these sacred possessions in trust for future generations. We have no right to transfer them to alien hands.

A note on the government's recent chastisement of Diaspora Jews: "You live abroad. Don't intervene in Israel's affairs."

Strange. During Likud administrations, opposition leaders (today's cabinet ministers) made every effort to solicit foreign intervention against the government, including urging the US to reduce assistance to Israel.

For decades now, I have repeatedly declared that Israel is not just an Israeli project, but the responsibility of all the world's Jews. What happens to Israel will affect the situation, even the destiny, of Jews everywhere. It is not only their right but their duty to make their voices heard.

It is so very sad to see how Sharon has changed. I do very much agree with the last paragraph in his article, with one important addition: Israel is not just an Israeli project, but the responsibility of not only all of the world's Jews, but Bible believing Jews and Christians everywhere.

It is not only their right but their duty to make their voices heard, because the current struggle is for the very survival of the Judeo-Christian Western Civilization against radical Islam.

U.S. President George W. Bush may want to create a Palestinian State on covenant land for reasons of what he wrongly conceives as beneficial to the United States.

Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon now believes in "Unilateral Disengagement", in effect retreat, because he has lost faith in the G-d given right of the Jews to the Land of Israel, or because he is afraid of the United States, and/or because he has just lost his nerve altogether. Both President Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon are not able to see the larger picture. And hence, both are going against the words of G-d as spelled out in the Judeo-Christian Bible.

As it is written in Proverbs 19:21: "Many are the plans in man's heart, but the counsel of Hashem will prevail."

Dear Friends: What can we do? It would be most effective if you forwarded this message to your friends, acquaintances, President George W. Bush president@whitehouse.gov, and Vice President Cheney vice.president@whitehouse.gov. To get the email addresses of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and your Senators and Congressman, call the Capitol Hill Switchboard at (202)456-6212 or (202)224-3121. They will even tell you who the Congressman of your District is, or transfer you to his office.

In addition, I hope that you will forward this Letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at pm_eng@pmo.gov.il. He needs thousands of reminders from you of what he told the world in 1995 about the Rabin Government's "mistaken irresponsible decisions" to make agreements of retreat with the enemy.

With Blessings and Love for Israel

Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green) is an activist group of women, based in Jerusalem (http://www.womeningreen.org). You can contribute to them by mail by writing to POB 7352, Jerusalem 91072, Israel. Or contribute online at https://host5.apollohosting.com/womeningreen/donation.html

Posted by Rabbi Dr. Natan T. Lopes Cardozo, December 24, 2003.
LIBERATED YERUSHALIYIM, D.C. (David's Capital), FIFTH DAY OF CHANUKAH, Yom Revi'i (Fourth Day - "Wednesday"), 29 Kislev, 5764, (Gregorian Date: December 24, 2003) (Hijri Date: 30 Shawal, 1424), Root & Branch [mailto:rb@rb.org.il] [www.rb.org.il]:

And the Lord said: For as much as this people draw near,
And with their mouth and with their lips do honor Me,
But have removed their heart far from Me
And their fear of Me is commandment of men learned by rote.

[Yeshayahu/Isaiah 29:13]

Isaiah protests against a common failure in prayer. Prayer within the Jewish Tradition carries a paradoxical demand. There is the need to carefully follow the words of the prayer book and never to deviate from them while praying with great devotion. The sages, with their understanding of the human soul, were able to create words of prayer which could touch each human being in different ways and according to diverse dimensions of human nature. After the sages determined which combination of words were befitting this need, they instituted the prayer book.

Still this was not without danger. Repetition of words can easily become learned by rote. The meaning and inspirational aspects of the words can get totally lost and turn into a mechanical performance. Scholars have called this "The curse of fluency."

To deal with this problem the sages emphasized the great need for kavana, man's spiritual intent and concentration while praying in which one tries to touch the music of the prayer words. Without such an endeavor, much of prayer can become almost meaningless.

Prayer with kavana has never been easy, even for the most pious. We all sometimes pray by rote. Prayer by rote easily leads to other serious problems. Worshippers may be so haughtily satisfied with ourselves, that we forget in front of Whom we stand while praying. We no longer speak or listen to God, but listen to ourselves. Our prayer becomes a performance in which we ourselves become the audience.

At other times it may lead to a situation in which we do not even hear our self since our mind is somewhere else altogether. In that case there is no audience at all and the prayers end up in Utopia ("no place"). Not uncommon is the situation where a spirit of competition pollutes our prayers and we try to outdo our neighbor. This may result in a kind of game in which the real objective is to see who can pray more loudly or even longer (or shorter). We no more think of God, but of putting on a show for our neighbors. We may call this a kind of godless prayer.

Besides the need for worshippers to use all techniques available to us to overcome and fight this problem (careful study of the prayers, meditation, singing,) it is also the task of the chazan (prayer leader) to save his congregation from these pitfalls. His task is to provide a living commentary to the prayer book while leading them in prayers. The intonation of his voice, his emotional connection with the prayer book and his body language, even facial expression, should give new meaning to the prayers and carry his congregation into a different mind and heart setting. He must try to create a revolution in the souls of all of his fellow Jews.

Not only is prayer often reduced to this "curse of fluency", but also the reading of the Torah in the synagogue. Some "ba'ale kore" (those who read the Torah in front of the congregation) have become such experts and fluent readers, that they run through the Torah text with such an ease, amazing pace and lack of the slightest mistakes, that one gets the impression they are skating over smooth ice while their minds are altogether in a different world. Often their performance is made without the slightest show of emotion or connection with the actual text and one sometimes wonders when the "ba'al kore" will actually fall asleep right on top of the Torah scroll, since he seems to be totally bored.

A Torah text must be read and rendered as a poem, with all the intonations and vibrations which are indicated in the traditional "trop" (the musical setting as stated by Tradition). The ba'al kore, just like the chazan, has to totally throw himself into the text and experience it as if he had never read it before. He must feel involved, accompany Josef in the prison of Pharaoh and travel with the Israelites when they find themselves in the desert on their way to Sinai. The Torah text must "hit" him and he should walk away from it in a state of exaltation, overwhelmed by its message and implication. Only then has he actually read it as it was meant to be read.

It is the task of every chazan and ba'al kore to educate themselves and to discover ways in which they can inspire themselves and the congregation so as not to get trapped into this "curse of fluency". Prayer or Torah reading should be an experience never to be forgotten.

Shavua Tov (Have a Good Week) and Chanukah Sameach (Happy Chanukah) from Yerushaliyim,

Posted by Michelle Stirling-Anosh, December 24, 2003.
Why does it seem impossible to make peace in the Middle East?

Westerners naively think that all people in the world want to live in a democracy and enjoy the rights and freedoms they have. Perhaps all PEOPLE of the world do want this; but certainly few dictators do.

No matter what they say publicly, most of the Arab leaders of the Middle East countries don't want a Palestinian democracy, because that might give their own people funny ideas. And that would probably lead to the deposing of the current leader, whoever he may be.

So the Palestinians have become a convenient pawn for these nations and any anti-Israeli/anti-American movement within them

The first and biggest culprit in the game is Yasser Arafat. Arafat is not even a Palestinian. He was born in Egypt. And while he may be emblematic of the 'terrorist who is the ultimate freedom fighter', look at the freedom he has won for himself and his adopted people now.

Some freedom. He is now in a form of house arrest in Mukata - his 'empire' is in ruins around him. His people are now living from closure to closure and every terrorist attack by a Palestinian group which is either directly funded or given a free hand by Arafat's regime brings more and more sorrow to those innocent Palestinians who once lived a relatively free life, earning a decent living in Israel at a higher standard of living than their counterparts in the surrounding Middle East states.

But by initiating the intifada, Arafat is still 'king'. How long do you think he would last if his people had a true free and democratic vote, and they were not threatened by the internal 'mafia' of the various terrorist groups?

Yasser Arafat is a kind of "American dream" in the Middle East. In the Middle East, power is typically only conferred by power - either tyrannical rule - or through monarchial lineage.

Yet Yasser Arafat, this non-Palestinian 'refugee', non-royalty, former peasant from Egypt once held the record for the most number of visits to the White House! He got the red carpet treatment in every nation of the world! He did what was formerly impossible in the Middle East. He overcame his class in this highly structured society. And he, like his ruling Arab counterparts, has no desire to see that power end through the creation of a democracy.

For all the public talk about the "Arab brotherhood", we see little brotherly action in the Middle Eastern States. Following the displacement of some say a few hundred thousand to a half-million Arab refugees after the Arab-initiated war of 1948 against the nascent State of Israel, the "Arab brothers" of the region were content to force the refugees to suffer in camps. Now more than 50 years later, they are still there, there are many more, and since the mid-1960's they have called themselves Palestinians.

By contrast, after World War II, some 14 million refugees were settled world-wide within 5 years. When Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien visited the Middle East region a couple of years ago he generously offered to resettle 15,000 Palestinians in the Great White North- and was soundly rapped for his insolence! The PA want their people to continue to suffer. And for all the talk of the Arab brotherhood, the people known as the Palestinian refugees today simply 'are not one of us', as far as other Arabs are concerned.

For more than a decade, the West and other global states such as Japan have been actively financing the push for 'real peace' in the Middle East. To this end, Yasser Arafat has received more than 900 Million dollars from the European community alone. If one divides that sum between the highest estimated figure of Palestinians in the world (some say 6 or 7 million) that still means each and every Palestinian could have won the Lotto a thousand times.

But that did not happen. The Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza live in poverty - they now even have little or no chance of working in Israel where once 100,000 of them worked.

Yet Yasser Arafat and his high-ranking colleagues still have fancy cars and houses and Swiss bank accounts. And they are still getting money from you well-meaning Western tax-payers.

For Gulf leaders who hate Israel and the threatening democracy and industrial success that it represents, Yasser Arafat is a great gift from the West. Here is a man who will gladly do their dirty work for them, and they don't even have to ask him to do it. He will ensure there will never be a democratic Palestinian state, so people like Hosni Mubarak and (until the recent Gulf War) Saddam Hussein could sleep at night, knowing their own sons will 'inherit' their rule.

Despite Egypt's apparent middle road, Mubarak doesn't want a real democracy in Egypt. He has some 68 million, mostly uneducated people living on the poverty line. His country has limited industry to support them and many in the outlying regions live an agricultural subsistence lifestyle as they did thousands of years ago. Mubarak needs American money, so he is willing to play along with the West - to a point. But not to establishing a true democracy.

Democracy would mean that women would have the right to vote - the right of choice. They might cause the same kind of revolution Canadian women caused when Nellie McClung and her colleagues won the right to vote. And now look at Canada - the country is wealthy, has one of the highest standards of living in the world, one of the highest levels of health and education...and yes, it is in large part due to the liberation and participation of women. In Saudi Arabia, women don't even have the right to drive a car.

To a demigod, democracy is a threat.

Saddam Hussein of Iraq and his cohorts certainly don't want real democracy. That's why there are so many terrorist attacks happening there against the Americans. The Americans are close to success - democracy is at hand. But for regional leaders, this is too much.

Democracy is so - well - confining for a tyrannical leader. In a democracy they won't let you gas to death those citizens who don't like your tyrannical rule. Democracy makes the leader accountable. In a democracy you have to answer for the brutal treatment given to suspected 'collaborators'; you have to explain why you build posh palaces while your people live in poverty - and you can't just cover up mass graves of 300,000 people. Democracies are so...annoying. No wonder Saddam Hussein was happy to send cheques for $10,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. No one helped his regional cause more!

Let's look at Syria. Bashar Assad, educated in England. Surely he shares Western values. Not really. He is the heir to the Allouwite 'throne' in Syria. The Allouwites are a minority who hold tenuous power over the rest of the Syrians. The country's main income comes from drug dealing through Lebanon where his army sits on top of that puppet government. Why would Bashar Assad want democracy? He would be voted out in a minute and once on the street he would suffer a violent end in vengeance for his father's and uncle's crimes against humanity. Why would he ever want to absorb Palestinian refugees? They are not 'his people' and their numbers, no matter how small, work against him.

And we know how the Assad family handles revolutionary voices. They simply level the town -as they did in the village of Hama - killing some 20,000 people overnight.

How about King Abdullah of Jordan? Of all the regional leaders, he would probably want some kind of democracy for the Palestinians, but only for those in the West Bank and Gaza. Some 80% of his own population is Palestinian; his own wife is a Palestinian. Yet he is a minority tribal leader - the head of the Hashemite kingdom. As for true democracy in Jordan? Very risky with the turbulent and violent percentage of Palestinians seeking revenge for 50 years of servitude.

The Palestinians in Jordan tried to revolt once. Abdullah's father, King Hussein, ensured that the resident Palestinians wouldn't try to revolt again. He undertook his "Black September" action in 1970 (a series of battles which took longer than that month) - wiping out a few thousand Palestinian agitators and routing the terrorist organizations. Of course in a real democracy, he would never have been able to do such a thing.

Saudi Arabia? Well, as one of the last and largest feudal monarchies in the world, which sits on probably the greatest wealth, the ruling class has no desire for change. The Palestinians are just another type of serf and they are certainly not deserving of their own state - especially not a democratic one. What message would that send to Saudi serfs? No, much easier and better to verbally support the Palestinian Authority to ensure that the conflict with Israel will continue; then those serfs will not rise above their station in life and they will not inspire anyone else in the region. Ironically for them the situation is about to boomerang as terrorist groups like Al-Quaida seek to capitalize on the dissatisfactions of the non-ruling Saudi serfs - attempting to destroy a corrupt monarchy and replace it with an extremist tyranny...but no democracy.

The list goes on, but in most instances, the circumstances are the same.

The Palestinians are excellent media pawns too. The issue gets lots of global airtime. Jerusalem is 'home' to hundreds, sometimes thousands, of foreign journalists. Since Israel is a democracy, the TV, radio and press teams have a great deal of freedom to report on anything they see, hear or suspect. The Palestinian pawns perform for the cameras without ever questioning why so much airtime isn't helping them get freedom and democracy. The little Palestinian boys throwing rocks at the Israeli soldiers believe they are fighting for their freedom, when in fact they are ensuring the opposite.

And to top it off the Palestinian Authority has created an army of Palestinian suicide bombers. The cheapest military machine in the world. The suicide/homicide 'soldier' is trained/brainwashed within weeks, no expensive equipment required, and there is no expensive maintenance or rescue of the 'soldier' required - the blast is usually completely destructive. The outcome is lots of free TV coverage worldwide, lots of psychological impact on the enemy - and most of all, each bomber ensures that the enemy is also less and less inclined to want a democratic state of suicide bombers next door.

The tyrannical rulers of the region (especially Yasser Arafat) couldn't ask for a better deal. People you don't like or care about are willing to kill themselves in great number, for a simple fantasy that a few charming "Jonestown-like" leaders can drill into their heads... and they are fighting your enemy for you, against their own interests! It's perfect!

And is Israel the real enemy?

No. The "enemy" is democracy. Israel's existence as a democratic state in the region has upset the balance by illustrating that democracy leads to change, growth, productivity and creativity. Democracy empowers the people.

But of course if you are a tyrant, you don't want powerful people. You only want pawns. And well-intentioned, naive foreigners are both funding the on-going oppression of all of the region's people - none of whom have democratic rights, while with their anti-war/anti-America/anti-Israel messages (i.e. instead of 'anti-Saddam' or 'anti-Arafat' messages) are ensuring that such tyrannies and dictatorships remain in power.

Tragically in all this, the Palestinian people are the pawns, as are those in the West who naively play along with this Machiavellian game. Obviously there are a certain number of Palestinians who are not suicide bombers and who may not love Israel, but they do want to have a real life. These are the Palestinian 'collaborators' - brave people who are really willing to risk their life for an ideal - peace, work, freedom - all for the price of telling Israel where the real terrorists are on a certain day or at a certain time. Many pay for it with their lives - and these are the unsung heroes that no Western governments, human rights agencies or left wing civil libertarians acknowledge or help. These Palestinians see the farcical reality of the situation and the hopelessness. Without their help in destroying the terrorist infrastructure, there will never be a Palestinian state and their children will have no future. They do not want to be martyrs - but more than that, they do not want their children and their nation to be hooked by the world's largest suicide cult into being martyred by Arafat, in order to stop democracy's spread in the Middle East.

Lately you've heard that Arafat is diverting $100,000 per month to his wife in France....that he gives $50,000 a month to terrorist organizations. Are you surprised? While the West still naively struggles with its own disbelief that this Nobel Peace Prize winner is not acting according to their plan, Arafat and his tyrannical cronies laugh all the way to the bank as they walk down the red carpet to another international conference on making peace in the Middle East.

"It's the occupation," they say. "It's the settlements. It's the assassinations."

No it's not. It's the way they want it to be, forever.

Read my lips.

Arafat does not want a democratic Palestinian state. For what? He is not a Palestinian. And it would ruin his rags to riches success story - the only one of its kind in the Middle East.

This first appeared on the Arutz-7 website (http://www.IsraelNN.com).

Posted by Michael Freund, December 24, 2003.
It was a bitterly cold December day in London, the kind of day when even the thought of venturing out with the kids seems almost as daunting as the prospect of spending the day with them locked up inside a hotel room. So after some generous bundling of clothes, we headed off to what seemed to be the perfect family outing - an afternoon at Madame Tussauds, the world-famous wax museum known for its life-like reproductions of the illustrious and the infamous. Thankfully, the initial response was one of enthusiasm and interest. There was David Beckham, soccer legend, and boy did he look real. A line actually formed next to his figure, as fans waited to have their picture taken with this faithful reproduction of the footballing hero. Nearby, Superman was flying off to defend truth, justice and the American way, while an enormous replica of the Incredible Hulk looked ready to scoop up visitors in his vast, outstretched hand. Even the adults found it somewhat amusing. Check out James Bond, looking as dapper as ever, and there is Marilyn Monroe with her skirt flapping in the wind. And over here is Steven Spielberg, Charlie Chaplin, the British Royal Family and... Yasser Arafat!

Sure enough, in the pavilion known as the "World Stage", the curators of Madame Tussauds saw fit to place a representation of the Chairman himself, where the man responsible for killing more Jews than anyone since World War Two shares the floor with the likes of Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Mahatma Gandhi. Apparently, the proprietors of this popular tourist destination, like much of the rest of Europe, make no distinctions when it comes to the good, the bad and the ugly. They evidently see nothing wrong with throwing together some of the world's greatest villains alongside some of its noblest heroes, ignoring the subtle message which this necessarily conveys.

And yet, one of the biggest attractions at Madame Tussauds is the "Chamber of Horrors", a floor devoted to scaring the Dickens out of you by telling the stories of some of the world's nastier characters, such as serial killers. Obviously, then, the curators are capable of making basic moral judgments, i.e. that serial killers are bad. But anything beyond this most elementary of logic seems to leave them utterly confused. Hence, someone who killed several women will have his waxen image placed squarely in the "Chamber of Horrors". But when it comes to the man responsible for sending suicide bombers to kill Jews, well hey, they'll just put him near George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, of course.

More astonishing, however, was the fact that there were people waiting to have their picture taken with Arafat's wax figurine, as though he too were a rock idol or a superstar. In utter disbelief, I watched as a Pakistani man proceeded to put his arm around Yasser, smiling for his friends back home as his wife snapped a picture.

But before I could recover from this pitiful spectacle, I had walked a few feet only to find myself staring as two young British men took turns photographing one another, smiles and all, with none other than Adolf Hitler. Surely, I thought to myself, there must be some mistake here. How could the people who run Madame Tussauds be so thoughtless, so inconsiderate, so insensitive? Did it ever occur to them that they might be diluting the evil which men such as Hitler and Arafat represent by turning them into tourist attractions?

Apparently not. Looking through the official souvenir guide, it quickly becomes apparent that Madame Tussauds could care less. After all, a two-page spread devoted to the wax figures of Winston Churchill and his arch-nemesis Hitler is entitled, "The greatest Briton meets his great adversary."

Now, there are plenty of adjectives that come to mind when thinking of Germany's wartime leader. Evil, wicked, cruel, brutal, and vicious, to name just a few. But "great"? Is that the best they could come up with? And then, to top it off, the guide includes a photograph of Hitler staring at Churchill, with a caption that reads, "The man who tried to change the world and the man who helped to stop him."

Call me oversensitive, but I generally associate the term "changing the world" with people such as Mother Theresa or Dr. Jonas Salk, not the founder of Nazi Germany. If you are as outraged about this as I am, then drop the wax-heads at Madame Tussauds a line at: csc@madame-tussauds.com, and let them know what you think. They should either take down the statues of Arafat and Hitler, or at least put a little more thought into how they are presented. Don't forget: millions of people visit Madame Tussauds (which has expanded to include branches in New York, Las Vegas, Amsterdam and Hong Kong). Who knows how many come away with jovial photos of themselves arm-in-arm with mass murderers of Jews?

At a time when anti-Semitism is spreading across Europe, it hardly seems wise to glorify its most lethal practitioners. In this world, there is a limit to everything, even entertainment. And when it comes to depicting the killers of Jews, Madame Tussauds has clearly crossed it.

The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post and is archived as http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1072239532580&p=1006953079865

Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, December 24, 2003.
This is going to be a short article, folks, if only because there's nothing behind the "peace" plan that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon presented at the recent Herzilya Conference - nothing besides intellectual flap-doodle and moral cowardice. Let us be honest, and let us not mince words - especially now, when the lives of countless Jews are at stake, and not only in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Like more than one of his predecessors, the prime minister of Israel is a cross between a cretin and a craven. Do you want a more polite or sophisticated explanation of what makes Ariel Sharon tick? Sorry, there ain't none. And please, enough of that shibboleth "American pressure": no loan guarantees, economic sanctions, and not a nut or bolt in the U.S. military supply line. That's just the point. Succumbing to American pressure is precisely what makes Sharon a Lilliputian.

You want an alternative to such pusillanimity? Suppose Israel had a Jew as a prime minister - and please don't remind me of Sharon's military courage. I'm talking about a different kind of courage. Suppose Israel's prime minister was a Jew - and what is a Jew if he lacks Jewish pride and Jewish vision? Suppose, I say, Israel's Prime Minister was a Jew - and perhaps it would be sufficient if he were just a man.

Suppose he were to hold an international press conference, which of course would have worldwide TV coverage. And suppose he said something like this:

"Israel is being blackmailed by the government of the United States - and quite contrary to the sentiments of the American people. While the government of the United States does everything in its power to suppress Arab terrorism in Iraq, it expects Israel to fight Arab terrorism in Israel?s own backyard with one arm tied behind its back. Moreover, and contrary to its own basic principles, the government of the United States is pressuring Israel to reward Arab terrorism by making tens of thousands of Jews homeless in what is misleadingly called the 'West Bank', but which every Christian knows is Judea and Samaria, the heartland of the Jewish People. "With all due respect to, and affection for, the American people, the Jewish State of Israel will not yield to the government of the United States, not as long as I am the prime minister of this country. Let it be understood once and for all: The birthright of the Jewish People, which includes Judea and Samaria, is not negotiable. The Land of Israel was given to the Jewish People as an eternal inheritance by God Almighty, and it is to the God of Israel, and not to Washington, that I owe my first and paramount loyalty.

"Let no one think that Israel is helpless without the support of the government of the United States. Israel's military power extends very far indeed, and I shall not hesitate to use this power in the event that it becomes necessary. I know very well what the economic prosperity of the world depends on, and I can assure you that it depends on what Israel chooses to do or refrains from doing.

"You will ask: 'But what about the Arabs in the so-called West Bank and Gaza?' If it comes to removing Jews or Arabs from this land, most assuredly it will not be Jews. A generation of Arab children have been educated to hate Jews and to emulate suicide bombers. We are going to put an end to this barbarism, and no one is going to stop us!"

Unfortunately, dear friends, Israel lacks such a prime minister. But let us not be deceived by its current poltroon.

This appeared today at the Arutz Sheva website (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 24, 2003.
This is potentially very good news for Israel. I have in the past commented that we should refocus our economic orientations away from America and Europe and towards the East. We are much too much involved with the West economically and politically. This is not an anti-Western idea but one that acknowledges the fact that we need to off set the overwhelming influence of America on our lives.

The Americans, and especially the Europeans, have their specific national interests and they do not coincide with those of Israel. The most common method to pressure us into accepting their interests over our own is through economic arm twisting. Having a more diversified export/import profile can greatly reduce the power of even very friendly nations on us and increase our independence of action. This news items appeared today on the Arutz-7 website (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=55003)

(IsraelNN.com) India and Israel are likely to sign a free trade agreement during the visit of Indian Commerce and Industry Minister Arun Jaitley, Indian official say.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had expressed keenness on signing the deal with India during his September visit while addressing a business meeting in New Delhi.

Israel already has similar trade agreements with the European Union and the US.

Since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries in 1992, the bilateral trade has grown five-fold reaching the $1.3 billion mark.

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 24, 2003.
This was written by Bruce S. Ticker, a freelance writer living in Philadelphia. It appeared in the "Israel Insider" (http://www.israelinsider.com) today.

Another new low in the Palestinian struggle: A Muslim gets roughed up when he attempts to pray inside east Jerusalem's al-Aqsa Mosque.

This is no ordinary Muslim. He was Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher, who visited Israel in an attempt to shore up peace efforts between Israel and the Palestinians. After meeting with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, the 68-year-old Maher went to the mosque on Monday and was surrounded right off the bat by a group of men belonging to a group called the Islamic Liberation Party.

They called him a traitor and a collaborator, tossed shoes at him and pushed and shoved him to the point when he cried, "I'm going to choke, I'm going to choke." According to various news accounts, he appeared to be short of breath, was treated at Hadassah Hospital and left for the airport four hours after the attack. Reuters news agency reported that Israeli police arrested seven Palestinians in connection with the attack.

So much for freedom of worship among Palestinians.

More than 36 years ago, Israeli soldiers put their lives on the line in a war that the Arabs thrust on Israel and seized the Temple Mount, which Muslims call the al-Aqsa Mosque. Then Israel turned over authority to operate the site on a daily basis over to the Palestinians.

On June 7, 1967, when Paratroopers hoisted an Israeli flag to fly over the Dome of the Rock, the first order from then-defense minister Moshe Dayan was for said Paratroopers to pull the flag down. The Waqf, a Muslim religious trust, was granted administration of and security in the site.

Great security the Waqf provided for Egypt's foreign minister on Monday.

In the let's-get-this-straight department, the Arabs wage war against Israel, Israel captures the Temple Mount and Israel swiftly returns it to Muslim control.

Obviously, Dayan intended this as a goodwill gesture, but when have the Palestinians who operate the mosque returned this good will?

This did not sound like a good idea. Certainly, Israel should treat any of its inhabitants humanely, but Israel also should have made sure to maintain its authority. After being attacked, Israel was under no obligation to turn the mosque over to them. I could see Israel allowing Muslims to worship there, but not to run the place.

The Arabs have treated the mosque as a symbol of power and the front line in their effort to retrieve land they believe is theirs.

Besides, what does the mosque have to do with Palestinian poverty, inconveniences and lack of self-determination which their advocates claim is the source of their frustration? Freedom and prosperity are good enough for most people, but that does not seem to be sufficient for them.

Under current circumstances, considering the delicate nature of the situation, any attempt by Israel to reclaim the Temple Mount site will only set off more chaos, but Israel sure has a right to do just that.

Maher's assailants desecrated a religious sanctuary and acted like hoodlums. In fact, they are hoodlums. If the mosque's operators can't control that, one has to wonder how they can be trusted to run it in the first place.

Posted by David Frankfurter, December 24, 2003.
On this Christmas eve, I wish all of our Christian readers a merry Christmas and a peaceful, joyous New Year. When celebrating, I ask you and your friends to give a thought to Christians in Muslim countries who may not experience the same religious freedoms as we in the democratic world enjoy. Those in Jesus' birthplace, Bethlehem, deserve our special attention. I attach an article by a friend, Jeanine Hirschhorn, who lives in Haifa - a mixed city of Jews, Christians, Muslim and Druze, who live together in remarkable harmony.

As people around the world celebrate Christmas, what will the Christians of Bethlehem be feeling?

Silent Night...

Bethlehem; It's the birthplace of Jesus, and the traditional heart and soul of Christianity. Bethlehem, historically a Christian city governed by Christians, and, with its sister towns of Beit Jala and Beit Sahur, the largest enclave of Christians in the West Bank. However, since 1995, when the Palestinian Authority (PA) assumed control of the city, Bethlehem has undergone stunning and disturbing changes to its historic Christian makeup and character.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) has changed the city's municipal boundaries to incorporate 30,000 Muslims from three neighboring refugee camps, and thus severely tipping the demographic balance. The city has also added a few thousand Bedouins of the Ta'amra tribe, located east of Bethlehem, and encouraged Muslim immigration from Hebron to Bethlehem.

Although there are no confirmed figures, estimates put today's population at around 120,000 people. From a 60 percent majority in 1990, the Christians are now a 20 percent minority. The purging of Bethlehem's Christian character continues, viewed silently by their disinterested co-religionist and largely ignored by a world media focused elsewhere.

Holy Night...

PA officials publicly proclaim their respect for Christian holy sites and institutions. But events have demonstrated that PA officials and gunmen regard Bethlehem's revered Christian shrines as little more than handy objects for political and personal gain.

The most blatant disregard for the sanctity of Christian holy sites has been at the Church of the Nativity. The New York Times reported that: "Palestinian gunmen have frequently used the area around the church as a refuge, with the expectation that Israel would try to avoid fighting near the shrine."

The Church was invaded in April 2002 by PA gunmen. They shot their way inside, attempting to evade Israeli soldiers who had entered Bethlehem to quell on-going violence and suicide bombings. This takeover was not an act of desperation nor did it centre over refugees seeking safe haven during the heat of battle. Over 100 armed and wanted terrorists invaded one of Christianity's holiest shrines, because it served their political agenda. As confirmed by Abdullah Abu-Hadid, a senior military commander in the Tanzim - a militia loyal to the PA's Chairman Yasser Arafat: "The idea was to enter the church in order to create international pressure on Israel..."

The gunmen held the Church of the Nativity under siege for 39 days. They used the Church as a firing position on Israeli soldiers, who, respectful of the sanctity and reverence of the Church, did not return fire. Hostages freed during and after the siege reported extensive looting and damage to Church property by the militia.

All is calm...

Out of fear for their safety and to deflect the growing hostility of the city's Muslim majority, Bethlehem's Christian spokesmen aren't happy to be identified by name when they complain about the Muslim treatment of them. Those brave enough to speak out publicly risk PA accusation of "collaboration with Israel," subject to arrest, extensive interrogation, imprisonment, and execution. However, off the record, Bethlehem's Christian spokesmen speak of harassment and terror tactics, mainly from the gangs of thugs who have looted and plundered Christians and their property, under the protection of Palestinian security personnel.

Examples of this are many and varied. Dwellings belonging to the Comtsieh family were possessed by a Muslim tribe from the Hebron area, and despite a court injunction in their favour, the land was not returned to the original owner. The head of the German Liaison Office to the PA protested against the turning of the "Talitakoumi" Beit Jala School into a base for terror activities against Israel. Women have consistently been abused, often leading to them becoming terrorists to save family honour.

Bethlehem's Christian residents rejoiced at the expulsion of the gunmen from Bethlehem at the end of the Church of the Nativity siege in 2002. Residents told of a two-year reign of terror imposed by the gunmen that included rape, extortion and executions. The gunmen were described as a criminal gang that preyed especially on Christians, demanding "protection money" from businesses. "Finally the Christians can breathe freely," said Helen, 50, a Christian mother of four. "We are so delighted that these criminals who have intimidated us for such a long time are now going away."

All is bright...

Between the 1993 signing of the Oslo Accords and the 1995 transfer of Bethlehem to the PA, Christians lobbied Israel against the transfer. The late Christian mayor of Bethlehem, Elias Freij, warned that it would result in Bethlehem becoming a town with churches but no Christians. He lobbied Israel to include Bethlehem in the boundaries of Greater Jerusalem, as was the Jordanian practice until 1967.

The situation for Bethlehem's Christians has deteriorated to such an extent that, during his visit there in March 2002, Pope John Paul II felt it necessary to urge Christians: "Do not be afraid to preserve your Christian heritage and Christian presence in Bethlehem."

Round yon Virgin, Mother and Child...

Accused of wearing "permissive" Western clothing, Bethlehem Christian women have been intimidated. Rape and abduction of Christian women is also reported to have occurred (especially in Beit Sahur).

Johnny Talgieh, a 17-year-old altar boy, was fatally shot during an Israeli incursion in October 2001. His family erected a small stone monument in his memory on the spot in Manger Square where he died. The monument was kicked and spat on by gang members, then toppled with ropes and cables and left smashed on the ground.

Holy Infant so tender and mild...

In the town at the heart of the story of Christ's birth, increasing Muslim-Christian tensions have left many Christians reluctant to publicly display their faith or celebrate religious festivals, such as Christmas.

Sleep in heavenly peace...

Officially, the PA asserts its respect for religious freedom and responsibility to protect the Christian minority.2 Yet Bethlehem's Christians are responding to the PA's methods of respect and protection by fleeing. Those Christian residents unwilling or unable to flee know that they face an unpredictable future.

If the Christian exodus continues at its present rate, the only Christian presence in Bethlehem may be foreign tourists. Bethlehem's Christian population may very well be consigned to a once upon a time Christians lived in Bethlehem historic footnote. Bethlehem's revered Christians shrines may one day become tourist curiosities, like the Nabetian city of Petra or the Roman amphitheater at Caesarea.

Secure in societies that protect religious freedom, Christians around the world joyously prepare for the season of peace on earth toward men of goodwill. But for Bethlehem's Christians, given the realities of their daily lives and their uncertain future, the forthcoming Christmas season brings neither security nor joy... nor heavenly peace.

Posted by Ray Guenther, December 23, 2003.
It seems somewhat naive to me that someone would ask: "Should there be a Fence in Israel?", because it depends so greatly upon which point of view we take to begin with. If from a Palestinian viewpoint then obviously they wouldn't want a Fence period, let alone on which line the Fence should be built on. They would not even grant that one be built as a temporary solution, having little or no care for the lives of Israelis: witness their suicide bombers and the Polls which indicate the vast majority of Palestinians approve. If from an Israeli viewpoint, then we have an array of ideas which conflict in regards to a Fence and withhold us from a straight "yes" or "no". But this is an Israeli website and so I have no need to apologize for an Israeli bias and for coming to a conclusion which will greatly favor the Israeli people and Government!

Some history please! Pre-Abraham, Canaan was populated by Seven nations: Canaanites, Perizzites, Hittites, Hivites, Jebusites, Girgashites and Amorites. After a success campaign under Joshua, the Israelites conquered and dwelt in Canaan until 586 BC. They were themselves cast out by the Babylonians and after a 70 year exile, were allowed by their captors to re-settle the land. They lived in Canaan this time not by their own Government, but under a Babylonian, and then Assyrian, and then eventually a Roman Administration. In 70 AD, the Romans this time cast out the Israelis and there was no Israeli population to speak of, and no Israeli Government until May 15, 1948 AD. The Muslims under Mohammed captured Canaan in the 7th Century, and this they now say is their land because of this victory. A Jurist once said practically: "Possession is nine-tenths of the Law," and this having due force in retrospect, gave the Palestinians control of the land of Canaan pre-1948.

The United Nations arrived on the scene and mandated a slice of Canaan for Israeli possession and habitation. From this the Palestinians and Arabs could not successfully argue against Israeli possession, and so they intended to get that slice back by war. Not once, not twice. Each successive battle found that Israel gained more and more land. (It would seem that war is hardly an option then for the enemies of Israel, but no one said they had to be wise). Applying the "Possession" rule now leaves us with a problem wherein each people group has their portion of land and barring mass emigration from one or the other, our solutions lie with the division of land and boundaries.

How much easier and less-costly the "emigration of the Arabs" answer would be, but no one offering this beside myself we are left with negotiation.

The Berlin Wall worked admirably for the Russians and yet non-Israelis oppose this as a working solution. In portions of the Fence that has been built to date, it is proven that it stymies infiltrators and gives great protection to Israeli citizens, leaving the opposers of the Fence to explain their opposition? What kind of reasoning is it that opposes the Fence which has been proven to work and yet they offer no alternative? Me thinks the Arafat-mindset has started to permeate the European!

One of our musical Poets sang: "They've got a wall in China, it's a thousand miles long, to keep out the foreigners they made it strong". A verdict on its effectiveness has long been around and so great is its force that the wall stands to this day! I hear Mr. Chen of Taiwan follow with: "I've got a wall around me, that you can't even see, it took a little time to get next to me". Given the nature of the result of such a clash between China and Taiwan, we hardly need to entertain anything except a Peaceful solution.

But now we are aware of the invisible walls and if we were in any way able to remove them, we would have no need of debating a Fence in Israel. This is however a Religious answer and far from most people's ability to craft including mine.

Therefore, having now concluded the necessity of the Fence, there remains the question of placement and cost. To me these two are inter-related and to have a say in placement necessitates an involvement in payment. So far, all the expense has been placed on Israel, including the feature that The USA has withdrawn $1Billion in loan guarantees from Israel, for their supposed impudence in continuing to build the Fence without the USA's approval. Despite the hypocrisy involved with this American response, (e.g., the Mexican Border, and their own fight with terrorism to protect the American public, which apparently the Israeli Government is not allowed to do), it does put a bite into the Israeli budget and makes them have to watch their already difficult economic situation.

We hear of cries from the Palestinians that the Fence is not following the Green Line, but who said it had to in the first place, and who ever gave the Green Line its credence secondly, and thirdly if our Palestinian neighbors wish to have a say, let them show up with some of those lost funds of Arafat and Israel will gladly allow them their input in the Fence!

How much better the emigration solution! How much better the removal of the invisible walls, but barring these, a Fence paid for mutually by Israel and the PA, will allow for peace and give the world a chance to breath.

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 24, 2003.
This article is by Daniel Pipes. It appeared today on World Net Daily (http://www.wnd.com) and is archived on Pipes' website as http://www.danielpipes.org/article/1374. The version on Pipes' site has dynamic links, so you can read some related articles.

Paul Harvey, 84, is an ABC radio personality whose "News and Comment" program appears on 1,600 radio stations. His radio career goes back 60 years and he is known as "the most listened-to voice in the history of radio" and is "generally considered the greatest salesman in the history of radio." His recent run-in with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), militant Islam's most powerful institution in North American, provides a textbook example of Islamist aggression.

The story begins on Dec. 4, 2003, when Harvey described the vicious nature of cock fighting in Iraq, then commented: "Add to the [Iraqi] thirst for blood, a religion which encourages killing, and it is entirely understandable if Americans came to this bloody party unprepared." CAIR responded a day later with a demand for "an on-air apology."

Comment: I have been documenting since 1999 CAIR's use of such censorious tactics against anyone who dares criticize Islam, militant Islam, or Muslims. This reflects the militant Islamic ambition to privilege Islam, which implies in part a prohibition on free discussion about it.

CAIR upped the ante on Dec. 8 by calling on its minions to contact a different sponsor of Harvey's each day to press it to drop its advertising on his program "until Harvey responds to Muslim concerns."

Comment: CAIR here rejects the American principle of free speech and the belief that differences in opinion should be dealt with through reasoned discourse; it wants to close down debate. I can think of no U.S. organizations except the militant Islamic ones that deploy comparable tactics.

Harvey immediately capitulated to CAIR, announcing on Dec. 9 (through an on-air substitute) that he received letters from "dear friends" who "reminded all of us that Islam is a religion of peace, that terrorists do not represent Islam." This statement dismayed some observers ("Harvey shouldn't have apologized," responded Rich Tucker of the Heritage Foundation). CAIR responded in a press release that same day by noting Harvey's "conciliatory statement" and thanking "all those who took the time to speak out in defense of Islam." As for Harvey, it offered him no gratitude for toeing its line, only the chance to further his re-education by meeting with "American Muslim leaders to begin a dialogue on issues related to Islam."

Comment: Calling for Harvey to meet for "dialogue" points to CAIR's intent not to move on but to exploit each opportunity to promote its agenda.

Still, CAIR has not relented. In an e-mail on Dec. 22, under a headline "GE Pulls Ads from Paul Harvey's Program," it reports that General Electric sent out the following message: "We have received your E-mail about the comments of Paul Harvey on December 4, 2003. GE certainly doesn't endorse the comment and regrets any offense that it may have caused. While we look into the matter further, we have pulled GE's advertisements from Mr. Harvey's show."

Comment: This effort to crush an opponent - get his apology and then deprive him of his livelihood - typifies CAIR's illiberal approach. As Stephen Schwartz notes, "CAIR needs to find and defeat enemies, for this most effectively mobilizes followers."
Posted by Ray Montgomery, December 24, 2003.
I have looked at your web site with admiration! It is so very good.

As a Christian I want to make an observation about ISLAM (the epitome of false religion). They call the terrorists "fundamentalists". That is striking. Quoting from the "Microsoft Encarta College Dictionary" Page 580, fundamentalism is defined as "a religious or political movement based on a literal interpretation of and strict adherance to docrine especially as a return to former principles" and "the belief that religious or political doctrine should be implemented literally, not interpreted or adapted". A Christian fundamentalist believes in the strict adherence to the Bible the way it is written with no interpretation. So that brings up the question, "What is an ISLAM fundamentalist?" It is one that STRICTLY views the Koran with no interpretation, period. And every one of them are extremely violent.

So much for the "peaceful" ISLAM religion. It is by its very so-called holy book a violent religion. I don't know how you can view it otherwise. It doesn't take much smarts to see what this religion is.

Long live the God-given rights of Israel!!!

Posted by Hilda Terry, December 24, 2003.
At 90, I thought I was THE ONLY ONE who remembers all this. Wondered why Jews never write about simple obvious facts. Apparently, they've been writing ALL ALONG. I thought I was the only one who has no voice. At 90, I have no money to help anyone but myself, but - will send you my writing. And will start right now, ADDING to it. What you need is MORE PUBLISHED VOICES...LOUD and AUTHENTICATED - as is this world-saving E-mail.

Am barely ambulatory, but I hobbled along to distribute my letter to the last Israel Day parade... as I have been doing every year since they started. I gave them to some Arab boys, and one chased after me. Looked in desperation for a camera man, but he just wanted a copy ... he didn't get.

On the other hand, one smart looking Jewish lady asked me. condescendingly, "Do you KNOW any Palestinian Refugees?" My own cousins, who spent a year in Israel, vehemently disagree with me. Every Jew I talk to thinks I'm ALL wrong. I'm just an old yentala who used to read. Am in nobody's inner circle. Have NO IDEA why Lieberman felt dutibound to destroy Bibi's bid for freedom for the kid [Jonathan Pollard] who blew the whistle on an impending WW 3 - what is it? 16 years now? Can't read or hear anything any more and don't know where I am one minute to the next. But I WAS in the right places: growing up after WW 1, the only Jews year round in an anti-Semitic New England summer resort; working for NY's Schraffts with German waitresses who dated German sailors, 1931-33; living in Tudor City overlooking the United Nations, 1945 to 1955.

I battle Arabs on Arab chat boards. They call me Broonilda. To which I once replied "Watch it, guys. I can make your noses grow." So wonderful to have your website leaking all these buried facts.


Hilda Terry did the Teena cartoons for King Features during World War 2. Her cartoons appeared in the Saturday Evening Post and the New Yorker. Her 8 Henderson Place Foundation is dedicated to preserving the history of a landscape building. She can be reached at www.hildaterry.com and www.8hendersonplace.org

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, December 24, 2003.
Few of Israel's planners, including Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Shimon Peres (perpetual loser) former Justice Minister Yossi Beilin (voted out of his own Party), America's President George W. Bush, etc. have contemplated the full long-term impact of another Arab Palestinian State on the 'other side of Sharon's security wall.' Allow me to suggest a few things that are likely to happen (not necessarily in order of their happening):

1. Each of the nations who have Arab Palestinians on their territory and have refused them citizenship will eject their 'Palestinians' toward the new Arab State of Palestine. Those nations include Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Libya - not inclusive of those Arab Palestinians living now in Europe, America and elsewhere. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia already ejected 700,000 Arab/Muslim Palestinians into Jordan after the PLO betrayed their brethren in Kuwait during 1990.

2. The estimated number of Arab/Muslim Palestinians to be ejected from their current residences in Arab and non-Arab countries ranges from 3 to 5 million - depending upon whose figures you believe. (Note! The neo-State of Palestine would be overcrowded if only 500,000 were allowed to enter.)

3. It would be highly probably that most new Arab/Muslim Palestinians migrating into this volatile area of the Middle East would be located in tents or shack slums, pressed up close to the Jewish State of Israel against Sharon's Security Wall. There they will need water, sewage, food, employment which the U.N. and E.U. will demand that Israel provide. Piling up against the Security Wall will provide a Gaza-like condition which will have intended political and practical consequences not yet understood by Sharon and his cronies.

There they will squat in misery and squalor as they have in refugee camps now going on 50 years. They will howl and scream, not against Yassir Arafat (or whomever takes his place) but against the Israelis who will not allow them past the Security Wall to join their Israeli-Arab brethren. That's what they'll say, appealing to the World to pressure Israel into opening the gates.

4. The virtual "Palestine" CITY OF THE WALL will grow to a typical festering refugee camp of squalor, filth and disease. As in other refugee camps, It will be an incubator for discontented youth who will join other Terrorists who will freely operate close to Sharon's Security Wall/Border.

As in Gaza, the Terrorists of many nations will become operating gangs, recruiting new members, manufacturing missiles, mortars, rockets, explosive devices - with no Israeli troops to interfere or disturb their planning. The removal of Jewish residents and Israeli troops will allow Terrorists to form well-organized and efficient armies of conquest through Terror.

5. Local Arab/Muslim Palestinians manufacturing weapons will now be free to produce mortars, Kassem Rockets, et al but, once it's no longer necessary to use the Egyptian tunnels in Rafah to smuggle in weapons, then larger weapons can be trucked, shipped or flown in. That means that larger missile launchers and artillery can be imported into the Terrorist Center of the World - much the same as the 10,000 missile launchers set up by Hezb'Allah in the area of Lebanon after the IDF retreated when ordered by then Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Launching mortars, missiles over the Wall into the densely populated near-by Israeli cities will be too easy.

Any documents promising peace and de-militarization to Israel which are drafted by the Europeans, the Arabist State Department, the non-Jewish Leftist Jews mandating a "Weapons-Free Zone" will, as always, be unenforceable - if not comical.

6. WMD, Weapons of Mass Destruction. Since the territory abandoned by Sharon will now be free of Israelis patrols or the IDF's snap raids, the Arab Palestinians can import WMD - including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical). Hezb'Allah, Al Qaeda, PFLP, PLO, Tanzim, Al Aksa Brigades, Hamas, et al will have no problem in acquiring NBC - WMD (Weapons of Mass Death) from Iran and Syria which would easily pass into Arab Palestinian hands - and may already have. Israeli intelligence definitely knows that of the 10,000 missiles on the Lebanese border in the zone abandoned by Barak, a substantial number have chemical warheads.

7. It is highly probable that the U.N. and the E.U. will be invited by the Palestinian Authority into the new territory to interfere with any reprisal raids against Terrorists by Israel. Hot pursuit of Terrorists, targeting Terrorist leaders, destroying weapons? depots will be difficult, if not impossible IF the U.N./E.U. troops are interspersed among the 'supposedly' civilian population. That could get worse if American troops are added to the so-called "Peace-Keeping Forces" planned by E.U. through NATO. Be assured that none of these troops would act as Americans are presently doing in Iraq or as Israelis have done to intercept and thwart Terrorist plans. Recall that U.N. troops stationed in Lebanon to stop Terrorists from attacking Israel became a porous line, often assisting Terrorists up and back after their violent missions.

8. I would imagine that Sharon will provoke a civil war when he tries to remove what some of the Media and world governments pejoratively called "settlements" but are really Jewish communities - villages, towns and cities. It has long been the plan of the Arabist State Department, in collaboration with the Labor Left of Israel and now even Arik Sharon, to turn over to incoming Arab Palestinians all the farms, homes, factories, wineries, water, sewage systems and electrical grids all built by the Jews. This will be claimed compensation for the 400,000 Arabs who fled at the behest of the seven Arab armies so they could sweep the Jews from the land into the sea without being impeded by Arab villagers jamming the roads. (As an aside, there is to be no compensation to the some 850,000 Jews who were ejected from the Arab countries where they had lived for centuries, nor will they be recompensed for the properties they were forced to abandoned after the seven Arab countries ignominiously lost the first war of 1948.)

9. Israel (under Sharon) will have also given up the water aquifers under the Judean and Samarian hills that provides Israel with 33% of her fresh water resources. Given the Arab custom of not treating their sewage and allowing it to run down, raw, into the valleys and from there down into the aquifers so that water flowing from it will be heavily polluted. The aquifer will be contaminated and any water coming from there would have to be heavily chlorinated and even boiled in order to drink safely. This situation is already occurring in those areas given over to the Arab Palestinian Authority now under Yassir Arafat's control under the Oslo Accords. Imagine the ground and air pollution when 3 or more million Arabs are packed up against Sharon's Security Wall/Border. Note! The aquifer in Gaza under the control of the PA is now drained so low from excessive pumping that it has been infiltrated with salt sea water. The Arabs call it their "salt tea". Having over-pumped their wells after Israel's Water Authority turned over water control to the P.A., the Arabs then demanded to be connected to Israel's main water carrier.

10. Sharon will have given up the Jordan Valley which was always considered a natural barrier to invasion from Jordan by Arab armies and a natural tank trap. This was confirmed on 6/29/67 by a once secret advisory by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff study of what Israel must keep in order for America NOT to have to rescue her from an attack by any coalition of Arab Armies.

Sharon will also be forced to give up their water rights to the Jordan River. Sharon will have given up the natural barrier of the Judean and Samarian Hills with their steep incline along with their high positions for artillery and the narrow roads that enemy armies would have to navigate to get to the heart of the Jewish country and Jerusalem.

11. Sadly Sharon, along with willing Leftist Jews, seems determined to divide Jerusalem and quit claim on Jewish Rights to the Holy Temple Mount. According to maps and plans developed long ago by Yassir Arafat, Jews, will be allowed to approach the Western Wall - only - with the permission from the Arab Muslim Waqf. The Waqf are the Muslim trustees to whom Moshe Dayan (a non-Jewish Jew) gifted the Holy Temple Mount of King Solomon after Israel liberated the eastern half of Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Days War. Like most Leftists he didn't want observant Jews to have a focal point for their rightful historical and religious claims on Jerusalem. The Left started the Oslo process then, although the real planning and conspiracy by Peres, Beilin and Rabin to evict all Jews from the territories began in earnest in the early 1980s.

In effect, under the Sharon/Bush planning, the Eternal Jewish Capital City of Jerusalem will return to the same division when Jordan illegally occupied it for 19 years. King Hussein destroyed 58 Jewish synagogues, drove out the Jewish residents, and turned the ancient Jewish graveyard on the Mt. Of Olives into truck routes with its headstones used as urinal splash plates for Jordanian soldiers. Yes, indeed, Arik, you will surely leave a legacy that no one will forget.

Having free unimpeded access to Sharon's Wall on their side, there will be little problem for the Arabs to dig down 20 or 30 meters (approximately 60 to 90 feet) as they have done successfully in the tunnels from Egypt to go under the Security Wall into Israel's heartland. They can dig - not dozens but hundreds of such tunnels which could only be filled on the Israeli side if and when found. I would imagine that Terrorist operations would ramp up far more viciously than we have seen even in these past 3 years.

In addition, they will have assistance from Arab Muslim Palestinians living inside of Israel as citizens (with full civil rights). Once Sharon has shown the yellow feather of fear and retreat as did Ehud Barak, Israeli Arab citizens will quickly cross over to assist what they consider the likely winner, namely Arafat or his replacement.

Think of Judea and Samaria in terms of a replica of Arafat's mini Terrorist state which he created inside Lebanon. No law except Terror, a free retreat for every Muslim Terrorist to ply his wicked trade - something like the Muslim Jihadists pouring into Iraq through Syria from Egypt, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Chechnya, Yemen, Algeria and even non-Muslim Arabs from France and England. They only will stay long enough to beat or kill enough Americans - if they can and many will move into the new Arab State of Palestine. But, Arafat's new State will be a permanent base of Terror operations against Israel, the Arab nations such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and then, globally, to America and Europe. It will be a more than a safe haven for Terrorists - it will be their new Terror Mecca created by Sharon and Bush.

Should Israel now feel that she needs to engage in hot pursuit of Terrorists or to try to take out missile launchers, be assured the U.N. would vote sanctions as would the E.U. who has been pouring money into Arafat's pockets and the P.A. - most of it embezzled.

As one looks over Sharon's Wall to a land once brought back to civilization by the Jews, your will soon see a backward conglomeration of a compressed howling mob of Arab Muslim Palestinians made into useful refugees by Arafat or his replacement. It will be one gigantic pest house of disease and sewage running down the middle of the street with hostile Terrorists always pushing, bombing, sniping, suicide bombing and pressing against or under Sharon's Wall. They will always be in contact with the Arabs living in the heart of Israel, breeding in extraordinary numbers and subsidized by Arab nations for birthing new Arab Muslim Palestinians - much as they were paid by Iran, Syria, Saddam and Saudi Arabia to martyr themselves while killing Jews. The end will be intended to be the same either way - that is, kill Jews with bombs or with babies who are later taught - from the age of 3 and up - to hate the Jews, kill them when able and advancing toward being a Shaheed (martyr for Islam).

Look over your War Wall, Arik, and see what you have done. You once had forward vision when you were a General and you were one of the truest and best warriors for the Jewish State of Israel. Now you are old, and as happens to old men, you dream of the past when you could think ahead and plan well. Now, you will try to evacuate Jews and give their life's dreams to the millions of incoming Arabs who will be packed tightly against your Wall.

So, now your legacy is to squeeze Israel behind a Walled Ghetto, 9 miles wide from the sea to its very center. As the millions of Arab Muslim Palestinians are packed into the impossibly small area of Arafat's State, they will begin to do what the Arabs promised in 1947, namely, to push the Jews into the sea.

This will be your legacy Arik Sharon IF you continue to assist the creation of another Arab State of Palestine. You will join Haman, Herod or Hitler in the eyes of the Jewish people. Be assured you will have a place in history as a betrayer of the Jewish people and hated for eternity.
Posted by Israel Ben-Ami, December 24, 2003.
This miserable politician has recommended that Israel be invaded by the West and dealt with as sternly as Iraq. He compares Ariel Sharon with Sadam Hussein [according to The Spectator], and accuses Israel of defying U.N. Decisions. This is the last straw. All we need to encourage European anti-Semites is a Jewish anti-Semite. Thanks to Yossi Beilin and similar well-intentioned idiots, European idiots - and Jews to boot - will now join the campaign to discredit an Israel fighting for its survival. The pity is that Government negotiators in London are close to reaching a settlement with the Palestinians and because of Yossi and others [Ami Ayalon, for example] will now face an increase in the expectations and demands of Yasser Arafat who knows he's beaten and was prepared for a modus-vivendi.

Insofar as a military action against Israel is concerned, we are no Iraqis and Zahal is not the Iraqi army. I trust the gentiles will not take the British Jew's advice vis-a-vis military action against Israel

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 23, 2003.
Sec. Powell deducts from Israeli loan guarantees an amount Israel is spending on the security fence. He calls the fence a "settlement activity." It is not. It does not protect very many settlements.

He also claims that it violates "Palestinian rights." The only right it violates is their right to murder innocent Jews at random. He does not deduct from aid to the P.A., which violates Israelis' right to live and which engages in drug trafficking. (The P.A. has no right to Yesha. Israel has a good claim to the area.)

State Dept. policy is hypocritical in trying to distinguish between terrorists it fights and terrorists, such as the P.A., whom it subsidizes. It calls P.A. terrorists "militants" and "activists." The distinction is specious and evil. Powell's policy towards Israel is "do as we say and not as we do." Thus the US denounces the military tactics it employs in Iraq, when employed by Israel in Yesha. One of several main examples: the US holds hundreds of prisoners incommunicado in Guantanamo, but demands that Israel free known terrorists.

The State Dept. lies in crediting the P.A. for trying to curb terrorism. The Dept. merely complains that the P.A. should try harder. Actually, the P.A., through Arafat's Tanzim organization, commits most of the terrorism. (The P.A. allows Hamas and Islamic jihad to commit the rest).

Powell illogically equates Arab terrorism with Israeli building of houses in Yesha. (He does not denounce illegal Arab building, only legal Israeli demolition of those buildings.)

Powell urges Israel to commit ethnic cleansing against its own people in Yesha and even before a peace agreement is reached. He does not suggest that Israel expel its Arabs. That would be a genuine equivalency, but that he does not advocate.

Although the P.A. violates its agreements by conducting incitement to violence against Israel, Powell does not call the P.A. to account for this. The State Dept. finances most of UNRWA's budget, which includes ant-Israel activities. The best he does is to make another false equivalency, by calling on both sides to cease belligerent propaganda. Most of the Israeli press favors appeasement of the Arabs, and is far from belligerent. His equivalency makes the innocent Israelis seem equally as guilty as the fanatical Arabs.

While the P.A. tortures, rapes, and executes anyone whom Arafat accuses of "collaborating with Israel," murders homosexuals, and terrorizes ordinary Arab citizens, the State Dept. denounces Israel for "violating Arab human rights," when it seeks to defend itself from terrorism. The State Dept. does not acknowledge that Arabs enjoy more rights in Israel and did in Yesha when under Israeli administration, than elsewhere in the Mideast.

Powell does state that the P.A. must end terrorism. The P.A. does not end it. Powel plies the P.A. with cash. He demands that Israel do likewise, even though Arafat steals much of it (and uses much of the rest for war). He also demands concessions for the P.A. from Israel. His statement that the P.A. must end terrorism is pro forma.

The Bush Administration broke promises to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, to make its policy towards the P.A. conditional upon P.A. compliance with its Oslo obligations, and to end terrorism.

"In short, Colin Powell's policies regarding the Middle East have been designed to weaken and delegitimize the only democracy in the region, while granting recognition and funding to the worst Islamofascist terrorists the region had produced, all this in the midst of the (supposed) American "total war" against world terrorism." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 12/3, e-mail.) I would not stress the dubious claim that Israel is democratic but that it is a US ally against the Arab jihadists.

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, December 23, 2003.
In the last Israeli elections, when Amram Mitzna, the then leader of the Israeli labor party, ran under the idiotic slogan of unilateral withdrawal, many denounced it for its extreme shortsightedness. Mitzna announced that if elected Prime Minister, he would give the Palestinian Authority one year chance to negotiate peace. If they did not, he would order the unilateral withdrawal of IDF from Judea Samaria and Gaza. All the Palestinians had to do is wait a year and get Israel to withdraw without having to negotiate one iota. As you know, Mitzna lost big and Sharon won big.

Now, comes Sharon, yes Sharon, and adopts the same idiotic plan on which Mitzna lost. He, will wait a few months (not even Mitzna's year) for the Palestinians to negotiate. If they failed to arrive, Israel will dismantle settlements and withdraw to unspecified new lines.

Now, tell me friends, must every Israeli leader commit suicide?

And Arafat, the eternal survivor, just sits there in his rat hole, rubbing his hands together with glee. Here is what Evelyn Gordon, a veteran journalist and commentator, writes on the subject. It's called "Withdrawal Under Fire" and it appeared in The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition yesterday.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's speech to the Herzliya Conference last week was indeed, as this paper's editorial noted on Sunday, something new. But new, unfortunately, is not synonymous with better - and the plan outlined by Sharon last Thursday represents a significant retreat that will encourage Palestinian terror and worsen Israel's international position.

In his speech, Sharon announced that even if the terror continues abated, Israel will withdraw from an unspecified number of settlements in another few months. But in an effort to pretend that this is not a withdrawal under fire - the very move that he was twice elected in a landslide on a pledge to prevent - he said that Israel will compensate for this retreat by "strengthen[ing] its control" over parts of the territories "which will constitute an inseparable part of the State of Israel in any future agreement," and warned that unilateral withdrawal will give the Palestinians "much less than they would have received through direct negotiations."

These caveats have been lauded by the Post and other Sharon apologists as a way of ensuring that unilateral withdrawal, far from rewarding Palestinian terror, will actually worsen the Palestinian position. Unfortunately, one need do no more than read the rest of Sharon's speech to realize just how empty and meaningless these caveats are.

Regarding the threat that the Palestinians will receive less through "disengagement" than through negotiations, the speech makes it clear that this is a strictly temporary measure that in no way prevents the Palestinians from obtaining everything they want in the future. The line to which Israel withdraws, Sharon promised, "will not constitute the permanent border of the State of Israel" or "change the political reality between Israel and the Palestinians;" it will also "not prevent the possibility of returning to the implementation of the road map and reaching an agreed settlement."

In short, the unilateral retreat not only grants the Palestinians short-term gains; it simultaneously assures them that they risk no permanent long-term losses.

Aha, say the apologists, but what about the promise to "strengthen Israel's control" over parts of the territories that Israel wants to keep in any future agreement? This pledge, unfortunately, is vitiated by a series of other promises in the very same speech.

First, Sharon pledged that the plan is "a security measure and not a political one," and that any unilateral steps "will be fully coordinated with the United States," which opposes Israeli annexation of any part of the territories. These statements preclude the possibility that Israel will annex certain areas outright.

Israel could still strengthen its hold by substantially increasing the Israeli population of these areas - but Sharon also pledged not to do this. Not only will Israel dismantle all unauthorized settlement outposts, even in these areas, but with regard to authorized settlements, "there will be no construction beyond the existing construction line, no expropriation of land for construction, [and] no special economic incentives." There will also be "no construction of new settlements."

IN OTHER words, Israel will do everything in its power to ensure that its hold on these areas is not strengthened: It will not annex them, it will not build new settlements, it will not expand existing ones, it will dismantle unauthorized outposts, and it will not provide incentives to encourage additional people to move there. What Sharon's speech boils down to, therefore, is an unadorned withdrawal under fire, with no compensatory moves whatsoever.

It goes without saying that this will encourage Palestinian terrorism. If three years of terrorist warfare can convince even Sharon - a leading exponent of the perils of rewarding terrorism " to retreat under fire, the Palestinians have every reason to believe that more of the same will produce more withdrawals. That is especially true now that Sharon and the Likud have broken the taboo against such retreats.

This move will also eradicate all the gains that Sharon has made over the last three years in convincing the rest of the world that Israel has a right to expect an end to terrorism in exchange for a withdrawal. Now that even Sharon has waived this requirement, why should the rest of the world uphold it?

Indeed, the only lesson the international community can reasonably draw from his retreat is the opposite: that with enough pressure, Israel can be forced to concede even its most cherished red lines without a single Palestinian concession in exchange.

This conclusion is almost certain to lead to increased international pressure on Israel for further withdrawals.

Finally, Sharon has almost single-handedly revitalized the Israeli Left. For three years, there has been a virtually wall-to-wall consensus in Israel that the Left's method of unrequited concessions proved itself to be a total failure.

That is precisely why Sharon, who twice campaigned on a platform of no concessions without an end to terrorism, trounced first Ehud Barak and then Amram Mitzna by the largest margins in Israeli history. Yet now, even Sharon is adopting the policy of unrequited concessions. And, as Haaretz columnist Zvi Bar'el aptly noted on Sunday, once one accepts the premise that "in order to increase security, it is necessary to retreat a bit," it becomes difficult to explain why it does not logically follow that "in order to increase security even more, it is necessary to retreat even further" " precisely what the Left has been advocating all along.

Sharon's disengagement plan, though vague on details, appears to envision a much more limited retreat than the massive withdrawal proposed a few weeks ago by Ehud Olmert. Yet the underlying principles differ little " and by virtue of having been advanced by a popular prime minister rather than a fading politician with no political base, the dangers that Sharon's plan poses are infinitely worse.

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 23, 2003.
You have to hand it to Israel's Jewish enemies. They figure good. Israel depends on its soldier sons and daughters. They are proud of them. So the Marxist Jews figured a way to demoralize Israel. Using funds from the American organization, Shefa, they hang out around bus stops and try to persuade IDF'ers to refuse to serve in Biblical Israel.

I have a question? Will they also pay all the loyal IDF'ers, who live in Biblical Israel - the so-called settlers - and who obey orders, even when it brings them into angonizing conflict with their own friends and families?

I hope everyone who contributes to Shefa will STOP giving them money.

This report was written by David Bedein, who is the bureau chief of the Israel Resource News Agency. It appeared on the http://www.makorrishon.com/ website December 12, 2003.

Next Wednesday night, at the Tzfata Restaurant hall in Tel Aviv, an Israeli organization funded by an American Jewish organization will be organizing an all day teach-in in the heart of Tel Aviv to convince high school students not to join the Israeli army and to convince Israeli soldiers to desert the Israel Defense Forces. The theme of the "teach-in": Israel's soldiers are "war criminals."

All this occurs after the PLO orchestrated over 20,000 terror attacks over a period of three years that have resulted in the cold blooded murders of more than 900 men, women and children throughout Israel.

Meanwhile, the Hizbullah organization gnaws at Israel's border with its war of attrition in the north, moving into the positions that the Israeli army unilaterally withdrew from under the Beilin/Barak left wing government's hasty retreat from Lebanon in May 2000. And, at the same time, tens of weapons smuggling tunnels are being dug along Israel's long southern frontier with the collusion of Israel's neighbor to the south, Egypt.

As a result, the Israel Defense Force has been forced to spread its small army to conduct operations in order to preempt terrorists by locating, arresting and neutralizing potential killers where they plan potential terror attacks, while at the same time guarding and patrolling two very hot borders.

While the IDF operations are taking place, a group of Israelis with support from a Jewish group in the US have been conducting a well-financed campaign to encourage IDF troops to desert their units.

I write this not only as a journalist, but also as the father of Noam, an Israeli soldier who serves as a sergeant in an IDF combat unit that operates in an isolated and sensitive area of operation where he risks his life every day.

My wife and I and our five other children look forward to welcoming our oldest son home whenever he can get away for Shabbat. Noam arrives home exhausted and, like the other young men and women his age serving in the army, he appreciates the support that he gets from the "home front" - our community and his own family.

Yet at every train station and bus station that Noam passes through he is "greeted" by paid professionals who distribute leaflets to IDF soldiers to encourage them to desert from their units, offering to pay them to do so.

The leaflets that Noam picks up describe Israeli soldiers as "war criminals" and are financed through a Jewish organization in my home community of Philadelphia in the United States.

That organization is the Shefa Fund.

As their website at www.shefafund.org proudly states, the Shefa Fund provides funds to the "Courage to Refuse" campaign, which proclaims that it will pay for any IDF soldier for the time that he might spend in prison and for any legal expenses involved in refusing to serve. A recent investigative TV program which aired on Commerical Station Channel Two in Israel showed how the "Courage to Refuse" campaign had set up a counseling service in the center of Tel Aviv known as "New Profile", which counsels young Israeli men and women on how to avoid Israeli army service altogether.

Page seven of the annual Shefa Fund report also proudly states that the Shefa Fund has most recently allocated funds to the Courage to Refuse Campaign. This has enabled the Israeli draft desertion campaign to take out ads, distribute leaflets at army bases and at bus stops, and to hire a PR firm to further incite IDF troops to desert their units. Instead of calling themselves "deserters", these soldiers call themselves "refusenicks," a term reminiscent of the struggle to save Soviet Jews who were refused exit visas from the Soviet Union in the 1970's and 1980's. Copying the tactics of the struggle to free Soviet Jewry, the Shefa Fund has now launched a campaign for Jews in the US to "sponsor" deserters from the IDF and to glorify them in their hometown communities in the US.

Needless to say, all this undermines the morale of the IDF by accusing Israeli soldiers of conducting war crimes against an Arab population which harbors terrorists and which encourages and celebrates the murder of Jews, even women and children.

The Shefa Fund has responded to these reports by distributing a letter in which it states that "as a matter of policy, we do not distribute flyers on buses or at points where soldiers are returning from the front. "Courage To Refuse," in fact, works only with reservists, not with soldiers who are under compulsory service. These organizations do not encourage desertion, and do not pay anyone to recruit members or to refuse military service."

The Shefa Fund also claims that "Yesh G'vul" and "Courage to Refuse" do not encourage desertion from the Israeli military, despite the fact that this is precisely what both organizations do by distributing letters, leaflets and internet messages every day in praise of IDF reservists and new IDF inductees who desert their IDF units rather than engage in the pursuit of PLO terrorists who escape to safe havens in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), Gaza and Jerusalem.

Throughout the past year, Yesh Gvul and Courage To Refuse have held countless rallies in honor of young inductees to IDF compulsory service who are now sitting in prison for deserting their units rather than pursuing PLO killers in the West Bank and Gaza.

So much for the Shefa Fund claim that they are "only working with reservists."

The Shefa Fund also claims that "Yesh G'vul and Courage To Refuse conduct activities that are legal", despite the fact that Yesh G'vul, as an Israeli-registered Non-Profit Organization, #58-039186-0, was disbanded as a non-profit organization on December 31, 1997 because of "financial irregularities" and remained disbanded until June 2002 when it was established as a profit-making corporation, listed in the Israel Corporate Registrar, #51-325106-6.

According to the Israeli law, it is a felony for Yesh G'vul to solicit or to receive funds, from Israel or from abroad, from the time it was disbanded as a non-profit organization until the time it was registered as a corporation. Even more important, it is illegal to encourage Israeli citizens to engage in the felonious act of desertion from the IDF.

Since the Shefa Fund asserts that neither Yesh G'vul nor Courage To Refuse pay Israeli soldiers when they desert the IDF, it would seem that the Shefa Fund's leaders did not read the websites of Courage To Refuse at http://www.seruv.org.il/defaulteng.asp>http://www.seruv.org.il/defaulteng.asp in which Courage To Refuse announced until recently, both in Hebrew and in English, that it would pay deserters for "the time that they spend in jail" to cover their mortgage, tuition, rent and day-care for their children - benefits which are much more than an IDF soldier would get from the Israeli government's meager "national security" allowance during IDF regular or reserve service. Imagine what would happen if the IDF paid the tuition, mortgage, rent and day-care for its soldiers while they are on reserve duty?

The current "Yesh G'vul" brochure offers a flat $750(US) a month for anyone who is jailed for desertion from the IDF.

The Shefa Fund has therefore created the first financial incentive system to make it profitable for an Israeli soldier to desert the Israeli army. All told, the Shefa Fund provided $160,000(US) for this purpose in 2002 alone.

And where does the Shefa Fund get this money? Its brochures show several hundred Jewish contributors who have earmarked funds for their support of IDF desertion.

However, a look at the US #990 IRS forms for the Shefa Fund reveals that the Shefa Fund received an anonymous $15 million donation, of which Shefa is not saying where it came from. Just who is this mysterious anonymous donor?

Ironically, the Shefa Fund is generally known as an agency that provides sorely needed health, education and welfare programs for social services throughout North America. It remains to be seen whether Shefa's assistance to IDF deserters will hurt or help its fund-raising for their worthy social causes. Meanwhile, Noam and his fellow soldiers remain on duty protecting the people of Israel.

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 23, 2003.
Hardly a day goes by but Hamas and other terrorist groups seek to carry out attacks against Israeli civilians, although the IDF and Shin Bet fortunately are getting better at intercepting them and preventing widespread carnage. But not every time. Egypt allows terrorists to cross into Israel with impunity and does nothing on its side of the border to prevent weapons smuggling into the Gaza Strip. In the meantime, Hamas & Co. reject any and all appeals for a total cease-fire.

Against this background, Israeli troops enter Rafah to find a huge weapons-smuggling tunnel. In the process, they come under heavy fire and, according to Palestinian sources, kill eight people, including five terrorists.

So what does Kofi Annan, the UN's global conscience, have to say about all this? As expected he slams Israel for "disproportionate" use of force and urges Israel to stop such operations and rejoin its Palestinian "partners" in "peaceful negotiations" to implement the road map - under the auspices of the Quartet (That group, of course, includes Kofi Annan, the EU and Kremlin - all honest brokers, right?) But which peace partners does he suggest Israel engage? Yassir Arafat, the terrorists' godfather? Or his docile prime minister? Or the heads of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc.? And what about the road map, which requires an immediate Palestinian crackdown on terrorist groups? And what about Egypt's tacit cooperation with Palestinian terrorist? Not a whisper by Kofi Annan on any of those points. Just the usual totally one-sided denunciation of Israel and total blindness to terrorism - its perpetrators and abettors.

And some people still wonder why the UN has lost all credibility as a venue for resolving conflicts! As long as Kofi Annan remains in charge, it should be dismissed as a total sham, the very opposite of what its founders intended. Kofi Annan long ago dropped the mantle of Mideast peacemaker. In the truest sense, he has become a dangerous warmonger by inciting anti-Israel hatred and lending his prestige, whatever is left of it, to terrorist kingpins.

Posted by MEMRI, December 23, 2003.
For the past several months, Al-Qa'ida operatives have been debating the organization's attacks in Saudi Arabia. There has been no dispute over striking American or Western targets around the world - only regarding attacks within the kingdom. Furthermore, while some favor striking only at "Crusader" - namely American - targets in Saudi Arabia, others are willing to include the Saudi regime and security forces as targets.

The opposition to attacks inside Saudi Arabia, and specifically against the country's regime and security forces, is not based on religious considerations. The arguments against these attacks focuses on tactical matters, such as the importance of Saudi society's identification with and funding of Al-Qa'ida - and the implications of such attacks on the potential of recruiting new members from Saudi Arabia. The following are excerpts from recent editions of the Al-Qa'ida magazine, "The Voice of Jihad":

The Attacks and Al-Qa'ida's Status in Saudi Society

High-ranking Al-Qa'ida member Abd Al-'Aziz bin 'Issa bin Abd Al-Mohsen, also known as Abu Hajer, who is on Saudi Arabia's most-wanted list, referred to the dispute over the attacks inside Saudi Arabia in an interview with an Al-Qa'ida online magazine, The Voice of Jihad: "Jihad members and Mujahideen sympathizers were divided: Some said we must attack the invading forces that defile the land of the two holy places [i.e. the Arabian Peninsula], and must cause the Americans to become preoccupied with themselves and their bases so they won't leave them to crush the countries and lands of the Muslims, country by country.

"Others said we had to preserve the security of this base and of this country [i.e. Saudi Arabia], from which we recruit the armies, from which we take out the young people, and from which we receive [financial] backing. It must therefore remain safe.

"My opinion is an intermediate opinion, between the two groups. It is true that we must keep the enemy preoccupied with himself and not give him a sense of security, because as soon as he secures his bases and his lines of supply, he will have an opportunity to use them to attack our brothers in different parts of the countries of the Islamic world. But we must prepare ourselves and be ready for this momentous event the best way we possibly can. We told them: 'Wait, we are readying ourselves.' Then we attacked the Americans.

"It is also true that we must take advantage of this country [Saudi Arabia] because it is the primary source of funds for most Jihad movements, and it has some degree of security and freedom of movement. But we must strike a balance between this and America's invasion of the Islamic world and its hobbling of the Jihad movement and even of other Islamic movements?" [1]

Another Strike in the U.S. Will Restore Sympathy for Al-Qa'ida

Al-Qa'ida members deny that Muslims have been killed in their bombings in Saudi Arabia, but recognize that the regime has managed, via the media, to convey such a message - which has damaged Al-Qa'ida's image.

In an interview in The Voice of Jihad, Louis Attiya Allah (an alias), [2] one of Al-Qa'ida's leading ideologues, stated: "Regarding the Al-Muhaya operation [the November 8, 2003 bombing in Riyadh], it can be claimed that the house of Salul [3] had some media success in portraying the battle as the killing of Muslims, and in inciting some against the Mujahideen. But this effect is temporary and will disappear if, for example, the Mujahideen strike another blow in America. Then sympathy will return to what it was in the past, and may even increase."

When asked whether the attacks in Saudi Arabia "caused Mujahideen shares to plummet" in Saudi society, he responded: "That may have happened, but we must look at the matter with a broader view, and place these operations in the framework of the war of the Mujahideen against the whole Western-American plan. At certain stages of this war, the Mujahideen can think they require these operations, despite their high price in terms of morale." [4]

Attacks are Against 'Crusaders,' Not the Saudi Regime

The statement that Al-Qa'ida members in Saudi Arabia are fighting the Americans and not the Saudi security forces has repeatedly appeared in The Voice of Jihad. In the interview, Abu Hajer said: "We have not carried out a single attack. All the operations that took place were defensive operations. The brothers try as much as possible to avoid clashes with the military and the security forces. Nevertheless, the government is escalating its war, and is trying to uproot me, uproot you, and uproot all Islamists... I have sworn to purge the Arabian Peninsula of the polytheists. We were born in this country, and we will fight in it against the Crusaders and against the Jews until we remove them or taste what was tasted by Hamza bin Abd Al-Muttalib [i.e. martyrdom]..." [5]

Voice of Jihad editorial writer Suleiman Al-Dosari went even further, calling on the Mujahideen to fight the Saudi security forces only when it was clearly self-defense: "We draw the attention of the Mujahideen to the strategy of the Sheikh of the Mujahideen, Abu Abdallah Osama bin Laden, and Sheikh Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri, a strategy on which many of the great Mujahideen have agreed in regard to fighting the enemy: Our number-one enemy is the Jews and the Christians, and we must make ourselves available and invest all our effort until we destroy them - and we are capable of doing this if Allah allows us to - because they are the main obstacle to the establishment of the Islamic state.

"... Notice the trick used by the [Arab] tyrants? [In their view] the blood of an American is equal to the blood of all the Muslims. They are willing to send hundreds [of Muslims] to their deaths in exchange for Americans enjoying security and well-being... We must be wary of this trick and avoid, as much as possible, confronting the state's armies and forces, so that we can deliver knock-out blows to the occupiers, Allah willing.

"This does not mean surrendering to those defending the Crusaders if they raid us; on the contrary, in this case we must resist with all our might and punish them so they turn their swords towards the Americans and fight in our ranks, refrain from confronting us, or stand against us and wait for what is anticipated for them [at our hands], by virtue of Allah and with His strength..." [6]

The Al-Haramayn Brigades: Focusing on Saudi Targets

Saudi Arabia does not lack for radical Islamists interested in filling the void left by Al-Qa'ida when it gave up direct attacks against the Saudi regime. One example is a new organization called The Al-Haramayn [Two Holy Places] Brigades, which has so far published two communiques claiming to have carried out, on December 5, 2003, the shooting of a high-ranking Saudi security officer. Its first communique stated:

"The aim of this operation was, first and foremost, to let him [the Saudi officer] and every apostate tyrant know that he will not in any way be protected from the Mujahideen and their weapons, Allah willing... This operation was the first measure by the Brigades in the land of the two holy places, and part of its plan to purge it, as it was decided that the first stage would focus on the two groups of apostates:

"The first group is the leaders of the Crusader attack on the land of the two holy places, and it includes all those who cooperated with America in any way - by gathering information on the Mujahideen, by writing reports, by giving advice to the Crusaders, by raiding peaceful Muslims and intimidating them in their homes, by bringing their sons to the prisons, and by raiding the Mujahideen groups. The second group is the hangmen, which includes anyone who carries out torture in the prisons...

"Since our brothers in Al-Qa'ida are preoccupied with waging war on the Crusaders, and since it has become clear from their repeated communiques that they are not attacking the internal security apparatus, we have decided to relieve them of this important [religious obligation] and to purge the land of the two holy places of the [Arab] agents, freeing [Al-Qa'ida] to purge it of the Crusaders...

"This is a message from The Al-Haramayn Brigades, [a message] based on a plan for 'cleansing the land of the two holy places,' directed at anyone whose hand is stained with the defilement of collaboration [with the Americans] or whose defiled hand has tortured any of the monotheists [i.e. the Islamists]: He must cease this immediately, or the hands of the monotheists will reach him..." [7]

Strike At America So America Cannot Strike at Saudi Arabia

The damage done to Al-Qa'ida's image by the Saudi bombings is not the only reason the organization prefers targeting "Crusaders" in Saudi Arabia or carrying out attacks in the West. According to Louis Attiya Allah,some Al-Qa'ida members claim that the Saudi regime's continued existence is in the organization's best interest, because it prevents the U.S. from striking hard at the Islamists in the Arabian Peninsula.

When asked why there had been no Jihad operations against the royal family, Attiya Allahsaid: "I don't know. Personally, I think attacking the heads of the regime will hasten its collapse. These decisions are discussed at Mujahideen meetings, and it is they who make this kind of decision, as ultimately these are military decisions.

"Perhaps the aim of the Mujahideen is to refrain from toppling the regime because the treasonous cover provided by the Saudi regime prevents America from striking a powerful blow to the entire country. That is one of the ideas that led the Mujahideen [to prefer] first of all neutralizing America, or paralyzing it, and only afterward turning to this regime and its ilk. I say this, even though I maintain that eliminating some members of the regime would be very useful and would make things easier for the Mujahideen without causing the regime's downfall."

Attiya Allah also discussed what might happen in the region were the Saudi regime to collapse. When asked whether "the Americans would leave us alone if the zero hour arrives and the regime of the House of Salul is removed," Attiya Allah responded:

"No, they would not leave us alone. As a first step, they would try to secure the oil fields, in accordance with an old plan. They would not stand idly by. But the question is whether they would be able to do this in the event that the regime completely collapses and anarchy prevails. I doubt this very much. If they become more and more entangled in the Iraqi quagmire, and if we strike painful blows in America, those blows will deprive them of their ability to focus on [Saudi Arabia]... What arouses real concern is the acts of their allies the Shiites in the event of the collapse [of the Saudi regime]. This would be an extremely grave situation requiring great thought and preparation of alternatives by the Mujadiheen."

Also in the interview, Attiya Allah explained why Al-Qa'ida was more concerned about the U.S. than about the Saudi regime: "The Mujahideen are waging a great ongoing war with the masters [the Americans], and the slaves [the Saudis] have no place in this battle. The slaps and kicks that harm the slave during the Mujahideen's battle against its master are of no consequence in light of his fate when his master is defeated... The Mujahideen are warring with the masters, but we may soon see a little more attention directed toward these slaves..." [8]

Al-Qa'ida's Political Program

In the interview, The Voice of Jihad asked Louis Attiya Allah how he responded to those who argued that Al-Qa'ida had no comprehensive political program. He said, "Does [Saudi Crown Prince] Abdallah bin Abd Al-Aziz, for example, have a political program, apart from being an agent and slave of the Americans? Do any of the existing regimes in the Islamic world have a genuine political program?... If you mean a political program compatible with the existing world order, I say to you that yes, Al-Qa'ida has no political program compatible with the existing world order, simply because the existing world order does not recognize us as an independent Islamic state, and forces us to be its satellite, to adapt ourselves to its secular laws and to be subjugated to its military rule.

"Al-Qa'ida is absolutely opposed to this, and states: The world order must be removed from the region and defeated, first of all militarily. Then, the Islamic state must be reestablished, in accordance with the Islamic regime. This means that we will control our fate, rule over ourselves, and control our resources. More generally, we will rebuild our lives according to our foundations and our principles. The experience [of an Islamic state] is real, and it existed 1,300 years ago. The peoples of the East ruled themselves and lived according to their own rules long before the West was in the region. There is nothing to prevent the revival of these rules, which are based on the Koran and the Sunna...

"No political program has a chance of succeeding if we do not defeat the West, militarily and culturally, and remove it from Muslim countries. Then, it will not be difficult for the nation, with the help of its tremendous resources, to rebuild life according to religious Islamic principles. We will become the masters of the world, as the world's economic fate depends on us because we have the resources the world needs and all the elements of controlling the world are in our hands. What we are lacking is to live free and to rule ourselves by ourselves, cut off from the West and its agents."

'Arab Nation States Have Neither a Right to Exist Nor a Popular Base'

Attiya Allah also spoke of the fate Al-Qa'ida has planned for the Arab countries: "The [Arab] nation-states... are a Western model that the West created to allow it to build up its general colonialist plan for the Islamic East. These countries have no religious foundation, and have neither a right to exist nor a popular base. They were forced upon the Muslim peoples, and their survival is linked to the Western forces that created them. Therefore, the general aim of the Jihad and the Mujahideen is to strike at the foundations and infrastructure of the Western colonialist program or at the so-called world order - or, to put it bluntly, to defeat Crusaders in the battle that has been going on for over a century. Their defeat means, simply, the elimination of all forms of nation-states, such that all that remains is the natural existence familiar to Islam - the regional entity under the great Islamic state.

The Jihad Movement Will Not Stop at Any Arab Border

"Expelling the colonialists from the Muslim lands means simply eradicating the borders and all types of nation-states created by the West. The significance of this is that when the Jihad goes into action in Iraq, for example, it will not stop at the colonialist borders; it will not stop in Jordan and recognize it as an entity, because in Islamic concepts this country called Jordan has no [right to] exist. The Jihad movement in the Arabian Peninsula will not be stopped by the borders of the so-called Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, because the entity called by this name is an artificial entity that has no religious foundation. There is no religious consideration that prevents, for example, the transfer of Jihad outside this entity to Yemen or to the countries called the Gulf States. All these types of nation-states have no significance, and they have no [religious] protection preventing their removal when the Jihad goes into action.

"Igniting the fire in the Arabian Peninsula is expected to be one of the keys to the great change, because the Arabian Peninsula is the heart, and any change in the Arabian Peninsula affects the other parts of the Islamic body."

'The More Martyrs' Blood Shed, the Greater the Light of Jihad'

"Even if we assume that, Allah willing, the sparking of conflicts will lead to painful results in the short term and perhaps in the intermediate term, in the long term the changes happening here will be the key to the cleansing of the entire Islamic world, to ridding ourselves of the colonialists, and to removing the Crusaders - so that we can then prepare for the great conflicts with them in the battles to come, including the decisive war with the Byzantines of which the Prophet spoke... [9]

"The main enemies of the nation, the Byzantines, will not come to their end until Judgment Day, and therefore there is no point in talking of stopping the battle.. The most important thing is that the Mujahideen will safeguard the burning ember of Jihad. The more martyrs' blood is shed for the sake of this ember, the greater its light; it will burn the enemies more quickly and victory will draw near, Allah willing..." [10]

[1] The Voice of Jihad, Nos. 1 and 2, Sha'ban 1424 (October 2003).

[2] Louis Attiya Allah is the alias of a Saudi who is considered a leading Al-Qa'ida ideologue. His writings have appeared on the Internet since September 11, and since the killing of Sheikh Yousef Al-'Ayyiri, Attiya Allah is probably the most popular of Al-Qa'ida's ideologues.

[3] A highly derogatory term used by Islamists for the Saudi royal family, the house of Saud. The term is derived from Abdallah bin Ubay ibn Salul, considered in Islam to be the leader of the hypocrites.

[4] The Voice of Jihad, No. 6, Shawwal 1424 (early December 2003).

[5] The Voice of Jihad, Nos. 1 and 2, Sha'ban 1424 (October 2003).

[6] The Voice of Jihad, No. 2, Sha'ban 1424 (October 2003).

[7] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/globalislamicmedia/message/228.

[8] The Voice of Jihad, No. 6, Shawwal 1424 (early December, 2003).

[9] A reference to the war against the Christians, termed in this context "Byzantines" following a Hadith that is attributed to the Prophet Muhammad regarding the future battle. See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 447.

[10] The Voice of Jihad, No. 6, Shawwal 1424 (early December 2003).

MEMBRI - The Middle East Media Research Institute - translates from the Arab media and does analyses. Its website address is http://www.memri.org

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, December 22, 2003.
On December 21st I wrote and published a piece on "The Value of Israel's Nuclear Deterrence" I mentioned something which I had written about before, namely, the paid involvement of Pakistan in developing and feeding back nuclear devices to its investors. I also mentioned, in passing, that Moammar Gadhafi may have already completed his assignment and passed nuclear components on to Terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda. Now, having completed it role, Gadhafi is looking to separate himself from whatever is about to go down and protect his backside.

I think that our intelligence sources had better take a deeper look at Gadhafi's sudden turn around. If Gadhafi has been double dealing the Brits, assuming the U.S. would buy his "Born Again" gesture, that's very suspicious for the International security services to trust from a man dedicated to the fall of the West.

If Israel or America are hit in the near future, we should look to Mr. Gadhafi as one of the contributing players. It would be better to know what Gadhafi has been up to before any such mega-attack.

Something else to think about.

Please also take notice of Egyptian UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) flying over the Israel's nuclear facilities at Nahel Sorek and the missile test site at Palmahim, south of Tel Aviv.

While Mubarak is telling the Israelis he is "thinking" of coming to Israel to discuss peace, his intelligence is flying over Israel"s defenses.

Do you recall Anwar Sadat's trick of sending troops and tanks into the Sinai during the day "as an exercise" but withdrawing them at night. The only problem was that he left men and equipment after each withdrawal. Then he launched his 1973 surprise War on Yom Kippur with the men and equipment that he had pre-positioned in the Sinai.

So, Mubarak may also be playing a double game as did Sadat while Gadhafi is playing his own double game. Mubarak, never a friend of Israel, seems to be playing a similar role to Gadhafi and is also protecting his backside against reprisal.

Israel would do well to arm its nuclear missiles and aim them at Cairo and Gadhafi"s capital, Tripoli. Should Israel be hit with a mega-attack on her cities or her nuclear plant in Dimona or Sorek, then she would have time to reduce both those nations" capitals to cinders. If nothing happens, then the alert can be stood down and there is nothing lost. Of course, there is also the possibility of coordinated multiple attacks in America as indicated by the rise in Terrorist Alert Status to "Orange".

Israelis always have what they call their "conceptzia" meaning they lock in on ideas and cannot be moved - despite evidence to the contrary. Let us hope that this time they will be more flexible than they were before the Yom Kippur sneak attack.

Posted by Beth Goodtree, December 22, 2003.
Now that the United States has captured Saddam Hussein, the self-deceiving Islamo-Nazi world was shown what the civilized world has known all long. And if they are smart, they will take this example to heart. Saddam is living proof that everything they believe is not merely a lie, but that their so-called heroes are nothing more than sniveling, parasitic cowards. It was with not some little humor that I read in many Arab papers quotes, as well as editorials, about how the Arabs and Muslims, once again, were humiliated by the big bad West. It seems that every time now that the Islamo-Nazis are caught with their evil intentions and deeds exposed, they blame it on America, the Jews, and Western civilization in general. And they accuse us all of "humiliating" them. In fact, it's become their mantra, because they have found that certain weak-minded, non-thinking, pseudo-intellectual people actually believe it. What we really saw was one of the chief Islamo-Nazi leaders exposed as a fraud to everything he and his followers espouse. And it was downright humiliating - but well deserved.

Saddam's capture showed the world that he was not merely a hypocrite, but a deranged yet cunning coward who doesn't believe a word of what he has preached. For example, Saddam happily funded Palestinian genocide bombers (homicide bombers whose sole intention is to kill as many Jews as possible and thus continue the genocide started by one of their self-declared heroes, Adolf Hitler). Saddam gave out many, many millions of dollars in reward money to anyone who murdered Jews, thus supporting their vile (as well as ridiculous) Islamo-Nazi teachings. These teachings, issued in fatwas by a host of imams including the official one for the Palestinian Arab entity, claim that it is not merely a noble and religious duty to commit suicide during a wartime situation, but it is one's duty, which will reap heavenly rewards.

Then the world got to witness Saddam's true belief. Unlike his over-the-top motivational speeches encouraging Arabs to fight and commit suicide, he himself was found in a vertical hidey-hole more reminiscent of a coffin than anything else. He had on him $750,000 and a loaded pistol. And instead of fighting for his freedom, or even committing a "noble" suicide as he has preached to others, Saddam reportedly tried to bribe his way out of his situation. Saddam demonstrated in a way that no one else could have, that suicide and fighting are not noble when it comes to saving his own skin. Saddam proved that he believes the fascist, Islamo-Nazi interpretation of Islam which he preaches is false, that he's a liar and manipulator, and his supporters are fools and dupes (at best). He also showed the entire world that the Arab "heroes," as well as the jihadists, are cowering little animals willing to sell out their professed ideals and betray their supporters to save their own hides.

Interestingly, Arabs place "face" above everything, even above the lives of their family and loved ones. We see this demonstrated time and again in the so-called "honor" killings where a parent might murder a child if they thought the child brought dishonor to the family. Granted this is a very primitive behavior indicative of the backwardness of the society that sanctions it. And while the civilized world cannot make a society mature beyond their capabilities or desires, Saddam's ignoble downfall shows the Arab world how their entire reason d'etre is based upon false notions and a failure to face even the most basic reality. It also demonstrates that instead of bravery, their heroes exhibit the utmost cowardice. It further shows the Arabs that to be a terrorist or a tyrant is to face well-justified humiliation. If they are so concerned with face, they'd best change their behaviors or face continual self-humiliation.

And finally, there is one more lesson the Arab world should finally learn. (Maybe the umpteenth time will be the charm...) Here it is for those willing to heed. Anyone who demonizes Jews or sanctions their genocide always, always gets destroyed. History is replete with examples. The Pharaohs and their society were destroyed. The ancient Greek empire, The Catholic Church's stranglehold on Europe which culminated in The Inquisition, Stalin's Soviet Union, and Hitler, to name but a few. And now Saddam.

If the Arab/Muslim world is smart - although Dr. Mahathir, the former head of The Organization of Islamic Countries'declared in his opening speech in October of this year that they aren't - they will accept Israel and the Jews as a welcome member of the Middle East and the oldest historical indigenous people. Or I predict that the Arab/Muslim world we know today will soon become a mere footnote meriting derision and scorn in the history books of tomorrow.

Posted by Jerusalem Prayer Team, December 22, 2003.
In 1995, President Clinton turned Bethlehem over to Yasser Arafat and the PA. Christians worldwide, who consider the city of Jesus' birth a sacred and holy site, were given no voice in the matter. Arafat changed the name of the city, and rewrote the Holy Scriptures. He declared Bethlehem to be the place where Jesus, "the first Palestinian Christian" was born.

President Bush met recently with PM Sharon. He said Judea and Samaria are illegal outposts, and asked them to relinquish them to the PA. That must not happen. Bill Clinton tried that before September 11th, and put our nation in harms' way.

Yasser Arafat is due to play the ghost of Christmas past once again at Midnight Mass in Bethlehem, his empty chair in the Church of the Nativity a symbol of the terrorism he has brought upon the region. For the third Christmas under the violence he has orchestrated, Israel has not lifted its siege of his battered Ramallah headquarters, effectively barring him from playing the role of benevolent ruler in a Palestinian Authority Christmas pageant in Bethlehem, a town he has done everything to rid of its Christian population.

There will be no illuminated giant tree in Manger Square, no carols by visiting choirs - practically no tourists at all. And practically no Christians! About 35,000 Christians live in the West Bank and 3,000 in Gaza, or about 1.3 percent of the Palestinian population. Islam is the official religion of the Palestinian Authority, which has been Islamicizing Bethlehem since Arafat's takeover in 1995. The area of Bethlehem, Beit Jala, and Beit Sahur - predominantly Christian for centuries - has undergone a sinister transformation, as 60 percent of its Christian families have fled and Muslims, now 75 percent of the local population, have taken over.

If the Geneva Initiative is allowed to gain momentum to the point of acceptance, Bethlehem will be only the first of many Christian holy sites to come under Arafat's influence.

"The Fatah and Arafat's intelligence network intimidated and maltreated the Christian population in Bethlehem," David Raab of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs quotes from a 2002 government intelligence report. "They extorted money from them, confiscated land and property, and left them to the mercy of street gangs and other criminal activity, with no protection."

There is probably no clearer illustration of Arafat's Christmas message than the true story of a Palestinian baby who was born in Bethlehem in mid-November and whose birth was widely acclaimed by Palestinians as miraculous. Ala Ayyad was born on the 27th day of Ramadan, known as Lailat al-Kader, the night the Koran was revealed to Muhammad by Allah.

Thousands of Palestinians thronged to Bethlehem's Aida refugee camp to pay him homage, because, in addition to the auspicious date, Ala was born with a large birthmark across his cheek that clearly spells out in Arabic letters the name of his uncle, Ala - a Hamas terrorist killed by the IDF eight months ago.

The family proudly told The Jerusalem Post (12.1.03) they would raise the baby to follow in his uncle's footsteps and lead a new generation of terrorists to fight against Israel. Cradling the infant in her arms, the baby's grandmother, Aisheh, said the birthmark is a clear sign from Allah that her son's death was not in vain.

"We will raise him to be good and pious like his uncle," she said. "Just as Mary received a sign from God that Jesus would be born to her in this holy place, so we have received a sign from God. This miracle shows that the martyrs who fall fighting for God do not die. It shows they live on in Paradise and that God is generous."

The Geneva Initiative ensures an "Arafat State" - repressive, corrupt and committed to the annihilation of the Jewish people, and the Christian people under his control. It will mean history forever rewritten from Arafat's distorted point of view.

Please sign the petition to President Bush today. Israel and the world are at a crossroads - not of peace, but of annihilation - if proven anti-Semitic countries are given the authority to negotiate away Israel's very right to exist!

The people of God MUST stand up and be counted!

"And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee:" (Genesis 12:3)

Add your support by signing our letter to President Bush. We must stand against Yasser Arafat and stop negotiating with terrorists. Please sign the petition to President Bush today.

Israel and the world are at a crossroads - not of peace, but of annihilation - if proven anti-Semitic countries are given the authority to negotiate away Israel's very right to exist!

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 22, 2003.
The P.A. expressed shock at the murders. Israeli officials consider that attack as a continuation of the P.A. conflict with the US. After all, "While expressing remorse and conciliation to Western audiences, the P.A. leadership, following their pattern before, during, and after the Oslo period, expressed wild vilification of Israel and the US to its own public." An official P.A. cartoon portrayed the Americans in antisemitic stereotypes. The P.A. blames Israel and the US for making the attack! (The Arabs often blame their victims.) The P.A. derides the US regardless of the annual US subsidy of hundreds of millions dollars a year and support for a P.A. state.

The Arabs celebrated over the killings. The P.A. threatened to slay foreign news bureau staffs if they didn't stop broadcasting the celebrations. The bureaus switched to photos of P.A. children carrying signs in English sympathizing with the victims of terrorism and of Arafat donating blood.

The P.A. takes the broad view. To it, this is a conflict of civilizations. The US heads the enemy civilization. It deems Israel a proxy for the US (despite the anti-Israel US policy). "The P.A. fights Israel because it represents the US; it does not hate the US because it supports Israel." The P.A. named a square in Jenin after a suicide bomber who had killed four American soldiers in Iraq.

The P.A. promised to cooperate with FBI investigators, but didn't. It contaminated the crime scene. When the US offered a reward for help in capturing the murders drew, the P.A. was outraged. It called that a slur on its (phony) criminal investigation.

The US had detailed the itinerary for the P.A.. The P.A. police have Islamist members and men trained by the CIA. The attack was timed and carried out too well not to have been an inside job.

The P.A., which proptgandizes its people against the US, told the US that its people are pro-American. However, The Arab crowd murmured, "They deserved what happened to them." After the attack, Arabs threw rocks at rescue workers and at a reporter known to be an American. The Israeli army had to help the Americans evacuate the dead and wounded.

The US claims that its aid does not go through the P.A. but through NGOs. In the P.A. dictatorship, NGOs are not independent. The US is making a non-existent distinction.

Criminal negligence by the US ambassador made the attack likelier to succeed. There had been an attack in June. It should have alerted him to what the Arabs were up to. He should have changed the procedures for traveling and taken other security measures and perhaps action. Instead, he let them attack the same way a second time, and succeed. That second attack was inevitable (Jewish Voice & Opinion of NJ, 11/2003, p.1).

Pres. Bush is reducing the loan guarantees to Israel, because Israelis continue developing their communities in the disputed Territories. Why doesn't he reduce the subsidy for the P.A. for every attempted terrorist attack by the PLO, which is part of the P.A., and for attacks by other terrorist organizations that the P.A. is supposed to eradicate? Murder is worse than building houses (Women In Green, 12/12, e-mail).

Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, December 22, 2003.
President George W. Bush, who purportedly has found "religion", nevertheless seems to think his overriding dictate is to listen to Saudi advice as to what is best for the Middle East. It was the Saudis who, in effect, devised the "Road Map" as a solution to the problems of the Middle East. The Saudis' friend in court, Colin Powell convinced President Bush, whose family has a long standing warm relationship with the Saudis, as to its merits. For their own respective self-interest, the U.S., EU, Russia, and U.N. are pushing the plan.

Notwithstanding, the L-rd of this Universe has repeatedly declared in His Bible that the Holy Land of Israel was given exclusively to the Jewish People, as His eternal bequest. It is therefore ludicrous for President Bush to declare: "It's in Israel's interest there be a Palestinian state." That is in direct defiance of the Will of G-d, as expressed over and over again in the Bible! President Bush, in effect, is telling the Jewish People that he knows what is best for them, and to disregard what is specifically declared in the Bible.

Bush further stated that "It's in the poor suffering Palestinian people's interest there be a Palestinian state." This despite the fact that these same poor suffering people were very unhappy about Sadaam Hussein being captured by the Americans in Iraq, and danced in the streets after the news of September 11. That the Palestinian Authority has directly supplied suicide bombers to kill American soldiers in Iraq. That the great majority of these Arabs support Arafat, the murderer of American diplomats, who Bush himself refuses to meet with.

This indeed is a strange, mixed up world when the President of the U.S.A. defies what many Bible-believing Americans, both Christians and Jews, hold dear. It is definitely not in the American People's best interest to defy the Will of G-d. Their President should be acting only with regard to that self-interest!

Saudi Arabia is a recent creation. In the long history of man on this planet, it is a temporary phenomenon. Nations rise and fall. This dictatorial, cruel and oppressive regime, which has been found to be a major supporter of terrorism and fanatical Islam throughout the world, is hardly the source for a peaceful solution to the problems of the Middle East.

One can only humbly pray that President Bush. who often speaks of the distinction between good and evil, will act in accordance with the Will of G-d. He must adhere and follow in his term of office, the guiding moral principles of the Book of Books. Only in this manner will there ever be peace in this region.

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 22, 2003.
ITEM 1. Time Magazine chose as its "Man of the Year" the American soldier. The cover shows three young GIs. The American soldier was chosen by Time because he represents the pride and the values that the Time editors believe in or wish to honor.

Not to be outdone, two Israeli daily newspapers may follow suit and chose as THEIR man of the year those people with whom they most clearly identify and whom they wish to honor, people who represent what they believe in, and so they might put on their covers for Man of the Year the Tanzim Terrorist.

ITEM 2. Just in time for Hannuka, the latest manifestation of leftist treason in Israel is the organizing of 13 reservists who serve in the elite Chief of Staff Scout Unit to declare that they will refuse to serve in the army until Israel implements the political policies advocated by the most extremist leftist 3% of the Israeli public. To put things into perspective, this Unit is the most elitist fighting unit in the IDF. It is the unit that rescued the hostages in Entebbe. On the other hand, while the exact numbers who have served in the unit are secret, the 13 traitors in question clearly represent far less than 1% of all the fighters associated with the Unit. The 13 are reservists, not in active service. The Israeli media as usual are hailing the 13 as heroes and brave men of conscience. The Channel One news granted endless time to the supporters of the traitors to express their views, while not a single person was interviewed who opposed their behavior or regar ded them as traitors. Even Ehud Barak, the Uberleftist of the Labor Party, denounced them.

The 13 reservists issued a statement saying they are opposed to Israel "oppressing the Palestinians" and demanding immediate ending of all Israeli military activities against the Palestinian terrorists. They went even beyond the group of air force pilot traitors from earlier this year. They also say they are refusing to serve because they oppose the construction of the "defensive wall" designed to prevent suicide bombers from murdering Jewish children. In other words, if we translate their position, these 13 are refusing to serve in the military because they oppose any attempts by Israel to prevent the Palestinian nazis from murdering Jewish children. They are opposed to any military action against nazi leaders hiding among civilians, and since the Arab nazi leaders always hide among civilians, they are in effect opposed to any actions by Israel of any sort to defend itself.

So once again Israel's Left has exhibited how openly and candidly treasonous it is, and how it believes that Leftists should be exempt from having to obey the will of the majority, or to obey the law, or to submit to democratic decision making.

ITEM 3. If Israel is ever annihilated, the Israeli intelligence services will bear a major part of the blame, including military intelligence (forgive my use of that oxymoron). From the start of Oslo, Israel's intelligence services have seen their jobs not as developing accurate intelligence assessments of the behavior and goals of the Palestinians, but rather of turning out "spin" and politicized press in support of the political agenda of the Israeli Left.

This morning, the press is full of the "news" that military intelligence thinks the Hamas is in fact observing a de facto ceasefire with Israel since September. The Hamas has not succeeded in carrying out a major nazi atrocity since Sept. 9, when it blew up a cafe in Jerusalem. Military intelligence, serving as the amen chorus for the Beilins and Pereses, sees this as a wonderful sign of progress and moderation. Haaretz goes so far as to declare that the Palestinians are now largely opposed to violence.

And if you are one of those people who thinks that a ceasefire is holding when Israel manages to arrest all the suicide bombers in a week before they reach their targets, no doubt you will find this persuasive. In fact, in recent weeks the military and police have managed to catch and prevent at least 52 different attempts by the Hamas to carry out atrocities. In many cases, they were operating in joint terror teams together with members of the Tanzim and Al-Aqsa Martyrs, two terrorist organizations under the direct command and control of Yassir Arafat. SO I guess if you do not count any of THOSE attempts to perpetrate atrocities as being purely Hamas activities, you could reasonably conclude that the Hamas is observing a ceasefire.

ITEM 4. In the early 1990s, Prof. Shlomo Avineri, the Labor Party senior political science professor from the Hebrew University, was one of the leading intellectual boosters of Shimon Peres' daydreams. Avineri could barely control his excitement and enthusiasm when the Oslo "Accords" were signed. After Rabin was assassinated, Avineri granted the Left further artillery support by insisting that Bibi Netanyahu was himself to blame for the assassination.

But never rule out the possibility that a Jew may wake up and return to sanity. In recent weeks, the same Avineri has been attacking Beilin's Geneva Boondoggle in the press. He wrote two pieces in Haaretz, the official propaganda organ for the Geneva Misunderstandings, attacking them and Beilin mercilessly. The Beilin "Accords" do not recognize the right of Jews to have their own country, at least not in the Middle East, says Avineri. Maybe in Siberia. They not only do not rule out any Palestinian "right of return" to the rump Israel Beilin wishes to constrict, but the "Accord" explicitly endorses such a "right" and the "right" to destroy Israel. One and a half cheers for Prof. Shlomo Avineri!

ITEM 5. I am sure that Khaddafi swallowed his gum and decided to end his nuke program just because he loves peace and freedom and that it has absolutely nothing to do with the Allied liberation of Iraq and Afghanistan and new US threats against Syria. So no one should think that it is part of the grand success of the US in Iraq. Just a coincidence, that is all. Can I now run for President as contender for the Democratic Party nomination?

Posted by Ken Heller, December 21, 2003.
Please, send your urgently needed check NOW, before it is too late.

Make checks payable to: "Jewish Civil Rights In Israel"

Mail to: Baruch Merzel, POB 150, Kiryat Arba 90100, Israel
(An 80 cent stamp is needed on envelopes mailed to Israel)

If you wish to speak to Baruch Merzel for further information, he can be reached at: 011-972-58-693866



News item: December 17, 2003. www.IsraelNN.com: Noam Federman, the unaccused administrative detainee who is being held in prison for a six-month extendable sentence based on unknown charges, was finally transferred out of the Ashmoret Prison in Netanya yesterday - but his wife says that it's nothing more than one big deception.

"The Prison Service officials promised us in the Knesset Committee last week that Noam would be moved to an 'open prison,'" Elisheva Federman said today, "but were we supposed to understand from this that he would continue to be treated like a 'closed prison' inmate! When he was held in isolation in Ashmoret, in a room adjacent to terrorists, at least he had two hours a day of yard time - but now even that he doesn't have! They drew a red line in the corridor, and told him that he is not allowed to cross it."

If before he was not allowed visitors without a glass partition or phone calls, his conditions now are barely improved, if at all. "He is permitted to speak with his family for up to 90 minutes a day," Elisheva told Arutz-7's Yosef Meiri, "but only on a phone that the other inmates told him has a tape-recording device inside. The other inmates refuse to use it for that reason, while Noam is not permitted to use any other phone. How can I speak to my husband under such circumstances? And he is only allowed to call home - but not to his mother, a 75-year-old sickly widow. There must be very important security reasons for that... We are allowed to visit him for a half-hour every two weeks, without a partition between us. To bring seven children for a five-hour trip, and for all of us - even the young children - to undergo body checks, and then to meet with him for just a half-hour - what kind of abuse is this? And if I only bring two children each time - what, each child should see their father once every two months?... Other prisoners are permitted an hour of visits a week, plus three hours every Rosh Chodesh [once a month], and another 12-hour monthly visit for the wife. Why is he treated so much differently?"

"There is a morning prayer service," Elisheva said, "but he can participate only when a prison guard escorts him. Today, for instance, the guard didn't show up, so he had to pray alone. I don't even want to think about what will be there on the Sabbath." In the previous prison, Noam was alone, "but now, he is in a room with six others, not religious inmates, who have the television blaring all day. He can barely even study!"

News item: December 21, 2003. www.IsraelNN.com: The Jerusalem District Court a short time ago rejected a request from Noam Federman that his hearing challenging an administrative detention order be open to the public. The court ruled the hearing would take place behind closed doors to permit the GSS (General Security Service/Shin Bet) to present classified evidence, apparently the reason the Hevron resident is being held in prison without being charged with a crime or being permitted to challenge the charges against him in a court of law. Hundreds of persons turned out to protest outside the courthouse, decrying the anti-democratic actions taken against Federman, depriving him of his basic civil rights. They are calling for his immediate release.

Posted by Isralert, December 21, 2003.
Tom Gross wrote:
A group called "Jews for Justice for Palestinians," together with a group called "Just Peace UK," are planning to sing these anti-Israel hate carols in London on Mon 22nd Dec. at 6 pm at the Edith Cavell statue, near the National Gallery, (nearest tube: Charing Cross), and from 6.30 pm to 7pm in Covent Garden, (probably Neal Street) and Leicester Square. They are planning to give out these song sheets filled with hatred for Israel and disgusting calumnies against her people with "carols" like this one to passers by."

On the twelfth day of Christmas, Arik Sharon sent me
Twelve assassinations,
Eleven homes demolished,
Ten wells obstructed,
Nine smashed computers,
Eight gunships firing,
Seven checkpoints blocking,
Six tanks a-rolling,
Five settlement rings.
Four falling bombs,
Three trench guns,
Two trampled doves,
And an uprooted olive tree.

Naomi Ragen comments:
Friends, I suppose it's fitting that self-hating Jews will be singing anti-Israel Christmas songs to curry favor with oh-so-genteel British anti-Semites. The carols leave out the death of Jewish babies in Hebron. The murder of Jewish brides on the day before their wedding. The blowing up of elderly Holocaust survivors at their Passover Seders in Netanya. The smashed skulls of fourteen year old Jewish boys gathering firewood for bonfires.... I hope this will give British Jews a chance to organize a counter campaign. If after reading what the hate-mongers are going to be saying, you'd like to contact these anti-Semitic Jews, here are some addresses.
Deborah Fink - debopera.fink@btopenworld.com
Robin Horsell ISM, robin@ism-london.org
Carol archer, carol.archer@camden.gov.uk

Here's a carol I wrote. You can send it to them with my compliments, and give it out when they are giving out their own:

On the Twelth Day of Christmas, Arafat's murderers sent to me:
twelve suicide bombers
eleven katyusha rockets
ten kidnapped soldiers
nine blown up buses
eight sniper-firing murderers
seven paralyzed mothers
six gunned-down doctors
five blown up babies
four dead grandmothers
three murdered Bar Mitzvah boys
too many dove-brained supporters
Who should all be hung from the nearest tree.

Tzippi Riise wrote:
Let me leave you with this thought. Jews who are for the safety, protection and security of Israeli citizens are not war mongers or hawks. We are realists. We know that you can not appease or negotiate with terrorists, any more than Neville Chamberlain could negotiate with Hitler. The "Palestinians" will have peace, safety and prosperity when they give up their desire to kill Jews and recognize our right to exist.
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 21, 2003.
Keep up the pressure! 14 normal MK from the Likud is a good beginning. See if you can get that to 15 and maybe 20! Sharon is clearly on the way out. How he is thrown out will determine the future of the Likud. If, as MK Katz pointed out, the Likud does not clearly distance itself from this insanity, it will be replaced. Who, how or by what are open questions but replaced they will be.

This is a news item from today's Arutz-7's news website: http://www.israelnationalnews.com

Likud Minister: "Sharon's Plan Could Cost the Likud the Ultimate Price" Agriculture Minister Yisrael Katz, Chairman of the Likud Central Committee, said this morning that Prime Minister Sharon's "disengagement" plan could cost the Likud its rule.

Katz said that all plans of this nature must be brought first for approval to the Likud Party institutions. It was announced today that the Likud's Central Committee will in fact debate the issue in two weeks' time.

Behind Katz's "threat" of the Likud's fall from power is a group of at least 13 other MKs who plan to vote against any plan to uproot Jewish communities in Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) or unilateral withdrawals. The group also says it will vote against the formation of a national unity government with Labor in the event that the National Union and National Religious Party quit the coalition government over this issue. This would leave Prime Minister Sharon with the unpleasant option of forming the narrowest-possible government - 60 MKs, exactly half the Knesset.

The government currently numbers 68 MKs and four parties - Likud (40), Shinui (15), National Union (7), and NRP (6). If the latter two quit, and Labor (19) joins in their place, the coalition will number 74 - but only if the 14 rebel MKs of the Likud continue to support it.

The most prominent of the outposts and communities that Prime Minister Sharon threatens to uproot and destroy in the framework of his plan is Migron, less than five miles north of Jerusalem. The residents, who have reason to expect that thousands of people will come to try and stop such a move, say that they have not received demolition orders. Such orders must be received 72 hours before they are carried out. The assumption in some circles is that the authorities are waiting until after Chanukah, which ends this week, when the youth will be back in school and not as available for demolition-stopping activities.

Migron lies on privately-owned Jewish land, and has received government aid over the years from six different government ministries. A mass Torah-dedication ceremony will be held in Migron on Tuesday afternoon.

The final approval for uprooting Migron must be signed by Sha'ul Mofaz in his capacity as Defense Minister. If he in fact does so, he is promised a hard time by some Likud members. An open letter to Mofaz by Central Committee member Haggai Greenzeig states as follows: "I promise you that if you decide to uproot a Jewish community in the Land of Israel, or to serve as the Prime Minister's rubber stamp in expelling Jews from their homes, you will see the Knesset plenum in the next Knesset only from the visitors' balcony. We - hundreds of Central Committee members from Tel Aviv, Netanya, Haifa, Ramat Gan, Holon, Bat Yam, Ganei Tikvah and elsewhere - will work with all our strength to make sure you end up on the bottom of the Likud list of candidates in the next election."

Greenzeig further writes, "The Jewish People's right to the Land of Israel, including Migron, does not stem from decisions by a Defense Minister as to which communities are important from a security standpoint and which are not. Your right to live in Kokhav Ya'ir or anywhere else is based on our title deed - namely, the Bible. Accordingly, no government, and certainly no Defense Minister, has the right to transfer Jews out of their homes - and certainly not to give over parts of the Land of Israel to the enemy."

Former Likud MK Michael Kleiner, who ran unsuccessfully for a Knesset seat on a Herut Party list in the last election, says that the right-wing parties should resign from the coalition with confidence. "If Peres and Labor take your place," Kleiner said in a statement, "the public will thus see that Sharon is operating on a left-wing platform, and this will help form a united nationalist opposition to his dangerous plan." Kleiner also noted that Sharon, in emphasizing his commitment to the Road Map, neglected to mention the 14 reservations that the Israeli Government voted to attach to the plan.

Prof. MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union) said this morning that he is leading efforts within his party to quit the government. Eldad explained to Arutz-7 today why Sharon's new plan is even worse than the Road Map: "The Road Map includes uprooting yishuvim [communities] and giving away territory, but it at least has the supposed advantage of being based on an agreement. Now Sharon is proposing a unilateral agreement: We'll do our part, retreating, uprooting, fortifying ourselves, while the Palestinians are not obligated to peace, or fighting terrorism, or anything at all! ... Yes, Sharon calls it a way of improving security - the same way the army calls a panicky retreat a 'tactical deployment enhancement to the rear.' Even the most junior officers laugh at these new terminologies."

So what then motivates Sharon? "He has simply collapsed," Eldad answered. "He just broke in the face of the pressure from within, from his drop in the polls, from his lack of effective PR response to Beilin and those who jumped on his bandwagon, from being caught between the hammer of the Quartet's Road Map and the anvil of terrorism - all this is causing him to show cracks. The cracks are getting wider, and he feels constrained to produce something of his own, so he comes out with the old cliches - cliches that were first sounded by [extreme left-winger] Uri Avnery 30 years ago, then by Shimon Peres ten years ago, and now by Ariel Sharon... Even the left is no longer talking about peace, because they know that it won't come. So the only thing that's left is 'steps' and the like - but with no direction."

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, December 21, 2003.
Moammar Gadhafi (1) has proclaimed that Libya will disclose and abandon plans to develop nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. This deal was negotiated by the Brits which could lift U.N. sanctions and allow Libya to purchase and arm with conventional weapons, namely, missiles, aircraft, tanks, etc. Guess who will be first in line to sell these weapons to Gadhafi?

Clearly, eliminating NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) weapons is all to the good - held by rogue nations - except that Libya has never been known to successfully develop such materials internally - so far. They always tried to purchase finished, ready-to-go weapons from outside sources. As in Iraq, it will take years to inspect the deserts of Libya to locate its hidden manufacturing facilities and to disassemble the equipment when found. I heard several years ago that, after the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam had disseminated his efforts to produce WMD to Libya, Syria, Sudan and other rogue states. I wonder: Why was this ignored for so long?

Some may recall Gadhafi's early efforts to purchase an operational nuclear bomb from China - a request which was turned down. He wanted to hit Tel Aviv with a nuclear weapons and, driven by his Islamic frustration, continued to either buy or try to build WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction). Gadhafi was also one of the financial contributors (along with Egypt, Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia) for Pakistan to build an "Islamic Bomb" and thus secure operational nukes in return for their investment. (That may have already occurred with Iran.)

After America bombed the chemical plant at Rabta (on the surface and not buried), Gadhafi, with the assistance of the Japanese and Germans built a vast underground complex to produce supposedly "innocent insecticides" - the equipment for which had dual use to produce poison gases, chemicals and biological weapons. Has Gadhafi offered to destroy this complex?

How much of the weapons' material and technology has he already released to Al Qaeda and other Terrorists" Therefore, via his present disclosure, he could now claim innocence when Al Qaeda strikes - even if some of the equipment is back-tracked to Libya. Granted, Gadhafi may have been frightened by Saddam's capture but, let's remember that Saddam's weapons' scientists were loaded into Libya from 1991 onwards to develop Saddam's WMD out of sight in the Libyan deserts.

What I also smell from this announcement is something else in the Bush Administration's planning for region. I believe this is a slow but steady buildup to a diplomatic aneurysm when, after Libya and Iran agree to nuclear inspections, then the real target, Israel, will be cited as "violating new international accords against nuclear weapons in the Middle East".

This "announcement" has already come from the United Nations' supposedly non-political (and generally incompetent) IAEA: "Israel should destroy its nuclear weapons if it wants real security, according to the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. In an interview with the HA'ARETZ newspaper, IAEA head Mohamed El Baradei called on Israel to destroy the weapons it is believed to have as part of a general peace agreement in the Middle East, and to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty. While Israel has never acknowledged having nuclear weapons, "we operate under the assumption that Israel has nuclear arms. Israel has never denied this," El-Baradei said." (2) This agency, the IAEA, an arm of the discredited U.N., has been notoriously incompetent in monitoring nuclear development in North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Libya, etc. and it seems has now been recruited as a political "shill" against Israel.

Some will recall the Madrid Conference in 1991 (a.k.a. Ambush against Israel) where I predicted that one of the Arab countries would raise the matter of Israel's undisclosed nuclear deterrent. Like clockwork, near the end of the Madrid Ambush of Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, the Egyptian representative demanded that the Middle East become a 'Nuclear-Free Zone' and that Israel specifically was to stand-down her nuclear deterrent.

It was my opinion at the time that it would be the Arabist U.S. State Department then represented by Jim Baker's Jewish team of Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller and Daniel Kurtzer (later joined by Martin Indyk), who encouraged the Egyptians to start the process of eliminating Israel's undisclosed Nuclear Deterrent. This deterrent was Israel's only chance to survive against any coalition of Arab armies assaulting her - again - with their newest weapons from the Free World - equal in quality and surpassing in quantity those the Arab armies possess and intend to use against Israel, whom they declare is their mortal enemy.

I don't believe hostile Arab leaders (whether dictators and mullahs) are capable of being de-programmed. I also see the fingerprints of the anti-Semitic E.U. (European Union), the Arabist U.S. State Department, the always anti-Israel U.N. (United Nations) and Russia, the country with an appalling history of anti-Jewish pogroms. This infamous "Quartet" is most likely arranging a series of theatrical showpieces indicating thatWW well-known hostiles like Iran and Libya have accepted a concept of NWWWWO WMD - including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) arms and tWWhe missile throw-weight to aim them far and accurately. I wonder if this assemblage of nations will themselves ever eliminate all the NBC in their own inventories? I don't think so!

Then, the demand will be made that Israel stand down and eliminate her one major deterrent card, that of a feared nuclear retaliatory response should these hostiles decide to invade Israel for the seventh major war.

Some people say there were seven previous wars if you count Desert Storm when 39 SCUDs were launched by Saddam against Israel from January 16 to Purim in February, 1991. Israelis sat in their gas masks in their plastic-sealed rooms, with their babies in plastic gas tents. It was a war in which Israel was forbidden to retaliate by President George Bush, Sr. Therefore, it was a war in which Israel fought by being stalwart and courageous by NOT fighting back. The Bush/Baker Administration had promised Israel that it would launch seek-and-destroy missions against Saddam's SCUD launchers. But, after the first Gulf War, the GAO (U.S. General Accounting Office) disclosed that virtually no such missions were undertaken. My opinion at the time was Saddam had SCUD warheads filled with gas and other agents which the Bush/Baker crowd knew about and believed he fired to insure a devastating attack on Israel. The only reason Saddam didn't use his NBC was because he feared Israel's capability for nuclear retaliation.

What proved my belief was when Sec. of Defense Caspar Weinberger wryly commented (as heard on Israeli radio at 4 A.M. January 16, 1991): "It is a shame that Israel is being hit with nerve gas." Let's remember who supplied Saddam with this capability. Weinberger knew Saddam had such weapons and believed the first salvo of SCUDs indeed had poison gas. Saddam's NBC capability was the information which Weinberger and Admiral Bobby Ray Inman refused to transfer to Israel despite America's obligatory agreements as signed in several presidential MOUs (Memorandums of Understanding). This is exactly what and why Jonathan Pollard felt pressed to disclose such vital information to Israel. Fortunately, Weinberger was mistaken as to Saddam's decision to use those poison gas SCUDs. Because Israel had threatened Saddam with nuclear retaliation, Saddam accepted Israel's ability to issue such a deterrent threat and, therefore, launched "only" conventional SCUDs.

Add to that fact, the 19 year imprisonment of Jonathan Pollard for blowing the cover of what Bush, Baker and Weinberger knew about Saddam's WMD capability. Clearly, the wrong guys escaped federal prison and the "whistle-blower" caught the blame and has been in prison for giving this vital information to Israel, America's ally - for more years than anyone who ever spied for an enemy of America.

Although Israel has an outstanding military and has fought off the combined Arab armies in six major wars on three fronts and withstood almost 120 years of ongoing Terrorism by using only conventional force, there is another fact to be considered. The Arab nations with 160 million or more people, plus the Muslims from other nations (which have presently joined to fight American forces in Iraq) can swamp Israel with unlimited numbers of soldiers should they unite to come together against the one Jewish State along with the hi tech weapons sold to them by the West.

Therefore, Israel must forever have a devastating deterrent capability which would not only eliminate advancing armies but would also destroy those nations who dare to send those armies. This would include Arab, non-Arab Muslims and/or European nations allied to the Arabs who would all seek to eliminate Israel.

Perhaps I am over-reacting to the threat of converging interests such as the Arab nations (read: Oil), the European nations (read: Oil), the U.N. (read: Oil and the collective anti-Israel/anti-Jewish voting blocks), et al. But, I don't think that the Arabs, driven by hatred of the Jewish State or the more driving force of the radical fundamentalist Islamists will cease their efforts until they win or are themselves totally destroyed. In order to accomplish their final goals with the assistance of the Arabist U.S. State Department, the E.U., and the U.N., they must find a way to strip Israel of its hitherto undisclosed Nuclear Deterrence. Once having accomplished this, then Israel with only conventional arms, will be an irresistibly vulnerable target for a full-scale invasion. The State Department has recognized long ago that hostile Arab/Muslim nations cannot be reasoned with or appeased and, therefore, in the interest of oil and other cash-producing ventures, it must be Israel who must be sacrifice.

As for requesting nations like Syria, Iran, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia* to cease building or acquiring missiles, fighter aircraft, destroying the chemical and biological plants or missile war-heads, I wouldn't count on it.

I wonder how soon the Arabist State Department, the Jew-hating Europeans or the Arab/Muslims led by Egypt will make some grand announcement, probably through the U.N., that Israel must accept a "Disarmament Agreement for the Sake of Peace" by making the Middle East a Nuclear-Free Zone. Perhaps the campaign will be initiated by Shimon Peres and his gaggle of Osloids, like Yossi Beilin, and Avrum Burg in the lead - all shouting that it's time for a love-in.

Whenever it starts, be assured that it's been cooking on the stove since well before the Madrid Conference. Making Israel vulnerable was planned long before the Bushes plan for another Arab State of Palestine which will inevitably be a central base for training and implementing Terror world-wide. If Israel is to be extinguished as an irritant to the Arab nations, then Israel must first be forced to withdraw to indefensible borders and then stripped of her feared Nuclear Deterrence. With a Terrorist State on her borders and the same nations still pledged through Islamic law to eliminate non-Muslim entities, Israel's existence is continually threatened.

All of this will be lathered over with treaties, agreements, solemn assurances, citing of International Laws and lots of paper. Then, when the time came, all would go into the shredder, having no importance to begin with. Regrettably, the Jewish State of Israel and Jews in general believe in contracts, agreements, gestures of appeasement and are always surprised when their co-partner(s) simply ignore those tediously crafted agreements.

We have now alerted Israel to what is likely being planned for her which we expect will be ignored.

After the pressure to disarm is placed on Israel - which is the stick - no doubt, the U.S. will offer a fantasy carrot. This will likely be an offer for Israel to receive new equipment, somewhat like the deal former President Clinton offered if Israel would retreat from the high ground of the Golan Heights - all based on reliance of U.S. (or U.N.) observers to warn Israel if then President of Syria, Hafez al Assad started to prepare his troops, missiles, tanks and planes for war.

Another carrot would be to offer to place American troops on the Arab Palestinian/Israeli borders of the proposed new Palestinian State to act as "peace-keepers" - as was done in the Sinai after the peace accords signed with Egypt in 1979. Neither of these options are as effective as Israel's own intelligence and ability to respond within precious minutes against any launched missiles and/or aircraft.

The next step is for Israel to ignore this "heads-up" to negotiate her own demise - as Ariel Sharon is presently doing. I guess it's something in our genes!

P.S. There are some immutable facts regarding trust and distrust. Rogue nations like Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Egypt, North Korea, Russia (now ruled by the KGB's Putin) will sign anything but cannot be trusted to keep agreements and NOT cheat.

Remember, Yassir Arafat claimed to his Arab Palestinians - in Arabic - that in signing the Oslo Accords, that he was merely copying Mohammed who signed the Hudabaiyah Treaty, which promised peace to the tribes of Mecca (including the Jewish tribe of Koreish, also spelled: Qurayza) in order to have access to the Kabba Stone of Mecca (holy to the pagan tribes) now holy to the Muslims. But, Mohammed returned in 2 years when he was militarily stronger, killing all the men of the Jewish tribe, selling the women and children into slavery.

I cannot help but wonder if Bush will offer to eliminate America's own nuclear arsenal of 10,000+ nukes and then be joined by France, Russia and Britain in declaring a nuclear-free world. Don't hold your breath.


1. "Libya to End Nuclear Program" by Jeff Zeleny & Stephen J. Hedges, CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 12/20/03.


*The U.S. has just dropped its promise to Israel to prevent Saudi Arabia from basing its F15s in Tabuk, near Israel. Israel's concern was that the F15s might fall into the hands of Saudi Muslim extremists and used as was done on 9/11 by the Saudi and Egyptian Terrorists committed to "Wahhabism" and "Jihad".

Posted by Women In Green, December 20, 2003.
(The following is an English Translation of the thrust of the Hebrew Media Release that was sent out to the Members of the Knesset, and the Local and World Media by Women in Green following Prime Minister Sharon's speech in Herzliya on Thursday Evening, December 18, 2003.)

Transfer Prime Minister Sharon out of the Government to his farm in the Negev!

Prime Minister Sharon's announced program, turns him into the worst enemy to the existence of Israel as a Jewish State!

In his speech at Herzliya Sharon formally joined those who are the criminals of Oslo.

He has chosen an unrealistic path. In effect, he would work together with our Arab enemies and surrender to their lies and disinformation.

He has abandoned his former Zionist beliefs, and has become indistinguishable from the positions held by Shimon Peres.

We call upon all those who hold paramount the national interests of this Jewish State to cut off all relations with the present Sharon Government.

Sharon for the true interests of the Jewish People and that of Israel, should be retired to his farm, and live out his days on a government pension.

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 20, 2003.
I have to admire Arutz-7's Israel National News (http://www.IsraelNN.com). Yesterday, they REPORTED Sharon's speech at Herzliya on the 18th and they REPORTED responses to it. Me? I just foamed at the mouth at Sharon. He was elected to get tough militarily with the terrorists, but he sounds like Amram Mitzna, whom he beat in the last election, when Israel, by a big margin, rejected Mitzna's plan to withdraw unilaterally from Biblical Israel.

Sharon said he is committed to the Road Map plan, which demands that the PA fight and destroy terrorism. Israel, however, will not wait indefinitely, Sharon said, and if there is no progress by a certain time, he will begin certain unilateral moves such as withdrawal from some areas in Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) and strengthening Israel's presence in others. He said that unauthorized outposts would be dismantled, and that some communities will be relocated.

Comments on the speech:

The Yesha Council of Communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza expressed its confidence that the Israeli populace would reject the "retreat plan." The Council is concerned, however, that withdrawals will increase the terrorists' appetite for more attacks.

MK Uri Ariel (National Union) said, "The residents of Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) feel that Ariel Sharon has shot them in the back - those who he himself sent to Zionism's front lines... Sharon is like a fool who repeats his folly" - a reference to Sharon's destruction of the city of Yamit in Sinai in 1982.

Deputy Education Minister Tzvi Hendel (National Union) adopted an optimistic note, noting that the Prime Minister had not "caved in to the pressure of Tommy Lapid, Olmert and their friends, and was not tempted to stoop to mentioning the names of towns designated for uprooting... Sharon will not have a majority in his government to uproot towns and expel their residents, but if Heaven forbid he succeeds in implementing this plan, the National Union party will resign and will fight the government with all its strength."

Welfare Minister Zevulun Orlev (NRP): "The sky doesn't fall in because of words. Whether or not the NRP remains in the government is dependent on its ability to influence the reality - and not on the rhetoric or verbiage of the Prime Minister... We believe in settlement, and we will fight to improve the situation in Yesha."

Aryeh Bachrach of the Almagor Terrorist Victims Association: "Sharon is repeating the Lebanon model of running away from terrorism - although he calls it 'detachment.' This is a reward for terrorism... Sharon's claim that the Palestinians could receive much more via negotiations is totally meaningless - because first Sharon will withdraw, and they'll receive the rest afterwards. The same with his promise to annex areas that are 'certain to be part of Israel' - even the annexation of the Golan did not prevent the late Yitzchak Rabin from agreeing to turn the whole Golan over to the Syrians... Sharon declared war on the Jews, but regarding terrorism - no war, just retreat."

Women in Green: "Sharon has become the #1 threat to the continued existence of Israel as a Jewish State. [With this speech] he has joined the ranks of the Oslo criminals who cooperate with the Arab enemy and cave in to the dictates of those who hate Israel. The nationalist parties and MKs must oust Ariel Sharon from the seat of power."

Yaakov (Ketzaleh) Katz, a prime force behind the establishment of Beit El and other Yesha communities and a former senior advisor to then-Housing Minister Ariel Sharon: "Sharon was very cautious in his use of words. Note that he said, very emphatically, that 'unauthorized outposts will be removed, period!' This means that authorized outposts, including those that will receive authorization, will not be removed. He also said that there will be no more construction in the Yesha communities outside the 'lines of construction.' What does that mean? It means that he knows it can't be stopped, especially private building - and we will continue to grow...

"In addition, this whole plan is virtual. Sharon's government will fall before all his plans can be executed. The Likud will not agree to be a minority in a government with left-wing parties in place of the right-wing parties..."

Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA: "Sharon referred to the Road Map as the Road Map adopted by his Cabinet - but without mentioning that his Cabinet adopted the Road Map with 14 clarifications ... Just a month ago, on November 20, the Prime Minister's Office issued a press release using a different formula: 'Israel would like to reiterate [that] the Government of Israel accepted the Road Map along with 14 clarifications that it decided upon, and this is the one and only diplomatic plan that Israel is prepared to carry out.' PM Sharon and [other ministers] have stated in the past that the 14 Clarifications are 'red lines' for Israel."

Lerner noted that Raanan Gissin, Prime Minister Sharon's Foreign Press Advisor, told him afterwards that there "is no significance to" the fact that Sharon did not specifically mention the 14 clarifications, and that "the Cabinet decision, including the 14 clarifications, is the operative decision."

Dr. Lerner also said: "I shudder to think how many Israelis may die as a result of the special bonus Jew-hunting season Mr. Sharon essentially announced for the Palestinians tonight." Lerner noted that according to Sharon, Israel will retreat from areas of "friction... located in the heart of the Palestinian population." Since these points remained unspecified, Lerner said, "you will find that if the Palestinians engage in enough terror, pretty much any Jewish community located anywhere near the Palestinians can be defined as being in an area of 'friction in the heart of the Palestinian population' that Israel may be induced to retreat from."

Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin had strong criticism of the Herzliya Conference itself. "The government is striking a blow at Israel's democracy when the Prime Minister and ministers deliver important speeches at the Herzliya Conference and not in the Knesset," Rivlin said. "The Knesset is the only place to hold important debates of this nature, and the government is causing the Knesset to be cheapened." Rivlin, a party colleague and friend of Ariel Sharon, has said that he would resign from the Knesset before voting to give up parts of the Land of Israel.

On the left, Labor Party leader Shimon Peres said that Sharon's speech was just "verbiage," and that he would not join a national unity government under such circumstances. Labor MK Matan Vilnai said that unilateral gestures would push off peace chances "for years."

The extremist left-wing Gush Shalom group came out swinging, calling Sharon's speech "a masterpiece of misrepresentation, half-truths and outright lies. The polished formulations hide the clear intent of annexing more than half the West Bank [Judea and Samaria], while giving up a few far-away and isolated settlements that the army considers a burden." Gush Shalom notes that according to the Road Map, Israel must remove all settlements set up after January 2001 - and not only "unauthorized outposts," as Sharon said.

"This is a new language by the Israelis," said an optimistic Sheikh Nafez Azzam, a spokesman for the Islamic Jihad terrorist organization, "and this is evidence that the uprising [Oslo War] has created a new fact on the ground."

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 20, 2003.
Of all the Jewish holidays, the one that I think best captures the contemporary Jewish Zeitgeist, the one that is the most relevant to the current (and, if certain trends are not reversed, the last?) chapter in Jewish history, is Hannuka. Hannuka is of course the story of Jewish national liberation. It is the story of the military victory of the few against the many, of the champions of Judaism against the pagan barbarians.

But it is more than this. It is the saga of the heroic struggle of Jewish survivalists (those one would today label"Zionists") against the assimilationists and self-hating Hellenists of thesecond century BCE. Hannuka is less a story about the battle against the Greeks than it is about the battle against the predominant assimilationist paradigm at the time among the Jews. It is about the battle against the anti-survivalists, those who hated themselves for being Jews and so those who seek to be "progressive", "modern", and "in", through rejecting, disgracing and degrading themselves and their people. The Hellenists who fought the Hasmoneans were struggling AGAINST Jewish survival. Sound familiar?

In the United States, the main movement of Hellenistic assimilationism has been the school of "Political Liberalism as Judaism," the pseudo-religion that holds that all of Judaism can be reduced to the pursuit of this week's liberal political fads. But the global avante garde of Jewish self-hatred these days is the Israeli Left.

The Israeli Left is the main manifestation today of Jewish anti-Semitism. It not only promotes "plans" and policies designed to end Israel's existence, increasingly endorsing the one-state bi-national Rwanda solution as the solution to the "problem" of Israeli national existence. It also regularly attacks every symbol and concept of traditional Judaism. You think I am exaggerating? Well just consider the Op-Ed last year in the Israeli daily Haaretz, penned by one Yehiam Shorek, a "historian" who teaches at the Beit Berl College in Israel. Beit Berl is a college run by the kibbutz movement and financed by the Israeli taxpayer.

The "historian" Shorek devoted his Haaretz column to proving that the Maccabis were fascist and racist hooligans, bloodthirsty zealots, and downright Likudniks. His column was entitled "Bloodthirsty Zealots". His thesis was that Jews should stop celebrating Hannuka and the exploits of the Maccabis and should instead feel sympathy for the poor occupied and mistreated Greeks and Hellenists. His article was NOT a spoof!

The evil Maccabis were plotting to perpetrate population "transfer", wrote Shorek, that most evil of all crimes in the "minds" of Israel's fundamentalist Leftists. Population "transfer" is far worse than, say, mass murdering 1300 Jews after signing with them a series of peace accords, or turning the West Bank and Gaza over to barbarian Nazis to allow them to carry out such mass murders. Shorek is a member of that same Fundamentalist Left that will not rest until all Jews have been expelled from the West Bank and Gaza in an act of ethnic cleansing and where no Israeli armed forces are left behind to interfere with the terrorist activities of the Palestinians.

Matityahu, the father of Judah Maccabi and his brothers, was a lunatic, wrote Shorek. He was a warmonger who dragged his country into an unnecessary "war of choice", one that was not a legitimate "war of self-defense". (Never mind that there is nothing at all in Judaism that says Jews should refrain from conquering their lands unless it is part of a war of self-defense.) The Maccabis were the aggressors, insisted Shorek. And they suppressed the free speech of those who supported the Greeks; how undemocratic of them!

Judah Maccabi was guilty of causing many families to lose their loved ones by leading people to war, wrote Shorek, instead of pursuing some sort of Hellenistic Oslo appeasement and capitulation, the sort the "enlightened Left" seeks today to impose upon Israel. All Judah Maccabi really wanted to do was to Occupy Occupy Occupy, insisted Shorek. No better than the West Bank settlers today!! And not only that, but Judah and his hooligans were Orthodox Jews, which every leftist knows must make them primitive and barbaric, unlike the enlightened Marxist historians who live on nice kibbutzim or teach at the Beit Berl college.

(If you would like to tell the management of Beit Berl what you think they should do with Shorek, write daliabk@beitberl.ac.il , or , Beit Berl College, Doar Beit Berl, 44905, Israel Tel. 972-9-7476333, Fax. 972-9-7454104. You could also write or send an email to the Minister of Education and demand that all funding for Beit Berl be frozen until Shorek is dismissed at sar@education.gov.il.)

Unfortunately, Shorek is hardly a lone phenomenon. Israel's anti-Jewish leftists have been launching similar jihads against every other symbol of Jewish valor. Masada was a cesspool of non-tolerant fanatics, according to them. The Bible is a backward document full of fabrications. The school should stop teaching it altogether, they demand, and instead teach something really useful like the poetry of Palestinian "poets". Archeology proves the Bible is nothing but lies and fantasy, they insist. One wag labeled such people Pentateuch Deniers (intended as alliteration for "Holocaust Deniers".)

In Israel, the country's politics - particularly its cultural/educational elite and its chattering classes - are now largely dominated by those motivated by the desire for their country to commit national suicide. They scorn themselves, their own country and their own people the same way that the Hellenized Jews did at the time of the Maccabis. Many endorse boycotts of Israel by anti-Semites abroad. Like the Hellenized Jews, they are convinced that traditionalist Jews are reactionary and primitive, and that the greatest national priority should be renunciation of Jewish peculiarity and the striving to assimilate amongst the cosmopolitan progressive "Greeks" of the world. They are ashamed of their Jewishness and convinced that the only path to peace is to renounce it. They insist that a Seleucid "narrative" should replace the Jews' own reactionary national one.

Israel's universities are by and large the Occupied Territories of these Hellenists. The Israeli media is to almost the same extent. Hellenists dominate much of the Israeli military and somewhat incredibly the intelligence services. (It is doubtful the country could have undergone the Oslo debacle had these intelligence services not operated as lapdogs for the Beilinized Israeli Left.) Hellenists have attempted to rewrite the Israeli school curriculum, to teach Israeli Jewish children to despise themselves. Their message is that Jews must feel ashamed because they are mean, selfish, evil and immoral people. Surely there would be no anti-Semitism on the planet were not the Jews such awful, insensitive people.

Their aim is to convince the Jews that the only way they may become accepted in the world is to adapt to paganism, to stop seeking to exist as a separate national entity, to commit national suicide. Moreover, their campaign is aimed at challenging the moral existence of the Jews. They realize this is the weakest chink in the armor of the Jews. If Jews can be convinced that they are morally in the wrong, then no Maccabis will arise. The aim of the Jewish Hellenists is the delegitimization of the Jews as a nation, discrediting the moral position of Jewish survivalism.

The message of the contemporary Hellenists is unambiguous: Those who wish to purify the Temple, who seek pure oil for the Temple lamp, who wish to evict the barbarians from Jerusalem, are the enemies of peace. The Maccabis must be arrested for incitement. The Jews must provide Antiochus with concessions and arms and funds and a Road Map. Under no circumstances should the Jews seek to defend themselves militarily against the Seleucids for there is no military solution to the problem of Seleucid persecution. If the barbarians murder the Jews, it is because the Jews are evil selfish people and because they have been too reluctant to abandon their primitive survivalism.

If the Israeli anti-Jewish Left has its way, the Post-Hasmonean post-survivalist era will be upon us. Dip the latkes in lard.

The Twelve days of Oslo

On the first day of Oslo, my true love gave to me,
A lemming in a pear tree.

On the second day of Oslo, my true love gave to me,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the third day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the fourth day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the fifth day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Five New History Texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the sixth day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Six more appeasements,
Five New History texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two shuls a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the seventh day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Seven deaths in Gilo,
Six more appeasements,
Five New History texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the eighth day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Eight kidnapped hostages,
Seven deaths in Gilo,
Six more appeasements,
Five New History texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the nineth day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Nine new subpoenas (for incitement),
Eight al-Kassem rockets,
Seven deaths in Gilo,
Six more appeasements,
Five New History texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the tenth day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Ten brand new taxes,
Nine new subpoenas (for incitement),
Eight al-Kassem rockets,
Seven deaths in Gilo,
Six more appeasements,
Five New History texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the eleventh day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Eleven car bombs popping,
Ten brand new taxes,
Nine new subpoenas (for incitement),
Eight al-Kassem rockets,
Seven deaths in Gilo,
Six more appeasements,
Five New History texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning
And a lemming in a pear tree.

On the twelfth day of Oslo my true love gave to me,
Twelve new excuses,
Eleven car bombs popping,
Ten brand new taxes,
Nine new subpoenas (for incitement),
Eight al-Kassem rockets,
Seven deaths in Gilo,
Six more appeasements,
Five New History texts,
Four soldiers lynched,
Three legless kids,
Two cafes a-burning


(Who's got the eggnog?)

Posted by Bary Chamish, December 20, 2003.
In light of the results of the last Israeli election, let us consider Sharon's withdrawal plan. If we recall, 67% of the voters chose to elect the Likud and it's leader, while a mere 18 seats out of 120 went to the Labor Party. The electorate chose overwhelmingly to throw out the scions of Oslo and get back on the survival track.

Yet Sharon on 18/12/03 publicly announced that he was going to cheat Israel on a massive scale by adopting the Oslo track of withdrawal from most of Judea, Samaria and Gaza and uproot tens of thousands of Jews by flattening their villages, and at least one full- fledged city. Sharon did not consult with the government cabinet before making the announcement, in fact, he didn't even inform his own ministers. But look who he did choose to consult with!

According to the weekly newsmagazine Makor Rishon 19/12/03, Sharon formulated his program by first consulting with Labor leader Shimon Peres. This meeting was followed by advisory sessions with Labor stalwarts Matan Vilnaii, Ephraim Sneh, Shalom Simchon and Ehud Barak. With them, he not only coordinated his withdrawal plan, but assured them that Labor would be invited into the government after his partners on the Right bolted in revolt.

And there's much more. Who are Sharon's two closest political advisors? One is Dov Weisglass, the attorney and business partner, along with Sharon's son Omri, of Jibril Rajoub, the PLO's chieftain of Jericho. The other is Avi Landau. Look at the masthead of the greatest deception of the year, The Geneva Initiative, and under the sullied moniker of Yossi Beilin, there is Landau's name. Sharon, for all his lying protestations, sponsored the Geneva stunt.

The electorate may have voted Likud but they're getting Labor and Oslo. This is the most flagrant display of cheating Sharon has ever pulled and my reading of the general media is that he's going to get away with it.

The question is, how? How can he cheat 2/3 of the Israeli people, and 80% of the country's Jews, without the vast majority understanding how they've been cheated. No amount of logic can explain it no matter how hard one seeks the reason.

I mulled the question for a long night, then a personal vignette hit me that did more to explain the cheating acceptance than any political analysis. Bear with me for a few paragraphs before we examine the upcoming consequences of Sharon's wool pulling.

There is a club in Jerusalem that meets to play Scrabble. For a decade I was a member and through arduous dictionary memorization, became a perennial champion. However, even in its earliest days, widespread cheating infected the club. Initially, the rule was that the tiles were reversed, placed face down on the top of the box lid and picked at random. But some players marked the good tiles subtly, so the rule changed that tiles had to be picked from a bag. That led to new forms of cheating. One involved feeling the tiles one by one until the telltale smoothness of the valuable blanks was detected. Another method was looking at the tiles in your hand and sneakily sliding the bad ones back in the bag.

No tile was more dreaded in the end game than the Q. It was hard to get rid of on a crowded board and if you got stuck with it at the end of the game, you had to deduct 10 points from your score. One remedy was to simply and quietly, drop the Q on the floor and claim it was there all along.

Early on, I got very good at finding the cheaters. My method was to appear to be concentrating on my own tiles while watching the opponent's hands and eyes very closely as he picked his. The most infuriating moment occurred at a national tournament when I clearly saw my opponent throw a tile back during a tight end game. There were only two tiles left in the bag, and wouldn't you know it, I picked the Q after my turn. What unsettled me more than the cheating was the supposed high character of the opponent, a respected scientist.

Sickened by the situation, I became agitated and quit the game for a year or so. But I was persuaded to return for a tournament with a big prize: a trip to the world scrabble championships. I played three games that evening.

Game one was with a woman I had known since the founding of the club. It was a close game ending with, you guessed it, the Q on the floor. And I sure didn't drop it there. Game two was fair. Game three was with an orthodox religious lady. Near the end she added an s to oily making soily. I knew it was wrong and challenged. She looked it up in the dictionary and declared, "Soily is good." I accepted the announcement, believing this upstanding woman would never cheat me to win. Only later, well after the game ended, did I look the word up myself, to discover that I had been cheated.

I appealed to the club president, an insecure, angry person with literary pretensions, to overturn the game. He turned to the cheater and she lied through her teeth to him. He was fooled and the club supported the cheat.

In this case, justice was ultimately served. I stopped wasting my life in a pointless pursuit and it blossomed. And the cheater continues with her pathetic existence. This was my first lesson in Israeli cheating. The most unexpected people are engaged in it and the people would rather believe there was no cheating in their world.

I quit the game for good in utter disgust and then Rabin was murdered. I had honed the skill of catching cheaters and this time I vowed I would not let them prosper. I caught Rabin's real murderers and though about half the country know it, they cannot be properly motivated to bring justice to their land. They would rather believe that their leaders are honest, the leaders know it, so the cheaters they elected can get away with anything. It is a national character flaw that is proving too costly in lives and integrity.

Nonetheless, Sharon is discovering a few major roadblocks to his latest cheat. Perhaps the most significant was the pronouncement earlier in the week by Rabbi Elias that it is a sin to remove a Jew from his land. Rabbi Elias is the most influential Sephardic rabbi, and most of Israel's policemen are Sephardic. They will not defy him. If the police will not remove the Jews of Yesha from their homes, Sharon's scam won't work. And if the Yesha residents resist in number, the only way of securing their removal will be extreme violence or state-sanctioned murder.

We know the state is capable of this in secret. Recall the disarming and murder of the three soldiers in Netzarim last Oct. 26. Three young Jews were murdered to persuade the Israeli public that a withdrawal from Netzarim was in the best interests of our endangered youth. Makor Rishon added new details to the Netzarim campaign this week. Haaretz followed the murders with an article in which four officers of the reserve unit which served in Netzarim were quoted saying that the village had to be abandoned. The four officers gathered together to reveal that they said nothing of the kind and that Haaretz had simply, lied to them and to their readers. All for withdrawal.

The bloody Netzarim campaign has been dirty but surreptitious. A public slaughter of Yesha residents is another matter. This, most soldiers will refuse to engage in. So, according to a few of my sources, Sharon has brought in Turkish Moslems to the job [as Turkish workers for projects in Israel from a private Turkish contractor].

Barry Chamish is the author of "Save Israel." It is available in Hebrew and in English. He also wrote "Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin" and "Israel Betrayed." They can be ordered by emailing chamish@netvision.net.il

JINSA REPORT #380: End of Year 2003
Posted by JINSA, December 20, 2003.
We've written on the movement of Saudi F-15s from the south to Tabuk in the north near Israel (JINSA Reports #358-359). It now appears that Secretary Rumsfeld lifted the restrictions that were part of Congress's considerations in approving the sale in 1978. News reports say he "cited the Saudi need to defend its air space amid the deterioration of its aging F-5 and Tornado fleets" and "asserted that Riyad demonstrated its loyalty as a peaceful U.S. ally in the Middle East." According to the MENL report, the Secretary "dismissed the prospect that the kingdom would use the F-15s against Israel."

Now, 25 years is a long time to hold a policy in place, and if circumstances dictate a change in the restrictions on Saudi F-15s, we could probably live with it, although frankly, we cannot imagine against whom Saudi Arabia plans to defend its air space. However, at the same time Mr. Rumsfeld was touting the peaceful kingdom as a loyal ally, the State Department was announcing that 300 non-essential U.S. government staffers and their families would depart Saudi Arabia at Washington's expense. The 30,000 American non-government personnel in the kingdom were also advised to leave amid new information of al Qaeda plots.

It should not be possible for the U.S. government to hold two entirely conflicting opinions at the same time. Which is it?

We painfully know that airplanes can be used as missiles and our concern is not that the Saudi government would choose to attack Israel, but that the Saudi government may not be running the show for long. In that case, every minute of early warning time could become important for Israel to stop an attack from the Saudi peninsula.

Cheers to Israel's Radio Farsi: Israel's Iranian-born defense minister Shaul Mofaz did a live broadcast to Iran in Farsi; the call-in questions came thick and fast - and friendly. One report said, "Mofaz...wished the Iranian people success in their struggle for freedom. But a stream of callers pleaded for Israel to intervene to help overthrow the Islamic regime. The defense minister replied it was up to the Iranian people to determine its fate. But he also mentioned the U.S. role in the region and said the Americans had much work to do after prevailing in Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran and Syria were still there as key elements of Bush's axis of evil. This reply brought forth a chorus of listeners who wanted to persuade the Israeli minister that the Teheran regime was more of a danger to the region and the world than Saddam Hussein had ever been.

"At the end of the 50-minute program, Mofaz said he couldn't have imagined the depth of sympathy for Israel entertained by ordinary Iranians - in sharp contrast to the violence and hate emanating from the rulers of the Islamic Republic. Israel Radio's Farsi service has become a byword among a wide audience in Iran. Last week, an Iranian legislator who voiced sharp criticism in parliament of the Iranian government was asked sarcastically whether he was Menashe Amir, director of Israel Radio's Farsi service, in disguise."

The JINSA Reports are published by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (http://www.jinsa.org). To subscribe, email info@jinsa.org

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 20, 2003.
Bangladesh like nuclear armed Pakistan is considered a moderate Islamic country. If you are wondering what it takes to be considered an extremist Islamic country, keep wondering. This article was on the Independent Media Review Analysis (IMRA) website (http://www.imra.org.il) today. It is called "MewNews. Open Letter From Salah Uddin Shoaib." - AZ


The letter below was written from jail by Bangladesh journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, arrested while he was at Zia international airport, on his way to give a talk in Israel. Bangladesh has no diplomatic relations with Israel and travel to Israel is not allowed. He was charged with a passport violation that carries a maximum sentence of 6 months and is a bailable offence, but he is being held without bail.

Additional charges of espionage and anti-religious activities may be preferred. The espionage charges relate to Choudhury's association with IFLAC, an Israeli and international non-government organization that promotes dialog. Apparently, the Bangladesh government and press decided that IFLAC is a branch of the Mossad intelligence agency. The charges concerning religion and sedition are related to Choudhury's outspoken articles about Islamism in Bangladesh.

Choudhury is suffering from glaucoma, which is not being treated in jail. He has been held since November 29 and two hearings have extended his remand for "interrogation."

The case has been taken up by RSF (Reporters Sans Frontieres) and by the Committee to Protect Journalists, and was the subject of a New York Times editorial.

The letter follows.

Dearest Friends, Well-wishers, Brothers and sisters:

I was arrested on 29th November 2003 for planning to visit Israel. The JOINT INTERROGATION CELL (JIC), in the name of interrogation mercilessly tortured me for consecutive 7 (seven) days.

Now they have lodged a case under PASSPORT ACT of 1973 and sought 5 more days REMAND. I am detained in a cell in Dhaka Central jail (14 Cell), which is basically made for MENTALLY INSANE PEOPLE and Drug Addicts.

I cannot sleep till deep hours of night since there is tremendous noise created by the "MAD" prisoners. My health condition has deteriorated.

Although the court ordered for proper treatment of my eyes, the jail authorities are absolutely CARELESS about it. I have serious EYE PROBLEM. I am sleeping on floor.

Bangladesh Government is planning to seize/confiscate my passport (which is already in their custody) to stop me from going abroad in future.

Authorities do not want me to speak about the ISLAMIC KINDERGARDEN nor they want me to disclose it's BAD activities. Various fundamentalists and extremist groups are investing fund, instigating and lobbying with the government to keep me detained for a long time.

Pro Saddam and Pro Al Qaeda groups are also very active against me.

If the US Government (even an under secretary) would kindly raise the issue with Bangladesh Government and demand END OF HARRASMENT on me, It would greatly help me. The message (from US) may reach Bangladesh Government latest by 23rd December 2003. For, I would be produced before the Magistrate's court on 24/12/2003.


Government has seized all equipment from my newspaper office virtually paralyzing the office. So, I cannot continue publication of the Weekly Blitz. My family and myself are in danger and financial constraint for everyday (through my family) I have to send "FUND" to the concerned department to LESSEN the amount of torture and not to Lodge cases which could ultimately RUIN my life.

I am writing these extremely personal matters to you, Because, here in Bangladesh, I do not see anybody extending their helping hands fearing attack on them.

In jail too I received LIFE THREAT from fundamentalist prisoners and Pro Laden/Saddam prisoners.



Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
From: Dhaka Central Jail

[Ed note: See also "Muslim Bangladesh Journalist Detained," posted by Dr. Aaron Lerner, December 5, 2003, on this Blog-Ed page. And "Another Suicide Bomber and a Question About Time," posted by Mr. Choudhury, http://www.think-israel.org/oct03bloged.html. It appeared October 14, 2003.]

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 20, 2003.
Ehud Olmert claims the only choice is to turn over all of Yesha to its enemies, as the Left urges, and turning over most of it, including some of the neighborhoods of Jerusalem, as he urges and calls a "right-wing line." "...Olmert asserted that his scheme was one of 'hope,' as though withdrawal and retreat should be causes for optimism, rather than concern." He actually casts "despondency and gloom,... as though there were no other possible options."

"That's not leadership - it is fear-mongering and frailty. Olmert's ideas are neither revolutionary nor bold. They are little more than a repackaging of Oslo, one that will bring neither peace nor security in their wake." Israel has tried retreat, and gotten war.

Michael Freund suggests that Israel "reassert complete military control over Judea, Samaria and Gaza," "Instead of running away from the problem, as Beilin suggests, or building a wall to hide from it, as Olmert would like..."

Israel must determine its future border. However it draws that border, it would be criticized by foreign states. Israel may as well take back what it never should have given up. There is no reason to believe that the Arabs would be satisfied with the 1967 armistice line as a border, anyway. They admit that their ideology requires conquest. Olmert and Beilin alike "are willing to displace hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Territories, tear away parts of our ancestral homeland, shrink the size of the state and endanger its future, all in the dubious belief that it will bring about a possible end to the conflict." National Unity Coalition for Israel, 12/12.)

While Olmert and other officials speculate about withdrawing from Jewish locations in Gaza, in response to terrorism, P.A. terrorists have stepped up their offensive with heavy gunfire attacks and mortar shelling. Arabs were responding to loudspeakers in cars driven by Arabs in Khan Yunis to join in and fight the "Zionist enemy." Dep. Education Min. Hendel said that the "booms of war we hear from the P.A. are the Arab response to the voices of defeatism and despair that Israeli ministers are sounding. The talk of evacuating and uprooting Jewish communities and a unilateral withdrawal is a direct endangerment to the soldiers and the residents here." (Arutz-7, 12/14).

Olmert doesn't understand the nature of jihad and the relentlessness and deceit of the Islamists.

Posted by Isralert, December 19, 2003.
The Vipac organization (www.vipac.org) is the source for this articles.

In America and in other true democracies, people are free to practice their religion, any religion, anywhere and at any time. This country contains a wide mixture of religions and sects: Mormons, Buddhists, Catholics, Hindus, Protestants and even Atheists - to name just a few. Our country prides itself on the freedoms it allows for all peoples and in the way we go out of our way to protect those freedoms.

In most parts of the world the wide variety of ideas and freedoms found in America do not exist. Life is generally dominated by the majority and the minorities are prosecuted or restricted in the manner in which they can carry out their beliefs. Few countries allow or nurture the wide variety of ethnicity and religions as are found in America.

In walking the streets of Israel one finds a wide variety of ethnic cultures. Not only among the Jews who found refuge from persecution there, but among the non-Jews who have made their homes there. The Moslems have a major holy site in Jerusalem. For many Christians, Jerusalem is held to be a shrine of preeminent holiness. The Israeli city of Haifa contains the shrines of the Bahai religion and other religions such as the Druze exist in freedom throughout Israel.

But only to the Jews is Jerusalem and Israel the most holiest of places. The Christians have Rome and many other shrines. The Moslems have Mecca and Medina. To the Jews there is only Israel.

One would think that the Jews would be reluctant to share their one country with the rest of the world but that has not proven to be the case. They have never prevented other peoples from observing their religions. For nineteen years the Kingdom of Jordan ruled Jerusalem but did not choose to refurbish the golden dome of the City's Mosque until the city was ruled by the Jews. Christian Monks walk the streets of the Old City with Hassidim in peace.

The shocking truth is that the Jews have less freedom to worship and live in their own country than do other groups. Last week a group of Jewish worshippers were attacked in Nablus while returning from worshipping at the Tomb of Joseph. A Rabbi was murdered there three years ago on his way to protect holy books from destruction by the Arabs. An Israeli soldier was killed at the Tomb trying to protect the freedom of worship.

Your call for another Arab Palestinian State, this one within the borders of Israel, is contrary to the spirit of the religious freedom our country stands for. Will the Arabs permit Jews within their "State?" Will they allow Jews to worship at their holy sites?

The Arabs failed the test at the beginning of their current war against the Jews when they burned the Tomb of Joseph, destroyed an ancient synagogue in Jericho and damaged numerous other holy sites.

The Arab call for the demolition of all Jewish towns and cities within the area they claim is blatant segregation. Apartheid! Arabs are free to live throughout Israel. Jews live in Hebron and other cities and places holy to their religion at the risk of their lives.

The former Chief Rabbi of Israel, Rabbi Avraham Shapira recently issued the following declaration: "We are encountering intentions, Heaven forbid, to evacuate Jewish communities in our Holy Land... We stand in shock at these futile ideas and thoughts, that come not from within, but from without. Our Sages have taught us: "The first stage of defeat is retreat." ... We must answer the call and come to the aid of these heroes in every spot in Israel, and take action to prevent the uprooting of communities. Such destruction is forbidden according to our holy Torah..."

The Jews of Israel have the right to live in their holy land. They have the right to live in all parts of their land. It is contrary to the principles of America to allow the Arabs the sole exclusive right to any part of the land of Israel to the exclusion of other peoples or other religions. The principles of freedom are not served by the uprooting of the Jews from Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

I urge you to support the right of the Jews to live throughout Israel.

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 19, 2003.
The most important news of this last week may turn out to be not Saddam's capture but the decision of Colonel Gadaffi to eliminate Libya as a radical state intent on developing and spreading weapons of mass destruction, while harboring and abetting terrorist groups. The Bush-Blair announcement, and Tripoli's confirmation, suggest a major strategic sea-change in the Middle East that could help validate Bush's cage-rattling strategy against rogue states, while taking another anti-Israel domino out of play.

Gadaffi's turnabout, which began with his decision to make amends for the Lockerbie massacre, could spawn a host of major ripple effects throughout the region and beyond:

First, it should take a lot of wind out of the sails of the anti-Bush, anti-Iraq argument that toppling Saddam would destabilize the Arab world and create graver threats to Europe and the United States. Less than a week after Saddam was pulled out of his pit, Gaddafi has just proved the opposite. The Middle East is becoming a safer place.

Second, with Iraq and Libya no longer able or willing to threaten their neighbors with WMDs and state-sponsored terrorism, that leaves only Iran and Syria as terrorist-supporting regimes intent on creating as much mischief as possible in their neighborhood. With Iraq out of play, Syria already is in a box, hemmed in by a new Iraq, Turkey and Israel. The major challenge remains Iran, which has not curbed its appetite for abetting as much radicalism as possible throughout the Middle East - whether with a stealth program to develop WMDs or as a pro-active haven for Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups that it actively sponsors and finances, including Hezbollah and Hamas.

Third, with increasing intelligence pointing to Iran as a co-conspirator in the recent terrorist bombings in Istanbul, the capture of Saddam and the about-face of Gadaffi may finally embolden the United States, Europe and NATO to squeeze Teheran more forcefully. For example, it's high time that NATO countries invoke a provision in the NATO charter that, when foreign countries support terrorists headed for Turkey, an attack against Turkey will be considered an attack against ALL members of NATO. This provision first was invoked immediately after 9/11. While it had no direct material effect in the hunt of Osama, it sent a powerful political and psychological message to supporters of terrorism. NATO now should do the same with Iran's terrorism-supporting regime, warnig the mullahs in Tehran to keep hands off with regard to Turkey and Iraq.

Fourth, for Israel, Gadaffi's desire to shed his radical, terrorism-supporting past means that another vicious player who used his power to foment trouble and death against the Jewish state effectively may no longer be part of the anti-Israel regional equation and that, with Washington's support, Israel can exercise more leverage against remaining enemy states.

Fifth, for the overall war against terrorism, it means that the fewer terrorism-supporting states there are, the easier it will be to pursue Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups that are not necessarily based in one or a few countries, but depend heavily on logistical and financial support from sympathetic countries. Al Qaeda may still be able to operate on its own, but with fewer safe havens, its options become more constrained.

Not a bad week for Bush, Blair and Sharon. In fact, a fitting run-up to Chanukah.

Postscript: It should not be overlooked that Gadaffi "surrendered" to Bush and Blair - not to the EU, not to Chirac, not to Schroeder, not to Kofi Annan, not to the International Atomic Energy Agency, not to the U.N. Disarmament Conference, not to the U.N. Security Council, not to the U.N. General Assembly. His capitulation underscored the muscle and effectiveness of the Bush-led coalition of the willing. Sometimes, carefully crafted unilateralism trumps p.c. multilateralism and the supposed authority of international institutions. Again.

ANOTHER TACK: The Prostitute's Price
Posted by Women In Green, December 19, 2003.
This article was written by Sarah Honig, who is a political analyst and columnist, who writes for the Jerusalem Post. This article appeared there December 12, 2003.

No need to worry about Ehud Olmert's latest pronouncements. He has evinced such dubious originality in the past, most glaringly when he sabotaged the Likud's 1999 campaign and starred in Ehud Barak's electioneering broadcasts, vouching that Barak won't divide Jerusalem. Shortly thereafter, Barak was about to sign everything away save for the subterranean strata of the Temple Mount.

That's not to say, however, that there's no cause for anxiety - not so much about Olmert, as about his boss, ultra-pragmatist Ariel Sharon. His cronies informally reassure us that our interests are in capable hands, that the wily old man knows best.

That's precisely what should deprive us of sleep at night. Crafty expediency may get us out of assorted jams but land us into life-threatening quicksand.

In this case, the road to disaster is paved with pragmatic considerations.

Pragmatism is akin to focusing on specific potholes in our national path rather than sometimes lifting our eyes from the ground to scan the horizon, survey the sweep of the land and behold the full track ahead. We bog ourselves down with details and neglect the whole. We quibble about issues and forget the basics.

Occasional pragmatism has its uses, but had Zionism's founding fathers been dogged by the demographic demon like Olmert, this state would have never been born. It came to be because of the Herzlian "irrational" resolve that "if you will it, it's no myth." Unlike visionary, against-the-odds Zionists of yesteryear, pragmatists reject dreams, absolutes and truths. Everything is judged by the practical outcome. The quicker and more facile the solution, the better, because impatient pragmatists rarely commit for the long haul.

THUS IF the world, for a host of ulterior motives, contends Israel is the villain and the Arabs its downtrodden victims, we don't quarrel with this basic premise. We throw the howling hostile hounds a few bones to mollify them, ease the pressure, win time.

If the world, for cynical self-serving reasons, equates us with South Africa's old apartheid regime and the Arabs with the oppressed indigenous masses, we don't challenge this odious distortion. We try to improve our image.

If the world decides we're foreign colonists who forcibly usurped the land of peaceful natives, we remove several settler outposts, rather than refute the brazen fabrications and stress our right to our only homeland.

If the world falsely depicts us as the many and the mighty and the Arabs as the few and defenseless, we shy from military solutions to violent conflicts. If the world calls us aggressors, we apologize.

If the world misrepresents this bloody dispute as being about a Palestinian state, we don't protest that it's really about denying the right of a Jewish state to exist. Instead, to please our critics, we concede the Palestinian cause.

By repeatedly conceding the basic assumptions against us, we aggravate our own distress and inevitably succumb to the inimical international axiom that we're in the wrong and that those who would annihilate us are desperate insurgents against injustice. Any means to which they resort are thereby quasi-legitimized and terrorism against Israel not entirely cast out of moral bounds. Our accommodating pragmatism effectively removes Israelis, even Jews, from what the world's anti-terror warriors define as terrorism.

Insidiously, terrorism becomes the indiscriminate targeting of non-Jews.

It's therefore quite counterproductive for us to exclusively harp on the terror theme. We'd do better to go back to basics, proclaim loud and clear that we are here by right; that we were attacked; that the Arabs only conjured Palestinian nationality in order to stake rival claims; that a Palestinian state never existed (i.e. we certainly didn't conquer and subjugate it); that we didn't drive out hapless refugees (who themselves started the war); that they caused their own downfall by plotting genocide and ethnic cleansing against us; that our only sin is surviving. We can remind the world of the Nazi legacy of "Palestinian" hero Haj Amin el-Husseini. We can point to Ahmed Yassin's recent declaration that there's no room in the region for a Jewish state.

Admittedly, we may not convince anyone. The dice are loaded against us. But we've nothing to lose by rediscovering our defiant spirit and lost Zionist ideals. Excessive pragmatism - the sacrifice of national honor for temporary gain - will lose us everything, from our own sense of justice to the souls of our youngsters.

Pragmatism will turn us into the woman once asked by George Bernard Shaw whether she'll go to bed with him for a 1,000 Pounds. When she answered in the affirmative, he offered her a mere 2 Pounds. Outraged, she railed: "What do you take me for? A prostitute?" Shaw replied: "We've already determined that. Now we're haggling over the price."

Posted by Isralert, December 19, 2003.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
Office of the Prime Minister
19 12 03/Erev Chanukah/Shabbat 5764

Dear Prime Minister Sharon:

You don't know me. I am 23 years old, a member of the IDF Paratroop unit No. *** which just spent two days and two nights in Schechem. As you know from the report of our Defense Minister Mofaz, our units engaged terrorists in the Casbah area of Schechem successfully in erasing these terrorists from further life to cause death to the Jews of Israel.

I did not sleep both nights as we continued going house to house,at times via the walls between the houses, in order to find, arrest, and kill the terrorists. We found one terrorist who was fully 'dressed' in his bomb belt along with his suicide note and video. This terrorist was planning to blow himself up in Hadera yesterday according to my commander. We were able to blow him up first. I know you are very familiar with the turf in Schechem as I have read books on your heroism and military actions over your 50 years of service to our country.

I have one more month left in my IDF service. The years combined in the IDF together with my Hesder yeshiva learning years have given me the opportunity to serve G-d and my nation. As I arrived home today for Chanukah and 36 hours of rest and relaxation here in Migron, I am reading today's papers that describe your intent to destroy Jewish homes and transfer Jews out of their home and land here.

I have spent the last few years going from the Beit Midrash where I am able to learn Tanach and Gemora to my IDF Paratroop unit. I have fought in Jenin after Passover 2002, I have been the recipient of shelling from terrorists near Kfar Darom in the Gaza area. I am now 'fresh' from the front line this week in Schechem. I am trying to prepare my little menorah, oil, and wicks for tonight's first candle to commemorate Chanukah's miracles and our victory over the enemies and Hellenists amongst us. My mother will light the Shabbat candles a few minutes after my father and I and my 4siblings light our Chanuka menorah tonight.

We are going to the synagogue, past the health care center, near the kindergartens and homes which Defense Minister Mofaz signed off permits for all of these places in Migron. I am sure that you have seen his approvals which are reprinted in today's HATZOFEH and other newspapers. My cousin, David, is a member of the Magavnikim unit of the Israeli Police. Tonight he and his family are joining us in Migron for Shabbat Chanukah.

Mr. Prime Minister, on Sunday morning, I will return to my IDF unit in Schechem, searching for more Chanukah enemies in the Casbah, risking my life for the lives of others whom we don't want to be blown up by terrorists in restaurants, malls, and busses. My cousin, David, has been 'training' for the removal of Jews from their homes. He tells me that in the next few weeks, his unit and other IDF units will be entering Jewish homes to take Jews out of their homes in Israel. David's mother and my father are siblings.

David could be assigned to Migron after Chanukah to join the orders to remove Jews from their homes. David could be assigned to move out our neighbors or his uncle and aunt, my parents. I will be in Schecem removing terrorists from their holes and homes, looking for bombs and bullets. You, Mr. Prime Minister, for whatever reasons from the USA or other minority members of your government will be overseeing removal and transfer of Jews while I, as your soldier of the IDF will be chasing terrorists.

As soon as I hear that Migron, my home, will be the target of your Jew transfer, I will leave my unit in Schechem which I know will get me jail time, and head to Migron. I will not use my hands or feet to touch one fellow soldier or policeman. My rabbanim at the hesder yeshiva have already warned us that we cannot lift a hand to a fellow Jewish soldier. I will join thousands of other Jews to block peacefully and according to law, the removal of my parents and siblings from our home in Migron.

I may 'face' my cousin face to face when you give the order to his unit to remove me and my family. Mr. Sharon, I would like you to witness the transfer of Jews, first cousins, and uncles and aunts as David approaches my home. David will be ordered to take Jews out of their homes in my town of Migron, from the same home which David and his family and mine will share Chanukah divrei Torah tonight.

I know that you have pressure from the world to give it all back and give in to terrorists. It makes me wonder why I am chasing, killing, and arresting terrorists in Schechem last week and again on Sunday. David and I and our parents will light a Chanukah candle tonight on a day filled with rain, storms, thunder and lightning in Jerusalem and Migron. The 134 of us here in Migron will sing Ma OzTzur and add "Al Hanisim" to our prayers starting tonight in the synagogue, next to the health center, next to the kindergarten building. By the way, Defense Minister Mofaz' approvals were blown up in large print and are posted everywhere here.

I am sure you are busy after last night's speech and preparing your Chanukah parties with your sons. I appreciate the time if you read my letter. You will probably see my face when David, my cousin, will carry me away with the other family members per your dream of transferring Jews out of their homes in Israel. You may even see some tears on David's face that might mix with my tears and add to the 'raindrops' of cries on this Chanukah in Migron.

Chanukah Sameach,

IDF Paratrooper No. ****

This was translated from Hebrew to English by Harvey Tannenbaum, Moshe's 2nd cousin.

Isralert is sent to an opt-in list. To subscribe, send an E-mail to Isralert@aol.com with the word "SUBSCRIBE" in the subject box.

Posted by David Bedein, December 18, 2003.
Next Wednesday night, when Christmas and Chanukah will coincide, an Israeli organization funded by an American Jewish organization will be organizing an all day teach-in in the heart of Tel Aviv to convince high school students not to join the Israeli army and to convince Israeli soldiers to desert the Israel Defense Forces. The theme of the "teach-in": Israel's soldiers are "war criminals."

All this occurs after the PLO orchestrated over 20,000 terror attacks over a period of three years that have resulted in the cold blooded murders of more than 900 men, women and children throughout Israel.

Meanwhile, the Hizbullah organization gnaws at Israel's border with its war of attrition in the north, moving into the positions that the Israeli army unilaterally withdrew from under the Beilin/Barak left wing government's hasty retreat from Lebanon in May 2000. And, at the same time, tens of weapons smuggling tunnels are being dug along Israel's long southern frontier with the collusion of Israel's neighbor to the south, Egypt.

As a result, the Israel Defense Force has been forced to spread its small army to conduct operations in order to preempt terrorists by locating, arresting and neutralizing potential killers where they plan potential terror attacks, while at the same time guarding and patrolling two very hot borders.

While the IDF operations are taking place, a group of Israelis with support from a Jewish group in the US have been conducting a well-financed campaign to encourage IDF troops to desert their units. I write this not only as a journalist, but also as the father of Noam, an Israeli soldier who serves as a sergeant in an IDF combat unit that operates in an isolated and sensitive area of operation where he risks his life every day. My wife and I and our five other children look forward to welcoming our oldest son home whenever he can get away for Shabbat. Noam arrives home exhausted and, like the other young men and women his age serving in the army, he appreciates the support that he gets from the "home front" - our community and his own family.

Yet at every train station and bus station that Noam passes through he is "greeted " by paid professionals who distribute leaflets to IDF soldiers to encourage them to desert from their units, offering to pay them to do so.

The leaflets that Noam picks up describe Israeli soldiers as "war criminals" and are financed through a Jewish organization in my home community of Philadelphia in the United States. That organization is the Shefa Fund.

As their website at www.shefafund.org proudly states, the Shefa Fund provides funds to the "Courage to Refuse" campaign, which proclaims that it will pay for any IDF soldier for the time that he might spend in prison and for any legal expenses involved in refusing to serve. A recent investigative TV program which aired on Commerical Station Channel Two in Israel showed how the "Courage to Refuse" campaign had set up a counseling service in the center of Tel Aviv known as "New Profile", which counsels young Israeli men and women on how to avoid Israeli army service altogether.

Page seven of the annual Shefa Fund report also proudly states that the Shefa Fund has most recently allocated funds to the Courage to Refuse Campaign. This has enabled the Israeli draft desertion campaign to take out ads, distribute leaflets at army bases and at bus stops, and to hire a PR firm to further incite IDF troops to desert their units. Instead of calling themselves "deserters", these soldiers call themselves "refusenicks," a term reminiscent of the struggle to save Soviet Jews who were refused exit visas from the Soviet Union in the 1970's and 1980's. Copying the tactics of the struggle to free Soviet Jewry, the Shefa Fund has now launched a campaign for Jews in the US to "sponsor" deserters from the IDF and to glorify them in their hometown communities in the US. Needless to say, all this undermines the morale of the IDF by accusing Israeli soldiers of conducting war crimes against an Arab population which harbors terrorists and which encourages and celebrates the murder of Jews, even women and children.

The Shefa Fund has responded to these reports by distributing a letter in which it states that "as a matter of policy, we do not distribute flyers on buses or at points where soldiers are returning from the front. "Courage To Refuse," in fact, works only with reservists, not with soldiers who are under compulsory service. These organizations do not encourage desertion, and do not pay anyone to recruit members or to refuse military service."

The Shefa Fund also claims that "Yesh G'vul" and "Courage to Refuse" do not encourage desertion from the Israeli military, despite the fact that this is precisely what both organizations do by distributing letters, leaflets and internet messages every day in praise of IDF reservists and new IDF inductees who desert their IDF units rather than engage in the pursuit of PLO terrorists who escape to safe havens in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), Gaza and Jerusalem.

Throughout the past year, Yesh Gvul and Courage To Refuse have held countless rallies in honor of young inductees to IDF compulsory service who are now sitting in prison for deserting their units rather than pursuing PLO killers in the West Bank and Gaza. So much for the Shefa Fund claim that they are "only working with reservists."

The Shefa Fund also claims that "Yesh G'vul and Courage To Refuse conduct activities that are legal", despite the fact that Yesh G'vul, as an Israeli-registered Non-Profit Organization, #58-039186-0, was disbanded as a non-profit organization on December 31, 1997 because of "financial irregularities" and remained disbanded until June 2002 when it was established as a profit-making corporation, listed in the Israel Corporate Registrar, #51-325106-6.

According to the Israeli law, it is a felony for Yesh G'vul to solicit or to receive funds, from Israel or from abroad, from the time it was disbanded as a non-profit organization until the time it was registered as a corporation. Even more important, it is illegal to encourage Israeli citizens to engage in the felonious act of desertion from the IDF. Since the Shefa Fund asserts that neither Yesh G'vul nor Courage To Refuse pay Israeli soldiers when they desert the IDF, it would seem that the Shefa Fund's leaders did not read the websites of Courage To Refuse at HYPERLINK "http://www.seruv.org.il/defaulteng.asp" www.seruv.org.il in which Courage To Refuse announced until recently, both in Hebrew and in English, that it would pay deserters for "the time that they spend in jail" to cover their mortgage, tuition, rent and day-care for their children - benefits which are much more than an IDF soldier would get from the Israeli government's meager "national security" allowance during IDF regular or reserve service. Imagine what would happen if the IDF paid the tuition, mortgage, rent and day-care for its soldiers while they are on reserve duty?

The current "Yesh G'vul" brochure offers a flat $750(US) a month for anyone who is jailed for desertion from the IDF.

The Shefa Fund has therefore created the first financial incentive system to make it profitable for an Israeli soldier to desert the Israeli army. All told, the Shefa Fund provided $160,000(US) for this purpose in 2002 alone.

And where does the Shefa Fund get this money? Its brochures show several hundred Jewish contributors who have earmarked funds for their support of IDF desertion.

However, a look at the US #990 IRS forms for the Shefa Fund reveals that the Shefa Fund received an anonymous $15 million donation, of which Shefa is not saying where it came from. Just who is this mysterious anonymous donor?

Ironically, the Shefa Fund is generally known as an agency that provides sorely needed health, education and welfare programs for social services throughout North America. It remains to be seen whether Shefa's assistance to IDF deserters will hurt or help its fund-raising for their worthy social causes. Meanwhile, Noam and his fellow soldiers remain on duty protecting the people of Israel.

This appeared on Front Page Magazine (http://frontpagemag.com) today.

Posted by A Time To Speak, December 18, 2003.
In Europe, the vilification of Israel vindicates 2,000 years of brutal and bloody oppression of Jews. They have shown that they deserved it, have they not? And it is a vent for resentment that while Europe's own life-force runs thin, the despised Jews thrive in their own restored and revived land and Israel ranks ahead of Europe in most fields of worthwhile accomplishment.

Europe's eagerness to sacrifice Israel for its own comfort and profit is explicated by Bat Ye'or [Hebrew for Daughter of the Nile], an outstanding scholar of Islam and especially of the institution of dhimmitude. Her account of the creation of "Eurabia" is reported in The Jerusalem Post, 26 November 2003:

"The anti-Semitism sweeping much of Europe is a concentrated effort led by the political and intellectual elites of Europe, driven by a pact between the European Community and the Arab League, Islamic scholar Bat Ye'or told a gathering at the Hebrew University on Wednesday.

"This meant a return to the 1949 armistice lines (in opposition to UN Resolution 242) and support for a Palestinian state, Arab sovereignty over Jerusalem, the PLO and Arafat, and an overall Arab agreement with Israel instead of separate ones. [...]

"Over the years it has ushered in a complex set of agreements that included mass immigration of Arabs to Europe, school textbooks written under Islamic supervision, the teaching of the Arab language and Islamic culture throughout Europe, and European recognition of the greatness of Arab civilization.

"[Bat-Ye'or] Egyptian-born and Swiss-based, is the world authority on dhimma, literally 'protection,' the status of inferiority imposed by Islamic civilization on Jews and Christians. In her groundbreaking works, such as The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmutude, she coined the term 'dhimmitude' - a state of mind 'so deeply internalized that it escaped critical evaluation and invaded the realm of self-image.'

"[...] In post-Christian Europe, a new cult of 'Palestinianism' has been created,... From the moment the average European gets up in the morning and turns on the radio he is bombarded by the message that the world revolves around Palestine - not on the Muslim-perpetuated genocide in the Sudan, with its 2 million Christian and Animist victims, or any other ongoing atrocity of a similar scale. Parallel to the massive TV and newspaper coverage, books on Palestine make up a large part of the publishing industry.

"On the theological front, Christianity is being detached from its Jewish roots as the Jewish Jesus is replaced with an Arab Palestinian one, emphasizing the traditional Muslim view that Jesus was a Muslim prophet. Yet the dialogue of this Christian-Muslim symbiosis carefully hides the Islamic belief that Jesus will come back to destroy the Christian faith,...

"[She] explained that Europeans feel that by declaring war on terrorism after September 11, Bush endangered their own policy of buying off Islamic terrorism by complying with Arab demands. By attacking Israel and America they feel they can fend off Islamic terrorism on their home ground.

"She similarly explained the wave of attacks on Diaspora Jews following September 11 as an attempt by Europeans to protect themselves from Arab reaction to the first break in European policy, in which some European countries followed American policy against Islamic terrorism."

The website address of A Time To Speak is http://israel.net/timetospeak Subscribe by writing speak@actcom.co.il

Posted by Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis, December 18, 2003.
I had one more day in Budapest before departing for Berlin where I was scheduled to address members of the Jewish community. It was a high pressure day and much remained to be accomplished.

I had a meeting with a publisher to arrange for the translation and publication of my book, "The Committed Life" in Hungarian, and I was also invited to the Parliament to meet with Dr. Istvan Hiller, the Minister of Culture.

In every country, official government buildings are impressive, but in Hungary, perhaps more so. The parliament in Budapest, on the banks of the Danube, is a very ornate and majestic structure. As I made my way up the winding staircase, I couldn't help but take note of the decor, the elaborate finishes, sculptures and awesome chambers. The parliament was in session, but soon, the minister greeted me most graciously. After exchanging formalities, he posed a very odd question: "How do you feel being in this building in which so many horrific laws were enacted against your people? Are you angry? Do you have hatred in your heart?"

For a moment I was taken aback by his question. To be candid, I didn't expect such words to emanate from the lips of a gentile. I answered the Minister by relating that last year, for the very first time since my internment in Bergen Belsen, I was invited to speak in Berlin. I never had the desire to return to Germany, but when I received an invitation to address the Jewish students and the Congress of Jewish Scientists and Physicians, I felt a responsibility to go.

Prior to my departure, the young people at Hineni asked me what I planned to say in Berlin. I responded by telling them that I don't have to say anything in Berlin - I just have to say "Hineni, Here I am - a child from Bergen Belsen speaking in Berlin about G-d, Torah and the Jewish people...and that, in and of itself, says everything!"

So I told the Minister of Culture that, instead of focusing on anger, which only begets more anger and leads to hatred and violence, I would like to focus on Hineni - that I am here and my people are here, and those who schemed to destroy us, to annihilate us, are no more. I went on to tell him that we, the Jewish people, have seen the rise and fall of the nations that persecuted us, and we outlived them all. We are here, more vibrant, more vital than ever and the secret of our survival is in the Divine Covenant that we sealed at Sinai - to bear witness to G-d's Holy Name.

His eyes told me that he was open to my words, so I went on to explain that thousands of years ago, our people were in bondage in Egypt. Our babies were cast into the Nile and bricked into the walls. In those days, had you asked a citizen of Egypt, "Who will survive the centuries?" he would probably have laughed at you. The question was ludicrous. It was no contest - Of course it would be the Egyptians. The Jews were in their twilight days. But today, ancient Egypt is gone and we are here.

And throughout the centuries, this same pattern has been repeated. Consider the great Babylonian Empire. They conquered our land; they razed our Temple; they destroyed Jerusalem, killed us by the multitudes and took our people to Babylon in chains. In those days, were you to have asked a citizen of Babylonia, "Who will survive the centuries?" he too would have laughed at you.

There's no question - Of course the Babylonians! But ancient Babylon is gone, and we are here!

If you skip the centuries and come to the great Roman Empire, you will again see our Temple razed, Jerusalem in flames, conquered and destroyed and our people taken into bondage. Our sons became gladiators in the Roman amphitheaters - food for the lions. This time the Jewish people would surely come to an end. There was no possibility of their being saved. This time there was no doubt as to who would survive the centuries. But ancient Rome is gone and we are here.

And now, let's enter modern times and consider the plight of Russian Jewry. Had you asked a Russian "What will survive the centuries, Judaism or communism?" the question would have been greeted by laughter. In Russia, Judaism was dead. Russian Jewry had been indoctrinated in atheism - denial of G-d. They had no knowledge of their past or their Divine heritage. Should they have even attempted to probe, to study, it was at the risk of their lives. For merely possessing a prayer book or lighting Shabbos candles, they were sent to prison. There was no possible way that Judaism in Russia could survive. But today, the Russian Jewish community is growing and thriving, and recently I spoke in Moscow in front of the old KGB building about G-d. Today, Lenin is gone, Stalin in gone, communism is gone, but we, the Jewish people, are here. Similarly, the Nazis are gone and their Hungarian counterparts are gone, and we are here.

"So," I said to the Minister, "as I walked up the steps of this parliament, it was the eternity of my people on which I focused rather than on those who schemed our annihilation."

"You see," I explained, "we are a nation that believes in tikun olam, in perfecting the world by healing it of its evil. So instead of dissipating our energy on anger, we kindle the light of faith, the light of healing, the light of our Torah.

I must admit that the Minister was very receptive to my words and told me that he was planning to hold a commemoration in 2004 to mark the deportation of Hungarian Jewry.

I told him that that would be a perfect time to issue a proclamation expressing the deep regret and contrition of the Hungarian government for the terrible atrocities that resulted from the passage of the laws against the Jews in these august halls. Even as I spoke, I fully realized that such proclamations are mere words, and unfortunately evil will most likely continue until Messiah comes - but at least such words would be proclaimed and those who deny the Holocaust as well as future generations would hear them. And he agreed - he promised to bring the matter before parliament and the commemoration has been set for April, 2004. Ceremonies, he told me, will be held throughout the world - in Budapest, at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, and at the Holocaust Museum in Washington. He invited the participation of our Hineni organization and I readily accepted. Mr. Andrew Friedman, a prominent attorney of Hungarian descent, a leader of the Los Angeles Jewish community and founder of our West Coast Hineni chapter, will spearhead the ceremonies in Los Angeles and I will conduct a parallel program in New York which would be broadcast via satellite.

As I walked down the steps of the parliament building into the cold Hungarian evening, I thought to myself, Blessed be G-d who preserved and continues to preserve our people - that, despite all the plots and schemes, "Hineni - we are here."

The Hineni Heritage Center's website address is http://www.hineni.org

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 18, 2003.
Israel has minimal strategic depth (and would forfeit that if it relinquishes Yesha instead of getting the Arabs out). Its air superiority could be jeopardized by guerrilla forces from the P.A. or from nearby Arab states. All of Israel's air bases are within range of enemy long-range missiles.

Jordan doesn't let much arms smuggling go on from its territory to the P.A.. Egypt could stop the smuggling into Gaza. The Suez Canal is more than 200 kilometers of undeveloped desert from Gaza. There are only two roads, easily checked for weapons. US pressure had gotten Egypt to arrest some smugglers and destroy one or two tunnels, but Egypt did no more. By allowing the smuggling of arms into Gaza, Egypt is tacitly supporting it. Egypt supports Hamas diplomatically against the P.A., to keep the P.A. from possibly cracking down on Hamas (while Israeli and US officials praise Egypt for "constructive" mediation). Egypt sees Hamas as a strategic asset against Israel, just as Syria and Iran use Hizbullah. The objective is to weaken Israel. Meanwhile, Egypt, unchallenged militarily, has been increasing its military expenditures sharply. Egyptian military doctrine and training focus on a future war against Israel.

Israel has to make up in the quality of its forces what it fell behind in quantity. That requires good universities and research centers (and money).

People think that the quality of Israeli forces would have the same effect as the quality of US and British forces that destroyed the Iraqi army swiftly. It wouldn't. The US air bases were far from Iraqi forces that might strike back. Having air superiority, the US was able to dispatch its troops when it chose. Israel lacks that strategic depth. Even its mobilization centers could be tied up by commandos.

During the first few days of war, when Israel would be trying to organize its reservists, enemy states could fire enough missiles to wreak havoc in Israel and perhaps paralyze the mobilization centers and air bases. Where then would be Israeli air and tank superiority? (The most missiles could come from Hizbullah. Hizbullah's strategic threat to Israel is the price Israel paid for some foreign-funded, leftist Israeli mothers' campaign to get the IDF out of the Lebanon security zone, because Israelis suffered a few casualties a year keeping Hizbullah from access to Israel.) Israel is vulnerable.

"In 1994, it was apparent that to the Egyptians, the peace process was not genuine, but rather an opportunity to weaken Israel." Between 1993 and 1995, Israel began reducing military spending.

Instead of warming the cold peace between Egypt and Israel following the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the W. Bank, Egypt sharply increased its military spending. It conducted more frequent military exercises simulating war against Israel. The difference between US military aid to Israel and to Egypt, about equal in amount, is that Israel has had to expend much of its aid in war, whereas Egypt has accumulated its military purchases. Now the Arabs are pressing the US to make sure that their weapons cancel out Israel's so-called qualitative edge.

When PM Barak tried to tempt Arafat into a concordat by offering part of Jerusalem, Egypt's President declared that if he signed such a pact, he would be considered treasonous to Arabs. Other Arab leaders copied the warning. Arafat knew he would not survive by defying them.

Egyptian rhetoric had become more hostile than before the Oslo process took place. What was Egypt's real aim? "Apparently, the real Egyptian policy is to let Israelis and Palestinians (Arabs) bleed together."

Egypt had pressed King Hussein not to sign his peace agreement with Israel. Egypt pressed Morocco and Qatar not to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel (IMRA, 12/11 from MK Yuval Steinitz, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs).

Writers usually do not define the term, "strategic depth." Perhaps that is taking too much for granted. What makes depth to a country strategic?

Example 1: In the 1967 war, Israel had to launch pre-emptive attacks, because its armistice lines from 1949 gave it no strategic depth. Otherwise, the war, already started by Arab blockade and mobilization with the boast of imminent invasion, would have been fought in Israel's populated areas, killing masses of civilians, obstructing Israeli mobilization, and enabling armored thrusts to separate and isolate Israeli forces.

Example 2: In 1973, Israel was caught by surprise. This time, however, it had the Territories, the Golan, and the Sinai, affording strategic depth. This kept the fighting outside its populated areas, allowed Israeli forces to gather and maneuver, and gave the IDF time to regain the military initiative and win. Having the Territories gave Israel secure boundaries, because of the steep hills and deep valleys that make the invasion route from the East a natural tank trap, as is the Golan, also for topographical reasons. From the Golan, Israeli artillery has Damascus within range. The government at Damascus is well aware of the risk to it of starting another war. (That is why Syria relies upon Lebanese proxies to harass Israel.) These outlying areas also enable Israel to have some warning of enemy invasion, and block line-of-sight enemy aiming of ordnance.

Modern jets fly so fast, that they need wide air space to maneuver in. Israel is too narrow for that, without the Territories. A PLO state, even if peaceful, which it would not be, would not allow such maneuvering; Israel would be hard-pressed to beat off an invasion by other Arabs. The result would be to make Israel more dependent upon pre-emption with nuclear weapons. That is not a desirable option, from anyone's point of view. Let it not come to that!

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF: The Maccabean Battles Reloaded
Posted by Ruth Matar, December 18, 2003.
Israel's Prime Minister Sharon, under heavy American pressure, has made the decision to destroy Migron, a community in the Judean Hills just minutes from Jerusalem. Migron is home to 43 young Torah-observant Jewish families with over 60 young children. They are professionals, teachers, students, and soldiers. They work in Migron or in Jerusalem, or in the surrounding communities, such as Michmash. (Michmash was the stronghold of Judah Maccabee, who reestablished Jewish sovereignty in this whole area, during the time of the Chanukah wars.)

It is important to understand that Migron is not some little collection of huts. The community has built a Synagogue. They also have a library, their own health care center, a petting zoo, and a kindergarten.

Why Migron? It seems that U.S. Ambassador, Daniel Kurtzer, has instructed Israel Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz that Migron has to be the first "Jewish settlement" to be evacuated, so as to make possible a contiguous Palestinian State. (More than shameful: Kurtzer, a supposedly Orthodox religious Jew, because of personal ambition, lends himself to try to destroy the Jewish State.)

The truth is that Migron was approved by Sharon and the Defense Ministry. In fact, successive previous Defense Ministers have insisted that Migron is essential strategically and must never be abandoned. Migron was built on Land owned by Jews, and the Migron residents have all the legal papers to prove these facts. What right does Prime Minister Sharon, or U.S. President George W. Bush, (or the State Department?) or the European Union, have to uproot these Jewish families from their homes? What right does anyone have to give away portions of the Jewish Homeland, the Land given to us eternally and irrevocably by G-d, to a bunch of terrorists, or to anyone else for that matter?

This Friday night we are lighting the first candle of the Chanukah holiday. What exactly are we celebrating?

In children's books the story is very simple: "Many years ago, a wicked king, named Antiochus, captured the Land of the Jews. He ordered them to give up their religion and to worship his Greek gods. All who refused to obey the king's command, were put to death."

But also for adults - in the popular perception - the story is not much more complex:

"Chanukah is the victory of a small band of the courageous Maccabees fighting the mighty Syrian-Greek army of King Antiochus. The miracle of Chanukah is the rededication of the Temple, and the triumph of freedom of religion in the face of oppression."

The TRUE Chanukah story is not so simple. Yes, the Maccabean wars were fought against a foreign occupying force, the Syrian-Greeks. But these wars were also waged against another enemy trying to destroy Israel as a Jewish entity, an enemy WITHIN. The Hellenized Jews at the time of the Hasmonians were a dedicated group of "worldly" Jews drawn to the "beauty" of Greek culture and alienated from their own heritage and from the G-d of Israel. They existed to ingratiate themselves by serving the whim of their foreign patrons and to eliminate the yoke of their own heritage - the Torah. They longed to be like the other nations of the world, free to indulge in whatever they wished, and to eradicate any vestige of what makes a Jew Jewish in the first place: The G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the Land of Israel, and the Holy Torah itself.

The REAL battle of the Maccabees was not only against the Syrian-Greek army of Antiochus. It was also against their fellow Jews, who were willing to sell out their Jewish identity for universality, world citizenship, economic advancement, and of course, acceptance by other nations. They were even willing to give up the Holy Temple, and to allow Jerusalem to become a Greek city, all in order to obtain for themselves "the good life", and to become enlightened "citizens of the world".

Today, our modern assimilationists are very much like the Hellenists of old. We have our own version of disloyal High Priests and our own Hellenizers - the Sharons, the Olmerts, the Yossi Beilins, the Yossi Sarids, and the Shimon Pereses, and others too numerous to mention.

It is not widely known that Antiochus did not issue anti-religious decrees against any other people than the Jews. He simply conquered many nations POLITICALLY, but did not attack their RELIGION in any way. It was ONLY against the Jews that he instituted anti-religious decrees.

Why just against the Jews? Historians say that Antiochus had no intention of issuing anti-religious decrees against the Jews, but his Jewish friends and collaborators, the Hellenists, advised him to do so. The Hellenists of that time - THEY were the ones who advised Antiochus how to break the Jews.

You want to break the Jewish People? Forbid them to study Torah and forbid them to perform circumcisions, allow their holy places to be desecrated and, above all, forbid them to live on their own Promised Land.

History, in truth, repeats itself! Or in modern terms, we now have "The Maccabean Battles - Reloaded!" The internal Jewish enemies counsel the external enemies, and give them advice on how to break the People of Israel. Hellenist Yossi Beilin is funded by the European Union and goes around the world selling his treasonous Geneva Accords. And Mr. Olmert and Mr. Sharon compete with each other as to who can announce more "painful concessions" to the world on Israel's behalf.

THE GREAT TRAGEDY of our present situation is that the war of the Hellenized Jews, who joined the enemy against their Jewish brothers, continues to this very day!

Today, we are faced with the same enemies: world powers that are pushing the tiny Jewish state, pushing hard to divide and give away large portions of the Jewish Homeland, the Land given to us eternally by G-d. The same enemies are still here, including the enemy within.

Like then, the enemy within has the political power in our Land, cow-towing to the world powers that urge the weakening and diminution of our tiny nation. And for what reason? Astonishingly, to appease and reward a vast multitude of Arab terrorists who strive to destroy tiny Israel along with the United States and the rest of Western Civilization. Make no mistake: these are the same Arabs who cheered the destruction and massacre of the Twin Towers, and who today, weep because of the capture of Saddam Hussein, as he hid like a rat in a filthy hole in the ground. Their other role model and hero, Yasser Arafat, also cowers like a rat in his decaying compound in Ramallah, but, alas, he is dangerous. This enemy continues to order and organize the murder of Jews in Israel, inside and out of the absurdity known as the 'green line'. Is he brought to justice for these atrocities, is he stopped, is he captured or killed? No. Instead, he is protected by the United States, and courted by Peres, Beilin, and those of their ilk, the Jewish Hellenists of today.

We cannot afford to loose this fight - THIS FIGHT IS FOR SURVIVAL.

Yesterday, December 17, our Women in Green went to the Judean Community of Migron, to show our solidarity with the 43 families with their 60 children, who are rebuilding this Biblical city. (Biblical references to Migron: Isaiah 10:28, Samuel I 14:2.) We brought the children toys and candy.

Also yesterday, a large number of Rabbis, under an umbrella called the "Land of Israel Rabbis", went to Migron. Last night they issued the following statement:

"The government is forbidden by a total religious prohibition to evacuate any outpost or settlement and has no right to give away parts of the Land of Israel to strangers, and anything done toward this aim is void. "

The "Land of Israel Rabbis" also stated that thousands of Yeshiva students will come to Migron to try and keep Israel Defense Forces troops from evacuating it.

Rabbi Elyakim Levanon, the Chief Rabbi of the Elon Moreh settlement, said that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's government was, "disintegrating the Land of Israel. We have never had a worse government than this one. The core of the problem does not lie with the IDF, the Ministry of Defense, or the Interior Ministry. All roads lead to Ariel Sharon. We are telling Ariel Sharon: You have 24 hours (before his speech at the Herzliya Conference tonight) to regain your composure and to examine your position. Otherwise you will lead us to the biggest disgrace in the history of Israel," the Rabbi said.

The Women in Green support these statements in their entirety. Judah Maccabee started the Maccabean battles by his statement: "He who is for G-d, follow me!" Women in Green will join and follow all those who believe in the G-d of Israel, in order to prevent this shameful attempt of the Hellenist Jews to abandon our Homeland.


With Blessings and Love for Israel,

P.S. Go to our website http://www.womeningreen.org/ to see pictures of the children of Migron.

Posted by Richard Lakisher, December 17, 2003.
In the now world-famous libel suit between Holocaust Denier David Irving and Dr. Deoborah Lipstadt, Irving sued Lipstadt and her publisher. Lipstadt had written that Irving was a Nazi apologist and admirer of Hitler. She had asserted that Irving was a Holocaust Denier who had distorted facts and manipulated documents to prove that there had been no genocide of Jews during World War II. Irving sued for libel. He claimed that Lipstadt damaged his reputation and credentials as a serious historian and writer.

Lipstadt's claims against Irving were in part based on Irving's own efforts as apologist for and promoter of the writings and views of the Neonazi and Holocaust Denier, Ernst Zundel, who was on trial at the time in Canada.

Dr. Lipstadt's defense was that her depiction of Irving as a Nazi and Holocaust Denier was entirely true and backed up by numerous writings by Irving himself. She presented evidence in court that Irving is a racist, an extremist anti-Semite, and associated with anti-Semitic Right-wing extremists.

The judgment in the case was handed down in April, 2000. The court found for the defendant's (meaning Lipstadt). The British court found that her assertions were simply statements of fact. The judge confirmed that Irving had served as an apologist for Neonazis and anti-Semites, and rejected his denials that he is an extremist, racist and anti-Semite. (It continues to be a fact that he regularly appears before and writes for anti-Semitic audiences.) The court ordered Irving to pay 150,000 pounds sterling in damages for his baseless suit against Lipstadt. The judgment and the legal costs are estimated by the Guardian to have cost Irving between one and two million pounds and to have forced him into bankruptcy.

The British court said effectively that it is not libelous to tell the truth about a fanatic extremist. It is not libelous to denounce him in strong terms. Extremists may not use the court as a club to stifle denunciations of their behavior and writings by those who are vehemently critical of their views.

It is one of the bizarre twists of the political scene in Israel that a David Irving Trial of sorts is taking place there at the moment. It is a trial that bears many similarities to the actual David Irving Trial in Britain. To begin with, it involves a political extremist suing for libel a courageous critic who labeled him an anti-Semite and fanatic because of his writings and political behavior.

The Israeli plaintiff is himself a writer, who has often been cited and featured on the personal web site of the British David Irving. His writings have been published on Neonazi and Holocaust Denier web sites, as well as in other anti-Semitic and Islamist fundamentalist journals and web sites.

The defendant argues that the plaintiff is attempting to use the court as a club to suppress free speech in an anti-democratic manner: the plaintiff has filed a frivolous nuisance suit to bully his critics so that they will be afraid to denounce the plaintiff's political views and behavior.

There are other significant similarities between the two trials. In both, the plaintiff has a record of praising and promoting the views of people commonly seen as Holocaust Deniers. In both, the plaintiff's associates with extremist anti-Semitic organizations and with individuals widely considered to be anti-Semites, and collaborate with them in publishing their views. Both plaintiffs are venomously critical of Israel and its leaders and have expressed "understanding" for anti-Israel terrorism. In both cases the extremist plaintiffs claim that their good names as researchers were damaged by those who attack their behavior and denounce their writings and opinions. In both cases, no attempt was made to prove that actual material damages were suffered by the plaintiff.

In short, both plaintiffs in the two David Irving Trials used the framework of a libel suit to try to force their critics into silence. There is one important difference though. The Israeli 'David Irving' is himself an Israeli and a Jew.

Moreover, while David Irving was never on the faculty of a bona fide academic institution, the plaintiff in the Israeli David Irving Trial is. He is Dr. Neve Gordon, from the Department of Political Science at Ben-Gurion University. The defendant in Gordon's libel suit is the professor, columnist and writer, Prof. Steven Plaut. He is on the faculty of the University of Haifa.

Neve Gordon teaches political science at Ben Gurion University; he is a member of a department that is nearly wall-to-wall leftist. He holds a Ph.D. from Notre Dame University, a Catholic school in Indiana. Most of the articles he has published are politicalized and/or devoted to attacking Israeli policies and/or denounce Israel as a terrorist country The Middle East Quarterly has declared him to be one of Israel's academic extremists.

Gordon goes beyond the chic support for the PLO and its positions so common today among Israeli academic leftists. Gordon has allied himself and collaborated with a wide variety of anti-Semites and anti-Semitic organizations. He used to lead the Physicians for Human Rights in Israel (despite not being a MD himself), a pro-Arab organization so extreme that it has been publicly denounced by the Israel Medical Association. It was condemned as an openly anti-Semitic organization by Prof. Gerald Steinberg of Bar Ilan University, who, together with 200 other people, signed a petition to that effect.

Gordon also maintains a long-term ongoing collaboration with Alexander Cockburn, the anti-Israel Far Leftist American columnist and publisher of Counterpunch magazine. Cockburn has been repeatedly denounced as an anti-Semite by The New Republic and by a variety of other journals and columnists, including the Seattle Times, Declaration Foundation, Prof. Edward Alexander, LewRockwell.Com, LeftWatch, and Christian Action for Israel. Cockburn has openly given credence to reports that Jews spread anthrax in the US and that Israel was part of a conspiracy to topple the World Trade Center. Cockburn insists Jews conspire to control the media. Gordon has published a large number of articles attacking Israel in Counterpunch.

Gordon is active in a Far-Left Israeli organization with the Arabic name Taayush, which in Gordon's own words (cited in an interview) is a seditious organization that "opposes Arab-Jewish coexistence". But Gordon's screeds appeal to an audience that goes beyond the mere vocal critics of Israel. Gordon's articles have been published and cited on a wide variety of neonazi, Holocaust Denial, and Islamist fundamentalist newspapers and web sites. On several neonazi web sites, a work by Gordon is cited right after a citation from Hitler himself, making for curious footnote bedfellows.

Gordon has published articles attacking Israel in the Egyptian anti-Semitic daily Al-Ahram, which routinely spreads anti-Jewish blood libels. Gordon's articles have been published by al-Jazeera, the same Iraqi-subsidized Arab news agency that airs the speeches of Bin Laden and broadcast the shots of the Allied troops being murdered by Saddam's Republic Guards during the recent war. The Holocaust-denying Radio Islam internet web site carries the writings of Gordon alongside its reprinting of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Radio Islam also indulges in traditional medieval anti-Jewish blood libels, and Der Sturmer-like cartoons showing Jews drinking blood.

Gordon's articles have been published on the Electronic Intifada, a pro-terror web site, and on the web site of the anti-Jewish Islamist pro-Hamas CAIR organization in the US. While Gordon claims that he himself did not place his articles on some of these more anti-Semitic web sites, the fact that the articles appealed to the operators of those sites sufficiently for them to carry them speaks volumes about their contents. Gordon is one of the few Israelis whose writings are cited with honor on the web site of David Irving himself, the convicted British Holocaust Denier.

In his writings, Gordon repeatedly insists Israel is a fascist state and a terrorist state, engaging in state terrorism that is no different morally from the mass atrocities of Palestinian and other terrorists. He has denounced Israeli fascism not only in English but also on web sites in German and Italian. Not only has he denounced Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu as war criminals, he has attacked leftist Labor-Party Ultra-Oslo-Dove Ehud Barak. Gordon has written that Bibi Netanyahu is the continuation of Yigal Amir, the murderer of Yitzhak Rabin, and is a spy, criminal or terrorist. He insists Sharon delights in the deaths of Arabs and Jews. He was one of the signers of the petitions before the recent Iraq war declaring that Israel was planning to perpetrate atrocities and massive crimes against humanity once the war broke out. Ben-Dror Yemini, a columnist at Maariv, has denounced all such signatories as being the Israeli equivalents of Lord Haw-Haw, the British traitor and lackey of Hitler during World War II. Gordon repeatedly endorses insubordination and mutiny by Israelis refusing to serve in the military and is active in political groups supporting the mutineers. He has compared Israel to apartheid South Africa and has called the Zionist Organization of America in the United States racist.

Gordon has repeatedly endorsed general boycotts against Israel and his articles are carried by pro-boycott web sites, magazines and organizations. He has expressed sympathy for the bi-national state solution, in which Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish state. He has expressed understanding for terrorism because it is caused by injustice. He has repeatedly insisted that Israel - and specifically Prime Minister Ehud Barak - only understands violence, implying that Arabs should engage in more of it. He considers Israel the main culprit responsible for Middle East violence, and insists this was so even when Barak was Prime Minister. Gordon's politics are so extremist that one of the professors at Notre Dame, where Gordon got his Ph.D. has denounced him venomously in writing and wished him to be blown up by terrorists in an Israeli mall.

Gordon has been active among those Israeli and international Leftists seeking to interfere with Israeli military operations against Palestinian terrorists in the territories. He has worked with Taayush and the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) in trying to prevent Israeli actions against terrorism there, and - according to his own admission - he was arrested for this at least once.

After the Netanya Passover Massacre of 2002, Israel launched Operation Defensive Wall against the terrorists. During that operation, Gordon was one of the group of Far Leftists who illegally infiltrated Israeli army lines and entered Arafat's besieged headquarters in Ramallah to prevent Israel from arresting the wanted terrorists holed up there, and trying to block IDF attempts to attack Arafat's offices. On February 2, 2002, Israel's Haaretz daily carried a large photo of Gordon in a warm embrace with Arafat in his besieged Ramallah headquarters, clasping hands together in a heart-warming show of solidarity. These hands of Arafat being clasped with affection by Gordon were the very same that signed the orders for the murders of hundreds of Israelis. No photo of Gordon showing solidarity with the victims of Arafat's terror was ever printed in the paper.

The most dramatic manifestation of Gordon's political extremism is his promotion and praise of the scribblings of Norman Finkelstein.

Finkelstein is by now fairly well know for his book The Holocaust Industry and other writings in which he trivializes and mocks the Holocaust and claims that virtually all Holocaust survivors are liars, thieves, and cheats. Finkelstein has been denounced as a Holocaust Denier, neonazi, Holocaust trivializer, anti-Semite, fraud, pseudo-researcher, and worse, by nearly every reviewer in every legitimate medium that has discussed him and his book. He was fired from jobs at two New York area academic institutions and now is employed by a Catholic college in Chicago. The NY Times has compared Finkelstein's book to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The British Guardian claims Finkelstein is an anti-Semite and a Holocaust Denier. The Washington Post declares Finkelstein an anti-Semite with ties to Nazis. Moment magazine, the ADL, the World Jewish Congress, Elie Wiesel, Prof. Edward Alexander, Alan Dershowitz, the Canadian Jewish News, the web site on Anti-Semitism at the University of Tel Aviv, Dennis Prager, the Jerusalem Report, Jonah Daniel Goldhagen, and many others have denounced Finkelstein as a nazi, Holocaust Denier, fraud, and/or anti-Semite. Finkelstein is also on record endorsing Arab terror and the destruction of Israel.

Finkelstein has become the featured hero of virtually every Holocaust Denial and Neonazi web site on earth. He is the Nazi's pet Jewish historian, whose research proves there was never any Holocaust of Jews by the Germans at all. The Neonazis insist his writings prove that talk about a Holocaust is all a Zionist hoax.

As it turns out, Neve Gordon from Ben-Gurion University has published articles in the leftist magazine The Nation, in Israel's Haaretz, and on several web sites that not only sing Finkelstein's praises and endorse many of the themes in Finkelstein's books, but has actually compared Finkelstein favorably to the Prophets of the Bible. Finkelstein himself is so proud of Gordon's praise that he features one of Gordon's articles on his own personal web site. Gordon may in fact be the only academic at a bona fide university in the world who acknowledges Finkelstein as a serious researcher.

All of which brings us to Gordon's libel suit against Professor Plaut. On various occasions Plaut has criticized Gordon's political opinions and political behavior on the internet. Gordon regards such criticism of himself as libel. In rather typical leftist manner, Gordon seems to believe that the most extremist, fanatic and outrageous behavior and opinions of leftists must be protected as free speech, but criticism by non-leftists must be suppressed, using the courts and lawyers as an anti-democratic bully club.

Leftists in many countries use the filing of frivolous nuisance libel suits as a guerilla tactic to suppress the free speech of their critics. Gordon's libel suit against Prof. Plaut is based mainly on two short sets of comments that Plaut wrote on the internet about Gordon and his friends. In one, Plaut described Gordon as a groupie of Holocaust Denier Norman Finkelstein. In Gordon's suit he intentionally mistranslates this into Hebrew as if Plaut were saying that Gordon is walking in the furrow of Holocaust Deniers. The fact that Gordon describes Norman Finkelstein as the moral equivalent of Biblical Prophets would seem to make his describing Gordon as a groupie of Finkelstein factually unchallengeable.

The other comment of Prof. Plaut's that upset Gordon was in an internet posting reporting the actions of the human shields entering Arafat's headquarters to defend wanted Palestinian terrorists during Operation Defensive Shield. Plaut reported that Gordon himself had entered the headquarters with these people and was thus to be found among the Judenrat wannabes. Haaretz had just published Gordon's photo in his solidarity embrace with Arafat. Describing people who appoint themselves as representatives and liaisons to mass murderers of Jews might legitimately be described as Judenrat wannabes. But Gordon and his Arab lawyer from East Jerusalem insist it is libelous.

Plaut also described Gordon as a fanatic anti-Semite because of his endorsements of Finkelstein's ideas and writings. In any case, if proof were needed that this is so, a very large host of anti-Jewish, neonazi and Holocaust-Denial web sites and newspapers themselves regard Gordon as sufficiently anti-Semitic to publish his writings. (In one of the more amusing features of Gordon's suit, he insists that Prof. Plaut also libeled him in several articles about him that were not published by Plaut at all but that Gordon believes were inspired by Plaut.) In short, Gordon has decided that Plaut will play the role of Deborah Lipstadt in Israel's analogue to the David Irving trial. Plaut is represented by Israeli Attorney Dr. Haim Misgav.

Everything Plaut has written about Gordon is simply an assessment of Gordon's own political writings and behavior. Gordon is a public figure - an Op-Ed columnist, a representative of several radical political organizations, a very public hand-holder of Yassir Arafat - and criticism of his political opinions and political actions is a legitimate expression of free speech. Plaut's criticisms and denunciations of Gordon's behavior and writings were evoked by Gordon's own political behavior, exactly as were Deborah Lipstadt's denunciations of David Irving. Actually, Plaut has never met Gordon and knew nothing about him before the suit, other than from his political writings and actions.

In recent years, filing frivolous libel suits has become a common form of harassment in Israel, where free speech on the right is sometimes weakly-protected and where libel laws allow attempts at suing for all sorts of things that are regarded as protected speech in most other democratic systems. In a (in)famous recent case, a leftist professor of philosophy at Tel Aviv University sued four people, including two other professors, for libel. He lost and was ordered to pay the defendant's a large sum for court costs and damages. The David Irving Trial of Israel is likely to have a similar outcome.

Free speech in Israel is under assault and the defeat of frivolous libel suits is a crucial part of its protection. Meanwhile, readers who would like to tell the authorities at Ben Gurion University what they think of Gordon's writings and behavior should write to Professor Avishay Braverman, President of Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheba 84105 Israel. Letters to the American Associates of Ben Gurion University (AABGU) should be sent to 1430 Broadway, 8th Floor, New York, NY 10018. Zvi Alon is President of AABGU and Seth Moskowitz is the Executive Vice-President. (phone: 212-687-7721; fax: 212-302-6443; email: info@aabgu.org)

Anyone interested in defending free speech through helping defray Prof. Plaut's legal costs is invited to contact him directly. His email address is Steven_Plaut@yahoo.com

Richard Lakisher is the pseudonym of an aademic familiar with academic politics in America and Israel.

Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, December 17, 2003.
(The following is an English translation of the Hebrew Media Release we sent out on December 17, 2003 to each Member of the Israeli Knesset and to the world and local media.)

Dear Police Officer!
Dear Soldier!

We are quoting from an article that was written in Yediot Acharonot by the Members of Knesset Yossi Sarid and Yair Tzaban on May 27, 1990, when a proposal was put forward to temporarily move a number of Arab villages until the completion of the harvest:

"This Is a Red Line!" - said Yossi Sarid and Yair Tzaban on May 27, 1990, "We want to say to all the proponents of transfer - this is our duty to speak, and we implore you to read our lips. We are speaking slowly and clearly, and not only in our name. Let there be no misunderstandings among us, and let it not be said that you were not warned in advance: We shall not obey the transfer order, nor will our children and those we have educated obey it. Those ones will have to carry out the deportation work by themselves, as we stand in their way, lying in the road. The day that the transfer order - that is a patently illegal order - will be given, shall be the day of our refusal to obey such an order."

If this is how these politicians talked about Arab villages in Eretz Israel, how much more so is it forbidden to destroy Jewish communities and outposts in the Biblical Land of Israel!

We therefore appeal to you, dear soldier and police officer:

Do not uproot what has been planted! (from a popular Israeli song by Naomi Shemer)

Do not be a party to this crime against your people, against your homeland! The order to uproot Jews from their homes and from their land is a patently illegal order. Do not fear - governments rise and governments fall - but Israel and its Bibilcal values, endure forever.

Ruth and Nadia Matar are founders of Women In Green, an activist group of women, based in Jerusalem. The website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

Posted by Casriel Accardi, December 17, 2003.
When I walk out my front door here in Kochav Yaakov, nestled in the Judean Hills, just minutes from Jerusalem, I look to my right, and from our high vantage point, I gaze over at the beautiful and growing community of Migron, located on a neighboring hilltop, less than a mile away. Migron is home to 43 young Torah-observant Jewish families, with over 60 young children. They are professionals, teachers, students, soldiers, people who work there or in Jerusalem and the surrounding areas. You can see Har HaBayit, the Temple Mount, from there, as well as from Kochav Yaakov.

Every month, a beautiful strawberry full moon rises over Migron, seemingly emerging from the mountain itself. Every month I walk outside my front door and gaze wonderously at this site, happy that the hilltop below this moon is now full of Jewish life, Jewish children, and Jewish people praying and studying Torah. They are building a Jewish community in the shadows of Jerusalem, much like our thriving community did some 20 years ago. Our yishuv, Kochav Yaakov/ Tel Tzion, now contains some 800 families, almost 5,000 Torah observant Jews of all colors.

Our neighbor, Migron, emerged two years ago, first with a cellphone tower from Orange, a major cellphone company in Israel. Some guard quarters followed, then some caravans. We witnessed many neat, white mobile homes, finished with Jerusalem stone, being added over the following months, along with a beit knesset (synagogue- study hall); a branch of kupat cholim (national managed care health clinic); ganim (kindergartens and nurseries), and a the paving of a kilometer long approach road leading up to the gated yishuv. I was astounded at the rapid progress of this fledgling community. Over 40 homes are there now. This cannot happen without the blessing and permission of many government agencies.

The army acknowledges that this previously uninhabited hilltop is of great strategic importance, as it looks down and over at several Jewish communities and two Arab villages. It looks down at the ancient city of Michmash, stronghold of Yonason HaMaccabee, who re- established Jewish sovereignty there during the era of the Chanukah wars.

Those wars were waged against a foreign occupying force, the Syrian-Greeks (amazingly enough, Syrian president Assad is now inexplicably on a state visit to Greece, on the eve of Chanukah).

These wars were also waged against another enemy trying to destroy Israel as a Jewish entity, an enemy within. The Hellenized Jews of the time of the Chashmonaim were a persistent and dedicated group of "worldly" Jews drawn to the "beauty" of Greek culture and alienated from their own heritage and from the God of Israel. They existed to ingratiate themselves by serving the whim of their foreign conquerors and to eliminate the yoke of their own heritage - the Torah. They longed to be like the other nations of the world, free to indulge in whatever they wished, and to eradicate any vestige of what makes a Jew Jewish in the first place:The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the Land of Israel, and the Holy Torah itself.

Today, we are faced with the same enemies: world powers that are pushing the tiny Jewish state, pushing hard to divide and give away large portions of the Jewish homeland, the Land given to us eternally and irrevocably by God.

The same enemies are still here, including the enemy within. They have existed in every era, from the time of Moshe, the time of the Chashmonaim, in Israel, in the diaspora, until this very day. This insidious enemy necessitated the institution, almost 2,000 years ago, of an additional blessing in the thrice-daily recitation of the Shemoneh Esrei prayer, against heretics (bircas haminim) in response to the internal enemies of that day, who became Sadducees, Christians and other heretical sects.

Today we see it is no different. Like then, the enemy within has the political power in our Land, cowtowing to the world powers that urge the weakening and dimunition of our tiny nation. And for what reason? Astonishingly, to appease and reward a vast multitude of Arab terrorist hordes who strive daily to destroy tiny Israel along with its peaceful citizens. Make no mistake: these are the same Arabs who cheered the destruction and massacre at the Twin Towers, and who today, weep because of the capture of Saddam Hussein, as he cowered like a rat in a filthy hole in the ground. Their other role-model and hero, Yasser Arafat, also cowers like a rat in his decaying compound in Ramallah, but, alas, he is dangerous. This enemy continues to order and organize the murder of Jews in Israel, inside and out of the absurdity known as the 'green line." Is he brought to justice for these atrocities, is he stopped, is he captured or killed? No. Instead, he is courted by Peres, Beilin, and those of their ilk, the Hellenists of today. Homicide bombings and shootings of innocent Jewish people, women, children, babies, occur in the heart of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa. Just a few short years ago,then prime minister Ehud Barak offered the Arab murderers over 95% of our bibl ical heartland, Yesha (Yehuda, Shomron, Gaza)- the so-called West Bank, and they rioted and screamed it's not enough!

For the non-Jew to ignore this and try to placate these murderers- who again, seek the destruction of America as well - might be understandable in a depressing and existential sort of way, which has unfortunately been borne out repeatedly throughout the bloody histories of Christianity and Islam. After all, as our sages have made clear: Esau hates Jacob. But how can it be, after decades of unrelenting Arab violence; clear attempts to utterly destroy Israel; that a Jew today can differentiate between so-called 'Israel proper' and the 'West Bank?'

In 1967, the Arab press of the early days of June of that fateful year gnashed their teeth with open proclamations of the destruction of the Jewish state and the slaughter of its inhabitants. You can check the Egyptian and other Arab newspaper accounts of those days.

At that time, there were no Jews in Yesha, yet they sought to destroy us anyway, in an unprovoked attack. Thank God, as we know, it didn't turn out that way - God intervened and "worked a great victory and salvation as this very day.

A friend of mine in the US Army tells me that this victory was so miraculous, that he was told by a commander at West Point that they do not teach the tactics of the Six Day War, because it follows no known or replicatable military strategic logic. The commander stated that they 'do not teach miracles' at West Point. Israel's victory saved itself; unified its most holy city; gave us back the holy Western Wall, denied by the British and the Arabs for decades; and it gave us the ability to reclaim the ancestral Jewish homeland in the West Bank- in Yesha.

Now, how can it be that a Jew today, after the incredible reality of the Six Day War, along with constant and repeated clear demonstrations by the Arab enemy that they are not interested in peace or in land, think that giving away our Land is ok? That this will actually result in 'peace'; that this is good for the Jewish people; good for Israel; and that this is what God wants us to do? I can only say that as a psychologist, I have seen delusional states, even psychotic illnesses, that reflected a higher grasp of reality than this.

Just outside our door, there are families living peacefully and productively on Migron, our beautiful and growing hilltop neighbor. Are they worried about Arabs? No. They have guns, and they know how to defend themselves should a terrorist try to infiltrate. But today, the children of Migron, who regularly play with soldiers who come up daily to enjoy the free coffee shop set up there specifically for cold and weary soldiers - these children are now awaiting the roaring of bulldozers and cranes, along with an entire battalion of IDF soldiers, who have been ordered by today's hellenists, the government of the state of Israel, to come and forceably take away their homes - without legal recourse, without compensation, without a home to go to elsewhere. Why? Because the United States, the Europeans, and the Hellenists inside the Jewish people itself, want it that way.

Today, we will go up to Migron. In the coming days, there will be thousands of us. The residents there need support. The government needs to see that our people - Am Yisrael - will not accept the deportation of fellow Jews from their homes in their homeland, homes that they were assured by this same goverment will be safe and secure. Homes that this government encouraged them to build and develop. Now, because of the latest ill-fated attempt at political machinations, today's Hellenists have decided that this community is expendable, and that families and young children will be forceably removed, something this government steadfastly refuses to consider to do to illegal Arab settlements in Israel.

We are in a twilight zone. As our sages and gedolim have told us, the world will be turned upside down in the End of Days. Surely, we are coming closer. It is also said that the Jewish people are compared to the moon. We may seem to be ebbing away, to be losing ourselves, to be disappearing. And just like that, we come back, and we thrive. It has been this way for over 3,000 years. We wax and we wane, but we have always known that "many designs are in man's heart, but the counsel of Hashem - only it will prevail.

For Hashem selected Zion, he desired it for His dwelling place. For God selected Jacob as his own, Israel as his treasure. For Hashem will not cast off His people, nor will He forsake His heritage."

We have borne witness to many miracles wrought for our forefathers, in those days, at this time.

And, surely, the moon will rise again over Migron.

Chanukah Samayach,

The author lives in Kochav Yaakov. He is a member of the group of Israeli Diarists, who are recording their experiences living in these tense times. Judi Balint, one of the group, has written "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen, 2002).

Posted by Isralert, December 17, 2003.
This was contributed by the Editor of Meetnet. More articles and information are available on their website.

When an opponent of the existence of Israel as a Jewish homeland supports any of the .... principles of ethnic nationalism, spiritual nationalism or self-determined nationalism, declares the Jews connection to Israel invalid, then yes, we are right in believing that anti-Semitism is at the root of this viewpoint.

Charge and Tactic: Can I be against the existence of Israel and not be anti-Semitic?

Defense No. 1: Not Any More!

(It is impossible to discuss Zionism without offending somebody. If anyone is offended by the definitions or comments below, I apologize for not being diplomatic enough).

Modern secular Zionism is a nationalistic movement that is particularly prone to condemnation, especially when compared to other nationalistic movements in history. As a call to action it has done much to save the lives of Jewish refugees from Ethiopia,Russia, Germany and more. It is also fiercely debated within the Jewish community, and is seen by some as diluting the Jewish connection to the land. It is attacked however, even by those who understand and admire other nationalistic movements.

From the Irish to the French to the Kurds to the Native Americans, our Western consciousness has an affinity towards expressions of "tribal" pride. Americans in particular recognize that an Italian street fair in Little Italy, a public celebration of Kwanza. (an ethnic tradition created in 1966) and a noisy Chinese New Year parade are all healthy and normal ways to show ones connection to ones roots. Indeed, across America from Pittsburgh to Miami to San Francisco we have community created "ghettos" of different ethnic groups, many of which are sources of pride to their inhabitants and delightful for visitors. Generally this kind of nationalism, whether one views it as overly sanitized or not, is well respected in the West.

Zionism has another deeper component. That is the Jewish traditional spiritual connection to the land of Israel, which has been documented since biblical times, and has never been discarded. Like all indigenous peoples, the Jew's link to the actual land of Israel is part of his psyche, his cellular memory, his destiny. And there are Jews who see this to be the overarching meaning of Zionism.

The vast majority of Jews believe that Jewish refugees should be able to call Israel a safe haven from the persecution they have endured and are still enduring. This sense of destiny predates and permeates the more recent secularization of Zionism in many ways ie; moving to Israel is called Aliyah, or going up/ascent. Ultimately however, for those who observe Jewish traditions, the Jewish right to live in the land Israel is impossible to sever from the individual and collective soul of the Jew, not merely to preserve the safety of the body of the Jew.

The West has a precedent of affinity for similar movements that recognize the concept of a spiritual homeland, in other words, a soul-connection to a land. Even those connections that seem to have come into existence relatively recently and are supported primarily by oral tradition, are admired instinctively by both Romantics and those whose metier is human rights. Many of those native to the Americas, both North and South, and Tibet, and West Africa identify the life of their people with their connection to their homelands. And indeed when separated from lands held to be supportive of the spiritual psyche of these people, because of economics, war or slavery, the effects on those transferred have been shattering to both the individual and the group.

Yet another Western ideal which should automatically support the right of Jews to live in Israel, is the powerful belief in self-determination. Most Americans and Europeans would never question the right of Jordanians or Kuwaitis or Italians or Liberians to define themselves, no matter how recently their concept of self and nationhood was born. Indeed Americans especially respect this kind of self-determination which is after all a noble aspect of the birth of the American nation. Yet many of those who fiercely believe the Palestinian Arabs have a right to consider themselves a people connected with a land, no matter that this was decided in the latter half of the last century, consider the Jewish understanding of ourselves as being a people connected with a land, (an ongoing, ancient claim), to be a decadent, artificial claim.

An African-American PhD I know, N., who sadly cannot identify where her ancestors came from in Africa, belongs to the first generation in her family to find that an African connection is one to be cherished. She celebrates and treasures Kwanza, to feel connected with a past she has been denied. She has declined to be identified here, but told me unequivocally that Jews have no right to live in Israel and that it is an illegitimate state created in the "minds of European Jews". Even without the ancient liturgy that powerfully reminds us of our tie to the land, even without the entire world's definition of Jews as a group, no matter our skin color or birth country or level of religious observance, my friend N., like so many others, can only recognize nationhood or people hood based on self-definition when it isn't the nationhood of Jews.

When an opponent of the existence of Israel as a Jewish homeland supports any of the above principles of ethnic nationalism, spiritual nationalism or self-determined nationalism, declares the Jews connection to Israel invalid, then yes, we are right in believing that anti-Semitism is at the root of this viewpoint.

In the 21st century of the common era, every country in Europe has experienced an incredible surge in persecution of Jews. Jews are targets in Synagogues in Istanbul and Tunisia, and even at Universities in Quebec. They are shot in front of El Al ticket counters in Los Angeles and beaten senseless during parades in London.

In addition to being a land sacred to Jews, Israel has an ongoing role as a safe haven for Jews from around the world. When Jews are persecuted and must leave their homes, whether in Paris, Iraq or Russia because of persecution, declaring that they must also leave or de-Judaize Israel, is blatantly anti-Semitic. If no kind of secular or spiritual nationalism is compelling enough to ensure the position of Jews in Israel, at the very, very least Jewish refugees have a right to live in a place among other Jews, free from fear.

We must insist that the double standard as applied to Israel is unacceptable.

Posted by Barry Rubin, December 17, 2003.
I'm now working on a book about liberal Arabs, meaning those who struggle for democracy, human rights, and moderating reforms in the Arab world. When I tell people this the usual response is that it must be a short book.

Actually, there is a lot of material. What is astonishing, though, is how few people are represented, both among these advocates and the number of those supporting them. It is startling - but typical of Middle East studies - that in an era when the U.S. government has made supporting democracy in the Middle East its main priority and key theme in the Iraq war, there has been no comprehensive survey or assessment of this faction.

Equally startling is how weak the liberal forces remain. There is no great liberal theorist or reform advocate who galvanizes people in the Arab world, no major original book which provides a manifesto for moderation, and no powerful political party or movement pushing for democratic change. Outside of Kuwait, there is arguably no organized liberal grouping at all. Though some Western observers - motivated both by wishful thinking and beliefs that a moderate triumph is inevitable - magnify each individual action, there just isn't that much to talk about.

This reality does not detract from the heroism of reform advocates. On the contrary, it makes their courage even more impressive because the odds against them are so stupendous. Yet it seems more realistic to call the liberals an endangered species rather than an ever-growing wave of the future.

Indeed, I would suggest that contrary to what many people are saying the following remarkable fact is true:

Middle East has been more effective at exporting authoritarian and extremist thought to the West than the West has been in exporting democratic thinking to the Middle East.

Look, for example, at the global wave of anti-Semitism; the wacky views of the region held by so many in Europe and America; the intellectuals who apologize for terrorism; media coverage which becomes increasingly bizarre; radical Islamist activities in Europe; and the way that Middle East studies are taught in university classrooms.

Who is having more impact on whom?

But back to liberal Arab intellectuals. I don't want to list here all the Arab world's political, economic, and social disasters of the Arab world in the last half-century. One should not have to be a genius to see how the existing systems and dominant ideologies - both radical Arab nationalism and revolutionary Islamism - have failed. Equally, the region's poor performance of the region compared to others and its falling behind in almost every index for measuring progress have been amply documented.

And what is the alternative response? A few hundred, at most, Arab intellectuals writing columns and op ed pieces with devastating critiques of these problems and a much larger degree of private muttering about how rotten the situation is for the Arabs today. Yet this compares to powerful regimes with giant armies and massive Islamist movements with many tens of thousands of followers.

Why is this so? Some of the reasons are apparent: for example, the strength of repression and relative lack of democratic experience in the Arab world (though a half-century ago there were many elected parliaments there). Nationalism and religion were often forces pressing for democracy in the West while in the Middle East they are aligned against it.

But if you want to know the secret of why this situation persists it is due to the real WMD (Weapon of Mass Deception) in the Middle East: xenophobic demagoguery. That's a fancy phrase meaning teaching people that everything is the foreigners' fault. It is the systematically exploited hatred of the West in general and of Israel and the United States in particular that is the most effective tool of the Arab regimes and their Islamist opponents.

The problem is not that the Arab-Israeli conflict should be solved (though that would be a wonderful thing) but that those in power - and that goes for the Palestinian leadership as well - will not let it be resolved. Such an outcome would be too politically dangerous for them.

As for the liberal Arab critique of all this, it is as fascinating to read as it is frustrating to write. As the liberal columnist Ridha Hilal put it in March 2001, "The calls for democracy and economic prosperity disappeared in favor of the slogan: 'No voice should rise above the voice of battle,' a slogan that returns to our life as if we are forever doomed to wallow in the mud of violence, dictatorship and poverty." (Translation by MEMRI)

Or to sum it up even more dramatically, there is a popular song written by an Egyptian entitled, "Better Saddam's Hell than America's Paradise." Nationalism and religion trumps democracy and higher living standards. And even in Iraq, where the dictator is overthrown, the old mental and structural system does not disappear so easily or quickly.

Although I do talk periodically about how regional problems, including the Israel-Palestinian conflict, can be solved, readers frequently ask what politicians should do based on the assessments I give in this column. Answering those questions has a place. But the most important point to make repeatedly is this: a lot more harm has been done in the last quarter-century by leaders thinking these issues were too easy rather than too hard to resolve.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal.

Posted by Michael Freund, December 17, 2003.
This article is about the demographic threat to Israel's Jewish majority and why the idea of unilateral withdrawal will only worsen the situation. I also argue that there is a vast, untapped resource waiting to be utilized which may just provide the answer to Israel's dilemma - reaching out to descendants of Jews around the world who wish to return to the Jewish people.

Now, I am really confused.

After ten years of telling us that Israel had to withdraw from the territories in order to "save its soul", the Left has now shifted gears, training its sights on our bodies instead, arguing that demographics leave us with no choice but to carry out a unilateral pullback.

Citing claims made by various academics to the effect that the number of non-Jews west of the Jordan river now equals, or even surpasses, the number of Jews, everyone from Shimon Peres to Ehud Olmert has come out in favor of abandoning Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

This, they say, will ensure that Israel maintains a strong Jewish majority, preserving the Jewish character of the state as well as its democratic ideals.

At first glance, this might sound reasonable enough. But, like most of the Left's policy prescriptions in the ten years since Oslo, it does not withstand even a few moments worth of scrutiny.

To begin with, an Israeli withdrawal would necessarily entail forgoing control over who enters the territories, since by default they would be under total Palestinian rule. Hence, the moment Israel leaves, there would be nothing to prevent the millions of Palestinian refugees from around the Middle East from pouring into Judea, Samaria and Gaza, sharply increasing the non-Jewish majority west of the Jordan river still further.

Indeed, according to statistics compiled by the United Nations, there are some 2.5 million Palestinian refugees in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan alone. A nascent Palestinian state would most certainly do its utmost to bring the majority of them back to "Palestine", and the euphoria surrounding its establishment would likely draw many to return, driven by the hope of improving their lives and leaving behind the misery of the refugee camps.

The result would be that by withdrawing in order to counter the demographic threat, Israel might actually find itself facing a Palestinian entity equal to, or greater, in size in terms of population.

At least now, by maintaining control over all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, Israel can regulate the number of people entering the territories. But once we leave, we would no longer be able to do so.

Moreover, if we take the demographic argument to its logical conclusion, then there is no reason to stop redrawing the border at the 1967 Green Line. For if, as the Left suggests, Israel should limit its sovereignty to areas with a strong Jewish majority, while pulling back from heavily populated Arab regions, then why focus only on Judea, Samaria and Gaza?

After all, the population of the Galilee has an Arab majority, so perhaps Israel should lower the flag over the north of the country as well?

And large sections of the Negev in the south are dominated by local Beduin tribes, so why not get rid of that too? Then, of course, there are towns in central Israel, such as Ramle and Jaffa, with large Arab populations, as well as Acre along the northern coast.

To be frank, if we are going to insist on limiting our national reach to areas with a solid Jewish majority, then perhaps we should confine the State of Israel to the downtown Tel Aviv area. Or, we might want to go one step further: declare Brooklyn, New York to be the Jewish state and call it quits in the Middle East altogether.

The fact of the matter is that over the past century, demographics have thankfully never played much of a role in determining the future of the Jewish state. Thankfully, because if they had, the State of Israel might never have been declared in the first place.

In 1922, for instance, the British mandatory authorities conducted a survey of Palestine and found that the Jewish population was just 84,000, while the number of Arabs was 643,000, or nearly 8 times as large. Had world Jewry resigned itself to the demographic realities of the time, they would never have campaigned for Israel's establishment.

In 1948, on the eve of independence, Arabs actually outnumbered Jews by more than 2 to 1 in the area under British mandatory rule. Had David Ben-Gurion allowed the dictates of demographics to prevail, he would never have declared the formation of the Jewish state.

This is not to say that numbers are not important, because they clearly do need to be taken into account when formulating policy. But it does suggest that demography should not be given undue weight in deciding on fateful issues such as the future of the country's borders.

Indeed, with just a little bit of creative thinking, even the issue of demography can be solved without having to resort to measures such as withdrawal.

For, in addition to all the standard ideas already out there, such as encouraging world Jewry to make aliyah, or providing Israeli mothers with incentives to be more fruitful and start multiplying, there remains a vast, untapped resource that has been largely overlooked: descendants of Jews seeking to return to the Jewish people.

Groups such as the Bnei Menashe of northeastern India, who claim descent from a lost tribe of Israel, or the crypto-Jews of Spain, Portugal and South America, whose ancestors were converted to Catholicism during the Spanish Inquisition, are clamoring to return to Judaism, and many wish to make aliyah.

The potential is immense. Thousands of Bnei Menashe wish to move here, while the Spanish-speaking world is said by academics to contain millions of people with Jewish blood coursing through their veins.

Nevertheless, neither the Israeli government nor the Jewish Agency are willing to reach out to such groups, perhaps because doing so requires "thinking outside the box", which is not what bureaucracies typically excel at.

But these groups constitute a large, untapped demographic and spiritual reservoir for Israel and the Jewish people. They are knocking on our national door, pleading to be let in.

So if Israel's policymakers are truly concerned with numbers, let them take up the task of addressing this challenge forthwith.

Enabling "lost Jews" to return will not only restore these precious souls to our people, but it might just provide the answer to our demographic needs as well. Qualitatively and quantitatively, Israel has nothing to lose, and everything to gain, from doing so.

The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. He is currently Director of Amishav, a Jerusalem-based group which reaches out and assists "lost Jews" seeking to return to the Jewish people.

This article appeared today in the Jerusalem Post.

Posted by Bryna Berch, December 17, 2003.
This is a news item in Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com) about the demographic threat the Israel Arabs are to the continuation of the Jewish State. Netanyahu is quoted.

It is about time the Israelis stopped pussyfooting about how they have done nothing to stop the self-indulgent breeding program of the Israeli Arabs: 1 man, 4 wives, 20 or more kids. Maybe next some Government official will come out with what they know about the Israeli Arabs as a fifth column for the Arabs living in Biblical Israel and beyond.

"The chronology is not peace, economic prosperity, security," Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said this morning at the much-touted Herzliya Conference, "as some still feel. I hold that the order is precisely the opposite: First security must be stabilized, using the means I described, then economic prosperity, and then peace. Because otherwise, every peace agreement is hostage to suicide terrorists."

Netanyahu, who served as Israel's Prime Minister from 1996-99, spoke at the beginning of the second day of the conference organized by the Institute of Policy and Strategy of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya. The three-day event is designed to bring together the country's military, political, academic, and economic brass, and has become the most influential forum of its nature on contemporary Israeli policy.

Netanyahu said that a demographic problem exists - but not with the "Arabs of Palestine, but rather the Arabs of Israel." He said that there is essentially no demographic problem with the Arabs of the PA, in that they are already under PA control, "even if the army sometimes goes into the cities." However, Netanyahu said, "regarding the Israeli-Arabs, who will remain Israeli citizens, here we have a problem... In our Declaration of Independence, we say that our raison d'etre is that we are a Jewish state, and this means that we must guarantee a Jewish majority. But we are also a democracy..." He said that if the Arabs become a minority of 40%, the State will cease to be Jewish - but if we remain with 20%, or even less, but with tough and violent relations, then this harms the State's democratic nature. "We therefore need a policy that will first of all guarantee a Jewish majority - I say this with no hesitation, as a liberal, a democrat, and a Jewish patriot - ... and one that will balance between these two needs."

Regarding the future borders, Netanyahu said that Israel must protect its vital security interests: "What connection is there between their right to self-definition and their ability to station themselves on hills near Ben Gurion International Airport and shoot down a landing plane? There is no connection. I therefore say that any peace agreement has to be built on two elements: The entire Palestinian population, or almost all of it, must be under self-rule of the Palestinians, and not Israeli; and Israel must maintain its control over the entry of arms and fighters into those areas."

Netanyahu said that there is no reason for despair, and that the situation has improved both economically and security-wise since last year.

The Finance Minister spoke of the importance of the counter-terrorism partition fence from many standpoints, including "economics, defense, demography, and as something that advances peace... Last night I signed an order releasing 700 million more shekels for the construction of the partition."

He said that under the present circumstances, we can't proceed diplomatically with the PA because "we have no partners on the other side." He said that a true peace partner must drop all its intentions to destroy Israel, "what they call the right of return or the liberation of occupied Palestine... What's important is not what they [the PA Arabs] say in Geneva, but what they say in Jenin, and in Kalkilye, and in Ramallah. We see that they [are far from that point] - from their education, their textbooks, their marketplace talk, their public dialogue - they have not dropped their plans [to destroy Israel]; on the contrary, they are encouraging it... The second test of a partner must be that they neutralize their tools of destruction - terrorism." Netanyahu said that he does not believe that a moderate PA leadership can arise under the current conditions of hatred and daily incitement, and that therefore Israel "must first take steps to destroy terrorism and bring about a societal interest in stability, and only then will a moderate leadership be able to arise."

Netanyahu had strong criticism of all the new plans being spouted by Likud ministers with no coordination with the Prime Minister. "The multiplicity of plans causes damage to Israel," he said.

Both Gen. Amos Gilad and Gen. (res.) Oren Shachor expressed opposition today to unilateral gestures by Israel. "Even if the war lasts until 2020," Shachor said, "we must not withdraw unilaterally." Gen. Shachor headed the Civil Administration in Judea and Samaria and was a senior member of the Israeli negotiating team with the PA under the Rabin and Peres governments, while Gen. Gilad is head of the Defense Ministry's Diplomatic Desk.

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 17, 2003.
Shame on Haaretz and AP for distorting the results of an Anti-Defamation League poll about American attitudes toward Israel and the Palestinians, starting with your provocative headline that almost half of the American people believe Israel is a threat to world peace. It's only further down in the story that you and the AP start to back away by noting that six other countries, starting with North Korea, rank ahead of Israel and that Israel's ranking is in a virtual tie, given the poll's margin of error, with the United States (43 percent of Americans said Israel is a threat to world peace; 37 percent said the United States is a threat to world peace)

What the poll actually showed was continued strong American grassroots support of Israel, quite unlike the public opinion climate in Europe, where a recent poll showed Israel as the greatest threat to world peace. And despite unrelenting efforts by the U.S. media to draw equivalence between Israel and the Palestinians in looking for perpetrators of the current violence, Americans squarely pin the blame on the Palestinians. In a similar vein, they refuse to equate Sharon with Arafat, with the latter in far greater disfavor. What you and the AP failed to adequately point out in the ADL poll findings is the following:

  • For every American who sympathizes more with the Palestinians, almost 3 Americans sympathize more with the Palestinians (40 to 15 pct)

  • For every American who blames Israel for the current violence, more than 2 blame the Palestinians (39 percent to 16 pct)

  • Seven out of 10 Americans believe Israel is serious about wanting a peace agreement with the Palestinians. But fewer than 5 in 10 feel the same way about Palestinian intentions (70 to 46 pct)

  • A plurality of Americans believe Ariel Sharon is genuinely interested in reaching a long-term peace agreement while about a third of Americans think he wants to squeeze the Palestinians into the smallest territory possible (42 to 36 pct). When asked about Arafat's intentions, only 1 in 4 Americans believes he's genuinely interested in reaching peace, while a solid majority believes his real goal is to destroy Israel (25 to 57 pct)

  • Along similar lines, 59 percent of Americans believe the U.S. and Israel are correct in their decision to stop dealing with Arafat.

  • An overwhelming majority (75 pct) of Americans believe Israel and the U.S. have a special relationship based on shared values, including freedom and democracy.

  • In the war on terrorism, Americans see Israel and the U.S. intertwined. While 73 pct say the U.S. is more likely to be targeted because of support for Israel, a clear majority - 62 pct - believes the U.S. should continue support of Israel even if it means a greater risk of terrorist attacks against the U.S.

  • On anti-semitism, 57 pct of Americans believe the U.S. has a moral obligation to combat anti-semitism around the world as part of its foreign policy.

NOTE TO HAARETZ EDITORS: The poll is easily available on the web. Had you exercised a modicum of professional journalistic responsibility, there would have been no need to splash a deliberately tendentious AP version on your own web site. But of course, your readers are well aware that by now you will go to almost any lengths to spotlight attacks on Israel - whether factual or not.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 17, 2003.
The Islamic victory over the USSR in Afghanistan, the creation of the al-Qaeda network, and the spread of Islam in Western countries indicate an Islamic awakening and a belief in eventual dominance.

Islam no longer considers Christians and Jews as "protected" minorities. Instead, it believes they may be terrorized or wiped out. A Saudi scholar proposed murdering ten million Americans. Other Islamists suggest total extermination.

Neither are Western civilians to be considered non-combatants, because they vote in elections, and democracy is prohibited because it contradicts Islamic values (IMRA, 12/9 from Jonathan D. Halevi of Jerusalem Viewpoints). More voted against Bush than for him. Murder them, too?

The US has to ask itself whether it should allow Islamists to control 4/5 of American mosques, used for preaching civil war to people who are especially moved to violence? Should it allow foreign Islamists to arm with WMD?

Many in Israel are also still not acting responsibly. Shimon Peres is an outstanding example of someone who ignores readlity. When Israel was negotiating over the Golan Heights in its possession (and incorporated into the State of Israel, making such negotiation illegal), Foreign Min. Shimon Peres admitted, "most of the (Arab) countries are governed by ... brutal authoritarians." Nevertheless, when asked what would happen to Jews living on the Golan and coming under Syria sway, he replied, "I don't see what's wrong with this. Just as there are Arabs living under Jewish rule, so there will be Jews living under Syrian rule."

Is that cynical or naive of Peres? There is a moral difference between Jews living under an intolerant Arab state and Arabs living under pluralistic Israeli rule. He is tainted by moral egalitarianism (which equates non-oppressive situations with oppressive ones).

Peres could say the same about Jews living in Yesha. Some would be in annexed areas, but the rest would be on their own. The abandonment of the rest would be tantamount to transferring them. Transfer is declared by the likes of Peres "immoral when applied to Arabs committed to Israel's destruction, but quite moral when applied to Jews who have worked and fought for Israel's survival. But this is fairly consistent in the Jewish State of Israel where Jews have fewer and fewer Jewish rights and even fewer and fewer human rights." That is, it is consistent with the usual double standard against the Jews.

If the Arabs gained control over most of Yesha, they undoubtedly would attack the remaining Jews there unmercifully. When those Jews flee, the Arabs would turn their guns full force on Israel. Many Jews would emigrate. The Arabs, allowed to vote in Israel, eventually would take over. The PLO would have conquered a "Greater Palestine." (Prof. Paul Eidelberg, Jewish Press, 11/28, p.50).

MK Peres boasts that he doesn't care about history - that's past and done with. (So he repeats the mistakes that he might have learned to avoid if he were educated). That may be a braggart's way of evading his lack of knowledge of history. Recent history shows that Jews cannot survive as a community under Arab rule. Almost half the population of Israel was formed by an exodus from Arab states? persecution. How outrageous of him to want to subject hundreds of thousands of fellow Israelis to genocidal antisemites! He claims to favor peace, but has enabled the Arabs to make war and proposes measures that would enable them to wage a worse war.

Posted by Honest Reporting, December 17, 2003.
Our third annual recognition of the most skewed and biased coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

2003: It was the year of the road map, the year of the hudna. Abu Mazen and Abu Ala, war in Iraq, targeted strikes in Gaza, the security fence. Destruction of Maxim in Haifa, Cafe Hillel in Jerusalem, the horrific "Children's Attack" on bus #2. The year that brought us an Israeli in space, Der Stuermer in the UK, the homicide donkey, child guinea pigs, and Rachel Corrie.

2003 was another trying year for Israel - a nation fighting simultaneous, uphill battles against terror and for fair coverage in the world media.

With the year drawing to a close, HonestReporting regretfully presents the third annual Dishonest Reporting "Award," our yearly recognition of the most skewed and biased coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Thanks for your nominations and votes! We begin with the ignoble award "winner," followed by recipients of Dishonorable Mention:


With over 200 news bureaus worldwide, Reuters stakes its claim as "the largest international multi-media news agency." Though Reuters' own editorial policy claims the agency's reporters "do not offer subjective opinion," and intend merely "to enable readers and viewers to form their own judgement," in fact Reuters' coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is flagrantly biased against Israel. Some examples from 2003:

  • In January, Reuters blamed Israel for "killing" Palestinian suicide bombers:
    Iraq has paid millions of dollars to families of Palestinians, including those of suicide bombers, killed by Israeli forces since the start of the uprising in September 2000.

  • As Israel prepared to build a wall to protect worshippers at Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem, Reuters published this headline:
    "Israel to Split Christ's Birthplace with Barrier"

    To emphasize its (completely external) point, Reuters repeated the word "Christ" or "Christian" in each of the article's first four sentences.

  • On Nov. 18, two Israeli soldiers were killed outside Bethlehem and a number of Palestinians were wounded in Gaza. Reuters had pictures of both events, but journalists who subscribe to Reuters' photo service were encouraged to publish the Palestinian victims in this email (emphasis added):
    Dear User of the Reuters Pictures Archive,

    Please find below a single picture presentation showing two Palestinians rushing a wounded Palestinian to hospital in the Rafah refugee camp in the southern part of the Gaza strip, November 18, 2003.

  • When Palestinian terrorist groups announced a hudna with the PA, Israel was not a party in the agreement, and the official road map demanded a full disarming of terror groups - not a temporary hudna cease-fire. Yet Reuters took the opportunity to vilify Israel with the headline:
    "Israel Pours Scorn on Truce With Militants"

    And when Israel did show flexibility for Palestinian demands, above and beyond the roadmap's requirements? On Nov. 3, Reuters reported that Israel reinstated 15,000 Palestinian work permits, and included this comment in a news report:

    150,000 Palestinians [previously] made a living in Israel, so Sunday's restoration of 15,000 Israeli work permits is still only a drop in the ocean.

    Actually, 15,000 was fully 10%, and a risky loosening of anti-terror policy. Even the Palestinian official quoted by Reuters called it "an important step."

* * *

The previous examples are specific to particular articles, but Reuters' anti-Israel bias extends to general editorial policy on terminology and headlines:


Reuters' refusal to use the term "terrorism" or "terrorist" reached new levels of absurdity this year. In November, Reuters released a list of "Worst Guerilla Attacks since September 11" that omitted terror in Israel entirely.

But beyond distancing itself from the term "terror," Reuters regularly legitimized Palestinian terrorist groups and their murderous acts by ascribing to them a worthy (though false) motive - the pursuit of independence:

The military wing of the Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack in a statement faxed to Reuters. Hamas has spearheaded a 28-month-old Palestinian militant uprising against Israel for a state in Gaza and the West Bank. (Feb. 15 - emphasis added)

Or take a Oct. 3 Reuters photo with this caption:

Members of the Islamic movement Hamas burn the Israeli and the U.S. flag over a model of the Star of David during a march through the streets of the Jabalya refugee camp in Gaza and vow to continue the three-year-old uprising for statehood. (emphasis added)

Hamas makes it perfectly clear in their official charter that their goal is the destruction of the State of Israel, and not merely an independent Palestinian state. Legitimate liberation struggles do not target innocent civilians in a systematic manner. Yet Reuters persists in this charade, justifying the horrific terrorist acts.

The terminology even reaches articles addressing Israeli perspectives. After the tragic space shuttle explosion in February, Reuters described Israelis' sadness over the death of astronaut Ilan Ramon:

The launch of Ramon's space flight had virtually erased news of the country's woes, spreading space fever among Israelis embittered by a Palestinian uprising for statehood, a scandal-plagued national election and a domestic recession. (Feb. 2, emphasis added)

Israelis were not embittered by an "uprising for statehood." They were, as always, prepared to offer Palestinians a state. They were embittered by relentless Palestinian terror. Reuters refuses to use the term "terrorist" because (as global news editor Steven Jukes states: "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter." But by continually using the term "uprising for statehood" to describe the terrorist wave, Reuters chooses to present them as freedom fighters. So much for journalistic neutrality.

Reuters regularly makes the effort to help readers "understand" the human side of Palestinian terrorists. When two Israelis were killed in Negohot, Reuters included this background information to help readers rationalize the terrorist act:

Palestinians regard Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as major obstacles to peace and have regularly attacked them. (Sept. 26)

This description suggests - preposterously - that Palestinian terrorists perpetrate the willful murder of civilians out of their quest for peace.


In July, HonestReporting released a study of one month of Reuters headlines on the conflict. Some findings:

  • In violent acts by Israelis, "Israel" was named in 100% of the headlines, and the verb was in the active voice in 100% of the headlines, i.e.: "Israeli Troops Shoot Dead Palestinian in W. Bank" (July 3)

  • But in violent acts by Palestinians, the Palestinian perpetrator was named in just 33% of the headlines, and the verb was generally in the passive voice, i.e.: "Bus Blows Up in Central Jerusalem" (June 11)

That is, in the world of Reuters headlines, when Israel acts, Israel is always perpetrating an active assault and the Palestinian victim is consistently identified. But when Palestinian terrorists act, the event just "happens" and Israeli victims are left faceless.

Moreover, Reuters presents Palestinian diplomats as pursuing peace, but frustrated by their obstinate Israeli counterparts:

"Palestinians Urge Israel to Free Prisoners" (July 4) "Israel Sets Tough Terms for Prisoner Release" (July 6) "Israel Fumes at U.S. Opening to Doves, Steps Up Raids" (Dec. 3)

The overwhelming message from Reuters headlines is tendentious indeed: Israel is the aggressor, and Palestinians are hapless victims.

* * *

Though maintaining that "the integrity, independence and freedom from bias of Reuters must be upheld at all times," Reuters' news reports indicate that the agency has clearly taken sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ceasing to provide neutral information, Reuters has instead become a sort of world ambassador for Palestinian factions, operating via the ubiquitous Reuters news wire.

And for this, the Reuters "news service" deserves the Dishonest Reporting "Award" for 2003.

DISHONORABLE MENTION (in alphabetical order)

Associated Press

The world's largest wire agency featured pro-Palestinian editorializing in straight news stories, factual mistakes, and coverage that downplayed Palestinian terrorism:

  • In late April, a Palestinian suicide bomber struck a crowded Tel Aviv nightclub. The attack came just hours after the Palestinian Legislative Council confirmed the nomination of Mahmoud Abbas as the new Palestinian Prime Minister. The AP headline: "Bomb Mars Historic Day For Palestinians." (Actually, the bomb "marred the day" for three dead Israelis and their families.)

  • AP glamorized Palestinian terrorists - a Feb. 25 tribute to dead terrorist Abdallah al-Saba waxed eloquent: "a new chapter in Palestinian lore was being spun" as this "longtime Islamic militant chose to fight and die rather than give in to Israeli wrecking crews." AP issued a lengthy, sympathetic biography of Hamas terrorist extraordinaire Abdel Aziz Rantisi: "pediatrician and poet," a caring and gracious patriarch of "six children and 10 grandchildren. He has written poetry for one of them, a girl named Assma." The AP article then proceeded to quote effusive verses from Rantisi's love poem.

  • In March, AP brushed off terrorist rockets as insignificant: "Palestinians have been firing primitive, homemade Qassam rockets from northern Gaza at the Israeli town of Sderot. Most of them miss their target, and those that land cause little damage with their small explosive warheads." (March 6)

    In fact, the increasingly sophisticated Qassam missile constitutes an extremely serious threat to Israeli cities, and the over 2,000 Qassams fired by Hamas have injured numerous Israelis, some seriously. Would AP minimize the threat if, say, Mexicans began lobbing missiles toward Houston?

  • In May, AP began using the term "bystanders" to refer to Israeli victims of Palestinian terror: "In 93 suicide attacks since the current violence erupted in September 2000, 357 bystanders have been killed." (May 18) A "bystander" is an individual peripheral to the central action in a given event. AP's term masks the true, civilian target of nearly all Palestinian terror.

  • In one week in March, an Iraqi killed five American soldiers by blowing himself up in a taxi, while in Netanya, a Palestinian ignited his explosive belt at the entrance to a cafe, causing 50 Israeli casualties. AP listed the Iraqi attack among other historical "terror attacks against the U.S. military," but called the Netanya attack the work of a "Palestinian militant."

  • In a report addressing the Palestinian claim to a "right of return," AP erroneously stated: "Israel has always objected to the right of return for about 4 million Arabs who fled the war that followed Israel's creation in 1948, but never made renouncing the demand a condition for peace talks before." (May 7)

    In fact, no party has ever claimed that 4 million Arabs fled Israel during its War of Independence. The actual number of Arab refugees in 1948-9 was, according to Israeli sources, 538,000. The UN puts the figure at 720,000, while Palestinians have claimed up to 850,000.

  • When American Rachel Corrie died under an IDF bulldozer in March, AP distributed a photo showing Corrie, standing in direct view of the bulldozer driver, dressed in orange and speaking into a megaphone in the direction of the oncoming vehicle:

    The AP caption read: "Rachel was run over Sunday by the bulldozer that she was trying to stop from tearing down a building in the Rafah refugee camp, witnesses said."

    The photo was carried in hundreds of newspapers worldwide. The AP caption led readers to believe that this photo depicted the very scene and moment of the accident, and implied cruel, criminal recklessness on the part of the IDF driver. But in fact, the photo was taken hours before Corrie's death, which the IDF later deemed an unfortunate accident. Corrie's death occurred while she was hidden from the driver's view.

  • On numerous occasions, AP called Palestinian terrorists "revenge bombers" - Israeli anti-terror strikes were said to "trigger" "revenge attacks." For example: "Generally the militant group Hamas carries out revenge attacks - as it did this week, when a suicide bomber killed 17 people in a Jerusalem bus blast." (June 13) This term paints Israel as the source of the conflict, and denies the sworn, documented commitment of Hamas and other terrorist groups to destroy Israel regardless of Israeli actions.


This year, the Beeb (the 2001 Dishonest Reporting "Award" laureate) was brought to its knees by domestic controversy, but found time to promote and broadcast a film that makes the outrageous claim that Israel used nerve gas against Palestinians in the Khan Younis refugee camp. And in September, when a terrorist killed two Israelis while they were eating a holiday meal (and was then felled by a nearby soldier), BBC headlined the event: "Three Dead in West Bank Attack."

Former Palestinian Prime Minster Mahmoud Abbas authored a book that denies the horrors of the Holocaust, but you wouldn't know it from the BBC profile that introduced Abbas to their readers: "A highly intellectual man, Abu Mazen [Abbas] studied law in Egypt before doing a PhD in Moscow. He is the author of several books." (BBC later updated the profile to include criticism of Abbas' positions.)


When twin suicide bombers murdered two Israelis and injured many others one August day, the Christian Science Monitor's homepage headline read: "Suicide attacks jolt Mideast peace hopes; Bombings may hurt Palestinian effort to stop Israel's barrier." The text of the article first indicated that the bombings "threaten to undermine the Palestinian Authority's campaign to stop Israel's barrier," and only afterward noted that the terror attack "left two Israelis dead and 11 wounded." Apparently, the warped moral compass of CSM determined that the most serious injury the twin suicide bombings inflicted was not to actual human victims, but to the "hurt" Palestinian political goals.


In a grave act of disrespect, The Guardian (UK) exploited the death of Col. Ilan Ramon to take a swipe at the Israeli government. In a report headlined, "Israel remembers astronaut as Sharon capitalises on US links," Chris McGreal wrote that the Israeli government "used the tragedy to paint Israel as a democratic western nation standing firm with the US against the barbarians."

In August, Yassir Arafat made a claim to "mass arrests of Palestinians," and The Guardian repeated Arafat's unsubstantiated claim as fact. The Guardian noted the hundreds of emails from HonestReporting subscribers on this matter, then surreptitiously moved back the frame of reference for their "mass arrests" claim, to a full month before the date referred to in the original article. We noticed.


In January, The Independent (UK) published an editorial cartoon by Dave Brown depicting Ariel Sharon biting into the flesh of a Palestinian baby:

In a decision as shocking as the original one to publish the cartoon, the British Political Cartoon Society awarded its Cartoon of the Year for 2003 to Brown's appalling and libelous work. (The Society deflected criticism by saying the award was based on popular vote.)

In July, The Independent painted Sharon as sly and evasive in Washington - the Israeli Prime Minister "reverted to the familiar tactic of laying the blame on the Palestinians for not moving more forcefully to crack down on terrorism." (Far from a diversionary "tactic," the uprooting of Palestinian terror would certainly foster peace.) And The Independent was apparently irritated by the warm personal relationship the two leaders have built: "Though Israel gave so little discernable ground, the two men were all smiles and friendliness, referring to each other as 'Ariel' and 'George.'"


In July, the LA Times made the patently false assertion: "Along with prisoner releases, the next important element in moving ahead with the 'road map' is the Palestinian demand that Israel withdraw from more of the West Bank." In fact, prisoner releases are not even mentioned in the road map. And according to the road map, the PA's obligation to uproot terror was clearly "the next important element."

In August, after the IDF killed a Hamas leader, a Hamas spokesman fed reporters this line: "The Zionist enemy has assassinated the truce," so therefore "we consider ourselves no longer bound by this cease-fire." This, despite the fact that Hamas themselves admitted to engineering the horrific Jerusalem bus bombing the week before. Nonetheless, the LA Times swallowed Hamas' propaganda and issued the headline: "Truce Ended After Israeli Airstrike."


A July San Diego Union-Tribune article merited the ignominious honor of generating the most letters from HonestReporting subscribers. The Union-Tribune blithely compared the death of an innocent terror victim to Rachel Corrie, whose militant organization was found harboring an Islamic Jihad terrorist in March. Both young West Coast women, said the Union-Tribune, "believed in their struggle."


A July Washington Post editorial repeatedly called Palestinian terrorist organizations "militant groups," and then - sandwiched among those references - referred to "militant Jewish settlers." The editorial claimed these two groups constitute "the extremists on both sides." HonestReporting investigated, but has yet to find any cases of Jewish suicide bombers.

After Israeli planes hit an abandoned Syrian camp, the Washington Post opined that "Mr. Sharon prodded a country suspected of supporting terrorism." Suspected? Since 1979, Syria has never failed to make the U.S. State Department's annual listing of nations that sponsor terrorism.

On April 30, the road map was delivered in Israel, and on that very day a terrorist struck a Tel Aviv bar, killing 3 and wounding 40. The Washington Post not only failed to give the terrorist attack headline coverage, but granted it only one brief paragraph, buried deep in the article covering the launch of the road map.

On the other hand, the very next day (May 2), on the front page above the fold, The Washington Post published an article headlined "Israeli Incursion Kills 13 in Gaza, 'Map' Sabotaged Palestinians Say."

* * *

HonestReporting encourages subscribers to write to Reuters, expressing your perspective on their "news" coverage: editor@reuters.com Thank you for your ongoing involvement in the battle against media bias.

Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, December 16, 2003.
Pay out George W. Bush 3:2. After capturing Saddam's advisor, the king of spades, Ali Al-Tikrit, it was discipline and patience that allowed the American president to pull a true blackjack.

The Iraqi deck of cards was a brilliant strategy developed by the US military to keep track of the "hits" it captured. However, why isn't Arik Sharon permitted to play under these same house rules in the World Casino using his own deck of Palestinian cards? By barring Israel from the gaming table, the world has allowed terrorism to blossom.

The newly released Saddam physical check-up video should teach terrorist leaders a lesson about the consequences of their evil action. Utilizing the instantaneous distribution network of cable and satellite television, their capture and pathetic demeanor are beamed to a few billion people worldwide, including those who idolize them. This public relations brainchild, created and produced by Donald Rumsfeld, is a wonderful 21st century WMD (Weapon of Mass Depression for both the terrorists and their followers).

The parallels between the two aces and their regimes are amazingly similar. The Iraqi ace of spades, Saddam Hussein and the Palestinian ace of spades, Yassir Arafat are men who have murdered many innocents and attacked sovereign nations. Both men have wives who presently live high on the hog in other countries, spending their people's wealth in quite an extravagant way. Both consider themselves to be modern day Saladins. Each leader has claimed to be "democratically elected" by over 90% of his people.

These two household names have become the key sponsors of Palestinian terrorism through financing suicide bombers and their families. Saddam and Arafat each sent other people's sons to die for them. Both of these high profile murderers have captured the awe and respect of Dan Rather and Ted Koeppel. The two Arab "executives" love corporate titles - Chairman and President. Each has manipulated the UN in his own way and has earned the veneration of Kofi Annan. Finally, both despots have a visceral hatred for Israel and America.

America has dealt an important hand to the Iraqi people. The evil house of cards has fallen and there will be no more cheating tolerated. Yet for many, there is no gratitude for making the game honest. After seeing their fraudulent, "brave" leader having an American doctor pick lice out of his hair, many Iraqis demonstrated wildly in favor of their ex-hero. How can any decent human being feel this way about a mass murderer, who was involved in the torture and death of close to one million of their fellow citizens?

Why are Palestinian Arabs walking around depressed with their tail between their legs? The Arab world in general is torn on this issue between sympathy and satisfaction. Although it is not politically correct to say so, the Arab mentality is quite childish. Due to its tribal nature, the entire society prefers evil dictators of their own kind to decent people from outside their culture. How sad.

Saddam and Arafat have stood up to America and Israel which is the reason why they are admired and worshipped. Until the Arab and Muslim world drops their "god of the macho" superiority complex, they will never become a viable part of the 21st century. With Saddam captured from his spider hole in the ground and Arafat confined to his little nest, the next image that the world should see is Arafat, who already looks disheveled and homeless, appearing with a nice Jewish doctor checking his hair and using a tongue depressor in his mouth.

Finally, the message would be out to the Osama's of the world, "You are next!" Evil leaders in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya and other dictatorships will be taught the ultimate lesson - public embarrassment is the severest penalty for the Middle East mentality. A loss of dignity is the ultimate disaster; which is the reason there are honor killings prevalent, whereby a father will actually murder his own daughter who has sex before marriage. She has brought shame to the family.

Since humiliation is worse than death, we can only hope that Rumsfeld is working on a new video story line for the Osama capture. Unfortunately, within the Arab world, pride is the most important value, whereas goodness is the predominant value in America and Israel. Unless Israel decides to bravely copy the US card playing strategy, the Israeli-Palestinian game will be a total "bust." "So ladies and gentlemen, let the chips fall where they may!"

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, December 16, 2003.
Is the media just behaving in what they consider a "politically "correct manner in deference to a religion that, with minor exception, openly encourages terrorism or - does revealing the fact that this country is itself engulfed in a euphemism called the "War Against Terror" somehow strengthen the courageous position of the man the media loves to hate - President G.W. This article is by Michelle Malkin, who writes for Creators Syndicate (http://www.creators.com).

From the moment John Alien Muhammad and Lee Malvo were arrested in the Beltway-area sniper case last fall, the media and Muslim activists wanted us to believe that the serial killings had absolutely nothing to do with Islamic terrorism.

CNN downplayed Muhammad's religious conversion - calling him by his old name, John Alien Williams, when his identity was first revealed, Nihad Awad of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) argued: "There is no indication that this case is related to Islam or Muslims."

Chicago Sun-Times columnist Richard Roeper railed against conservative commentators such as Mark Steyn, who had taken note of Muhammad's Islamic faith and his reportedly expressed anti-American sentiments after the September terrorist attacks. Roeper smugly concluded: "... An awful lot of conservatives really, really wanted the snipers to be terrorists. But they were wrong. I'll say that because they never will."

Now a chilling stack of evidence, introduced by Malvo's own lawyers last week at his capital murder trial, exposes accused sniper Malvo as an unrepentant Muslim extremist. Among Malvo's jailhouse artwork:

Exhibit 65-006: A self-portrait of Malvo in the cross hairs of gun scope shouting, "ALLAH AKBAR!" The word "SALAAM" scrawled vertically. A poem: "Many more will have to suffer. Many more will have to die. Don't ask me why."

Exhibit 65-013: The word "INSHALLAH" above a portrait glorifying "Muammar Kaddafi" as "The Liberator" dressed in full military regalia.

Exhibit 65-016: A portrait of Saddam Hussein with the words "INSHALLAH" and "The Protector," surrounded by rockets labeled "chem" and "nuk"(sic).

Exhibit 65-043: Father and son portrait of Malvo and Muhammad. "We will kill them all. Jihad."

Exhibit 65-056: A self-portrait of' Malvo as sniper, lying in wait, with his rifle. "JIHAD" written in bold letters. *

Exhibit 65-057: A drawing of the |Twin Towers burning with a plane flying toward the buildings. Captions: "JIHAD ISLAM UNITE RISE!" along with "America did this" and "You were warned." Portrait of Malvo as sniper labeled "Believer" and portrait of Osama bin Laden labeled "prophet." A poem: "Our minarets are our bayonets, our mosques are our barracks (sic), Our believers are our soldiers." The American flag and the Star of David drawn in crosshairs.

Exhibit 65-067: A suicide bomber labeled "Hamas" walking into a McDonald's restaurant. Another drawing of the Twin Towers burning captioned: "85 percent chance Zionists did this." More scrawls: "ALLAH AKBAR," "JIHAD" and "Islam will explode."

Exhibit 65-103: A lion accompanies chapter and verse from the Koran ("Sura 2:190"): "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you and slay them wherever ye catch them."

Exhibit 65-109: Portrait of Osama bin Laden, captioned "Servant of Allah."

Exhibit 65-117: The White House drawn in cross hairs, surrounded by missiles, with a warning: "Sep. n we will ensure will look like a picnic to you" and "you will bleed to death little by little."

Exhibit 65-114; Self-portrait of Malvo as sniper. Rant says, "they all died and they all deserved it."

Exhibit 65-101: Malvo's thought for the day: "Islam the only true guidance, the way of peace."

Ten Americans were murdered at the hands of the Beltway-area snipers. Malvo's lawyers say he was insane and "brainwashed." No more so than your average madrassa student in Jeddah or America-hating cave dweller in Tora Bora. Malvo is, in his own words, a "believer" of Allah and a "soldier" for "JIHAD."

Stop telling me Islam had nothing to do with it!

Jerome Kaufman presents articles and essays on the Israel Commentary web page (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, December 16, 2003.
Because I am aware of people who believe in the viability of the Geneva Initiative as a "model" for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (even that I am sure many of them did not bother to scrutinize it), I feel compelled to deliver this important document. It was written by Maj.-Gen (res.) Yaakov Amidror, who is former commander of the IDF's National Defense College and the IDF Staff and Command College. He is also the former head of the IDF's research and assessment division and served as the military secretary of the Minister of Defense.

His article is titled "The Geneva Accord: A Strategic Assessment." It is "Jerusalem Issue Brief" (JIB), Vol 3, # 0, 4 December 2003. JIB is a publication of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (http://www.jcpa.org). You can subscribe to JIB by writing to brief4-subscribe@jcpa.org.

*  A self-appointed Israeli negotiating team, claiming to speak in the name of a majority of Israelis, concluded the Geneva Accord with a Palestinian delegation. It conceded almost all the security arrangements for the West Bank and Gaza Strip sought by past Israeli governments.

*  The Geneva Accord leaves Israel with no safety net in the event that the agreement is violated by the Palestinian side. It is as though its architects learned nothing from the collapse of the Oslo Agreement.

*  The Geneva architects agreed to the expulsion of more than 100,000 Israeli Jews from the territories.

*  In the name of the Jewish people, the Israeli Geneva team gave up the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Jewish history. They seem unaware of the long-term implications for the Zionist movement of conceding Zion.

*  According to Geneva, Israelis recognize for the first time a Palestinian "right of return" to pre-1967 Israel. In exchange, the Palestinians agreed that not all the Palestinians will come to Israel. The number that will enter Israeli territory cannot be understood from Geneva's wording.

*  The Geneva model should not be adopted by anyone concerned for the security and future of the Jewish state.

The Geneva Accord: A Strategic Assessment

The Geneva Accord, which perhaps should have been called the Dead Sea Agreement, for that is where it was negotiated, is not an agreement between states. Nevertheless, its Israeli signatories present it as a "model" for a future treaty. In this context, it is fitting to examine what exactly the Geneva model contains and what it lacks, as though it was a real peace treaty, for only in that way can the model it proposes be judged.

Looking at some of the comments about the agreement, it appears to be based on very tangible Israeli concessions in exchange for what is presented as a real Palestinian concession over their claim of a "right of return." Is this really the case? This requires detailed examination.

The Israeli Concessions

The Temple Mount

What did the Israeli team concede in this model agreement? First, the Israelis took a step that no Israeli government had ever taken before: they transferred sovereignty over the Temple Mount in Jerusalem to the Palestinians, establishing "Zionism without Zion." This is an ideological concession that is a matter of individual values - something everyone can judge according to his or her own world view.

There will be those who see in this concession a break between Israel and its historical heritage, and therefore an act that negates the very legitimacy of the return of the Jewish people to their land. According to this view, Geneva provides the Palestinians with their ultimate victory on the central question that has been raised since the beginning of the modern return to Zion: have the Jewish people returned to their historic homeland or did they come as foreign occupiers? True, Israel lived without the Temple Mount from 1948 to 1967, but this would be the first time it actually conceded possession.

In contrast, there will be quite a number of Israelis who will see the Temple Mount issue in very practical terms - that formalizing Palestinian sovereignty is only making permanent the present-day arrangements that have existed on an interim basis since 1967, since the Muslim Waqf (originally Jordanian and now Palestinian), and not the State of Israel, really determines what happens on the Temple Mount. From this perspective, "territorial compromise" must necessarily include Jerusalem, and the Temple Mount within, and there is no added significance to this concession except the recognition that, without it, Israel will be forced to live by the sword for eternity. Accordingly, it is worthwhile to make this compromise over symbols in order to reach a better future.

The Geneva model contains the most extreme version of this approach, for it conceded the most important place in Jewish history. Gauging the impact of this kind of concession over a central value tied to the national soul of a people is not easy to measure, but it is probably far more damaging than those who elected to follow this course might ever imagine. Moreover, in Geneva this concession is total. The agreement ironically establishes that the supreme authority over the Temple Mount will include various states, the United Nations, and the European Union, as well as representatives of the Organization of Islamic States - but Jewish representatives will not take part in the proposed international body.

The West Bank and Gaza

The second major Israeli concession is an almost total withdrawal from the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and the Gaza Strip. In the matter of territory, the Israeli Geneva signatories took a major step beyond the concessions offered by the Barak government: of all the settlement blocs, Geneva leaves mainly those surrounding Jerusalem. Its concession of withdrawal from the Ariel area dramatically increases the number of Israeli citizens who will have to be removed or expelled from their homes. Geneva also entails an almost total abandonment of the high ground dominating the metropolitan Tel Aviv region, leaving the central stretch of Israel's coastal strip, where most of its population and industrial capacity are located, completely exposed, without any real strategic depth.

The transfer of the Jordan Rift Valley to the Palestinians leaves Israel with no ability to defend itself from threats from the east, should they emerge once again in the future (no one knows exactly what will be in Iraq in the long term). The withdrawal from the West Bank also has elements in common with the concessions the Geneva architects made over Jerusalem. The power of its historical significance may be less, but the withdrawal has broad practical significance for both Israeli security and for the vast numbers of Jews who will have to be removed. Moreover, even the tiniest Palestinian territorial concession is fully compensated for with an equivalent amount of empty land inside the State of Israel. Thus, in effect, there isn't even the slightest territorial concession by the Palestinians to Israel.

Security Arrangements

The third concession in Geneva worth analyzing is the loss of "security arrangements" that had been an essential part of previous Israeli proposals. Looking at the results of this negotiation, the involvement of former Israeli army officers was completely superfluous. The Geneva Accord contains no security safety net whatsoever. There is evidence of the involvement of former Israel Air Force personnel in the drafting of Geneva, for the only arrangement that is related to security is the right reserved for the Israel Air Force to conduct military exercises in the airspace over Palestine.

It is true that there are a few elements that remain of what former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin insisted upon - that Israel will have its military border along the Jordan River. Geneva provides Israel with two isolated, and hence worthless, early-warning stations. But all of Rabin's other security requirements are dropped in Geneva, either immediately or over the course of three years. The Geneva security arrangements are even scaled back from what appeared in the draft to which the Palestinians gave their agreement during the Barak period.

In essence, almost all of Israel's security requirements were exchanged for the idea of deploying a foreign military presence that will be supervised by an international committee created to oversee the agreement's implementation. Israel's security needs were also conceded in return for basically empty declarations about cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian security establishments. According to the logic of Geneva, the Israel Defense Forces can be dismantled, for the IDF has no role in fighting terrorism and in defending the State of Israel. These responsibilities, according to Geneva, will now lay with the proposed international force. The end result is that decisions on matters crucial to Israel's sovereignty and security are put in the hands of an international committee. Since the end of 1947, such committees have consistently rallied against Israel. In Geneva, the European Union, the United Nations, and others will be responsible for the security of Israel.

For example, there is no provision in the agreement for the deployment of Israeli forces in the Jordan Valley, if a concrete threat from the east evolves. Israel would have no control, or even an Israeli presence, at the borders between Palestine and Egypt or Jordan in order to thwart the infiltration of terrorist elements into Palestinian territory. There would be no Israeli presence at the international entry points, or at Palestinian airports and seaports, in order to prevent the smuggling of illegal weaponry (which was attempted regularly during the Oslo years). Even if the Palestinian regime or the international forces that are deployed fail to take effective measures against persistent terrorism, Israel would have no right to operate against terrorist cells coming from Palestinian territory or to act against terrorists that it knows are planning to strike. Indeed, there is an Israeli responsibility to avoid such actions. The only right Israel has is to complain about the negligence of those who are supposed to protect its security.

Of course, if Palestinian terrorism does not come to a halt, Israel will find itself without the necessary capabilities to prevent such attacks and bring them to an end. Moreover, since an international force will be present, Israel will lose its freedom of action, even if it is forced to ignore its commitments under the agreement. Zeev Schiff, the commentator on national security for Ha'aretz newspaper, has already noted that if a Geneva-like agreement were to collapse for any reason after it was implemented, Israel would find itself in a far more difficult situation. The assessment of the security threat to Israel under such a scenario must include regular Katyusha rocket attacks on Tel Aviv, unrestrained terrorist attacks across all of Israel, and the use of far more sophisticated weaponry than has been used in the past. The qualitative improvement in the weaponry on the Palestinian side will make it much more difficult for the Israel Defense Forces to counter them.

A reader of the Geneva Accord gains the impression that those who drafted it completely forgot that there was already a "peace process" begun in Oslo that collapsed and continued in the form of a brutal terrorist campaign, that was supported by some of the Palestinian signatories to Oslo. The Geneva exercise is not based on any serious attempt to learn any lessons from Oslo's breakdown: What if the dream of peace is not realized because the intentions and capabilities of the other side were not correctly evaluated? When Israeli intelligence warned that the Oslo agreements could end up with the firing of Katyusha rockets on Ashkelon, this appeared at the time to be illogical to its architects and supporters. Among former Israeli officers, the question must be asked how some people allow themselves to ignore this possibility, even today, after Qassam rockets have already struck Ashkelon and Sderot. It is a sad irony that the language on Israel's rights in the Geneva Accord leave it only with the option of issuing a complaint, even if it detects the movement of tanks and armored vehicles within the Palestinian corridor it is to create between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. This encapsulates the extent to which Israeli security was treated irresponsibly in the Geneva Accord.

The Palestinian Concessions

What are the Palestinians giving in return for the Israeli concession of sovereignty over the Temple Mount, the near total withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza, and the loss of all meaningful security arrangements? The Israeli Geneva architects say that the Palestinians gave up their claim of a "right of return" of Palestinian refugees to pre-1967 Israel. This point requires very careful examination, because with the exception of Sari Nusseibeh, no leading Palestinian public figure has dared to speak of a concession on the "right of return." To the contrary, the more negotiations progress, the more it will become clear that the Palestinians still insist on their demand for "the return."

From the Palestinian viewpoint, the "right of return" contains two elements:

1 The matter of principle - meaning the recognition of the existence of such a right.

2 The method of implementation - meaning how many Palestinians will actually exercise this right if it is accorded to them.

The Israeli Geneva architects assert that their main achievement is with respect to the second element of the right of return, for they claim to have reached an agreement that will let Israel control the numbers of those returning. Yet the very recognition of the first element, the principle of a "right of return" based on Geneva's explicit reliance on UN General Assembly Resolution 194 of 1948 and on the resolutions of the Beirut Arab Summit of 2002, is nothing less than an historical error of the highest order of magnitude. It connects the very existence of Israel to a Palestinian version of a fundamental injustice whose historical accuracy it can no longer refute after Geneva. In short, it undermines Israel's very right to exist.

It is clear upon examination of Geneva that its main achievement for Israel - blocking the Palestinian right of return - is far from hermetic. True, the Palestinians concede their unqualified demand to allow all the refugees to immigrate to Israel. Yet the Palestinians obtained Israeli recognition of the "right" to assert it in large numbers. The actual number of "returnees" is supposed to be calculated according to the average number of refugees that will be taken in around the world. On one hand, the agreement stipulates that it is up to the individual Palestinian refugee to decide where he wants to settle (in Palestine, Israel, or a third country). On the other hand, the agreement recognizes Israel's sovereign right to determine the entry of refugees. This potential contradiction is bound to leave Israel open to continuing international pressure to open its doors. It is not surprising to find the Palestinian legislator who was one of the Palestinian team leaders, Kadura Fares, telling the London Arabic daily al-Hayat, in mid-October 2003, that the Palestinians did not give up the "right of return." The results of this could be devastating, even leading to a change in the demographic balance inside Israel in a manner that will threaten its character as a Jewish state.

The Geneva proposals on the Palestinian refugees are a trap for Israel, for if an Israeli government were to refuse to fully implement the decisions of the international committee concerning the "return" of tens or hundreds of thousands of refugees to Israeli territory, the Palestinians retain the right, according to the Geneva Accord, to continue the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and their struggle as they did before the agreement was signed. This is a formula for future disarray. The section on refugees ends with an Israeli commitment to commemorate the memory of former Palestinian villages that existed before the 1948 invasion by the Arab states. Wouldn't such a project simply reinforce Palestinian awareness of their refugee status forever? This is a huge Palestinian achievement.

Other Issues Emanating from Geneva

While the above analysis covers the major issues that appear in the Geneva Accord, there are other aspects of the proposed model that need to be critically examined:

Conditionality and Reciprocity

There is no conditionality in the timetable of Geneva's implementation. According to the agreement, Israel's complete withdrawal is to take place even if terrorism persists. Of course, Israel has the right to complain to the international committee, but it may not halt its withdrawal, even if Israel has solid confirmation that the Palestinian Authority is not lifting a finger to combat terrorism or if there are intelligence indications that it is actually providing tangible assistance to terrorist groups. Even under these conditions, Israel is required to transfer territories vital to its national defense and to concede its ability to fight terrorism.

The Issue of Water

The Geneva Accord contains no understanding between the parties over the question of water resources. Nonetheless, the Palestinians have achieved a significant advance payment in this area: explicit Israeli recognition of Palestinian sovereignty over water resources in their territory. There is no reference to the fact that these water resources are part of the mountain and coastal aquifers that stretch into Israel and constitute the primary source of water for Israelis residing in central Israel. It is not clear why, even in this unfinished area of negotiation, the Israeli team created a position of clear-cut inferiority for Israel, right from the start.


The Palestinians are to be given a corridor from the Gaza Strip to the Hebron highlands that crosses the State of Israel. By contrast, in cases where such corridors would have been useful for Israelis, such as from Jerusalem to Ein Gedi or along Route 443 connecting Tel Aviv and Jerusalem through Beit Horon, Israelis have no equivalent rights of passage.

Israel as a Jewish State?

Even what ostensibly should have been a fundamental matter of principle - that the Palestinians recognize the State of Israel as a Jewish state - is phrased carelessly and in a manner that is open to diverse interpretations. This allows the Palestinians to give a very different meaning to this clause, so that there is no connection between any claim of an achievement for Israel and the actual language that Geneva adopts. In the agreement, the State of Israel recognizes a Palestinian state, with its national character defined, but "Palestine" only recognizes Israel as a state, with no reference to its character. Indeed, Kadura Fares of the Palestinian negotiating team told al-Hayat that the Palestinians did not recognize Israel as a Jewish state in the Geneva document. Furthermore, given the clauses in Geneva on the "right of return," the Palestinians can wage a campaign to alter Israel's demographic make-up and remain true to their signature on the agreement.

In summary, an analysis of the Geneva model indicates that it is completely slanted to the Palestinian side. It is an agreement that contains virtually no Israeli achievement whatsoever in comparison with the tangible concessions it grants to the Palestinians: principally, the abandonment of the Temple Mount and the loss of security arrangements that up until now Israel insisted upon, and whose importance has been demonstrated over the years since the signing of the Oslo Agreements and their crashing failure. Israel loses an important part of its national sovereignty in this agreement to an international committee, and it concedes the ability to defend itself to an international force. In addition, Israel will have to deal with the "right of return" and absorb massive numbers of refugees on its territory within the "green line," for Israel itself is not to decide how many will come.

Israelis should judge the model put forward in the Geneva Accord according to what it contains and what it lacks. This analysis is far more important than the ceremonies and participation of foreign leaders, for whom the destiny of Israel has never been a top priority.

Posted by Women in Green, December 16, 2003.
This was written by Gary Cooperberg, Director of Public Relations for the Jewish Community of Hebron. He has has established Project Shofar (http://www.projectshofar.org), an outreach program to American Jews.

Saddam Hussein was a symbol of defiance to the power of the U.S. and the free world in general. He mocked the first President Bush and the present one and really thought he could get away with it. The first time he really did get away with it, and I have a feeling that were it not for the horror of 9/11, he would have succeeded again/ And to be perfectly frank, it is too early to be certain that he will not succeed again. Okay, great, we got the murderous dictator. It has been reported that he has been offered a deal. Tell where he is hiding the weapons of mass destruction and he will spend life in prison rather than be executed. Nice try. How come no one offered him a Nobel Prize for chutzpa? Does anyone honestly expect that he will be executed? No way.

Let's take a look at Israel. She has in her custody a far greater criminal than Saddam, yet she is forbidden to assassinate him or even to bring him to trial and then execute him. Why? Bush has already agreed that he is personna-non-grata (not to mention a major terrorist murderer). What makes Arafat so special? It should also be pointed out that he is great friends with Saddam. He and all of his PLO cohorts are devastated at the news that Saddam has been captured. Although President Bush appeared very pleased as he announced the good news, I don't really think that he can honestly believe that now Iraq will turn into an oasis of democracy. And, I daresay, I sincerely doubt that Saddam will suffer serious punishment either. Saddam did not knock off the twin towers, and we still didn't find the MWD. But, what is more significant, I do not think Saudi Arabia would be too happy to see a fellow Islamic fanatic dictator demeaned any more than he already has been. You see, the war against terror does have its limitations. Arafat is off limits. It will be very interesting to see how Saddam squirms his way out of this one. And he will.

George Bush has turned a blind eye to the Bible and developed a "vision" of a two state solution for Israel because Saudi Arabia is blackmailing him. He is keeping Arafat safe for the same reason. And it is also for this same reason that Saddam cannot and will not be executed. Were the President of the United States truly his own man, he would have Saddam tried and executed and place his own puppet Islamic government over Iraq. If he doesn't do this then Iraq will simply be taken over by some other Islamic dictator who is not likely to be friendly to the United States. Were he sincere in his war against terror, and not under the thumb of Saudi petro-dollars, not only would he not tie the hands of the Israeli government, he would encourage Jewish settlement in all of the Land of Israel, especially Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and he would declare Arafat and the PA or PLO the terrorists that they are, giving Israel the green light to eliminate them.

Unfortunately, his war against terror is little more than a facade. Bush has failed to muster the personal courage to stand up to the evil by sounding the alarm to Jew and Gentile alike, and to open our eyes to the G-dly process that is presently underway, and to work to support it. We dare not stand idly on the sidelines.

Posted by Dr. Hagi Ben-Artzi, December 16, 2003.
It's Been More Than 2,000 Years...

The holiday of Chanukah is approaching. Over 2,000 years ago, the Nation of Israel was called upon to manifest dedication and a willingness to sacrifice in the face of an oppressive world power.

It's already more than 2,000 years that we have been celebrating the great miracle that happened then - the one that began with the Nation of Israel withstanding a great test, not breaking and not caving in.

It's already more than 2,000 years that we have been commemorating the victory not only over the Syrian-Greeks, but also over a traitorous Jewish Hellenistic regime that cooperated and collaborated with the enemies of Israel.

It's already more than 2,000 years that we have been drawing great strength, courage and spirit from the call of Mattathias the High Priest: "Whoever is for the Lord - to me!" - even though responding to this call was liable to cost one his life or those of his family.

It's already more than 2,000 years that the dramatic declaration by Judah Maccabee has been ringing in our ears: "We will defend with our bodies our Torah, our Holy Temple, and our forefathers' inheritance."

It's already more than 2,000 years that the words of Shimon the Hasmonean to King Antiochus VII have been escorting us, as a charge for generations: "We did not conquer a foreign land, nor did we snatch the inheritance of others. We have returned to the inheritance of our fathers that was taken from us unjustly."

In Those Days, At This Time

Just like in those days, so too at this time do we face a world power, together with most of the world, trying to tear us from our forefathers' inheritance, our Holy Land.

Just like in those days, so too at this time we have a weak Jewish government caving in and breaking, cooperating with the treachery against our Torah and our covenant with our G-d.

Just like in those days, so too at this time, we are called upon to show true self-sacrifice in order to defend on all that is precious and sacred to us.

Just like in those days, so too at this time, the great question is whether we will pass the test and go out to defend, bodily, Amona and Migron, Beit El and Hevron, Netzarim and Kfar Darom.

The Big Move Against Yesha Has Begun

There can be no doubt: He who has decided to uproot flowering and flourishing communities with dozens of families such as Amona and Migron, has already decided on the "big move" of uprooting the Jewish settlement enterprise in Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza).

It is clear that the uprooting of Amona and Migron, and the expulsion of their residents, will lead to the immediate resignation of the NRP and the National Union from the government. In order to keep the government going, the Prime Minister will have to include the Labor Party - which demands in return the uprooting of all the communities in Gaza and of dozens more in Judea and Samaria. The transfer of the Jews of Yesha thus begins in Migron and Amona.

To the best of my understanding, it is incumbent upon us to enlist all our forces as early as possible. Those who would push off the "great struggle" until later stages are making, in my opinion, a dire and terrible mistake. At times of shmad (religious persecution), one is obliged to give his life even on matters of "shoe laces," i.e., mere customs. This is because in a fight, one must defend the first fortress; when the fall begins, it is hard to stem it. On the Sabbath, we go out to war even if the threats involve only "straw and sawdust" - because he who gives up on his home and his property will, in the end, lose the entire war.

Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook, of saintly blessed memory, declared, "Over Judea and Samaria there will be a war!" - and the war has started in Migron and Amona.

Hineni - Here I Am!

If we enlist all our human, spiritual and financial resources and power in a determined and uncompromising struggle, we have a chance to win. The Maccabees were an even smaller minority than are today's loyalists to the Torah of Israel and the Land of Israel. Even just a "small flask of oil, signed with the signet of the High Priest" can burn for eight full days and sweep along most of the nation in its wake on the way to victory.

I call upon the former Chief Rabbis, the yeshiva heads, the leaders of the faith-driven public, the Yesha Council, and all those who are loyal to the Torah of Israel and the Land of Israel to declare aloud: "Here, in Migron and Amona, we will defend with our bodies our Torah and our Fathers' inheritance."

I call upon every Jew whose soul longs for Zion to arise and "report for duty" in Amona and Migron, less than a half-hour's drive from Jerusalem, and to say just one word: "Hineni!" [Here I am]. I am with you, ready for any mission, willing to accept any job.

A Chanukah miracle can occur, with G-d's help, in these times as well. We have in fact seen wondrous miracles in recent generations throughout the period of the Jewish People's revival and return to its Land. May it be G-d's will that we will prove to be worthy of the Maccabees' legacy.

Dr. Ben-Artzi is an activist who lives in Hebron and Professor of Bible Studies. This first appeared in Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnn.www).

Posted by Women In Green, December 16, 2003.



Please Read the following short News Release from Arutz 7:


Defense Minister Sha'ul Mofaz has given orders to uproot and dismantle the 'outpost' of Migron - including all 42 of its families.

Migron is over four years old. It is located on a hilltop overlooking the Shomron's central artery highway 60. The tall buildings of Jerusalem can be clearly seen to the south, such that Migron is part of Jerusalem's defense belt.

Mofaz has ordered O.C. Central Command Maj.-Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky to prepare an order that will bypass the need to receive Supreme Court approval for the evacuation of the families. Arutz-7's Haggai Huberman reports that information in the hands of Yesha Council leaders indicates that the dismantling will take place this Thursday, ignoring the necessary legal process. The strategy will be to highlight the fact that Israeli law does not apply to Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and that the IDF is sovereign there. Buildings and towns will thus be able to be demolished without receiving legal approval. IDF officers arrived at the site of Migron yesterday to ascertain what equipment will be needed for the evacuation.

Current Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon has warned that the site is a critically strategic point, and that if Israel does not take it, the Arabs would. A former Central Commander, Yitzchak Eitan, who was not a great friend of the Jewish settlement enterprise in Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza), also insisted that the site remain Jewish. He even told then-Defense Minister Binyamin Ben- Eliezer that if Jewish civilians were not permitted to remain, he would build an army outpost there. "This site must not be abandoned," he said.

The 130 residents of Migron, virtually all of them young couples and families, have no other homes - and this would thus be an "expulsion" in the full sense of the word.

The entire work force of the Binyamin Regional Council and associated bodies are convening today in Migron to decide on their next steps. A network has been established in all the Binyamin communities - Adam, Psagot, Kokhav Yaakov, Rimonim, etc. - to call on all residents to arrive at Migron to stop the destruction of their neighboring town. A large 200-square-meter tent has been erected to house the masses of people expected to arrive, and generators and large containers have also been brought.

Minister Mofaz told people, who spoke with him about Migron in the past few days, that it was PRIME MINISTER SHARON, UNDER HEAVY AMERICAN PRESSURE, who made the decision to destroy Migron. Sharon has experience in decisions of this nature; in 1982, as Defense Minister under Prime Minister Menachem Begin, he oversaw the destruction of the city of Yamit. Since then, and most recently in the last election campaign, he has said that destroying Yamit was a 'mistake' that he regrets."

Dear friends- Women in Green are joining the intense preparations to prevent this crime:

1) On WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2003 at 10:30 A.M from the Inbal (LaRomme) Hotel, we will go to Migron on a chizuk (strengthening) visit by private cars. We urge you all to join us. We plan to be back around 1:30pm.

We will bring the children of Migron treats and toys. There are 60 small children in Migron (20 under the age of 1 year; 7 between 1 and 2 years old; 15 between the ages of 2 and 3; 10 between the ages of 3 and 4; 3 children 5 years old; 2 children in first grade and 3 children in 2nd grade.

2) We are preparing lists of people who are willing to be called on the day of the attempted deportation of the 42 Migron families, in order to come to Migron - day or night- to try to prevent this heinous crime. If you are willing to be called- Please email us asap your name, phone number, cell phone number and we will be in touch with you.

3) we call upon all friends of Israel, in the entire world, to bombard the offices of Prime Minister Sharon and Defense Minister Mofaz with phone calls and faxes NOW. Do not waste your time with emails- they won't be read. Tie up their phones and faxes with the following message:



The Land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel as promised by God in the Bible.

Prime Minister Sharon: Tel: 972-2-670-5555 and fax: 972-2-566-48-38

Defense Minister Mofaz: Tel 972-3-697-66-63 and fax 972-3-697-62-18

On the eve of Chanuka, let us find strength in the words of former Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, who has warned against the uprooting: "Whoever is for God, rally around me!"

This was the call of the Maccabees over 2000 years ago, prior to their victories over the Syrian-Greeks and their Jewish Hellenist collaborators - victories that guaranteed the Jewish people's spiritual and national freedom.

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 16, 2003.
The movers and shakers, who advise the masses what to think, think with difficulty, themselves. Their perspective is too narrow, when not biased or ignorant. Yes, ignorant. Many of the "opinion-makers" have neither a factual nor a logical basis for their own opinions.

They argue that military action has failed, because the Oslo war goes on. Misconception. Certainly the war goes on - Israeli military action has been limited. How can limited military action be decisive? If Israel military action were all-out, the war would end. Military victory, in itself, is not actually the solution but the prerequisite to one. Is that difficult to understand?

Yes, those with a narrow perspective and a neurotic outlook cannot grasp the notion of Israel asserting its rights, such as the right of self-defense and to be free of enemy aggression. They perceive Israel as helpless. Most of the bonds on Israel's strength are in their minds. (To be fair, some of the Jewish nationalists, especially Kahanists, think that Israel is free to do as it pleases. I believe that Israel has more latitude than it exercises, but has some constraints. The more Israel asserts its rights, the more it would be respected, and the more latitude it would gain.)

They then suppose that there are only these options: (1) Negotiate an agreement that gives the Palestinian Arabs most of what they demand in the first phase for the conquest of Israel; (2) Join with the Palestinian Arabs in a single state; or (3) Give the Arabs much of what they want without negotiating, simply by retreating.

Most Israelis realize that amalgamating with the terrorists who wish to kill, expel, or control them, is no solution. It would not mean peace but slaughter. Arab hatred has become genocidal. Israelis also are coming to realize that there simply is no negotiating a solution with the Arabs. The Arabs use negotiations to make Israel weaker, not solve a conflict. The conflict is not over territory but over Israel's existence. That leaves the third option.

What would unilateral withdrawal from most of Yesha solve? It would give up the historic core of Jewish religious and national development, strategic depth, and water sources, without stopping terrorism. Why would it end the conflict? The Arabs would fight on. The Arabs would claim they are fighting for the rest of Yesha. However, if they got the rest of Yesha, they would then demand parts of Israel. Next they would take what is left. They would do it with "fire and blood."

Withdrawal would allow the PLO to gain sovereignty. Thereafter, defense against further terrorism would mean invasion and war. The UN would disapprove. Israeli defense would be impeded, by the heavy arms that sovereign PLO would be entitled to import, regardless of what agreements the pre-state regime had signed. Unilateral withdrawal, partial or total is no solution.

We are back to the aftermath of military victory. The solution is simple, though it would not be popular abroad, and would have to be done incrementally. First, Israel annexes all adjoining Jewish municipalities, the parts built up and parts reserved for later building. Israel should annex all vacant areas in the Territories, as unallocated areas under the Palestine Mandate, their legal status now, so that there is no room for the PLO state's expansion or maneuvering. All that can be done without diluting the Jewish character of the State of Israel.

Second, Israel should not let the Arabs in the Territories into Israel or into the remaining Jewish communities in Yesha. Neither should it pay any sums to Arafat or the P.A.. The P.A. would go broke. Arabs would move out in droves. As they vacate areas, Israel would annex them.

Third, Israel should take measures against the Israeli Arabs, with some exceptions. Affirmative action for them should be rescinded. Their illegalities, such as sedition, rioting, stealing land, building illegally, polygamy, and tax evasion should be prosecuted and punished by confiscation, fines, and imprisonment that may be traded for deportation. They should not be drafted for the military but should be required to serve civilian national duty, to retain citizenship.

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, December 16, 2003.
From Beilin to now, of all people, Ehud Olmert, Israelis among themselves suggest solutions upon solutions, as if what we Israelis think or do really matters to the Palestinians. As if our unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon to borders decreed by the UN mattered to either Hizballah or the Lebanese government. The sad fact is that the Palestinians have a plan and stick with it (stage by stage elimination of Israel as a Jewish state) and we not only do not have any plan, we do not stick even with what we do not have.

Tragically, Israel faces only one alternative: We must carry on with this war imposed on us until it is won by us! We have not yet reached the point in the conflict at which the Palestinians really had enough. The fact that some Israelis may have had enough only increases their appetite. Whether we withdraw, a little, or a little more, or completely, the conflict will not be resolved and our position will only weaken not strengthen.

Yes, maybe Abd Rabbo, and Nusseiba are genuine, MAYBE, but can we, or should we trust them? Tomorrow, a different Nusseiba will tear the agreement. Can anybody say with confidence that a new ruler in Egypt will not tear the "peace" agreement signed by Sadat? And then will Jimmy Carter come to our rescue?

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 15, 2003.
Dear Professor "S"

Thank you for your note asking me what my reaction is to the recent event in which an Israeli tank crew fired a shell that killed some civilians.

Professor, I am not sure I understand your question. You asked what is my reaction to this incident.

My reaction is quite simply that if the Palestinians would stop sending mass murderers out to murder Jewish children and other Israeli civilians intentionally, then Israel would not have to send out tanks and other units to hunt down the murderers. If it were no longer necessary to send out Israeli tanks to hunt down Palestinian mass murderers, then errors in judgment, mistakes and mishaps in which Palestinian civilians and minors accidentally get killed would not take place.

It is all very simple. When the Arabs stop mass murdering Jews, there will no longer be any innocent Arabs accidentally killed or injured by Jews.

My reaction, in other words, is exactly the same as it would be had you asked me what was my reaction to the fact that many, many Japanese and German children died in the bombings of Cologne, Dresden, Berlin, Hamburg, Tokyo, Okinawa, and Hiroshima.

My reaction is: Tough.

Those who do not want innocents to be accidentally targeted must stop the fascist aggression and terrorism by the Arabs (like that of the Germans and Japanese), which makes such incidents inevitable. How many innocent children were killed in Afghanistan thanks to Islamist fascism? How many Iraqi civilians were injured in the two Gulf Wars? Whose fault was that?

People who support Palestinian terrorism make such deaths of Palestinian children inevitable and bear much of the blame.

Meanwhile, you claim that it is unfair of people to accuse you of being anti-Israel, and all the more so of being an anti-Semite. You say you are merely endorsing the positions of some Israeli leftists, and you name Uri Avnery and Shulamit Aloni. You say you endorse a complete withdrawal of Israel to its 1967 borders, removal of all settlements, and creation of a Palestinian state with half of Jerusalem as its capital - because you love Israel and want it to live in peace.

I do not believe you.

I do not believe that you love Israel. I do not believe that you desire Israel to survive and live in peace. I do not believe that YOU believe that your prescription will bring peace.

Suppose someone - a non-American - would announce that he is not anti-American, but he merely endorses the political position of people like Taliban John and Edward Said and Louis Farrakhan regarding the United States. Suppose he were to insist he is in fact PRO-American, but just has pro-positions of "dissident" Americans.

Of course, such a claim would be ludicrous. Such a person would be supporting American traitors, people driven by hatred of America. Such people's "ideology" is nothing more than anti-Americanism, and foreigners supporting such people would be in effect admitting that they themselves are anti-America and wish America harm.

Your support of Uri Avnery and Shulamit Aloni is exactly the same thing. Israel's leftist extremists are motivated by anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism in exactly the same way that the extremist left camp in America is motivated by hatred of America.

Moreover, your own positions belie your pretended love for Israel. When you support sanctions against Israel and against Israeli academic institutions because you disapprove of Israeli government policy, you are revealing your hostility to the existence of the country, not to this or that specific policy. You are not trying to influence Israel's decision-making, you are delegitimizing all of Israel and exhibiting a desire to see Israel destroyed.

When you encourage those who are organizing mutiny and insubordination in Israel's army, you are showing that you wish Israel destroyed. You are also showing your fundamentally anti-democratic proclivities.

If Israel's far leftists wish to try to persuade the rest of the country of the correctness of their ideas, they are free to do so democratically. But mutiny is anti-democratic and designed to divide and paralyze Israel's military and prevent Israel from making decisions about its own self-defense in a democratic manner.

But your position is even more untenable. At least Israel's extremists will bear part of the costs of the foolish policies they advocate if such policies are adopted by their country. They have already borne parts of the costs of the Oslo debacle and they are at risk every time they go outside thanks to their own policies having been pursued.

You bear none of those costs or risks. You are seated on your comfortable suburban sofa over there and spouting advice. And if your advice turns out to be harmful, you can just sit back and say, "OOPS", and switch the channel.

But there are other reasons why I do not believe your protestations of affection for Israel. Israel has already applied your philosophy and your approach. It already turned most of the West Bank and Gaza over to the PLO, agreed to the establishment of a PLO state, offered the PLO parts of Jerusalem, and at Camp David Ehud Barak offered the PLO its entire wish list, including a partial "return" of Palestinian "refugees", the Old City of Jerusalem with the Western Wall, all of the West Bank and parts of pre-1967 Israel. You know the result perfectly well.

For the past ten years, every single step Israel has taken to implement YOUR philosophy and YOUR vision of peace has produced escalated violence and bloodshed. You have had more than ample empirical proof that YOUR approach is simply incorrect. Israel's goodwill gestures and flexibility have ALWAYS produced Arab atrocities, not reductions in Arab hatred and violence. Israeli moderation always produces Arab aggression.

Israeli niceness is interpreted by the Arabs as weakness and destructibility. This is NOT a matter of "ideological disagreement" but of empirical proof.

The fact that you still advocate endless Israeli submission to Arab demands can be interpreted in one of two ways. Either you are too stupid to acknowledge the hundreds, perhaps thousands, of empirical proofs that your approach to settling the Arab-Israeli conflict is incorrect, or you in fact understand perfectly well that your approach is really designed to produce the destruction of Israel. I happen to believe the second explanation for your behavior as the correct one.

You continue to oppose all forms of Israeli self-defense short of capitulation, since the only form of defending herself you are willing to allow Israel is her complete submission to the Arab world's dictates and her placing her neck in a noose where she has to trust the goodwill of the Arabs not to pull the rope.

I do not agree that you are a real Jewish patriot. I think you are a Jewish Taliban John, a Jewish Uncle Tom. I think you really want Israel weakened and destroyed because it will allow you to posture and feel righteous, that it will allow you to save face and avoid embarrassment when you are hanging out with your leftist friends.

This appeared in NATIV Online (Vol. 1 / 2003), a publication of the Ariel Center for Policy Research (ACPR).

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, December 15, 2003.
Dear friends,

Consider the following quote and try to guess who wrote it:

"The establishment of such a [Palestinian] state means the inflow of combat-ready Palestinian forces (more than 25,000 men under arms) into Judea and Samaria; this force, together with the local youth, will double itself in a short time.

It will not be short of weapons or other [military] equipment, and in a short space of time, an infrastructure for waging war will be set up in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Israel will have problems in preserving day-to-day security, which may drive the country into war or undermine the morale of its citizens. In time of war, the frontiers of the Palestinian state will constitute an excellent staging point for mobile forces to mount attacks on infrastructure installations vital for Israel's existence... and to cause bloodshed among the population... in areas adjacent to the frontier-line."

Did you guess? Yes, the above subject gave it away. Shimon Peres in 1977, he who is trying to convince us today, after his above prophecy actually materialized, to allow a terrorist infested Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria.

A small reminder: Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin were the architects of many of the settlements in Judea and Samaria... This is the December 13 Jerusalem Post article on the subject. It was writen by Martin Sherman, who lectures in political science at Tel Aviv University.

In his "First Word" opinion piece in The Jerusalem Post entitled "Israel's two greatest mistakes" (December 5), Shimon Peres argues that our greatest blunders were first, the failure to take Anwar Sadat's peace offers seriously and thereby avoid the 1973 Yom Kippur War; and second, the Likud's insistence on constructing settlements across the 1967 Green Line, squandering huge sums which could have been invested elsewhere.

Peres goes on to regret the absence of David Ben-Gurion, who, in his view, would have ended the conflict through territorial concessions - much as Peres's Oslo policy purported to do. As Peres put it, "had we invested the necessary energy in making peace with Egypt after Nasser's death and before the Yom Kippur War, we would probably have avoided that war and might have achieved a different kind of peace accord than we got at Camp David." However, according to his own public statements, it is clear that one of the greatest opponents to Ben-Gurion's supposed largesse would have been none other than Shimon Peres himself. Consider the following quotation made several years after the Yom Kippur War. In a detailed programmatic book entitled Tomorrow is Now (Keter, 1978), Peres blatantly rejects the Sadat "peace proposal" that Ben-Gurion would have allegedly accepted prior to 1973: "Now Sadat proposes a peace treaty in this generation. However, it may be the present generation of Arabs is not able to live in the full harmony of peace with the people of Israel; this is something that cannot be ignored. Perhaps the present Arab generation can do no more than reach an interim agreement; but such an agreement cannot involve a return to the 1967 borders or the establishment of a Palestinian state" (p. 232 - all translations are mine).

Indeed, Peres was quite explicit in his opposition to a Palestinian state, declaring in a chillingly accurate prophesy: "The establishment of such a state means the inflow of combat-ready Palestinian forces (more than 25,000 men under arms) into Judea and Samaria; this force, together with the local youth, will double itself in a short time.

It will not be short of weapons or other [military] equipment, and in a short space of time, an infrastructure for waging war will be set up in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Israel will have problems in preserving day-to-day security, which may drive the country into war or undermine the morale of its citizens. In time of war, the frontiers of the Palestinian state will constitute an excellent staging point for mobile forces to mount attacks on infrastructure installations vital for Israel's existence... and to cause bloodshed among the population... in areas adjacent to the frontier-line." (p. 232.)

In his Post article, Peres laments the settlement enterprise as a "tragic missed opportunity." "Had the Likud and its leaders accepted Ben-Gurion's view 25 years ago, the whole country would look, and live, differently. Tremendous sums of money invested in the territories would have been invested in the Negev. Instead of cultivating a cruel fight between us and our neighbors, we would have developed the alternative 'fight': with the Negev wilderness."

But who was among the chief architects of the settlements and one of their most ardent advocates? Again, Shimon Peres.

In the same 1978 book Peres wrote: "[Israel needs] to create a continuous stretch of new settlements; to bolster Jerusalem and the surrounding hills, from the north, from the east, and from the south and from the west, by means of the establishment of townships, suburbs and villages - Ma'aleh Adumim, Ofra, Gilo, Beit El, Givon and Nahal outposts - to ensure that the capital and its flanks are secured and underpinned by urban and rural settlements.

These settlements will be connected to the coastal plain and Jordan Valley by new lateral axis roads; the settlements along the Jordan River are intended to establish the Jordan River as [Israel's] de facto security border; however, it is the settlements on the western slopes of the hills of Samaria and Judea which will deliver us from the curse of Israel's 'narrow waist'" (p. 48).

Peres writes now that Israel's tragic "mistake was falling in love, without bounds, without demographic considerations, with the territories." Yet it was Peres who urged the nation to expedite its development of the territories, warning, "What we do not do today, we will sorely regret for generations, but what we invest and develop today will be accumulated wealth for generations. It is better that we owe money but develop our land, rather than lose land (whose value will ever-increase) and save money (whose value will ever-decrease)" (p. 49).

With regard to the Golan, Peres is no more consistent. He currently claims, "I know from my contacts with Hafez Assad that he was prepared to take an initiative that would have turned an agreement with Syria into an agreement with all the Arab countries." This is totally at odds with his former resolute affirmation of the enduring need for Israeli settlement of the Golan, declaring: "The purpose of the settlements in the Golan is to ensure that this territorial platform will no longer constitute a danger, but a barrier against a surprise attack" (p. 48).

Accordingly, if Peres is right in what he diagnoses as Israel's greatest mistakes, then he is undeniably among the chief perpetrators and instigators of these historic blunders. If he is wrong, then he is guilty of abandoning those who, at his behest, established their homes in the territories across the 1967 borders.

Either way, some humility would seem to be in order from a leader who has demonstrated a lack of foresight, staggering historical amnesia, or both.

Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, December 15, 2003.
I once had a high school assignment to write the epitaph for my tombstone. A rather macabre English teacher was fed-up with my being the class clown, and so she gave me two minutes to reflect on my behavior and to come up with six words or less before she did me in. So, in ten seconds, I came up with four words and answered in all earnest, "She made people laugh."

It grieves me that this funny, optimistic person has spent the last few years trying to make people cry - or more accurately, to move people and to get people to move.

Why is it that somebody who's a painter and visual thinker has felt compelled to struggle in order to articulate my thoughts and ideas into words? The truth is, I usually write these articles with a dictionary and thesaurus on my lap. I guess I put forth the effort because I want people to see the reality behind the awesome events that are occurring before us. It's not that I can see things that others can't, it's more like most people have made a conscious choice not to look - and consequently not to act.

There are those who think that the darkness of the world around us is an indication of G-d's distancing Himself. I believe, on the other hand, that the very obvious menacing events and devious personalities encircling us are evidence of G-d's personal involvement and closeness.

This time around, G-d, in His mercy, has taken off the veils so we can see with utter clarity the danger before us. We Jews have encountered many enemies over the centuries, but I'll go out on a limb and say, never have we been confronted with such blatantly transparent evil. The Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Spanish, and Germans, hid behind science, art, culture, physical beauty, luxurious lifestyle, highly evolved government and strength. Is it any wonder that we Jews were blind-sided and caught off-guard when destruction came? Even amalek attacked us from behind.

But, today, there is no doubt. The killers parade their knives, dynamite and guns in full view. They appear in full dress as the ghouls, phantoms and the devils that they are. And yet, we react like zombies, like the walking dead -unable to feel, react, or sense the danger.

There is an selection process taking place, there always has been. G-d presents us with a choice that is often obscured, but this time it's ever-so clear. "I have placed life and death... before you. Choose life so that you and your descendants will survive."

Under the current circumstances, how will we answer to G-d when he asks us Jews that timeless question, "Where were you?"

Will we respond like Adam and say, "I heard your voice...and I was afraid...so I hid?"
Will we respond like Cain and say, "Am I my brother's keeper?"
Will be open our eyes in amazement and, like Yaacov, realize, "G-d is truly in this place, but I did not know.?"
Or, will we sell our birthright like Esau and respond like the wicked son from the Passover Hagadda?

Which of the following answers will you use?
a) I didn't hear. I didn't see. I didn't care, because I was too busy with other things.
b) Huh, you mean there is something beyond me and that reflection in the mirror?
c) C'mon G-d, get real. I had more faith in the demographic reality of many billions of Muslims compared to mere millions of Jews than I did in You and Your promises to us. The few against the many is just a story, right?
d) I don't really get involved in politics, G-d. I was busy doing other mitzvot.
e) That inner voice has nothing to do with You, G-d. I don't even believe in You. This is just my highly evolved and developed consciousness speaking, so be quiet.
d) I'm really sorry about what's happening in Israel and the rest of the world, but my home is in America. This really has little to do with me.

When faced with court battles concerning finances, custody, or inheritance, many people disrupt their daily routine, take time off from work and risk financial loss in order to dedicate their resources and energy into fighting for what they know rightfully belongs to them or their children. And yet, when it comes to our most precious possession and eternal inheritance, we've turned our back. This is nothing less than a rejection of G-d and all that He has given us. But in His mercy, He's shown compassion upon a confused generation by clarifying the situation and defining our choices. And yet, many of us still refuse to see.

I bear witness to the fact that there are those Jews who simply don't give a damn and have chosen virtual reality, Saks Fifth Avenue, the NASDAQ, and nanotechnology over the Land of Israel. We have brought the current situation upon ourselves and I fear that we will have to answer for it.

There is still hope. We can take the gifts that G-d has bestowed upon each and every one of us and use them and dedicate them to effect change. That means whether you're in a position to speak, write, finance, fight, organize, protest, petition, volunteer, pray, or make Aliyah, just do it! You're under obligation, as there really is no choice.

I like to tease my mother, because, when she was a child, she sang in a concert for Helen Keller. Now everyone knows that Helen Keller was born blind, deaf and dumb, so how could she possibly appreciate my mother's beautiful voice? But Helen placed her hand on my mother's jaw and at the end of the concert she said, quite coherently, "G-d bless you, child." See, even though she was unable to see or hear, she could still feel and perceive G-d in this world.

Ellen Horowitz lives on the Golan Heights with her husband and six children. She is a painter, writer and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com/

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 15, 2003.
The Left is willing for Israel to withdraw from Yesha, thinking it has little value to the Jewish people. PM Sharon and Minister. Olmert declare that Yesha is integral to the Land of Israel, and belong to the Jewish people, but mostly must be sacrificed for the good of the Jewish people. The Right thinks of the land as a commodity to be disposed of as desired.

The serious Israeli discussions of unilateral withdrawal from Yesha, involving the eviction and transfer of tens of thousands of Jews and the destruction of dozens of communities, rewards terrorism with a victory. The Arab enemies conclude that if they can get such huge Israeli concessions without much sacrifice, they need try only a little longer for a full conquest. Thus both Left and Right facilitate the end of the Jewish state (Hebron_today, 12/8). Their proposed concessoins encourage the Arabs not to compromise.

Just because Sharon and Olmert are in a Party that was right wing doesn't make it perpetually right-wing. Sharon is an old leftist. Much of Likud has moved leftward. As secularists, many are politicians foremost and do not appreciate Jewish nationalism and Jewish religious ties to the Land. Neither do they realize the strategic implications. They think of themselves as "pragmatists." Actually, they are impractical in wanting to yield to the importuning of the world powers.

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 15, 2003.
News Item from Ha'Aretz.

Immigration Police arrest more than 60 Filipinas working illegally as household help, in major police operation.


This policy is meant to force us to hire Gazan and "West Bank" Arabs. For every 10 Filipinos or "Slavs" deported, the Israeli Government will issue 100 work permits to Gazans, and 150 to PA residents. This is rascist "Arabification" at it's most deadly - all non-Arabs are deemed to be "Untermenschen". We can now count the hours until we are murdered in our beds or on our streets by the "approved" "Ubermenschen" - Arafat's subjects.

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, December 15, 2003.
This was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner of the Independent Media Review Analysis (IMRA), which provides "A current digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events." IMRA's website address is http://www.imra.org.il

His article is as clear and to the point as can be said. Ariel Sharon is willing to destroy the entire country, cause the murder and maiming of thousands to save his own skin. His deal with the Left-wing Devil is: let me off the hook and you get a Palestinian State.

Once again, I turn to the members of the Likud and ask you, is this what you want? What will it take you to throw this degenerate out of your party? How many more Jews must be murdered and maimed in order to satisfy Sharon's blackmailers? Call an emergency meeting of the Likud Central Committee and vote to censure Sharon. Do it today.

While the capture of Saddam Hussein's may possibly reduce American pressure on Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, the looming paddy wagon back home may very well determine the content of Sharon's upcoming Herzeliyah speech.

The recent Supreme Court decision ordering Mr. Sharon's son to hand over probably incriminating documents brings the possibility of the prime minister's indictment closer than ever before. It should be noted that unlike his predecessors, Mr. Sharon did not apparently rely on lawyers and other third parties to handle questionable campaign contributions. Instead funds appear to have flowed directly through his own children - and even then in a sloppy fashion that could very well leave a trail straight to the prime minister himself.

To make matters worse, while Attorney General Elyakim Rubenstein has gone out of his way to avoid indicting leading politicians, State Attorney Edna Arbel, who will soon hold Rubenstein's position until a replacement is found, opted to essentially declare war on Sharon yesterday. In a rare comment on the probe into Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his sons' affairs, Arbel told a group on Saturday that anyone who has large sums of money in his bank account must prove where it came from and what it is for.

It is commonly assumed that if the evidence for indictment is available that the only thing that could deter Arbel and the rest of her team from a quick indictment are withdrawals. Arbel and her colleagues, the argument goes, would not want to interfere with the implementation of Israeli withdrawals.

With the paddy wagon looming on the horizon, Sharon may feel that offering an immediate withdrawal from Netzarim, for example, could keep the wolves at bay for a while.

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 15, 2003.
As you would expect, the NY Times and the Washington Post devoted reams of copy to the capture of Saddam Hussein, including reactions from around the globe. Yet, neither paper mentioned how Israel was targeted by Saddam with a barrage of Scud missiles in the first Gulf War and neither paper did any interviews with ordinary Israelis to gauge their reactions, although both devoted lots of coverage to reactions around the Arab world. Also, neither paper mentioned Arafat's support of Saddam in the first Gulf War and how Palestinians cheered when Scuds flew overhead toward Israeli targets. Nor was there any mention of the price paid by Palestinians for that Arafat mistake (one of so many) when Kuwait later kicked out Palestinians and Saudi Arabia for a while cut off the supply of money.

The NY Times was by far the greater culprit. It failed to mention that Palestinian officials maintained a public silence following Saddam's capture. Not a word about the reactions of average Palestinians. No mention that Saddam regularly sent $25,000 checks to families of suicide bombers. While the Times devoted an entire story to how dispirited people in the Arab world were that Americans had captured the modern "Saladin" without having to fire a shot, the Times, which prides itself on printing "all the news that's fit to print," didn't devote a single sentence to Ariel Sharon's comments.

The Post was considerably better after some initial lapses. The first draft of Glenn Frankel's global wrapup, which the Post featured on its web site, mentioned that Palestinians expressed disappointment about the capture, but the article said nothing about one of the big reasons for that disappointment - the payment of big sums to families of suicide bombers and "martyrs." After this was pointed out to the foreign desk of the Post, the print edition did mention Saddam's routine payments to such families, although omitting the specific dollar figure. The Post also added a Sharon comment to the Frankel draft it had featured on its web site.

In all, readers got a sense that the views of Israelis and Palestinians were a bit of an afterthought at the Post and a complete blank with the Times.

Incidentally, Pat and I celebrated Saddam's capture in perfect fashion - by attending a concert of the Israeli Philharmonic at the Kennedy Center. To hear this orchestra, which dodged Saddam's Scuds a dozen years ago, render a thrilling rendition of Hatikvah right after the brutal dictator, a modern Haman to Israel, had been caught like a cowardly rat was more than worth the price of admission. Am Yisrael Chai!

Shalom. Leo

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 14, 2003.
This was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner, who is Director of Independent Media Review & Analysis (IMRA). Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il

With news of Saddam Hussein's capture, it remains unclear if the White House w ill continue to pressure Israel to jeopardize its security.

Until the arrest the argument was made that Israel had to sacrifice its own national security and interests in order to help bolster President Bush's position.

Israel's "contribution" to the "efforts" have included swallowing the Bush initiative and the Road Map - both programs aimed at ultimately leading to the creation of a sovereign independent Palestinian state, an entity that the Oslo experience demonstrates would ultimately be used as a deadly effective platform for the continuation of the Palestinian program for the destruction of Israel in stages.

Israel also has repeatedly "contributed" to Mr. Bush by reducing security measures to make it easier for Palestinian terrorists to complete their missions.

Put bluntly, since the time the idea of a campaign against Hussein first developed, literally hundreds of Israelis have "died to please Washington" in terrorist attacks that exploited reduced security measures.

With the capture of Hussein Mr. Bush no longer needs a Palestinian-Israeli photo op for his re-election campaign. The capture may also change America's need to sacrifice Israel to Arab "allies".

14 December 2003 marks a milestone in the liberation of Iraq. It remains to be seen if it will also may the end of the subordination of Israel's security and future to Washington's perceived temporary political and regional needs.

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, December 14, 2003.
I would think that after a moment of mourning by the Palestinians, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezb'Allah, PFLP, Tanzim, Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigade - among other Terrorist groups, there will be numerous demonstrations of Terrorist bravado and frustration.

The network of Global Terrorists did not rely solely on Saddam - just as the Al Qaeda Terrorists do not rely on Osama Bin Laden. These Terrorist organizations were allowed to mature and leave the incubator in order to start their own independent network of Terrorist organizations. That's what they've been taught (brainwashed) to do - to hate and kill, mostly in the name of Islam.

While they may have had benefactors like Saddam or Bin Laden, they could and have conducted their own independent operations.

All those "sleeper cells" in the U.S. may feel that now is the time to attack and not lose momentum because of Saddam's capture.

I would not be surprised to see a ramp up of attacks in Iraq from the numerous foreign Terrorists who came through Syria into Iraq. Even if Terrorist groups had planned Terrorist operations for later times, I would estimate Saddam's capture would accelerate their schedule.

This could happen in Europe, America, Israel or wherever the Terrorist networks have operational bases. Reports are already circulating, out of various Arab Muslim nations that, while some are pleased, others are angry and threatening retribution. From the Arab Palestinian areas comes a steady stream of commentary that Saddam's capture marks a Black Day for Arab/Muslim Palestinians.

Let us remember Arafat and his Palestinians were Saddam's partners in the invasion of Kuwait. Saddam also paid out approximately $35 million to Arab Palestinian families whenever one of them martyred himself while killing Jews. The Arab Palestinians were more than close to Saddam, they were operating partners. These are the same Arab Palestinians whom President George Bush insists must have their own state, pressing on Israel's borders. After all, betraying a friend and ally who has assisted America in her fight against Saddam's is only a matter of politics.

George Bush now knows that he cannot appease Arab Muslim 'Jihadists' (Holy Warriors for Islam) as more American soldiers are killed in Iraq. But, Bush seems to be in synch with French Premier Jacques Chirac and British Prime Minister Tony Blair who tells us again and again that we are not at war with Islam.

I wonder who then is blowing up embassies, cafes, airplanes, buses and markets all over the world? It can't be that the Muslim 'Jihadists' or the mix of Arab Palestinian Terrorists who plague Israel or anyone else who doesn't believe in Islamic superiority. Must be aliens from another planet who are doing all that killing. Now that the Arab Palestinians have marked the day of Saddam's capture as a Black Day, I am sure we can expect attacks every year on this "Black Day".(1) But, President George Bush doesn't have to worry if the new Arab Palestinian State turns into a factory that manufactures Terrorists. After all, unlike Israel who is a stone's throw away, the Arab Palestinian State will now have planes to commandeer in order to fly their Terror to America.

While we are all cheering the good news of Saddam's capture, I would increase vigilance for the inevitable "I am gong to get-even attacks".


1. "Palestinians Mark 'Black Day' of Saddam Capture" by Mohammed Assadi in MidEastTruth.com (REUTERS 12/14/03)

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 14, 2003.
You know how it is a platitude that everyone remembers where they were when they heard JFK was shot? In my case, I actually do recall it quite clearly. I suspect the capture of Saddam will not be as memorable and as historically marked in people's minds as the JFK assassination. But nevertheless, I thought I would share my own experience of where and when I heard the glad tidings about Saddam's cature.

I had taken a break from some office work at Haifa University shortly after noon local time and I went down to the Arab student cafeteria. No, that is not what it is officially called, just what I call it. Haifa U has the largest contingent of Arab students in Israel. While they are not a homogeneous bunch, the bulk are ferociously anti-Israel and pro-PLO and pro-terror. There is one cafeteria where they tend to congregate in large numbers, and this cafeteria has a better than average shwarma stand. The fellow who sells shwarma is himself an Arab who is not pro-Saddam. I know because I once brought him an internet photo of Saddam cutting shwarma off a churning roaster with the caption "We have discovered where Saddam is." He thought it was hilarious and he hung it up, telling me that most of the Arabs who come there to eat are Saddam supporters and would be angered by the photo.

I was waiting in line for the shwarma-in-pita when I started listening to the TV set in the cafeteria. It was the announcement by the US governor in Iraq that they had caught Saddam. The Arab students in the cafeteria were thrown into deep remorse and anger and shock. Their faces showed their sorrow. I ordered extra Amba sauce to celebrate.

The sorrow of the Arab students at seeing their hero captured should not be restricted to Haifa University. You might want to send condolence cards to the anti-war protesters and leftist professors in your town, telling them how sorry you are that the guy who best represents their values and dreams is behind bars.

And Saddam? In the first photos, he looked ever so much like one of those homeless men south of Market Street in the Mission District of San Francisco who eat out of garbage bins. The tyrant of Iraq reduced to dressing like a derelict, hiding in the mud, pouring dirt on himself to try to escape capture. Could there be a better image to deter the Islamofascist leaders of the Arab world? To throw the fear of death into them?

And for Israel, could there be any better lesson in how to handle Yassir Arafat? The tyrant and fascist leader who would also make a wonderful poster boy for homelessness and dereliction?

Posted by Nadia Matar, December 14, 2003.
We are now in a new period. Until a few days ago, we did not know where the Israeli Government was leading us, and we could still think that Ariel Sharon "is only talking, but doesn't mean it"; now things are crystal-clear: the Sharon Government intends to betray, hand over, uproot, destroy, and transfer.

The Prime Minister's mouthpiece, Minister Ehud Olmert, said this: in his opinion, Israel is incapable of controlling the entire area between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, and, therefore, we must withdraw. This is Sharon's political plan: to withdraw from most of the regions of Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza District, and even from part of Jerusalem. Why? We all know that this will only increase the enemy's appetite. A withdrawal will be interpreted as surrender to terror - and if we withdraw from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, the Katushas will start to fall on Tel Aviv, Ben-Gurion, and Haifa. But nothing fazes Sharon and Olmert. According to them, we have to fold.

It is not important now whether Sharon implements this as a unilateral withdrawal, or as a withdrawal that is the result of yet another disastrous agreement with the Arabs. What is important to know is that this time Sharon is serious, and that he wants to be rid of most of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, to uproot settlements, and to transfer Jews. As Sharon already said in the past, only he is capable of doing this.

This is not the place to begin a lengthy analysis of how it happened that people from the national camp suddenly become Yossi Beilin clones. In my opinion, the reality proves that only a believing leader, who believes that God gave us this land, is capable of standing firm in the face of pressures. The moment that you base our being in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza on a security reason, without the Bible, without any Divine promise, you have no "case," and, ultimately, you surrender and cave in.

But, as we noted, now is not the time for analyses of what and why, now is the time to ask: What is to be done? How do we organize in order to thwart Ariel Sharon's malicious plans? First of all, we must state, clearly: 1) What the entire struggle is all about?

The struggle is not over Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. The battle is not to save one settlement or another. The struggle is to save the State of Israel, and for the Jewish people's right to exist in its land. The moment that the government of Israel will agree to uproot settlements in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, it will have swept away from under its very feet our moral right to be in any other place in Eretz Israel. For if we were to retreat from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, what moral right do we have to remain in Sheikh Munes in Tel Aviv? [Sheikh Munes is the neighborhood where Shimon Peres lives, which used to be an Arab village before 1948]. Accordingly, when we will act to prevent the uprooting of a settlement such as Migron, we actually will be struggling to save Tel Aviv, Beersheva, Tiberias, and Jerusalem.

2) This is not an evacuation! We must not use the expressions "evacuation or removal" or "shifting" of settlements. This is the uprooting of settlements and transfer for Jews. Politicians who want to mitigate and downplay the crime that they intend to commit use words that do not shock the public. We have the task of crying out that this is actually the brutal uprooting of settlements and the transfer of Jews. It is extremely racist, anti-Semitic, and would involve a virtual Civil War with Jews fighting Jews.

3) About the eating of pork and the uprooting of settlements Question: if 120 Knesset members and an overwhelming majority in the government were to legislate the obligatory eating of pork, would those who observe kashrut obey this "democratic decision"? Obviously not. They would say that despite the decision having been made by majority vote, this is a patently illegal decision, over which a black flag flies. Such a decision is not to be obeyed. If they insisted and sent companies of policemen and soldiers to feed us the pork, we would forcefully resist and we would proclaim: We shall not let you! Period. In other words: over my dead body. The same holds true for the uprooting of settlements. A majority in the government or in the Knesset does not make the handing over of portions of Eretz Israel legal and moral. We shall not obey if the government or the Knesset were to betray the homeland. Accordingly, the residents in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza must remain in the settlements, and IDF soldiers must refuse to participate in the uprooting of settlements and the transfer of Jews.

According to various reports in the media, the authorities believe that some 85 percent of the residents in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza would consent to leave of their own free will if they were to receive suitable compensation, and that the security forces would be required to deal with "only" about 15 percent of the "problematic" ideological inhabitants. We must show them that the numbers are exactly the opposite, and that an overwhelming majority of the residents will remain where they are and refuse to leave. If this will be the situation, uprooting and transferring would not be possible.

4) On the Judenrat and the serious fear of a provocation by the authorities, Yair Sheleg, a journalist and member of the Israel Democracy Institute, wrote a position paper on The Political and Social Significance of Evacuating Settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In this paper he compares the uprooting of the Yamit settlements to what is liable to happen in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and he gives the authorities recommendations how to facilitate the work of uprooting. (Incidentally, it must be understood that Yamit and Judea, Samaria, and Gaza cannot be compared. We were in Yamit only for several years, while a third generation of children is growing up in Judea. Samaria, and Gaza. In Yamit we were only a few thousand, the majority of whom left of their own free will. In Judea, Samaria, and Gaza we are at least a quarter of a million people - not including the massive amount of relatives, friends, and supporters who live in pre-1967 Israel and are willing to come on the day of reckoning.) The bottom line in Sheleg's position paper is that the work of uprooting the settlements will indeed be difficult, but he hopes that the local leadership of the settlers will honor the democratic decision to uproot settlements, aid in calming the waters, help the authorities, and cooperate with them. In more blunt language: Yair Sheleg hopes that the leaders of the settlers (the Council of Jewish Communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, rabbis, educators, and the like) will constitute a sort of "Judenrat" that collaborates with the transfer government. I would like to hope that this would not be the case, and that the leadership in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza will head the total resistance to this crime.

In such an instance, there exists the frightening possibility that the authorities will find another way to expedite the labor of transfer for them. We must already warn against such a possibility, and declare that we are aware of the fact that the authorities may plant several provocateurs within the public in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and that these agents will commit some terrible act (such as shooting at soldiers) to shock the public, to delegitimize us, and to silence our struggle. If this should happen, we will know that these individuals do not belong to our camp, and that they are new "Avishai Raviv"s.

5) What has to be done:

It is time to awaken and begin to organize. I believe with total faith that, with God's help, it is within our power to prevent the crime that the government intends to commit. Battalions of lawyers are already working on appeals to the High Court of Justice to prevent the uprooting of outposts and settlements, using legal tools. The national members of Knesset must organize and give Sharon a clear and unequivocal message that if even a single family will be uprooted, his government will fall.

And we must begin to take to the streets in droves, to show the world that the people of Israel firmly opposes defeatist and suicidal political plans. In the emergency meeting of the joint staff of the extraparliamentary organizations, that was attended by the rabbis of "Piku'ah Nefesh," Professors for a Strong Israel, Gamla Shall Not Fall Again, Matot Arim, and the Women in Green, the following decisions were taken:

(a) the uprooting of outpost settlements and settlements that the government is plotting would constitute patently illegal racist transfer and ethnic cleansing, over which a black flag flies. This uprooting itself constitutes civil war. We call upon our soldiers to take advantage of the opportunity given them by the IDF not to participate in such actions.

(b) We stand behind the rabbis of "Piku'ah Nefesh" in their announcement to the public that they regard the "uprooting of Jews from their land" as a betrayal of the Jewish people. We ask the Attorney-General to add us to the list of those to be interrogated.

(c) We call upon all those loyal to Eretz Israel to mobilize on behalf of the settlements. We, for our part, have prepared the means for sending out the alert, transportation, and the method for bringing people.

(d) the upcoming activities are: a demonstration, under the slogan: "Olmert Is Dividing Jerusalem" on Sunday, December 14, at 7 p.m. opposite the Jerusalem Theater, against Minister of Communications Olmert who is to speak there. There will also be a demonstration against the Prime Minister on December 12 in Herzliyah during the time of the speech in which he is to announce his intent to hand over the heart of the land to the enemy. Details will be forthcoming in the coming days.

We conclude with the words of Simon the Hasmonean (I Maccabees 15:33-35): "We have not taken other people's land, nor are we in possession of other people's property, but of the inheritance of our forefathers; it was wrongfully held by our enemies at one time, but we, grasping the opportunity, hold firmly the inheritance of our forefathers."

Nadia Matar is Co-Chairperson of Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

Posted by Leo Rennert, December 13, 2003.
The latest issue (Dec. 15) of the New Yorker has a long article that purports to be a profile of Elliott Abrams, who has the Mideast portfolio on the staff of the National Security Council. In the process of attempting to show his evolution from hard-line neocon to supposed soft-line neocon, it tries to sketch an insiders' view of the Bush administration's diplomacy with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The BAD NEWS is that the piece is riddled with anti-Israel bias - the harsh occupation, the intransigence of Sharon, Bush's failure to be more involved, etc. It cites various present and past players, including Martin Indyk, who still hasn't reconciled himself that he's no longer assistant secretary of state and, of course, is convinced he could do a better job than Bush and Powell.

The GOOD NEWS is in the last four paragraphs when the reporter finally gets the inside lowdown from an "administration official." My guess is that this official is probably Abrams himself. Condi Rice could be another candidate, but it's supposed to be a "he." Anway, this official sweeps away all the previous stuff in the article with a simple declaration that Bush remains committed to the road map, once the Palestinians finally get their act together. And the article concludes with this very critically revealing paragraph:

"The official emphasized that he doesn't make policy himself but merely carries out the President's instruction. 'We HAVE a policy,' he said. 'It was elucidated on June 24th (2002) and at various times since. Our view is that the June 24th (Bush) speech is the BIBLE. ALL THE REST IS COMMENTARY" (emphasis added).

Notice that he didn't say that the road map is the Bible, but instead gave primacy to the June 24th speech, which demanded an Arafat-less, democratic, reformed Palestinian leadership ready to end terrorism as the sine qua non to move ahead with the peace process. As some of us have suspected all along, unlike Kofi Annan and the Europeans, Bush doesn't regard the road map as the absolute essential centerpiece of his diplomacy. Instead, it's the June 24th speech that remains his lode star and everything else is subordinate to it.

Posted by Israela Goldstein, December 13, 2003.
In the past week you will have noticed that the EU, despite evidence that the money they have given to date to the Palestinian Authority cannot be accounted for and has been misappropriated, has voted to give another large sum to them The Americans and the British government are planning to do the same. This is an article by one of the top experts on this topic. Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of "Funding Evil; How Terrorism is Financed - and How to Stop It" (2003), is director of the New York-based American Center for Democracy. This article appeared in the Washington Times, December 12, 2003 (http://www.washingtontimes.com).

This week, the International donor community has been gathered in Rome to approve another contribution of $1.2 billion to the Palestinian Authority for the 2004 budget. The United States, Japan, the European Union and Norway, are the biggest contributors, joined by the Arab League countries and the International Monetary Fund. In the meantime, the World Bank last week granted it $15 million, and the European Union gave $40 million more in assistance to the PA for "reforms and emergency economic aid." But giving any money to the PA before it fully accounts for the more than $6 billion already has received in aid since 1993 could facilitate the ongoing PA terror activities.

In news reports from Saudi Arabia, the chief of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the West Bank, Zekariya Zubeidi, stated that, "the Brigades are backed by Palestinian President Yasser Arafat's Fatah and the faction stipend is a welcome supplement to police wages."

And the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades is not the only terror organization backed by Mr. Arafat. Oman Mansur al-Hadiri, a Hamas operative who took part in preparations for the Passover homicide bombing at the Park Hotel in Netanya in March 2002, was killed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) prior to the bombing. In a condolence telegram signed by Yasser Arafat to his family, Mr. Arafat wrote: "Among the [religious Muslim] believers, there are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah: some of them [have already fulfilled their vows and] found their death [in battle]; and some still wait [their turn]. However, they have not in any way broken [their vows]. [Surah 33 (al-Ahxab), Verse 23]."

Mr. Arafat signed this telegram as: "President of the State of Palestine; chairman of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization; head of the Palestine National Authority." This document was found by the IDF at the al-Ihsan Charitable Society in Tulkarm, which fronts for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Mr. Arafat's use of religious Islamic terminology is not limited to this letter. He often uses religious verses in his speeches and broadcast interviews to publicly praise and encourage homicide bombers. Similar verses of the Koran can be found on posters glorifying the shaheeds (homicide bombers), in supermarkets, public spaces, schools and on television programs.

Despite this evidence and thousands of Palestinian documents captured by the IDF, demonstrating Mr. Arafat's and the PA's complicity in funding and encouraging terrorist attacks against Israel that continue to be provided to the U.S., the European Union, the United Nations and other international organizations, the money keeps pouring into the PA coffers. On Sept. 20, 2001, President Bush declared: "The only way to defeat terrorism... is to stop it, eliminate it, and destroy it where it grows... Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done." But not even the killing of U.S. citizens while attacking Israeli civilians, is enough to bring those responsible to justice - first and foremost their leader, Yasser Arafat. And he, unlike Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, is not hiding.

Moreover, instead of stopping the funds to the terror enterprise created and still run by Mr. Arafat, the international donor community, led by the Europeans, keeps filling the PA war chest with billions of dollars. There is ample evidence that since 1993, Mr. Arafat and the PA have continued to abuse the billion granted to them on behalf of the Palestinian people, and that some of this money was used for the upkeep of their terror agenda and infrastructure.

Before granting any further aid to Mr. Arafat's puppet PA, the international donor community, the U.S. and the EU Parliament should demand full accountability from the PA on how it spent the billion it received in aid, and demand return of the missing funds to the Palestinian people for whom they were intended.

Unless these demands are met, no more aid should be given. If it is granted anyway, and the PA continues funding terrorism, the international donors should be held legally accountable.

Posted by H. Hashmonay, December 13, 2003.

Friends, Could you find a way to stop ARUTZ 1 and the Israel Broadcasting Authority (IBA) in general calling the security fence "separation fence" (gader hafrada)? No hasbara could help when the main government-controlled media speaks in terms used by enemies and some Western World "friends!" And in addition - the IBA websites illustrates the fence with two pictures of... the WALL. Please transmit this request to one of the Ministers without portfolio in the Prime Minister Office. The same office is responsible of the Israel Broadcasting Authority, isn't it?

Posted by Women in Green, December 12, 2003.
A letter has come to our attention which has the germ of an important idea, and we believe should be read by you, digested, and acted upon. If you agree with the contents of this letter, Please send it out to President Bush and to Vice President Cheney. Use, of course, your own name and address in your letter although you can select what pertinent language of this letter you decide to use.

Their respective email, fax and phone numbers are: President Bush: president@whitehouse.gov Fax: (202) 456 2461 Phone: 202 456 6213 Vice-President Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov (202) 456 6212 Phone 202 456 7549

Dear Mr. President and Mr. Vice President,

A little while ago your administration (which I've been a strong supporter of) withheld close to $300 millions from the loan guaranties provided to Israel based on their continuous development of the so-called settlements in the disputed territories. Taking into account that you are often criticized for the lack of "evenhandedness" in the Arab-Israeli conflict I would like to suggest that a corrective action is in order. Would you consider withholding some amount from the money our government provides to the Palestinian Authority for every attempted terrorist attack by the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade, which is a faction of the PA and is controlled, directed and financed by it? Even better, what if you withheld let's say a $1,000,000 for every attempted terror attack by the presumed non PA affiliated terror groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others, who PA is suppose to control, and $10,000,000 withheld for every attempted terror attack by the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade? If you feel comfortable and just withholding the money from Israelis because they are building houses where you think they shouldn't, surely you must feel more than being fair if you refuse to pay for killing and maiming innocent civilians (Israelis and Americans). I believe this simple action would do a lot of good in minimizing the terrorist activities, showing your moral stand and "evenhandedness", as well as strengthening the hand of Palestinians who really would like to live in piece with Israel.


Michael K.(from Redwood City, CA 94065)

Posted by Eliezar Edwards, December 12, 2003.
I've come across two articles recently that tell us about the effect of Wahhabism on Ethiopia. Both were also reprinted on the MEMRI website. The first is " Against the Saudization of Somalia" and describes some of the detrimental effects of Wahhabism on Somalia. It was written by Bashir Goth a Somali Muslim journalist, and appeared November 21, 2003 in the Addis Tribune. It can be read in full at Addis Tribune (Ethiopia), November 21, 2003 (www.addistribune.com/Archives/2003/11/21-11-03/Against.htm). These are some of his remarks:
"It is a pity... to see that, at a time when Saudi Arabia, the home of Wahhabism, is reassessing the damage that Wahhabism and extremism had done to their country's name and to the reputation of Islam all over the world... that Wahhabism has to find a save-haven in our country."

"Wahhabism, is the only school that compels its followers strictly to observe Islamic rituals, such as the five prayers, under pain of flogging, and for the enforcement of public morals to a degree unprecedented in the history of Islam"

"The most conspicuous foot soldiers of Wahhabism are the moral police known as Mutawi'un, who roam in the streets like riot police and force people to perform rituals or adhere to Wahhabism's code of decency in dressing and other mannerisms. [This] religious police... forced a group of schoolgirls to their deaths by forcing them to go back to an inferno that had been their school. Their crime? Forgetting the head coverings in their haste to save themselves"

"These fanatics are on a mission to eliminate co-education schools, shroud young girls and deprive them of their healthy childhood social interaction with boys. They want to bury them alive and teach them from an early age that the female body is an eyesore to public decency"

This second article was written by Alem-Zelalem and appeared in Ethiomedia.com September 26, 2003. It's called "Saudi Arabia and the Threat to Ethiopia's National Security." It's at http://ethiomedia.com/press/Wahhabism_threat_to_ethiopia.html These are some quotes from the article.

"This destabilizing factor, which, next to oil, has become the major export item of Saudi Arabia - is called Wahhabism."

"As the whole world knows, Saudi Arabia is a fundamentalist state. The type of Islam that it preaches and practices is not Sunni Islam that we have lived with for centuries in Ethiopia, and that has become an integral part of our culture and history, but Wahhabism - a terrorist and violent form of Islam, that is responsible for the slaughter of thousands of innocent lives throughout the world."

"... madrassas are brain washing sessions and jihad factories nurturing potential bin Ladens, where students are taught not to live under "infidels", and to hate Christians and Jews as a matter of religious duty. All the Saudi financed Mullahs - the directors of the madrassas - are anti-American, anti-Christian and anti-Jewish."

"After the madrassas, innocent Ethiopian kids are taken to various countries in the Middle East for military training, and then return home to participate in the meticulously planned and widely coordinated jihad. So far, some 5,000 have already been trained."

"The Saudis claim that Wahabism is a religion of peace and tolerance. But the truth is, what they say is a ridiculous fiction that is not borne by facts. The history of Wahabism has been a history of jihad, plunder, conquest, intolerance and violence."

"Saudi Arabia wants a free ride. It takes advantage of opportunities offered by liberal democratic societies to spread its poisonous Wahabism in the USA, Europe, Africa, and elsewhere by building mosques. Yet, American, European, and African missionaries will not be permitted to build churches in Saudi Arabia."

What makes me nervous is that right here in America, the Saudis are doing the same thing - building madrassas and teaching the Muslim kids to despise Christians and Jews. Have they started bringing them to Cairo yet for propaganda training and then all over the Middle East for military training?

Posted by Voice of Judea, December 12, 2003.
News Item.

Hamas was the big winner in West Bank student government elections after a campaign touting terrorist attacks. In voting at Bir Zeit University in Ramallah, Hamas took 25 out of 51 seats; Fatah won 20. In previous elections, Hamas earned a two-seat margin over Fatah, the party of Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat. During the campaign, Fatah blew up models of Jewish settlements, and Hamas blew up models of Israeli buses. At one debate, a Hamas candidate bragged about the number of "Zionists" killed by Hamas activists at Bir Zeit; his opponent boasted that Fatah had killed its share of Jews as well. Candidates said issues at the school were barely touched on in the campaign because the main issue is Israel's occupation of the West Bank. (JTA)

Voice of Judea Commentary.

Once again we see how Arabs, when given a democratic choice, always favor the same kind of violent, Nazi-like forces that brag about their daily murder of Jews. The west constantly pushes Israel to make "gestures" in order to democratize the Arabs, as if that would do any good. In a completely open, fully democratic election, who does Mr. Bush think the Arabs would elect? Possibly not Arafat's Fatah, maybe Hamas, or Islamic Jihad. The election and its outcome would be totally dependant on who could kill the most Jews and effectively convince the public that it is they who hate the Jews the most. This is the people with whom we are dealing. They don't argue over whether to end the war (for good) and have peaceful relations with Israel or not, they merely debate which is more effective, bombing settlements or buses. If there was any doubt in anyone's mind about the character of the "Palestinian" people, it should be gone now. This is a sick, demented people, in the mold of Nazi Germany, which must, like Nazi Germany, be defeated utterly. Any people that is split between terrorist groups like Hamas and Fatah is clearly bent on evil.

The website address of Voice of Judea is http://www.voiceofjudea.net

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, December 12, 2003.
Israelis have been told that there's nobody to talk to on the other side. Henry Siegman of the Council on Foreign relations asserts that the Geneva Plan disproves that notion (James D. Besser, Jewish Week, 12/5, p.34).

There's a difference between talking and making peace. Arabs talk to Israelis in order not to make peace. Analysis of the Geneva Plan indicates that it is more of the same dissembling.

The Israelis who talk with the Arabs are particularly naive. They are counter-productive. Mr. Siegman is not naive. He simply is anti-Zionist. He long has favored radical Israeli concessions to the Arabs, while posing as a friend of Israel and a seeker of peace.

Posted by Tamar Rush, December 12, 2003.
I admit it, I am a stubborn Sabrit who believes it her birthright to ignore the politically correct niceties of the Diaspora.

Subtlety and tactfulness are qualities that were rejected by Israeli journalists and commentators for pragmatic reasons, long ago. Academic papers written in a careful, pedantic, manner, appeal to a handful of donnish "Academics" - while prose has the ability to reach into the hearts and souls of the common-man.

Asher Ginsberg, one of the "Fathers" of Modern "Spiritual" Zionism took the name "Ahad Ha'am" or "One of the People" as a gesture of solidarity with the entire Jewish Nation, not just the Jewish intellectuals who, at the time, were quietly discussing the practical considerations of re-establishing a Jewish State in Eretz Israel. Israelis have taken the term "Ahad Ha'am" to heart, and while we still have a few genteel academics whispering to each other in polite language, we realise that to communicate with the widest possible audience we must employ the rather blunt and unreserved vernacular of "One of the People".

I was pleased to find one of our finest minds, former Education Minister Amnon Rubinstein has dropped all academic pretence for his article in Ha'Aretz today October 11, 2003. Mr. Rubinstein's comments on the "New Anti-Semitism" controversy will be regarded as uncharacteristically blunt and offensive to those who would believe that our country must bow to every whim of the "International Community" and it's myriad of agencies and organisations, but his essay reflects the true feelings of the Israeli people. We do not need the favours of strangers.

In writing recent articles on anti-Semitism, I felt as if I were forced to swim through a river of filth: the new blood libels in the Egyptian, Saudi and Syrian press; "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," coming back to life again and again; the final scene of the Egyptian television series "Horseman Without a Horse," which calls for the murder of Jews (but not babies); old-time anti-Semitic writings reappearing under the new guise of anti-Zionism; hysterically irrational articles against Israel, such as the report in the Spanish newspaper El Mundo, under the headline "Israel against the Palestinians - three years of walls of shame," that Israeli soldiers carved a Star of David on an Arab's arms, or the reports in the Spanish-language El Pais of an Arab girl who "died of fear" because of the Israel Defense Forces and of an Arab "activist," as it calls him, who killed a nameless Jewish baby near Hebron; newspapers that totally ignore Palestinian terror as the reason for the construction of the fence; an exhibition in Athens devoted to female Palestinian suicide bombers, exhibiting an explosive belt made of macrame.

While having to deal with this filth, I asked myself: How did this happen? How did it happen that the hatred for Jews - the oldest and longest-lived hatred in the world - has remained unchanged? How is it that there is such a great similarity between what the Roman Emperor Julian said about the Jews two thousand years ago ("a cruel and arrogant people") and what De Gaulle said 40 years ago and Mikis Theodorakis just four weeks ago? Is there something about us, as author A.B Yehoshua has said, that drives other people mad?

After all, Zionism arose in order to do away with all that - to provide the Jews with a safe asylum in Zion as well as to enable them to live in dignity throughout the Diaspora. And now we are seeing just the opposite happening, and we are once forced to grasp at the consolation that Ahad Ha'am drew from the blood libels at the end of the 19th century - that by their very spuriousness, they counter the suspicion that there could be anything to the accusations against the Jews. When I read the groundless accusations about Israeli society in the Belgian Le Soir, I took consolation in Ahad Ha'am, but I was unable to find the consolation that Zionism had put an end to this kind of hatred.

True, a different policy in the territories would mitigate the hostility, but who is gullible enough to believe that it would completely eradicate it?

I was, however, able to find one small comfort. About a year ago, when attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions in Britain surged, when the mendacious propaganda regarding the so-called Jenin massacre caused a number of British newspapers to come out with groundless attacks on Israel, a delegation of Jewish leaders, among them some of England's leading Jewish judges, met with Prime Minister Tony Blair in order to persuade him to quell the spread of the wave of anti-Semitism. It was a delegation in the best tradition of the Diaspora Jewish community from pre-Emancipation times. At least in Israel, we are spared delegations of that stripe.

It is true that Zionism sought to save the Jews from the great evils that befell them in the Diaspora - and in that, in the creation of a world "without evils," it did not succeed. But at least for the Jews in Israel, it managed to create a life "without favors."

This article was posted on Internet Hagana, whose website address is: http://haganah.org.il/iarchives/001035.html#001035 The website maintains a database of terrorist-affiliated websites.

Posted by National Unity Coalition for Israel, December 11, 2003.
"Palestine" is not being restored - it is being invented

Five US Senators have sponsored a Senate resolution, S.Res. 276, praising the Geneva Initiative, "Whereas despite mutual mistrust, anger, and pain, courageous and credible Israelis and Palestinians have come together in a private capacity to develop serious model peace initiatives, like the People's Voice Initiative, One Voice, and the Geneva Accord." Grassroots Americans must let these Senators know that American public opinion does not support this resolutiion.

Add your voice to the growing out-cry against the much-ballyhooed Geneva Initiative: an unsanctioned, unauthorized, and unofficial "agreement" that reflects the same bias as the Oslo Accord - only it calls for more Israeli concessions. Your message will be sent to key US and Israeli govermental officials. You may edit the message as you see fit. Please also use your internet browser to copy and paste in the following links to the Senators themselves:

  1. Use Feinstein to contact Senator Feinstein.
  2. Use Lautenberg to contact Senator Lautenberg.
  3. Use Nelson to contact Senator Nelson.
  4. Use Leahy to contact Senator Leahy.
  5. Use Chafee to contact Senator Chaffee.

Here is the suggested message:

Dear Senators Feinstein, Lautenberg, Nelson, Leahy, and Chafee,

I oppose S.Res. 276 promoting the Geneva Initiative. It ignores the basic underlying Arab/Israeli problems, which are

1. the denial by the entire Arab world of Israel's right to exist as a free and sovereign nation, and

2. the contrived arguments designed to discredit the only democratic government in the Middle East.

The Middle East conflict is not about Jewish settlers in "Palestinian" occupied territory or the need to adopt one false peace plan over another.

It is about the Arab world denying the right of Israel to exist. It is about Arabs conspiring to take over and devour the Jewish homeland.

From the unmitigated disaster of the Oslo Accords, to the folly of the Quartet's "Road Map," to the unsanctioned Geneva Initiative, any plan that strives to create an official "Palestinian" state given today's reality would be doomed to become a 23rd Arab undemocratic despotic terrorist entity.

The only answer is for the UN to dismantle Arab refugee camps and for the 22 Arab countries to absorb their own people by accepting them as citizens.

Senators, please stand with us. We care about the sanctity and security of Israel. Promoting "Palestinian" statehood at a time of unprecedented Islamic terrorism only serves to officially recognize and reward such terrorism.

The National Unity Coalition for Israel was founded in 1991, we are the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel.

Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!

Our website address is http://www.israelunitycoaltion.com. Email us at voicesunited@israelunitycoalition.com

Posted by Women In Green, December 11, 2003.
Ariel Sharon said in an Op-Ed article in the Jerusalem Post of September 3, 1993, entitled: "You Can't Dance With a Murderer":

"... By recognizing this murderer's organization, the PLO, the government has committed an act of madness. By reviving Israel's greatest enemy on the eve of its disintegration and turning it into Israel's shield against Hamas, the government has added crime to folly... There can be no reconciliation, historic or otherwise, with the man who ordered the murders of schoolchildren in Avivim, Ma'alot and Antwerp, of 11 Jewish athletes in Munich..."

The Archives of the Jerusalem Post have proven to be an incredible treasure trove. I'm going to give you some interesting examples of what Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said in the past, before he was the Prime Minister of Israel.

The following is an excerpt from an Op-Ed article in the Jerusalem Post of August 18, 1995, entitled "Amazing Role Reversal":

"The State of Israel has always felt committed to the defense of Jews wherever they may be. Accordingly, Israel has acted to defend Jews in Europe, Latin America, North America, the CIS, everywhere.

"In my childhood, during the pre-state era, our parents volunteered to guard settlements whose security was more precarious than that of our moshav. Volunteers continued guarding vulnerable settlements even after the creation of the state.

"...True the IDF hasn't yet withdrawn. But this can change within a short time; and we must prepare for it, in case these communities are abandoned by the government.

"... And if not the governments, the opposition should be helping to organize the volunteering. Surely the opposition must know that the Jewish towns and villages in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the last line of defense before the armistice lines of 1949.

"To help the Jewish residents across the Green Line doesn't mean forming an underground or an armed militia. It means defending and preserving life. Nothing could be more legal, moral, honorable or right."

And, finally, these are excerpts from an Op-Ed article in the Jerusalem Post of November 17, 1995, written about two weeks after Rabin was assassinated, entitled "Pain Must not Obscure Judgment."

"The Judean mountains and the Samarian hills haven't become any lower in the wake of Yitzhak Rabin' tragic death. They retain a commanding position over most of the Jewish population, two thirds of it, living on the strip of land along the coast.

"Half of the Jewish population is still within a 30-40 km radius of Tel-Aviv, occupying an area the whole of which is overlooked by the Samarian hills.

"Airplanes loaded to overflowing with passengers which land at Ben Gurion Airport from the east, as often happens, fly low for miles over the Samarian hills. They would make an easy target for shoulder-carried land-to-air missiles of the kind possessed by the Arab terror organizations.

"The settlers aren't 'a cancer in the body politic,' as the left has called them. Their settlements were set up by every government of Israel. They are citizens and taxpayers; they all serve in the IDF; some serve in the most elite combat units defending the communities of the north and the Negev.

"The government is not doing anyone a favor by protecting Israeli citizens, wherever they live. That is their duty."

"Pain Must not Obscure Judgment" is an interesting title for Sharon's Op-Ed article. What has happened in the eight years since he wrote these words, which has made him change his beliefs and his opinions so radically? What pain has obscured his judgment to the point of declaring on November 21st, 2003 that within six months, the government may move to uproot Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, as part of a package of UNILATERAL Israeli steps in the territories?

If this happens, Yasser Arafat would at last see his dream come true, as a government of the state of Israel does what Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad could not: force Jews out of their ancestral Homeland! The forcible expulsion of Jews from their homes would constitute an unabashed assault on the fundamental principles of Zionism. It will be the betrayal of two millennia of Jewish hope and yearning, and a victory for our enemies.

The Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza purchased land, built houses, planted gardens, and opened businesses with the full backing of successive Israeli governments, Labor and Likud alike. By what right does a government, any government, assert for itself the power to eject hundreds, or perhaps thousands of citizens from their homes?

What does Sharon mean by UNILATERAL ISRAELI STEPS? What Sharon means is that if he is unable to restart negotiations with the new Palestinian premier, Abu Allah (the third in a series of Abus) Israel would carry out a series of unilateral moves, essentially giving up territory and giving nothing in return.

Sharon is virtually telling the Palestinian Arabs: you had better talk with us to get what you want, or else we will just have to give it to you anyway. With regard to this diplomatic plan, Sharon told his cabinet "It is clear that in the end we will not be sitting in all the locations where we're now situated."

Quite a reversal from what Ariel Sharon used to say BEFORE he became Prime Minister!

Even though Olmert's father, Mordechai Olmert, was a fighter in the Jewish Underground before the establishment of the state, I am less surprised at Ehud Olmert turning his back on his Zionist upbringing than at Sharon's complete turnaround.

Firstly, Olmert owes his present position completely to Prime Minister Sharon. Olmert was not at all popular within the Likud party, where his position on the Knesset list was a low number 33 out of 40. Sharon invited him to be his campaign manager in the 2003 election. Olmert's reward for a successful campaign was to be appointed Deputy Prime Minister and being given the ministries of Industry, Trade, Labor and Communication. Because of the many departments he now heads, some of Olmert's detractors call him "Ministers Olmert!"

Three days ago, there was an interesting article in the Jerusalem Post about Ehud Olmert entitled "A history of Olmert's zigzagging."

The following is a quote from this article:

"Olmert has made countless controversial statements and taken many surprising steps that straddled the border between Right and Left. He has managed to meander back and forth in his political leanings and ideological orientation. In the 1970s, Olmert gained fame for joining then-Labor MK Yossi Sarid in a crusade against organized crime, implicating future minister Rehavam Ze'evi in the process. Olmert gained many enemies in the Likud when he joined efforts to try to unseat legendary leader Menachem Begin."

The first recent Olmert bombshell: Ehud Olmert, on November 28, as Minister of Industry, Trade and Labor, caved in to the European Union, and agreed to their request to label products made in Israel with their city of manufacture. The European Union can now refuse to grant custom benefits to Israeli products manufactured in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. The effect on the producers in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip will be the loss of their livelihood. Then comes Olmert's second bombshell. In an interview he gave to Nahum Barnea of Yediot Ahronot, on the 5th of December, he called for a UNILATERAL withdrawal from most of the territories, including neighborhoods on the outskirts of Jerusalem. This is the man who always spoke of the importance of an undivided Jerusalem.

Olmert has positioned himself squarely on the left of the Likud. He is not only a very close friend of Shinui chairman, Minister Yosef (Tommy) Lapid, but long time friends with Labor chairman Shimon Peres, whose 80th birthday mega-party he coordinated.

What prompted Olmert to make his radical proposal? According to Olmert, he feels that UNILATERAL steps are necessary, because Israel is rapidly approaching the point where Arabs will outnumber Jews.

As always, the beloved boogieman of the Left is the DEMOGRAPHIC SCARE. The Left tries to scare the rest of us with the threat that soon there will be more Arabs than Jews in Israel, and then we won't have a Jewish democratic state.

This is a deliberate campaign to frighten and mislead the public. In the "good old days" when Sharon still held strongly Zionist opinions, he said the following in a September 29, 1995 Op-Ed article in the Jerusalem Post, entitled: "Sick Joy of Retreat."

"I felt pain after the agreement [Oslo 2] was signed this week; pain caused not merely by the government's mistaken, irresponsible decisions, but chiefly by its ministers' devilish joy at the "defeat" of their foes - the settlers. A very premature joy, I believe... Arafat's Israeli advocates claim there is no other way. They don't want a binational state, they don't want to rule over another people, they say.

"What do they really mean? Are they planning a divided Jerusalem? After all, about 150,000 Arabs live in the city. Do they intend to "transfer" 850,000 Israeli Arabs?

"We have never proposed granting Israeli citizenship to the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria: all have Jordanian passports. And there are other peaceful, acceptable solutions to the threat of binationalism.

"Neither the Israel of the Left nor that of the National Camp has the right to concede Hebron, Rachel's Tomb, Shilo, Beit El and Joseph's Tomb. Certainly no government has the right to give up the Temple Mount.

"Governments come and go and so do generations: it is our great privilege to hold these sacred possessions in trust for future generations. We have no right to transfer them to alien hands."


More than most, former General Ariel Sharon realizes that before going into battle, it is essential to know from where the troops will be fired upon. Olmert's statements about unilateral concessions was a trial balloon par excellence!

If Sharon wants to know where the fire is going to come from and how intense it is going to be, let me quote Pinhas Wallerstein, Binyamin Regional Council Head: "The decision to dismantle populated settlements is unacceptable. We will end up with direct confrontation and, if need be, there will be a war," he told army radio.

What about President George W. Bush, urged by Colin Powell and the US State Department, by the Saudis, and by the European Union, to pressure Ariel Sharon to make concessions?

I am sure there is such pressure! And continual and strong pressure at that! But in the years from Israel's rebirth in 1948 until 1992, Israeli Prime Ministers often had to defy very heavy U.S. pressure, for example:

1948/9: U.S. pressure on Ben Gurion with threats of economic sanctions to refrain from declaration of independence.

1967: The U.S., the U.S.S.R. and the UN pressured Levi Eshkol to refrain from a pre-emptive strike and from reuniting Jerusalem.

1981: The U.S., U.S.S.R., Europe and the UN threatened Begin with military and economic sanctions, lest he bomb Iraq's nuclear reactor.

Previous Prime Ministers were able to successfully withstand incredibly strong pressure of the U.S. Go for it Arik, like in the old times. The world and the US are more likely to respect a "NON-PUNCHING BAG ISRAEL." And as you said yourself way back in 1993: "You Can't Dance with a Murderer."

Dear Friends: What could we do? It would be most effective if you forwarded this message to your friends, President George W. Bush president@whitehouse.gov, and Vice President Cheney vice.president@whitehouse.gov. To get the email addresses of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and your Senators and Congressman, call the Capitol Hill Switchboard at (202)456-6212 or (202)224-3121. They will even tell you who the Congressman of your District is, or transfer you to his office.

A strong, democratic, undivided Israel, as promised to the Jews according to the Judeo-Christian tradition, is not only in Israel's interest, but in America's interest as well.

The website address for Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green) is http://www.womeningreen.org

Posted by David Frankfurter, December 11, 2003.
This article gives a great deal of food for thought. I wonder what might be the fate of the Jews in cities such as Ariel and Efrat, should the Geneva Accord vision of these towns being under Palestinian Authority control come to fruition. I also wonder about the fate of Jewish and Christian communities if moderate Islam (such as that presented by the Palestinian Authority) became a democratic majority elsewhere.

Israel My Beloved (IMB) is an association of Christian Zionists. The article is from the IMB website: http://www.israelmybeloved.com

The spiritual and historical connection of Christian communities with the Holy Land is well documented. Possibly surprisingly, despite the current heated environment, some are sensing a revival in their fortunes.

The Christian communities in the Holy Land can be divided into two main groups, those living in the State of Israel, and those living under the control of the Palestinian Authority. United by a common history and religion, the conditions under which these two groups currently live is vastly different.

Christians in Israel have a well-established history of participation in the development of a pluralistic society. They enjoy the same rights common to all of the population, such as freedom of worship, movement, legal protection from persecution, equal opportunities to jobs, and religious autonomy.

Israel's Christian population is generally middle class and highly educated. Most own their homes, comparable to all sectors of the Israeli population, and are employed in a wide variety of professions ranging from academic and entrepreneurial to technical and judicial. Approximately half are high-school graduates. And the recently-accredited Mar Elias University is the first Christian university to open in the Middle East for decades. Located in the Galilee, one of the University's missions is to provide "an innovative model of academic excellence and research combined with pluralistic living, in which acknowledgement and respect for difference builds upon the resources and richness of diversity".

Israel's Ministry of Religious Affairs is responsible for meeting the ritual needs of the Christian communities. The Ministry's Department for Christian Communities offers a liaison to turn to for problems and requests. The Ministry also serves as a neutral arbitrator in ensuring the preservation of the established status quo in those holy places where more than one Christian community has rights and privileges. According to Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics, 137,000 people, or just over two percent, are Christian. The majority is affiliated with the Greek Catholic (42 percent), Greek Orthodox (32 percent) and Roman Catholic (16 percent) churches. Nazareth is Israel's largest Christian city, with Christians comprising one-third of the city's population. Christian communities are also concentrated in Haifa, Jerusalem, Shfaram, Tel Aviv-Jaffa, and a number of Christian-majority villages in the Galilee.

Pope John Paul II's 5-day visit to Israel in March 2000 marked a joyous and historic milestone for Israel's Christian communities. The Pope celebrated an open air mass attended by over 100,000 and was warmly received by Israel's Prime Minster, President, Jewish and Muslim religious leaders. The first visit by a Papal Pontiff for over three decades, it was seen as a major lift for the Christian family as a whole in the country.

Tragically, Christians living in Israel have also fallen victim to horrific terrorist attacks. In the October 5, 2003 suicide bombing of the Christian-Jewish co-owned Maxim's restaurant in Haifa, at least seven of the 21 people murdered in the attack were Christians. Four were members of the Matar family, co-owners of the establishment. And this was a not an isolated case. In March 2003, a suicide bomber blew himself up on a No. 37 bus in Haifa, murdering 17, mostly school children. The bus driver, a Christian from Shfaram, was among the injured. In March 2002, a suicide bomber murdered 15 people in Haifa's Matza restaurant, a popular meeting place among the city's Jewish, Christian and Muslim residents.

Despite these incidents and the general atmosphere of conflict during the last few years, the Christian communities continue to thrive. According to Israel's English-language daily, the Jerusalem Post (November 18, 1994), the number of Christians living in Israel has trebled since the re-establishment of the State in 1948. Whether they are praising political actions of the Israeli government or criticizing them, Israel's Christian population continues to experience freedom of speech, religion and movement.

Sadly, the same cannot be said about Christian communities living under Palestinian Authority (PA) rule. Here, they struggle for a place and a voice in a largely Moslem, non-democratic society. While Christians may be found in several Palestinian cities, the majority remains in Bethlehem, Beit Jala and Beit Sahour. These three cities once boasted overwhelmingly Christian majorities. However, many young, well-educated Christians are now choosing to emigrate to the US, Canada, England and Australia, due in part to the shattered economy and on-going violence.

The Christian population of Bethlehem, a town synonymous with Christ and Christianity, has dwindled from over 60% in 1990 to just 20% in 2001. Amazingly, there are now more Beit Jala Christians reportedly living in the small Caribbean nation of Belize than in the entire city of Beit Jala itself.

Christian emigration has grown to such an alarming rate that some local churches have held conferences to find ways to stem the emigration flood. Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation, Catholic Relief Services, the Holy Land Christians Cooperative Society, and other agencies have sponsored programs to encourage Christians to remain in the area.

Some Christians have cast their lot publicly with their Muslim compatriots. Prominent figures, such as Canon Naim Ateek and Archimandrite Atallah Hanna are noted for their support of the Palestinians' resistance, and the latter has come close to promoting the notion of armed struggle. At the same time, these church officials are exploiting the open composition of Israel's society as they export their overt hostility into the diplomatic arena.

Nevertheless, many other worshippers privately they express fears about their future. Christians continue to be suspect in Muslim eyes, and have been subjected to harassment, physical attacks, and property destruction, due in part to Muslim identification of Christianity with the West and Western values.

A particular case in point is the "Talitakoumi" school in Beit Jala, which is financed by the Protestant Church in Berlin. The head of the German Liaison Office to the Palestinian Authority protested against the use of the school for terror activities against Israel.

In an incident about Christmas celebrations in Bethlehem, Israeli Prime Ministerial Spokesperson Ra'anan Gissin stated that "a 10 percent tax ('jizya') was levied on the Christians to help finance the Intifada" (International Christian Embassy web site, December 2002).

It appears that the Israel army has been sensitive to the needs of the Christian population, by lowering the visibility of troops immediately prior to and during the Christian festivities and by allowing secure transport during holidays for Christians from the surrounding areas to holy sites. Conversely, the PA leadership has, over the past several years, politicised the celebrations. Much attention was garnered during the Intifada by its forbidding public Christmas celebrations in Bethlehem, citing 'Palestinian suffering' as the reason and by choosing this sensitive period to turn public attention to Chairman Arafat's confinement in Ramallah.

As the population continues to dwindle in Palestinian areas, the remaining community is becoming an uncertain minority. While Christians living under the PA can praise the actions of the Palestinian leadership, they are unable to openly or vocally criticize the PA for fear of physical or economic harm.

Ultimately, if Christians are to maintain a presence in the Holy Land, the status of Christians in both Israel and the Palestinian Authority will need to be given more attention and the trend towards emigration reversed. What we can see is that if Christians are allowed to practice their faith freely and with full social rights, as in Israel, the community has demonstrated the clear ability to flourish.

Posted by Richard A. Shulman, December 11, 2003.
The distinction between Islamic moderates and extremists is a projection of Western values onto the Muslims. Our adversaries exploit this tendency. Reason with the moderates, and resolve conflicts, the West wants to believe. It was supposed that the West could deal with Egypt, S. Arabia, and the P.A., as supposed moderates, and not with Iran, Syria, Libya, and Hamas, as extremists. The Prime Minister of Malaysia, who raved about Jewish control of the world, and his approving colleagues at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, many of whom are supposed to be moderate, showed themselves extremists, after all.

What is the difference between the two types? The difference is not in their beliefs (and goals), but in their tactics (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2003, Ed.).

What difference in tactics? The purported moderates negotiate for concessions, then fight. The supposed extremists just fight.

Turns out that S. Arabia sponsored Islamism. The P.A. is allied to it and fighting the same jihad and preaching the same hatred. Egypt fights its own terrorists but cooperates with Libya and the P.A..

Posted by Moshe Feiglin, December 11, 2003.
So now we're being brought to trial in the International Court in the Hague, not because of the settlers but because of the separation fence.

The Almighty has a very special sense of humor.

Their original intention was to destroy the settlements in Yesha, which drove them crazy, because they emphasize that the country belongs to us, and we are part of it. In fact, the settlements are restoring Judaism to its proper place in history after the long years of exile made it shrink into a religion outside history.

This frightens them, because this is precisely what they are running away from. They want to be a normal nation, to be the Singapore of the Middle East, without this Jewish burden.

So they hate the settlements and the settlers, because they really hate themselves. It makes no difference if the problem is security, the economy, society, peace, or war - it will always be the settlers' fault. But the funniest thing is their argument that there won't be a Jewish State because of the settlers. They are really so concerned about the Jewish character of the country.

But don't worry - the settlements will flourish. The issue in question is currently that of the separation fence. So how did this state of affairs come about? In fact they want to be rid of the settlers because they want to abandon their Jewish identity.

But anti-Semitism is pursuing them throughout the world, desecrating Jewish cemeteries and synagogues. The UN is always against them and it's no longer very pleasant to take a holiday in Europe. In short, the Gentiles are reminding them forcibly that they are Jews.

They fail to understand what is happening to them. After all, we've built here a suburb of New York, with interchanges and skyscrapers and hi-tech.

So it must really be he fault of the settlers! If we get rid of them, and the territories, we can finally become normal.

But unfortunately the Arabs are diabolically preventing this.

They brought the Arabs here from Tunis, gave them all the territory, even a state of their own, and let them get away with murder (literally). Then the great idea was conceived of using Arafat against the settlers, to take away their land, and kill them (but only them!).

So let's build a wall, with Arafat and the settlers on that side, and the normal people on this side.

An end to occupiers, rulers, a foreign people, Hebron, Shechem. That's it - enough - leave us alone, we've surrendered.

So how come we're now called war criminals? The whole world has accused us of crimes, and is actually saying that we are Jews.

This is like a cartoon film in which the mouse runs away from the cat, closes the door behind it, sighs with relief - and then discovers that it is in the same room as the cat, which is now licking its lips in anticipation.

Reality is now saying to them, together with the Almighty that you have nowhere to run to, away from yourselves.

To see more articles by the author, go to the Manhigut Yehudit website: http://www.manhigut.org

Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, December 11, 2003.
Some call it the separation fence. Some call it the security fence. Some just call it the fence, but the "Palestinians" like calling it a "wall". Truth be told, most of it is metal and wire, like any other fence. But there are parts of it, solid concrete, more than five meters - almost 20 feet - tall. But, more importantly than what it is, is why it is.

Long before Israel - the state, government, and most of the people - wanted to build it, to "separate"; the "Palestinians" had already built a wall between us. Suicide bombings, endless machine-gun attacks on the roads, rocks and Molotov cocktails, car thefts and kidnapping-murders, had long before "separated" us, had shattered the illusion that Israelis and "Palestinians," Jews and Arabs could live together. The fence or wall or however you choose to describe it, is only the outward manifestation of an inner state of mind that had already gripped both peoples.

Arabs had always been a part of Israel. Arabs were part of the newly formed state, after the 1948 War of Independence. Technically part of the enemy population who had just warred against Israel, Arabs that found themselves within the borders of the new State of Israel were related to in contradictory ways. Jews were justifiably suspicious of them, having by-and-large just sided with the invading Arab armies trying to crush the newborn Jewish state. They were under military rule at the beginning and it took some time until they were afforded full citizen rights including the right to vote in the Knesset, Israel's parliament. Yet, the "new Hebrews" or "new Israelis" in the making - Jews distant from their own traditions - had for some time already been romanticizing the Arab, and his connection to the land. The Fellah, the Arab peasant farmer, was an early role model for waves of Labor Zionist youth - during the pre-state period - trying to re-connect their roots into the land , their ancient homeland. But, the Arab was also dangerous. He was wild, untamed and uncultured, very different from these central and eastern European Jewish youths coming to settle the land.

Israeli Arabs were eventually extended the vote, and Israeli Jews thought they, the Arabs, were integrating - i.e. benefiting from Israel's western economy and lifestyles - Israeli Jews also thought they were benefiting from the cultural symbiosis with the Arabs. Jews were seen going to Arab villages to buy traditional crafts, drink some "real" Arabic sweet coffee, and this all could be done on the Sabbath, when stores and restaurants were closed in the Jewish neighborhoods and towns. The Arabs had entered Israel's heart, they had found their "place", or at least, that's what Israeli Jews felt. When the miraculous victory of the 1967 Six-Day War took place, in its aftermath, Israel found itself in charge of more than three-quarters of a million more Arabs. Now Israelis could "educate" and "help" more Arabs and mingle among them, to suck up their primitive "lust" for life. What Joy!

In what probably is history's greatest case of going "native," many Israeli Jews started identifying with the Arabs. Long since educated to reject and revile their own traditions, many secularized Israeli Jews held Arabs, and Arabic culture in high esteem, eventually supporting a growing political independence movement among the "good" Arabs that Israel "oppresses".

Not all Jews, I might add, succumbed to this way of feeling. Those Jews still steeped in their own traditions, filled with love and respect for their own history, when given the opportunity to visit, and then later, to move out to the heartland of Jewish history, where the Bible was born, Judea and Samaria - the West Bank - grabbed the chance. They built cities, towns, and villages. They re-established a connection to all that was holy and pure in their homeland. The heartland that was ripped away from them by the Roman Legions almost 2,000 years before, and denied to them by successive occupation forces, Byzantine, Arab, Crusader, Muslim, Ottoman-Turk, British, Jordanian, had finally returned to them. Jews re-settled every nook and cranny of their ancient homeland, as they tried not to bother the Arab invaders in their midst. They built on empty hilltops, they bought land, they farmed empty fields, and they loved their homeland.

Arabs, who had "settled" into the hearts of Israelis, began causing "heartburn". They began demanding equality, or more. They began demanding political independence. Truthfully, they always had, but just as secularized Israeli Jews over-romanticized what the Arabs were, they over-romanticized how much the Arabs loved and appreciated them, and their western economy and lifestyle, selectively ignoring Arab complaints for decades. Terrorism grew; many Israelis now openly spoke of "separation," "divorce," and the need to start building "the fence". So the Israeli government rolled out maps, plans, and devised schemes to carve up its homeland. The "fence" had begun!

Not all Israeli Jews support the fence. Many on the "wrong side" of the fence feel that their personal safety has been sacrificed. If Hamas or Islamic Jihad can't get to Tel-Aviv or Haifa to bomb, then terrorism in Judea and Samaria will probably go up. Are those Jews there worth any less, than these Jews here? Is their blood any redder in Tel-Aviv?

But more significantly, is the symbolism. A fence, a wall is being created that will separate the "Palestinians" from the Israelis. If a Palestinian state is born, the "wall" will economically choke the newborn, so say the Arabs. It signifies to them the end of "Palestinian" workers coming into Israel to labor. But it will also help to "separate" the Israeli Arabs from their brothers in "Palestine".

Or will it?

Will Israeli Arabs feel disconnected from those in the new state, as they did before 1967?

I doubt it, modern telecommunications technology will see to that. Over 25 years of Israeli control of the areas - until it was handed over to the Palestinian Authority, and 10 years of a "Peace Process" has "Palestinianized" Israeli Arabs beyond recognition. Note, their increasing involvement in terror acts alone, or with "Palestinians" against Israeli Jews. This I believe will only grow.

Two other phenomena I believe will also grow. First, if Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the other terror groups can't access pre-1967 Israel anymore - if the security fence is that good - then their motivation to improve their missile technology will grow exponentially. Remember, that as many times as Israeli politicians point out the "impenetrability" of the Gaza security fence and how it's prevented terror attacks originating from Gaza, they never mention the growth of Kassam missile technology and the increasing vulnerability of Negev towns, on the "right side" of the fence, from Gaza. They've even shot Kassam's at Ashkelon. Although no Kassam's have yet been fired in Judea and Samaria, you can be sure that if kept out by the security fence, they'll start, and Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv will then be within range. Imagine more accurate missiles - eventually with chemical or biological warheads - suicide-bombers will be child's play in comparison. Second, there will be increasing irre dentism - i.e. calls for independence and affiliation with "Palestine" - on the part of Israeli Arabs.

But as I said earlier, not all Jews want the fence, the wall. Almost 200 years ago, a process of "enlightenment," better called secularization and assimilation began within the Jewish people. It spread from western and central Europe eastward, and even crossed the Mediterranean to North Africa. It promoted a more "universal" cultural approach. Many of the early non-religious Zionist leaders promoted it in the developing Jewish state. Many Israeli Jews began to feel alienated from their history and traditions, as earlier pointed out. The "wall" being put up in the heartland of the Jewish people will separate most Israeli Jews from their most holy places and history, the burial place of their forefathers in Hebron and Joseph's Tomb in Shechem -Nablus - for example. Truthfully, many don't care. But, a country that doesn't honor, respect, and care about its past, will have a hard time, convincing its sons and daughters to strive for a future. The Arabs in contrast, have a mythologized false past in this land and - even so - are willing to fight, kill, and sacrifice for it. The Jews need to know why they are in Israel and not in Paris, Morocco, Algiers, New York, or Moscow. The wall in the heart of the Land of Israel will help prevent this from happening.

And what about for those who do care? What about for those Jews who daily sacrifice for their beloved Eretz Yisrael - the Land of Israel - living in Judea and Samaria? They are being cut-off from the rest of the Israeli nation. Put on the "wrong side" of the fence as if to symbolize, they've done something wrong sticking to their traditions and history, in spite of all attempts to take it away.

But, in spite of it all, they have their forefather's graves before them. What other nation can make such a claim, that they know where their founding fathers and mothers are buried? They can walk the places that biblical figures - kings and prophets - walked. They can climb up the same mountains, and down the same valleys. Most Jews on the "wrong side" of the fence know why they are there. They haven't gone "native," they aren't "losing" to the Arabs. Their world isn't shattered because the pipe dream of peace is shattered.

But that "wall," that "wall" hurts!

Posted by Mikimia and Herb Sunshine, December 11, 2003.
What possible relationship could there be between Ehud Olmert, Crown Prince to the throne of Sharon, and Noam Federman, the Jew most arrested since the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane.

Disregard for the moment the fact that Olmert advocates the transfer of Jews from Israel, while the followers of the martyred Rabbi would transfer potential murderers from Holy Land.

When Ehud Omert tells us that Israel cannot be both democratic and Jewish, unless we undemocratically throw Jews out, he is not peddling this nonsense of his own volition. Ehud Olmert has been put in place to attract the fire of any dissenters. Olmert is the lighning rod which will determine for Sharon and the Likud whether it is politcally safe to empty Yesha of its Jews.

It follows that the shameful administrative detention of a Jew from Hebron is another lightning rod, one set up by the Shin Bet. Should the good citizens of Israel placidly accept this outrage, it is virtually certain that selected religious Zionists of Judea and Shomron will share jail cells with Noam Federman. The purpose, of course being to break the spirit of resistance to the Olmert/Sharon little Geneva plan.

Were our leaders not so removed from logic and common sense, they might know that by giving enemy aliens the right to vote, by subsidizing their fertility rate, by "uniting" their families, and by removing Jews and Jewish land from Israel's control, they are the ones endangering the Jewish democratic State of Israel.

Posted by Gil Ronen, December 10, 2003.
This article was also posted yesterday on IsraPundit. (http://israpundit.com)

Way back in 1987, I founded an Israeli action group against police brutality, "Or Adom." MKs Yossi Sarid and Dedi Zucker of Ratz - the precursor of Meretz - provided an old office of theirs for our 24 hour hotline. I turned to what was then a relatively new Israeli-American fund - the New Israel Fund (NIF), to help us out. The NIF gave us $24,000, enabling us to hire a full time worker who answered the phone/hotline during the day, and to print stickers.

We were very effective in creating awareness to the problem of police brutality in Israel. We got great press coverage, especially in the Tel Aviv papers, got the Knesset and top police brass involved, and put the subject on the public agenda. A few years down the line, the police and the Ministry of Justice announced a revolutionary change: a new department - the Department for Investigation of Police Officers (known by its Hebrew acronym, Mahash) - would be created in the Ministry of Justice. From that day until the present, whenever there is suspicion of any kind of wrongdoing by a police officer, it is Mahash that does the investigating, and not the officer's buddies from the nearby station. One giant leap for democracy and civil rights in Israel had been taken, and we had helped bring it about.

I am still very proud of Or Adom and its achievements, and I still believe in most of what I believed in back in 1987, but my priorities have changed somewhat since then. In the days of Or Adom, I was considered left-wing. I am now considered right-wing. So be it. I find myself, again, trying to reform the police. Except this time, what bothers me is its extreme anti-male and anti-family bent, and the way it - along with the press, judicial system and social services - persecutes husbands and fathers. I am trying to create a pro-family and pro-fatherhood lobby in Israel, much like the one that has been forming in the US in the past few years. I see this as part of a general de-feminization and re-masculinization process which is essential if Israel is to regain its healthy militaristic spirit. This is a small part of what needs to be done.

We need to undergo a social and psychological revolution before we can defeat our enemies. In this sense - and only in this sense - the Terror War is a good thing. It is forcing us to abandon our decadent, effete ways and rediscover our virility. It is forcing us to ask ourselves if we, in Israel, are really better off with annual gay pride parades than we were with annual military parades (and whether, perhaps, we can find room for both). The non-religious among us need to re-examine our adherence to the PC rulebook, and think about going back to at least some of the "old style" morality of past generations which had great respect for the Bible, even if they hardly followed any of its commandments. Because of faulty education and over-indoctrination in Israel's early years, "Zionism" has turned into a dirty word in Zion: it's time to give it a new, updated luster.

The kinds of changes we need to undergo require grassroots action. Grassroots action requires funding. Look at the dozens of groups the NIF is funding. Do you think their effect is not felt in our everyday life, in our national priorities, in the media and political mood? If you do, you're wrong.

We need a new fund, for a new type of grassroots activity. We need a fund that will encourage Israeli and foreign filmmakers to make positive documentaries about the Yesha settlers and terror victims. We need a fund that will be used by local leaders to affect the way the media perceives the settlers (by taking young journalists on month-long seminars in Judea and Samaria, for instance) and create modern Bible-study facilities in secular Jewish communities, as part of larger libraries. We need to create online video links between communities in Israel and the US. We need to fund TV and newspaper ads that call the Jewish-Israeli nation to arms. We need to fund legal aid for right-wing activists persecuted by the Left. We need to fund the creation of patriotic weblogs, books and magazines. There are hundreds of ideas that can be made real, if there is funding. We need to start thinking the way the Left does, and unashamedly engage in educating the public, even if it sometimes looks like what we are doing is no more than manipulative social engineering. There is nothing wrong with gentle manipulation if it is to a good end.

I hear that the new fashion among affluent American Jews is to spend exorbitant amounts on Bar and Bat Mitzva celebrations: $25,000, $50,000, and more. That means that there is a lot of money floating in the air that can be put to good use. What is needed is for someone to create a Strong Israel Fund, for pro-Zionist, pro-family, pro-Jewish, pro-military, pro-Yesha organizations and activities. Let's spend a bit less on Bat Mitzvah catering for the next few years, and a bit more on Israel's survival and ultimate victory in the war against the Arab enemy. How about it?

Posted by Isralert, December 10, 2003.
This was written by Tony Blankley, the journalist. It is archived at http://www.townhall.com/columnists/tonyblankley/tb20031210.shtml [Ed.- He makes a better case for Israel than some of Israel's leaders do.]

In a few weeks it will be time to celebrate "Peace on Earth, Goodwill to Men," so I wanted to get this column topic - assessing the Middle East peace process - in print before that theme period starts. Almost every week on television, the other pundits and I are asked to assess the fine points of the latest Mideast peace plan. Inevitably someone on the panel intones that "everybody knows the outlines of a successful peace plan." The remaining pundit panelists nod their heads in quiet, knowing assent. And it's true.

If peace in the Middle East could be decided by American and European experts, we could wrap it all up by Christmas. Unfortunately, it's the Arabs and Jews who have to make peace. And they have never seen a peace plan they both like simultaneously.

Every peace plan is a minor variant on the same theme. The United States "leans" on Israel to give up land, while Israel hopes that the Arabs living on the West Bank and Gaza will say thank you very much, we are now satisfied and will stop killing Jews. Then the two peoples would cheerfully give up their historical, biblical and Koranic claims on Jerusalem, and forget about the Arabs' desire to return to the pre-1967 Israeli lands they were driven from (or left voluntarily, depending on whose history you read) a half century ago.

Then, with a few minor adjustments of various lines of demarcation (and after resolving some pesky water rights issues), we will have two happy peoples living in "viable" states next to each other hugger-mugger, and dropping in for tea on each other like good suburban neighbors.

It is pitiful to see grown, well-educated and presumably worldly experts discussing this fairy tale as if it were remotely plausible in the next several years.

The Middle East Jews and Arabs are ancient peoples with ancient grievances and damnably excellent (if selective) memories. While the Israeli Jews have repeatedly proven their willingness to reach a genuine peace agreement, they can be as stubborn as a Dutchman, or a company of American Marines or any other proud group of humans in refusing to sign their own death warrant by agreeing to a phony deal. And with the recent recrudescence of 1930s-style anti-Semitism across the planet (particularly in bloody old Europe), Israelis are even more motivated to cling to their tiny scrap of a survival redoubt on the edge of the Mediterranean Sea.

While the French ambassador to Britain refers to the filthy (expletive slightly cleaned up) little country of Israel, while American university campuses are banning Israeli cultural events, while the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is once again an international best-seller, while respectable people in the Middle East, and even in Europe, shrug their shoulders at the thought of "again," the Israelis - from peace-loving left to adamantine right - persist in their quaint idea of "Never again."

With the memory of the 1930s-40s still blood red in their minds, we can be sure that the Israelis will not rely on security guarantees from the United Nations, Europe or even the United States (the cut-and-run mentality of President Bush's presidential opponents regarding Iraq remind the Israelis that betrayal may never be more than four years away in the United States).

Nor can one blame the Israelis for not trusting in the good faith of the Arabs in Palestine and elsewhere - particularly now. With the jihadist temperament still in its upsurge, the prevalent - if not dominant - mood amongst the Saracens right at the moment is clearly "On to the Mediterranean."

Under these regrettable conditions, a helpful world might better serve the peoples of the Middle East by encouraging mutual isolation between the Israelis and the Arabs. Instead of browbeating the Jews as they build their fence (or wall, if you prefer), we should encourage it.

Five thousands years of brutal and hate-filled history have ingrained in the Jews a profound sense of the practical. They have learned that well-intentioned bright new ideas or utopian visions tend to lead to more dead Jews. On the other hand, a sensible, well-built wall might result in less dead Jews. That is the beginning of a wise foreign policy for Israel.

Genuine peace will only be possible, if at all, when the jihadist fire has been extinguished in millions of Muslim hearts. To that end, we must persist in our democracy project in Iraq and beyond. It would help that project if we were smarter than we currently seem to be. But it will probably be sufficient if we are persistent.

Perhaps in five or 10 years we will be able to find two genuine peace-seeking negotiating partners. Until then, a sturdy, electronic and gun-bristling wall-fence is probably Israeli's best temporary salvation. If such a wall kept East Berlin Germans in, it might keep West Bank Arabs out.

Tony Blankleywas press secretary to the then Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingirch. He is currently a political columnist at The Washington Times and appears on several TV political talk shows.

Posted by Steven Plaut, December 10, 2003.
Human rights are a strange thing, especially when they fall into the hands of the fundmentalist Left. That is because the Left has its own ideas regarding what constitute human rights. For example, the Left has long argued that humans have an entitlement to have all their basic needs provided for free by the government when people themselves do not feel in the mood to work and earn income to buy them. Then there is the right of convicted murderers and rapists to be kept alive in cushy prisons and not executed, because execution violates their rights. Then there is the human right of gay folks to get "married". And of course we do not want to forget about the right of women to abort a 10 month old fetus. Nor the human right of all ethnic minorities to equal homogeneous representation in absolutely everything. And we sure do not want to forget about the human rights of red squirrels and nice snails!

Leftist deconstruction of human rights gets really mindboggling of course when it comes to the Middle East. Murderers who organize mass atrocities and suicide bombings have the human right to never be targeted for assassination. It goes without saying that the Left's notions of human rights never extend to Jewish civilians, and Jewish children definitely should NOT have the human right to ride buses and go to school without being murdered. The Palestinian have the human right to shell Israeli civilian homes because Israel is an occupier. They also have the right to murder any Jew who steps into lands they claim. The Hizbollah has the human right to shell northern Israel because Israel did not hand over to the Hizbollah a portion of the Golan Heights that the Syrians claim is theirs.

This week, Israel's Arab "human rights" lobby is demanding "national rights for Arabs in Israel" - you guessed it, as a human right. By national rights they essentially mean national independence. In the same way that Taiwan has national rights inside China, I guess. One of the main groups pushing this "human right" agenda is Adallah (www.adalah.org, see further discussion below). Betselem, Israel's human rights watchdog that does not think Jewish civilians have any human rights that should be defended, has big well-funded ads in the press today denouncing Israel building security roads on which Palestinian are prohibited from travelling in the West Bank. The fact that Palestinians murder Jews when they ride on these roads is irrelevant. It would never occur to Betselem to call on Palestinians to stop murdering Jews so that such security roads closed to Palestinians would not be needed.

The best known Israeli leftist "human rights groups" are precisely the same ones who have never agreed that Jews have a human right to defend themselves or their children or their country. They have never really acknowledged Jews having any human rights at all. When they say human rights, it is nothing more than a code word for endorsing the Arab fascist agenda. They have never had much interest in abuses of the human rights of Arabs by Arab regimes nor by the PLO's Reichlet. Among the worst leftist extremist anti-Jewish groups dressing themselves up as "human rights watchdogs" are Betselem, which has never met a terrorist it thinks should be condemned or prosecuted, Checkpoint Watch, devoted to forcing Israel to remove all its security checkpoints so that it will be so much easier for Palestinian suicide bombers to mass murder Jews, and the above-mentioned Adallah, an "Arab human rights" group that is little more than a front group for the PLO.

It being international human rights day and all, the Likud is desperately trying to show how eager it is to merge with Yossi Beilin and the Meretz Marxists.

Think I am joshing you? Yesterday one of the senior Likud Knesset Members, Michael Eitan, a guy once considered a serious contender for party leadership and incorrectly thought (by me) to be a man of principle, proposed in the parliament that Israel's Knesset will now set up a "parliamentary committee" on human rights, whose soul purpose will be to assist the far-leftist anti-Jewish "human rights groups" around to lobby for their agenda in the country. And the three specific "human rights groups" mentioned in the Likud proposal are Betselem, Checkpoint Watch, and Adallah. Apparently the association for the human rights of al-Qaida and the Union for Pension Rights for Gestapo Officers will not necessarily be put in touch with committee members.

Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, December 10, 2003.
The United States government is violating a group of US citizens' civil rights and it has to stop. They want to throw a whole ethnic group out of their homes, and restrict where they can or can't live. Sounds racist doesn't it? The White House, State Department and other agencies, right under the noses of us all, without a peep by us, are pursuing a deliberate policy of ethnic/religious 'cleansing'. They haven't started for real yet, but the plans are in the making. Who could possibly stand for this discriminatory behavior on the part of the American government against its own citizens in the year 2003? A class action suit demanding an injunction to stop these law-breaking plans needs to be filed in the courts.

No, I'm not talking about African-Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders or some small, exotic, unknown tribe from who knows where. I'm talking about a group estimated to encompass at least 8-30,000 people, whose members are known to all Americans. I'm talking about a group who's been persecuted and discriminated against throughout written history. It's a group who thought they found refuge in the US, and became good, law abiding citizens, only now to find themselves being treated differently than other American citizens. Their homes are in jeopardy, their livelihoods are threatened, and their way of life is under siege. We must demand that the US government cease and desist in this discriminatory behavior. We must demand that the government put an end to violating their civil rights and sue for redress in the courts if necessary.

I'm talking about discrimination against American Jews, who once again are being told where they may or may not live, this time by the American government.

In the darkest days of Czarist Russia, Jews were told where they couldn't live. They were restricted to the "Pale of Settlement", to the west of Moscow and Petersburg. Most European cities until modern times segregated Jews into "ghettos". Earlier in European history they were thrown out of county after country, in the most brutal way. Muslim society in North Africa and the Middle East was no better, introducing the equivalent of the Yellow Star - distinctive clothing - by Islamic Dhimmi law, from the 7th century onward and restricting Jews to certain "quarters" of the city. And now in the 21st century, in the name of "Peace", Jews are being told that they will have to leave their homes or be forced out. Such a blatant violation of civil rights must be resisted by all Americans. Not to protect the Jews, but to protect themselves!

There exists in American law the concept of the "Right of Eminent Domain". Simply put, if a governmental body, whether federal, state or local wanted to build a highway through an existing neighborhood, and people would need to be moved out of their homes to accomplish that public good, the government has the right to force people to relocate. Of course there would be zoning committee meetings, a judicial process of appeal, and ultimately if decided to proceed with the building, the payment of compensation. But if only the white people, or only the black people, or only the purple people were told they must move...well you get the idea.

That's exactly what's taking place right now. It's not Puerto Ricans or Koreans being told, "You can't live there". It's not Women or Men being told, "You can't join our club". All civil rights violations I might add. But, only American Jews are being told - by the American government - that they will have to leave their communities, their homes, schools, business, and farms in Judea and Samaria - the West Bank - and Gaza; American Arabs aren't being told that! That's a civil rights violation, pure and simple.

You might say, that it will be the Israeli government that might expel people and not the American government, and that's partially true. But the American government with its involvement in the "Peace Process," through the Quartet - US, EU, UN and Russia - and the Road Map, calling for the dismantling of "settlements" - i.e. Jewish cities, towns, and villages, and the transfer of Jews - including American Jews - to another place, has been caught red handed, with its fingers in the cookie jar!

The American CIA is being used to monitor the implementation of the "Road Map". There is a "Special Operations Committee," whose main purpose is to see that "settlement" activity is "frozen" and "outposts" are "evacuated" - i.e. expel Jews, including American Jews from their homes. Speaking at an American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference not long ago, US Secretary of State Powell blankly stated, "Settlement activity is simply inconsistent with President Bush's two-state vision," quoting the latter's recent statement, "as progress is made toward peace, settlement activity in the Occupied Territories must end."

Two different private "peace" initiatives have come to light recently.

The first, the Nusseibeh-Ayalon document, called "the People Vote" is a petition that Israeli Adm. and former head of the General Security Service - Israel's F.B.I. - Ami Ayalon and Palestinian professor Sari Nusseibeh have circulated. It calls on Israel to give up all the territory the Arabs lost in the 1967 Middle East war and turn the land over to the Palestinians for a state. It assumes that all the Jewish "settlers" will be ethnically cleansed from "Palestine".

US Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, during a speech in Washington not long ago, disclosed he had met with Ayalon and Nusseibeh. Praising their efforts, Wolfowitz said that the Nusseibeh-Ayalon proposal represented "a significant grass-roots movement."

Then there was Powell's recent meeting with former Israeli Justice Minister Yossi Beilin and former Palestinian Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo, after their PR inspired "Geneva Accord" signing ceremony was held in Switzerland. The "Geneva Accord